In my experience, literal words that come into mind as commentary on discursive thoughts are a way of prolonging and even memorising those thoughts - grasping on to them in other words. On the other hand, I read somewhere that Buddhas do not talk to themselves; I assume this is meant figuratively (in the sense of discursive thought) as well as literally (in the sense of actually thinking, mouthing, or even speaking out loud to oneself using words).Zhen Li wrote:The voice doesn't even arise if you relax enough. The insight that is gained in meditation does not come in monologue form, it is direct seeing. Whenever you speak mentally, you are filtering through contact, feeling, perception, and volition - it is viewing through four layers of rose-tinted glasses.
I'm not sure your 'quick' way will work for everyone, atleast not throughout every meditation session - 'Active tranquilisation' sounds like suppressing thoughts, and although you may not have meant that, there's plenty of room for misunderstanding as well as (most likely) the mere satisfiying of the natural desire for control.Zhen Li wrote:This works. However, it is the long way. In the end I must disagree that thought must continue the whole time. While you can tranquilise formations through awareness alone, it really works better when it is active tranquilisation. Try it, it is really quite interesting the first time.mandala wrote:You can even label it "thinking" and then go back to whatever your meditation focus was.. body awareness, breath counting, visualisation, analysis etc.
Edit {Just thought of something}: In case you weren't aware, 'tranquilise' in English literally means to give a human or animal a drug that suppresses mental activities; as a metaphor, it would mean much the same - only without the medication.
'Make tranquil' would have a less extreme meaning.