306
‘I’ is the eye of existence.
‘Me’ is the figment of fantasy that imagines itself owner of that eye. ‘Me’ is the way ‘I’ refers to itself, yet neither an ‘I’ nor a ‘me’ can ever be located.
The I-eye of clear Awakeness is owned by nothing – no circumstance, no person/entity, no thing whatsoever.
It is never born, although the body- mind organism it saturates and substantiates appears to be born.
It never dies, although its ‘host’ will appear to do so.
It can never be found, for it is always inseparable from that which seeks.
‘I’ is nothing to do with me, or any other personal pronoun.
‘I’ is.
That’s all that can be known – or said – about It.
And even that’s two words too many.
~
echoes from emptiness 
Inspired!
Paraphrasing, “The Atman is not the seeing of the eye, but That by which the eye can see”. I may have quoted the scripture wrongly; would you say that the seeing and It (Atman) are one and the same? (who sees otherwise?)
You answer your question beautifully, AM:
“who sees otherwise?”
inLove
~ ml