The doer/observer

[CoreyNiles92]

I was just wondering whether or not once a person becomes the observer, they are still in control of where their life is going. When I make a decision, and follow through I choose the course of my life, but only when I let the doer take control, if I were the observer wouldn't I just sit there aimlessly?

[daverupa]

once a person becomes the observer

...what?

[SarathW]

Hi Corey
It appears to me that you have to understand the concept of Anatta, the most important of Buddhist teaching which separate it from all other religions. This does not mean to say that Buddhist reject other religions. There is no doer or observe in Buddhist teaching. Once you fully comprehend this without any doubt and eliminate ignorance you will attain Nirvana. Please read the following book. I read this book more than ten times to just to get a glimpse of this teaching. Please start reading from chapter 15 which will answer your question.
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/buddh ... gsurw6.pdf

[Ben]

I was just wondering whether or not once a person becomes the observer, they are still in control of where their life is going. When I make a decision, and follow through I choose the course of my life, but only when I let the doer take control, if I were the observer wouldn't I just sit there aimlessly?

There is no observer - just a process of observation.
And no, you won't just sit around aimlessly. You'll live an informed life and not one which is dominated blind habitual reaction, craving and ignorance.

[Goofaholix]

Doing is a process, it does.

Observing is a process, it observes.

Becoming is a process, it becomes.

There is no you that "becomes" any of these processes.

[polarbuddha101]

Doing is a process, it does.

Observing is a process, it observes.

Becoming is a process, it becomes.

There is no you that "becomes" any of these processes.

Just as a clarification, the 'it' in 'it' observes isn't anything, it is the same it in the phrase: it is raining

It is raining= there is rain

it observes= there is observing

[CoreyNiles92]

My apologies, I'm reading a book called Brahm Meditation. There is some referencing to the doer and knower/observer in it, that got me confused.

"To understand this process, I
will now introduce the two halves of the mind: the knower
and the doer."

Is Brahm Meditation not a proper teaching of Buddhism? I'm kind of lost with it.

[daverupa]

Well, I fail to recall a relevant Sutta, but living instruction involves a broad range of referents and tools of various and varying usefulness.

For my part, I wonder where the description goes, as I'm unfamiliar with it. What is "this process"?

[santa100]

From Ajahn Brahm's Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond:

Dullness in meditation is the result of a tired mind, usually one that
has been overworking. Fighting that dullness makes you even more
exhausted. Resting allows the energy to return to the mind. To understand this process, I will now introduce the two halves of the mind: the
knower and the doer.The knower is the passive half of the mind that simply receives information. The doer is the active half that responds with
evaluating,thinking,and controlling.The knower and the doer share the
same source of mental energy. Thus, when you are doing a lot, when
you have a busy lifestyle and are struggling to get on, the doer consumes
most of your mental energy, leaving only a pittance for the knower.
When the knower is starved of mental energy you experience dullness

So basically Ven. Brahm used the expression within a specific context, dullness in meditation, also known as sloth and torpor, a "popular" hindrance among the Five Hindrances. The link below has helpful info. about the Five Hindrances and could be used as complementary reading along with Ajahn's book. It might help clarifying things for you..

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el026.html

[mikenz66]

Here's a link where Ajhan Brahm explains some of this in more detail:
http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books3/Ajahn ... ANATTA.htm

'The knower' is usually called consciousness or citta (mind), which is what knows. That knowing is often seen to be the ultimate 'self'. ...

And I think that "the doer" is referring sankhara:
http://what-buddha-said.net/library/Bud ... kh%C4%81ra

II sankhāra also means sometimes 'intentional effort', e.g. in the formula of the roads to power iddhi-pāda, in sasankhāra and asankhāra-parinibbāyī see: anāgāmī, and in the Abhidhamma terms asankhārika and sasankhārika-citta i.e. without effort = spontaneously, and with effort = prompted.

Mike

[Goofaholix]

it observes= there is observing

Good clarification, in many ways self view is caused by the language we use.

[Yana]

I was just wondering whether or not once a person becomes the observer, they are still in control of where their life is going. When I make a decision, and follow through I choose the course of my life, but only when I let the doer take control, if I were the observer wouldn't I just sit there aimlessly?

Hi CoreyNiles92,

There is no person.No observer or doer.There is only observing and doing.
This existence is like one big Verb..eating,sitting,walking,thinking,wanting,hating,etc..

because there is suffering there is wanting to be free from suffering....everything is in the PRESENT TENSE..which is why it ends with an -ing. All your memories from the past,thoughts and plans in the future they are all in the PRESENT.Your are not actually traveling back in time or the future your experiencing them NOW in your Mind.

There is no person.All there is in an Action which contributes to the Process!and Everything is a Process Conditioned by the Process Before It.Skillfull actions is what you need to do in the present moment not sit aimlessly and observe.

[Mr Man]

I was just wondering whether or not once a person becomes the observer, they are still in control of where their life is going. When I make a decision, and follow through I choose the course of my life, but only when I let the doer take control, if I were the observer wouldn't I just sit there aimlessly?

I think the course of your life would be more determined by what is appropriate to circumstance + ripening of past actions.

[SarathW]

The attachd link may further help to clarify this question:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .niza.html

[ground]

... if I were the observer wouldn't I just sit there aimlessly?

No. "I" always has aims, maybe fluctuating and momentary but there are always impulses to do this or that which are affirmed.

[cbonanno]

I was just wondering whether or not once a person becomes the observer, they are still in control of where their life is going. When I make a decision, and follow through I choose the course of my life, but only when I let the doer take control, if I were the observer wouldn't I just sit there aimlessly?

Hi CoreyNiles92,

There is no person.No observer or doer.There is only observing and doing.
This existence is like one big Verb..eating,sitting,walking,thinking,wanting,hating,etc..

There is no person.

This goes against the Buddha's teaching and is considered an extreme view.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... tself.html

[SarathW]

Hi Cbon
Good link. Anatta is such difficult subject to understand. Safest think is to point to a link. So I will give you another good link.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el202.html