Mechanical mind @ 5 pm

It was 4.55 pm. I was waiting for 5pm to go back home.  The exact time of 5 pm has been fixed in my mind that I should complete my entire task and leave. Or sometimes it doesn’t matter, by 5pm I should go back whether the task has been completed or not. The task can wait for tomorrow. But the 5pm can’t wait. I must go back at 5 pm although by reaching home on time is not going to change any of my future plans.  Actually I have no future plans except to cook, watch TV and sleep. The same routine I have been performing for the past 3 months of my stay in Australia. I am sure it’s not going to change my life even a slightest inch by going back sharp at 5pm.  I am pretty sure that the world will be remained the same as what it is without any change what so ever even if I reached home 1 minute later. But that is not the question here. The question is I have to go back at 5pm.  I have been always pre-occupied with time. I always make sure that at 5pm, I should start packing my bag with the black umbrella and lunch box to head home. I will lock the drawer and with the jacket on, I will head towards the tram.  The tram stop is just 20 meters away from the hospital door. But I have to cross 2 traffic lights for the pedestrian cross before I reach the tram stop. There are times while waiting for the traffic light to turn green; the tram 59 will pass in front of my eyes. I will curse myself for missing the tram in which I have elaborated in very detail in yesterday’s writing.

            So I have decided one day, not to go back at 5pm. I am going to wait for the time to pass after 5pm. I have decided not to listen to my mechanical mind and start packing at 5pm. I have decided to ignore ‘it’. I just sat on my chair. I did not concentrate on my task either. I just sat in my office in front of the iMac aimlessly to just observe what will happen if I refused to listen to my mechanical mind. I waited and waited, for seconds, and minutes just for the clock to pass 5 pm and resisted every opportunity to get up to head home. My mind has failed to convince me at that particular time to go back by 5pm. But at 5.40 pm, I thought I should go back. While walking down the stairs from my office, which is situated at the 4^th floor, I have this particular tendency to pick up a free newspaper at ground floor. I would use the freely distributed newspaper while travelling in the tram to avoid a sense of awkwardness, which I always felt while sitting in the tram with complete strangers.  The content of the newspaper does not really matter for me but I will go through every page readings only the subtitles, conveniently avoiding the details. I am not sure why I have these predilections to read the subtitles alone unless the content is at utmost significance.

            While walking to the tram stop, it came to my mind that I should not again listen to my mechanical mind. Instead of taking the tram at the convenient stop 14, which is just 20 meters from the hospital doorstep, I have decided to walk further and to take tram at other stops. I also firmly decided not to take the freely distributed newspaper today and not going to entertain myself by reading the subtitles. There I was walking, observing how my mechanical mind will try to convince me to take the tram at the most convenient stop. My mind was trying to convince me that I already paid for the daily trip via the tram and I should take the tram instead of walking. It came up with other few suggestions why I shouldn’t walk and just take the tram.  The weather was too cold to enjoy the walk. I am wasting my time by walking, as it takes longer to reach home.  I can’t possibly reach home by walking alone as my home is 12 km away. What I am achieving through all these exercises and experiments. The tram will be more crowded if I board on it after 6 pm as other public commuters will be start using it. All these excuses were running in my mind while I was walking. I have decided to ignore and just walk without listening to my mechanical mind. I realized my mind is nothing better than a chatterbox. Its keep on chatting like a priest repeating a ‘mantra’. My mind keep on haunting me like a broken record. It refuses to give up. It’s worse than my shadow.  At least a shadow will stop momentarily without the sun. But the mind just refused to back off. It likes to question me at every instance whether I am paying attention or not. I have decided to completely ignore it and just walk while concentrating in my breathing. After a few hundred meters of walk, I realized I was just walking. The chatterbox was not there. The shadow was not there. There were no more excuses. There was no more reasoning. There were no more suggestions. For the first time I realized ‘I’ was walking alone without the mechanical mind.  And it’s a different feeling what so ever. It’s so difficult to describe the feeling. It was just a deep silence. Although outside ‘me’ there was hundred of cars and people passing by but inside it was utter emptiness. Inside there was a complete silence.

Mind and Tram Stop 44

I started to write after 4 previous postings. It’s harder to write this time. The first 4 times the flow was there. The spontaneity was there. But now, each time I write something, my mind plays a trick with me. My mind quickly organize what I intended to write. The mind wants perfection. The mind wants polish writing.  It refuses to accept any flaws or defect. It wants some writing that is presentable. It wants people to read and enjoy it. It wants to know what other people thinks about the piece of writing. It wants people to talk about it. The mind expects some result. It wants a goal. What is the point of writing for the sake of writing if there is no goal? Everything we do need to have a goal. We need objective. What is the aim? The aim is directed to both the writer/author and the reader. The author wants the reader to read and understand the message being conveyed. The author wants the readers to read and praise or critic the writings. There reader reads it to find out what is it all about. Either he accept it partially or fully as it suits his ego. Or reject it fully if it challenges his ego.

            This is the dilemma I was facing yesterday. I wrote half way and I stopped. I stopped writing the moment I realized there is no spontaneity in it. It is not natural. It comes from my organized thinking. It comes from my past. It is not alive. It is dull. Dull mind cannot write. Dull mind is equivalent to dying. It’s like committing suicide. It has to die. There is no energy in it. There is no meaning in it. The writing would be just the copied words and phrases. Nothing new in the writing if it is written based on an organized mind.  It would be repeating as what other has said. It would be just the same core with some adjustment with the periphery. With some twist and bends. No meaning at all. No meaning whatsoever.

            I realized how dull I am. How mechanical I am. How I am so confounded to the same routine. I am restless with even a slight deviation with the routine. My mind has found a security in routines.  The moment I deviate from it, it retaliates. It wants to go back to the routine. It is just not used to the new path. It feels safe with the same path. After all, everybody is doing the same routine. Why should I differ? Why should I run from the norm? The path has been tasted and tested by others. Surely it is the safest way. It can’t be other way around. My father has done the same thing and he is still following certain routine. My mother has done same thing and she has her own routine. Even my professor has his own routine.

            I woke up the other day and started to think about work. I started to think I am going to be late and I rushed with my packed lunch. I walked briskly to the tram station (stop 44). Just 50 meters before I reached the tram stop, my mind was running ahead of my pace, praying the tram would not pass now. If the tram passes now, I would have to wait another 15-20 minutes for the next tram to come. The feeling that I have to wait for another tram would create tremendous uneasiness in me. I would blame myself for walking so slowly. I would be thinking I should have woken up 1 minute earlier. I would be blaming myself for taking my own sweet time while brushing teeth or while answering the nature’s call.  Now I am thinking whether I might reach late to work. I am thinking what would be the professor’s opinion on me for joining late for the ward rounds.  I was sure he wasn’t being impressed if I am late again. So much of thoughts running in my mind in that 50 meters of distance before I reached the tram.  I realize the tram hasn’t passed the stop and in fact I reached 5 minutes earlier than tram. But why within that 50 meters my mind has to race with that many thoughts. 

I realized my mind assumes that the tram might reach to the stop 44 just before me and created all the subsequent connecting thoughts. My mind, I realized has the capability to reason out the causes and consequences if the tram would have pass before I reach the stop 44.  It has find out a way to react to the situation that might or might not happen. My mind creates a way for me to adapt to the situation in the event I miss the tram. It creates a buffer for me so that I will be capable to accept that there are a chance of me missing the tram and what are the consequences of it. The mind comes even with possible solutions in the event I miss the tram and late for work. My mind teaches me to find a reason in case I was asked by my professor for the late appearance for the rounds.  In the nick of the time, my mind has prepared with few possible answers. Why I am late to work? Reasoning 1: The tram was late. Instead of blaming myself to reach late at the stop 44, my mind finds it easier to blame the tram. Reasoning 2: The tram was malfunction during the course of its route to my workplace (which is stop 14).  Reasoning 3: I woke up late, as my alarm clock wasn’t functioning. Interestingly in the third reasoning my mind put the blames on the alarm clock (which happened to be my I-phone 3) that is already 2 years old. I started to analyze of course with the help of the same mind for all the reasoning. I found in all three reasoning there are some similarities. The first similarity is in all the reasoning; I was never being blamed by my mind. In the first 2 reasoning’s, my mind cleverly puts the blame on the innocent tram. On the third reasoning, my mind puts the blame on I-phone 3(alarm clock). I further questioned my mind why is that so. On further analysis, I realized that I had experience with the tram coming late and there was once the tram did stopped completely and I have to board another tram to work. So I figured out that those two particular events probably would have stored in my brain and my mind conveniently retrieve it to accept that as the cause for my late arrival. The third reasoning has a reason too. There was an instance 3 weeks after my arrival in Australia; my I-phone could not be switched on. As my I-phone takes the role of alarm clock, again my mind cunningly took that particular event as my third reasoning for being late to work.  Now I was asking my self a question. Why my mind never blames me? Why my mind refuses to accept the blame on itself? Each time the blame goes outwardly. It never comes inwardly.

I realized as well that I was never late at the first place. In fact I reached 5 minutes earlier than the tram. But within the distance of 50 meters so many questions, possible causes, consequences and reasoning was running in my mind. I realized how my mind plays the trick with me by giving a situation and at the same time prepares an answer for it. After all, the situation never arises. I wasted so much of energy thinking of it in that short 50 meters of distance. The moment I ‘stepped out’ and looked at my own mind, suddenly all the questions disappeared. All then possible causes stopped. All the possible consequences stopped. All the possible reasoning stopped. Everything stopped. The tram stopped as well and I took the tram to work and reached on time. 

Oh my mind?

Oh my mind?

Ho do you define normality. Is perceived set of cultures define by a group of people defines normal? Do the culturally bounded humans perceive a set of values as normal?  If these sets of values are normal, what is abnormal then? How you differentiate normal and abnormal. Why can’t we have values without a boundary? Values remained values as they are without definition. Values not given a meaning are meaningless?  Why can’t we look at things as they are without given our specific judgment? Why can’t we perceive things as it is rather than looking at it with our veils? Values are imposed on humans. These values are thought to humans till they are perceived as normal. These so called values are perceived since the centuries as norm of human beings.  As long as our mind perceives values as acceptance rather than imposition, the mind remained bounded. It remained bounded to the set of values forced into it. The mind remained confined to the set of values. It knows no freedom. The mind become restless the moment the values removed from it slightest sight. The moment the concept of mind conceptualized and perceived, it forgets the master. It by itself remained as master. It ‘s strengthened by its own belief. The mind become solidifies by re-enforcement of its own kind. The more it tries to untangle from its clutch, the more it get entangled. Gradually, it accepts the entanglement as part of itself.  Entanglement is mind.  The more entangled the mind is, the greater the achievement it perceives.  The achievement of a tangled mind is rewarded.  Rewards that further encourage entanglement. It’s exponentially rewarding. 

            Mind oh minds, why I am created. What am I? Again I am trying to define myself. Defining by giving meaning to myself. Defining by giving substance to myself. Defining to give value to myself.  Defining to create an identity to myself. So is it the identity that strengthens the mind. Mind oh minds, who am I. Am I John, Peter, William, Sarah, Rose, Linda? What if I am nobody? What if I remained as I am without the mind? But than, who is this I? Is the ‘I’ the mind or the mind is the ‘I’? Or both the “I” and mind are one.  Or is my body is ‘I’ and mind just attached to it.  Or the mind is the ‘I’ and the body is attached to it. How if the mind, the body and the ‘I’ are not connected at all at the first place? Are they three different entities? The three defines human? Is it possible for this ‘I’ to live without the mind? Is it possible the mind to live without the ‘I’? Is it possible the ‘I’ and the mind just be there without the boundary? Where the body comes into the picture than?

            Is it possible the body comes at birth without the mind and ‘I’? It remained as a body without any thoughts. It remained as a body of a baby without the name given by the owners, (parents). The mind comes later.  The so-called ‘I’ is not an actual ‘I’ but the ‘I’ identified by the parents to the body. The body still can’t perceive the ‘I’ given to it. It needs the mind to tell the body about the ‘I’. So, without the mind, the body cannot identify or defines itself with the ‘I’. So when the mind comes? When the naked body identified by the mind as ‘I’? Why at the first place the mind has to come to tell the body about the ‘I’? Is it possible to remove the mind from the body entirely so the ‘I’ never identified. Is it possible the body lives with the mind without the identification of the ‘I’.  But the moment the mind recognizes the body the sense of ‘I’ is perceived.

            Body is a matter of cells, a mass of protoplasm, which biologically functions with or without the mind. Is the mind really needed for the body to function? How about animals? Do animals have mind? Are the animals functioning with the mind or just with the body? If mind is something 100% needed for the body to function than all animals even the smallest bacteria or viruses has mind. So if the animals have mind, can they have emotions too?

Ok, Lets come back to humans.

            Lets come to an agreement. The body comes first, later the mind comes to be identified with body and ‘I’ defined by the mind. So the ‘I’ cannot stand alone without the mind or the body. The ‘I’ needs the mind and the body. The ‘I’ needs the mind to tell the body it is the ‘I’. So, who is this ‘I’?

            Do we really know when the mind starts it journey? Do we really know when the mind starts to incorporate the body into it as one and as the ‘I’, which is perceived by the mind?  Is it possible the mind knows nothing till it is thought?  So who is the first culprit to teach the mind to identify with the body and to perceive it as ‘I’? So who is the culprit to teach the mind to identify itself with the given name?

            Yes, the thought arises and the mind given birth. The set of collection of thoughts forms the mind. What are thoughts than? Is it the stimulus received by the body creates thoughts? Is it possible for the thoughts to arise without the stimulus? Is it possible to create a state of thoughtlessness with the entire stimulus removed from the body? So, if the five senses in which the body communicates with the surrounding removed, can the thought process stops? Would elimination of the visual, hearing, taste, smell and touch inputs, stops the brain from generating these thoughts?  Is it possible for a man to have no thoughts without these five senses? There are only two ways to live without all the senses, either by cutting off the connections between the senses and the brain or take away the organs that are responsible for generating senses.  Is it possible for a man to have all the five senses and the connections of the senses to his brain and still remain thoughtlessness? Is it possible to achieve a state in which the thoughtlessness remains despite of intact senses and the connections to the brain? The thoughtlessness stage or mind would see the body as it is without identifying it as ‘I”. The state itself would cease all the boundaries between the mind, the body and the ‘I’. 

Truth and religion

Man to feed his ego about his god creates religions. Religions are diverse, unique but fundamentally the goal is the same. If just the importance of god emphasized more than religion, every human being should be enlightened by now. However the reverse is true. Religion is far more important than the truth itself. Some are born, live for 100 years and die one day without knowing anything about truth but mastered the religion. Why mastering the religion not equivalent to mastering the truth? It is just a shift of angle required to realize the difference of religion and truth. It’s just a shift of perception needed to see the truth rather than being masked by religion. You can master all the religions yet truth is still far away. You can read the whole Holy Bible, Bhagawad Gita or any other religious scriptures, yet you now nothing about the truth. Reading the books and scriptures makes you more knowledgeable but does that makes you realize god?

            No doubt religion is needed to know about the truth. But religion itself is not the truth. Religion is just a guide for man to search the truth. One needs to understand the concept of religion to read about the truth, to understand and comprehend the truth but not for realizing the truth. The religion is needed in initial stage but there will be one stage where man has to let go to realize the truth. Too much emphasis has been placed on religion rather than the truth itself in modern days. Each devotee prefers to identify themselves with the religion rather than the truth. They rather sacrifice themselves in the name of religion for defending the so-called self professes truth. But do we know what is actually the truth?

            Ask any man about his opinion of god, and he quickly tells you what religion he is and how firmly he believes in his god. But why you should believe in god at the first place? You only believe something that you are not sure of rather than you are really sure. You believe there is ghost as you think there might be ghost living somewhere. You have heard of ghost but you have never seen it, thus you believe there is ghost.  But just imagine if you have seen ghost with your own eyes, do you still believe in ghost or you are hundred percent sure that ghost exist. So what is the difference about ghost and god if you believe that ghost exists and god also exist. Can you prove their existence?  Or is it your gut feeling tells you that god exist as well as ghost.

If you are hundred percent sure of Him, the question of believe will never arises. The moment you realized Him, you stop in believing Him but your whole core being will be convinced of his presence. So let us analyze ourselves where we belong? Do we belong to the group that believes there is god or do we belong to the group that we are convinced one hundred percent the existence of god. Perhaps the word ‘convince’ is not convincing enough to us to describe His presence. The problem with the words ‘convince’ is, it is created to say agree, understand or realize the truth but all these words are not enough to describe Him. He is more than the feeling of convince, He is more than the feeling itself, He is more than any other words that created by humans. He is indescribable. He is unimaginable. The five senses given to us are not sufficient to tell about Him. The eyes alone are not enough to describe Him. The ears alone are not enough to hear of Him. The nose itself is not enough of smelling Him. The tongue itself is not enough of tasting Him. The hands alone are not enough to touch Him. He is more than these five senses, which we mortals equipped.

            The moment He is realized, there is a joy sweeps our heart. The heart dances with bliss. The mind stops thinking. The brain stops ‘functioning’. The whole body shivers with ecstasy. The breathing ‘harmonizes’ with the nature. The legs start to dance. The hands start to dance. Oh what a joy! What a joy to be gifted to realize Him. What a joy to be gifted to smell His presence. What a joy to be gifted to hear of Him. What a joy to be gifted to touch Him. What a joy to be gifted to taste and to see Him. Ah, so many years have wasted not knowing Him earlier.  But here ‘I’ am today in his presence or there is no ‘I’ after meeting Him. The ‘I’ has melted away. The ego has run away.  It is just He and only He. 

The doer and the observer

The doer and the observer

Let us analyze a serious inquiry, which has been running in my mind. We are going to analyze a very basic question of our lives. Who am I? Let me illustrate to you by giving this example:

a.     A boy looking at a cat, which was running in the garden and trying to catch it.

b.     The boy’s sister also looking at the same cat and at the same time looking at the boy as well.

           

Now let us analyze the scenario. First we start with the boy who is looking at the cat and chasing it. The boy’s eyes have fixed the image of the cat and it is interpreted by the boy’s brain to enable him to chase it. But actually who is seeing the cat? Is it the boy who is seeing the cat? Is it the boy’s eyes seeing the cat? Is it the boy’s brain seeing the cat? Definitely the eyes needed to see the cat. Suppose the boy is blind, no way he can visualize the cat. But do eyes alone suffice to see the cat? The boy needs the brain to interpret the image he has seen. Definitely without the brain, the eyes can’t interpret the image seen. A functioning eye has the capability to see many images but it is the brain, which tells the boys that particular image is a cat and not a dog. So are brain and eyes themselves sufficient enough to see the cat? How the brain interprets that particular image as cat and not any other animals? So the boy’s brain has learned in the past about a cat’s image and the moment he sees similar visual, the brain signals to him to bring out his past memories to match the animal and he identifies that particular animal as a cat. So, the brain is definitely needed like a computer CPU to store and to interpret visual images for the boy. These illustrates that the eyes, brain and the boy all are needed to see the cat. But are we missing something? If the boy’s brain sees the visual image via the eyes and interprets it and the boy identifies it as a cat, now the question arises as who is seeing the cat?

            The part of the brain that is involved in the interpretation of any visual images is the occipital lobe, which is the posterior part of the brain. So the image of cat goes through the eyes to the retina and the signals send to the occipital lobe. The final image, which is projected on the occipital lobe, is interpreted as cat.  But actually who is interpreting? Is it the brain? Does a brain alone have the ability to interpret the cat? No. The brain is needed but together with the functioning eyes and the boy must be alive to see the cat. So, there is ‘something’ that connects the eyes, the brain and the boy to make him to see the cat and to chase it. That ‘something’ is the life energy or awareness or consciousness that unifying the eyes, brain and the boy’s body to enable him to see the cat and chase after it.

            In the above illustration we understood that there is awareness or consciousness playing a role for the boy to see the cat. It’s not just the eyes or the brain or the boy’s other part of body but the awareness is needed to see the cat. But do you think the boy knows that his awareness is the one, which is looking at the cat. I doubt so, as the boy just sees the cat, get excited with the cat and running together with the cat to catch it. His emotion of happiness and excitement drives him to catch the cat. He is not aware at that time of running that his consciousness or awareness is the one seeing the cat. The same question I throw to the reader who is reading this article at the moment. Who is reading the article? Is your brain reading the articles? Which part of the brain in you reading this article? To read this article, you need functioning eyes to see the words. The words need to be translated by the brain into a meaning to be understood by the reader. So the reader reads the articles and comprehends it according to his understanding. But does the reader realize who is actually reading it? Does the reader aware during the state of reading? While the reader observing the words (the observed) does he aware, who is the observer?

            Now we go back to the same scenario as I pointed earlier. How about the girl? The girl is seeing the cat and the boy. So the girl is seeing the boy who is seeing the cat same time. In the above illustration, in a simple term the girl is the observer who is observing the boy and the cat. Does it make sense now? So taking into context the above illustrations, what ever we perform in our daily life, there is always the observer. It does not matter whether we are talking, reading, singing, dancing, eating or sleeping the observer is always there. It’s just whether we perform things as an observer or the doer. In most instances we are the doer and not the observer. We perform certain things, thinking that we are the one who is doing the thing by becoming a doer. We forget about the observer. It is just a shift of paradigm needed to be an observer rather than a doer. 

            Whenever we perform things as a doer, we identify ourselves with the action that we perform and take pride of it. We become upset when the result is not achieved according to our desire and we are happy if the result is achieved.  We fall into the cycle of karma each time we takes the role of doer. The ‘ego’ sets in each time we become the doer. We tell ourselves, I am the one who did it. I am the one who achieve it. I failed. I passed. The ‘I’ or the ‘ego ‘ attached to it. Being a doer we fall into the cause and effect rule or the law of karma. By being an observer, all the actions done are not attached to the ‘ego’ or ‘I’. It is possible to become the observer and the doer at the same time. If the observer is the doer, he is not bounded to the attachment of his actions.

           

Behavior and thoughts

Behavior and thoughts

The adaptation of a certain set of thinking, which translates to actions, is behavior. So, behavior is dependent on thinking. Although in a long run the adaptive behavior may function independently without thinking. For a conscious mind and in wakefulness state thinking plays an integral part of a certain behavior. However during sleep, there is minimal communications between thinking and behavior. Behavior is a complex interplay of an individual with his inherent qualities, character, personality, upbringing, and social with educational exposure. Certain socially acceptable behavior in one culture may contradict with another. Why behavior is placed such a great importance in modern society?

            Behavior is so important that one classifies another as unacceptable or intolerable if that particular behavior does not suits them or the culture they belong. This creates a conflict in humans to follow the set of behaviors that is socially acceptable. Why we need to remain bonded with the rules set by another humans with antagonizes our thinking. But our thinking itself is bounded by a set of rules imposed by us on our mind.  So, the key question is how to break from the chain of bondage of thoughts and the resultant behavior.

            First we need to analyze where the thought process arises. Despite of modern medicine and new imaging technology, scientist or neurologist still fails to answer the question of origin of thoughts. Which part of the brain is responsible for generating thoughts? How to control the thought process still remains a mystery to doctors. Our ancestors have answered these questions long time ago. It’s our ignorance that hindering us to rediscover it.

            Do we realize at the first place how many numbers of thoughts are running in our mind at a certain time? Do you even realize how many thoughts are running while reading this piece of article? Often, we ignore these questions, as it does not bother us in our daily life. We are complacent as long as we wake up in the morning; satisfy the bodily function and the society or family needs. Have we ever wondered why we are born at the first place? How many of us even think of the significance of our birth. Without answering all these questions how can we call ourselves professionals, PHD holders, graduates, intellectuals or educated ones? Surely life is more than just the cycle of birth and death. Surely life is more than just satisfying the bodily needs. Surely life is more than fulfilling our desires. Surely life is more than procreating. Surely life more than owns a number of properties and gaining more power. Surely life has much more to offer than all these mundane desires.

            Lets stop digressing and focus on the topic of thoughts. So what are thoughts? Is it something that runs in our mind? Is it the constant buzzing in the brain than needed for us to function or to complete a task? How is it possible to have no thoughts and function? It’s like living without thinking or living without a brain. Is it possible to live without thoughts or rather even thinking? Animals do that or we presumed they do that. But we are not animals. We are humans. We are created to think and to use our brain. We are the one gifted with that extra sense among all creatures. So what’s wrong in using that extra sense and live.

            The thoughts are generated in the brain following the external input in which brain receives through all the five senses. The thoughts are the past memories that imprinted or stored in the brain in our lifetime. The thoughts are the emotions. The thoughts are the whole of thinking process. The thoughts are the very complex mechanism in which we interact with ourselves and with others. The thoughts are needed before we could even speak. We speak what comes in our mind. The thoughts process is also responsible for all our conscious action. Any action that we perform consciously needs thoughts to modulate the actions. How about the actions we perform without we are fully conscious, for an example when we are sleeping, when are under the influence of drugs. Are thoughts still present or absent during that so-called unconscious act. The thought are still there during that state of unconsciousness. It’s our brain that is not capable to bring the thoughts to our conscious state. Subconsciously the thoughts are always there. So we can argue that the thought process is so fundamental in our lives yet we don’t fully understand its mechanism.