I think the thought is a natural process. Mind is for thinking, trying to stop the thought is impossible and it always slips. The content of the mind can be changed by working on every aspect of our understandings. Jiddu said that mind is for “Thinking”.
I observed a thoughtless state happens “SOMETIMES” inside my system but it occurs without any control. 
May be my reply in the present context is different, as I haven’t read the complete conversation.
So lautet die Theorie. (So goes the theory.) Alas, we humans are great at theory, meh at realization. 
Yes I agree. We’re not talking about “stopping” thought (who is there to stop it?) ‘Denying’ thought is different. When it’s realized that its action moves away from what is , for example moving away from fear, or sorrow, or confusion, etc through substitution…that that movement to change, escape, condemn, only strengthens those conditions , then its movement or activity is denied in order to be totally with ‘what is’.
Yeah.
Absolutely.
Beautiful. That’s all it is. This is the “TRUE” understanding that “thought cannot understand/solve anything, because it has created everything”.
In fact, what you identify as ‘problem’ is nothing but a “previous solution - it made for the previous happening it ‘identified’ as ‘problem’, which is nothing but previous of previous solution it made - and goes on and on and on”. It tries to understand, so it gets caught in the loop. What it identified as ‘problem’ is nothing but sufferings of it’s desires. It’s not a problem. It’s just it’s ‘desire’. Nothing more.
Then thought “STOPS” it’s movement and slowly ends.
There is nothing more to speak about ‘anger/sufferings/anything’. Just “What-is”. No need to find out that thing, but “feel” it.
I edit this, as I’m restricted again with replies. Please @sivaram check it out.
Sure. By the way, the name is “Mahesh”.
Sir, first when we are born, we feel ‘secured’ by the parent’s affection. Then when we grow, we ‘think’ that, only if we are ‘secured’ there is ‘peace’. And so, we form a ‘best friendship’ with a person and don’t want to ‘lose’ them, like our parents. Even the same with ‘toys’. This ‘security’ is the ‘desire’, and we derive pleasure from it. But when days pass, parents/friends/people’s true ‘selfish’ nature is gets revealed to us (Wherever there is ‘self’, there is ‘selfish’ act). We suffer of their act. So, we ‘think’ - we have to move on and find another ‘friend’ - based on ‘give and take’ policy. Even in teenage, we make a GF with this ‘two sided give and take’ terms, and derive pleasure from that ‘security’. Days pass, true nature of their ‘self’ revealed, sufferings, then we ‘think’ to move on to a job for our ‘survival’. (This survival thought itself don’t affect self). But, after we get a job, we ‘think’ we are ‘secured’ by the ‘payment/money’. We pay rent, buy foods,clothes,joy,pleasure by spending money. Days pass, and money starts to run out - as our ‘desire’ for next pleasure of Car/bike/house/investment/returns/millionaire/billionaire increases - and so the “Loan/EMI” too, we suffer. We ‘think’ we are secured by the ‘things’ we bought, but we suffer, so we find a partner, as we ‘think’ we may feel secured of her. Time passes, her true ‘self’ nature revealed, and ‘motivational’ people says, “LIFE is adjustment. Just adjust yourself and ‘give and take’ from her.” THen a child is born, there comes responsibilities to take care of their ‘desires’. Then we run for their ‘desires’ too, and suffer, and also 'apply for more loan for his studies, responsibilities increase. The employer too pressurizes the ‘employee’ in some inhuman/immoral/illegal ways - to earn more ‘profit’ for him, and motivational people says “Adjustment is Life. You can do it.” So, we adjust with him, and we also cannot quit it, as we have “EMI”. We also ‘think’ secured of the own house, so not ‘feel’ to sell it and go back to rental house. Even if we decide, the partner won’t does so bcz of her ‘secured’ ‘thoughts’. Then we enter into inhumane acts - go to greater ‘positions’ - many political pressures, etc… Too much ‘frustrations’ and ‘think’ everything as a ‘problem’. Even in science, they try to find a solution for previous discovery bcz of it’s limitations, and so again find solutions to that limitations by ‘thoughts’
But those are not ‘problems’. It is just what we ‘desire’ as ‘security’ for ‘pleasures’, had shown it’s ‘real’ face of the ‘self’. And we try to solve with another ‘thought’ of ‘security’ - and it goes one after another after another.
The person who raised to ‘positions’ also ‘think’ ‘secured’ of this ‘positions’ - and so there is ‘war’ between nations of this ‘desires’. It is not bcz of ‘soldiers’. It will happen no matter what - even if there is no ‘soldier’ - if the ‘person’ in that ‘position’ feel pleasure and ‘think’ secured of that ‘position’, and don’t want to lose it or give up to another person/country.
So, just “STOP” thinking/moving/questioning/understanding/identifying, so that you can ‘see/watch/observe/feel’ ‘what-is’ – as it is.
“I” cannot stop it.
Before “Stopping” thought, “STOP” interest/desires in objects - as we can see the ‘effects’ of it. Whenever you have free time (more than the repsponsibilities), take a pose to sit and always sit in that position (Like K sits erect). In this pose, “thoughts” have no outward movement, so it just roam around inside and “STOPS” itself. Then ‘feel’ the silence.
As this feel continues for days - “Intelligence/Truth” gets anchored, and ‘thoughts/desires’ power too start decreasing. There is no need of effort to put it down then, as one is ‘strongly’ anchored in it, and not interested in ‘limitedness’.
Yes man, I realized that escaping from fears, aspects which bothers the self will just dissipate the energy inside.
Hi viswa,
It sounds interesting.
can you elaborate on that?
I wouldn’t be so sure of that. The “verbal” means spoken/written language, and that makes it exclusive. I suggest we are rooted in imagery, drama, visual art and music more deeply than “the verbal”.
That’s not really the question. Why do you assume you can speak for yourself? When one says, ‘I am rooted in the verbal,’ for example, it has no meaning at all if those verbal roots remain intact. In the same way, when we are faced with this question of what to do about thought and intelligence, it is pointless for thought to speak about it. So what shall we do about it? Thought will always answer the question before it has found the answer, which is the continuation of thought and the denial of intelligence. Is it possible to find the complete answer first and only then speak about it?
Perhaps you are missing the point. If you are thinking about something, what’s the difficulty? You are thinking. Therefore at that moment you are thought. You and thought are not two separate components.
But these may all be reactions to the verbal. That is what we are trying to find out. After all, can any image exist without a word which is attached to it?
I observed that inside visuals happen according to the situations, state of mind may change based on music.
All these are created by the mind, and the mind is rooted in its own creation. This is the indication of society’s influence on our thought process.
Is there any thought which is not affected by these aspects?
Hi Paul,
Image associating to words, I see this as very important aspect. Associating words to an image is nothing but the way we understood the situation happened. You are asking, whether we can see the situation or image without any understanding or bias. I observed that the same situation can be understood differently, which depends on the state of mind.
Coming back to your question, my answer is no. Some understanding will happen inside for every situation we encounter in life.
Then can you explain what you mean when you say that you are conscious of what you are thinking? Is that awareness of your thinking different from the thinking? Or is it just another level of thought?
Thought can see certain aspects of itself with great clarity. It’s one of its hallmarks, self-reflection.
But, try as it might, thought cannot see itself in its entirely, cannot see its limits. To do that it would have to be able to stand outside of itself, which is logically impossible. (Note: To what extent does logic hold in this realm?)
Now we might posit that ‘intelligence’ stands outside of thought. Or insight, intuition, realization, kensho … whatever. But how do we know we’re not just spinning spiritual fairy tales? Even if we have a meditative Aha! experience in which we see these things vividly … how can we know we’re not just fooling ourselves at a subtle level?
Indeed!
“Attached” is the word. The image comes first, then the word in response to the image, and the word must be translated and defined before it signifies anything more than the string of images or sounds that it is.
What’s your point?..
We said that this is our single most important psychological problem or question. Right? Are we meeting this question with the totality of thought? Or is there a fragment of thought that is already engaged in a different activity?
Yes, that is on the face of it. But are we willing to look a little deeper?
So we are rooted in the word. Before the word, there are no roots to my consciousness.
No. Images are the roots to our consciousness. The word follows the image.