witness? watcher? who? where?

329

Several highly respected books on ‘awakening’ advise that once the impossibility of a separate self-entity has been irrefutably seen, ‘identification’ needs to shift from that illusory person to the ‘watcher’ or ‘witness’, and that further along the path, this witness will dissolve into pure primordial Awareness – which is what One truly is.

I find this quite illogical. I just don’t get it, never did; I missed this step, totally.

Having met the impossibility of ‘my’ separate existence, the impossibility of an independent object called by my name here, there or anywhere, past present or future, just who would this person with ability to identify with anything BE?

Who could become the ‘watcher’ or ‘witness’ – or for that matter, emptiness?

Identification was suddenly as obsolete as the old ‘me’ and it took off – taking self and no-self with it – when it was clearly seen that wild wideawakeness is the only player in this game, and that that wideawakeness – aka natural, naked aware-ing – is none other than ‘I’.

The ‘I’ casts off the illusion of ‘I’
and yet remains as ‘I’,
such is the paradox of Self-realization.
~ Sri Ramana Maharshi

Wondrous!

~

seething, teeming wideawakeness

325

It’s true that there’s nothing to do in order to abide in this brilliant wideawakeness. It’s also true that doing nothing is no different from doing everything possible.

Wideawakeness has no preferences whatsoever; its unimaginable vastness includes all activities and practices, faiths and beliefs and philosophies.

Wideawakeness is sometimes called the ‘silent witness’ but if one looks very closely a witness cannot be found at all – it’s merely another arising thought. When the witness idea dissolves, it’s clearly seen that no separation exists between wideawakeness and whatever (is appearing, happening).

The witness and the watcher and the wee-me are all sparkling froth on this unfathomable ocean of seething teeming wideawakeness.

~