The Observer is the Observed

[Guest guest]

The observer is the observed

 

 

" This awareness that the observer is the observed is not a process

of identification with the observed. To identify ourselves with

something is fairly easy. Most of us identify ourselves with

something - with our family, our husband or wife, our nation - and

that leads to great misery and great wars. We are considering

something entirely different and we must understand it not verbally

but in our core, right at the root of our being. In ancient China

before an artist began to paint anything - a tree, for instance - he

would sit down in front of it for days, months, years, it didn't

matter how long, until he was the tree. He did not identify himself

with the tree but he was the tree. This means that there was no

space between him and the tree, no space between the observer and

the observed, no experiencer experiencing the beauty, the movement,

the shadow, the depth of a leaf, the quality of colour. He was

totally the tree, and in that state only could he paint.

 

Any movement on the part of the observer, if he has not realized

that the observer is the observed, creates only another series of

images and again he is caught in them. But what takes place when the

observer is aware that the observer is the observed? Go slowly, go

very slowly, because it is a very complex thing we are going into

now. What takes place? The observer does not act at all. The

observer has always said, `I must do something about these images, I

must suppress them or give them a different shape; he is always

active in regard to the observed, acting and reacting passionately

or casually, and this action of like and dislike on the part of the

observer is called positive action - `I like, therefore I must hold.

I dislike therefore I must get rid of.' But when the observer

realizes that the thing about which he is acting is himself, then

there is no conflict between himself and the image. He is that. He

is not separate from that. When he was separate, he did, or tried to

do, something about it, but when the observer realizes that he is

that, then there is no like or dislike and conflict ceases.

 

For what is he to do? If something is you, what can you do? You

cannot rebel against it or run away from it or even accept it. It is

there. So all action that is the outcome of reaction to like-and

dislike has come to an end.

 

Then you will find that there is an awareness that has become

tremendously alive. It is not bound to any central issue or to any

image - and from that intensity of awareness there is a different

quality of attention and therefore the mind - because the mind is

this awareness - has become extraordinarily sensitive and highly

intelligent. "

 

 

(Excerpt from Freedom From The Known, chapter 12 - by Krishnamurti).

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr

wrote:

>

> The observer is the observed

>

>

> " This awareness that the observer is the observed is not a process

> of identification with the observed. To identify ourselves with

> something is fairly easy. Most of us identify ourselves with

> something - with our family, our husband or wife, our nation - and

> that leads to great misery and great wars. We are considering

> something entirely different and we must understand it not verbally

> but in our core, right at the root of our being. In ancient China

> before an artist began to paint anything - a tree, for instance - he

> would sit down in front of it for days, months, years, it didn't

> matter how long, until he was the tree. He did not identify himself

> with the tree but he was the tree. This means that there was no

> space between him and the tree, no space between the observer and

> the observed, no experiencer experiencing the beauty, the movement,

> the shadow, the depth of a leaf, the quality of colour. He was

> totally the tree, and in that state only could he paint.

>

> Any movement on the part of the observer, if he has not realized

> that the observer is the observed, creates only another series of

> images and again he is caught in them. But what takes place when the

> observer is aware that the observer is the observed? Go slowly, go

> very slowly, because it is a very complex thing we are going into

> now. What takes place? The observer does not act at all. The

> observer has always said, `I must do something about these images, I

> must suppress them or give them a different shape; he is always

> active in regard to the observed, acting and reacting passionately

> or casually, and this action of like and dislike on the part of the

> observer is called positive action - `I like, therefore I must hold.

> I dislike therefore I must get rid of.' But when the observer

> realizes that the thing about which he is acting is himself, then

> there is no conflict between himself and the image. He is that. He

> is not separate from that. When he was separate, he did, or tried to

> do, something about it, but when the observer realizes that he is

> that, then there is no like or dislike and conflict ceases.

>

> For what is he to do? If something is you, what can you do? You

> cannot rebel against it or run away from it or even accept it. It is

> there. So all action that is the outcome of reaction to like-and

> dislike has come to an end.

>

> Then you will find that there is an awareness that has become

> tremendously alive. It is not bound to any central issue or to any

> image - and from that intensity of awareness there is a different

> quality of attention and therefore the mind - because the mind is

> this awareness - has become extraordinarily sensitive and highly

> intelligent. "

>

>

> (Excerpt from Freedom From The Known, chapter 12 - by Krishnamurti).

>

 

yes...but your advice was to join...you gave a direction...

and krishnamurti...is saying that you cannot do anything...(not even

join)...he is not giving a direction...

....iietsa

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@>

> wrote:

> >

> > The observer is the observed

> >

> >

> > " This awareness that the observer is the observed is not a process

> > of identification with the observed. To identify ourselves with

> > something is fairly easy. Most of us identify ourselves with

> > something - with our family, our husband or wife, our nation - and

> > that leads to great misery and great wars. We are considering

> > something entirely different and we must understand it not

verbally

> > but in our core, right at the root of our being. In ancient China

> > before an artist began to paint anything - a tree, for instance -

he

> > would sit down in front of it for days, months, years, it didn't

> > matter how long, until he was the tree. He did not identify

himself

> > with the tree but he was the tree. This means that there was no

> > space between him and the tree, no space between the observer and

> > the observed, no experiencer experiencing the beauty, the

movement,

> > the shadow, the depth of a leaf, the quality of colour. He was

> > totally the tree, and in that state only could he paint.

> >

> > Any movement on the part of the observer, if he has not realized

> > that the observer is the observed, creates only another series of

> > images and again he is caught in them. But what takes place when

the

> > observer is aware that the observer is the observed? Go slowly, go

> > very slowly, because it is a very complex thing we are going into

> > now. What takes place? The observer does not act at all. The

> > observer has always said, `I must do something about these

images, I

> > must suppress them or give them a different shape; he is always

> > active in regard to the observed, acting and reacting passionately

> > or casually, and this action of like and dislike on the part of

the

> > observer is called positive action - `I like, therefore I must

hold.

> > I dislike therefore I must get rid of.' But when the observer

> > realizes that the thing about which he is acting is himself, then

> > there is no conflict between himself and the image. He is that. He

> > is not separate from that. When he was separate, he did, or tried

to

> > do, something about it, but when the observer realizes that he is

> > that, then there is no like or dislike and conflict ceases.

> >

> > For what is he to do? If something is you, what can you do? You

> > cannot rebel against it or run away from it or even accept it. It

is

> > there. So all action that is the outcome of reaction to like-and

> > dislike has come to an end.

> >

> > Then you will find that there is an awareness that has become

> > tremendously alive. It is not bound to any central issue or to any

> > image - and from that intensity of awareness there is a different

> > quality of attention and therefore the mind - because the mind is

> > this awareness - has become extraordinarily sensitive and highly

> > intelligent. "

> >

> >

> > (Excerpt from Freedom From The Known, chapter 12 - by

Krishnamurti).

> >

>

> yes...but your advice was to join...you gave a direction...

> and krishnamurti...is saying that you cannot do anything...(not

even

> join)...he is not giving a direction...

> ...iietsa

 

 

such popular statements in spirituality like " the observer is the

observed " .....or " the world = you " ......or " you are the

world " ......or.....or....

 

.......don't give any peace to people who can't stop to observe

anything......and therefore are constantly trapped/catched within the

dream called....life....means, in/by their imaginary self

 

 

Marc

 

 

Ps: it seem that some people observed some trees....stones.....

 

.....too much....too much

 

memory is full....

 

giving/getting nothing but restless mind.....and world.....

 

.....

 

a heart for imaginary observer, please!!

 

 

>