Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
General Discussion | moderated by Dev Singh

Has sitting quietly to observe thought any value?


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 87 in total
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #1
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 822 posts in this forum Offline

Krishnamurti addresses this question in the video below (just under 20 minutes). What do you think about what he says?

link text

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Thu, 02 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #2
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Thanks for this link Sean.

In this video K insists on the motive (or intention) of meditation, if the motive is to attain some kind of 'superconscious state' or obtain some powers or rewards or to achieve something or to 'progress' and make it a routine, a 'method' ... or to obey to the promises of a 'guru' (and pay him lots of money :-) ... then meditation is a trap.

But if you sit quietly without any motive (meaning no 'movement'), just watching what happens without trying to achieve something, then the mind quiets down, the mind chattering comes to an end by itself, and you become quiet naturally ...

... and quietness is the real 'value' you get from meditation ... but mind does not 'value' quietness very much, isn't it ? Mind wants 'more' than that ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

This post was last updated by Jean Gatti Thu, 02 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #3
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1396 posts in this forum Offline

He's saying, don't be 'blind' to your "motive"... for doing whatever you do,... whether it's sitting quietly or standing on your head or listening to Krishnamurti or posting a question on a public forum or... responding to one.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Thu, 02 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #4
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
He's saying, don't be 'blind' to your "motive"...

In other words: don't trust thought ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #5
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 822 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
He's saying, don't be 'blind' to your "motive"... for doing whatever you do,... whether it's sitting quietly or standing on your head or listening to Krishnamurti or posting a question on a public forum or... responding to one.

Hi Dan. I think he's also saying that you don't have to stand on your head just to observe with a quiet mind.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #6
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 822 posts in this forum Offline

This is what Krishnamurti says on the video (14:38 - 15:22 minutes)

"Is it not possible to be quiet? Naturally? To look at a person, or to listen to a song, or to listen to what somebody is saying, quietly. Without resistance, without saying “I must change, I must do this, I must not do that.” Just to be quiet. And apparently that’s most difficult. So we practise systems to be quiet. Do you see the fallacy of it?"

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #7
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1396 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
In other words: don't trust thought ...

Not a matter of"trust" or not trust, can one be clear as to what the real motive is. Or in other words, can the motive behind the action, become "aware of itself", not 'you' become aware of 'it'. (Because after all, you ARE the motive,as well as the 'thought', No?)

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Thu, 02 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #8
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Because after all, you ARE the motive,as well as the 'thought', No?

No. You are that which perceives motive and thought ... ie. awareness

Why resist 'what is' ?

This post was last updated by Jean Gatti Thu, 02 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #9
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1396 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
No. You are that which perceives motive and thought ... ie. awareness

You hope.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 3 readers
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #10
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
You hope.

No hope ... fact ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #11
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5552 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
No hope ... fact ...

No fact....opinion...

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 3 readers
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #12
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1396 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
No hope ... fact ...

Wishful thinking? We may or may not be 'awareness' (and how that is understood will probably vary with each person). K is reported (by T. Stamp) to have said: ..."the unadorned naked awareness that is always there, rarely heeded is what you always have been, always will be. Cannot not be...."

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Thu, 02 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 02 Jun 2016 #13
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
K is reported (by T. Stamp) to have said: ..."the unadorned naked awareness that is always there, rarely heeded is what you always have been, always will be. Cannot not be...."

Well, you see Dan ... would you say that K was 'wishful thinking' on this ? Of course we are awareness, it is so obvious ... what else could you be ?

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #14
Thumb_au_b Alberto Brandeis United States 59 posts in this forum Offline

Obvious? Jean, listen to yourself.

This is conjecture. You are a victim of reductionist convictions.

Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #15
Thumb_avatar Ravi Seth India 1573 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
K is reported (by T. Stamp) to have said: ..."the unadorned naked awareness that is always there, rarely heeded is what you always have been, always will be. Cannot not be...."

Thanks Dan. Could you provide some reference please?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #16
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Alberto Brandeis wrote:
This is conjecture.

Would you call a fact a 'conjecture' ? ... maybe a question of word definition ?

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #17
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5552 posts in this forum Offline

Alberto Brandeis wrote:
You are a victim of reductionist convictions.

What a finely crafted and very interesting sentence. A very astute observation. I suppose all of us have fallen victim to this tendency at one time or another. But some seem to have pursued trying to make an art form of it.

Reductionist:
The practice of simplifying a complex idea, issue, condition, or the like, especially to the point of minimizing, obscuring, or distorting it.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #18
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5552 posts in this forum Offline

Dan, in one of your posts, probably on another thread, you suggested that certain conditions have to be met before observing one's thoughts could take place. You know I think you're right. I seem to remember K talking about getting one's life in order to creat a conducive environment for the observation of thoughts to take place.

If one's life is full of disorder observation of this kind may not be possible. Remove the strife and disorder from one's life first seems sensible.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #19
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1396 posts in this forum Offline

Hi Jack

As far as I'm concerned there are no conditions regarding the meditation that K speaks about. He suggested keeping the eyes still if you were sitting but that was about it. The most important element of watching the movement of thought wherever and whenever it's done, I think, is the realizing that the 'thinker' (me) isn't separate from the thoughts being watched. One's motive is also important in this; trying to get something out of it, a reward, 'insight'i.e., is not the 'meditation' K is speaking about. A 'spontaneity' is important too. My idea is that this has a 'freeing' effect on the brain due to the unusual 'elimination' of the 'watcher'/ 'thinker' and perhaps some 'space' could be made there that can 'allow' something else to 'happen'.(?)

Critical in all this is his way of phrasing his suggestion for the 'exercise' of watching thought: "See if the thought can become aware of itself"

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 03 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #20
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Alberto Brandeis wrote:
Obvious? Jean, listen to yourself.

Seems you cannot seem the very obvious because mind always looks for complex theories and cannot see what is very simple and clear ... the word 'reductionism' you did use shows how much mind needs complexities, something so simple as awareness and quietness does not interest mind ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #21
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1396 posts in this forum Offline

Ravi Seth wrote:
Dan McDermott wrote:

K is reported (by T. Stamp) to have said: ..."the unadorned naked awareness that is always there, rarely heeded is what you always have been, always will be. Cannot not be...."

R: Thanks Dan. Could you provide some reference please?

I found it a year or so ago on this website, I think it's called Interview with Terrance Stamp. It's not very long, I've copied it if you can't find it. It was to me pretty striking.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #22
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
I found it a year or so ago on this website, I think it's called Interview with Terrance Stamp. It's not very long, I've copied it if you can't find it. It was to me pretty striking.

Correct, it was in a discussion initiated by Paul Sylvan on 5th June 2014.

http://www.kinfonet.org/forums/2-general-discus...

The quote comes from an article written by Terence Stamp called "Meetings with a Remarkable Man".

Here's the complete quote:

"What you are...what you actually are, is being. Being is not the mind thinking. Thinking is a movement, a motion. Being is the silence that precedes the motion. You cannot see it; you cannot grasp it because you are it. The feeling that you are. The unadorned naked awareness that is always there, rarely heeded, is what you always have been, always will be. Cannot not be. You can't look for it, because it is what is looking. It is like space, you can't see it but everything is in it. Everything is it. So I say to you, 'be aware when you are unaware' let its presence warm you, fill you. Be present in the Presence."

Probably one of the most important and clearest statements from K ... and very obvious too ...

You find the complete article here.

http://krishnamurti-america.blogspot.be/2012/09...

Why resist 'what is' ?

This post was last updated by Jean Gatti Fri, 03 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #23
Thumb_avatar P Sylvan United Kingdom 309 posts in this forum Offline

Meetings with a Remarkable Man

British Actor Terence Stamp and Michael Krohnen
at the Pepper Tree Retreat

Wow. This fella is a diamond, I thought, as the diminutive Indian sat down opposite me. It was Rome 1968. I was working with Fellini.

Initially on being invited to lunch with a Sage, I had been confused. Sage was something I had only encountered with onions inside a Christmas turkey. If a little explanation is needed, although I was a working actor, and had been known for some time, I remained an East-End spiv trying to come to terms with what had happened to me. Jeddu Krishnamurti or Krishnaji to his associates, was extremely well turned out, well-cut strides, wearing two shirts. The Indian silk bottle green under a paper-thin two-button cashmere.

We didn't speak, yet occasionally, when he noticed me checking him out, the edges of those dark eyes would crinkle and make me feel self-conscious and, although I wouldn't have admitted it, shy.Other more assured guests, European stringers from Time and Newsweek, peppered him with questions. He didn't appear fazed. After the meal, delicious vegetarian fare, his secretary asked me if I would like to accompany Khrishnaji on his afternoon walk. Is Maraschino a cherry? The fresh air, the energy of our stride evaporated my timidity, and I went into verbal diarrhea. I recall babbling on about my Uncle Bob who'd had major heart surgery and technically died for a moment. I couldn't stop. He didn't speak. At one point he stopped walking and said "Look at that tree." I did as bid. A tree, a sapling actually. Nothing to write home about.

I looked back at him. He smiled. I smiled back. We continued our stroll. I continued rapping. Some more time passed. He paused again, this time touching my arm and glancing up: "Look at that cloud." I did. A cloud, not evening pink or lit from within, rather mundane as clouds go. He looked back at me and smiled. I smiled back. We turned back, I took note of his shoes, bespoke and tiger-stripe brown.

I can't claim to have had any expectations, so I can't say I was disappointed, however I did feel I had somehow failed the audition. And yet. And yet it is, as they say, as if it happened yesterday. But with the benefit of hindsight and the passage of forty years those two incidents may have been what G. I. Gurdjieff intended with his 'Stop' practice or what a fellow traveller entitles 'The pausing of thought'!

Impressed as I was by the perfume of the little fella's personality, I struggled through his many books and lectures, when I could. Not a lot sunk in: 'The observer is the observed.' Rome. 'When the eagle flies it leaves no mark'. Wimbledon.

His favourite pal, the wondrously named Contessa Vanda Pasigli Scarivelli, basically encouraged me to adopt a vegetarian diet, gave me instruction in her 'Hollow Yoga System' and taught me about 'Complete Breath'. Yet, I suppose I was too coarse a material. I sought instant gratification on the less demanding guru circuit, 'enlightenment light' I think of those years now. I justified it to myself as acts of refinement, a rope ladder up to Krishnaji's austere (no toys) dialectic.

Years passed. Tai Chi forms. Whirling Dervishes, Tantric texts, enlightenment intensives, encounter groups, taste abstinence, continence.

A message from Brockwood Park. It is 1977; Krishnamurti has opened a school for children, he is encouraging artists to visit. I clamber on the Portsmouth train at Waterloo, happy at the idea of seeing him again, bothered by a vague notion that it is the very seeking (during my ten years, forced, sabbatical from filming) which is distracting me from the moment, the 'what is' as Krishnaji terms it.,

I find myself beside him at lunch, this meeting is two tiered, starting out as two fellas interested in threads. Current shirt maker, price of bespoke shoes etc. However there occurs a disconcerting shift in his voice and manner best likened to Cole Porter's lyric 'how strange the change from major to minor'."Why do you choose to live superficially?" he asks. I look around at the close proximity of the other diners. "Shall we walk?", he asks.

We stroll toward the ornamental woods and an impressive 'handkerchief tree', which I hadn't seen in bloom before, and is a favourite of his. He takes my hand and fixing me in his glance "I don't mean to be hurtful but you won't get this in a supermarket." He had obviously heard about my sojourn in India, decked in saffron.

"I get caught up in distractions, I guess. I can't grasp your stuff. It's above my ceiling."

"Thought can't grasp it", he replied. "The mind can't grasp it."

"That's what I mean - you always talk about what it isn't."

"Exactly. Any movement of thought is away from it. Yet ask yourself what you can't get away from. Look into it. We'll talk again."

As it turned out, a few years passed while I was looking into it. And then in the Eighties I am in California and I hear he is in Ojai, the place where it 'happened' to him all those years before. On impulse I ring the Foundation and speak to Mary Zimbalist, his current secretary. "Come on up" she says, "He always enjoys seeing you." It is only a two-hour drive on the motorway toward San Francisco. Ojai is an American Indian word; in means 'the nest'. They considered it an enchanted valley and only smoked pipes of peace there. It is high desert festooned with orange groves and often permeated with fragrance of their blossom.

I am taken to the old house where he and his younger brother were billeted to get them away from the London Blitz during World War II. We pass the old pepper tree he leaned against the night 'the ocean was poured into the drop'. Mary sees my look "Yes, it is still here" she says. He is waiting on an old sofa in the main room. Krishnaji is usually dressed in the style of the country he is in but today it is unusually dry and hot and he is wearing his Indian khadi white pyjama draw-string trousers and knee-length kurta. The house has been kept the same, carpets, furniture, fittings all Twenties period. He is austere without harshness. I sit. We sit in silence for some time.

Finally he says "Haven't seen you in any films lately."

"My films don't pull in big audiences. As it happens my public is almost as small as yours."

This draws a chuckle "It's true."

"Why is that?"

It's like what we were talking about at Brockwood; people choose to live superficiality. They have a vested interest in thought. Years, lifetimes, centuries. Can't give it up or rather can't see beyond it."
I try a different tack.

"It's known you don't like to talk about yourself, but I feel we've known each other a long time." He doesn't appear to object, so I press on. "I heard you liked motorbikes."

"No", he replies, "cars, fast cars."

I take a deep breath. "Before this happened to you." I am thinking of the Pepper tree, "What were you like?"

"I was an idiot." Then he corrects himself and letting his jaw slacken he pulls it down. "No, I was gormless. No thought in the head. My parents would give me money, I would give it to the first beggar who asked. They would send me out for a walk, I would just keep walking. That's why they had my little brother keep an eye on me. When the realisation came that the mind could observe itself, there were no distracting thoughts."

"I find that depressing," I said.

"Why?"

"Well it's been nearly twenty years since our paths crossed. I've sweated through your books, tried to stay alert during your talks, always assuming you had a radio in your head, always on. Now you tell me you're not a free diver but a fish."

His voice segued into its minor key. "You don't have to be Edison to switch on the electric light."

"Listen", I said, "I am a simple guy, self taught mostly..." He reaches out. His hand on my arm warm and dry.

"What you are...what you actually are, is being. Being is not the mind thinking. Thinking is a movement, a motion. Being is the silence that precedes the motion. You cannot see it; you cannot grasp it because you are it. The feeling that you are. The unadorned naked awareness that is always there, rarely heeded, is what you always have been, always will be. Cannot not be. You can't look for it, because it is what is looking. It is like space, you can't see it but everything is in it. Everything is it. So I say to you, 'be aware when you are unaware' let its presence warm you, fill you. Be present in the Presence." He smiles the serene smile. How could I not believe him? It's okay. It's really O.K.

It was to be our last conversation. He passed away shortly thereafter.

"Each of you hold a hand" he told Mary Zimbalist and a young man who happened to be with him in Ojai "and you will feel me go." They did. And, they did.

Terence Stamp

Posted 19th September 2012 by Andy Gilman

In the spirit of dialogue

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #24
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

P Sylvan wrote:
K "Being is not the mind thinking. Thinking is a movement, a motion. Being is the silence that precedes the motion. "

Such a beautiful quote, really ... good to hear from you Paul, thanks again for bringing this excellent article to this forum :-)

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #25
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

P Sylvan wrote (quoting Terence Stamp in his article):
But with the benefit of hindsight and the passage of forty years those two incidents may have been what G. I. Gurdjieff intended with his 'Stop' practice or what a fellow traveller entitles 'The pausing of thought'!

Interesting Terence Stamp refers to this famous 'stop' technique frequently used by Gurdjieff to incite his students to bring back attention and become aware of presence and stop the chatter process of thought ... K used it twice while Terence was lost in his intellectual explanations and thought process, K just asked him to observe the nature around: a tree, a cloud ... it works fine ... this technique is also often used by Zen teachers ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #26
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3167 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
K used it twice while Terence was lost in his intellectual explanations and thought process, K just asked him to observe the nature around: a tree, a cloud ... it works fine ... this technique is also often used by Zen teachers ...

Works fine? Is this a fact? How did it work for Terence? Did he become free of his suffering from this very effective technique? Come on, this is so artificial to me. Nothing 'wrong' with observing a cloud, but it's nothing to do with understanding oneself....nothing at all that I can see. How many times did K. point out that there is no 'technique' ...method...practice...that will lead to understanding....to truth?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 04 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #27
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5552 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
As far as I'm concerned there are no conditions regarding the meditation that K speaks about. He suggested keeping the eyes still if you were sitting but that was about it

Dan what about on another thread when Julian posted the following:

He's talking about a looking which is free from self, free from time, beyond division, and beyond suffering. What does that have to do with a fragmented, deeply conditioned ego observing it's own superficial thought processes? Not a lot, as far as I can see.

And you cited this quote from Julian and your first words were: "I agree.....". Those sound like conditions to me.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #28
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5552 posts in this forum Offline

Ok I know how this is going to sound but that post about Terence Stamp is loaded with inaccuracies. For example Krishnamurti's surname was Jiddu not Jeddu. He was not, possibly contrary to what some of you might think, a Jedi Knight. There were other inaccuracies too.

Later on Stamp writes that he visited the house in Ojai where K and his brother were "billeted during the Second World War". K's brother, Nitya, died twenty years before WWII. Basically this reads like what it is. A breathless, over dramatized story by an actor who admits he doesn't have a clue what K is talking about. I think this story is a whole more about Terence Stamp than it was about K.

Why would any one post this stuff on this site?

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 03 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 03 Jun 2016 #29
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3167 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
I think this story is a whole more about Terence Stamp than it was about K.

I think you may be right, Jack. In all the collected works, did K ever talk once about 'being' in this context?:

P Sylvan wrote:
"The feeling that you are. The unadorned naked awareness that is always there, rarely heeded, is what you always have been, always will be" quoting K.

Or am I mistaken? If someone has a reference I'm willing to stand corrected.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 04 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 04 Jun 2016 #30
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Works fine? Is this a fact?

Yes Tom, I use this myself at times when people are so much absorbed in a discussion trying to convince me of something, then I draw their attention to something around (a noise or a bird's song etc) and it creates a 'stop' in their mind flow ... but of course it does not make them 'enlightened' :-)

Why resist 'what is' ?

This post was last updated by Jean Gatti Sat, 04 Jun 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 87 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)