Who Am I? Again

[`mud]

That coin does have two sides, and it doesn't have to be flipped.
But if it doesn't get flipped, how does one remove the veil ?
Once the coin is flipped, and veil removed, will we know the result ?
Maybe the coin lands on it's edge, then what will the language be ?
What then controls the thoughts that are generated, and the actions ?
How does one use another language to effect the results of this ?
Now, with this, are conventions really needed to see the results ?
This seems to be a grand circular path around the bush, doesn't it ?

 

[Willamena]

That coin does have two sides, and it doesn't have to be flipped.
But if it doesn't get flipped, how does one remove the veil ?
Once the coin is flipped, and veil removed, will we know the result ?
Maybe the coin lands on it's edge, then what will the language be ?
What then controls the thoughts that are generated, and the actions ?
How does one use another language to effect the results of this ?
Now, with this, are conventions really needed to see the results ?
This seems to be a grand circular path around the bush, doesn't it ?

Most of these questions make no sense to me.

It's not a choice that the coin be flipped: it is either flipped by virtue of holding to one ontological model, or it isn't by virtue of holding to another. The former, generally referred to as the Cartesian duality, is prevalent.

I stood that coin on its side once, but I don't think it's the same as what you ask about.

One removes the veil with the realization that the world outside your head does not differ from its reflection inside your head. We like to think the world is hidden behind the blanket our thoughts, but there literally is nothing to hide.

 

[`mud]

I said it was a grand circular path, didn't I ?
No matter the language or the side of the coin or the convention,
it makes no difference in the absolute results, the veil is gone !
Do you want to go around again ? Flip the coin and try again.

 

[`mud]

OH...Remember the OP...
Who am I !
With the veil removed.

 

[atanu]

The understanding arises with discrimination between seer and the seen because of convention. It is the grammatical convention (in most languages) that verbs have a subject.

When we are taught, as youngsters, that this action means "to eat," we are at the same time implicitly taught that there is an eater who is eating. When we understand that there is thinking, with that thought we also have learned that there is a thinker. And when our ontological models of the universe give life to thought, as if distinct from the world, we also give life to that other side of the coin.

We bring what is behind the veil to life, with how we use language.

Without correct discrimination, the notion that the body is ‘me’ will continue.Whereas ‘me’ is the seer of the objects.

Different schools proceed in different manner to unveil the veil. In Vedanta, the ‘not this not this’ or ‘Who Am I?’ enquiries are prescribed.

It is not Cartesian duality. Neither it is Zen or Buddhism.

 

[Willamena]

Without correct discrimination, the notion that the body is ‘me’ will continue.Whereas ‘me’ is the seer of the objects.

Different schools proceed in different manner to unveil the veil. In Vedanta, the ‘not this not this’ or ‘Who Am I?’ enquiries are prescribed.

It is not Cartesian duality. Neither it is Zen or Buddhism.

I see the Cartesian duality in the conventional notion that the seer is distinct from the seen (objects). The veil is revealed to be no veil, when seer and seen come together.

Ordinarily, people consider themselves very much a part of the world, while practicing very, very much to not be a part of it. There is no genuine belief that they are the world; instead, they consider the world to be something that happens to them, for them, about them. To be the world is to believe that you, the world, happen.

 

[atanu]

I see the Cartesian duality in the conventional notion that the seer is distinct from the seen (objects). The veil is revealed to be no veil, when seer and seen come together.

It is not Cartesian duality. In Cartesian duality, the duality is real. In advaita, OTOH, the consciousness is non dual. The duality is in the level of mind, which is nothing but "I am this" thought. The mind is reflected consciousness like a moon shown in a puddle.

The Seer-Seen-Seeing never became divided. Yet it does not seem so to any one, because mind is not at same non dual consciousness level.

The wave does not know the ocean, which does not know the water. Water never became not-water.

The coming together of seer and seen is known by what? By the seen? Does the brain see the "I"? Does the body see the awareness? These questions are very basic yet are necessary when the idea is "I am this body-mind-intellect".

I do not know how you arrived at the non dual 'seer-seen-seeing' scenario. But Vedanta prescription for common man like me is to first drill down to the seer through an enquiry "Neti-Neti" and then be the seer and nothing else -- and abide patiently. The knowledge is that the seen is a dream creation -- like images of one moon in many puddles.

Ordinarily, people consider themselves very much a part of the world, while practicing very, very much to not be a part of it. There is no genuine belief that they are the world; instead, they consider the world to be something that happens to them, for them, about them. To be the world is to believe that you, the world, happen.

We practice being part of the samsara, with tools of samsara, called Buddhi (intellect) and ahankara (ego). With these two tools we are to drill down to the source of these two.
...

IMO, it is different from pantheism of Zen etc.

 

[`mud]

Not this...not that...and not the other.
This leaves not much of a choice,
this leaves the Cosmos' offering.

 

[atanu]

Collected Works of Sri Ramana Maharshi: Five Verses on the Self

Five Verses on the Self

1. When, forgetting the Self, one thinks
That the body is oneself and goes
Through innumerable births
And in the end remembers and becomes
The Self, know this is only like
Awaking from a dream wherein
One has wandered over all the world.

2. One ever is the Self. To ask oneself
`Who and whereabouts am I?'
Is like the drunken man's enquiring
`Who am I?' and `Where am I?'

3. The body is within the Self. And yet
One thinks one is inside the inert body,
Like some spectator who supposes
That the screen on which the picture is thrown
Is within the picture.

4. Does an ornament of gold exist
Apart from the gold? Can the body exist
Apart from the Self?
The ignorant one thinks `I am the body';
The enlightened knows `I am the Self'.

5. The Self alone, the Sole Reality,
Exists for ever.
If of yore the First of Teachers
Revealed it through unbroken silence
Say who can reveal it in spoken words?

 

[`mud]

Atanu said:
"The ignorant one thinks `I am the body';
The enlightened knows `I am the Self'."

I can add: "The enlightened knows `I am the spirit'."

The whole thing I copied and will hang up, very good thoughts !

 

[Kirran]

Nisargadatta says the duality between seer and seen is illusory, but it's still a necessary step for many people to learn to focus on the former.

 

[atanu]

Silence is the answer to "Who Am I?" and sohum, our breath repeating "I am that" is the nearest answer as per Vedanta.

 

[atanu]

 

[atanu]

The answer to query “Who Am I?” cannot be found Intellectually, since the true I, the subject of the I, is prior to intellect. But the I that we come to know through mental chatter is a product of mental fabrications.

The only correct answer to “Who Am I?” Is silence of mind and word.

I found a nice article that deals with this subject in a more scientific way.

Figuring Out the Answer to Who Am I?

 

[Audie]

Terrif. Instead of taking any note of the
beauty of the surroundings, close eyes and
make it all about me me me.

 

[atanu]

When the attention involutes to the so called individual ‘me’, comprised of body-mind, there remains no individual ‘me’. The beauty is still there in all glory sans extinction.

 

[atanu]

Lawrence Kuhn is on a mission to find ‘What continues?’

Those who want to get a summary only may see the video beginning from 21:30 minute.
...