There is No Perceiver, Only Perceiving

[Guest guest]

There is No Perceiver, Only Perceiving

Pointers from Nisargadatta Maharaj

Chapter 33

 

One morning, when a visitor began his question with the usual: "I want know

.. . .," Maharaj began to laugh and without waiting for the Marathi

translation interrupted with a counter-question in English: "I -- who"?

Then, having enjoyed the joke hugely, he went back to his native Marathi and

said: It is really so very simple, this that I am trying to convey to you.

You too would find it so, if only you could keep the 'me' aside, when you

listen! If you would only remember that so long as there is a supposedly

autonomous entity, volitionally trying to understand what I am saying, true

understanding is out of the question. Apprehension of metaphysical

revelation presupposes an enquiring, open 'vacant' mind in which such

apprehension could enter. Any 'independent' entity indicates a conditioned

mind, full of concepts, resisting the entry of anything that I want to

impart. Do I make myself clear, I wonder!

 

 

Even though I use words, and you hear them, the imparting will be possible

only if the subject and the object merge in the hearing of it. Begin at the

beginning and examine whether there exists any 'one' either to talk or to

listen, or there is merely 'functioning' -- talking, listening,

apprehending, experiencing.

 

When you think of something 'existing', you think only in terms of something

which is objective, with a form. You are concerned only with objective

phenomena, whereas I see all objects, including you, as nothing more or less

than appearances in consciousness, and therefore as not existing.

 

And, subjectivity as such, without any objective quality, obviously cannot

exist. So then, what exist? There cannot be such a thing as existence or

non-existence!

 

Let us come back to the visitor who wanted to ask some question a little

while ago. He has come here, perhaps with some inconvenience and at not

inconsiderable expense, to seek that kind of knowledge which would enable

him to turn himself into 'a better individual' -- a sage, a Jnani. Now do

you understand why I could not help laughing -- no at him, please, but at

the tricks Maya plays through her illusions.

 

Think for a moment: who is thinking in terms of transformation, changing

from one state to another; in terms of self-improvement? Surely, it is

nothing other than an appearance in consciousness, a character in a movie,

an individual in a dream -- a dreamed pseudo-entity considering itself

subject to the workings of Karma. How could such a dreamed character

'perfect' itself into anything other than its dreamed self? How could a

shadow perfect itself into its substance? How could there be any

'awakening' from the dream, except for the dreamer to re-solve the true

identity of the source of the dream, the manifestation?

 

And 'awakening' consists in apprehending that there is no individual

perceiver of the phenomenal world, but that the essential nature and purpose

of all phenomena is merely the perceiving of phenomena, that is,

functioning in this-here-now; apprehending that every sentient being -- I --

as the potential source of all experience, experiences the apparent universe

objectively through a psychosomatic apparatus. The very first step in

understanding what this is all about is giving up the concept of an active

volitional 'I' as a separate entity, and accepting the passive role of

perceiving and functioning as a process.

 

Let me gladden your hearts by giving you a couple of 'tips'. In spite of

whatever I say, I know you will continue on your 'self-improvement' course

and keep looking for 'tips'. So open you note books an write them down:

(a) Make it a habit to think and speak in the passive tense. Instead of

'I' see something' or 'I' hear something', why not think the passive way:

'something is seen or 'something is heard.'? The perception will then

be not on the basis of an action by the phenomenal entity, but on the basis

of an event or occurrence. In due course, the pseudo-entity 'I' will recede

into the background.

 

(b) Before going to sleep at night, spend about ten minutes sitting relaxed

both in body and mind, taking your stand that 'you' are not the body-mind

construct but the animating consciousness, so that this idea will impregnate

your being throughout the period of your sleep.

 

 

Subscribe: ANetofJewels-

 

URL to this page: ANetofJewels

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

>"Manuel V. Hernandez" <manuel1498

>advaitin

>"Manuel V. Hernandez" <ANetofJewels>

> There is No Perceiver, Only Perceiving

>Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:21:54 -0800

>

>There is No Perceiver, Only Perceiving

>Pointers from Nisargadatta Maharaj

>Chapter 33

 

Any perceiving involves perceiver, perceived and perceiving. If perceiving

is there then automatically the perceiver and perceived have to exist.

 

I understand what Nisarga maharaj is indicating - Unfortunately the

technical terms are used by different mahatmaas sometimes in their own way

to point out the same thing.

 

In Vedantic terminology - it is pure objectless chiatanya - or nir vishesha

chaitanya - objectless awareness. I have noticed in studing "I am that" of

Maharaj, the awareness and consciousness are used in different connotations.

A caution is therefore advised.

 

If one understand the fundamental error involved, then it becomes clear if

someone uses different terms to indicate the same essense.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com