“Awake. Be the witness of your thoughts. You are what observes, not what you observe.”

This is a Fake Buddha Quote.

It seems to have a hybrid origin. The first part — “Awake. Be the witness of your thoughts.” — comes from Thomas Byrom’s “translation” of the Dhammapada. I put the word translation in quotes because Byrom’s rendering is less translation and more “look at the Pali original and make up something poetic vaguely based on what you see there,” as you’ll see below.

In this case the original Pali (Dhammapada verse 237) is:

Appamadarata hotha sacittam anurakkhatha.

A literal translation would be:

Be devoted to heedfulness. Guard your mind.

There’s no “awake.” There’s no “witness.” The root of the verb translated as “witness” is rakkh-, which means “to protect.”

The second part — “You are what observes, not what you observe” — seems to come from Robert Earl Burton’s Self-Remembering (1995), p. 23.

Byrom appears to have been a Hindu, and this may have affected his choice of words, which is rather non-Buddhist. In the Hindu tradition they talk about “witnessing consciousness.” You are not your thoughts, emotions, or other experiences. You are instead that which is aware of those experiences. That is your true Self, your atman. The Buddha’s approach was of course one of anatman, or not-self. One recognizes that neither our experiences nor what experiences (which is really just our experience of experiencing) is the self. Over and over in the Pali texts we’re told to note that “this is not me, this is not mine, this is not my self.” We are never told to identify anything as being the self. To the Buddha, any view of the self — even the view that there is no self — was a form of clinging that would lead to suffering. The ideal is to live free from any views on the self whatsoever.

Here’s a quote from the Sabbasava Sutta of the Middle Length Discourses. I’ve added emphases to highlight the important differences between our Fake Buddha Quote and the Buddha’s teaching:

In a person who thus considers improperly there arises one of the six [wrong] views. The view ‘I have self’ arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view ‘I have no self’ arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view ‘I perceive self through self’ arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view ‘I perceive non-self through self’ arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view ‘I perceive self through non-self’ arises in him really and firmly. Or, he has the view thus: ‘That self of mine speaks, knows and experiences the results of wholesome and unwholesome actions. That self of mine is permanent, stable, durable, incorruptible and will be eternal like all things permanent.’

Bhikkhus! This wrong view is called a false belief, a jungle of false beliefs, a desert of false beliefs, a thorny spike of false beliefs, an agitation of false beliefs and a fetter of false beliefs. Bhikkhus! The ignorant worldling who is bound up with the fetter of false beliefs cannot escape rebirth, ageing, death, grief, lamentation, pain, distress and despair. I declare that he cannot escape dukkha.

Burton, incidentally, was neither a Buddhist nor a Hindu but a teacher of the “Fourth Way” in the tradition of Gurjieff and Ouspensky.

I don’t know where, when, or how these two separate quotes became cobbled together, or how they became ascribed to the Buddha. But by 2008 the two are found combined in a book, Awake Joy: The Essence of Enlightenment, by Katie Davis, and presented as a Buddha quote. It’s likely that the amalgamation of the two quotes took place on the web, although we may never know.

This adoption of the “witness” as the self seems to be seen sometimes in certain Buddhist schools, such as the Tibetan Dzogchen and Mahamudra traditions, despite its being profoundly un-Buddhist. It’s also a feature of the teaching of the popular spiritual teacher Ekhart Tolle.

7 thoughts on ““Awake. Be the witness of your thoughts. You are what observes, not what you observe.””

  1. Hmmm … there seems to be some misunderstanding. The ‘adoption’ of the ‘witness’ is really just a stage towards the realization of the non-existence of the self, in my understanding of Hinduism, which ultimately is non-dualistic.
    It seems a shame to me that we do not strive to discover unity in truth instead of sharpening differences – when surely both Buddha and all the great enlightened ‘beings’ knew/know the same truth?

    1. As I mentioned in a reply to one of your other comments, I’ve never studied Hinduism and so I may be prone to misunderstanding it. I don’t see any reason to assume that everyone who says that they’re enlightened is describing the same experience, though.

      1. I was a little taken aback by the comparison between Hinduism and Buddhism. It seems as if you were referring to Advaita Vedanta which was heavily influenced by Buddhism. It also encourages “this is not me, this is not mine, this is not my self.” The concept of Atman in Advaita Vedanta is often misunderstood by Buddhists. Both actually have very similar concepts but different verbiage to express them. You stated you have not studied Hinduism. I encourage you to do so and you will see how much they both have in common.

  2. I do not know if it is because english is not my mother language but I find that calling “fake Buddha quotes” to quotes that were translated by well intentioned people but that they might not be 100% accurate, is kind of rough, don’t you think. Whom ever has done any kind of translation knows that it is hard to chose between translating literally, interpretative or a middle ground translation.

    Thank you for trying to bring more accuracy to Buddha’s quotes.


    1. Are you suggesting I rename the blog “Not 100% Accurate Buddha Quotes”? ?

      As far as I can recall, the only translators whose mistranslations are featured here are dead, so I don’t have to worry about hurting their feelings

      Anyway, I’m glad that you appreciate the overall aim of what I’m doing here. Thank you.

  3. You dont have abc knowledge on buddhism. What buddhism you Practise its distorted version. i am from this land where buddha took birth.Sanskrit and pali is the languages of our forefathers. Most of westerns translate buddhist scripture without having proper knowledge in sanskrit and pali. And like you people read their book and get wrong knowledge. Neither try to verify that. So rather than running this site go to deep meditation. If you are really and serious truth seeker only this can help you. Budha actually taught same thing. Non dualism. Budha never taught that you didnt exist. He said you do not exist that way you think. Most of western misunderstood him and fell into nihilism And act as materialist. They reached to emptiness not clear light. Its ultimate awareness in boundless space,and that clear light is real you. He taught same thing what non dual vedanta teaches as attributeless bramhan or supreme reality. only you will get clarification once you reach that state. So verify it by yourself. Even jesus christ,guru nanak and thousands of indian enlightened monk like swami vivekananda who is very popular in usa ,yogananda and many others also taught this. But like buddha christ was misunderstood. if you would have tried to understand christ you wouldnt have to accept buddhism even.. Go to deepest meditation and find it out who you really are. You will understand what actually buddha tried to mean. No book can help you. Always remember irrespective of all religions teach same ultimate reality That cant be twice. If you read adi sankaryacharya and non dual vedanta you will discover same thing.also thats practised in zen culture. So dont misunderstand buddha. Verify by yourself.

    1. Hi Saswata.

      You’ll be happy to know that I do practice meditation. I also write blog posts about Fake Buddha Quotes, just as you also comment on them.

      You say that most westerners translate buddhist scriptures without having a proper knowledge of Sanskrit and Pali. That really isn’t true. Translators such as Bhikkhu Bodhi, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, and Bhikkhu Sujato have deep training in Pali and are very fine translators.

      You wrote, “Buddha never taught that you didnt exist. He said you do not exist that way you think.” I have made that very point many times myself.

      All the best,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.