The negation of phenomena lays bare Noumenon.

Wei Wu Wei has written the following, “Negation (of phenomenality) is the truth, by knowing which we can be aware of what-we-are in the act of knowing what-we-are-not.”

The above indicates that there is no knower nor any thing known. There IS only know-ING, which is what-we-ARE.

Advertisements

I become an “object”

Identification being the identifying of one object with another, in order that identification can occur at all it is necessary that I become an object — which shall be identified with a phenomenon — which then will be known as “I”; Nominative-I becomes accusative-I (me). The analysis above should reveal the artifice whereby this false dialectical process has become acceptable.

I could never in any circumstances be or become an object; such an arbitrary transformation is a contradicticon-in-terms. I must always be subject, subject of all objects cognized. I can never in any circumstance be an object of what I am, and this applies to whoever says “I”.

The essential understanding is incompatible with entification, and any supposed form of release from “bondage” that leaves an “entity” experiencing it, however enjoyable that experience may be, is not release from bondage at all — for bondage and entification are one and the same phenomenon.

— Wei Wu Wei

no thing and every thing

Only “No-thing”, Non-objectivity can be “Total”, “All there IS.”

Any “thing” perceived or conceived, is thereby limited to one half of subject-object opposition — in which case “Whole-mind” has conceptually split into that apparent mental or physical object AND the supposed subject of that object.

Therefore, “Wholeness” or “Totality” cannot be anything objectively perceived or conceived in mind divided into subject and object.

What IS, what-we-ARE simply “is-as-it-is” — inconceivable, and so, illimitable.

What is NOT the Absolute (“Enlightenment”) ?

Seeking for “Enlightenment” could be characterized as attempting to have a better or closer relationship with the Absolute which, of course, is impossible.

As Wei Wu Wei wrote, “What is NOT the Absolute? What else could anything BE? What we are as “I” is everywhere and always. “I” cannot hide; from whom could “I” be hidden (or separate)? To play hide-and-seek with myself is a game even small children do not play.”

I am not divided

VOLITIONAL attention and awareness can only be relative, time-bound, phenomenal, as such, and can have no “access” to Noumenon or Mind that we ARE.  Wei Wu Wei wrote, “Split-mind, cognizing by means of a subject cognizing objects, cannot cognize its own “wholeness” as its object.”

“Volition” itself, is a symptom of split-mind; some “one” intent on some “thing.”

Wei Wu Wei continues, “(Whole) Mind cannot be REACHED by (split) mind. The attempt is itself an obstacle. Awareness is no “thing” of which “we” can be aware.”

He goes on to write, “If one were to say that (direct) auditory apprehension might reveal it — such might be an indication of what is implied — but quite certainly not in the sense of DELIBERATELY listening to music, nor of DELIBERATELY looking at any object, touching any “thing”, or seizing any thought.”

“Why is that so? Because split-mind must be in abeyance, and “we” must be absent for Awareness (Whole-mind) to be present.”