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

Listening


Displaying all 18 posts
Page 1 of 1
Mon, 15 Oct 2018 #1
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 709 posts in this forum Offline

Krishnamurti talked about the importance of listening and I think we would probably all agree that if one is going to be aware of what is going on around us, good listening skills are important. Personally, I am always struck when I meet someone who really listens. It seems quite a rare quality. Perhaps it demands a certain amount of stillness of the brain. I mean, one can't pay much attention to what is being said if the mind is chattering and wandering all over the place. Like many other things, I think it's easy to over-estimate our ability to listen. What I mean is we might often consider ourselves to be good listeners but in actual fact we don't really listen very much most of the time. Would you say that is a fair assessment?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 15 Oct 2018 #2
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 423 posts in this forum Offline

I hear you. I'm sorry what did you say?

To be attentive is to use our senses, to open them wide to what is going on. All of them, all at once.

To listen is not only to hear what is said, but also what is unsaid, and what is implied, and more. Attention is whole.

When we observe our listening - or our reading if we are on an internet forum - we might notice a back and forth shift between taking in and mental commentary. Do you notice the switch? We listen a bit, and then the thinking mind has something to say about it: a criticism, or an agreement, or a partial concurrence ("that's nearly right but a little off in this respect"), or some other judgment brought forth from past understanding.

So very rapidly we go from attention to inattention.

Attention, listening, is not acceptance or denial. It is simply openness to what is.

The thinking, commenting mind is very quick to sneak in and begin inattention, yes?

This post was last updated by idiot ? Mon, 15 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 15 Oct 2018 #3
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 Myself Wrote United States 641 posts in this forum Offline

Listening is different than hearing, most of us hear but not listen. Listening has a duration where as hearing is immidiate. When you listen to mozart you follow note by note. So listening is continuous and hearing is instantaneous. I think that is important to see.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #4
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 288 posts in this forum Offline

Can one listen at all if one doesn't see one's own reaction ? Isn't the immediate reaction, which is conditioned, based on our conditioning to judge, to compare, or simply from the known , that can be seen if there is attention, an hindrance to listen, to see what seems hidden ? As idiot ? say: To listen is not only to hear what is said, but also what is unsaid, and what is implied, and more. Attention is whole. ( end of quote. )

Is it at all possible with the reaction of the conditioned mind ? Or is it only possible in silence ? Isn't what is unsaid, what is implied and more can be revealed only when the mind is perfectly still , as pointed out Sean in post #1 ? Which I suggest to read again,

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Tue, 16 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #5
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5283 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
To listen is not only to hear what is said, but also what is unsaid, and what is implied, and more. Attention is whole. ( end of quote. )

Rich Nolet wrote:

Is it at all possible with the reaction of the conditioned mind ? Or is it only possible in silence ? Isn't what is unsaid, what is implied and more can be revealed only when the mind is perfectly still ?

Yes, that is the question. Can we be totally attentive and thinking, reacting at the same time?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #6
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 Myself Wrote United States 641 posts in this forum Offline

None of us can translate what some one else says and teach others what he says , that is the activity of an authority based minded person.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #7
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 Myself Wrote United States 641 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
Can one listen at all if one doesn't see one's own reaction ?

One can listen any time he finds out that he has not been listening. There is no precondition in listening..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #8
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1216 posts in this forum Offline

why then proceed to translation?
That is obviously the activity of the ego, which demands authority?
If insight is shared, nothing needs to be translated, nor is there authority.

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
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #9
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 709 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
When we observe our listening - or our reading if we are on an internet forum - we might notice a back and forth shift between taking in and mental commentary. Do you notice the switch?

Yes, this is exactly what happens. I would say that what takes place before we listen or read is also important. Before opening a message on this forum we probably have a pre-conception of what we are going to read based on our image of the writer which gets in the way of actually reading a post with clarity. While listening to people we know well we probably have a strong image of the person speaking that often greatly limits our ability to actually listen to what they are saying. We can observe this in ourselves and in people around us every day. How well do we actually listen though?

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Tue, 16 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #10
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 Myself Wrote United States 641 posts in this forum Offline

I think you are talking about how to read comments not how to listen. When you read a comment it is important to know who has written the comment and for what reason. Listening in not verbal but reading is. You don't have to listen to anybody in these forums. There are a lot of nuts in Internet. They think that they are clever. Reading words is not the same as listening. But then again you can do what ever you want. Give wrong meanings to the words and so on.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #11
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 288 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Can we be totally attentive and thinking, reacting at the same time?

Sean Hen wrote:
While listening to people we know well we probably have a strong image of the person speaking that often greatly limits our ability to actually listen to what they are saying. We can observe this in ourselves and in people around us every day. How well do we actually listen though?

So true . Are we aware of that image, which is a conditioned reaction ? The image is one thing that is an hindrance to listen ( except when I see a snake). Our ideas and opinions and conceptions are some others, which become resistances and which prevent from listening.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Tue, 16 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #12
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 709 posts in this forum Offline

Myself Only wrote:
Reading words is not the same as listening.

Reading and listening are obviously different although they are both receptive skills rather than productive ones. One important difference is that one can always go back and read what has been written while most listening takes place in face-to-face situations and the utterances disappear once they have been produced. Idiot? wrote about listening, reading in forums such as this one and attention and inattention. I thought the points he made were very interesting.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #13
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 709 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
So true . Are we aware of that image, which is a conditioned reaction ?

I would say that generally we are not aware of that image Rich. It just seems to be part of a certain sense of "normality". What would you say?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #14
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 288 posts in this forum Offline

Sean, you said : Idiot? wrote about listening, reading in forums such as this one and attention and inattention. I thought the points he made were very interesting.( end of quote).

Of course I would say it is not only interesting, but essential, if I may.

Sean Hen wrote:
I would say that generally we are not aware of that image Rich. It just seems to be part of a certain sense of "normality". What would you say?

Yes it is. But the image is like a resistance. It act as a wall. Can one feel it when it occurs ? Seeing it, feeling it, is ending it. Attention and inattention is for everything, including our daily life. With attention, we are listening, not only life and what is being said in a forum like this one, but it must include what is going on inside our own mind. If our mind chatter while reading or listening, it is inattention. Is not listening with attention only possible when the mind is quiet ?

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Tue, 16 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #15
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 423 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Before opening a message on this forum we probably have a pre-conception of what we are going to read based on our image of the writer which gets in the way of actually reading a post with clarity.

Yes. The first thing we see in the upper left corner of a post is the name of the poster. I wonder if we covered that up, or shifted the browser window over so it was covered, if we could read a post without preconception, without our recalling past ideas about the poster?

Sean Hen wrote:
How well do we actually listen though?

Yes. As long as there is this back and forth between listening and reactive mental commentary, then our listening must be interrupted, and therefore incomplete. "Fragmented," to use another K word.

To go a little further:

Krishnamurti, The First and Last Freedom, On Immediate Realization:
Only when you are directly in relationship with the problem will you find the answer. If you introduce an answer, if you judge, have a psychological disinclination, then you will postpone, you will prepare to understand tomorrow what can only be understood now. Therefore you will never understand. To perceive the truth needs no preparation. Preparation implies time and time is not the means of understanding the truth. Time is continuity and truth is timeless, non-continuous. Understanding is non-continuous, it is from moment to moment, unresidual. I am afraid I am making it all sound very difficult, am I not? But it is easy, simple to understand , if you will only experiment with it.

The brain is trying to create continuity. It says, "This poster always behaves in such and such a way." The thinking brain is not open to discontinuity, that the poster need not fall into a predictable pattern. The thinking brain is not open to a brand new relationship with the poster.

But if there is just listening without preconception, then there is no reactive interruption, then seeing simply is, and then loving response blooms.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 16 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 #16
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 423 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
Is not listening with attention only possible when the mind is quiet?

Exactly. We cannot force the mind to be quiet. But we can see its interference in listening. We can see it introducing distortion.

This kind of seeing is self knowledge. The first step is the last step. To really be aware of interrupting thought commentary is its transformation.

But most of us would rather indulge our mental commentary and be convinced it is right. Being aware of it from moment to moment is just too much bother.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 17 Oct 2018 #17
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 Myself Wrote United States 641 posts in this forum Offline

As far as I understand in this blog about listening is that the ego interferers with listening all the time. So if one is at all serious one needs to find out what is the source of ego in oneself ? How the ego is made? Is ego an inward movement or always an outward movement of thought?

This post was last updated by Myself Wrote Wed, 17 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 17 Oct 2018 #18
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1216 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
We cannot force the mind to be quiet. But we can see its interference in listening. We can see it introducing distortion.

And one also can observe the stifling working if the attention is profound.

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
Displaying all 18 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.)