Post by Figgles on May 1, 2021 23:08:24 GMT
A question oft prescribed to those seeking for Truth that is meant to guide mind into looking beyond the body/mind/person that has to date, seemingly been the locus of seeing. The seeker swears he is seeing from the position of being a limited person that he erroneously knows himself to be.
Who/what am I, is a question designed to ultimately shift that locus of seeing, but even more, to ultimately destroy all sense of 'locus'...all sense of seeing from any defined, limited, designated place/position/something/someone/somewhere that can be conceptualized.
If/when that question leads to it's intended end, what gets seen is that all seeing, all experiencing, all perception happens 'absent' a seer, absent an experiencer, a perceiver...which also means, absent a limited, secular, individualized, vantage point. The very idea of 'individualized vantage point' implies multiple perceivers, which surely if there are in actuality, NO perceivers at all, is of course then, a gross misconception.
We see that the very idea of 'my' Being....'my' awareness, of a who/what that lies behind seeing, has always been nothing more than a misconception.
To speak of a 'who' then, of a 'my life,' or of 'my body,' means an 'in the dream view.' And that's fine. Even in SR, there's a body, a 'me character' that continues to appear.
To arrive at a sense of 'who/what,' that can be put into words, when seeking Truth, is to speak from mind's interpretation even if that 'who' is deemed to be something/someone very grandiose and without limits.
If the question of a "who" has truly been seen through, there's no longer a conflation of that appearance (nor any other appearance) as inherently absolute...in other words, we no longer take the appearing character as the ground to which the world arises, rather, the appearing character is seen to be an arising within that that which fundamentally abides as the ground. It's appearance only.
The seeing through of separation/SVP means an absence now of the SVP and thus, the locus of seeing shifts from the realm of the person to beyond. But sometimes mind jumps back in to fill the void of the seeing through/absence and it imagines a 'who/something' that exists beyond the personal, that then takes the place of 'seer/experiencer/doer/perceiver.' (ZD is a good example of this).
When mind does not jump back in to erroneously fill in the absence of a 'who/what,' and there simply remains an absence of 'who/whatness', no identification whatsoever with the conceptual, the very question then of "who am I", get seen as misconceived. The end of seeking is always an undoing....an unknowing....a seeing through/absence, NOT the addition of new knowledge.
SR reveals that what you really are, is not a what....not a who....not any-thing that can be defined, grasped or designated as a 'some-thing,' and in that, even the most nuanced shade/sense of somethingness, is clearly seen to be 'appearance only' and as all appearances, an arising within to that which abides (and cannot be grasped by concepts or intellect).
Who/what am I, is a question designed to ultimately shift that locus of seeing, but even more, to ultimately destroy all sense of 'locus'...all sense of seeing from any defined, limited, designated place/position/something/someone/somewhere that can be conceptualized.
If/when that question leads to it's intended end, what gets seen is that all seeing, all experiencing, all perception happens 'absent' a seer, absent an experiencer, a perceiver...which also means, absent a limited, secular, individualized, vantage point. The very idea of 'individualized vantage point' implies multiple perceivers, which surely if there are in actuality, NO perceivers at all, is of course then, a gross misconception.
We see that the very idea of 'my' Being....'my' awareness, of a who/what that lies behind seeing, has always been nothing more than a misconception.
To speak of a 'who' then, of a 'my life,' or of 'my body,' means an 'in the dream view.' And that's fine. Even in SR, there's a body, a 'me character' that continues to appear.
To arrive at a sense of 'who/what,' that can be put into words, when seeking Truth, is to speak from mind's interpretation even if that 'who' is deemed to be something/someone very grandiose and without limits.
If the question of a "who" has truly been seen through, there's no longer a conflation of that appearance (nor any other appearance) as inherently absolute...in other words, we no longer take the appearing character as the ground to which the world arises, rather, the appearing character is seen to be an arising within that that which fundamentally abides as the ground. It's appearance only.
The seeing through of separation/SVP means an absence now of the SVP and thus, the locus of seeing shifts from the realm of the person to beyond. But sometimes mind jumps back in to fill the void of the seeing through/absence and it imagines a 'who/something' that exists beyond the personal, that then takes the place of 'seer/experiencer/doer/perceiver.' (ZD is a good example of this).
When mind does not jump back in to erroneously fill in the absence of a 'who/what,' and there simply remains an absence of 'who/whatness', no identification whatsoever with the conceptual, the very question then of "who am I", get seen as misconceived. The end of seeking is always an undoing....an unknowing....a seeing through/absence, NOT the addition of new knowledge.
SR reveals that what you really are, is not a what....not a who....not any-thing that can be defined, grasped or designated as a 'some-thing,' and in that, even the most nuanced shade/sense of somethingness, is clearly seen to be 'appearance only' and as all appearances, an arising within to that which abides (and cannot be grasped by concepts or intellect).
It's not anything I'd ever confront a seeker with unless I thought it might help on a one-to-one personal level, in the moment, and I was just relating what it meant to me during the time of glorious confusion.
