“Brain games” is a reality TV series on National Geographic Channel that explores how our brain functions in certain situations.
One of the episodes was about Free Money. The money was kept in a glass box in a booth and people could take as much money as they wanted for free.
Watch these videos in this order, before reading further.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAa1OBWJ9Y0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRc_1vvKrGs
As we have seen three experiments were carried out.
In these three experiments there is an observer and the observed. The observer sees the observed and reacts accordingly.
What is the observed? Is the observed an actual object i.e. the man, empty booth and giant eyes? Here the observed is the perceived notion of the object, which is independent of the object.
When the man (actual object) is in the booth the perceived notion of the observer could be one or more of the following. The man in the booth shouldn’t take me as a greedy person; I shouldn't degrade myself in front of him; I don’t care whatever he thinks as I am in a dire need of money.
When there was no one in the booth, the perceived notion would include no one is watching me and I could take advantage of it, someone may take it and I don't want to be a loser, etc. With the giant eyes (just a picture object) the perceived notion could be someone is watching my actions, there should be some catch in offering the free money and so on. The same object can be perceived in many different ways. Thus the object is independent of the perceived notion.
As we have seen in the video, the perceived notion may also vary person to person. This perceived notion is nothing but the thoughts about the object.
Who is perceiving these objects? It is the observer. Who is the observer? The observer is one of the several snapshots of the earlier observations (observed). Throughout my life the observer has accumulated many observations. Within me there are many such observers. The observers would include: money brings happiness, know that money should be earned but not taken, taking the free money is not cheating, since they are offering for free why can't one take advantage of it? Thus the observer is also made up of thoughts.
In other words, among the many past observations (perceived notions) one of them becomes the observer and looks at the observed (perceived notion of the object) in the present moment. The observer or the ego is nothing but the identification with one of the past perceived notions (observed thoughts) and looks at the currently perceived notion (other thought and not the actual object) in the present moment and takes actions. Thus, both the observer and the observed are one and the same and they are nothing but thoughts.
The division is not between the observer and the object. The division is created between the observer and observed. The dialog is between the observer and the observed, not with the actual object. Should I take the money? If I take, what others will think of me? Is there a catch? Can it be trusted? Even after taking the money, would I feel guilty? If I didn't take it, would I regret?
In the Indian epic Mahabharatha, if we take Arjuna's case, there were many such observers. One of them was the perceived notion of enmity with Kauravas. And the other one was the perceived notion of the Guru. Yet another one was with the relationships. Besides, there was also the perceived notion of the society.
With the perceived notion (Observer) of fighting with Kauravas, Arjuna arrived at the battlefield. When he took the position as the grandson of Bhishma and disciple (another observer) to his Guru it over weighed the fighting observer, duality arose in his mind. He also lamented that the society would go to doldrums as a result of the war, when he identified with protecting the society (yet another observer). Even after taking the decision of not to fight (another observer), he was depressed indicating the conflict in his mind. When the observer (the past observations) changed, it had an effect on the present observations, creating conflict within Arjuna’s mind. Thus the division and the resultant conflict is not external but within himself.
Similarly, throughout my life I have accumulated countless observers (past observations) and these observers interacts with the present observation. Depending on the hat I wear (observer) it creates different types of conflicts with the observed. I may do several analyses to resolve this conflict including, criticizing my behavior, blaming the situation, people and / or the creator. Sometimes I would temporarily manage or escape from the situation, but nothing seems to resolve the conflicts completely. There is always one or other conflicts going on internally. What is the way out of these conflicts? How to work with the observer and the observed?
Now, the question to ask is if both the observer and the observed are nothing but thoughts, who am I then? When the mind becomes quiet and completely and attentively listens the conflict between the observers and the observed (both are nothing but thoughts) and questions the observer, then understanding comes that I am independent of the observer and the observed and remains unaffected at all times. I just bring awareness of this internal conflict without judging, evaluating, taking positions, criticizing or trying to do something about it. If I root myself in that indivisible awareness, stillness, I will recognize that I am the peace and it is impossible to have conflict without any kind of division.
The Self Knowledge has nothing to do with the action. Self Knowledge cannot be attained as a result of any action. It cannot be attained, created or produced through the process of purification or transformation. It is not of the nature of a doer or an enjoyer. It is the substratum upon which all things (thoughts) rise and fall and the nature of Self is peace which remains unaffected by the apparent rise or fall of its contents.
One of the episodes was about Free Money. The money was kept in a glass box in a booth and people could take as much money as they wanted for free.
Watch these videos in this order, before reading further.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAa1OBWJ9Y0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRc_1vvKrGs
As we have seen three experiments were carried out.
- With a man in the booth
- Without no one is watching the booth
- With just giant eyes picture
In these three experiments there is an observer and the observed. The observer sees the observed and reacts accordingly.
What is the observed? Is the observed an actual object i.e. the man, empty booth and giant eyes? Here the observed is the perceived notion of the object, which is independent of the object.
When the man (actual object) is in the booth the perceived notion of the observer could be one or more of the following. The man in the booth shouldn’t take me as a greedy person; I shouldn't degrade myself in front of him; I don’t care whatever he thinks as I am in a dire need of money.
When there was no one in the booth, the perceived notion would include no one is watching me and I could take advantage of it, someone may take it and I don't want to be a loser, etc. With the giant eyes (just a picture object) the perceived notion could be someone is watching my actions, there should be some catch in offering the free money and so on. The same object can be perceived in many different ways. Thus the object is independent of the perceived notion.
As we have seen in the video, the perceived notion may also vary person to person. This perceived notion is nothing but the thoughts about the object.
Who is perceiving these objects? It is the observer. Who is the observer? The observer is one of the several snapshots of the earlier observations (observed). Throughout my life the observer has accumulated many observations. Within me there are many such observers. The observers would include: money brings happiness, know that money should be earned but not taken, taking the free money is not cheating, since they are offering for free why can't one take advantage of it? Thus the observer is also made up of thoughts.
In other words, among the many past observations (perceived notions) one of them becomes the observer and looks at the observed (perceived notion of the object) in the present moment. The observer or the ego is nothing but the identification with one of the past perceived notions (observed thoughts) and looks at the currently perceived notion (other thought and not the actual object) in the present moment and takes actions. Thus, both the observer and the observed are one and the same and they are nothing but thoughts.
The division is not between the observer and the object. The division is created between the observer and observed. The dialog is between the observer and the observed, not with the actual object. Should I take the money? If I take, what others will think of me? Is there a catch? Can it be trusted? Even after taking the money, would I feel guilty? If I didn't take it, would I regret?
In the Indian epic Mahabharatha, if we take Arjuna's case, there were many such observers. One of them was the perceived notion of enmity with Kauravas. And the other one was the perceived notion of the Guru. Yet another one was with the relationships. Besides, there was also the perceived notion of the society.
With the perceived notion (Observer) of fighting with Kauravas, Arjuna arrived at the battlefield. When he took the position as the grandson of Bhishma and disciple (another observer) to his Guru it over weighed the fighting observer, duality arose in his mind. He also lamented that the society would go to doldrums as a result of the war, when he identified with protecting the society (yet another observer). Even after taking the decision of not to fight (another observer), he was depressed indicating the conflict in his mind. When the observer (the past observations) changed, it had an effect on the present observations, creating conflict within Arjuna’s mind. Thus the division and the resultant conflict is not external but within himself.
Similarly, throughout my life I have accumulated countless observers (past observations) and these observers interacts with the present observation. Depending on the hat I wear (observer) it creates different types of conflicts with the observed. I may do several analyses to resolve this conflict including, criticizing my behavior, blaming the situation, people and / or the creator. Sometimes I would temporarily manage or escape from the situation, but nothing seems to resolve the conflicts completely. There is always one or other conflicts going on internally. What is the way out of these conflicts? How to work with the observer and the observed?
Now, the question to ask is if both the observer and the observed are nothing but thoughts, who am I then? When the mind becomes quiet and completely and attentively listens the conflict between the observers and the observed (both are nothing but thoughts) and questions the observer, then understanding comes that I am independent of the observer and the observed and remains unaffected at all times. I just bring awareness of this internal conflict without judging, evaluating, taking positions, criticizing or trying to do something about it. If I root myself in that indivisible awareness, stillness, I will recognize that I am the peace and it is impossible to have conflict without any kind of division.
The Self Knowledge has nothing to do with the action. Self Knowledge cannot be attained as a result of any action. It cannot be attained, created or produced through the process of purification or transformation. It is not of the nature of a doer or an enjoyer. It is the substratum upon which all things (thoughts) rise and fall and the nature of Self is peace which remains unaffected by the apparent rise or fall of its contents.
