Tracing the master by his scent...

Of course, I am talking about the simile Maharshi had quoted, w.r.t. the way enquiry works. For those who have not come across the quote, here it is:
Source: Maharshi's Gospel, Ch: Aham and Aham-Vritti, Pg 86.
"Self-enquiry by following the clue of aham-vritti is just like the dog tracing its master by his scent. The master may be at some distant, unknown place, but that does not at all stand in the way of the dog tracing him. The master’s scent is an infallible clue for the animal, and nothing else, such as the dress he wears, or his build and stature etc., counts. The dog holds on to that scent undistractedly while searching for him, and finally it succeeds in tracing him."

Someone in a public forum had long time back said concentrating on "I-am"ness is same as self-enquiry. It had not convinced me to be right. But since I did not have an answer as a matter of experience, I had not dismissed it totally either. Off late, I have been able to ward off the thoughts, become thoughtless for few moments at least and "settle" in the "I-am"ness. I was not sure if I need to just be in that state or if I needed to dig further. If needed to dig, "how", "where" blah blah... I had conveniently ignored these questions and was at peace with those few moments' silence. Some days back, I felt I was cheating myself by not digging into what was the right way. Even after Maharshi giving the shortest-cut, I wasn't making the best use of it. So, as I was reflecting on all these, if it was sufficient to just stop at "I-am"ness devoid of all the thoughts or if there is more to it . I felt that once the "I-am"ness is "reached", we need to see for the source. The awareness quality that it has, it must have "inherited" from the source it springs forth! Bingo! There I have the answer! We are not to just stop at the "I-am"ness, but try to trace its source. And then, I remembered the above quote.

As I searched for the source of the quote and see if Maharshi had anything more to say about it, the below lines appear as a continuation of same "talk":
"Although the concept of ‘I’-ness or ‘I-am’-ness is by usage known as aham-vritti, it is not really a vritti like the other vrittis of the mind. Because, unlike the other vrittis which have no essential interrelation, the aham-vritti is equally and essentially related to each and every vritti of the mind. Without the ahamvritti there can be no other vritti, but the ahamvritti can subsist by itself without depending on any other vritti of the mind. The aham-vritti is therefore fundamentally different from other vrittis.

So then, the search for the source of the aham-vritti is not merely the search for the basis of one of the forms of the ego but for the very Source itself from which arises the ‘I-am’-ness. In other words, the quest for and the realization of the source of the ego in the form of aham-vritti necessarily implies the transcendence of the ego in everyone of its possible forms."

Well, how exactly to "trace" the source after landing at "I-am"ness? That still remains a mystery... :)