Indulgence, Aversion, Dissolution, and Somethingsomethingelse

[bluegaruda]

I've been meditating for a couple of years now, have a lama, and will be forwarding this info to them as well.

To begin, I've been having a lot of ruminating and obsessive thoughts and tell myself the following: "By acknowledging I don’t have control over my thoughts it loosens my attachment to the obsession. They dissolve on their own." I don’t know if this is true. I tell myself this. I feel a little better and the thoughts come back and feel a little worse.

What does letting a thought be entail? If most of my ruminating thoughts are narratives of distrust of people how do I know if I should let that narrative/thought be and when should I stop that thought? When do I know that stopping that thought isn't just aversion? If I let a thought be, does that mean that thought doesn’t produce another sequential narrative of that thought?

How far do I let the process indulge into the thoughts? How do I know I’m not just induldging into a thought rather than letting it be and seeing the thought through. How do I know the difference between letting go and aversion? The difference between indulgent feeding of a thought process and letting a thought be?

Basically, what is healthy way to stop obsessing over intrusive thought loops in my day to day life?

[Dan74]

Hi bluegaruda

Paying attention is how I think we learn to answer these questions. So rather than the usual reactivity, at some point we just listen, observe these thoughts, observe what arises in response to them. This approach creates a space around them where we are no longer on autopilot but actually engaged and aware.

This space is actually what's important. The reactivity, the habits, etc begin to dissolve once rather than responding in a habitual manner, we pause and actively listen.

Such has been my experience, at least.

_/|\_

[明安 Myoan]

Awakening the Luminous Mind has really helped me find what stillness, silence, and spaciousness mean in this particular life I live. It's nice to hear things explained from a different angle anyway!

[Vasana]

Pema Chodron in her book on lojong, tonglen, shamatha and vippasana (Start where you are) has some great instructions for how to approach any thought, even ones we deem problematic, intrusive, compulsive. Giving them space and not making such a big deal when they arise, either by recognizing them or labelling them and letting them pass can be difficult but once you've seen it can be done it will give you confidence In the training.


"Someone once told me, “When you feel afraid, that’s ‘fearful buddha.’” That could be applied to whatever you feel. Maybe anger is your thing. You just go out of control and you see red, and the next thing you know you’re yelling or throwing something or hitting someone. At that time, begin to accept the fact that that’s “enraged buddha.” If you feel jealous, that’s “jealous buddha.” If you have indigestion, that’s “buddha with heartburn.” If you’re happy, “happy buddha”; if bored, “bored buddha.” In other words, anything that you can experience or think is worthy of compassion; anything you could think or feel is worthy of appreciation."

"Tonglen practice (and all meditation practice) is not about later, when you get it all together and you’re this person you really respect. You may be the most violent person in the world—that’s a fine place to start. That’s a very rich place to start—juicy, smelly. You might be the most depressed person in the world, the most addicted person in the world, the most jealous person in the world. You might think that there are no others on the planet who hate themselves as much as you do. All of that is a good place to start. Just where you are—that’s the place to start." -Pema Chodron

[stevie]

What does letting a thought be entail? If most of my ruminating thoughts are narratives of distrust of people how do I know if I should let that narrative/thought be and when should I stop that thought? When do I know that stopping that thought isn't just aversion? If I let a thought be, does that mean that thought doesn’t produce another sequential narrative of that thought?

For me recognizing the deceptive nature of thoughts has been most helpful. It entails losing interest in thoughts regardless of their meaning contents. If their is no interest in or attachment to thoughts then they subside on their own and fewer thoughts arise.

How far do I let the process indulge into the thoughts? How do I know I’m not just induldging into a thought rather than letting it be and seeing the thought through.

Can't give advice but just refer to my experience: my truth habit that imputes truth to deceptive toughts can be clearly registered. So this truth habit, a kind of a mental factor, is what makes the difference. If it is active and not registered there is indulgence in thoughts which entails proliferation of thoughts.

How do I know the difference between letting go and aversion?

Aversion against thoughts may be helpful in the beginning but it may also cause suffering. From my perspective best is disenchantment due to deceptive nature of thoughts.

[bluegaruda]

Thank you for all the thoughtful replies

Can't give advice but just refer to my experience: my truth habit that imputes truth to deceptive thoughts can be clearly registered. So this truth habit, a kind of a mental factor, is what makes the difference. If it is active and not registered there is indulgence in thoughts which entails proliferation of thoughts.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like by imputing truth it puts a stop to some thoughts. In your experience, when you put an end to a sequence of thought it becomes a reference point to stop a thought from ruminating. Is this correct?

Or are you using registered in the sense that the sequence/thought becomes made aware of?

[stevie]

Thank you for all the thoughtful replies

Can't give advice but just refer to my experience: my truth habit that imputes truth to deceptive thoughts can be clearly registered. So this truth habit, a kind of a mental factor, is what makes the difference. If it is active and not registered there is indulgence in thoughts which entails proliferation of thoughts.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like by imputing truth it puts a stop to some thoughts. In your experience, when you put an end to a sequence of thought it becomes a reference point to stop a thought from ruminating. Is this correct?

Or are you using registered in the sense that the sequence/thought becomes made aware of?

No. The meaning intended is that: my truth habits and my ignorance are the same. Ignorance is continually lying in ambush to impute truth to whatever thought arises. If this imputation is registered - so there obviously is a faculty of mindfulness to register ignorance in action - then thoughts appear as empty of truth and thus aren't attractive anymore and indulgence in thoughts stops and proliferation of thoughts continually decreases.