Third time is the charm!

[matumba]

Hi Xain,
No problem in delayed response... things come up. My internet was down yesterday.

Do you have any control over the thoughts appearing?
Are they even 'yours'?

There really is no control over thoughts - and the assumption that they are mine fades when examined. Giving rise to more thoughts wondering where the other thoughts originated :)

Could the 'I' that is assumed to be having thoughts, just be a thought itself?

Yes it could, and this brings about the resistance.

If I ask you to look, is there actually anyone looking?
Or could this 'I' just be a thought and nothing more?

And that brings up the cognitive dissonance you wrote of!

who would it be possible to be obvious to?

Good one! It would be obvious to whatever is aware of these thoughts that it is just another thought.
Thanks Xain,
John

[Xain]

So what 'I' can you find that isn't a thought.

Is there a seperate self that really exists as thought says that it does?

It would be obvious to whatever is aware of these thoughts that it is just another thought

Consider what you just said - It's interesting.
You seem to be claiming that there are two things - The thought, and that which is aware of it.
Can you find two things . . . or just one . . . the thought itself, which is just automatically 'known'?
Is there a seperate knower of thoughts at all to be found - Or just the idea that there is one?

Could 'I' just be an idea? A thought?
Could it be that it's always just been a thought . . . and that's all that it ever will be?

Xain ♥

[matumba]

Hi Xain,

So what 'I' can you find that isn't a thought.

Can't find one but something sure doesn't want to think "I" am a thought :)

Is there a seperate self that really exists as thought says that it does?

No

Consider what you just said - It's interesting.
You seem to be claiming that there are two things - The thought, and that which is aware of it.
Can you find two things . . . or just one . . . the thought itself, which is just automatically 'known'?
Is there a seperate knower of thoughts at all to be found - Or just the idea that there is one?

Could 'I' just be an idea? A thought?
Could it be that it's always just been a thought . . . and that's all that it ever will be?

You are exactly correct - it is interesting as I read them it is even stranger. I will spend some time on this and get back to ou ASAP
Many thanks,
John

[Xain]

Can't find one but something sure doesn't want to think "I" am a thought :)

Congnitive dissonance again perhaps?

Just relax and consider what is being pointed to.

Notice how thoughts always appear to come before or after the event - Let's take driving a car for example.
We might think, 'In an hour, I'll drive to town' or 'This morning, I drove into town' - And yet when the driving actually takes place without thought, it all appears to be automatic.
Notice how thought 'claims' actions.

Consider the control that 'thought' has - And what 'thought' automatically assumes. A seperate self is always assumed in everything. Just like it's been programmed that way, and in a way you could say that it has from childhood etc

What if you had never been told that what you were, was a seperate being, an 'I'?
What actually makes you seperate? Is it anything other than thoughts saying so?

Could this whole muddle just be thought playing a trick on itself. That 'I', this seperate self we believed we are just simply have been an idea all along and nothing more?

Xain ♥

[matumba]

Hi Xain,

What if you had never been told that what you were, was a seperate being, an 'I'?
What actually makes you seperate? Is it anything other than thoughts saying so?
Could this whole muddle just be thought playing a trick on itself. That 'I', this seperate self we believed we are just simply have been an idea all along and nothing more?

I have spent quite a bit of time looking the past day or two... my mind is being blown - not much to report back on though. You have really got 'me' observing on a different level here. Cognitive dissonance indeed!
I hope to have something to write to you tomorrow. Don't take my lack of in-depth posting as lack of time or interest, just... no real questions at this time.
Thanks,
John

[Xain]

No problem, John.

Take a little time out and consider all this.

Could 'I' be just a thought? And that's all that it has ever been?
What have been discovered so far in our discussion?

Are you expecting something special to happen?
If there has never been a seperate self, an 'I' all along, if it's all been a thought . . . what's going to change?
Any who or what is it going to happen to?

Is there an 'I', a seperate self that anything has ever happened to?
Can you find anything other that another thought? An idea?

Xain ♥

[matumba]

Hi Xain,
Responding by phone tab so it will be brief and no quotes. Will try for more tomorrow. Yes resistance. Yes hidden expectations. Really focussing on trying to see I as an idea - it is obvious but not staying with"me"
More tomorrow thanks
John

[Xain]

It is obvious but not staying with"me"

Is there an existing 'me', an 'I' here right now that 'something could stay with'?
Can you find one?
Or is this statement just a thought? An idea?

Xain ♥

[matumba]

Hi Xain,
Thanks for your patience.

Are you expecting something special to happen?
If there has never been a seperate self, an 'I' all along, if it's all been a thought . . . what's going to change?
Any who or what is it going to happen to?

There is something expected on this end... and it is as though "I" expect a change in outlook. But there is nothing to have an outlook - so that is just another circuitous thought.

Is there an existing 'me', an 'I' here right now that 'something could stay with'?
Can you find one?
Or is this statement just a thought? An idea?

There is no "I" but there sure is resistance. I have been looking more intently and noticing it (resistance). Maybe it is getting less and less, but this "cognitive dissonance" gives rise to some frustrating feelings haha.
Really, not much more to report on my end. Just hope that things are falling into place.
Thanks,
John

[Xain]

Is it clear that the resistance is from thought?
Thought says 'I see' and yet from experience, it is clear that there isn't a seperete 'I' here that sees?
This causes a clash perhaps?

How certain are you that 'I' is just a thought, an idea?

Indeed, is there an 'I' here right now . . . can one be found that is certain about anything?
Is 'I am certain' anything more than just an idea?

Do you have any questions about anything at this stage?

Xain ♥

[matumba]

Hi Xain,
Phone tablet again. Sorry for brevity and no quotes.
I WISH I had questions! Also wish it was clear haha. You are right on and I continue to look. It seems a bit like things are working themselves out. Will try posting when I get to a PC.
Thanks
John

[Xain]

Hi John

No problem.
Throw some questions my way when you have a moment.
Try to pinpoint where the issue is.

There is something expected on this end

Open up.
What exactly?
What is expected?

Xain ♥

[matumba]

Hi Xain,
Thanks again for your patience. I will just stay up late tonight and actually get a decent post in to let you know how its been going.
I can see there is no evidence of a separate I when looking. It is just a thought, but its expected to be a thought that is seen clearly as such, and it just doesn't resonate as clearly as other thoughts do. So I try to find whats expecting this entity known as I to be seen CLEARLY as a thought - and its done by comparing the idea to other thoughts which are clearly seen as thoughts.
WHEW. sounds strange.
There are feelings. These feelings are real and something feels them or is at least aware of them. There are thoughts. These thoughts are not real (but they are a fact because something is aware of them), just ideas that pop up about different things. Prior to LU, when a thought manifested, positive reinforcement (previously) falsely affirmed a separate entity "I" as the manifester of thought. Now that belief is gone and thoughts continue. They are seen as just thoughts for the most part.
I cannot seem to see that "I" am an idea clearly. I see it logically but it is not really sinking in. That is what I refer to as resistance. Is this resistance a thought? I've tried to look at it as such, but (just like "I") it doesn't sink in as a thought. It (resistance) SEEMS to be associated with an expectation(s). Like "I" expect to see this CLEARLY.

Now, I can't find out what it is that is expecting or doubting, or resisting - just that there ARE expectations, doubts, and resistance. So maybe they are feelings as opposed to thoughts. But aren't feelings just physical manifestation of thoughts?

Forgive this lengthy diatribe. I swear I am trying not to think/justify, but just look. Maybe I am not doing too good a job of just looking because all this makes logical sense (I being a thought), and if it makes logical sense, it should be obviously seen! Maybe I should take a break or maybe I should try harder? Right now there is a feeling of frustration - but again it's not "me" thats frustrated, just that feeling.
Thanks for your help,
John

[Xain]

I can see there is no evidence of a separate I when looking. It is just a thought, but its expected to be a thought that is seen clearly as such, and it just doesn't resonate as clearly as other thoughts do.

Incidentally, what was doing this looking?
Right now, this moment, if I asked you to LOOK - What is going to do that?

I am unsure what you mean regarding 'resonate'.
Can you give me an example of an 'I' thought that doesn't resonate clearly.
Perhaps tell me what 'I' thought appears most 'real' or 'true'?

Incidentally, what is going to see that the 'I' is a thought with absolute clarity?
What is going to do that?

So I try to find whats expecting this entity known as I to be seen CLEARLY as a thought - and its done by comparing the idea to other thoughts which are clearly seen as thoughts.
WHEW. sounds strange.

Look at what you are saying :-)
The very 'I' that could see that 'I' was a thought . . . is . . . itself . . . a thought!

I cannot seem to see that "I" am an idea clearly

'I am' is a claim of existence. I wouldn't state that you 'exist' as an idea.
More, that every reference to 'I', only appears in thought.

These feelings are real and something feels them or is at least aware of them.

There are feelings - Sure.
What can you find that feels them?
Don't think about it - Examine the feelings directly.
What 'I' is feeling the pressure on the body right now?
Are there two seperate things, the object creating the pressure (chair / bed) and the body experiencing the feeling?
Or is there just 'a feeling'? And no seperate 'thing' doing the feeling.
Could the only 'thing' that could be found or guessed that was doing the feeling is an idea about it - A thought.
One of them being 'I'?

I see it logically but it is not really sinking in

If there was an 'I', a seperate self there right now, then the idea that 'I' is only a thought could certainly 'sink' in.
Is there such an entity? Describe it?

Xain ♥

[matumba]

Hi Xain,

Incidentally, what was doing this looking?
Right now, this moment, if I asked you to LOOK - What is going to do that?

I've tried to observe that several times, and I don't really have an answer.

I am unsure what you mean regarding 'resonate'.
Can you give me an example of an 'I' thought that doesn't resonate clearly.
Perhaps tell me what 'I' thought appears most 'real' or 'true'?

When thoughts go into daydream like plans and they get realized as just that... a pipe dream and they resonate pretty clear. Whereas "I" as a thought is not realized as such. It (the I thought) is more akin to the awareness that identifies those thoughts that are realized as thoughts. And a thought can't realize a thought, so that is a nice muddled explaination ;)

Incidentally, what is going to see that the 'I' is a thought with absolute clarity?
What is going to do that?

As above, the same thing that realizes "obvious" thoughts. Say there are thoughts about me winning the lottery... that's easy to recognize as a thought/dream. Whereas the "I" thought is not realized as an obvious dream, but logically it IS.

Look at what you are saying :-)
The very 'I' that could see that 'I' was a thought . . . is . . . itself . . . a thought!

I mentioned above that I didn't think thought could realize a thought, but I guess that may be in error... thoughts don't think, but they can realize?

'I am' is a claim of existence. I wouldn't state that you 'exist' as an idea.
More, that every reference to 'I', only appears in thought.

Good stuff right there - I will sit with that for a spell.

Could the only 'thing' that could be found or guessed that was doing the feeling is an idea about it - A thought. One of them being 'I'?

Just a feeling and not a separate thing. I don't know what is doing the feeling. It doesn't seem right to guess that the only thing feeling the feeling is a thought - maybe that is it, but it doesn't fit in with my preconception of thought. The I doesn't appear there really even as a thought (seemingly). However, when I don't or can't examine the feelings directly, then the habitual I emerges, and when it's realized (by I don't know what as mentioned above) then that habitual I is logically explained away, but not experienced as a thought... I don't know what it is, but its not seen as a thought.