Observer

Who are you?

Let's make one assumption: if you can observe something then you are not that thing. For example, you can observe a distant star, hence you are not that star.

Under the above assumption, you are not the body because you can look at the body. You are not the thoughts because you can observe the thoughts. You are not the emotion because you can feel the emotion. You are not the conditioned brain because you are aware of the conditioning.

What are you? You are the Observer of all these things. A disinterested Observer at that. (Disinterested because conditioning is very much observable). The disinterested Observer is the essence of you-ness. The very fact that we are able to make this claim about an observer indicates that the Observer is somehow self-aware. There is no second observer observing the first observer; that is contradictory to our experience and logically would result in infinite observers.

We think we are the body, thoughts and conditioning because: a) Only we can voluntarily control our body, nobody else can and b) Only we are aware of our thoughts, nobody else is. I think these are sufficient reasons to distinguish them from say a star or a tree and to claim them as part of oneself. But, along with that, the silent witness in the background should also be noticed and acknowledged.

What is the contribution of the Observer? I think it is two-fold; a) It is the ground for the sense of self ("I") and b) It is needed for the awareness of any 'other' thing ("I am not that thing").

[If you don't make the assumption made in the beginning, the counter-assumption is, if you can observe something then you are that thing. Under this assumption, you are everything you observe. So, either you are none of these things or you are all of these things.]

-