It was conceived and written at the same time as
Transcending Ego.
This is a
graduateconversation,
which means engaging with it will be worth your while if you already
have an experience of transformation,
Werner's work,
and its distinctions. If you do, it will hold
some power
and utility for you. And if you don't, it will introduce you to
the power
and utility of the distinctions of transformation. This conversation is
about the thing we call "I" and on other occasions, "Me". What exactly
is this thing we call "I" / "Me"? In
answer
to
the question
"Who are you?", you may
answer
"Who I am is ..." ie who you
consider
"I" / "Me" to be.
Interestingly
enough, "I" / "Me" is not who you really are.
Consider
this exchange:
you and a partner face each
other.
You ask "Who are you really???". Your partner comes up with
an answer.
"Thank You" you say, "who are you really???". Your partner comes up
with yet
another answer.
"Thank You" you say, "who are you really???". Your partner comes up
with still
another answer
... and another ... and another ... and another ... for hours ... and
hours ... and hours. Then you switch. Your partner asks "Who are
you really???". You come up with
an answer.
"Thank You" your partner says, "who are you really???". You come up
with
another answer.
"Thank You" your partner says, "who are you really???". You come up
with yet
another answer
... and another ... and another ... and another ... for hours ... and
hours ... and hours. The process inquires into who you might be
really. If you engage long enough with a process like that,
something eventually becomes obvious.
Let's say that a selection of your
answers
to
the question
"Who are you?" are "a democrat" (political persuasion), "a father"
(family
affiliation), "a man" (sex), "an American" (nationality),
"Laurence"
(your name /
identity).
Eventually what becomes glaringly apparent is: if you are really your
name, then who (or what) is the "I" asking
the question
"Who am I?". So the first thing to get clear about is: you're almost
never really your
answer
to
the question
"Who am I?". Really. Your
answer
to
the question
"Who am I?" is almost never what your "I" / "Me" really is. Be careful:
none of the above implies that
the question
"Who am I?" is problematic. It may point to the fact that who you
really are, isn't who you ordinarily
consider
yourself (ie your "I" / "Me") to be.
Werner,
decades
ago, distinguished who we really are, as
"the space ie (the
clearing) in which the events of your life occur (show
up)"
ie who you really are, is
the context
for everything
happening
in your life. OK, if that's who we really are, then what
is the thing we call "I" / "Me", the thing we all confuse with who we
really are?
Consider:
"I" is just something that shows up in the clearing we
really are ie "I" / "Me" is just something that occurs in the space of
who we really are ie "I" / "Me" is just something that appears in
the context
we really are. "I" / "Me" is not who we really are. Deeming it so, is
an error.
