Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
A Quiet Space | moderated by Clive Elwell

When any one thing ends fully, everything ends..


Displaying all 6 posts
Page 1 of 1
Wed, 07 Jun 2017 #1
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 594 posts in this forum Offline

There is very little time to participate here , but I happened to see some words written by Huguette, which are so utterly meaningful (the meaning can only be wholly in wholeness), so I am copying them here.

Huguette: "So, as I see it, the whole of consciousness is negated in the moment there is awareness of the slightest stirring of friction or interruption."

m: This is the wonder. The WHOLE of consciousness is negated in the moment of awareness of the SLIGHTEST STIRRING created by thought/mind/consciousness.

When the 'detail', 'the fragment', the 'slightest movement in psychological contradiciton', the 'ego', all that, is seen WHOLLY, with the eyes of awareness and not the eyes of the mind, NOTHING else but awareness can survive in it.

The mind that a collection of fragments, can only understand its own frgamented logic and says...oh, i have so many things to understand etc...No. there is only One, and that is no thing, no mind.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 07 Jun 2017 #2
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 314 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
m: This is the wonder. The WHOLE of consciousness is negated in the moment of awareness of the SLIGHTEST STIRRING created by thought/mind/consciousness.

Does someone knows that state?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 10 Jun 2017 #3
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 594 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Does someone knows that state?

m: No one knows. Conciousness is the known, knowledge. That which is not of knowledge, cannot obviously be known.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 10 Jun 2017 #4
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 314 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
m: No one knows. Consciousness is the known, knowledge. That which is not of knowledge, cannot obviously be known.

Yes, that's the answer i was expecting ...

How then, can you talk about "This is the wonder. The WHOLE of consciousness is negated in the moment of awareness of the SLIGHTEST STIRRING created by thought/mind/consciousness."?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 10 Jun 2017 #5
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 348 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
How then, can you talk about "This is the wonder. The WHOLE of consciousness is negated in the moment of awareness of the SLIGHTEST STIRRING created by thought/mind/consciousness."?

Juan,

For me, the following quote clarified the relationship and difference between knowledge and awareness. It has been quoted before and there are other similar quotes:

So there is the superficial awareness of the tree, the bird, the door, and there is the response to that, which is thought, feeling, emotion. Now when we become aware of this response, we might call it a second depth of awareness. There is the awareness of the rose, and the awareness of the response to the rose. Often we are unaware of this response to the rose. In reality it is the same awareness which sees the rose and which sees the response. It is one movement and it is wrong to speak of the outer and inner awareness. When there is a visual awareness of the tree without any psychological involvement there is no division in relationship. But when there is a psychological response to the tree, the response is a conditioned response, it is the response of past memory, past experiences, and the response is a division in relationship. This response is the birth of what we shall call the 'me' in relationship and the 'non-me'. [...] Now can there be an awareness, an observation of the tree, without any judgement, and can there be an observation of the response, the reactions, without any judgement? In this way we eradicate the principle of division, the principle of 'me' and 'non-me', both in looking at the tree and in looking at ourselves. [The Urgency of Change, Awareness]

It is the same awareness, the same action. This is a very important fact to me, not negligible. When there is awareness of the rose (when I'm aware of the rose), that awareness is not thought. Yet thought records the rose as memory, doesn't it? And it is later remembered. Remembering the rose of course is not the same action as awareness of the rose.

That awareness which sees the stirring of thought is also not thought. Yet thought records it as it recorded the rose, and the stirring of thought is later remembered. Remembering the stirring of thought is not the same action as awareness of it.

The awareness which sees the rose is the same awareness, the same action, as that which sees the stirring of thought. There is no naming, labeling or reacting in awareness, neither in seeing the rose or in seeing the stirring of thought.

As I understand it, the mental process that "affirms" (which prevents "negation of") the whole of consciousness is the psychological response to the tree or to the response/stirring of thought. Where a response or stirring of thought is observed and the conscious mind understands the nature and significance of that thought/time, it makes no effort to do anything about it, to change it, fix it or avoid it, does it?

To me, this is the conscious mind understanding its own limitations. It is not complete understanding of the whole, but it is essential, isn't it? As long as the conscious mind (thought) does not understand its limitations and the nature of self, effort, desire, fear and time (i.e. thought), it will continue its efforts to find solutions to its problems. Understanding itself, it also understands that awareness is not thought, doesn't it? This is thought's limited understanding.

Understanding its limitations and going to the end of these limitations, the conscious mind falls silent, doesn't it? And another "kind" of learning and understanding can take place in awareness. Doesn't the conscious mind KNOW that there is awareness, and that awareness is not something IT "does"?

Understanding its limitations, the conscious mind then does not make an effort to solve its problems, such effort not being whole action but division. So that awareness and intelligence are unimpeded by the conscious mind. Is this so? I'm not sure.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Sat, 10 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 11 Jun 2017 #6
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3560 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Understanding its limitations, the conscious mind then does not make an effort to solve its problems, such effort not being whole action but division. So that awareness and intelligence are unimpeded by the conscious mind. Is this so? I'm not sure.

It might sound odd, to someone who has not taken this journey of self undestanding - ie most people - but I feel confident that you are right, Huguette, the human turmoil, the conflict and suffering, can only come to an end when the mind ceases to try to solve its problems. Have just been touching on this in another thread. And yes, only awareness of its own limitations, its own futilty, can bring the mind to this point. That is, choiceless awareness.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying all 6 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.)