Just seeing?

An Eternal Now SG

Is there such thing as a pure seeing in and of itself?

No.

Seeing is the interplay of my fingers acting now typing the words, words appearing colours shifting vivid luminosity

ALL together as a seamless activity

called

Seeing

But do NOT think of seeing as a thing in and of itself

See what the word points to

Its not even right to say scenery sees

Its much more than that! Its the eye, the attention, the light, the space, the environment, this seamless process occuring, together, is called seeing

All of this aggregates, together, is called self

See a universe in an atom

See a universe in a single moment of consciousness

Ozean SG

ISn't it what is appearing in front the 'seeing' itself?

There is a Seeing of that 'seeing'is taking place. If I wear glasses and put them on the table, it is not that I see worse. The Sseeing is the same but that which is being seen is become worse. The sight so to speak.

So what is looking out of these eyes, then, if the eye cannot see itself or the seeing cannot see the seeing. There is something that perceives that colours are being seen by the eyes/brain. But again, It sounds very dual.....a Seeing of 'seeing taking place'. Now I am distanced myself from that which is taking place and there is not 1, but 2 now.

NOt sure if I state my doubt correctly in text.

An Eternal Now SG

Hi Ozean, it is normal to have a dualistic view at first - but with practice and experiential investigation, an insight that seeing is just the seen, and that subject-object view does not truly apply in reality, will arise.

A practitioner must be sincere in challenging such views. It will not be easy at first but it pays off at the end.

Ozean SG

Thanks for the reply.

That the 'viewing' or 'seeing' or the 'awaring' is behind the eyes is only another thought or mental proyection.

There is is seeing colours for sure.

There it is.

We will see how this challenging will take shape and hoping it will be worth it.