On one side there is the strictly metaphoric nature of witnessing. It is an essential metaphor or image of consciousness but it cannot be actual, except as a sort of ecstatic nightmare, since that would lead to an infinite regress of witnesses. Everything imaginable is experiencable, without bounds, but this is not the same as being actual. You don't know how to be in unboundedness, there is no knowing, that's what knowing is. On the other side it is personal all the way, there is no escape from the 'I' of consciousness into impersonality - into some sort of 'impersonal functioning of totality'. The self might be, or most certainly is, a provisional stability at one or more levels of experience, but it does not represent the limit of the personal. That quirky form of self-inquiry that uses 'Avoiding relationship?' targets the same opening as 'Who am I?'