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

Understanding "constrained" in the QOTD


Displaying all 28 posts
Page 1 of 1
Fri, 04 Aug 2017 #1
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

K- as long as the mind is in any way constrained, it is unable to discern the many hindrances that impede true perception.

Often when i read a quote like this (QOTD), I feel that I understand it but when I go deeper, I see that I don't. Here my question is, 'what is it that 'constrains' the mind and creates the inability of the mind to "discern" these "hinderances"?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 04 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 04 Aug 2017 #2
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

I think that what is meant here by the mind being "constrained", is that it has put itself in a sort of strait-jacket. If culturally I have adopted 'nationalism', say, that 'belief in country' will keep me from seeing what is wrong (destructive) that can flow from (the 'effects') of that 'ism' i.e.division, war, global inequality, pollution, etc. So the 'constrained' mind 'filters' out the negative effects of its belief, I don't 'discern' them and true perception is impeded...without that constraint of the mind (nationalism), I can see how war, famine, inequality, etc. are 'effects' directly related to the 'cause' which is the 'pride' of nationalism. The cause and effect are seen as one.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 04 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 04 Aug 2017 #3
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

Dan - everything that props up the self and gives comfort and security is a constraint surely? This includes nationalism, religion, conditioning, and all the little personal feel-good-about-myself rituals we daily indulge in.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 05 Aug 2017 #4
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
everything that props up the self and gives comfort and security is a constraint surely? This includes nationalism, religion, conditioning, and all the little personal feel-good-about-myself rituals we daily indulge in.

Thanks Patricia for your weighing in here. I agree and I guess we have to understand our own 'hypocrisy' in all of this without judgement. It is relatively easy to see the problem with the big things like nationalism, religion, etc...but those "feel-good-about-myself rituals", that does get "personal" but it is the 'personal" that needs to be seen without judgement because judgement is based on what should and what should not be, but not simply on 'what is'.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 05 Aug 2017 #5
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

The passion to discover the truth of human disorder negates judgement.

The fact is disorder. There is no judgement in staying with that fact, and in the only place where one has total access to understanding its movement, which is within one's own thoughts and actions.

Perhaps the real problem is in the willingness to allow some 'comforts' to slip by. Believing that there is no real harm in that, and that if there is - well that is 'my' right.

And in not understanding that we human beings have it ALL wrong - not just a little bit here and there that we can tweak back into place. ALL WRONG.

So - is that a judgement or is it a fact? :)

This post was last updated by Patricia Hemingway Sat, 05 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 05 Aug 2017 #6
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
So - is that a judgement or is it a fact? :)

If you say that "human beings have it ALL wrong", that is a 'judgement'.:)

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Perhaps the real problem is in the willingness to allow some 'comforts' to slip by. Believing that there is no real harm in that, and that if there is - well that is 'my' right.

I don't know if my 'actions' are the problem at all, given that they flow from my 'conditioning'. The problem that I see is in the 'thinker/thought' duality. If the 'thinker' is in charge of putting one's house in order, that will be 'disorder'. Without the ending of the 'thinker', there will be desire and that desire will lead to effort, discipline and the inevitable 'guilt' when it fades.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
The fact is disorder. There is no judgement in staying with that fact, and in the only place where one has total access to understanding its movement, which is within one's own thoughts and actions.

Yes and that 'staying with' is determined by the "passion" to discover the 'truth'..." (which may be strong or weak or non-existent ) But when the passion takes any direction other than to see 'what is', it becomes a 'constraint' on the mind and becomes an obstacle (a hindrance) to "pure perception".

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 06 Aug 2017 #7
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
If you say that "human beings have it ALL wrong", that is a 'judgement'.:)

Or a statement of fact. But only if the fact has been seen and understood completely.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 06 Aug 2017 #8
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
But when the passion takes any direction other than to see 'what is', it becomes a 'constraint' on the mind and becomes an obstacle (a hindrance) to "pure perception".

The question remains: 'Does perception act independent of thought, or is thought a part of perception?'

Dan the so-called big things (general and universal) and the so-called small things (personal) are the same action - they are both the same pattern as self.

While there is any division into self and other then the movement of self is not being seen and insightfully understood.

Perception acts regardless of the divisionism of thought - being that the senses are alive and active and perceiving, BUT they are overridden by the centre as self.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 06 Aug 2017 #9
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

Hi Dan and all. The full quote can be seen below. I think this helps to put the quote in context. K says here "you must think wholly and intensely" which might seem surprising to some. Anyway, I hope this helps.

Krishnamurti Quote of the Day
Early Writings, Volume VII | Talks at Adyar, India 1932-33

I am not preaching self-contentment or satisfaction. Quite the contrary. I say that as long as the mind is in any way constrained, it is unable to discern the many hindrances that impede true perception. To discover those hindrances you must become fully aware of all your words, your actions, your thoughts and feelings. In that flame of awareness, the cause and the effect are understood instantaneously, and thereby is created that harmony without struggle or effort.

To become aware, you must think wholly and intensely. Now if you are afraid, you seek courage, and thereby courage becomes but an escape from fear, the opposite of fear. The covering up of fear you call courage. The conflict of the opposites continues to exist; whereas if you become wholly aware of the cause of fear, then fear itself disappears, and therefore you are free of both fear and its opposite, courage. Whatever thoughts arise in the mind, think them through - all the hindrances of public opinion, past authorities, future wants, ideals and acquisitions. In thus facing them you will become free of these limitations.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 06 Aug 2017 #10
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 408 posts in this forum Offline

There is no constraint in observation, is there? For example, in the simple observation of thoughts - such as "This is good, I must do it" or "This is bad, I must not do it", or "This is good, I must reward it" or "This is bad, I must punish it", and so on - there is no observer. Isn't it through conditioning that authority has been assigned to thought and that the mind has been divided? Isn't constraint the act of thought exercising its authority (over itself)?

The observer is the fear, the reaction to the fear, and the effort to control or escape it. But observation gives totally free rein to thought without judgment, without effort to control or repress, and without assigning authority to thought. Observation does not "override" (Patricia's word) thought. So where thought is constrained, it is thought which is constraining itself, isn't it? Doesn't observation - choicelessly giving thought the freedom to fully express itself - reveal this?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 06 Aug 2017 #11
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Perception acts regardless of the divisionism of thought - being that the senses are alive and active and perceiving, BUT they are overridden by the centre as self.

The senses are alive in the moment always gathering information. But 'attention' is drawn to thought. Thought long ago put the outside world into categories (images) and classifications and sub-classifications...etc. The thought/self "overrides" the senses in that the shape, color, smell of the 'flower', 'plant', tree' etc., the individuality of each of these 'creatures', is ignored, is not of 'interest. Thought/self dominates the field of perception, except in moments when something 'extraordinary' occurs; a sunset, light on water, the shape of clouds, etc.

But suppression of thought is not the answer, that is like getting into a fist fight with yourself... of which there can be no good outcome.:)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 07 Aug 2017 #12
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
There is no constraint in observation, is there? For example, in the simple observation of thoughts - such as "This is good, I must do it" or "This is bad, I must not do it", or "This is good, I must reward it" or "This is bad, I must punish it", and so on - there is no observer.

"Good" and "bad", "right" and "wrong" are value judgements and as such are psychological thought, implying that there is an observer and the observed.

In pure observation, where there is no observer and the observed, value judgements, as a moral compass, simply do not exist, as thought (both technical and psychological) is not acting.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 07 Aug 2017 #13
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
The senses are alive in the moment always gathering information.

Dan, to clarify: The senses do not gather information. The senses and pure perception are a unity, and as such do not have their root in thought as knowledge, and therefore have no 'information' (which is knowledge) to gather.

"The nerve impulses for all sensations (this includes conscious and unconscious) are identical. They are carried to the brain, where impulses in particular fibres are identified with their sources and translated into information about the environment." Quote: Medical Encyclopedia.

In other words - 'information' used here in this definition is post sensation and not of a thought basis, because it involves natural reflexes which mitigate other physiological responses with the holistic environment as a referent.

This post was last updated by Patricia Hemingway Mon, 07 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 07 Aug 2017 #14
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Thought/self dominates the field of perception, except in moments when something 'extraordinary' occurs; a sunset, light on water, the shape of clouds, etc.

Dan - perhaps one has to be very careful here as there is a big difference between technical thought acting on perceptive (sensory) input, and psychological thought acting on perceptive (sensory) input.

Technical thought remains within perceptive order and is mitigated by it, and psychological thought brings about disorder as it measures the measurer.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 07 Aug 2017 #15
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Thanks Sean, yes this is very interesting. Another way to experiment with this is, that for there to be awareness, thought must become "wholly and intensely" aware of itself.

Hi again Dan. Yes, I see what you mean here. Krishnamurti talks about this for seven minutes on the video you can find here.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 07 Aug 2017 #16
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 408 posts in this forum Offline

13:

Huguette . wrote:

There is no constraint in observation, is there? For example, in the simple observation of thoughts - such as "This is good, I must do it" or "This is bad, I must not do it", or "This is good, I must reward it" or "This is bad, I must punish it", and so on - there is no observer.

"Good" and "bad", "right" and "wrong" are value judgements and as such are psychological thought, implying that there is an observer and the observed.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:

In pure observation, where there is no observer and the observed, value judgements, as a moral compass, simply do not exist, as thought (both technical and psychological) is not acting.

Patricia,

I don't know if we understood each other. Were you understanding me to be saying that the value judgments - good/bad, right/wrong - are made BY observation? Thought - including the attached value judgments - is being observed. There is observation of thought, including the "observer's" value judgments. Thought is moving and its movement is being observed. In observation there is no constraint. Constraint is thought, isn't it? Observation is not thought so there is no constraint in it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 07 Aug 2017 #17
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 209 posts in this forum Offline

What is the opposite of "constrained?" It is freedom. And what is freedom in K teaching? It is freedom from the known. It is freedom to investigate without influence of a guru or spiritual books.

Freedom is only in meditation, which is not a way to somewhere, but rather is right here, now.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #18
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 528 posts in this forum Offline

Why ask questions Dan , when one is not in a listening / learning mode ?

Patricia : " The fact is disorder. There is no judgement in staying with that fact, and in the only place where one has total access to understanding its movement, which is within one's own thoughts and actions.

And in not understanding that we human beings have it ALL wrong - not just a little bit here and there that we can tweak back into place. ALL WRONG.

Perhaps the real problem is in the willingness to allow some 'comforts' to slip by. Believing that there is no real harm in that, and that if there is - well that is 'my' right." ( post 5 )

I think in her above post ( 5 ) in this thread Patricia summed up well in more or less terms answering to your queries .

and I think there are problems many fold and many dimensional ... Unable to accept the basic fact is one is ' ignorant ' of what all K is referring to . Lack of inner coordination / integration ... Various parts of ' oneself ' asserting , affirming to state that one ' knows / understands ' ... Boredom / loneliness and the fear of facing oneself which manifests in the form of this urge to constantly indulging in expressing / writing activities ....

When the' constraints' are not seen and not acknowledged where is the space for inner order ? Leave out ' freedom' ?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #19
Thumb_me_3_reduced_copy Patricia Hemingway Australia 1858 posts in this forum Offline

Thanks Pavani - for listening and communicating. :)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #20
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
Boredom / loneliness and the fear of facing oneself which manifests in the form of this urge to constantly indulging in expressing / writing activities ....

Hello Pavani

I was aware that I could not completely relate to Patricia's postings as well as you seem to, but it was for me a real question (one of many). But I was not looking for an answer but to hear how others would relate to it. I also value these forums. They may only include a handful of people who are interested in posting and who take the chance to appear foolish, or as you say "Unable to accept the basic fact (that) one is ' ignorant ' of what all K is referring to " I won't put myself in that category nor would I put Patricia. Whether it applies to you, only you can know. You give above some reasons why people would come here and post regularly: "boredom, loneliness, fear of facing oneself "etc. Really? K. wrote and talked for over 60 years. Because he was "bored", "lonely"? Why so strict regarding the desire to express with others, one's questions, insights around K.'s work? It may not come up to the standard you have, but that is your own situation to look at, your judgement, that you have come here to express. You quote Patricia, say she is right, accuse me of not hearing her and you leave. I may or may not understand her way of expressing herself as I don't with some others that come to the forums but everything is 'grist for the mill' where self-knowledge is concerned. I thought to put the question of 'the mind being constrained that creates a lack of discernment' etc. because this forum was very 'dead'. It had become a place for occasional bickering and many days would go by with no-one sharing anything. The forums will disappear eventually if people don't post their thoughts and feelings, discoveries, etc. I think that would be a 'loss'. Also There is a 'joy' in trying to "express" one's thoughts coherently even if one fails. Sorry to be so verbose (obtuse?). In any case, I will be more careful in future to not overly indulge myself.:)

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Wed, 09 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #21
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
Unable to accept the basic fact is one is ' ignorant ' of what all K is referring to .

Hello Pavani. I've read the sentence above several times but cannot make sense of it. The word "is" appears both before and after the word "one" which creates confusion. Is the sentence a question which is missing a question mark or is it a statement? I can only guess that you are saying that because Dan is, in your words, "unable to accept the basic fact" he is ignorant of "what all K is referring to". Can I ask if that was what you were trying to express?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #22
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 528 posts in this forum Offline

Yes Dan some one had to be CONCERNED about the forums and you people are doing a great job about that . Naturally those who are more concerned of finding out about what K pointed out and in unraveling ' oneself ' had left the forums .... As the realization dawns on one that endless ' intellectualization ' cannot help in resolving ones life's issues and on top of it takes away ones vital energy levels ....

Bringing the example of K was a poor one Dan . As a very old member of the forums and mostly writer of very sensible and wise posts , one expected better answers from you .

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #23
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 528 posts in this forum Offline

Endless ' intellectualization ' is a sign of ignorance Sean . There is a world of difference in passive / random participation of sharing ones understanding / views, life's experiences and genuine inquiry to compulsive dead habbit of wanting to stay online wasting away ones energy levels .

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #24
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
Yes Dan some one had to be CONCERNED about the forums and you people are doing a great job about that . Naturally those who are more concerned of finding out about what K pointed out and in unraveling ' oneself ' had left the forums .... As the realization dawns on one that endless ' intellectualization ' cannot help in resolving ones life's issues and on top of it takes away ones vital energy levels ....

This is quite a statement Pavani, but thank you I guess for your CONCERN about my (our) "vital energy levels". K. realized that the only place the teaching can 'live' is in the human brain, not in books, not in videos, and not in what one has "unravelled" in oneself, or anywhere in the 'past'. And he also realized that it has to be 'deepened' always, in oneself, there is no end to it, only a beginning, a taking in and a letting go..and being here, there, or anywhere does not preclude that 'deepening'. (or "unravelling":)

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Tue, 08 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #25
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3067 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
and being here, there, or anywhere does not preclude that 'deepening'. (or "unravelling":)

Truth is to be found right where we are, isn't it? I'm reminded of K's statement that 'what is' is most holy. Maybe 'where we are' as well.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 08 Aug 2017 #26
Thumb_de4 Dan McDermott United States 1214 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Truth is to be found right where we are, isn't it? I'm reminded of K's statement that 'what is' is most holy. Maybe 'where we are' as well.

Using the words "most holy" is interesting, isn't it? How do we understand what he is saying here? How do we understand that term: "what is"? It obviously can't be 'known' since knowing is the past. So what does 'what is' mean in terms of myself and the 'world'?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Tue, 08 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 09 Aug 2017 #27
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 528 posts in this forum Offline

Dan : " a taking in and a letting go..and being here, there "

"LETTING GO " is certainly a key Dan , as far as my understanding of K teaching goes .... but then the problem is if time lapse between the idea of ' letting go ' and the real action of ' letting go ' is too broad , then I'm afraid one is loosing the worth and value of that ' insight '

In K terms that is asking for ' time ' and of no use at all . Either there is ' seeing ' or there is none . Explanations , wonderful analyses how ever good they may sound , but they cannot bring true peace , and they pale away in the light of ' insightful seeing ' .... which is possible only when one truly and really ' DOES '

None of the members of the forum are neither naive nor joined yesterday , in the sense most of us are quite old as far as our membership of the forum goes . In my opinion there are only two people who come in multiple forms and have this habit of perpetually expressing themselves in the forums . Well if one is speaking of ones experience of how one goes about ' unravelling ' oneself ... Order is / has to be restored amongst different fragments of ' oneself ' pulling in ten different directions ...

I'm sure it's not at all easy and indeed quite difficult too to keep away or let go of the ' image ' of oneself ... Since one started quite early in age exploring into all these ' spiritual ' matters and some how one felt that one ' understood ' everything .... and when one came across K teaching one finds out that he is speaking from an entirely different dimension altogether .. and it turns out that however ' intelligent , sensible and wise ' one is .... unless and until he / she examines all this and musters the ability to ' let go ' of all the ' images ' mind conceived of everything .... No foundation can be formed ... Long read and remembered quote comes to mind " foundation of truth cannot be formed on castles of sand '

Well Dan that looks like a long post there . Well with the long association of staying together in the forums I felt free to express how / what I see the things as they appear to be to me . Kindly forgive me if any aspect of the post sounds objectionable ... After all it's our life . Every one has the right to live the way one likes / lives ...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 09 Aug 2017 #28
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
Endless ' intellectualization ' is a sign of ignorance Sean

Hello Pavani. Thank you for clarifying that point. What you say here may well be true. Perhaps we all approach Krishnamurti's teachings far too intellectually. However, I must say that I find the word "ignorant" problematic when we are exploring the teachings here together. As I was not the one you applied this adjective to it may not really be my place to comment. An element of thought provoking challenge is certainly very welcome and important on this forum but as soon as a word like "ignorant" is used I think it is inevitable that exploring together will cease and argument will start.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying all 28 posts
Page 1 of 1
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.)