Yes, how tricky :)But when there is looking, AE is seen with an I-thought overlaid (with a lag) almost as if to imbue the AE with a sense of self. I is thought.
Could you please tell me your definition of AE?
How did you get to the conclusion that the content of thought is I?V: What is the difference between a thought and its content?B: A thought is AE, not I. The content of thought is I.
Let’s say there is a thought “I like this sunny weather”.
Apart from the word ‘I’ in the above sentence/thought, is there any ‘I’ there?
If not, what makes you think that the WHOLE content of that thought is ‘I’?
The thought as an phenomenon is AE, it’s there.
But whatever the thought is about, the content, is not there. It’s not happening.
Thought, in and of itself, does not contain any experience whatsoever. If it did, you would be able to taste the word ‘sweet’, feel the word ‘hot’. Can you see this?
Can an imagined visual thought of sitting on the sun give you a sunburn?
Can the salt be tasted on the lips by imagining swimming in the ocean?
‘Imagination’ is the key word here. It is imagined saltness is it not? How can it be actual saltness? Is it the ‘real’ deal?
When you imagine a monster under the bed...is there a real monster, ..or are they thoughts ABOUT a monster?
Can you see CLEARLY that the difference between the thought and its content is that the thought is real, it’s there, it’s happening as a phenomenon, but the content, what the thought is about is not there, not happening, not real?
Is what this thought ABOUT (the content) actually happening? Is it a really happening?E1: "What will she think of what I said yesterday... I may have been unclear, maybe in ...maybe I should call ....hmm, wasn't there an issue with my phone? .. I should have that checked... don't forget also to..."
Or it’s all realness was only as an appearing thought phenomenon?
Is there an ACTUAL craving going on, or there are only thoughts ABOUT craving?"I am craving chocolate"
In other words, does the content of this thought actually happening?