Yes, that was very nice Peter. Thank you. And it seems Roberta also understands it.

If you wish to dance then I will happily play the music.
If you wish to sing then I will sing with you
If you wish to teach then I will learn

what is below thoughts- nothing or rather no one thing. Peeling back, dropping away hatred ignorance jealousy & greed. We diffuse become ageless sexless, everything timeless whole & infinite pure presence

Hi Peter, James and everyone,

Tee a great break down though I might gently push back on the idea that “the answer should always be hope, love, focusing on the positive.” In my experience, such an approach often turns back on itself, creating the very suffering we seek to release or allow to die.

thanks Peter. I understand your viewpoint of not even hoping for anything positive (or for a specific positive outcome), because that in itself might create suffering if it doesn’t come about.

However, I was speaking from the perspective of someone who is in physical pain, who lost a part of their health and physical well-being irreversibly, and who needs to adapt to and accept the new circumstances.

If I don’t focus on the positive – on what I still have, rather than what I’ve lost – it could very easily lead to depression and despair. Which is the end of the soul.

A part of my hope is that things won’t get much worse health-wise, because they can. While being in the present moment means not focusing on the physical pain, which I feel in that same present moment, but choosing to focus on deeper realities: on my true self and the joy that can come out of it (and does come out of it), even if it doesn’t include the joy of moving freely, dancing etc, i.e. the things that gave me quite a lot of joy in the past.

Or take an extreme example: of people being held hostage. I’d assume that they need to hope that they would be freed some day, otherwise they would have a very hard time surviving the conditions in which they are kept.

So I think that sometimes hope is necessary and desirable, perhaps more so when we find ourselves in physically dire circumstances, perhaps existential circumstances. In other, less challenging circumstances, perhaps it is advisable to stop hoping for some preferred outcome, but simply enjoy the present moment:

The act of dying James speaks of I think points to something different: allowing space in our narratives to remain empty. Not rushing to fill the gap with positivity or certainty, but letting go of the compulsion to replace one story with another. Sometimes, the most compassionate move for ourselves is to leave room for silence, for unknowing because that space can become the doorway to freedom from the known, and to the joy of simply being.

Maybe I’m wrong about this, but it seems to me that enjoying the present moment can only happen if we feel a measure of safety in our body and in our physical environment. And for people who don’t feel that, I believe hope and a positive mindset can help them relax in the present moment and not get overwhelmed by it. Anyway, that’s my take on it, stemming from my personal experience.

I also think we all approach these deeper categories, such as hope, faith, God… from our own vantage point, trying to make sense of our suffering and trying to alleviate it. What works for one person might not work for another. I like what Thomas said that Buddha gave 3 different answers about God to 3 different people (Thomas, Oct 10, page 5 of this thread):

When asked, “Is there a God?” the Buddha answered according to the need of the person. For one person his answer was “No, there is no God.” For another, the answer was “Yes, there is a God.”. And yet a third person asked, “What can you tell me about God?”. The Buddha closed his eyes and the person closed his. After a half hour of silence. The person got up, thanked the Buddha and left.

If I understood well, Buddha gave the answers according to what each of those people needed to reach the next phase of their spiritual development, and eventually spiritual liberation. For some it is letting go of all preconceived ideas about God, or what it means to be a good, worthy person. For some it is finding a deeper meaning in life, not only focusing on material goals. For some, it is getting out of the rat-race and appreciating the present moment. Stopping to smell the roses rather than mindlessly rushing to the next achievement.

So perhaps the real question is what is it that each of us needs in the next phase of our spiritual development, which can help us reach freedom from suffering. If our thoughts keep us in pain and suffering – keep us in the illusion of separation – then we should get rid of those thoughts, as James says.

If for example we believe that we need to achieve something or behave in a certain way so we would be worthy of love – that’s a lie and needs to be abandoned. If we believe that God’s love is conditional and that we need to be perfect in order to be loved – that’s a false belief that needs to be abandoned.

However, if our thoughts and believes are not based on the illusion of separation, and we recognize that we are already loved and one with God – then there’s no need to abandon those thoughts and beliefs. Cognition is what makes us human, neocortex hasn’t developed in vain. Clear thought is a divine quality, I’d dare say.

Getting rid of all thought is not the goal. Getting rid of wrong thought – thought that keeps us in separation and consequently suffering – that’s the goal, in my opinion.

Hi Tee,
I sense we’re landing in the same space, even if we’re using different language to get there. That said, when I read your statement -“Getting rid of all thought is not the goal. Getting rid of wrong thought…” the word “wrong” stood out. For me, it introduces a kind of tension, a grasping that clings, rather than the spaciousness that invites a more fluid relationship with thought.

As you noted, in Zen the goal isn’t to eliminate thought, though it also warns against categorizing thought as “right” or “wrong” in a moralistic or dualistic way. It’s the very act of labeling, of dividing, that often deepens suffering. Not because the thought itself is inherently problematic, but because of how we hold or reject it.

I’m reminded of the Genesis story where the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is often interpreted as granting divine clarity about what is good or evil. But “knowledge of” is not the same as “knowing what is.” That subtle difference matters (or should more then it tends to). In reaching for that knowledge, we stepped into separation, mistaking the capacity to judge for the wisdom to know. One is a burden; the other, a mystery that unfolds in relationship, in presence, in humility.

For me, and as you suggest, the invitation isn’t to get rid of thought, especially as a act of will, but to hold thoughts lightly creating flow and space for the ‘unknown’ to arise…

Hi Peter,

when I read your statement -“Getting rid of all thought is not the goal. Getting rid of wrong thought…” the word “wrong” stood out. For me, it introduces a kind of tension, a grasping that clings, rather than the spaciousness that invites a more fluid relationship with thought.

Yes, you’re right. What I meant is unhelpful thought, a thought that will push us even further into separation. And I didn’t even mean “one thought”, as in sometimes we start thinking unhelpful thoughts, e.g. thoughts of helplessness and despair, or thoughts of worthlessness and self-hatred, or thoughts of jealousy and hatred of others. We all might slip into such thoughts from time to time, but if thoughts are like birds, we don’t let them build a nest on top of our head. We observe them and let them go…

By “wrong” thought, I meant the false core belief that we’re separate from God, i.e. that we’re worthless and unlovable, or that we’re abandoned by God. That we’re all alone and helpless. That our life will be suffering till the day we die. I meant that type of thought. It’s more like a conviction: something that is more permanent, more solid, and more difficult to change.

And of course, we shouldn’t judge ourselves if we can’t think more positively. Sometimes our convictions, i.e. or false beliefs, are rooted in personal experience, often in childhood trauma that has shaped how we see ourselves and the world. We might have plenty of “proofs” that make us believe that indeed, we are doomed, for example, or that no one loves us or cares about us.

Our personal experience from childhood has become the lens through which we see the world, and now every new experience is a “proof” to us that our negative beliefs are true (e.g. that we’re bad, unlovable, unworthy, doomed, etc). Our mind can get stuck in this circular thinking and unable to let go of those negative beliefs.

In my experience, the only way to get “unstuck” is healing – in which we rewrite the damaging personal experience from childhood with a new imprint, and thus, we can finally let go of the false core belief. We stop seeing the world through the old distorted lens and our perception changes. And suddenly we are free to have new, fresh experiences, in which we feel loved, cared for, and not doomed, for example.

I’m reminded of the Genesis story where the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil is often interpreted as granting divine clarity about what is good or evil. But “knowledge of” is not the same as “knowing what is.” That subtle difference matters (or should more then it tends to). In reaching for that knowledge, we stepped into separation, mistaking the capacity to judge for the wisdom to know. One is a burden; the other, a mystery that unfolds in relationship, in presence, in humility.

To be honest, I don’t know what eating from the Tree of knowledge of good and evil means (although I’ve been pondering on it in the past 🙂 ). But it could be that we shouldn’t judge what is good or evil. That judgment is bad? Possibly.

What I know is that judging ourselves and not having compassion for ourselves certainly leads to separation (from God, i.e. our divine nature). And judging others and not having compassion for them leads to separation from other people.

So yeah, judging ourselves as inadequate in thinking (thinking “wrong” thoughts) is also a form of judgment, and is keeping us in separation. The goal is return to oneness, which I believe can only be done through self-compassion. Healing starts with self-compassion…

Thanks Peter for the explanation. I see the mystical explanation as very likely:

The story of eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is traditionally seen as the origin of sin where disobedience ruptured humanity’s innocence. But mystics read it differently. They see it not as a moral failure, but as the birth of duality: the moment consciousness split into opposites, good and evil, right and wrong, self and other.

In this view, the “fall” wasn’t into sin, but into ego. Into the mind’s habit of dividing and naming, of grasping and judging. It was the loss of unity with the divine, replaced by the illusion of separation.

Yes, if we start judging ourselves or others as “sinners”, and we see this as our main identity, that’s definitely the fall into ego, into separation from our divine nature. If we see ourselves as mortal sinners, and that there’s nothing divine in us, that’s the fall, I believe. The consciousness of separation.

As for naming, sometimes we need to name that something is hurtful. Such as hurtful behavior. We need to name the problem in order to solve it. But it doesn’t mean that the person who has said or done something hurtful is a horrible person. That they are a bad person. When we label someone (or ourselves) as bad, and we stop having compassion for them (or ourselves), that’s a recipe for duality and separation.

So I’d differentiate between naming and labeling – one is useful and can help us see things clearly, but the other can lead to judgment and deepening of separation.

Sadly, in my opinion, the traditional view holds the most sway and maybe why law is so often mistaken for love, discipline for devotion and righteousness for relationship. But that may be unkind…

Yes, there’s a lot of rigidity (and lack of compassion) in traditional religious doctrines. Henry Cloud, a Christian psychotherapist, says that healthy Christianity should possess both Truth and Love. Truth (as in law, rules) without Love (compassion, forgiveness) is harsh, judgmental, non-forgiving. Love without Truth is permissive and enabling (e.g. allows the abuse to go unchallenged). He says that we need both Truth and Love for healthy relationships, and I agree…