Presence of Being The persistent question for some seekers is, “If ‘I am That’, why do I not sense it, or know it?” You are doubtless objectifying it. As a subject (you), there is an attempt to relate to it as some thing, somehow apart: “I am this thing; it is that thing.” It is vital to recognize that it is not a thing; any thing has a confining limitation as the basis of its particular definition: it is the thing it is, within the boundary of all that it is not. But the referent, here, is posited by all traditions to be boundless, without limitation whatsoever. As such, it must also be without configuration, without form of any kind. Being formless, it is not an object; all objects are forms limited by boundaries. Consequently, it cannot be exclusively seen, touched, heard or apprehended by sensory apparatus, in any way. Nor can it be known as we would know any other element or object or form. All that can be realized is its true ineffable circumstance. All referent suggestions of its circumstances say: infinite (titling it sometimes as Infinite), eternal (Eternal), and without limitation: unrestrained spatially, unconfined temporally, ever present every where, without being limited as a form anywhere. It is sometimes said to be the background, or the ground of being, in which all forms are present. Your form, as a limited organism, “rests” on this ground as a “human” being. Your being is within, or an element of, Its being. Whenever you acknowledge—are aware of—your being, you are in recognition of Its being. Its “being” is not apart 133