I am ....

Who am I ?

any attempt to answer that question implies the assumptions -- a) i am something that i can understand, b) i can explain what i understand, and c) i do not change by the above processes of understanding and then explaining myself.

[ :) ]

you see, i am not sure if any of those assumptions are valid. here are the problems:

a) is the paradox of the eye seeing the eye. no, not the eye seeing the model of the eye, the eye seeing another eye, but, the eye seeing itself, in its entirety, inside out. umm... you see the problem ;)

b) even if the eye can see itself, can it describe itself? will it make any sense to anyone else?
वो जब रामजी ने सीताजी को देखा, तो उस समय का वर्णन तुलसीदासजी कुछ ऐसे करतें हैं की
गिरा अनयन
नैन बिन वाणी
अब जो मैं कहीं भूले भटके ख़ुद को समझ ही लूँ, तो भी, समझाऊँ कैसे?

c) its like that guy heraclitus worried about not being able to step into the same river twice. the river flows, is constantly changing. so even if i do understand who i am right now, and then explain it to you, i might as well not have done it, because the manual is obsolete by the time it is written. the very process of becoming self aware, alters me, and i am someone else now.

there.

the defense rests.

:D