bardia (bardia) wrote in bournvita,
bardia
bardia
bournvita

"... leaving aside for the moment our own 'selfs' ..."

If,
as Plato teaches,
'vision'
consists of 'something'
entering the eye, from 'without,'

and some other 'something'

exiting the eye, from 'within,'

how are we to
'account for'

one's
'vision'
of one's
'self'?

leaving aside the absurd
notion that we 'are'
our physical bodies,

one's 'vision,'

one's 'impression,' of one's 'self'

clearly pertains to what is often referred to as

'the mind's eye.'

the questions are:

what is 'entering' this 'eye'
from within ... anything at all?

what is 'exiting' this 'eye'
(again) from within?


when I 'look inside'
and 'see'
my 'self,'

just who is 'seeing' what?

there are 'thoughts,' yes.

there are 'emotions' and 'feelings,' yes.

there are 'memories,' 'dreams' and 'anticipations,' yes.

BUT,

in that
'I'
am
'seeing'
them,
they cannot be my 'self,'
cannot be 'me,'
'

no more than can
any 'thing' 'I'
'see' in the so-called
'external world,' e.g., that tree over there.


Thus,
the 'manner' in which I
'identify'
my 'self'

pertains (only) to
what 'exits' my mind's eye,

to an 'identity' I super-impose upon the
'internal' field of perceptions and upon the
various 'ojbects' perceived within it.

If,
as an East Indian Teacher says,


"we see what we 'want' to see,"

Then,
the 'self'
'I'
'see'
is (precisely) the 'self'
'I'
'want'
to 'see' ...

which is, alas,
(part of the reason)
why the Enlightened Ones
teach that there is, in fact,
no 'self'
'in there'
to 'see'
--- at all.

the 'self'
I 'see'
is only a super-imposition from my 'mind'
onto the internal field of experiences.


if this 'want' to see is
entirely eliminated,

will 'I'
'see' ('find') a 'self'
'inside'?

No,
only thoughts, feelings, emotions, memories, dreams, hopes,
anticipations, plans, fears, etc.

These 'things' are
mine,
like the clothes 'I' am wearing,

but are not
'me.'

so, then, of what does 'self-knowledge' consist?

In order to answer such a question,

it has been suggested (for millenia) that one must first
find-out the answer to this question:

"Who (what) is asking?"

Answer: "I am."

Question: "Who is this 'I,' if it is not the body, mind,
feelings, etc., let alone 'items' in the body's
'environment.'

Answer: "the 'I' asking is not a 'who' at all,
not a 'what' at all,

IT
IS,
(simply)

"I AM," and,

unlike the bland, self-congratulatory claims of the pseudo-
'enlightened,'

'realization' of that

"I AM"

is
not
the
'end,'
but,
is,
alas,
but the barest beginning on

the
"Way" ...

it
is the
Portal,
through which one must
'pass'
in order to become,
in 'time,'
a true learner,
a true pupil ...

of Those Who Know ...

super-imposition overcome
'thinking' one 'knows' overcome ...


'perception,
pure,
and simple.'

Another 'interesting' question:

(just) how, then, do
'I'
let-go of
this 'self'

which is not
'me,'
but,
nonetheless,
'mine' ...
in that
'it'

is

'my'

'creation'?


more, perhaps,
in the 'course' of 'time.'
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic
  • 0 comments