That’s a What, Not a Who!

The question isn’t “who am I?”  The question is:  “What am I?”  And as long as you try to answer the question “who am I,” you’re always going to come up with an answer different from the Real one, which is:

You are the presence of God expressed, or the presence of God expressing Himself.

You are a Function, not a thing.

You are a Movement, not an object.

You are, you could say, the place where God shines through.  You see?  That’s a what, not a who!

Inverness, Scotland 1996
Quote | This entry was posted in Quotables. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to That’s a What, Not a Who!

  1. Judy Lasswell says:

    I always thought my “who” was the presence of God, & that my “what” was more about the kinds of stuff the world uses to assess my worth – accomplishments, wisdom, talent, money. But I get your drift. Thanks

  2. Derek says:

    Profound and humbling. Derek

  3. sandy says:

    Thank you Raj – these reminders are so welcome.

  4. We are neither beyond the Point of Perfection or approaching the Point of Perfection, but are at the Point of Perfection and must understand ourselves therefrom. We are already perfect and so there is nothing to become.

    With Peace, Jamie. a Holy Son of God

  5. Cris Loesser says:

    We are verbs, not nouns:)

    • Gale-Denver says:

      And it is not yet clear what we shall become.

      • verbing!
        The noun suggests a thing that acts or is acted upon. Identifying in ‘self’ image collapses edgeless infinity to a thing – that then seems a centre around which everything revolves – and contracts upon itself in the the attempt to control or integrate what now appears chaotic or dissonant. This chain reacts into an action-reaction of self division and limitation that essentially fragments a mind into a delusional self definition, a ‘self’ defended against exposure to awareness as if sanity and survival is maintained by unconsciousness of source and of the Source Nature and Condition that the wish to a fantasy experience obscures.

    • miguel carvalho says:

      Active or passive? I guess the former.

      • Aah! There’s a mystery plot to keep the pages turning!

        We shall become indifferent to the notion of a process of becoming. (To our story). For the light of being renders the soap opera meaningless – excepting insofar as it serves to reflect the qualities of God-Being – in which nothing is waiting on time or circumstance to be all that it is in all that it is.

        Some say God is ever becoming but I don’t feel for that language. The very act of definition is a limit – excepting as true meaning and quality is rendered perfectly defined in the light of being itself. That is – God’s Word is already Given – and the little mind’s attempt to come between what cannot be divided is an incredibly weird activity to be devoted to!

        • oops – that was to reply to ‘And it is not yet clear what we shall become’.

          Passive verb is set as accomplished. Active verb is the Current movement of attention. The Nature is accomplished and its expression is the act in which it knows itself ever new.
          The definitions of language-mind make these things seem two – as if Always has been set in the past an Will set to creating to a future – whiles Be is forgotten or overlooked in the excitement!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s