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

'What has been put together by thought can be undone'


Displaying posts 31 - 49 of 49 in total
Sun, 19 Jan 2020 #31
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 832 posts in this forum Offline

re: #13 and #14

Clive Elwell wrote at 13:
This may seem a very childish, silly question, but still I am asking it - what is the meaning of "meaning", in the sense you are using it.

Clive, I think your question is relevant. There’s nothing silly or childish about it. I just don’t know if I can convey what I mean by “meaning”. But I'll "try" :o)

To Clive and Tom,

There obviously can be no communication where every person uses their own personal definitions. Words have defined meanings. To convey instructions, directions, information, danger, descriptions, to talk about sensations and feelings, or anything, mutually accepted meanings, definitions, are necessary.

I’m not using “meaning” in the context where definitions are needed. When we ask what the meaning of life, love, suffering or fear is, don’t we mean: what is life’s purpose, what is the sense of it, what is life, morality, what is action? We're not looking for a dictionary definition of the meaning of life.

When questions arise in the context of experiencing existence - questions about the meaning of life, about anger, violence, injustice, action, relationship, beauty, cruelty, corruption, and so on - it is observed that these questions cannot be satisfied by knowledge of any kind - not by instructions, directions, information, definitions, etc.

When we call war “terrible” or call a pedophile’s actions “reprehensible” or “evil”, that is not understanding the meaning of it. To eulogize someone is not to give meaning to or understand the person. Thought explains or clarifies nothing in this sense. Does it? In these contexts, words are unnecessary, superfluous. Naming is not what gives meaning to and understanding of events and actions. As soon as I see what the pedophile has done or what violence war has done, the meaning is seen in the thing itself, not in thought.

When we label actions or an event “terrible” or “wonderful”, we think we are providing meaning, speaking the truth about it. But the naming is irrelevant. The truth - meaning - lies in the actions and events themselves. Words are extraneous, as I see it. The heart, mind and body “know” the truth of it, feel it, understand it. The intellect may call it “horror”. The intellect may condemn it. And what does that change other than moving the mind away from facing the actual thing and frittering energy? Where there is understanding of the meaning, naming adds nothing to meaning. No?

And still, a healthy brain is important. For someone with advanced dementia or other brain pathology, nothing “means” anything - not instructions, not knowledge, not danger, not affection, not self-observation, not witnessing horror or beauty.

Tom Paine wrote:
What is the inherent meaning of a river?

It does not lie in the word, as I see it. I can swim in it, drown in it, drink its water, listen to it. But that is not the whole of it. The inherent meaning is in the awareness of it. It is not static.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 19 Jan 2020 #32
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3260 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

What is the inherent meaning of a river?
It does not lie in the word, as I see it. I can swim in it, drown in it, drink its water, listen to it. But that is not the whole of it. The inherent meaning is in the awareness of it. It is not static.

So at the moment I am having a good bath in the river, that is the meaning of the river. If I’m fishing for my dinner, at that moment the meaning of the river is the fishing I’m doing. That’s how I understand meaning. Or I’m silently watching ...observing...and I see the amazing beauty of the river or feel the incredible power of it, that’s the meaning of the river

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 19 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 20 Jan 2020 #33
Thumb_open-uri20200202-16653-rg2qz5-0 Mina Martini Finland 418 posts in this forum Offline

Manfred Kritzler wrote:
Manfred: Do I understand it correctly that we could say that there is silence and thinking at the same time?

Mina: Yes, at the same time in the sense that thoughts keep arising directly from silence and not from other thoughts, which would happen in the habitual state of the observer separate from the observed.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 20 Jan 2020 #34
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3260 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
As soon as I see what the pedophile has done or what violence war has done, the meaning is seen in the thing itself, not in thought.

Yes...the direct experience of it. I recounted peviously my 1st experience of the Holocaust as an 8 year old child watching newsreel footage on TV. I had never heard of such a thing as 'the Holocaust'. My whole being was thrown into a state of shock and horror. No words can describe. That was the meaning of Holocaust for me. I think I see your point now Huguette after re-reading.

When we label actions or an event “terrible” or “wonderful”, we think we are providing meaning, speaking the truth about it. But the naming is irrelevant. The truth - meaning - lies in the actions and events themselves. Words are extraneous, as I see it. The heart, mind and body “know” the truth of it, feel it, understand it

The beautiful as well as the ugly.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 20 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 22 Jan 2020 #35
Thumb_avatar Manfred Kritzler Germany 86 posts in this forum Offline

Mina: Yes, at the same time in the sense that thoughts keep arising directly from silence and not from other thoughts, which would happen in the habitual state of the observer separate from the observed.

———-

Manfred: I am not sure if I have understood you correctly. You see a difference between thought arising directly from silence and thought coming from other thoughts?

When I am choiceless aware of a chain of thoughts, thought does not come out of silence, but silence could be still there and observe this chain without interfering. Or is this only a thought construction?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 22 Jan 2020 #36
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

Manfred Kritzler wrote:
When I am choiceless aware of a chain of thoughts, thought does not come out of silence,

Is it possible for there to be attention and thought, at the same time?

Manfred Kritzler wrote:
thought arising directly from silence

I'd say thoughts that arise from "silence" are just thoughts that arise from further back in time, or from a deeper subconscious.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 23 Jan 2020 #37
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:

I’m not using “meaning” in the context where definitions are needed.

Thank you for going into the meaning of meaning, Huguette.

it is observed that these questions cannot be satisfied by knowledge of any kind

If this is seen, then the intellect's search for understanding should cease, should it not? Something more profound is needed for understanding, something not based on what meanings have been assigned in the past.Is this the significance of choiceless awareness?


It came to me that one 'meaning of meaning' is seeing the context of something. Seeing how something is connected to other things. Understanding the net of relationship that surrounds or infuses everything.

That is, in isolation things have no meaning, do they?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 23 Jan 2020 #38
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Manfred Kritzler wrote:
You see a difference between thought arising directly from silence and thought coming from other thoughts?

To the best of my knowledge, K has always said that thought arises from memory. And if we had no memory, thought would not be possible. Putting it another way, thought arises from experience. As I see it, that does not necessarily imply only my own, personal experience, connected to this life in this body. Thought may also arise from the collective experience of humankind.

But if this is so, what is the meaning, if any, of "arising from silence"? Does it mean that then thought is no longer based in memory at all?

And does it imply that thought is no longer verbal? Because the verbal structure of thought is part of memory, is it not?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 23 Jan 2020 #39
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3260 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:

Manfred Kritzler wrote:

You see a difference between thought arising directly from silence and thought coming from other thoughts?

C:
To the best of my knowledge, K has always said that thought arises from memory. And if we had no memory, thought would not be possible. Putting it another way, thought arises from experience.

But if this is so, what is the meaning, if any, of "arising from silence"? Does it mean that then thought is no longer based in memory at all?

Thought is obviously based upon memory...my own and mankind’s whole history that’s passed on generation to generation. So that thinking arises as a reaction to the environment doesn’t it? A black bird is perched in a tree making a loud call and my thought says, “Ah! A crow is here.” Or thought reacts to another thought. I think about someone I don’t like and another thought reacts telling me that I should be more understanding or tolerant. Or thought arises as a reaction to a bodily feeling like hunger. I don’t know the truth or falseness of thought arising from silence....I’m just investigating here. Perhaps I have insight and perceive something totally new. Perhaps thought tries to verbalize this in some way...to convey this to another....so thought is arising from the insight...from seeing ...from truth.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 23 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 24 Jan 2020 #40
Thumb_open-uri20200202-16653-rg2qz5-0 Mina Martini Finland 418 posts in this forum Offline

Dear Manfred, Clive and Tom,

Thank you all for your observsations which rightly demand more clarification.

Seeing now that it was the words 'DIRECTLY from silence' that have caused misunderstandings.

...

Now, when saying that words arise DIRECTLY from silence, I do not mean that there is ANY word in silence. No, there isn't. The word never enters the core of our being.

What I mean by the words 'directly from silence' is that it this core of one's own being that is the 'speaker', instead of the speaker being one's image of oneself.

So, when speaking from silence, thoughts keeps appearing from the silence, as its expression, never the core of it, but totally aligned with it, in harmony with it, as one with it in the sense that then the unknown and the known, the silence and the word, are inseparable.

Separation, or the experience/impression of it, is created only for and as the observer and observed.

This does not mean that words THEMSELVES do not come from memory, they do! But when imbued with silence, their quality is different. This difference can only be sensed in/by silence again.

When a question is put to one for example, it is in silence, in total cessation of the thinking mind that the 'answer' come from, and then, it may take the expression of words as well. That is the 'talking directly from silence'.

In the habitual state of an observer and observed, the answer would come in the form of reaction, which is detached from the silence into its own closed reality.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Fri, 24 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #41
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
o at the moment I am having a good bath in the river, that is the meaning of the river. If I’m fishing for my dinner, at that moment the meaning of the river is the fishing I’m doing. That’s how I understand meaning

Take a saucepan. If there is nothing to put into the saucepan, then it can be said that the pan has no meaning, no?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #42
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 878 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Take a saucepan. If there is nothing to put into the saucepan, then it can be said that the pan has no meaning, no?

that brings me to the idea that in order to create a pure sauce, there must be no residues from previous use in the pan.

I think a nice analogy with the use of the brain.

Truth will unfold itself to those who enquire their own actions.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #43
Thumb_open-uri20200202-16653-rg2qz5-0 Mina Martini Finland 418 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
that brings me to the idea that in order to create a pure sauce, there must be no residues from previous use in the pan.

I think a nice analogy with the use of the brain.

Mina: Yes! -the brain is the pan. In order for the sauce to be pure and not pick up tastes or any residues from previous uses, it has to be completely clean, so that nothing new gets stuck to it (teflon pan?? :) ) ..

When the brain functions like this, it can keep receiving, never holding, that energy which comes from the source.

There is no 'sauce' more delicious and nutrious than that simmered in the embrace of the 'source' itself. :-) :-)

And Clive, THERE is the meaning of the saucepan! When it wants to be its own meaning in the sense of thought inventing ideas of meanings in order to be motivated to go on with its limited contradicictory energy, the understanding of the word 'meaning' is limited..

The meaning is in being wholly alive, not an inch elsewhere in any distance, in any ideas of meanings!

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #44
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

Isn't "meaning" necessarily utilitarian and relative? Can potential have meaning? Emptiness? Wholeness? Flux? Do these have meaning?

Does "meaning" mean : for Something? Or does "meaning" mean : what is?

Dictionary : The meaning of something is what it expresses or represents.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #45
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3260 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Take a saucepan. If there is nothing to put into the saucepan, then it can be said that the pan has no meaning, no?

Yes. They are related. Living is relationship, isn’t it? Nothing exists in isolation. There’s no bird without the tree ...no fish without the stream. I don’t know, but this is how I’ve been seeing it...even many years back sitting in a park watching the pigeons perched in the trees, I observed this. “To be is to be related”, I think is how K put it. Not sure the exact wording.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 28 Jan 2020 #46
Thumb_avatar Manfred Kritzler Germany 86 posts in this forum Offline

to #40

Mina: This does not mean that words THEMSELVES do not come from memory, they do! But when imbued with silence, their quality is different. This difference can only be sensed in/by silence again.

When a question is put to one for example, it is in silence, in total cessation of the thinking mind that the 'answer' come from, and then, it may take the expression of words as well. That is the 'talking directly from silence'.

————
Manfred: Yes . I agree with this statements. It’s getting more and more clear to me what the difference is of thought coming directly from silence and thought coming from other thoughts.

Talking directly from silence has no conclusion or dualistic logic. It’s beyond our normal test of right or wrong. It has no conclusion and we can not ask what is the background of this thought.

There is only the experience. Sometimes when I ask myself a difficult question about life or also a difficult logical question about a certain problem, I wait in silence and sometimes an answer comes to my mind I had no idea where it came from. There is a kind of a feeling hard to describe. It’s a mixture of thankfulness, connectedness and trustworthiness.

But unfortunately very often my old system is taking over to handle the situation. And although I know that it makes no sense at all to go against it, it is a big challenge for me to stay in the observer modus.

This post was last updated by Manfred Kritzler Tue, 28 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 28 Jan 2020 #47
Thumb_open-uri20200202-16653-rg2qz5-0 Mina Martini Finland 418 posts in this forum Offline

Manfred Kritzler wrote:
Manfred: Yes . I agree with this statements. It’s getting more and more clear to me what the difference is of thought coming directly from silence and thought coming from other thoughts.

Mina: Yes, the very sensing of the radical difference between the two comes from awareness itself.

Manfred:>Talking directly from silence has no conclusion or dualistic logic. It’s beyond our normal test of right or wrong. It has no conclusion and we can not ask what is the background of this thought.

Mina: Yes! How beautiful...that is the right thinking..it keeps appearing causelessly, carrying no past, from moment to moment...

Manfred:>There is only the experience. Sometimes when I ask myself a difficult question about life or also a difficult logical question about a certain problem, I wait in silence and sometimes an answer comes to my mind I had no idea where it came from. There is a kind of a feeling hard to describe. It’s a mixture of thankfulness, connectedness and trustworthiness.

Mina: Yes, this is so. And 'the more' one is living surrendered to silence, as silence itself, there is no attempt any more to resolve anything in and from thought...it becomes impossible..if a separate observer and observed (psychological mind) arise, they are doomed to crash onto each other and die..:-)

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Tue, 28 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 28 Jan 2020 #48
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

Manfred Kritzler wrote:
Sometimes when I ask myself a difficult question about life or also a difficult logical question about a certain problem, I wait in silence and sometimes an answer comes to my mind I had no idea where it came from. There is a kind of a feeling hard to describe. It’s a mixture of thankfulness, connectedness and trustworthiness.

Magic! When a question is important for us, instead of getting caught up with the same thoughts going round and around in circles in our heads, we just let the question be, answers do pop into the head. And eventually, if we do not cling to those answers, the perfect solution suddenly turns up - an understanding that shows us that there wasn't really a problem to begin with.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 28 Jan 2020 #49
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 832 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote at 37:
That is, in isolation things have no meaning, do they?


Tom Paine wrote at 45:
Nothing exists in isolation. There’s no bird without the tree ...no fish without the stream.


Perfectly put, if I may say so!

This post was last updated by Huguette . Tue, 28 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 31 - 49 of 49 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.)