Guest guest Posted February 25, 2000 Report Share Posted February 25, 2000 >Moller: [snip] But seeing, when directed from the >fragmented disposition of I -consciousness, can only present two. The >observer and the observed. False identity indicates a disposition of being >totally identified with duality and as such cannot be whole. The moment >false identity is seen by wholeness for what it is, the latter falls away >and only wholeness is the case. J. Krishnamurti has said: The seeing of the >false, IS the truth. Perhaps this is what he meant. D: Enjoying appreciatively the clarity of the above statement. The Unknown One is fully present without appearing. Embededness in the known constitutes "false identity/identities" -- an ongoing series of attempts to formulate and maintain a position, a process of attempted self-perceptions trying to establish continuity that isn't there. In truth, there is no identifiable subject as perceiver. The only "perceiver" is everywhere present in the entire field of perception, fully Unknown knowingness. The "true subject" is no-subject, is omnipresent and nonlocal. All apparent objects then arise and depart without anything arising or departing, in and as awareness, with no identifiable subject anywhere. The false is seen as false only now, only as nonembededness is experientially truth. This is psychological dying to the known self, dying to identification with emotions driving survival of body-mind-self, dying to self-esteem associated with attempts at continuity of self-perceived existence. Love, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.