from The Wisdom of the Overself: ch VI: Secret of the I: Wonder of Awareness
para 3 …The fact that he could examine his own thoughts showed that there was something in him which was itself deeper than them, … that intangible principle of awareness itself whose own existence makes the existence of all the multiple items of awareness itself possible.
Para 7 … this projected fraction of awareness is what we ordinarily term consciousness,
Para 11 In the opening page of this chapter there was described the case of a man who wept during dream over the supposed sufferings of his family. What was the real relation during the dream itself of the wakeful man to this projected fraction of consciousness which was his dream self? It was that of a mere spectator but, owing to his temporary identification with the dream self, this relation was concealed from him at the time. There were thus two aspects of one and the same man: the projected active dream personality of whom there was consciousness, and its spectator of whom this personality itself was then quite unaware.
Para 12 Now the fact that such a double nature can exist during dream should warn us that it may exist also during wakefulness and that the waking self may be no less a mental construction than the dreaming one; that there may be a spectator behind it of whom ‑because of our temporary identification with this waking man, there is no consciousness; and that this relation may likewise be a concealed one.
… When we believe that we are conscious of ourself we are really conscious of a heavy disguise of the powerful complex of thoughts constituting the conscious ‘I’ which the unknown self puts on and takes off. This deeper self is of course there beneath the disguise but we never know it in its undisguised state. just as we do not see an invisible gas in the chemical laboratory but can detect its presence by smelling its odour, so we are ignorant of the hidden observer but can detect its presence by noting that something makes it possible for us to be conscious of the fluctuating states of the surface ‘I’. Thinking, being itself a part of the field of our observation, unfortunately cannot break through into the consciousness of the observer which transcends that field. The consciousness which knows cannot itself be included in what is known. It cannot itself be known except as the conscious idea of it, which would be like knowing a man only through a photograph of him. For there can be no knowledge of the comings and goings of the ‘I’ except by some witness that could be less limited than itself, which could precede it and be its final owner. The ‘I’ is indeed a symbol which stands for something immeasurably wider than itself.
***********