Markusl

I think, as has been mentioned by others earlier in this post, that attributing qualities to the self is not possible. As @abrakamowse noted, attributing ''I'' or ''Nothingness'' to that which is the recipient of perception cannot be done, for the self is outside of linguistic conception. The only thing one can truly say about the ''perceiver of perception'', is that it's there. It's of such a nature that you paradoxically locate it when you realize that you cannot point at it, or describe it's qualities. It is basically the empty, eternal space (properties attributed to it for illustrating intentions only) to which neurons send their message. In the tradition of Advaita, as well as in the field of Indian philosophy as a whole, one of the main presumptions is that ''that which endures, is ultimately real'', or, more precisely, that that which is ''longer enduring'', carries a higher ontological status. Seeing as nothing in the manifest material world is permanent, and that the self allegedly is eternal, indivisible, unexplainable etc. It is revered as that with the highest ontological status.

@dice @Azrael You could do as Azrael instructed (staring into a wall), however, in my meditation experience, i have found staring out into an open space with lots of objects to be helpful too. If you do this, you can try to detach from your vision. You'll eventually manage to keep your eyes open, without being bothered by anything happening in your visual field, much like how focusing on your breathing during ''regular'' meditation helps you to not be bothered or attached to arising thoughts. The main point i'm trying to present is that by keeping your eyes open, you're very unlikely to get sleepy. However, if you're a novice at meditation, you might find it hard to enter a meditative state without closing your eyes. You'll have to figure out which solution works best for you yourself!