IF THE OBSERVER IS THE OBSERVED THEN WHO/what is observing? Can there not be observing without conflict; allowing oneself to feel/experience without repressing, resisting, running or identifying with it?
'IF THE OBSERVER IS THE OBSERVED THEN WHO/what is observing?" Consciousness is observing.. Not your consciousness nor my consciousness, consciousness doesn't belong to you nor I, that's all too childish. When one speaks of "my consciousness" he means the *content* of consciousness, and *not* consciousness itself... The content of consciousness is that which thought has amassed in memory, through time, and built into the image or illusory entity called "me'. "Can there not be observing without conflict; allowing oneself to feel/experience without repressing, resisting, running or identifying with it?" Consciousness without content doesn't seek to feel nor experience... Nor does it analyse, compare or judge but rather, there is just observation.
The Observer (egoic mind/past pain, pleasures, experiences reacting in the now judgmentally) is the Observed (by our non-judgmental awareness or higher self - as if observing something for the 1st time with no previous experience) My 1st awareness with the observer is the observed. Let me explain. Years ago when I was experiencing a great depression, there was part of me in my upper charkra just observing. What it showed me was that my egoic mind was judging my life now (death of a person close me and money and health problems etc.) and comparing it to happier times which made me very depressed. It showed me that my ego mind was causing my suffering by my judgement and comparison, and it was not helping, and I preferred to be happy. I immediately bowed to God within for the realization and immediately my peace of mind came back with no hint of depression, then I started feeling an expanding love in my heart area beyond my physical body, then it shot up to above the top of my head. I felt blissful and noticed how silent my egoic mind was. For the next 3 days my egoic chatter was a lot more silent than usual with occasional thought. Then 3 days later the chatter started to try to creep back in, but I saw it was trying to do the same thing as before, so I observed it again without judgement which brings in duality, and then things got put in proper order. For myself and many, the egoic mind often runs the show in between short bouts of intuition, peace, meditation and such. The egoic mind categorizes, judges (brings in duality), separates us from each other and God/Source, prevents direct perception and causes most of our suffering. The egoic mind cannot control the egoic mind, but it can be observed by our Spiritual nature or higher self and get put in proper use or order. The observer is more like observing something for the 1st time with no experience, judgement or past, just pure observation. There is great peace, love, bliss when you operate beyond your egoic mind in control. Your egoic mind is more to remember how to get home and protect this temporary physical body suit. Your spiritual or highest self should be running the show and using your body and egoic part of the mind as needed. We are not this temporary physical body suit, nor egoic mind identity, we are eternal consciousness or the observer, all part of one God/Source. Eternal God was one and alone, and desired to be many in order to enjoy the delight of self discovery as God ascends back to itself through the successive stages of evolution. God wanted to know more about itself thus all these creations. To realize your true self or Spiritual nature is the exact reverse process of creation. Also if you get attached to things that change, you invite suffering unto yourself. (Detachment can be the key) What in the physical world and egoic mind does not change? I am grateful for what God/Source gives me and one day takes away. God/Source is the Ocean and we are not just a wave of the Ocean, but the whole Ocean in a wave. Practicing meditation helped me to discover true meditation. Do you know why some meditation traditions observe the breath? Your breathing is in the now, not future or past, and your attention/energy goes there instead of following the train of thought. It helps you to observe more, rather than judge. The breath is what connects your true self to the physical body suit, no breath and the body suit will die.
@@Purwapada Incorrect. Your true eternal self observes objects but not itself. It can observe your temporary physical body suit, and chatty egoic mind, or a chair. Your true self is awareness/witness.
@@Purwapada When I finally realized this during a great depression, my non judgmental awareness exposed my ego for what it was. The awareness is not an intellectual thing, but awareness. I became aware what my ego was doing. Once you get it, the mind becomes silent most of the time and no longer runs the show with all it's judgements, desires etc.. Your higher self runs the show instead of your chatty egoic mind, or physical desires. There is great peace, love, bliss. If you create a desire for money to make you happy, and you do not get the money, most get unhappy, you did it to yourself. No one is poking you in the eye but yourself. If you get attached to things that change, you invite suffering unto yourself. What in the physical world and chatty egoic mind does not change? What is changeless? (besides change) To realize your true self or Spiritual nature is the exact reverse process of creation. Be still and know you are of God. Still your physical body, your chatty egoic mind. Your Spiritual eternal self is connected to your physical body by breath. No breath, no physical life. Some scriptures say -"God breathed His life into man and they became living Souls. (No true seperation) I prefer actual awareness rather than book learning. The word mountain is not the actual mountain, but points to it. If you observe something for the 1st time, so no experience or judgement. There is just pure observation with no words, except maybe a little wonder.
It simply means that when you look at a tree with all of yourself, when there is no analysis, no thoughts, no self, then you become what you're looking at. In order to understand K. Its necessary that we spend time listening to him. And he has always said the more we analyze we miss the bus entirely.
I appreciate music's healing ability generally. But probably not with K. K himself would have completed stepped away from anyone making such an attempt. It dissipates the intensity and depth of where he wants to reach us, heal us. :/
Could you please continue posting these bite size Krishnamurti speeches. They are short but precise and perfect. I understand it takes time to create video, so even if you can just post the few minutes with a background song and a still picture to take less of your time. Cause you haven’t post a video for a while and I assumed because of its time consuming problem. Thank you very much for everything.
I have understood from other teachers that a goal of meditation and mindfulness is the ability to observe yourself objectively without self-judgment. However, it is hard for me to reconcile that with the teaching here of Krishnamurthi. He seems to be saying if you observe yourself and you are in a bad mood, say "angry" or "frustrated", then if you ("the observer") are separate from the anger, i.e. you are objective and not angry, then you will suffer. He seems to be saying that you as the observer should be angry just like you as the observed. That there shouldn't be an "objective" observer who is not angry and is just observing the anger. But the initial teaching, taught by many others teaching mindfulness, is that you should try to observed yourself objectively; and that the "anger" is not you, it is just an emotion. Im having a hard time squaring these two views; do others see the contrast ? Am I understanding correctly?
I feel that the same principle applies. You as entity of awereness (the observer) investigate your feeling (the observed) and therefore accept the feeling instead of running away from it (the division that is spoken of). Investigating/observing your feelings/thoughts/sensations should be without judgement as mindfulness teaches. Via this mindful observation of yourself you end inner conflict by the explained concept of the observer becoming the observed. So to reply to your example: Instead of fighting and running away from angriness as we normally do nowadays, we sit down and mindfully investigate the feeling of angriness or frustration. By this the observer becomes the observed. If done with mindfulness, over time we truly come to accept those feelings that are deemed negative, which therefore lose a significant part of their hold over us. We allow ourselves to feel angry, frustrated or anxious. This attitude towards those emotions frees us from them paradoxically: fully accepting and embracing feelings of hatred will dissolve the feelings itself and creates space for other sensation to be felt.
You understand correctly but miss something. When you as an observer TRY by external forces to separate yourself from the observed (anger, fear) you will create ego. You will never succeed. The only way to do this is to understand inside that anger is you, you are anger. Do not separate yourself from it. Do not run from it. Meet that fact. Then, it will naturally dissapate.
It's not a simple thing, but if you reach it, you are Free. Just observe your self even there is a bad thoughts, you will win the devil. We are sons of the universe. ❤️
I heard the phrase "observer is the observed" from JK in some discussion video with few scientists, searched yt, and watched 2 more vids (including this), and my confusion isn't gone. I don't originally have a confusion, but now there is confusion, and it's created by jk. All this feels pure bullshit. Lemme explain. Whether I'm enlightened or intelligent or dumb, the mind is the only way for me to have an experience (thoughts or sense perceptions). If mind is observing a rose flower, suppose with full intensity, there is no thought, there is no self, exactly at that time. But the mind exists at that time, the observer. The rose flower exists at that time, the observed. So, observer is not the observed. It's a different aspect that the intense observation helps to not only observe the flower very keenly, but also helps the mind to experience peace or joy or bliss or ecstasy (depending on the intensity of the observation). From my understanding, in such intense situation, such energy (bliss for example) enters the mind directly from the source of creation. Still, the observer is separate from the observed, practically seeing. At energy level both are same because both mind and rose are essentially energy. At brahman or atman level both are same because both mind and rose are brahman alone, appearing as mind and rose. But at the materialistic level, mind (observer) is very clearly different from rose (observed). Now, let's see loneliness. Mind experiences loneliness due to a set of thoughts. When loneliness is at thought level, the thought is constructed and simultaneously experienced by the mind. So the thought has life as long as mind experiences it. Exactly at that time, there is no space in the mind for the mind to observe the thought. So, in the case of a thought, the mind can never be the observer. Observation of a thought is not feasible at all. After the thought goes away, 2 things remain. The -ve emotion of loneliness felt somewhere in the body, the saving of loneliness thoughts in the mind's memory. If mind is observing the memory content about loneliness, it is not technically observing, it is retrospection. So, observing is not feasible. If mind is observing the discharged energy of the -ve emotion of loneliness, this is similar to observing a rose flower. The observer (mind) is clearly separate from the observed (loneliness emotion). So, the phrase fails here too. The only thing that works is "experiencer is the experienced" and ONLY in the case of thoughts about loneliness, because as I wrote above, when the mind is experiencing a thought, both are one (unlike an emotion or a rose object). So, the experiencer is the experienced. But "experiencer is the experienced" isn't feasible in the case of loneliness emotion or rose, for the exact same reason as I wrote above for "observer is the observed". All this jk talk makes no sense to me at all. Please correct me if U clearly notice a mistake in my understanding.
@@abhitew I’ve once again read my 7 months old msg and everything makes perfect sense to me now too I’ve already covered your point in my prev msg. While observing rose if I’m observing myself through my past thoughts and experiences, it means my mind is experiencing the thoughts about the rose, like the name or label of rose, the smell of rose, etc which were recorded in my memory in the past. This belongs to the same category as mind experiencing thoughts about loneliness. Essentially this is about mind experiencing thoughts The starting point in my previous msg was about intensely observing a rose. When the observation is really intense, there is no scope for a thought to enter the mind during those few moments. The mind just experiences the rose without thinking about its name “rose” and thinking about its fragrance. Yet the rose is apart from the mind. Hence observer is not the observed I’ve just repeated those 2 aspects from prev msg once again so to respond to ur msg. 1st is about thoughts, 2nd is about intense sense perceptions. Observer is not the observed in both cases. Anyway, I dug deep during these past many months, and I understood the deep meaning of “observer is the observed” with help from Advaita Vedanta concepts and Sadhguru’s teachings. I’ll write if u r interested to know. The inner meaning is really deep and profound 😊
So in a way, whatever, literally EVERY THING n EVERYONE IS ME ! I am that tree, dat mountain, that painting, that pretty lady whose taking her selfie, that waiter picking up d cups, that ocean outside as I gaze through d window of this cafe "i"m " sitting in just about to have tea! N then I get it- if I love myself n if everyone is me, it's so much easier to interact with them with patience n respect n I take it ..with love!💞 Thanks for sharing this video, right time right place right UA-cam 🤩🙏
While I agree with your comment, I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion based on this particular video, as this video doesn't say that "you are everything and everyone". All this video is saying is that there is no difference between "you" and the contents of your mind. Meaning, if you're angry, that anger is also you. How did you take that statement and turn it into saying that you are that tree and that pretty lady? Again, I'm not disagreeing. I agree that we are all One, but not based on this video. There are countless teachings and videos that speak of this, just not this one lol
1: consciousness is like water 2: observer (the identity) and the observed (the thought) are like containers that holds water. Like the ocean and clouds create each other, the ego and the thoughts create each other.
We must be careful. The _experience_ of reality is a necessary part of the self, because all sensory input is receptive. This is not to deny the existence of the exterior reality, but to say that the only thing we ever know is our "experience of" reality via the senses and not reality itself. This is an important distinction, because our actions have consequences in reality, which we can never truly see. The light goes into our eyes. We do not look out of them. This is an aspect of the reverse inference problem.
Damn I thought the objective is to stay as the observer until the ego self fades into the background. I often find myself confused and frustrated in this search.
From my limited understanding, it seems that meditation is a useful tool to understand all the objects in ones experience (both outside of the body and what's inside the body - thoughts, feelings, emotions). But the next step to growing understanding is the realization that observer is equally part of the dream as the objects . It's all one thing. The human mind wants to look for a clear "observer" in this experience but there's isn't one (which is difficult to understand). Instead, there is only the action happening on its own (doing, thinking, AND observing are all equally acting). God IS all this action. All that "you" can do is rest in this understanding from moment to moment.
The observer is the observed is one of the most significant things ever said by any man on earth The statement is as extraordinary as JK. The statement belongs to the unknowable. When there is nothing to observe when there is only the observer is left then the observer itself becomes the observed. Because there is nothing else to observe what else can we do The knower simply knows itself The seer sees himself. The energy that was going towards objects thoughts there are no thoughts no objects. The energy has no way to go any where it simply becomes a light into itself. There is nothing that it lights it lights it lights only itself a flame surrounded by silence surrounded by nothingness. AK
What is this “me” that observes it’s own content? Suppose I sense restlessness within, and say…why am I being restless? I shouldn’t be. I should be calm. But the fact is, that which senses this state of restlessness within, is restlessness itself. The “me” is a projection, a split from this restlessness that claims to observe and tells itself to be calm. Most of us get caught in this illusion that we call “me”. Perhaps the only “me” that exists is the physical body. The “me” that lives in the mind is an illusion, a thought. So if I say…I am sad, it’s as if sad and me are separate. Sadness can only sense itself as it arises. There is no one to claim it. Hence, observer is observed. All of this is hard to see or perceive via the mind / brain. Our brain is heavily conditioned. We can hope to see this clearly only if we can attempt to look beyond the mind. This requires deep pondering and meditation.
Your experience of "what is" is alive. The reality may be different, but the experience is necessarily alive. It is a part of you, and it actually is you. What is more, your experience of "what is" is the greater part of you. It is much greater than the man who reacts to the you who is "what is." The real fun is to see this in other people, and to allow them the option to see it in themselves and in others as well.
The thing is that Krishnamurthy use to say or pronounce the Observer word on Two different things.. (The one is that who is the seer who is observing, who is the Seer, the watcher, and the another one is the "Mind, full of Conflict, the working mind.)
When the mind ceases, and the observer is the observed, the observer(mind, ego etc) turns into the infinite watcher, observer who is not identified with the content of the consciousness.
@@samvelgevorgyan8534 That's what I'm saying, K used to say observer on two different things, (The one who is Observing:- Judging, Making choices, therefore identified with conflict, which is identified with mind) And the second one Which K used to say (Observer, Who is simply observing, Without any conflict, Which is the seer, and the one who watches!) That's observing without Duality, without any choice.
Matthew 19:25-26 Stunned and bewildered, his disciples asked, "Then who in the world can possibly be saved?" Looking into their eyes, Jesus replied " Humanly speaking, no one, because no one can save himself. But what seems impossible to you is never impossible to God!" If you would like to know the real solutions to mankind's problems then ask one of Jehovahs Witnesses. After all doesn't one ask oneself how did this duality Krishnamurti speaks of start? Was it not when Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and bad? If they had not done so would we ever have had conflict within ourselves
to me the observer and the observed are the same thing and are divided at the same time. divided in that the observer has a higher authority in directing thoughts and emotions, but at the same time it is the same thing in terms of essence so that there is no conflict. which is clear when the observer appears all thoughts and emotions go to the side and everything becomes clearer so that thoughts and emotions can recalculate more productively
When observer is not present only observed is present then who is observing that observer is not present and observed is present? or if I say that only observer is present observing the whole process very completely that all things is different from me it may be your thoughts etc...then it also may be your end of conflict . Complete observing is also the end of conflict.because there is gap between controlled and uncontrolled mind if we totally observe this gap then there is no conflict
from what i understand, the question that ramana maharshi advice to us, is inquiring until the 'I thaught' dissolve in the real Self. in the begining, we start from a dualistic position, a confilictic one in other terms. then, after you will realize that the thinker is thought and there is no thinker, or doer or whatsoeve else,
An observer x will observe objects in nature (another observer y is called an object, when x observes y). If y observes x, x is called an object (all observers are equal).
Suppose if I am observing a chair, then I am a chair...means the thought that came into my mind is in form of chair, if I am observing a tiger I am tiger
They did a study on the messages that the brain sends to the heart.. and somehow discovered that the heart sends more messages to the brain, than it receives.. by a bunch. They didn’t know why, nor did any of the researchers dare speculate the reasons for this I myself thought right from the start one possible reason.. Could it be, that the observer is within your very heart, and the reason throughout history things were always heartfelt.. or in your heart of hearts you knew Infact the strongest feelings of what is right, or wrong.. let alone.. When falling in love.. are all from your heart, and seems to always shape your thoughts, long before the what some say is rational thinking, that you may think is in your brain..? Any chance of this being the observer? It makes you think about the way you treat them,and or me as in you’re own self.. esteem of the pride and ownership in lifelong caring relationships. Be good to others who have been made to believe that they have a purpose in their own life, and Forgivness is the blessing that you allowed to give yourself not just to these others., 1. Because in doing all that means is you’re wanting to change!! Think about it
In meditation, suppose you observe the thought then you observe that you observe the thought and so one...like infinity. Has anyone faced this problem? and know how to do that correctly?
If you are interested in understand this very well hear this other point of view of the same: Your own being is happiness, from Rupert Spira. Also check Hume the philosopher who said "The me is a bundle of toughts"
From my limited understanding, it seems that meditation is a useful tool to understand all the objects in ones experience (both outside of the body and what's inside the body - thoughts, feelings, emotions). But the next step to growing understanding is the realization that observer is equally part of the dream as the objects . It's all one thing. The human mind wants to look for a clear "observer" in this experience but there's isn't one (which is difficult to understand). Instead, there is only the action happening on its own (doing, thinking, AND observing are all equally acting). God IS all this action. All that "you" can do is rest in this understanding from moment to moment.
when you observe ''things,objects'' in meditation after a while you ask, curiously, who observes the observer, who is watching upon him? it takes you to another demention of unknown, the thinking machine (brain) kind of stops or slows down. Thats how i get it
The light goes into our eyes. We do not look out of them. The light goes in, and our brains synthesize our experience of the exterior reality. We do not look out of ourselves. This is impossible. We never see reality as it is. All our experiences of the external world are events internal to the brain. Those events, that brain, is just as much you as your interior thoughts and feelings. Not only that - your capacity to experience the otherness of exterior reality is the greater part of you - far greater than your personality or your talent or your work ethic.
This is exactly the opposite of what all great spiritual teachers teach, from the Buddha to Marcus Aurelius to Eckhart Tolle. We are not the content of our consciousness - I am NOT my thoughts, my emotions - and that recognition allows us to observe them without identifying with them. If you say I AM my fear, it's a recipe for disaster!
I think we shouldn't go by with, what other people have to say. We should learn about ourselves by observing and find out what ia the truth.we shouldn't blindly follow anyone even if he is Buddha.we are conditioned to depend on authority or our education is such that we always depend on authority even to know ourselves.i think if i have to know myself then i shouldnt need anybody other than myself.Right now what we know as ourselves as our body and minds and mind is nothing but bundled of memories as our likes,dislikes, anger,fear,haterd and all the experiences i have accumulated over time.what we know ourselves is just bundled of memories which is as me and and as long as we don't see that observer is observed, we ll everlastingly be conflicts.once one is free from all the conflicts and mind is absolutely in silence then one go beyond me and then only that's a reality for us that we are not anger,envy or watever but for now we are anger.
@@Venom_590 I heard the phrase "observer is the observed" from JK in some discussion video with few scientists, searched yt, and watched 2 more vids (including this), and my confusion isn't gone. I don't originally have a confusion, but now there is confusion, and it's created by jk. All this feels pure bullshit. Lemme explain. Whether I'm enlightened or intelligent or dumb, the mind is the only way for me to have an experience (thoughts or sense perceptions). If mind is observing a rose flower, suppose with full intensity, there is no thought, there is no self, exactly at that time. But the mind exists at that time, the observer. The rose flower exists at that time, the observed. So, observer is not the observed. It's a different aspect that the intense observation helps to not only observe the flower very keenly, but also helps the mind to experience peace or joy or bliss or ecstasy (depending on the intensity of the observation). From my understanding, in such intense situation, such energy (bliss for example) enters the mind directly from the source of creation. Still, the observer is separate from the observed, practically seeing. At energy level both are same because both mind and rose are essentially energy. At brahman or atman level both are same because both mind and rose are brahman alone, appearing as mind and rose. But at the materialistic level, mind (observer) is very clearly different from rose (observed). Now, let's see loneliness. Mind experiences loneliness due to a set of thoughts. When loneliness is at thought level, the thought is constructed and simultaneously experienced by the mind. So the thought has life as long as mind experiences it. Exactly at that time, there is no space in the mind for the mind to observe the thought. So, in the case of a thought, the mind can never be the observer. Observation of a thought is not feasible at all. After the thought goes away, 2 things remain. The -ve emotion of loneliness felt somewhere in the body, the saving of loneliness thoughts in the mind's memory. If mind is observing the memory content about loneliness, it is not technically observing, it is retrospection. So, observing is not feasible. If mind is observing the discharged energy of the -ve emotion of loneliness, this is similar to observing a rose flower. The observer (mind) is clearly separate from the observed (loneliness emotion). So, the phrase fails here too. The only thing that works is "experiencer is the experienced" and ONLY in the case of thoughts about loneliness, because as I wrote above, when the mind is experiencing a thought, both are one (unlike an emotion or a rose object). So, the experiencer is the experienced. But "experiencer is the experienced" isn't feasible in the case of loneliness emotion or rose, for the exact same reason as I wrote above for "observer is the observed". All this jk talk makes no sense to me at all. Please correct me if U clearly notice a mistake in my understanding.
When you are watching a rose intensly is there any observer separate from observed?observer only comes into being when you try to keep that as a memory.
@@Venom_590 I hope u have read my long msg. There are 2 ways to look at this #1: I wrote in my prev msg. During intense observation there is no thought. But mind is separate from rose. So observer is not the observed. We can say this is the fact when the mind looks at the event after completion of the event #2: exactly at the time of the event, there is intensity, there is no thought. Even though the rose is outside, information about the rose is in the brain (eye picks rose as photons, eye encodes that as optical info and sends into sensory portion of left brain, brain decodes the info when mind decides to watch the rose, all happening immediately but in this order, this final rose content experienced by mind is called vritthi in Sanskrit). So when mind is intensely observing the rose, at that exact moment, there is neither the rose nor the mind, there is just the observation. This is practically evident. I tried just now with intense observation of something. So here too observe is not the observed because both are absent JK is clearly creating his own spirituality language which doesn’t match with osho or sadhguru or Eckhart Tolle or Advaita Vedanta Please comment.
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 sorry first but you have to understand what is observer and observed.you are mixing so much and making it so much complicated.
Observe is the observed the control is controled the thinker is the thought . j kuishna murti. Am I different from the content of my consciousness? If I am different from the thing I observe in myself, then there is a division between ‘me’ and the thing which I enquire into. We’re going to go into a little more. I observe in myself anger. I am angry. Or I am greedy, envious. Is that envy different from me who is observing that reaction which I call ‘envy’? Or that envy is me; I am not different from that envy. So, when I observe, is there a division between the observer and the observed? Then there is conflict. Then I try to suppress it, control it, or run away from it, or try to wish to change it. But if the observer is the observed, then a totally different action takes place. Are we dissipating the mystery of it? Because this is very important, right from the beginning. We are conditioned to the conflict of this division. We are conditioned to either suppress it, or analyze it or run away from it. We are educated, to accept this division. But when one looks into it very, very deeply - not very deeply, it’s fairly simple - one sees the observer is the observed, therefore, you eliminate all conflict.”
I watched all Drg Drsya Viveka videos by Swami Sarvapriyananda of Advaita Vedanta org on yt. AV clearly say observer is not the observed. They are same only at the level of energy or at the fundamental level of brahman. At worldly or materialistic levels observer is clearly different from the observed. Rose different from eye different from mind different from pure consciousness
I heard the phrase "observer is the observed" from JK in some discussion video with few scientists, searched yt, and watched 2 more vids (including this), and my confusion isn't gone. I don't originally have a confusion, but now there is confusion, and it's created by jk. All this feels pure bullshit. Lemme explain. Whether I'm enlightened or intelligent or dumb, the mind is the only way for me to have an experience (thoughts or sense perceptions). If mind is observing a rose flower, suppose with full intensity, there is no thought, there is no self, exactly at that time. But the mind exists at that time, the observer. The rose flower exists at that time, the observed. So, observer is not the observed. It's a different aspect that the intense observation helps to not only observe the flower very keenly, but also helps the mind to experience peace or joy or bliss or ecstasy (depending on the intensity of the observation). From my understanding, in such intense situation, such energy (bliss for example) enters the mind directly from the source of creation. Still, the observer is separate from the observed, practically seeing. At energy level both are same because both mind and rose are essentially energy. At brahman or atman level both are same because both mind and rose are brahman alone, appearing as mind and rose. But at the materialistic level, mind (observer) is very clearly different from rose (observed). Now, let's see loneliness. Mind experiences loneliness due to a set of thoughts. When loneliness is at thought level, the thought is constructed and simultaneously experienced by the mind. So the thought has life as long as mind experiences it. Exactly at that time, there is no space in the mind for the mind to observe the thought. So, in the case of a thought, the mind can never be the observer. Observation of a thought is not feasible at all. After the thought goes away, 2 things remain. The -ve emotion of loneliness felt somewhere in the body, the saving of loneliness thoughts in the mind's memory. If mind is observing the memory content about loneliness, it is not technically observing, it is retrospection. So, observing is not feasible. If mind is observing the discharged energy of the -ve emotion of loneliness, this is similar to observing a rose flower. The observer (mind) is clearly separate from the observed (loneliness emotion). So, the phrase fails here too. The only thing that works is "experiencer is the experienced" and ONLY in the case of thoughts about loneliness, because as I wrote above, when the mind is experiencing a thought, both are one (unlike an emotion or a rose object). So, the experiencer is the experienced. But "experiencer is the experienced" isn't feasible in the case of loneliness emotion or rose, for the exact same reason as I wrote above for "observer is the observed". All this jk talk makes no sense to me at all. Please correct me if U clearly notice a mistake in my understanding.
@@omegamudondo4748 Thanks for replying! Either JK has to be wrong or me. How both can be true! Since JK is JK, an ELed being, I wanted to believe that I'm wrong somewhere, and so explored more, and found the below : Have u listened to (or watched) any Sadhguru talks? He described a few times his experience on Mysore, Chamundi Hills... at the time of his enlightenment. He said he suddenly lost the separation b/w whatever is outside and himself. He said he could sense that his skin is no longer a boundary separating him (his body in this context) from outer world. He said he experienced everything out there as himself. So, after more exploring I found 2 points, which are in sync with JK's "observer is the observed" (1) Through spiritual practices (like osho or SG or JK or anyone did) if mind gets into a lot of no-mind states (i.e. mind staying calm and stable during such times). Calm -- no impulsive thoughts, which are the major% of thoughts. Stable -- no random or frequent or sudden jumps from 1 sense perception to another. During such no-mind states, apart from the source of creation (or brahman or atman or spirit or pure consciousness) helping mind experience lot of joy (or bliss or ecstasy), through the mind and body the source of creation sends high frequency vibrating energy into the human system. Due to this the energy body of the guy becomes intense and more vibrant and becomes wider. As per the theory (bcoz I haven't practically experienced this yet), normally the energy body would be within the body and extends a little outside. But for a guy experiencing frequent no-mind states the energy body grows wider and wider, and anything that becomes within the boundary of the energy body, the mind PRACTICALLY experiences as how mind experiences the hand or leg or stomach or brain -- like the human system -- as itself. This is the PRACTICAL meaning of "observer is the observed". There is no separation between mind and the rose experienced by the mind, when the rose would be physically within the energy body of the guy It seems when Gautama Buddha used to walk through villages, people used to feel tremendous bliss, and that's becoz his energy body used to extend into kilometers Similarly, Jesus and the apostles. They fell in love with him due to the size of his energy body. (2) Using the language of Advaita Vedanta, everything is brahman, the universe is an appearance of brahman, but feels real due to the veiling power of Maya... but all this is only at theory level. It seems, when the guy becomes enlightened, there would be a quantum jump in the context of his mind (i.e. the core foundation in which the mind is always rooted, using which mind does all the experiences of thoughts and sense perceptions), and the mind would experience everything exactly as the same -- which we can label as brahman So, what JK said is 100% correct -- is what I finally understood. But JK is talking about the ultimate experience. If someone who is not yet capable of getting into frequent no-mind states is talking about "observer is the observed" as if he has really experienced it, it is just his HALLUCINATION. We need to invest lot of energy and efforts in the spiritual direction Thanks for reading :)
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 exactly, JK is on the other level, the way he understands the words he says are different from our interpretation and perception, I end up hallucinating and fantasizing about observer and observed and all that awareness stuff, so when I observe my emotions nothing happens, it gets even worse, more negative thoughts appear and fuel the negative emotions, at these moments I want to kick the asses of gurus for advising me this practice
Absolutely there's no difference but relatively there's a lot of difference. What he says here in nonsenae when it comes to living in the relative field of existence, society, with fruit cake religios who want to kill you if you don't agree with or like their stuod nonssense.
Exactly. If I can observe a thought that appears in my mind, and then the thought vanishes, do I vanish too? Nope! Anger and other emotions appear and disappear, but I am not them. There is an Indian philosophy known as Advaita Vedanta, which encourages you to inquire into your self. Who am I? I am not that which I am aware of. If I am aware of it, I am not it. And so it's encouraged to inquire into everything that you think you are, only to discard it, "not this; not this."
@@silverblaize if you r nothing , then there is no problem🤪 If you r walking on street , and you see a beautiful girl ,and suddenly a bad thought comes in your mind. Is this thought comes from sky ?? Is it not part of u ??on that time you that thought , you r not saprate from your thought. But you saprate your self form that thought....by becoming thinker....observer Then you think I will control my thought , I will do some meditation or reading a book like Advait.....so that this type thought never come in mind.
Maharshi is saying the content is illusion. The self is consciousness and it is what sees the illusion. Krishnamurti says you are the illusion. Because it is happening within your consciousness. Both are correct. This is beyond rational thinking. You are the artist and the canvas. But it takes a 3 step process to realize. First you start seeking god, then you find god (yourself) then you realize there is nothing but god. You and god are one!
Observer is the observed: This is the beginning of knowing you place in this universe.
Golden Words.
Thank you J.K.
The observer is the observed
The thinker is the thought
The doer is the doing
When the observer, thinker, doer are absent then you are free..
Prashant Patil meditation
IF THE OBSERVER IS THE OBSERVED THEN WHO/what is observing?
Can there not be observing without conflict; allowing oneself to feel/experience without repressing, resisting, running or identifying with it?
'IF THE OBSERVER IS THE OBSERVED THEN WHO/what is observing?"
Consciousness is observing..
Not your consciousness nor my consciousness, consciousness doesn't belong to you nor I, that's all too childish.
When one speaks of "my consciousness" he means the *content* of consciousness, and *not* consciousness itself... The content of consciousness is that which thought has amassed in memory, through time, and built into the image or illusory entity called "me'.
"Can there not be observing without conflict; allowing oneself to feel/experience without repressing, resisting, running or identifying with it?"
Consciousness without content doesn't seek to feel nor experience... Nor does it analyse, compare or judge but rather, there is just observation.
Yes u have become, pure observation.... A talented artist... But not a suffering artist.....
@@leighcecil233 Yes leigh, that would be a good expression for that state of being.
Most profound statement ever said in history regarding human mind
The Observer (egoic mind/past pain, pleasures, experiences reacting in the now judgmentally) is the Observed (by our non-judgmental awareness or higher self - as if observing something for the 1st time with no previous experience) My 1st awareness with the observer is the observed. Let me explain. Years ago when I was experiencing a great depression, there was part of me in my upper charkra just observing. What it showed me was that my egoic mind was judging my life now (death of a person close me and money and health problems etc.) and comparing it to happier times which made me very depressed. It showed me that my ego mind was causing my suffering by my judgement and comparison, and it was not helping, and I preferred to be happy. I immediately bowed to God within for the realization and immediately my peace of mind came back with no hint of depression, then I started feeling an expanding love in my heart area beyond my physical body, then it shot up to above the top of my head. I felt blissful and noticed how silent my egoic mind was. For the next 3 days my egoic chatter was a lot more silent than usual with occasional thought. Then 3 days later the chatter started to try to creep back in, but I saw it was trying to do the same thing as before, so I observed it again without judgement which brings in duality, and then things got put in proper order. For myself and many, the egoic mind often runs the show in between short bouts of intuition, peace, meditation and such. The egoic mind categorizes, judges (brings in duality), separates us from each other and God/Source, prevents direct perception and causes most of our suffering. The egoic mind cannot control the egoic mind, but it can be observed by our Spiritual nature or higher self and get put in proper use or order. The observer is more like observing something for the 1st time with no experience, judgement or past, just pure observation. There is great peace, love, bliss when you operate beyond your egoic mind in control. Your egoic mind is more to remember how to get home and protect this temporary physical body suit. Your spiritual or highest self should be running the show and using your body and egoic part of the mind as needed. We are not this temporary physical body suit, nor egoic mind identity, we are eternal consciousness or the observer, all part of one God/Source. Eternal God was one and alone, and desired to be many in order to enjoy the delight of self discovery as God ascends back to itself through the successive stages of evolution. God wanted to know more about itself thus all these creations. To realize your true self or Spiritual nature is the exact reverse process of creation. Also if you get attached to things that change, you invite suffering unto yourself. (Detachment can be the key) What in the physical world and egoic mind does not change? I am grateful for what God/Source gives me and one day takes away. God/Source is the Ocean and we are not just a wave of the Ocean, but the whole Ocean in a wave. Practicing meditation helped me to discover true meditation. Do you know why some meditation traditions observe the breath? Your breathing is in the now, not future or past, and your attention/energy goes there instead of following the train of thought. It helps you to observe more, rather than judge. The breath is what connects your true self to the physical body suit, no breath and the body suit will die.
the higher self is the observed
@@Purwapada Incorrect. Your true eternal self observes objects but not itself. It can observe your temporary physical body suit, and chatty egoic mind, or a chair. Your true self is awareness/witness.
@@yuewenb How do you know its not the ego in disguise? In other words, why is it not self observant?
@@Purwapada When I finally realized this during a great depression, my non judgmental awareness exposed my ego for what it was. The awareness is not an intellectual thing, but awareness. I became aware what my ego was doing. Once you get it, the mind becomes silent most of the time and no longer runs the show with all it's judgements, desires etc.. Your higher self runs the show instead of your chatty egoic mind, or physical desires. There is great peace, love, bliss. If you create a desire for money to make you happy, and you do not get the money, most get unhappy, you did it to yourself. No one is poking you in the eye but yourself. If you get attached to things that change, you invite suffering unto yourself. What in the physical world and chatty egoic mind does not change? What is changeless? (besides change) To realize your true self or Spiritual nature is the exact reverse process of creation. Be still and know you are of God. Still your physical body, your chatty egoic mind. Your Spiritual eternal self is connected to your physical body by breath. No breath, no physical life. Some scriptures say -"God breathed His life into man and they became living Souls. (No true seperation) I prefer actual awareness rather than book learning. The word mountain is not the actual mountain, but points to it. If you observe something for the 1st time, so no experience or judgement. There is just pure observation with no words, except maybe a little wonder.
@@yuewenb ok great! thanks for clarification :)
This channel deserves more recognition!
Great work mate!
the cinematography in this video is simply stunning!
Thank you!
Yes, the eyes really captivate me. I'm looking at this before I do my Taoist mediation.
@@Saveg36 u
I think you missed Krishnamurti
I'm watching this after2 years but it is still fresh and young as it always was..it is power of word by absolute man...thx for posting it
It simply means that when you look at a tree with all of yourself, when there is no analysis, no thoughts, no self, then you become what you're looking at. In order to understand K. Its necessary that we spend time listening to him. And he has always said the more we analyze we miss the bus entirely.
The world needs more videos of the talks of Krish with beautiful imagery and music, thank you very much.
The music is distracting. If you think it improves the video you are missing the point he is making.
Hmm
I appreciate music's healing ability generally. But probably not with K. K himself would have completed stepped away from anyone making such an attempt. It dissipates the intensity and depth of where he wants to reach us, heal us. :/
Whole world need to know this man!!!!!!!!!!
GREAT speech . Carpe diem . Enjoy calmly . Seize the day in a healthy way . Mindfulness .
The meditator is the meditation. Krishnaji 🙏
Very profound!
Thank you for posting short videos......
7732925256 watsapp number
Could you please continue posting these bite size Krishnamurti speeches. They are short but precise and perfect. I understand it takes time to create video, so even if you can just post the few minutes with a background song and a still picture to take less of your time. Cause you haven’t post a video for a while and I assumed because of its time consuming problem. Thank you very much for everything.
I'm backing this guy
So true! These videos are amazing. Perfect for my attention span. Thanks for posting them. The music is great, so are the visuals 😊
@@EddieAndMum z
Wowww. this is awesome!! transcribed and beautiful visuals. thank you!
and the music! chefs kiss 😗🤌🏽
if the thinker is the thought, this means you identify with that thought? you are the awareness behind the thought
I subscribed..!! And the reason behind this is Krishnamurti ji🙏
what a gift? i have seen this video! you are a great observer of J.K. you tube is to day used me! thanks a lot!
Loved your work the immeasurable
Pls continue uploading these kinds of videos
A precious resource, please keep making these beautiful videos. 🙏🙏🙏
We are totally separated from "sin," ALREADY. "Come ye out from among them; and, be ye separate." Thank YOU, God.
when the observer is the observed , that's the truth, the highest form of inelegance
Please continue to post the videos, they are short and conveying the message to the point.
Greatest Master ...Jiddu Kirishanmurti 💐💐💐
I have understood from other teachers that a goal of meditation and mindfulness is the ability to observe yourself objectively without self-judgment. However, it is hard for me to reconcile that with the teaching here of Krishnamurthi. He seems to be saying if you observe yourself and you are in a bad mood, say "angry" or "frustrated", then if you ("the observer") are separate from the anger, i.e. you are objective and not angry, then you will suffer. He seems to be saying that you as the observer should be angry just like you as the observed. That there shouldn't be an "objective" observer who is not angry and is just observing the anger. But the initial teaching, taught by many others teaching mindfulness, is that you should try to observed yourself objectively; and that the "anger" is not you, it is just an emotion. Im having a hard time squaring these two views; do others see the contrast ? Am I understanding correctly?
I feel that the same principle applies. You as entity of awereness (the observer) investigate your feeling (the observed) and therefore accept the feeling instead of running away from it (the division that is spoken of). Investigating/observing your feelings/thoughts/sensations should be without judgement as mindfulness teaches. Via this mindful observation of yourself you end inner conflict by the explained concept of the observer becoming the observed. So to reply to your example: Instead of fighting and running away from angriness as we normally do nowadays, we sit down and mindfully investigate the feeling of angriness or frustration. By this the observer becomes the observed. If done with mindfulness, over time we truly come to accept those feelings that are deemed negative, which therefore lose a significant part of their hold over us. We allow ourselves to feel angry, frustrated or anxious. This attitude towards those emotions frees us from them paradoxically: fully accepting and embracing feelings of hatred will dissolve the feelings itself and creates space for other sensation to be felt.
You understand correctly but miss something. When you as an observer TRY by external forces to separate yourself from the observed (anger, fear) you will create ego. You will never succeed. The only way to do this is to understand inside that anger is you, you are anger. Do not separate yourself from it. Do not run from it. Meet that fact. Then, it will naturally dissapate.
thank you so much
The essence of self awareness.
Very attractive & life changing
Thank you Deepak!
It's not a simple thing, but if you reach it, you are Free.
Just observe your self even there is a bad thoughts, you will win the devil.
We are sons of the universe. ❤️
I heard the phrase "observer is the observed" from JK in some discussion video with few scientists, searched yt, and watched 2 more vids (including this), and my confusion isn't gone. I don't originally have a confusion, but now there is confusion, and it's created by jk. All this feels pure bullshit. Lemme explain.
Whether I'm enlightened or intelligent or dumb, the mind is the only way for me to have an experience (thoughts or sense perceptions).
If mind is observing a rose flower, suppose with full intensity, there is no thought, there is no self, exactly at that time. But the mind exists at that time, the observer. The rose flower exists at that time, the observed. So, observer is not the observed. It's a different aspect that the intense observation helps to not only observe the flower very keenly, but also helps the mind to experience peace or joy or bliss or ecstasy (depending on the intensity of the observation). From my understanding, in such intense situation, such energy (bliss for example) enters the mind directly from the source of creation. Still, the observer is separate from the observed, practically seeing. At energy level both are same because both mind and rose are essentially energy. At brahman or atman level both are same because both mind and rose are brahman alone, appearing as mind and rose. But at the materialistic level, mind (observer) is very clearly different from rose (observed).
Now, let's see loneliness. Mind experiences loneliness due to a set of thoughts. When loneliness is at thought level, the thought is constructed and simultaneously experienced by the mind. So the thought has life as long as mind experiences it. Exactly at that time, there is no space in the mind for the mind to observe the thought. So, in the case of a thought, the mind can never be the observer. Observation of a thought is not feasible at all.
After the thought goes away, 2 things remain. The -ve emotion of loneliness felt somewhere in the body, the saving of loneliness thoughts in the mind's memory.
If mind is observing the memory content about loneliness, it is not technically observing, it is retrospection. So, observing is not feasible.
If mind is observing the discharged energy of the -ve emotion of loneliness, this is similar to observing a rose flower. The observer (mind) is clearly separate from the observed (loneliness emotion). So, the phrase fails here too.
The only thing that works is "experiencer is the experienced" and ONLY in the case of thoughts about loneliness, because as I wrote above, when the mind is experiencing a thought, both are one (unlike an emotion or a rose object). So, the experiencer is the experienced.
But "experiencer is the experienced" isn't feasible in the case of loneliness emotion or rose, for the exact same reason as I wrote above for "observer is the observed".
All this jk talk makes no sense to me at all. Please correct me if U clearly notice a mistake in my understanding.
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 Rose is not the observed sir, you observe yourself through past memories and experiences.
@@abhitew I’ve once again read my 7 months old msg and everything makes perfect sense to me now too
I’ve already covered your point in my prev msg. While observing rose if I’m observing myself through my past thoughts and experiences, it means my mind is experiencing the thoughts about the rose, like the name or label of rose, the smell of rose, etc which were recorded in my memory in the past. This belongs to the same category as mind experiencing thoughts about loneliness. Essentially this is about mind experiencing thoughts
The starting point in my previous msg was about intensely observing a rose. When the observation is really intense, there is no scope for a thought to enter the mind during those few moments. The mind just experiences the rose without thinking about its name “rose” and thinking about its fragrance. Yet the rose is apart from the mind. Hence observer is not the observed
I’ve just repeated those 2 aspects from prev msg once again so to respond to ur msg. 1st is about thoughts, 2nd is about intense sense perceptions. Observer is not the observed in both cases.
Anyway, I dug deep during these past many months, and I understood the deep meaning of “observer is the observed” with help from Advaita Vedanta concepts and Sadhguru’s teachings. I’ll write if u r interested to know. The inner meaning is really deep and profound 😊
Amazing music 🔥
congratulations, very great work😍
I liked your video 👍🔔
Exactly defined 🔥
Wonderful insight ❕
Huge thanks for spreading his original words
Great sound quality of speaker
Life saver for me thx with gratitude
Great work. Please keep making such videos
Yes observer is observed. 💞
Wow very beautiful ❤️
So in a way, whatever, literally EVERY THING n EVERYONE IS ME ! I am that tree, dat mountain, that painting, that pretty lady whose taking her selfie, that waiter picking up d cups, that ocean outside as I gaze through d window of this cafe "i"m " sitting in just about to have tea!
N then I get it- if I love myself n if everyone is me, it's so much easier to interact with them with patience n respect n I take it ..with love!💞
Thanks for sharing this video, right time right place right UA-cam 🤩🙏
While I agree with your comment, I'm not sure how you arrived at that conclusion based on this particular video, as this video doesn't say that "you are everything and everyone".
All this video is saying is that there is no difference between "you" and the contents of your mind. Meaning, if you're angry, that anger is also you. How did you take that statement and turn it into saying that you are that tree and that pretty lady? Again, I'm not disagreeing. I agree that we are all One, but not based on this video. There are countless teachings and videos that speak of this, just not this one lol
The observer is the observed
The thinker is the thought.
The experiencer is the experienced.
What's meant by observer is the observed can u elaborate ? Here's my insta @mynk.sngh would love to hear from you if you really understand.
The experiencer is the expirence
This is great! thank you !
MARAVILLOSO
1: consciousness is like water
2: observer (the identity) and the observed (the thought) are like containers that holds water. Like the ocean and clouds create each other, the ego and the thoughts create each other.
The observed (reality) is a part of the observer( who creates reality); hence can be no conflict among them and no need for supressing anything?
We must be careful. The _experience_ of reality is a necessary part of the self, because all sensory input is receptive. This is not to deny the existence of the exterior reality, but to say that the only thing we ever know is our "experience of" reality via the senses and not reality itself. This is an important distinction, because our actions have consequences in reality, which we can never truly see. The light goes into our eyes. We do not look out of them. This is an aspect of the reverse inference problem.
Muchas gracias.
Please, keep up with the good work.
Damn I thought the objective is to stay as the observer until the ego self fades into the background. I often find myself confused and frustrated in this search.
There's nothing to search for, just relax & let it be.
From my limited understanding, it seems that meditation is a useful tool to understand all the objects in ones experience (both outside of the body and what's inside the body - thoughts, feelings, emotions). But the next step to growing understanding is the realization that observer is equally part of the dream as the objects . It's all one thing. The human mind wants to look for a clear "observer" in this experience but there's isn't one (which is difficult to understand). Instead, there is only the action happening on its own (doing, thinking, AND observing are all equally acting). God IS all this action. All that "you" can do is rest in this understanding from moment to moment.
Enlightenment is natural process and you don't have to work at it...just take a good deep breathe in and allow :) Your search is over now..
🎉😊
The observer is the observed is one of the most significant things ever said by any man on earth The statement is as extraordinary as JK. The statement belongs to the unknowable. When there is nothing to observe when there is only the observer is left then the observer itself becomes the observed. Because there is nothing else to observe what else can we do The knower simply knows itself The seer sees himself. The energy that was going towards objects thoughts there are no thoughts no objects. The energy has no way to go any where it simply becomes a light into itself. There is nothing that it lights it lights it lights only itself a flame surrounded by silence surrounded by nothingness. AK
when there is nothing left but observer, who is observing the observer?
What is this “me” that observes it’s own content? Suppose I sense restlessness within, and say…why am I being restless? I shouldn’t be. I should be calm. But the fact is, that which senses this state of restlessness within, is restlessness itself. The “me” is a projection, a split from this restlessness that claims to observe and tells itself to be calm. Most of us get caught in this illusion that we call “me”. Perhaps the only “me” that exists is the physical body. The “me” that lives in the mind is an illusion, a thought. So if I say…I am sad, it’s as if sad and me are separate. Sadness can only sense itself as it arises. There is no one to claim it. Hence, observer is observed. All of this is hard to see or perceive via the mind / brain. Our brain is heavily conditioned. We can hope to see this clearly only if we can attempt to look beyond the mind. This requires deep pondering and meditation.
Thank you
The “What is” is a living thing !!!!!!
Your experience of "what is" is alive. The reality may be different, but the experience is necessarily alive. It is a part of you, and it actually is you. What is more, your experience of "what is" is the greater part of you. It is much greater than the man who reacts to the you who is "what is." The real fun is to see this in other people, and to allow them the option to see it in themselves and in others as well.
واو..محاولة جميلة جدا...
The thing is that Krishnamurthy use to say or pronounce the Observer word on Two different things.. (The one is that who is the seer who is observing, who is the Seer, the watcher, and the another one is the "Mind, full of Conflict, the working mind.)
When the mind ceases, and the observer is the observed, the observer(mind, ego etc) turns into the infinite watcher, observer who is not identified with the content of the consciousness.
@@samvelgevorgyan8534 That's what I'm saying, K used to say observer on two different things, (The one who is Observing:- Judging, Making choices, therefore identified with conflict, which is identified with mind)
And the second one Which K used to say (Observer, Who is simply observing, Without any conflict, Which is the seer, and the one who watches!) That's observing without Duality, without any choice.
Accepting thing, seeing what is!
Matthew 19:25-26
Stunned and bewildered, his disciples asked, "Then who in the world can possibly be saved?" Looking into their eyes, Jesus replied " Humanly speaking, no one, because no one can save himself. But what seems impossible to you is never impossible to God!"
If you would like to know the real solutions to mankind's problems then ask one of Jehovahs Witnesses. After all doesn't one ask oneself how did this duality Krishnamurti speaks of start? Was it not when Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and bad? If they had not done so would we ever have had conflict within ourselves
to me the observer and the observed are the same thing and are divided at the same time. divided in that the observer has a higher authority in directing thoughts and emotions, but at the same time it is the same thing in terms of essence so that there is no conflict. which is clear when the observer appears all thoughts and emotions go to the side and everything becomes clearer so that thoughts and emotions can recalculate more productively
From the comments below it is sure world is full of super intellectual who are interested in only making simple things complicated.....
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻JK
The observer and the observed are (apparently) distinct aspects of the same "dream" which we call reality.
When observer is not present only observed is present then who is observing that observer is not present and observed is present? or if I say that only observer is present observing the whole process very completely that all things is different from me it may be your thoughts etc...then it also may be your end of conflict . Complete observing is also the end of conflict.because there is gap between controlled and uncontrolled mind if we totally observe this gap then there is no conflict
Separation is the ultimate illusion
Whether the converse is also true?
That is, whether the observed is also the observer?
Then what about question of raman maharshiWho i am
Is it not conflict???
from what i understand, the question that ramana maharshi advice to us, is inquiring until the 'I thaught' dissolve in the real Self. in the begining, we start from a dualistic position, a confilictic one in other terms. then, after you will realize that the thinker is thought and there is no thinker, or doer or whatsoeve else,
The observer is conscious while the observed is unconscious. How could something conscious is something unconscious?
An observer x will observe objects in nature (another observer y is called an object, when x observes y). If y observes x, x is called an object (all observers are equal).
Suppose if I am observing a chair, then I am a chair...means the thought that came into my mind is in form of chair, if I am observing a tiger I am tiger
They did a study on the messages that the brain sends to the heart..
and somehow discovered that the heart sends more messages to the brain, than it receives.. by a bunch.
They didn’t know why, nor did any of the researchers dare speculate the reasons for this
I myself thought right from the start one possible reason.. Could it be, that
the observer is within your very heart, and the reason throughout history things were always heartfelt.. or in your heart of hearts you knew
Infact the strongest feelings of what is right, or wrong.. let alone.. When falling in love..
are all from your heart, and seems to always shape your thoughts, long before the what some say is rational thinking, that you may think is in your brain..?
Any chance of this being the observer? It makes you think about the way you treat them,and or me as in you’re own self.. esteem of the pride and ownership in lifelong caring relationships.
Be good to others who have been made to believe that they have a purpose in their own life, and Forgivness is the blessing that you allowed to give yourself not just to these others.,
1. Because in doing all that means is you’re wanting to change!! Think about it
No brother we can talk about it
Nice
In meditation, suppose you observe the thought then you observe that you observe the thought and so one...like infinity. Has anyone faced this problem? and know how to do that correctly?
If you are interested in understand this very well hear this other point of view of the same: Your own being is happiness, from Rupert Spira.
Also check Hume the philosopher who said "The me is a bundle of toughts"
Would anyone know the title and artist of the music playing in the background of this video? thank you
Eternal pranams to the great Krishnaji.
I don't understand but I have an idea
not easy task for average mind to understand completely,
🙏🙏🙏
ok.can anyone say what happens when the observer is the observed?
He's saying that it's fairy simple.
The true meaning is - Neither 'observer' nor the 'observed' is.
God grace
Of king grace
To recognize
These persons.
That's okay
It's called Luck.
Fortune favours the brave
What u r on
Zero. 💯
That's what I did 💯
Hmm yogshastra
From my limited understanding, it seems that meditation is a useful tool to understand all the objects in ones experience (both outside of the body and what's inside the body - thoughts, feelings, emotions). But the next step to growing understanding is the realization that observer is equally part of the dream as the objects . It's all one thing. The human mind wants to look for a clear "observer" in this experience but there's isn't one (which is difficult to understand). Instead, there is only the action happening on its own (doing, thinking, AND observing are all equally acting). God IS all this action. All that "you" can do is rest in this understanding from moment to moment.
when you observe ''things,objects'' in meditation after a while you ask, curiously, who observes the observer, who is watching upon him? it takes you to another demention of unknown, the thinking machine (brain) kind of stops or slows down. Thats how i get it
The light goes into our eyes. We do not look out of them. The light goes in, and our brains synthesize our experience of the exterior reality. We do not look out of ourselves. This is impossible. We never see reality as it is. All our experiences of the external world are events internal to the brain. Those events, that brain, is just as much you as your interior thoughts and feelings. Not only that - your capacity to experience the otherness of exterior reality is the greater part of you - far greater than your personality or your talent or your work ethic.
Feeling u
Is Observed
Listening to Feel
Is observation
Rum dum
This is exactly the opposite of what all great spiritual teachers teach, from the Buddha to Marcus Aurelius to Eckhart Tolle. We are not the content of our consciousness - I am NOT my thoughts, my emotions - and that recognition allows us to observe them without identifying with them. If you say I AM my fear, it's a recipe for disaster!
I think we shouldn't go by with, what other people have to say. We should learn about ourselves by observing and find out what ia the truth.we shouldn't blindly follow anyone even if he is Buddha.we are conditioned to depend on authority or our education is such that we always depend on authority even to know ourselves.i think if i have to know myself then i shouldnt need anybody other than myself.Right now what we know as ourselves as our body and minds and mind is nothing but bundled of memories as our likes,dislikes, anger,fear,haterd and all the experiences i have accumulated over time.what we know ourselves is just bundled of memories which is as me and and as long as we don't see that observer is observed, we ll everlastingly be conflicts.once one is free from all the conflicts and mind is absolutely in silence then one go beyond me and then only that's a reality for us that we are not anger,envy or watever but for now we are anger.
@@Venom_590 I heard the phrase "observer is the observed" from JK in some discussion video with few scientists, searched yt, and watched 2 more vids (including this), and my confusion isn't gone. I don't originally have a confusion, but now there is confusion, and it's created by jk. All this feels pure bullshit. Lemme explain.
Whether I'm enlightened or intelligent or dumb, the mind is the only way for me to have an experience (thoughts or sense perceptions).
If mind is observing a rose flower, suppose with full intensity, there is no thought, there is no self, exactly at that time. But the mind exists at that time, the observer. The rose flower exists at that time, the observed. So, observer is not the observed. It's a different aspect that the intense observation helps to not only observe the flower very keenly, but also helps the mind to experience peace or joy or bliss or ecstasy (depending on the intensity of the observation). From my understanding, in such intense situation, such energy (bliss for example) enters the mind directly from the source of creation. Still, the observer is separate from the observed, practically seeing. At energy level both are same because both mind and rose are essentially energy. At brahman or atman level both are same because both mind and rose are brahman alone, appearing as mind and rose. But at the materialistic level, mind (observer) is very clearly different from rose (observed).
Now, let's see loneliness. Mind experiences loneliness due to a set of thoughts. When loneliness is at thought level, the thought is constructed and simultaneously experienced by the mind. So the thought has life as long as mind experiences it. Exactly at that time, there is no space in the mind for the mind to observe the thought. So, in the case of a thought, the mind can never be the observer. Observation of a thought is not feasible at all.
After the thought goes away, 2 things remain. The -ve emotion of loneliness felt somewhere in the body, the saving of loneliness thoughts in the mind's memory.
If mind is observing the memory content about loneliness, it is not technically observing, it is retrospection. So, observing is not feasible.
If mind is observing the discharged energy of the -ve emotion of loneliness, this is similar to observing a rose flower. The observer (mind) is clearly separate from the observed (loneliness emotion). So, the phrase fails here too.
The only thing that works is "experiencer is the experienced" and ONLY in the case of thoughts about loneliness, because as I wrote above, when the mind is experiencing a thought, both are one (unlike an emotion or a rose object). So, the experiencer is the experienced.
But "experiencer is the experienced" isn't feasible in the case of loneliness emotion or rose, for the exact same reason as I wrote above for "observer is the observed".
All this jk talk makes no sense to me at all. Please correct me if U clearly notice a mistake in my understanding.
When you are watching a rose intensly is there any observer separate from observed?observer only comes into being when you try to keep that as a memory.
@@Venom_590 I hope u have read my long msg. There are 2 ways to look at this
#1: I wrote in my prev msg. During intense observation there is no thought. But mind is separate from rose. So observer is not the observed. We can say this is the fact when the mind looks at the event after completion of the event
#2: exactly at the time of the event, there is intensity, there is no thought. Even though the rose is outside, information about the rose is in the brain (eye picks rose as photons, eye encodes that as optical info and sends into sensory portion of left brain, brain decodes the info when mind decides to watch the rose, all happening immediately but in this order, this final rose content experienced by mind is called vritthi in Sanskrit). So when mind is intensely observing the rose, at that exact moment, there is neither the rose nor the mind, there is just the observation. This is practically evident. I tried just now with intense observation of something. So here too observe is not the observed because both are absent
JK is clearly creating his own spirituality language which doesn’t match with osho or sadhguru or Eckhart Tolle or Advaita Vedanta
Please comment.
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 sorry first but you have to understand what is observer and observed.you are mixing so much and making it so much complicated.
Nothingness can't be observer and observed.
Don't add
Even
Zero (non superstitious)
Not fear(zero)
He having no right (zero)
Put it in stories
Not in theories 💯
Observe is the observed the control is controled the thinker is the thought . j kuishna murti. Am I different from the content of my consciousness? If I am different from the thing I observe in myself, then there is a division between ‘me’ and the thing which I enquire into.
We’re going to go into a little more. I observe in myself anger. I am angry. Or I am greedy, envious. Is that envy different from me who is observing that reaction which I call ‘envy’? Or that envy is me; I am not different from that envy.
So, when I observe, is there a division between the observer and the observed? Then there is conflict. Then I try to suppress it, control it, or run away from it, or try to wish to change it.
But if the observer is the observed, then a totally different action takes place.
Are we dissipating the mystery of it? Because this is very important, right from the beginning. We are conditioned to the conflict of this division. We are conditioned to either suppress it, or analyze it or run away from it. We are educated, to accept this division. But when one looks into it very, very deeply - not very deeply, it’s fairly simple - one sees the observer is the observed, therefore, you eliminate all conflict.”
I am not cement but I am a tree.
No…what is observed is the observer.
i cant even comprehend the question :(
Subroto Xing where is the confusion?
me.too
nirvana
Drg Drishya Viveka
I watched all Drg Drsya Viveka videos by Swami Sarvapriyananda of Advaita Vedanta org on yt. AV clearly say observer is not the observed. They are same only at the level of energy or at the fundamental level of brahman. At worldly or materialistic levels observer is clearly different from the observed.
Rose different from eye different from mind different from pure consciousness
I heard the phrase "observer is the observed" from JK in some discussion video with few scientists, searched yt, and watched 2 more vids (including this), and my confusion isn't gone. I don't originally have a confusion, but now there is confusion, and it's created by jk. All this feels pure bullshit. Lemme explain.
Whether I'm enlightened or intelligent or dumb, the mind is the only way for me to have an experience (thoughts or sense perceptions).
If mind is observing a rose flower, suppose with full intensity, there is no thought, there is no self, exactly at that time. But the mind exists at that time, the observer. The rose flower exists at that time, the observed. So, observer is not the observed. It's a different aspect that the intense observation helps to not only observe the flower very keenly, but also helps the mind to experience peace or joy or bliss or ecstasy (depending on the intensity of the observation). From my understanding, in such intense situation, such energy (bliss for example) enters the mind directly from the source of creation. Still, the observer is separate from the observed, practically seeing. At energy level both are same because both mind and rose are essentially energy. At brahman or atman level both are same because both mind and rose are brahman alone, appearing as mind and rose. But at the materialistic level, mind (observer) is very clearly different from rose (observed).
Now, let's see loneliness. Mind experiences loneliness due to a set of thoughts. When loneliness is at thought level, the thought is constructed and simultaneously experienced by the mind. So the thought has life as long as mind experiences it. Exactly at that time, there is no space in the mind for the mind to observe the thought. So, in the case of a thought, the mind can never be the observer. Observation of a thought is not feasible at all.
After the thought goes away, 2 things remain. The -ve emotion of loneliness felt somewhere in the body, the saving of loneliness thoughts in the mind's memory.
If mind is observing the memory content about loneliness, it is not technically observing, it is retrospection. So, observing is not feasible.
If mind is observing the discharged energy of the -ve emotion of loneliness, this is similar to observing a rose flower. The observer (mind) is clearly separate from the observed (loneliness emotion). So, the phrase fails here too.
The only thing that works is "experiencer is the experienced" and ONLY in the case of thoughts about loneliness, because as I wrote above, when the mind is experiencing a thought, both are one (unlike an emotion or a rose object). So, the experiencer is the experienced.
But "experiencer is the experienced" isn't feasible in the case of loneliness emotion or rose, for the exact same reason as I wrote above for "observer is the observed".
All this jk talk makes no sense to me at all. Please correct me if U clearly notice a mistake in my understanding.
There is no wrong in your view or this teachings.we develop as we learn more of ourselves and the point of existence so you are learning more.
@@omegamudondo4748 Thanks for replying! Either JK has to be wrong or me. How both can be true! Since JK is JK, an ELed being, I wanted to believe that I'm wrong somewhere, and so explored more, and found the below :
Have u listened to (or watched) any Sadhguru talks? He described a few times his experience on Mysore, Chamundi Hills... at the time of his enlightenment. He said he suddenly lost the separation b/w whatever is outside and himself. He said he could sense that his skin is no longer a boundary separating him (his body in this context) from outer world. He said he experienced everything out there as himself.
So, after more exploring I found 2 points, which are in sync with JK's "observer is the observed"
(1) Through spiritual practices (like osho or SG or JK or anyone did) if mind gets into a lot of no-mind states (i.e. mind staying calm and stable during such times). Calm -- no impulsive thoughts, which are the major% of thoughts. Stable -- no random or frequent or sudden jumps from 1 sense perception to another. During such no-mind states, apart from the source of creation (or brahman or atman or spirit or pure consciousness) helping mind experience lot of joy (or bliss or ecstasy), through the mind and body the source of creation sends high frequency vibrating energy into the human system. Due to this the energy body of the guy becomes intense and more vibrant and becomes wider. As per the theory (bcoz I haven't practically experienced this yet), normally the energy body would be within the body and extends a little outside. But for a guy experiencing frequent no-mind states the energy body grows wider and wider, and anything that becomes within the boundary of the energy body, the mind PRACTICALLY experiences as how mind experiences the hand or leg or stomach or brain -- like the human system -- as itself. This is the PRACTICAL meaning of "observer is the observed". There is no separation between mind and the rose experienced by the mind, when the rose would be physically within the energy body of the guy
It seems when Gautama Buddha used to walk through villages, people used to feel tremendous bliss, and that's becoz his energy body used to extend into kilometers
Similarly, Jesus and the apostles. They fell in love with him due to the size of his energy body.
(2) Using the language of Advaita Vedanta, everything is brahman, the universe is an appearance of brahman, but feels real due to the veiling power of Maya... but all this is only at theory level. It seems, when the guy becomes enlightened, there would be a quantum jump in the context of his mind (i.e. the core foundation in which the mind is always rooted, using which mind does all the experiences of thoughts and sense perceptions), and the mind would experience everything exactly as the same -- which we can label as brahman
So, what JK said is 100% correct -- is what I finally understood. But JK is talking about the ultimate experience. If someone who is not yet capable of getting into frequent no-mind states is talking about "observer is the observed" as if he has really experienced it, it is just his HALLUCINATION. We need to invest lot of energy and efforts in the spiritual direction
Thanks for reading :)
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 Yes i listen to Sadhguru.also try to add Ecko Tolle,Mooji,Papaji and Carl Jung.we must keep on searching more to keep rising
@@omegamudondo4748 and osho :)
@@madhukiranattivilli2321 exactly, JK is on the other level, the way he understands the words he says are different from our interpretation and perception, I end up hallucinating and fantasizing about observer and observed and all that awareness stuff, so when I observe my emotions nothing happens, it gets even worse, more negative thoughts appear and fuel the negative emotions, at these moments I want to kick the asses of gurus for advising me this practice
no need music!
Tell that to a gazelle... that the lyon and it are the same...
he is obviously reffering to the content of one's consciousness and not two seperate beings.
He says that you and your thoughts are the same because you are made from all that old thoughts...
yes. thinking has created the thinker
exoa & thinker is the thought.
Why ? Try to listen ferry good and look in yourself than you dont come with a answer like this ,
Absolutely there's no difference but relatively there's a lot of difference. What he says here in nonsenae when it comes to living in the relative field of existence, society, with fruit cake religios who want to kill you if you don't agree with or like their stuod nonssense.
Krishnamurti is wrong:
That who you can see, you are not; that which you can observe, you are not; that which you can become aware of, you are not.
Exactly. If I can observe a thought that appears in my mind, and then the thought vanishes, do I vanish too? Nope! Anger and other emotions appear and disappear, but I am not them. There is an Indian philosophy known as Advaita Vedanta, which encourages you to inquire into your self. Who am I? I am not that which I am aware of. If I am aware of it, I am not it. And so it's encouraged to inquire into everything that you think you are, only to discard it, "not this; not this."
@@silverblaize if you r nothing , then there is no problem🤪
If you r walking on street , and you see a beautiful girl ,and suddenly a bad thought comes in your mind.
Is this thought comes from sky ?? Is it not part of u ??on that time you that thought , you r not saprate from your thought.
But you saprate your self form that thought....by becoming thinker....observer
Then you think I will control my thought , I will do some meditation or reading a book like Advait.....so that this type thought never come in mind.
Maharshi is saying the content is illusion. The self is consciousness and it is what sees the illusion. Krishnamurti says you are the illusion. Because it is happening within your consciousness. Both are correct. This is beyond rational thinking. You are the artist and the canvas. But it takes a 3 step process to realize. First you start seeking god, then you find god (yourself) then you realize there is nothing but god. You and god are one!
For those who want to see the original content
ua-cam.com/video/KRonyIv4nBI/v-deo.html
wel apnly @ refns🪞refld
🙏
🙏🙏🙏🙏