yes,
"I" desiring to know
departs from the source
rising-up to a higher vantage point
makes its claims of ownership,
confirming the dualistic-viewpoint
on which society is built.
Doubt is also a useful tool
to dismantle belief
Tonight I don't have the time.
But this thing has been bouncing around inside the shell.
Unformed. Ungrasped. (apparently not a word!)
Some speak of staying in the "I am".
I suppose that means "be awareness".
There can be the sense of a subject looking at an object.
There can be a sense of the subject pulling back into itself,
with objects arising.
In that particular case...objects are simultaneously known...
there is knowing of arisings.
and not known.
The subject is somehow...not.
The intuition is....
Right!!!
The sense of something looking at something is really quite palpable.
The sense of a subject pulling back into itself is also palpable.
Subject held out of the way, objects still appearing, knowing with no knower.
Almighty "I" appears to be the problem.
Trying to find itself somewhere.
Seems like the apparent knower dissolving into the arisings is closer to wholeness
Than the apparent knower pulling back into itself, hoping to know itself.
Bottom line is
seems there might be a choice here.
A more fruitful direction.
All pretty advaita talk aside.
Between pulling back and staying in what feels like the subject.
Objects known, knower busy pulling back
Or dissolving into the objects.
Some seem to posit a knower outside of the known.
More and more that seems like an error over here.
I've heard it said (once or twice) that the "knower" must know itself as separate from the known before it can know itself as the known.
How one does one or the other I can't say.
Seems like it's just time to be the known.
Knower be d??ned.
Darned is the best I can get away with.
Seems so...so... weak an expression.
Thanks for helping me work this out.
Any luck I'll remember I resolved something.
I'll remember what to sit with tomorrow.