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

Thought is limited.


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 31 in total
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #1
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 675 posts in this forum Offline

We all experience that thought is limited. Don't we? We see in so many ways that thought is limited. It is a daily fact that thought is limited, is it not?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #2
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 728 posts in this forum Offline

Me Myself wrote:
We all experience that thought is limited. Don't we? We see in so many ways that thought is limited. It is a daily fact that thought is limited, is it not?

Hello. Why is thought limited and how does this affect us? Imagine you see a bird flying across the evening sky. It's a great thing to see, isn't it? But what ususally happens? Thought jumps in and interprets the whole scene with thoughts like, "Oh, that's a heron. I saw one of those last week. Herons live near water. I wonder where that bird is flying". This interpretation of the scene reduces and limits the experience of seeing the bird flying across the sky.

It seems to be extremely difficult to observe with a silent mind. Isn't this the problem that we always come back to?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #3
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1311 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
It seems to be extremely difficult to observe with a silent mind. Isn't this the problem that we always come back to?

Hi Sean

Looking at this in the way K. presented it. Why make a "problem" of it? If it becomes a problem then it calls for a solution and I don't 'know' how to have a "quiet mind". I don't know how to 'get' a quiet mind. And if I realize that I don't know how and no-one can do it for me and no book can show me how...I stop 'trying' and then there is no 'problem'.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #4
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 728 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Looking at this in the way K. presented it. Why make a "problem" of it? If it becomes a problem then it calls for a solution and I don't 'know' how to have a "quiet mind". I don't know how to 'get' a quiet mind. And if I realize that I don't know how and no-one can do it for me and no book can show me how...I stop 'trying' and then there is no 'problem'.

Hi Dan. Yes, the word "problem" may not have been a good choice. However, perhaps we need to be careful not to become entangled with words. Maybe words block our communication sometimes.

I think we both know that there is no point trying to have a quiet mind, don't we? We both know we are surrounded by beauty that we can't see most of the time because we're distracted by thought. No effort or technique will help us here surely. Here are two quotes from Krishnamurti from the same talk:

"The earth is so beautiful, the sunsets, when you look at it, have extraordinary splendour, there is great beauty in a tree and a sheet of water has immense meaning; and a bird that's flying across the sky of an evening tells you a great deal if you know how to look."

"Now, the problem is this, if you are really interested in this question: whether behaviour and the responsibility of relationship can be free from pleasure, pain, reward and punishment."

Public Talk 2 Bangalore, India - 06 January 1974

The phrase in the first quote "know how to look" might imply technique but we know Krishnamurti didn't mean that. In the second quote, Krishnamurti also talks about a "problem" but we know he wasn't making a problem of this that required a solution and all the rest. The essence of what he was expressing comes across clearly despite his choice of words, doesn't it?

Well, I'm going out for a walk now on a lovely autumn evening here in Spain.

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Fri, 30 Nov 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #5
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1311 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Yes, the word "problem" may not have been a good choice. However, perhaps we need to be careful not to become entangled with words. Maybe words block our communication sometimes.

Yes. What I wanted to communicate was that I make a 'problem' of 'what is' when there is a desire to go beyond it: If I see that the mind is 'noisy', I want it to be still. If I see that thought 'interferes' I want it to not do so and stay in its rightful place etc. To communicate that this way of looking at my wish to go beyond 'what is' is an entanglement of thought: thought creates (is) the 'noisy' mind and then imagines a 'quiet' mind which it pursues but can never reach because it is just an image. One part of itself is trying to act on another part of itself. Thought is a 'problem' solver. That is its forte. But in the psychological it only creates 'noise'. If you haven't heard this talk in Saanen, here is the part where he addresses this in relation to the possibility of removing the deep hurts in us:

K.: Now, if there is nobody to answer you, to tell you, and you are faced with this problem, which is: the deep hurts, how are they to be wiped away so that the mind can never be hurt - right? What is your answer? You, who are very clever people, read a great deal, can quote Freud, Jung and all the professionals, what is your answer? Please be honest, what is your answer? Would you honestly say that you don't know? Can you honestly say, "I really don't know how to answer that question". Can you? Now please be careful, can you, with truth, with integrity, say, "I really don't know"? Or is your mind still searching to find an answer in books, or in people who have said there is an answer. Are you following all this? Come on sirs. Can you say with truth that you have no answer for this, you really don't know? Right? If you really truthfully, honestly say, 'I really don't know. I have no answer. I have only the problem, I have no answer. I know what the problem is, I am fully aware of the meaning of that problem, the significance, the depth of that problem. I have looked at it, I have watched it, all round it, from different angles, I have looked, worried, examined, but I have no answer.' - right?

What makes it a problem - please listen carefully - what makes it a problem? Do you understand my question? A problem exists only when you want to resolve it. Right? Please listen carefully. I have a problem: my problem is I want to have a mind that is so clear, unhurt, not polluted, free, vital, full of beauty and energy. And I have examined, I have looked at it and I see analysis is not the way, dreams, examinations, going off to somebody to say, "Please help me" or following some guru who will say, "Forget all that, think about god" and all the rest of it. I see all that is of no value - right? So I have this left with me, and it has become a problem. And I say why has it become a problem. If I can't do anything about it, it is not a problem. You are following all this? It is only when I think I can do something about it, it becomes a problem. I don't know if you understand this?

If I actually know when I am confronted with a gigantic mountain, and I can't do anything about it, it is there, with that great height, dignity, majesty, full of stability, splendour - why should I make a problem of it? It is only when I want to go beyond it - right? Climb it, go beyond it, then it becomes a problem. You understand? But when I see that I can't do anything about this, is it a problem? You have understood? If it is not a problem then it is resolved, isn't it? This is not a trick please. It is the truth. It is not a trick. A river is flowing by, full, strong, heavy with water, it is only when I want to cross to the other side where I think there is more freedom, there is more beauty, there is more loveliness, peace and all the rest of it, the crossing the river becomes a problem - right? But I see I can't cross the river, I haven't got a boat, I can't swim, I don't know what to do. Therefore what happens to my mind? It is not content with remaining on this side - you understand? It has no problem. I wonder if you are getting all this? So my hurt is not a problem - right? Therefore I am not hurt - right? Oh, it is so simple if you see this. It is so simple that we refuse to see it.

Saanen 1972 talk 4

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #6
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 728 posts in this forum Offline

Hi again Dan. Thanks for posting the part of the Saanen talk which was very interesting.

Dan McDermott wrote:
Yes. What I wanted to communicate was that I make a 'problem' of 'what is' when there is a desire to go beyond it: If I see that the mind is 'noisy', I want it to be still.

I would say that my original posting was more of an observation rather than a desire for the mind to be still. My observation was that we are often surrounded by great beauty but our chattering minds stop us from seeing it. I would say that this is true. I'm not saying it's good or bad or we should do this or that, just that it appears to be true for me and most people. I do think that there are moments when our minds are, to some extent at least, "clear, unhurt, not polluted, free, vital, full of beauty and energy". There are moments when we flow and are not blocked by mechanical thought. Wouldn't you agree Dan and all?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #7
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 675 posts in this forum Offline

In our relationship with our neighbour or with our friend or with our family member we have build an image about each other through time. That image is created by thought therefore limited. And where there is limitation there is conflict. That is a law. So realizing that anything that thought creates psychologically or inwardly must be limited and therefore creating conflict and problems one doesn't build these limited images about others anymore ..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #8
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 443 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Why make a "problem" of it? If it becomes a problem then it calls for a solution and I don't 'know' how to have a "quiet mind". I don't know how to 'get' a quiet mind. And if I realize that I don't know how and no-one can do it for me and no book can show me how...I stop 'trying' and then there is no 'problem'.

No, ignoring is not a solution.

I'm a murderer. I kill people. But I'm not going to make a problem of it. If I don't make a problem of it, it's not a problem, right?

Of course, it's ridiculous for the murderer and it's ridiculous for the person with the busy mind, too!

The first order of business is awareness! If I am clearly aware of my busy mind, I notice that it harms me and others! I'm so self-occupied I don't notice my friend who needs help. I don't notice all kinds of other things, including my own activities, which cause harm.

It takes a clear and aware mind to notice that a busy, self-preoccupied mind is violence. When that is clearly seen, in relationship, in daily activity, then change is. The mind spontaneously quiets. Awareness is. Love is.

But we only are vaguely aware of any of this. Therefore we believe we can ignore it in the spirit of not making a problem out of it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 30 Nov 2018 #9
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 675 posts in this forum Offline

Problems multiply when they are not understood or resolved immediately. Thought is the problem because it is not fully understood. The source of it, how it is created.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #10
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1311 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
But we only are vaguely aware of any of this. Therefore we believe we can ignore it in the spirit of not making a problem out of it.

Hi Idiot

Your use of the word 'ignore' misses the point of what K. was saying, I feel misses the point. Read the excerpt again, if you are interested, and see if 'ignorance' was what he was trying (in quite a passionate way, it seemed to me) to get across to his audience.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #11
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 443 posts in this forum Offline

I always read K very carefully.

Krishnamurti said:
A problem exists only when you want to resolve it. Right?

Wrong! Absolutely wrong.

Take the murderer. Murdering is not a problem for him. He has no conscience and no empathy. No problem. But it sure as hell is for the rest of us! It is not fine that he kills. It is a problem. We don't exist in isolation walling ourselves off from problems that "other people" have. We are in relationship. And that means responsibility.

This deserves a lengthy response that I will not have time for for days.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Sat, 01 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #12
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 675 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Krishnamurti said:

A problem exists only when you want to resolve it. Right?

Krishnamurti speaks psychologically. That is the first thing to see or realise. He is not talking about the housing or economical problems in the world. He is talking psychologically or emotionally. Emotionally we all know that we create our own emotional problems. Thought creates its own emotional problems. That is what k says. Does he not?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #13
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5298 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
The first order of business is awareness! If I am clearly aware of my busy mind, I notice that it harms me and others! I'm so self-occupied I don't notice my friend who needs help. I don't notice all kinds of other things, including my own activities, which cause harm.

When you say a "busy mind" does that include one that is obsessively preoccupied with whether someone they have never met, never talked to and don't know is superstitious or not or doesn't show enough gratitude to suit you? You mean that kind of busy mind?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #14
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 728 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
The first order of business is awareness! If I am clearly aware of my busy mind, I notice that it harms me and others!

Hello idiot? and all. Yes, this is what I was referring to when I made the comment about observing with a silent mind. I used the word "problem" in saying that this is something which we seem to find very difficult to do. I mean this as an observation. I'm not saying that I'm trying or making an effort to have a silent mind. I don't think you can't set out to be aware. If someone is speaking, you are either attentive and listening to what they are saying or your mind is chattering away and you are not listening at all. If you don't listen, there is little real communication. Perhaps being attentive or being a good listener isn't really valued much in modern society.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #15
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1311 posts in this forum Offline

I think that why K. was so passionate in his talk about this to the group in Saanen, is that he considered it key. We are in conflict, we suffer, as children we were all hurt to one degree or another. Supposedly the scars of those hurts remain in the brain as memory and dictate, to one degree or another, how we behave, interact, what we strive for, what we aspire to etc. and what we avoid and fear...not being free from these past hurts enslaves us in patterns of actions. So when I become aware of these unconscious memories in my relations or in dreams, I see that they are keeping me within certain parameters outside of which I don't go. They restrict me, and then how to be free of these unconscious 'restraints' is seen as the 'problem'. The 'problem' to solve. So I may try everything, meditation, analysis, drugs, gurus, religion, choiceless awareness, etc. (or as most do, just live with it) I try everything I know, but there is no 'fundamental' change. Now that may not be very well expressed but it gets to the point that I feel is critical in all this: that we are conditioned to believe that we know how to change. Thought thinks that it can solve any problem given time and that our psychological problems are no different. K.'s question here, as I see it is, can I realize that I don't know how, truly do not know how to erase the hurts of my childhood...(or more broadly to be "free from the known", free from the past.) and if that is understood totally with not one shred of belief left in me that 'I' can do anything to bring about this fundamental change... then the 'problem' dissolves. What is there is there...it is the wishing to go beyond it that creates the 'problem'.(And perpetuates the 'hurt')

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 01 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #16
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 675 posts in this forum Offline

Thought is limited and mechanical. It keeps going around the same field over and over. Somebody calls you an ugly name on the street and he is gone but thought keeps thinking about it for days.

My question is that has the whole brain become mechanical and limited or there is part of the Brain which is not mechanical therefore free? And if so can that part of the Brain which is not conditioned by the past operate in the daily life?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #17
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

K's secret: "I don't mind what happens"

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #18
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

Is there something within us that is not matter?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #19
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

The real question is: What is the self?

You are mistakenly assumeing that you know, or that you are close to knowing, what it is that is the self.

K has told you something, and you accept it, but it is only knowledge, you don"t question that knowledge, that known.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #20
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

Are you thought?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Dec 2018 #21
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 728 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
What is there is there...it is the wishing to go beyond it that creates the 'problem'.

Dan, I would say that the busy mind is there. Lack of attention is there. There isn't any going beyond it. It's just a fact. That's how we live. Our minds chatter a a lot of the time and we are unaware of what is around us a great deal of the time. If we start by realising exactly where we are, I think that could be helpful.

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Sat, 01 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #22
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 675 posts in this forum Offline

Peter Kesting wrote:
The real question is: What is the self?

Are you ready for this?

" You know what I mean by the self? By that, I mean the idea, the memory, the conclusion, the experience, the various forms of namable and unnamable intentions, the conscious endeavor to be or not to be, the accumulated memory of the unconscious, the racial, the group, the individual, the clan, and the whole of it all, whether it is projected outwardly in action, or projected spiritually as virtue; the striving after all this is the self. In it is included the competition, the desire to be. The whole process of that, is the self;

The Book of Life, February 6, HarperSanFrancisco, 1995

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #23
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 675 posts in this forum Offline

So the self is the "strive" to get to anything, outwardly or inwardly.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #24
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

Me Myself wrote:
" You know what I mean by the self? By that, I mean the idea, the memory, the conclusion, the experience, the various forms of namable and unnamable intentions, the conscious endeavor to be or not to be, the accumulated memory of the unconscious, the racial, the group, the individual, the clan, and the whole of it all, whether it is projected outwardly in action, or projected spiritually as virtue; the striving after all this is the self. In it is included the competition, the desire to be. The whole process of that, is the self

And all of that is matter.

This post was last updated by Peter Kesting Sun, 02 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #25
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

Is what you are only matter?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #26
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5298 posts in this forum Offline

Me Myself wrote:
" You know what I mean by the self? By that, I mean the idea, the memory, the conclusion, the experience, the various forms of namable and unnamable intentions, the conscious endeavor to be or not to be, the accumulated memory of the unconscious, the racial, the group, the individual, the clan, and the whole of it all, whether it is projected outwardly in action, or projected spiritually as virtue; the striving after all this is the self. In it is included the competition, the desire to be. The whole process of that, is the self;

The Book of Life, February 6, HarperSanFrancisco, 1995

Good quote at the appropriate time.

Peter Kesting wrote:
And all of that is matter.

What it is actually is a mirror for you to see yourself in or not.

Peter Kesting wrote:
Is what you are only matter?

Aren't you just theorizing? Thought is matter. The self is the invention of thought therefore the self is matter. What point are you trying to make, Peter?

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sun, 02 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #27
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1311 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D wrote:
It is not simply that the "I" is memory, but the identification with memory which creates the "I"

I don't understand 'who' or 'what' it is that "identifies" with all that...Being, Awareness? What or who is the 'identifier'?

Thought?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sun, 02 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #28
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D wrote:
There need not be a "who" or a "what". It is most likely an emotional need, based on fear.

Aren't you suggesting here that emotional need and fear are beyond matter?

This post was last updated by Peter Kesting Sun, 02 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #29
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

Hello Ken,

As I see it photons enter the eye and are converted to signals that travel along nerves to the brain. Nerves in the brain are activated. That activity becomes a complex of signals moving again along nerves. That activity in the material brain somehow produces the experiencing of, for example, something seen as red But the inside of the brain is black. The redness that is experienced, the experiencing of it, is unexplained. Would you say that redness, the actual experiencing of that, is something that is material? Emotions including fear as experienced, the experiencing of these, and also all other experiencings are beyond the material.

There is something that is beyond the material that sees. As I see it, there is something, that is empty of any attributes. No shape, form, color, not biological, timeless, no memory,something (not a thing) having no past, not person, nothing in it that would distinguish that something here from the same something there in any other. That is what we actually are, the emptiness that sees. That is the observer that can observe the self without identifying with it. That is when the falsly identified self, the I, the whole of that, no division, can be the observed. As K says the observer is the observed.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #30
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1311 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D wrote:
There need not be a "who" or a "what". It is most likely an emotional need, based on fear.

An emotional need, based on fear, in the brain? I'm confused because I see there is 'identification' so 'something' has identified itself with 'all that' (the memories e.g.). What is the factor (who or what) 'doing' the identifying?

Definition of identify: a person's sense of identity with someone or something.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sun, 02 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 31 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.)