Several times it has been observed that the object of the subject cannot be itself, i.e. as such, a conscious, dynamic, active agent.
When possible it is comforting to refer to the words of the enlightened who spoke from the awakened state, since what we others say are no better than rumours - except in so far as our words may seek to interpret genuine intuitions. Huang Po, Wan Ling Record, N. 42, states, 'Let me repeat that the perceived cannot perceive.'
In so far as we are percepts or concepts, therefore, we can neither perceive nor transform perceptions into concepts. Have we understood - for the fact is vital for our understanding of what we are? That which, all that which, we can perceive or conceive as ourselves, our neighbours, or anything else, is incapable itself of perception or of conception, i.e. it has no mind of its own.
Therefore WE are not that objective element, cannot possibly be that - since we say 'we', i.e. we are not objects in so far as we are dynamic....
Let us draw our own conclusions, all that results from this information; pointing fingers are not ladders to the moon.
Note: It is the subject of the object that supplies the dynamic characteristics. If we would realise this instead of attributing subjectivity to its object there would be no room left for the activity of an imaginary 'ego', which consists precisely in this misplaced attribution.
