15178[Meditation Society of America] Re: Meditation Advice
- Jan 18, 2007"It is enough to know what you are not. You need not know what you
are. For as long as knowledge means description in terms of what is
already known, perceptual, or conceptual, there can be no such thing
as self-knowledge, for what you are cannot be described, except as
except as total negation. All you can say is: "I am not this, I am not
that." You cannot meaningfully say "this is what I am." It just makes
no sense. What you can point out as 'this' or 'that' cannot be
yourself. Surely, you cannot be 'something' else. You are nothing
perceivable, or imaginable. Yet, without you there can be neither
perception nor imagination. You observe the heart feeling, the mind
thinking, the body acting; the very act of perceiving shows that you
are not what you perceive. " - Nisargadatta Maharaj
Who is the one who is aware, who is the meditator?
One may assume that one knows who the meditator is. Then, meditation
is a process to get for the meditator the benefits of meditation.
Or, meditation may throw into question any assumptions about the
nature of the one who is aware during meditation.
In which case, meditation may not be a means for acquiring anything,
but rather for dissolving previously maintained assumptions,
particularly assumptions of self-identity.
Is the previously assumed meditator the one who is actually aware
Is meditation a technique for uprooting assumptions, or is meditation
itself "what is" when assumptions (about a situated self which is
aware) are not?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>