In need of direct pointing-out instruction

[Canfora]

The question that immediately comes up when looking for an "I" is, "what exactly am I looking for?"

Notice how the question is a distraction, how it takes you away from seeing.
And notice also how it isn't possible to see an I :)
The first thing that "pops up" is a thought because you are used to thinking instead of looking, when trying to solve or understand something. Since is the thinking that creates the self illusion, this exploration is an invitation to look before or after the thinking happens. To focus in what isn't thoughts. Don't worry with giving the right answer but try to look for a self instead of thinking about this. See if you can find an I.

[Aphorism8]

I get stuck right away on that.

[Aphorism8]

OK, I will try.

[Aphorism8]

It seems there is nothing that can be found by looking for an "I."

"I" seems to be [just /i]a concept. It doesn't refer to anything that can be found by looking.

[Aphorism8]

I did not intend to italicize anything in that last post!

[Canfora]

Don't worry with how the posts work out. You're doing fine.
It seems you can't find a you when you look for it?
Does that mean the body isn't a you?
That there isn't a little entity inside the body?

[Aphorism8]

With regard to the body, the body is not what I am. We speak of "my arm," "my legs," "my body," etc., which means that in our normal use of language, whatever "I" am is something other than the body. I cannot say that I inhabit my body either - I'm not "in" there. If I look down I see the same arms, legs, and torso that are always present. I'm never without this body, but it's not the so-called "I" eitheir.

[Canfora]

Okay. Would you say you are your experiences? Are the present thoughts about "your" past, present and future experiences a prove that there is a real you somewhere?

Right now, is it possible to find what is living this experience?

[Aphorism8]

Okay. 1. Would you say you are your experiences? 2. Are the present thoughts about "your" past, present and future experiences a prove that there is a real you somewhere?

3. Right now, is it possible to find what is living this experience?

1. No. There is still, however a sense that something is having or is aware of experiences. More on this in #3.
2. No. Clearly memories are totally insubstantial.
3. Despite all the looking, so far there is nothing that can be found. Whatever is living this experience or is aware of it cannot be found in the world of objects/experiences.

And yet, there is a very, very strong feeling that I am, or that something is - something that is aware. In some way I "know that I am," but nothing I can find through looking can be whatever I am, because anything of which I can be aware is another "object" in awareness. I guess it seems like I am, but I can't be an object.

Or maybe those expressions are relics of the subject-object language framework that's so deeply ingrained and contain too much speculation; perhaps it would be more accurate to direct looking to say there seems to be awareness of a world. But as soon as "aware of" or "awareness of" is used, the notions of subject and object are invoked/implied by the very language being used.

No real certainty!

[Canfora]

I've enjoyed reading your answers. They're a mix of seeing and of thinking.
Here it seems to me you have looked to find the answers:

1. No. There is still, however a sense that something is having or is aware of experiences. More on this in #3.
2. No. Clearly memories are totally insubstantial.
3. Despite all the looking, so far there is nothing that can be found. Whatever is living this experience or is aware of it cannot be found in the world of objects/experiences.

I get a feeling of what you didn't saw, what you didn't found. And at the same time I don't have a clue about what you saw.

Here it seems to me you are explaining what you think:

In some way I "know that I am," but nothing I can find through looking can be whatever I am, because anything of which I can be aware is another "object" in awareness. I guess it seems like I am, but I can't be an object.

Or maybe those expressions are relics of the subject-object language framework that's so deeply ingrained and contain too much speculation; perhaps it would be more accurate to direct looking to say there seems to be awareness of a world. But as soon as "aware of" or "awareness of" is used, the notions of subject and object are invoked/implied by the very language being used.

No real certainty!

This is seeing what is here also - you are describing something that is felt:

And yet, there is a very, very strong feeling that I am

Sure. Yes. There is a strong feeling that seems to be "me". But when you look at this feeling what do you find? Have a look. Is this a real feeling or a real me? Do you see any evidence that this feeling is stuck to a you? Or even to the body?



And here you are thinking, making an assumption - I'm 100% sure you didn't experience any evidence of such a *thing*, other than the thinking:

or that something is - something that is aware.

I would like to know what you are seeing right now. What did you saw that made you answer like you did to the 3 questions that are quoted at the top of this post?

Can you describe what is happening? What would you say is real or - like one of the guides here likes to say - what is actual? What can you see?

[Aphorism8]

Struggling a bit here! Are you saying that even to speak of awareness is too much thinking/conceptualizing?

[Aphorism8]

My goodness, I'm awfully confused and in need of instruction. Through these decades of fruitless seeking, It seemed that while I have probably always been wrong about what I actually am, the one thing that seemed certain was the simple fact of my own being. "I don't know what I am, but I know that I am," in other words. Is that not a true statement? Is that another unexamined concept not based in direct experience?

Who or what is it, if anything, that is communicating with you? Something exists, right? To doubt my own being requires that I be there to have the doubt, etc., etc.....

But now with what you're asking me, I'm wondering if even that is just another thought, not something directly experienced? Perhaps another spiritual concept I picked up along the way? Is there anything that can be said other than negation? What a mess here!

Right now I see a computer on a desk, with various things or shapes around it. I see a keyboard, I see hands typing, I see arms and legs. I hear talking in the other room. There are various thoughts arising - the Game of Thrones theme music playing in the mind, various word-thoughts in an assortment of voices. Thinking seems to go on by itself, non-stop. Some of the mental noise clearly is random, while other "lines of thought" seem directed and coherent. But whether random noise thoughts or "coherent, directed" thoughts, they are seen fully formed; I cannot say there is any awareness of thoughts being generated, let alone an "I" thinking them, only thoughts.

[Aphorism8]

I'm starting to realize just how much "spiritual baggage" I'm carrying around, and I'm sure it's getting in the way, making it harder to just look at things in the manner you are pointing me toward. Years and years of reading books about Advaita and Dzogchen, etc. I think that's informing the kind of thoughts that keep popping up.

What of all that? What do I do with their core concepts....I am awareness, I AM THAT, etc.... Is there any truth to any of that?

If none of that is useful, how do you shake it off so you can get back to the heart of the matter?

[Canfora]

Thank you for your posts. It seems you are experiencing some confusion and maybe frustration? That's normal, that's okay. It's a sign that you are stepping outside your comfort zone. We are going in the right direction!

I'm starting to realize just how much "spiritual baggage" I'm carrying around, and I'm sure it's getting in the way, making it harder to just look at things in the manner you are pointing me toward. Years and years of reading books about Advaita and Dzogchen, etc. I think that's informing the kind of thoughts that keep popping up.

I think this above realization is a good thing. I think I've asked you if you would be willing to drop the identification with the spiritual seeker because it could get in the way. But since you are aware of what is happening I don't think that you should worry about the "spiritual baggage". This baggage will drop naturally as a result of being aware of it. I've spent 2 or 3 years after seeing the self illusion still caught in my "spiritual baggage" and I still enjoy hearing or reading about these subjects but my interest in spiritual stuff seems to been lessening and lessening and lessening as time goes by.

What of all that? What do I do with their core concepts....I am awareness, I AM THAT, etc.... Is there any truth to any of that?

Is finding the right concept important? Can a concept change what you are? Does what you are need to know what it is?? What for?

Would it be okay not to know, to just be what you obviously are? Why do you need to stick a concept into what can't be described? (if it could, you would be capable to do it a long time ago)

If none of that is useful, how do you shake it off so you can get back to the heart of the matter?

You are doing fine and everything that is popping up in this conversation is useful. It's the thinking that causes the self illusion and it's important to be aware of how that works.

Right now I see a computer on a desk, with various things or shapes around it. I see a keyboard, I see hands typing, I see arms and legs. I hear talking in the other room. There are various thoughts arising - the Game of Thrones theme music playing in the mind, various word-thoughts in an assortment of voices. Thinking seems to go on by itself, non-stop. Some of the mental noise clearly is random, while other "lines of thought" seem directed and coherent. But whether random noise thoughts or "coherent, directed" thoughts, they are seen fully formed; I cannot say there is any awareness of thoughts being generated, let alone an "I" thinking them, only thoughts.

This is very nice. Did you look to the thing the word I implies is there? Right now, if you use your senses, if you look, do you see any evidences that a entity, a you, is real?

[Aphorism8]

Using only the senses, no, I find no clear "I" anywhere.

It seems we use the term "I" sort of mindlessly, just based on assumptions. There is a perception that this body is part of a separate organism, and this feeds into the concept of "I," as opposed to the rest of the world.