 And in that sense the construct is asking the question, the small self that's concerned about job or family issues or abortion or capital punishment or even I'm a screwed up person. I'm this little person and I'm all screwed up and I don't have it together like so and so. Comparison is once again you have to have a subject object split for that and you have to get into even to compare thought forms, you have to, there is an ordering involved and with that comparison, with that ordering, then the construct then asks the questions. And those aren't real questions in the alderman sense, those are statements, it's like Statements of the construct. When I say what about my, I have a problem with my boss or I have a problem with my daughter or so forth, it's really or even the construct asking the question, what's wrong with my relationship with so and so or what's wrong with my life, really it's just the construct asking the question or another way of looking at it is the construct making a statement that it is a construct because the construct isn't seen as a construct. So this points us around full circle to defining the problem that even if the problem has been solved, how can one know that it has been solved if one hasn't been able to see what the problem is? It seems like really once that you can really see what the problem is, what seemed to be the problem doesn't seem like a problem. There is no problem. That's the fact that there is no problem. Because the only problem, well, because every perceived problem really is a belief in separation and there is no separation, is that what you're saying? And so there is no problem, there's only seeming problems. Once the construct is seen as a construct, the split is healed because there is no subject object split anymore. The problem has been seen as a problem in the mind. The split was in the mind and once it's been given up, once it's been seen as that's not the fact of it, that's not what is reality, then there is no problem. So the key idea that we opened up with about you first have to see the problem as being in the mind and once it is recognized to be a problem that the split is in the mind, not out in the world, then there is no problem. So why doesn't it seem that easy to do? I guess because the mind just doesn't want to see that it's not out in the world. The mind doesn't want to see that it's just right there in the mind. Well, let's bring it back to our conversation here and pull it away from the abstract. I mean, if it doesn't seem easy, there has to be an investment in that construct in those thought-form associations. Why is there such a strong investment in it? Because there's fear. There's fear that if I give up ordering my thoughts, if I give up this construct of who I think I am as a person, all my meanings and associations and conclusions I've reached about the world, that there will be loss involved, that it will be scary. It's somehow that this construct is serving me, that it has value to me. And it's like, why would I want to step back in the mind to see the bigger picture? Why would I want to question the construct if I still believe that it serves me? It wouldn't. There'd be no motivation. There's no point in fixing what isn't broken. So, one can say, well, that seems awful deep. It seems awful abstract. Let's bring it back to the feeling level. Do you feel complete, stable peace in your life? Is it a roller-coaster ride? Do you have emotions, fluctuating emotions, seeming times of peace and joy and seeming times of whatever, upset, aggravation, irritation, guilt, fear, jealousies, so on and so forth. Mild or major, irritation, rage, regardless of the degree, regardless of the direction. Can one start to look at one's life and honestly look at the emotions and say, gee, I don't feel a constant, consistent, stable state of peace. That there is something here that needs to be looked at. A lot of times people have said, well, you just try to minimize your demons or your vices and everything. Manage your neurosis. Just come to a sense of general unhappiness and try to manage the major crises. Is that a particular miserableness? Can we come to a point where one can start to see, realistically see the hope of completely bringing to an end all sense of upset, all sense of disorder, all sense of chaos. A phenomenal kind of proposition. To do that requires the questioning of the constructs. Requires that the mind let go of those thought-form associations. And you can't let go of them unless you see that they're there, obviously. And you can't see that they're there if you believe that they, that you are they, that you are a construct. So the dialogue helps to uncover, disclose, expose the constructs. It helps the mind to see, oh, I thought that was me. I thought that was me, but I'm not that. To step back and to disidentify that which it thought it was. And there's just immense joy with that. I mean, it's like weights of strain, stress lifted off the mind. By holding on to the construct and the thought-form associations, it was denying its natural, abstract state, its state of freedom. And conversely, by being able to step back and disidentify from the false construct, the mind is released to its natural state and feels a stable sense of peace and joy. It takes a lot of energy to hold in place an idea of myself that's not myself. I can see how freeing it is to just let go of all that garbage that I've tacked on. In the early stages, it is frightening because it seems to be letting go of the ways of the world. The world teaches bigger, better, faster and more. Upward mobility, for instance, is a common-held belief. Competition, staying ahead of the competition. So you were saying that it feels kind of scary to think about stepping out of all the ways of the world that has a concept familiar? Because, once again, it gives back to the security. The construct, the mind is placed its identity in this concept. And it seems ludicrous to step out of ambition. It seems ludicrous, you know, it seems to the construct says, you will die. You know, that is a sense in the world of scarcity from within the belief system. The concept that to give up the striving and the fighting and everything, you will be swallowed up by this so-called external world that itself is a construct. Because the teaching has been that it's only by setting goals and working hard and going for it that you can get anything. That you can get your fair share, that you can stay ahead of the game, that you can keep your chin above water. And what you're saying is that when you let go of that construct or that self-concept, that you're also letting go of all those kinds of goals. You're actually replacing those kinds of goals with the one goal of being at peace. A unified goal of peace. So we're not speaking of this process of laying aside the concept as a goal less process in the sense of it has a goal. But that goal is an abstract goal, peace of mind. It is not, there is no form, thought form associated with that goal. The goal can seem to be a very, that can seem to be very ambiguous and abstract when the mind is conditioned to pursuing achieving concrete goals. Certain outcomes that are desirable in the world side. But that's in effect what it is, is the laying aside of the worldly goals for the one goal of peace.