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

Choiceless self-awareness


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 247 in total
Fri, 29 Dec 2017 #1
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

Many of our discussions here deal with the self. Can there be freedom from selfishness? In the video below, which lasts just under 10 minutes, Krishnamurti explores this question. Any comments on this video would be welcome. You can watch the video here.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Dec 2017 #2
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Sean Hen wrote:
Krishnamurti explores this question.

Or is he simply asking us to explore our response to the questions?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 03 Jan 2018 #3
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Or is he simply asking us to explore our response to the questions?

It's not clear from what you wrote if you actually watched the video Richard. Anyway, to answer your question, I would say that there is more to it than Krishnamurti simply asking us to explore our response to the questions.

Krishnamurti says at minute 2:06 on the video, "One has to discover for oneself whether there can be complete and total freedom from all selfishness ... all self-centred activity ... right? That is meditation!"

Also, at 03:03 minutes on the video Krishnamurti says the following:

"One has to be tremendously aware of every movement of thought. That’s very easy, don’t complicate it."

He goes on to talk about the importance of watching the arising of anger, greed, envy, ambition and aggression. He says that if you watch these things as they arise they wither away.

Is Krishnamurti "simply asking us to explore our response to the questions"? I'm not sure what that means. He seems to be stressing the importance of being "tremendously aware of every movement of thought" as he puts it.

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Wed, 03 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 03 Jan 2018 #4
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Sean Hen wrote:
I would say that there is more to it

Krishnamurti generally has one message, over and over. If we choose to dwell in a particular set of words to analyze and discuss and try to decipher some special meaning.....well, carry on Sean.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #5
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1182 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Krishnamurti generally has one message, over and over. If we choose to dwell in a particular set of words to analyze and discuss and try to decipher some special meaning.....well, carry on Sean.

Richard, do you point to the possible danger below ??

Many use various techniques to go beyond the reach of the means,
but the means shape the mind-heart, and so in the end
they become slaves to the means.
The means and the end are not different, they are not separate.
If you are seeking an end you will find the means for it,
but such an end is not the Real.

from: Krishnamurti Quote of the Day | Jan 04, 2018

Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #6
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Krishnamurti generally has one message, over and over. If we choose to dwell in a particular set of words to analyze and discuss and try to decipher some special meaning.....well, carry on Sean.

Richard, if we discuss Krishnamurti's teachings (this is a Krishnamurti forum after all) then it is inevitable that we talk about "sets of his words" as he conveyed his teachings in words. For many, Krishnamurti's teachings seem to have a great deal of meaning. I don't hink it's a case of trying "to decipher some special meaning" but it does seem valid to discuss his teachings here on a Krishnamurti forum.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #7
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
Richard, do you point to the possible danger below ??

Wim, at 03:03 minutes on the video I posted Krishnamurti says the following:

"One has to be tremendously aware of every movement of thought. That’s very easy, don’t complicate it."

Would you consider that a technique? Surely pointing out the importance of awareness is not a technique.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #8
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1182 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:

Wim, at 03:03 minutes on the video I posted Krishnamurti says the following:

K:Quote:
"One has to be tremendously aware of every movement of thought.
That’s very easy, don’t complicate it."

Would you consider that a technique?
Surely pointing out the importance of awareness is not a technique.

Sean,
It could be technique to pointing out the importance of awareness,
but being aware of the importance of awareness isn't.

Every now and then one meet people who are very good at repeating
the vocabulary of K. and at the same time show it does not perform.

Seeing that difference is awareness......,
judging, condemning, finding yourself special because you see that,
than ego is at work, at least that is my view of the matter ..

Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else.

This post was last updated by Wim Opdam Thu, 04 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #9
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 361 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
Every now and then one meet people who are very good at repeating
the vocabulary of K. and at the same time show it does not perform.

Every now and then? It is very common here on kinfonet to encounter the use of K terminology without deep insight, isn't it?

Superficially, it's very easy to know that K condemned technique. To go deeper, we must ask why. What is technique? What about it is problematic? What are examples of techniques? What is it to be completely free of technique? Why is that important?

To me, this is all very clear, but I'm not going to just answer immediately.

There are also side issues that are interesting but of somewhat less importance: Was K trained in meditation technique, such as mantra, or astral traveling to the Masters? Obviously, yes. This must be considered because some argue that meditation must begin with technique and only later can there be freedom from it.

Also, we're asking, is self-knowledge, the following of every thought moment by moment, a technique? And how so or how not? This is very important! Notice that elsewhere K calls self-knowledge "arduous," which implies tremendous effort, which implies internal conflict between the part of the self exerting effort to follow every thought and the part that gets distracted and goes off on a thinking journey with little awareness. Clearly, an effort that involves internal division results in distraction and wasting of energy. So it seems that without care, self-knowledge could very well be a technique, and problematic.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Thu, 04 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #10
Thumb_k2 Ken D United States 84 posts in this forum Offline

"The 'I' is not contaminated by society; it is the contamination." Krishnamurti

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #11
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
K trained in meditation technique, such as mantra, or astral traveling to the Masters? Obviously, yes. This must be considered because some argue that meditation must begin with technique and only later can there be freedom from it.

Thanks for your contribution idiot?. I must say I've never considered the points above. One thing appears clear though - Krishnamurti seemed to be able to be "tremendously aware of every movement of thought". The rest of us seem to find this very, very difficult indeed.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #12
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Wim Opdam wrote:
Richard, do you point to the possible danger below ??

Pointing out the dangers along the path of knowledge, is what I do Vim. ;)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Jan 2018 #13
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Sean Hen wrote:
I don't hink it's a case of trying "to decipher some special meaning" but it does seem valid to discuss his teachings here on a Krishnamurti forum.

Krishnamurti himself-frequently-warned of the pitfalls/dangers inherent in the use of words/knowledge/information (including his own words/books, etc..) to find something beyond the use of words. I simply carry on that honorable "tradition". ;)

Please do not take what is posted personally (even though it may or may not be directed at something you post). All of what goes down at Kinfonet (what you do/say, what I do/say) is an integral part of the noise game and is a necessary component even though it may seem uncomfortable.

This post was last updated by richard head (account deleted) Thu, 04 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #14
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5196 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
is what I do Vim. ;)

Exactly. But when you realize that as long as there is a you "doing something" then you are still caught in that conditioning, in those experiences and knowledge that invent a center, the you, I, etc that keeps you blocked from what is happening right now. We all do this, not just you. What happens when you see this? If even just for a moment?

Everything we think we know, which is the basis for what we do, for what we are, is the past. All thought and knowledge is the past.

Your "doing something" is an illusion based on your own knowledge and belief that there is a you separate from what you "know" and what you think is right. And this "you", that thought has invented, is here to guide others to conform to what you think you know. What you think is right. Can you see the fallacy of this?

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 05 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #15
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5196 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Krishnamurti himself-frequently-warned of the pitfalls/dangers inherent in the use of words/knowledge/information

Even as you are writing you are do just exactly that as you use words to express your opinions. Can't you see that you are caught in your own net?

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 05 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #16
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1182 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Can't you see that you are caught in your own net?

But Jack, is not that a common habit of humanity?

Also a good example is Mister Trump's statement about his bigger button !

Adolescent grandeur over whoever has the greatest indicates who is the greatest........

Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #17
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Jack Pine wrote:
this "you", that thought has invented, is here to guide others to conform to what you think you know.

Yes and post #14 is a beautiful illustration of your point, thank you.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #18
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Jack Pine wrote:
Even as you are writing you are do just exactly that as you use words to express your opinions.

I will refrain from addressing this post till you are sure this is what you really want to say.

But in any case, it is not my opinion that K gave warnings of the kind being discussed. It is quite obviously a fact. Which makes me wonder if you even read the post you responded to.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #19
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Please do not take what is posted personally (even though it may or may not be directed at something you post). All of what goes down at Kinfonet (what you do/say, what I do/say) is an integral part of the noise game and is a necessary component even though it may seem uncomfortable.

I shall certainly try not to take the sets of words used by you as personal Richard. All discussion welcome here as far as I'm concerned.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #20
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
What happens when you see this? If even just for a moment?

Good question.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #21
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5196 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
But Jack, is not that a common habit of humanity?

Of course it is. Everything I wrote applies to all of us not just one or a few.

If we are thinking we are not observing. Everything we are is the product of thought which is the expression of memory; experience, knowledge.....the sum total of our life-long conditioning.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #22
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5196 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
I will refrain from addressing this post till you are sure this is what you really want to say.

Instead of trying to come up with some glib response, instead of engaging in a duel of "my reply is better than your reply" why don't we try to understand what has been expressed? Not only by me but what everyone is writing?

This is not a battle of who is right and who is wrong but rather it is to understand who we are. Seeing that the center is nothing more than the accumulation of experience and knowledge.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 05 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #23
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5196 posts in this forum Offline

I recently have been reading "AS ONE IS" which is a transcript of the 1955 Ojai Talks. What K spent a lifetime trying to point out, which among other things, was "what is the center" is so beautifully explained in these talks.

I wish I could ask K, "what is death then?". If the self, the center is an illusion, the accumulation of experience and knowledge then what significance does living and dying have? The body dies but who we are psychologically is already dead. The dead past.

Humanity is destroying this planet like any other virus destroys it's host. Is that all we are? Self-seeking, self gratifying entities that are born to perpetuate ourselves, entertain ourselves for a few years or decades and then die? What is life?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #24
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Jack Pine wrote:
why don't we try to understand what has been expressed?

But Jack, I am wondering what is more fundamental, to understand what some other self wants to express, or what is going on in the space between my own ears?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Jan 2018 #25
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Sean Hen wrote:
it does seem valid to discuss his teachings here on a Krishnamurti forum.

In the same way that there is logical validity to discussing Jesus on a Christian discussion forum.

The question then becomes, why? What is our fundamental motive for this activity. Please do not post a public response to these questions. (anyone)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Jan 2018 #26
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

idiot ? wrote:
To me, this is all very clear

Most people experience a certain sense of clarity in the things K talked about. However, as he warned, this sense of "understanding/clarity" is an illusion of thought/self. A "verbal/intellectual understanding" as he might term it. Which seems insufficient to the task at hand.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Jan 2018 #27
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5196 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
But Jack, I am wondering what is more fundamental, to understand what some other self wants to express, or what is going on in the space between my own ears?

Maybe that's because you continue to see yourself as being different and separate from the rest of humanity. K is pointing out that that is an illusion.

The self is the product of our total conditioning; experience and knowledge. The self, the I, the me, doesn't exist apart from this conditioning. The fact your conditioning may vary slightly from someone else's is irrelevant when we are talking about what K pointed out about the psychological center most of us believe actually exists.

If you understand how conditioning has invented who you are then you understand how it works for everyone else. We are, at a basic level, the result of the same process. Conditioning.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 06 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Jan 2018 #28
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Jack Pine wrote:
Maybe that's because you continue to see yourself as being different and separate from the rest of humanity. K is pointing out that that is an illusion.

Sorry Jack, but this post is not an adequate response to the quote you highlighted.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Jan 2018 #29
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5196 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Sorry Jack, but this post is not an adequate response to the quote you highlighted.

Of course it is. But perhaps you didn't understand what was written. Maybe you would like to explain why you don't see that we are not unique? That we are all a product of our conditioning.

Or if you disagree with K when he points out that the center is an illusion and that what we think is uniquely "us" is just a slight variation of everyone else please explain to us why it's not.

All I am saying is that if you understand how conditioning has created what you think is "you" then you understand that the process is the same for everyone.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 06 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Jan 2018 #30
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 689 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
But Jack, I am wondering what is more fundamental, to understand what some other self wants to express, or what is going on in the space between my own ears?

Richard, is your position that you have actually understood Krishnamuti's teaching and the rest of us have not? If that is the case, you need to demonstrate that understanding through what you write here. Understanding of K's message will always shine through from what you say here. It's simply not enough to say things like "Krishnamurti himself-frequently-warned of the pitfalls/dangers inherent in the use of words/knowledge/information" (contribution 13). We all "know" this. Everything that everybody writes here is words. You can easily dismiss it all as words/knowledge/information. Does discussing Krishnamuti's teachings on this forum have absolutely no value for you?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 247 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.)