Why the same dream?

[Miguel Angel Carrasco]

On Date:  Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Greg Goode wrote,

             >You had said this:

             >       >For me, there is only the One, the Absolute, MySelf.
I am the only Subject (when there is something in my Consciousness to be
the Subject of, in which case I am not only Pure Contentless Awareness but
also the Witness of My Manifestation onto Myself).

             >If this is the way experience is happening through your
body/mind mechanism (as Ramesh would say), then the Ultimate Understanding
has been rached through (your) body mind.  The non-event of enlightenment
has happened, and there's no personal do-er left.  Usually in this case,
there are no questions, everything is seen as perfect, unable to be any
different.

------
A very clear and neatly-worded answer. Thank you. I like this, and quite
agree to it. Let^Òs then proceed from here.
^ÓExperience is happening through your body/mind mechanism^Ô. Exactly.
Through every body/mind mechanism there is an experience happening.  Of
course, there is no separate, individual experiencer, for the simple reason
that there is only Self, who is the only experiencer.  Nisargadatta: ^ÓThe
Absolute contains everything experienceable, but without the experiencer
they are as nothing. That which makes the experience possible is the
Absolute. That which makes it actual is the Self.^Ô  (334) and : ^ÓWhen the
food is stopped, the body dies and the mind dissolves. But does the
observer perish? It is a matter of actual experience that the self has
being independent of mind and body.^Ô  (210)

Not that the Self is just the experiencer : it is (also) the witness of the
^Óexperience happening through the body/mind^Ô while there is something to
witness, otherwise It is Pure Awareness. Agree?

Now, if an experience (mind you, not real, just an object in Consciousness)
^Óis happening through _your_ body/mind^Ô that means that through a different
body/mind (also imagined, an object in Consciousness) a different
experience is happening. And that is why in some body/minds there appears
(just appears, mind you) to be enlightenment whereas through others there
doesn´t. Only One Experiencer experiencing differently through different
(imaginary) body/minds. Nisargadatta: ^ÓThe dreams are not equal, but the
dreamer is one. I am the insect, I am the poet - in dream.^Ô  (117)  and :
^ÓThe variety of personal worlds is not so great. All the dreams are
superimposed over a common world. To some extent, they shape and influence
each other. ^Ô  (92-93)   Agree?

And when enlightenment appears to happen, the imaginary obstacle to
Self-Realization (the imaginary Self-identification with a body/mind) is
removed, and all apparent happenings are seen as what they were all the
time: just objects in Consciousness. Agree?

So, I already am what I have always been and will always be. If I don^Òt
_feel_ that yet, it is just because at present (the relative, imaginary
present)  I, the Self, have not yet realized that this particular
experiencing through this particular body/mind is just a dream.
Nisargadatta: ^ÓThe personality (vyakti) is but a product of imagination.
The self (vyakta) is the victim of this imagination. It is the taking
yourself to be what you are not that binds you. The person cannot be said
to exist on its own rights; it is the self that believes there is a person
and is conscious of being it.^Ô  (143)    Agree?

Provisional stop here.


PS
        >On the other hand, the quote could be an intellectual understanding. The
intellect sees it this way, but there is still the tug of emotions, there
are doubts, questions, fears, insecurities, etc.

Indeed this is (apparently) my case.

--Miguel Angel