Another View Point of Observing Without An Observer

E-mail to P. F. Dziuban Sent May 4, 2014 at 8:47 am Good morning Peter… Found myself at Swanwick Centre yesterday in one of the Krishnamurti enquiry sessions. The subject was his famous saying “observe without the observer.” Now it is understood that he is referring to the apparent conditioned mind or thinker. But wouldn’t “mind” as you describe it as the ‘sense-mind’ still have to be functioning in order for any thing at all to be observed? Thanks Robert   Sent May 4, 2014 at 10 am Hi Robert, I’m not sure exactly what K. meant by that…because in order for there to be observing, there HAS to be some kind of observation/observer.  I guess he means the sense of a personal “me” that is observing, or one who is “doing” the observing. That’s right–in order for there to be observation, there still would be the “sense mind” because it “would be” the very “stuff” of all that is observable.  This is something overlooked by a lot of nonduality…they will say there is no ego/separate self…but it still leaves the “finite mind” itself still functioning as observable finite experience.  It’s not the same as pure Infinity being pure Infinity. Peter   “PS – For more on this enquiry gathering see ” http://www.swanwickcentre.ca/trying-play-game-absolute-relative-field