The Supreme Observer
Sometimes I take a break from reading my book by sitting down on a black steel bench in front of the library and observing the passers-by and those who are standing under the green trees. On a few occasions, it so happens that the people whom I am observing are themselves observing other people. Once when I was observing a young man observing an old beggar trying to light a cigarette, it so happened that I looked up and saw an old woman observing me. So this is what she was observing : she was observing me as I was observing another man observing another man ...
But what if someone else was observing her too?
(According to Vedanta, of course, there is the omnipresent Great Atman silently observing all of us. Me too, even as I am typing this post. I am already beginning to feel a bit spooky.)
(And yes, you too will be observed if you try to comment on this post.)
3 Comments:
At 25.5.05, Shantisudha said…
Hopefully that's why according to vedanta "self-observation" is there which may enable us to realise his presence or to merge in that supreme observer!!
At 26.5.05, Anonymous said…
Oh, I can't help commenting on this one. Actually this is also a response to an earlier dialogue that we had a few days back.
You said that the Super-Observer was beyond your observation. Not quite. You also say that (according to vedanta) there is the omnipresent Great Atman silently observing all of us. Again not quite. It is more appropriate to say that it is infused in all of us. I do not intend to spook you or give you a migraine bt to know what I mean try this small experiment: Look at any object and while looking become aware SIMULTANEOUSLY of both the object and the subject, the observed and the observer. Imagine this like an invisible arrow (with no tail, but two heads) which points in two directions: one towards the object being looked at and the other towards the looker, and you become aware of both the dimensions simultaneously. Then you might get a vague feel of what the Super-Observer means. In fact I would like to modify the nomenclature here a bit: the look-ed, the look-er and the observer.
At 26.5.05, The Transparent Ironist said…
Yes. That is why I used the word 'observer' since it presupposes a clear (ontological) distinction between the onlooker and the onlooked.
Post a Comment
<< Home