The claiming

When there is thinking of a future or past moment, as in planning or remembering, there is conceptualising. All attention is on the words of a story arising as the mind. If there is interest in the story the attention then continues to fuel it and this leads to its continuation in time. The attention of the moment is broken or split from the perceptual reality to the conceptual reality, which, although appearing to be real enough, is in fact not at all real but a figment of imagination.

As a young child this did not happen as the attention was not encumbered by conceptualising, but was conscious only of what was perceived. What was perceived was what appeared, NOT what was imagined to be appearing. The mind of a child does not conceptualise but is present to what appears as a reflection to the senses, the room, the moon, mums face etc. It holds no thinking process.

In a sense the child is a feeling being only. As an adult there is a split second between the attention being in perception and the attention habitually being drawn to the conceptualising so there is a very short period of time when one is rested at the level of the percept before the split in the mind takes place. As a result of this as an adult one becomes a thinking being.

As an adult we do have this perceptual moment but are unable to remain present to it before we are separated into subject to object relationship. Just a split second before this happens we are One with the object, in fact we ARE it and there is no sense of separation. Consciousness and its object are always One and when this is true of the moment there is no sense of being someone or something viewing something or someone. The moment that the attention by habit jumps from being what IS to being an apparent two is where or when the ego arises.

The ego is a habitual thought that arises to claim what IS in the moment as being a result of its presence. The so-called THINKER appears AFTER the thought claiming to be the producer of the prior thought, it itself is but another thought arising as all other thought does from what witnesses the appearance of all thought.

I see, I think, I feel etc. are all claims made after identification with the object seen have been made. The fact that seeing, thinking and feeling have occurred is true but it is NOT a fact that something or someone calling itself I or me has produced them. This I or me is an idea, a belief, a concept, another thought arising.

If attention is able to remain present to what IS the bringing into play of the splitting of attention into subject and object relationship does not occur and there is Oneness. In this Oneness there is Awareness of being what is in that moment, the I and the object are One and so no subject to object relationship is present. Where there is no splitting of what is essentially One consciousness, there is Oneness. The I is what IS, what is IS I.

When I is alone it has no means of being aware of itself, this is only possible once the I itself creates out of itself an object to appear within itself to be aware of. When this occurs there is Oneness with what appears, if the splitting of what is essential One takes place then the subject to object relationship takes place and I lives in apparent duality, apparent separation.

Seeing that thought is an object appearing AFTER the splitting has occurred and that thought itself is the one that claims to be the one that is doing the done action it cannot be a true identity but an identification with an object that has already appeared. This apparent entity is therefore not an entity at all but an activity, the identifying with an action. The ego therefore is an activity of which the true entity is the action of witnessing itself. The ego in truth is neither the producer nor the doer, as it claims to be, of anything that takes place, it itself being superseded by the witnessing. As the witness(ing) is superseded by nothing when the object is removed from the situation the witness must therefore be Nothing, Emptiness, Absence, bound neither by the objective nor the subjective relationship. Our true identity does not identify with itself because it has no requirement to do so as it is always in conscious Awareness of itself as Nothing, prior to that appearance that it itself brings into play to create the illusion of time and space.

The true identity of ALL things AND the Nothing is absence. True presence is absent of any sense of thingness.

If what has been stated is intuitively understood it will be seen that it is totally futile for the ego, which is a misidentified with already appeared object, to do anything at all to remove its identification with itself as a someone or something for in so doing it continues to try to reinstate and reinforce itself as the doer. All and any methods therefore to eradicate the pseudo self ( the ego) to reveal the true Self cannot achieve their intended goal, but will continue to fuel the concept of a me as the subject of an objective reality thus resulting in the continuation of apparent duality and suffering.

Once this is clear and obvious a letting go takes place in which no one is involved.

Avasa