If there is no I, then where am I?

[SoonHei]

34 minutes ago, Mu_ said:

What has these idea's?  What see's things this way?  If "You" were not truely awake, you would not see any of these idea's inside yourself.

What is aware of the free floating see of association and memories and feelings and the rest?  What is aware of the Construct?

NOTHING has these ideas
NOTHING sees things that way
NOTHING is aware of the construct, memories etc

 

NOTHING and I are exchangeable as it's all ONE.

[ground]

17 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

@ground @SoonHei The human mind is conditioned to use pronouns such as "I", "me", "you" in a personal context. In daily life, pronouns are used in a personal context 99.99% of the time. On this forum, personal pronouns seem normal and fine for discussions at the human/personality level. Yet, when conversations start entering trans-personal / no-self zones, it can get a bit awkward and tricky at times. Here, "I", "me" and "you" doesn't literally mean there is a real self. We still use pronouns because without pronouns conversations get very awkward, inefficient, confusing and annoying. However, there is an underlying understanding that we are not literally referring to a self. It just makes conversation more efficient. 

 

Perfectly fine. However my point was the sentiment 'I' not the concept 'I'. I think that 'I' often is negated on a merely intellectual level and that this is why many people run into more and more merely intellectual issues about 'I'. Therefore if 'I' is identified on an experiential level it can be quite straightforward to realize the truthlessness of this sentiment and the negation of it can be final and doesn't lead to intellectually fabricated  'monkey mind' proliferations.

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, ground said:

Perfectly fine. However my point was the sentiment 'I' not the concept 'I'. I think that 'I' often is negated on a merely intellectual level and that this is why many people run into more and more merely intellectual issues about 'I'. Therefore if 'I' is identified on an experiential level it can be quite straightforward to realize the truthlessness of this sentiment and the negation of it can be final and doesn't lead to intellectually fabricated  'monkey mind' proliferations.

Agreed. A personality may speak intellectually of no-self without awareness of the personality. The embodiment of no-self is key.

[LastThursday]

4 hours ago, Mu_ said:

What is aware of the Construct?

Thank you @Mu_ for your video.

That's the realisation. The Construct is aware of the Construct. It has literally pulled itself up by its own bootstraps. It has conjured itself up from nothing. The Construct is aware of its own awareness. The awareness is an awareness of something however. Aside from the vagaries of language use, awareness is something that 'cuts' or 'divides' or 'separates', because otherwise everything would be the same and awareness would cease. If the awareness were dropped into an infinity of nothing it would not exist. And yet despite that, here is reality and there surely is awareness.

If I kill the Construct, does awareness also die? Is the Construct awareness itself? Is awareness all there is?

[Mu_]

3 hours ago, LastThursday said:

Thank you @Mu_ for your video.

That's the realisation. The Construct is aware of the Construct. It has literally pulled itself up by its own bootstraps. It has conjured itself up from nothing. The Construct is aware of its own awareness. The awareness is an awareness of something however. Aside from the vagaries of language use, awareness is something that 'cuts' or 'divides' or 'separates', because otherwise everything would be the same and awareness would cease. If the awareness were dropped into an infinity of nothing it would not exist. And yet despite that, here is reality and there surely is awareness.

If I kill the Construct, does awareness also die? Is the Construct awareness itself? Is awareness all there is?

From what I gather on how your using Construct, no, the Construct is not Awareness, but a system of looking and feeling and believing the world. 

Is Awareness all there is?  If by God/Oneness, yes, but if you mean your personal awareness, or awareness as a function that makes bodies/beings able to experience, no theres more+that.

[ground]

10 hours ago, LastThursday said:

Is awareness all there is?

This is funny, isn't it? Mind is always looking for support. When all there is has been denied then there has to be at least one remainder. So let's take 'awareness'. 

And since mind needs support and all there is has been denied - except 'awareness' - the ontological monism so typical for Hindu-like thinking ensues. Because - please please please be true! - at least this  'awareness' has to truly exist.

However having said that 'Mind is always looking for support' is actually implicitly asserting a support. Why? Since 'mind' has been applied in the affirmative.

Ok, then: 'Nothing whatsoever exists.' To this it may be replied 'Who/what is saying this?'

It's only language.
Therefore:
'Is awareness all there is?' - 'No, everything exists.' 
'But wait, above you have said Nothing whatsoever exists.' - 'yes'.
'you're contradicting your self!' - 'No.'
'But why?' - 'Because it's only language.'

[LastThursday]

Thanks all. I've exhausted myself on this topic. Time for a mushroom tea and a darkened room...

[Amanaki]

The "I" that the OP is thinking of is the Ego, that because i experience the world there must be a peronification of "ME" And when thinking with the Ego one does not see the physical realm in a true/real way.

Example: If you put your body under a big enough mircoscope you will, if you zoom in far enough see that the "solid" you are full of holes empty space.

And the other way, if you look at cosmos there are space between planets and stars. there is no difference in you as a person and you as the cosmos. In this physical realm you for lack of word is cosmos. everything is you and nothing is you as person.

Think of cosmos as a body and you as a body. planets go around starts (sun) neutrons and protones go around a cell.

But when you let go of the attachments to a self this become clear, no words is needed to see it then