Who is this 'I' that cannot find the 'I'? - 27th June 2016

Good-looking. What are we looking at? We say that we have found that at the root of all maintenance is the presumed 'I', you see? So let's analyze first into who this 'I' is. Then you say, 'I cannot be seen, it cannot be found.' That means that you have lost it. Have you lost 'I'? Where did you lose it? Who's the one that is here then? You know, when we lose something, usually people ask, 'So where did you see it last?' So you lost the 'I' and you cannot find it. Where did you see it last?

I never saw 'I'. I just assumed it is here.

Just assumed. So, assumed. It is against your analysis or questioning life, isn't it? Because people assume the world is flat. That's a wrong assumption, you see. So let's not assume anything. Let's find out. You say the assumption is 'I cannot be found,' therefore it must mean it's not here. The assumption was it is here, but in the looking of it, it is not found. How do you know it is here? How do you know that is 'I'?

Just the division of subject. If I didn't hear the definition, I would not know this distinction between me and other will be there.

We even talked about the distinction. You said that 'I lost' or 'I cannot find the I.' I cannot find the 'I'. So which 'I' is looking? Which 'I' sees that 'I can't see it'? Which 'I' knows that 'I cannot know it'?

I try to explore this many times, but there is no end to this relation.

But there must be an 'I' that has tried many times. Are you not that 'I'?

How can I say that? I lost the 'I'. Who's the one saying then? Who is looking for the self? Who sees there is no 'I'? It's a futile exercise. I know it. I cannot find 'I'. I know it.

Who is this 'I'? 'I want to choose this or that. I don't want to choose the I because I can't find the I.' So much 'I' in that. Which 'I' is this 'I'?

I feel like I'm speaking the simplest words.

Why not simplest words? How to use always other else what I'm saying? I feel like I'm speaking the simplest words. I wonder if they're sounding like that to all of you. Is it possible for the dream character to know that there is a hunter of the dream character?

I considered it a possibility.

On what basis?

The basis is the reference of the experience I had last night of the dream, and the experiencer was a dream character. It's a dream one was experienced through the dream body. Dream world was there, dream body was there, both were experienced.

Yes, but the dream one was experienced only through the center of the dream body, through whatever instrument it might be experienced. Who is the experiencer? Was it not you?

Now I see the whole experience of the dream as 'I', as any reason.

Okay, very good. So the 'I' that sees this entire experience of the dream as an illusion is also illusion? Or is the same that continues through this illusion and that one? But it is only realized after the dissolution of the dream.

How you know? By waking up from the dream, yeah. But you are still here. The one who had the dream and the one who was having this experience is still here.

And what is common about that in this, that you are here? Everybody in the dream could be different. Every environment could be different. Every situation, every law of gravity, light, sound—everything could be different. But what is common? Can we lose that one? What is the common? That's what I'm asking. Is that not 'I'?

I proposed this theory. Tell you, ladies, looking... is it a theory about 'I' or appearances?

So if it's a theory about appearance, let's keep it aside. What's the theory about 'I'?

I'm sorry if it's not going anywhere.

No, it's going somewhere very, very nice. You said, 'We lost the I. I cannot find the I.' And it's not just you; it's a very popular notion. Ninety-nine percent of all seeming spiritual seekers have this notion: 'I cannot find the I.' Who is the 'I' that cannot find the 'I'? Is that lost? 'What's the point of this I?' That's the second most popular notion, oh, maybe the first, I'm not sure. So what's the point? Find 'I', you see the point, isn't it? Because everything is about 'I'. My life, my family, my work, my money—everything at the center of it is me.

Yeah, exploring most of those things are centered around fulfilling the way you want the life to be.

But it is not that way. It is like you that wants life to be a certain way is which one? That's all we ask. 'I want my life to be this way.' Isn't it better to know who this 'me' is before we know what my life should be? That's what you seek. So when asked to look, you say, 'I cannot find it.' Or then, 'I... are you here? Are you lost?'

More like I can't say anything with certainty. Like for example...

It is still you say, 'I can't say anything with certainty.' That means you're pretty clear about 'I'. You're not saying something here can't say anything with... 'I can't say it with certainty.' To use this one, even this saying can be enhanced data for this unclarity. Is it unclarity? It could be, for example, if we take the example of reducing from unclarity to clarity. That's why I said that I do not know. For example, the dream character; it didn't know that when it was questioning the existence, it didn't know anything about 'I'.

I don't care about any dream character. I care about you. So when you say 'I don't know' or 'I don't know if it's clear or unclear,' what is clear or unclear? That you don't know whether you exist or not? Is that clear or unclear?

Yeah, but this question, like the way it is being asked, I feel it still presumes that there is no reality outside of my experience and perception.

Don't question the question. Answer the question. You exist? Or this experience could... if all this experience of the sensitization, it rolls as right now, I could say from the experience that I exist. But what I am saying is definitely open exploration. It could be wrong. It is an experience of existence.

Experience of existence. Existence is also an experience, you say this now. So the 'I' that knows of this experience of existence, is that also an experience? You have it?

Not really. Finish after that. Like, that is beyond my current understanding.

What does it mean, 'current understanding'? This is... is it not your experience of existence?

I don't know. Like, what even this experience of existence is, I am not clear.

Yes, but I am not asking about that. I am saying whatever the experience might be, you know or don't know it, isn't it?

I'm not sure even this knowing is real or not, truth or not.

Yes, but the 'I' that knows it or does not know it, is that also an experience? Is the question.

It could be. I consider this also to be a possibility, that mind is the source of consciousness, or this as a spark of consciousness is maybe in the brain.

Okay, who is this 'I' that considers it this way? You say, 'I consider it.' You wouldn't say, 'A sham considers it.' Repeat: 'I consider.' Who is this one? Don't presume anything, just look.

I'm exploring all the possible options.

Not mentally this way. Looking. Just look for it instead of thinking for it, because thinking is presumption; looking is contemplation. Who is the 'I' that cannot find 'I'?

You... other... like, it's so strange. Like, in the looking, this question even does not arise, and in this questioning, this looking is not possible.

It's very fancy, but we can drop it. No, it's real. So why? Because what is important is the looking. If the question has led you to the looking, then stay with that. What do you see?

I don't understand what do you mean when you ask what you see.

You say the looking is there, so the question has done its job. The looking is there. What is the looking? Look at... how can you be sure that this looking is not another part of your experience also? Like the awareness is also because of the presence of consciousness, and this consciousness is also in a spark in the brain.

Yes, okay, all this is true. Who would check on this? Is the intelligence which God created in this process, in this value of course related? Say something before this creation, or it was the primal creation? If it is a primal creation, then no creator? No, but it could be simply like this is a piece of life and it has its own intelligence which knows this is this one. Who would know all this? How it is to presume all this? Or do we want to see the direct experience of all this?

Yes, but this knowing could be the intelligence of this piece of life which is here.

But who would know the piece of life is here?

Yes, the intelligence which is present here when this is a part of the piece of life and the piece of life is part of the intelligence which is here.

Like I said, if you think about it, then you will come up with more and more concepts. What is it that you see? You see, when you say, 'When I check, I cannot find myself,' but how this model is not possible? For example, there is body, there is brain. What model? It may be models you can get from books. I am pointing you to that which is prior to all models. So you say that when I check, I don't find the 'I'. So for what are you using the word 'I' for the first time? The 'I' that doesn't find the 'I' is which one? Look, don't think. Are you just making up this, that 'I don't find I'? No, it's your experience. So who is this 'I' that cannot find the 'I'?

Everyone is looking for self-realization. That means everyone is looking for the self. But are they not themselves? And if they are not the self, then who is looking for the self? You? Is it possible to find the answer to this question? Yes, might surprise you, but it is completely possible. What if I told you that? No, no, answer the question: who is the 'I' that cannot find 'I'?

You should give me a workout.

Are you here to get a workout? What kind of gym is this? The instructor keeps getting the workout, is it? I don't... you contemplate this. No, I don't have to contemplate this. For example, I'm saying you do this push-up. Find out who is the 'I' that cannot analyze what me. You say, 'No, no, you do this push-up. No, the push-up is not better, the pull-up is better. You do the pull-up and show.' I see ice cube dancing road when the instructor asked to do fifteen pull-ups and I say it is not possible, then you show. Yeah, I remember a master instructor like this. Hmm, really, you not begrudge him. In fact, they show me twenty or thirty push-ups. That's not video showing off. You want to show off? So much resistance through this. The question is simple. You say, 'I cannot find I.' So which is the one, which is the 'I' that cannot find the 'I'? You too much to know. That's fine. This is what we are here for. Everything else is in the periphery.

The dancing road... when the instructor asked to do 15 pull-ups and I say it is not possible, then you show. Yeah, I remember. Matter inspector like this, hmm? Really, you not begrudge him. In fact, they show me 20 or 30 push-ups. That's showing off. You want to show off so much resistance through this. The question is simple. You say, 'I cannot find I.' So which is the one, which is the 'I' that cannot find the 'I'? You too much to know. That's fine. This is what we are here for. Everything else is in the periphery. The 'I' that can or cannot find, is that also a presumed notion which can or cannot find? Like you say, 'I cannot find the I.' This 'I' which cannot find the 'I', is that also a presumed notion? A presumption? Are you not here? Are you just an idea? Are you a concept, a belief? Are you an appearance?

Yet I'm just this bundle of course. Your energy roams through. Whom are you appearing? Maybe to God.

So you okay with just using concepts? So you want to look? There is a possibility, a whatever possibility is the hypothesis. How will you validate it?

I don't feel like okay to accept just what is seen here as the truth or as the reality of this entire universe in which this form, what this piece of rye, we just an aspect, not even touched.

So you're unwilling to accept what is seen and you are willing to accept what is presumed? Because either it is seen or it is presumed. Do we agree on that at least? That it must be either seen or it must be a concept.

What I am seeing is not even these are reversed on this point. It must be either seen or a concept.

So either it is seen or a concept. So when you say that I am willing to accept what is... unwilling to accept what I see, that means are you unwilling to accept anything? Are you willing to accept some concepts instead?

Independence means to accept the possibility of all the things that is presented. For example, if it is presented to you that whatever your perception and your experience right now is very limited and there is a possibility...

Openness means you believe every concept? Openness means we let every concept come and go.

I'm open to the possibility. Maybe I open to the possibility that you don't exist.

Yes, I comes. Okay. So if you open to this possibility, then the one that is open to the possibility of non-existence is which one? Do you not exist as what? Yes, it's a great day for the mind. Do you exist in deep sleep?

I truly can't see anything about the states in which I am completely unconscious, like the deepest...

Okay, forget. How do you exist now?

Yes.

So you know this or no? Is this a concept or team? Anything is here. What is here?

This form is here.

So you exist as the world in the form? You exist?

Yes, I could not be existing with all the experience.

So you exist as just the world and the form?

There could be alterations in the experience. For example, different forms of energy, sensations, like the appearance could be varied forms.

So the 'I' changes though? The 'I' that exists changes when this rate change?

But the sense of existence is not separate from this experience. The entirety of all this experience, there is a sense of existence also. So if you will take away from me all these experience, then I would not be able to say that I exist.

Yeah, but you say the sense of existence. What is that? A deity of all the experiences? That is the sense of existence? Is that something you heard somewhere? One by one all the senses fail and one by one all the seemingly innocence ations also go, then you cease to exist? So in short, if this body was dead right now in this moment now, then it could be possible that I don't exist anymore?

No, right now if you just see that all these senses they would stop reporting, then even the sense that I exist would go.

Like you can stop being. Never-ending mystery. You like it that way? It is that way. You like it that way or no? If it came to an end, would you be happy? Let's be honest. If the truth came to be known... no, I am saying if you say never-ending mystery, if it ended, would you be happy or you prefer it to be never-ending mystery?

Never-ending because join the game.

Who is not? Hmm? Is there anyone who is not? Who is not what? Who is not enjoying the play? EP existing this way anymore? Yeah, so you're happy with just finding out about the world and who is doing what and what's happening here and you know all of this is happy with that? You never want to know who you are?

Of course I want to know.

Now you want to know with your own... you want to know only that which fits into your ideas and concepts of what it is, or you open to looking without any of this? I must have matched what you think about it.

I am open to new possibility.

Now if I say there is no mystery, you are here and you know it. Are you willing to look at that? Whether you know that with you yourself? I have looked many, many times, isn't it? I say again, you're diverting. What does need to deflect is okay. All I said was you are here and you know it.

I know. I also said that I hadn't asked what you say that I'm saying.

I'm saying that this is true enough. So the one that knows it, even that you are here, is which one? Yeah, why? Why is it your one that you? Why is it not one? Why is it that one? You tell me it's one. You tell me it's one and we are happy to accept it. You look. Can you tell me it's one? That's all I want.

Yes. Don't presume that answer came too fast. Yes, I am self-conscious. So Mr. Yoga LG1, I am that I am, I am consciousness, I am self-conscious, whatever. What is the mystery? But the truth must be one wherever it is experienced. So it could... it should fit into the way the great masters have described. For example, in my experience, I don't see any shift in the way I perceive the world. It is still appearing as though it is the world is being looked through these two eyes. So how she looks that you're flying over it? Whoever said with grace master said that your perspective will change as if you're looking at it from the skies, something? Whatever. How about the experience is 16 or worse this one? Let's go one by one. So first is what? That why do they still look as if I'm it's a feeling through these eyes?

So who have said it doesn't? Doesn't it mean that consciousness has not yet lost its individuality yet? Utter. And what about these experiences to see oneself, to experience this reverse as one's body? And what about these experiences of self-realization? Or do you see it as you see it as outside of you?

I cannot perceive even what is outside of this room, what to talk about the universe.

So this is it. So that sages have said they know what's happening in West Africa like that? That's a prerequisite to freedom? If someone claims to know the truth that he must know the truth of these for existence, this whole universe? Yes, not just was, this whole existence? Because it is this just this, just like dream. There is only that which is seen in science is coming to the same conclusion. Nothing exists without the observer of it. He's looking. No truth has been found that the mind wash. And what truth? What is your idea of truth?

For example, in the waking up from the demonstrate it was realizing that instant that whole of this...

I thought you didn't want to speak about those states which are not here. No, I said there's only when it's convenient.

No, no. I said those states in which I was completely unconscious, I cannot talk about this because I do not have a memory of those students. But their states like the dream estates, I have a full memory of those shirts. I can use it in my contemplations.

So you have no memory that there was any other state except the dream state?

I can say that there is a sleepy state because there is a gap in my experience or in my memory.

Who saw there's a gap? Who knows of this gap? You? There is only waking and dream, and waking and green with it. Is it like that now? The I states in which I am completely unconscious, you know this? I thought you couldn't report on these things. Okay, so can we just use the dream when only great is very important to you? But that one is like you come to too difficult to talk about the deep sleep estate. Why?

Hi there using that my experience is only this dream and the reeking. There is no other experience.

Then who invented this concept of sleep state? You've never gone to sleep? You only want to dream?

Yeah, any experience like I have seen that there is a transition from the unconscious to the conscious states.

So who is there to see the unconscious, to see the transition? Who was there?

No, there was no any second reagent which knows this, which knew this UTI.

But who's the primary? The primary was this experience itself or becoming conscious more at work? Or is it it went from this conscious waking state consciousness to drip state of consciousness? Is that it?

Yes. And for example, the states which I call deep sleep, so there was a... what is the deal if I don't know what is really? Okay, so in my experience I saw that the this self-consciousness or the consciousness was kind of emerging and coming into light and with it the diameter is not there.

Yeah, so you presumed that before this it was not? I'm just presumed? Yeah, because I was no right into this. Presume that it's there as this waking, then suddenly the scenery changes in your inhibition drill because that is more accurate. No, there we don't have any experience of sleep. So this is waking and suddenly a different element there, different people are there, and then there's waking and the different realm is the possible yet wind coming. You know what is your experience? Is it that there's only waking and dream?

I feel like there there are the science and symbol in the waking states or like in the experience of transition from different states of consciousness through which I can make up that there was a state in which I was not there, in which there was a gap or the states of transition from work toward had the experience of sleeping.

You have just been awake within different, different realms. That's it. But that's what it is called. The deep sleep is defined as that stating Edward is defined. I'm asking what your experiences. You've never experienced sleep, only waking and dream? You can never say, 'I went to sleep. Sorry, I went to sleep for a second and I woke up.' No, never happen? You just suddenly at night it's dark, then suddenly it's light. That's it. Time lapse anyway. Just EST on our set with a dream state fossils. Why? But is it not an experience? You sleep not inexperienced. You tell me you have not had it. How would you say it's time disappears? You have not had this experience? How do you know time disappears? How do you know there is such a state? You only heard about it. You never experienced sleep. You never gone to sleep in your life. Only mythical concept like the pink elephant sleep.

Hey, sorry. Like if everyone is getting bored and it's okay wasting everyone's time.

No, I feel it's very important because we carry these presumptions. Sleep is only a presumption, an idea. In my experience what I call it sleep, there was this experienced. At what time do you wake up this morning? Roughly. Don't want the exact minutes and seconds. What time did you wake up? Don't think of the hands over the next question which you know, which I know you know it's coming. Roughly what time do you wake up regularly? Can't be that difficult.

7:30.

So you woke up from what? Beam? Now what did you wake up from? What woke up? What did you wake up from and what woke up? So it's only waking state and dream state? There is no scope for sleep, deep sleep? It is a concept. This is called mental demands, defending the indefensible. Are you hearing yourself? What are you defending actually? Denying the deep sleep state. I'm saying that since I was not conscious in that is shared, so I cannot read or talk about...

How do you know there is something called deep sleep state? That's all I'm asking. You had it or no? You never gone to sleep? So how do I know it? You tell her. Is it just a concept for you or you experience sleep? That's all you ask. But is indeed also an absence of all the experience? Is that not an experience to experience absence of all experiences? To say that there was no experience, there must be a you to see it.

I'm saying that since I was not conscious in that state, so I cannot read or talk about it. How do you know there is something called deep sleep state? That's all I'm asking. You had it or no? You never gone to sleep? So how do I know it? You tell her. Is it just a concept for you, or you experience sleep? That's all you ask.

But is it indeed also an absence of all the experiences? Is that not an experience, to experience absence of all experiences?

To say that there was no experience, there must be a you to see that there was no experience. Who saw this? Who came and told you there was no experience yesterday for so much time? You okay? If you look at the example of deep sleep, so can I ask this: why can't you just answer this? Who saw that there was no experience?

Yeah, I have meditated on this topic of deep sleep and, like, I've never came to any conclusion.

The important question is very simple. Do you know of something called sleep, or no idea?

I know there is something called deep sleep, but I am not very much clear about it.

You never gone to sleep on this ship? Of course. Well, what happened when you went to sleep?

Deep sleep means the consciousness itself is not there. How can you...

But are you just making this up?

No, I know that I was not conscious.

You know? So consciousness was not there. Who knows then? Because in coming out of that state, slowly, slowly... the crucial point: you say, 'I know that consciousness also was not there.' So what remained when consciousness even was not there? Now don't deflect anything. Stay here. The one that knows even the presence and absence of consciousness, which one is that one? How should I look at these questions? Where I look at it from? A fragment of memory? Is there something that continues of that one to this one? Is that one gone now? The one that knows that consciousness was not there, is that also gone? Consciousness is here. You knew then consciousness is not there. So this one that knows either presence or not presence is which one? Is that changing? Is that a mystery, or is it you? But do you at least understand what I am asking? The one that says even consciousness was not there, now you know that consciousness is here. So this one is which one?

Right. What the question is, like, the one who is born into this world and came to know that before this birth I was not. In the same way, when consciousness comes into existence from the deep sleep, then it knows that there was a state before this when I was not. Okay, then who was? If I was not, if consciousness was not there, then who was? If nothing was, then there was no state there. And just like before the creation or the birth of this body, if you ask me that where were you, and I could only say that there was a state, something which is not presumption, as I can say this: that I was not conscious of myself before the birth of this body. Or there was no nothing which I can call... there is no any memory, there is no any experience that I can recall before the birth.

As what? If you say this is not a presumption, then you were there as what before consciousness? What are you?

But I didn't exist.

You too? Before consciousness? Now see this. But how you know this? Is it as I said, no presumption? I came to know this before the consciousness is... okay, after, after the birth of consciousness, I can handle this. Yes, that I was. Consciousness also was not there, you see, and then you were also not there. So there was nothing. So the birth of everything with the birth of consciousness. Then how can you report on prior to consciousness if there was nothing? Cannot. But is sleep like that? So there was no sleep. What is sleep like that? You didn't have experience of sleep? Like merry-go-round, speak into the mic. Like sleep is like that, that when the consciousness regains its self-consciousness, then it has this...

Yes, but who saw that there was no consciousness? It is presuming. If I say there is no state where there is no consciousness, you see, deep sleep is a myth. Nobody ever goes to sleep. If I say that, why? What's the problem? Now I wouldn't be... not accepted by everyone. I say deep sleep is a myth. There is no such thing as sleep. Then I know what you want to say. You want to say, 'I know I went to sleep.' How can you say that? It's just your knowledge which is getting in the way of saying that. No, Father, but how this is unacceptable? That answer my question. I am saying the sleep is a myth.

Of course I will not accept this.

Why?

Because there are many moments I have been completely unconscious, and I can call it deep sleep.

Yes, so consciousness was not there. Then what was there?

I have been unconscious. That means consciousness came and went, but I was still there. Oh, it's a... maybe it's a consciousness which is saying that I was unconscious. Yeah, I was not there at the time. Otherwise, how could this consciousness be saying I was not there? Then what was there? This being obstinate, this other... like, it's impossible to contribute on this because at first I don't have any memory of that state.

Then where are you saying? And are you saying there's something called sleep? Are you not accepting me? You don't believe my words when I say there is no sleep, right?

Because in my experience, there are gaps of experiencing.

So this... you are not your experience. You say, 'In my experience there are gaps of experiencing.' Therefore there was an I which experienced these gaps. It logically sounds very nice, but you said it, not me. Sounds very good. I know today's satsang will sound like just a big argument, but if not this, all these ideas we have about consciousness and awareness, all that is getting clarified here. I lost myself, I cannot find myself, I cannot experience sleep. Then sleep must be just a concept. There is an experience of sleep. So there's an I who has the experience that there was no consciousness. Now, something changed for that I when waking comes? Like, it sounds perfectly nice with ideological and the interpretive aspects of it. By looking at the now, is there a different I that experienced no consciousness? Is there a different I now that is here that experiences consciousness? You asked what is constant between that state and this state. What is constant?

Of course, like, by logic it seems that... not logic, nice. There is no experience of constancy of anything. The I is just a concept, just logic. The I which saw there is no consciousness and the I who is seeing now that there is consciousness, this one is just logic. Logic or concept. There seems to be this, this constant, like, which is knowing. Like, which knows everything. I don't know what this knowing is. What I mean, like, for example, the experience of this body is here and there is a knowing of this experience. And today's morning I had a dream and I can say with full confidence that I knew the experience of the dream. And when the transition happened from the dream state to the waking state, then if there is anything I can call that remained constant, that remained constant throughout the transition. Now I would say that your satsang is lame. Okay, so this knowing... it's knowing, but not only with the confidence goes like this. Knowing itself is not like... it's not an object that I can clearly identify.

If it is an object, then it would have to be known by a knowing which is not an object, yes? Isn't it? So this knowing, can you keep it aside? You say, 'I cannot clearly find it.' I'm saying, can you lose it? Now show me there is no knowing.

And this I cannot lose. I tried many times. I cannot lose.

Is there a you which is apart from this knowing? Like, again, we are just going through the, you know... come quietly. Experiential. My knowing in question, quite lately, just doing that. Experiencing being class. We are not at that word here for... you're not... yeah, like the mind. What mind is also known, as well as the energy of thoughts. Does it have to say about this knowing? What is the distance between this knowing and you? This mind that appears, is that more I, or is this knowing more I? So when this mind comes and goes, does the knowing remain or no? So do you come and go along with the mind, or you stay with the knowing? Okay, so if this knowing is constant between these states, like that sleep state and the waking state... and in the waking state there was no space, no dimensions. The waking state has no... in the sleep state there was no dimensions and now there is a whole bunch of it. Yes, because of the fact that awareness is the basis of all experience. So for example, this hand is here, there's an awareness of it. This hand is here, there is an awareness of it. Is an awareness of what you mean by awareness of it? Awareness of it means there is a knowing that this hand is here. The experience of the sensation how is present here. So if the experience of the sensation, the knowing of these experiences, the knowing of the experiences of the hand, yes, is awareness. Okay, there are these visuals or your, yes, energy. The knowing that all these energies are experienced is awareness.

Okay, but I don't feel like it is dimensionless. What I feel like it is completely into the experience.

Because you're confusing the phenomenal experiencing with the awareness of them. So if I would only turn, then I would say that a space-like awareness is here, here is here, and it's like space. It has dimensions like space, yes? Awareness. And who knows this dimensions of that which knows this? You? Phenomenal witnessing, the phenomenal experiencing is being confused as awareness. You are perceiving all of this phenomenally, and this space of being in which all of this perceiving is going on, this is also known. The knowingness itself does not have dimension.