Nemra

No. It is direct.

The same thing that can identify with thoughts.

You have the ability to know. If the I is already known, then you would have had to know it before not knowing it. However, you didn't know it in the beginning. Although, we can assume that we know things.

If I only were the thoughts, then I wouldn't exist when I didn't think. However, that's not the case.

When you don't think. My worldview is intact even when I'm not thinking or having thoughts.

You don't have to walk to be the walker. Likewise, you can be thoughtless while being the thinker, even though you are not thinking.

You are diverging from your main disagreement with me, which is the following: Let's not pointlessly argue. And frankly, your thoughts are too choppy, which confuses me.

Why, in the first place, were you able to identify with thoughts? Think about it.

Aren't you thinking, writing and walking?

I agree that the self can be built on top of constructions. But if you can know that something is a construction, then knowing itself would be beyond constructions. I don't know that when you never think, you would eventually be conscious of nothing. Maybe. However, thoughts can point to those things. We are using our thoughts now. If it's not experience, then the "nothing" never happened. So, you can't even say that you know what nothing is. I don't agree that thoughtlessness necessarily is equal to "nothing".

Then how do you know that thinking happens? Isn't that your mind? If that mind isn't yours, how do you know about it?

I don't know. Isn't knowing possible? Haven't you known something? However, the above is another matter. When you try not to think, you will have a thoughtless experience.

I don't understand how the stuff you said about "knower and known" is a proof that "thoughtless experience" is impossible.

And I didn't agree with you and wanted an additional explanation from you by asking you a question. We were talking about "thoughtless experience", if I remember. You brought up the "knower and known".

Firstly, why would it be conjoined as twoness if the knower and the known are united? Secondly, how is your post above connected to the below?

I don't understand why it can't be both.

Yes. We are sharing our thoughts. Why would it be impossible?

Yes, you do. If your thinking isn't self-reflective and you find understanding the underlying processes difficult, perhaps it might be better for you not to think.

Thoughtless experience. You are sharing your thoughts about it now.

@Ziran, I like it when non-duality pops up unintentionally.

Ugh. "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" was the first one I watched when I was a kid, and it's my favorite. The writing is better than the others.

If experience was a form of thought, wouldn't you be able to think stuff into existence? Can you have a thought if there wasn't an experience? Haven't you had an experience without thinking about it? I would say that we have ideas about experiences.

It was emotional. The song choice was great.

@Miguel1, you've got moves!

I didn't deny reality being a dream. I just added more nuance. Where do you think the dream analogy comes from? It comes from when you have dreams at night. When you're dreaming at night, your waking life doesn't exist. Are your dreams less real than your waking life?