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

guidance


Displaying posts 31 - 60 of 121 in total
Tue, 19 May 2020 #31
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Seems to me, Tom, that this should help clear up your confusion, rather than create it. If all these people, all these groups, ideologies, tell me different things, give me different, conflicting "solutions", these conflicting ideas point out to me just how confused the world is. And as a consequence, I reject such "window shopping" for ideas on what to do, and I am thrown back onto myself.

Myself who is made up out of all these fragments.

If this happens, then hasn't a lot of confusion been cleared away?

Not sure I understand your point.

That does not mean that "I know what to do". In fact I see the same thing within myself, a confused mess of conflicting ideas and feelings, as in the world around me.

Exactly

The essential thing here, it seems to me, is seeing, as K eternally pointed out, the danger of accepting authority.

We can fairly easily come to the point where we reject all the ideologies and religious beliefs that we were raised with. I recall in my younger days how the hippie generation rejected most ...or many...of society’s beliefs and ideals. Think, John Lennon, Bob Dylan, etc. But that’s just the obvious stuff on the surface. There may be a ton of hidden ‘authority’ that we’re not aware of.

When I look at the conflicting thoughts/feelings in myself, I see I cannot accept any of them as true, and the others false - I cannot accept any one of them as an authority over the others. And so I see that it is not possible that thought can clear up its own mess.

Will have to return to this point later time permitting. Have to begin my work day.

Seeing these things clearly, am I in a state of confusion, or clarity?

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 19 May 2020 #32
Thumb_open-uri20151228-18124-1kyi3s7-0 Jose Roberto Moreira Brazil 117 posts in this forum Offline

Thank you for the very interesting reply, Id, Tom and Clive. I need to think it over before replying.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 19 May 2020 #33
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5946 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But that’s just the obvious stuff on the surface. There may be a ton of hidden ‘authority’ that we’re not aware of.

I think that is a crucial point, Tom. There is indeed a ton of stuff hidden in the subconscious. But if one is aware of it as it arises, as it is exposed to the light, then is it still an authority?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #34
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
There is indeed a ton of stuff hidden in the subconscious. But if one is aware of it as it arises, as it is exposed to the light, then is it still an authority?

But we’re not aware of it. That’s why it’s subconscious. We’re aware of the anger that arises for example...but not the unconscious basis for it..,,not the root/s of it...the hidden authority. The deep religious conditioning for example I received in childhood...some of it I only recently became aware of....aware that I had accepted it as authoritative.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #35
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 99 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
the hidden authority.

As I see, this is an important observation, it's not only the unconscious 'contents' which could be brought to light in the present, but the authority it has which forces us to play with choices in the present and thus prevents choiceless-ness in awareness. And that's where crisis is important, wherein despite the involvement of whole psyche, there is a failure acknowledged, and the organism as a whole somehow realizes that escape is not the way and that the authority unconscious holds (which in other words is the psychological security) is an illusion.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #36
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1855 posts in this forum Offline

natarajan shivan wrote:
And that's where crisis is important, wherein despite the involvement of whole psyche, there is a failure acknowledged, and the organism as a whole somehow realizes that escape is not the way and that the authority unconscious holds (which in other words is the psychological security) is an illusion.

What is the "failure" you mention here?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #37
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 99 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
What is the "failure" you mention here?

Failure of the ‘usual’ mode of operation of psyche (i.e. usual in the sense of being able to step back into the familiar terrain while meeting the crisis and by doing that making the future predictable to an extent) and also correspondingly the patterns of behavior. Crisis is therefore something that erases the ground of past completely to the point of ensuring a non-return and future remaining unknown always. That’s the continual reorientation in the vision of the present. Choiceless awareness as I see it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #38
Thumb_open-uri20151228-18124-1kyi3s7-0 Jose Roberto Moreira Brazil 117 posts in this forum Offline

Dear friends, this thread has been very useful for me. Thank you very much for that.

As an engineer, I like definitions. So did K. For instance, he said we have to definine what is meditation BEFORE attempting to meditate or attending a meditation course!

So it seems to me very important to define what is a confused mind. Similarly to love, we cannot say what a clear mind is, but we can define what is a confused mind. However, it is not as easy as defining what is not love.

I better understand now the relationship between authority and a confused mind.

When one particular authority is very strong, the mind does not seem to be confused. Donald Trump probably thinks his mind is not confuse at all. So does the Pope and so on. All religions try to eliminate the confusion by imposing a strong authority, obviously.

Quite recently, I discovered that I have lived under a strong unconscious authority which caused a lot of suffering to me and others.

It took me a lot of suffering to realize that. It was so obvious and yet I could not see it.

So I think it is very simple: a confused mind is one that follows one or more authorities.

I do not know what a clear mind is.

Do you agree on that?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #39
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 182 posts in this forum Offline

Certainly following an authority can be a source of confusion. There may be other sources. If there is awareness of following an authority then that is a beginning of understanding, yes?

I follow an authority because I am confused, because I don't trust myself to go into things fully. I also may have been raised to follow that authority, conditioned. Or in the past, the authority seemed helpful so now I rely on it even though it may no longer be helpful. So I follow an authority out of confusion.

But also, following an authority may cause confusion. It is fixed, based on set past ideas, whereas the situation right now is fluid and dynamic. Trying to bring to bear fixed principles from an authority to a situation that is in motion will generate conflict, suffering. Reality and the authority are rubbing against each other.

So I look. Am I following an authority? Are there certain patterns, certain ideas, certain leaders or teachers, that I just accept without questioning?

This post was last updated by idiot ? Wed, 20 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #40
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 891 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:

There is indeed a ton of stuff hidden in the subconscious. But if one is aware of it as it arises, as it is exposed to the light, then is it still an authority?

Tom Paine wrote:
But we’re not aware of it. That’s why it’s subconscious. We’re aware of the anger that arises for example...but not the unconscious basis for it..,,not the root/s of it...the hidden authority. The deep religious conditioning for example I received in childhood...some of it I only recently became aware of....aware that I had accepted it as authoritative.

What IS it that one is aware of as it arises, what is “the thing” which acts as authority? Maybe just a feeling - of fear, anxiety, unease, disturbance of some sort - which is not necessarily attached to a specific memory or conclusion. If a specific memory IS attached to it, then I might use it to explain or justify my action but, either way, it is “the thing” itself - fear, anxiety, etc. - which determines or influences conflictual, divisive actions, isn’t it? So it is awareness of the actual "thing" which guides me to understanding.

If I become aware of ONE of the multitude of hidden authorities within the unconscious, is it necessary for each and every such unconscious memory or contradiction to be exposed to the light of awareness? Is it necessary to consciously observe each and every memory within the entirety of consciousness in order to understand the process or mechanism of inner authority which influences and limits my actions?

In observing and understanding the presence and influence of a single, isolated instance of inner authority, isn’t the whole of unconscious fear and authority understood?

Does one have to observe and list every possible type of memory which produces violence, fear and authority in order to understand violence, fear, authority?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #41
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1855 posts in this forum Offline

Reading all of the above, I want to mention a very recent occurrence and hear from you all whether it relates to the terms like: unconscious authority, fear, anger, crisis, etc. In an exchange with another, I found that they had an image of me that I thought was completely erroneous...one thing led to another and we were insulting one another. What arose in me was an 'anger' that was shocking in its fury and intensity. (Crisis?) It was an emotion that in a certain situation could escalate very quickly into violence. It felt wild, out of control but then subsided with thankfully no harm done but this question arose, related to Tom's post: Is that rage always there out of sight, repressed perhaps since childhood but always ready to ignite in the 'right' situation? Is conscious anger just the tip of an iceberg? If so the 'authority' of its existence is also always there as Nat said (the root of ?) "psychological security'? (It will literally kill to keep itself intact, to preserve itself?) An illusion that can kill.

And I recall K.,rather than 'throwing' it away,...holding it up as a "jewel"

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #42
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
In observing and understanding the presence and influence of a single, isolated instance of inner authority, isn’t the whole of unconscious fear and authority understood?

Possibly...can't myself say conclusively. There's possibly some deep powerful conditioning that may still remain. I thought many times in the past that I understood the issue of inner authority, yet totally unexpectedly became aware of a very deep and powerful unconscious conditioning from early childhood. Like the conditioning to a father figure God for example...or good vs. evil...typical Judeo Christian stuff that the primitive might be totally free of. He slays his enemy with not a thought of good vs evil perhaps. So probably I didn't even understand the issue totally...of inner authority. But attention in the present moment seems the key...attention when this inner authority is acting.

Does one have to observe and list every possible type of memory which produces violence, fear and authority in order to understand violence, fear, authority?

A rhetorical question of course....and obviously an impossibility as there are thousands and it would take a lifetime...and new ones perhaps are being added in our daily living today.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 20 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #43
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 182 posts in this forum Offline

Personally, when I look into myself to see if I follow authority, I realize that I still can take Krishnamurti as an authority. I have questioned many things that K said and did. I had a long thread in the general forum about K's superstitions that angered some people there. I question the existence of the Theosophical Masters, which K never unequivocally repudiated. I have questioned certain aspects of "You are the world." And many other things.

Even though I question what K says for myself, to some degree I still give him the benefit of the doubt. If I encounter something he says that seems a bit off, my inclination is to ask what he really means, whether there is a way it can be understood to be true.

Things he said have opened my eyes, have brought in ways of considering things that hadn't occurred to me, have tested out to work. Since various aha moments have happened in the past, I have been conditioned by them. They have had an effect on my life and continue to do so.

So when, for example, I see a fervently patriotic person, who loves and would die for their country, who is very emotional about it and deeply values it, is there judgment or condemnation in me? Do I see this person as they are, including the "us versus them" division, but also including everything else about them? Or does my K conditioning close down my seeing this person? Without awareness, it could.

Clearly Krishnamurti has influenced me and that influence continues to act. And I have to ask myself, isn't even my being aware of this, of looking at this in myself, isn't even that a result of my exposure to Krishnamurti?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #44
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 182 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
I found that they had an image of me that I thought was completely erroneous...one thing led to another and we were insulting one another. What arose in me was an 'anger' that was shocking in its fury and intensity.

His (or her) image of you conflicted with your image of yourself. This triggered fear since your self image was threatened. Fear triggered anger, which is activated fear. Ironically, the anger reaction was also contrary to your self image, since in general you are not an angry person and don't think of yourself that way.

Even though what (s)he said about you was erroneous, there must have been at least a tiny truth in it or a hint at something true in it. If (s)he had called you a green alien from the planet Claire, you would have just laughed. Somehow (s)he latched onto something that is mostly not true but was slightly true enough to trigger you. That can be investigated.

Now that things are calmer, perhaps you can talk honestly with this person. Perhaps you can see together things that surprised you.

With Covid-19, we are spending increased time with people we live with, with fewer breaks and down time. This intensifies relationship. Or if we live alone, loneliness can be intensified. This can make things challenging. But it also can bring understanding because what was a hidden undercurrent can come to the fore.

Personally I live with someone and am finding awareness vital in these times. Awareness of that person's moods, reactions, etc. and awareness of myself.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Wed, 20 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #45
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Is that rage always there out of sight, repressed perhaps since childhood but always ready to ignite in the 'right' situation?

I don't think so, but the memory that triggered the initial rage is stored in the brain. A situation in the present moment is the trigger because it threatens our physical or psychological security on a very deep level in the same manner which the initial situation did. Just my take on this.

Is conscious anger just the tip of an iceberg?

Yes, that seems to be true.

If so the 'authority' of its existence is also always there as Nat said (the root of ?) "psychological security'? (It will literally kill to keep itself intact, to preserve itself?) An illusion that can kill.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 May 2020 #46
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 891 posts in this forum Offline

re: 42

Tom,

Does it matter what precisely the unconscious memories are which produce fear, anger and the acceptance of authority? Do I have to consciously see every psychological memory to understand the limitations of thought?

No matter what the content of psychological memory is, it produces fear, anger, conceit, pleasure, and so on. Where the authority of the psychological memory is accepted, it engenders action which is irrational, divisive, conflicutal, conflicted and so on. No? Does the intellect have to try to solve every problem engendered by memory to understand that it can't? Does the mind not realize that it doesn't have the ability to solve such problems? Does the mind not understand the danger of authority, one's own or another's?

Do I have to keep measuring circles of all sizes endlessly to realize that the relationship between the measurement of circumference and diameter of any circle doesn't change? Do I have to keep putting my hand in a different fire every day to realize that fire burns every time?

I'm not expecting a reply.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Wed, 20 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #47
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5946 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote #34:
But we’re not aware of it. That’s why it’s subconscious.

I was not suggesting that we should somehow become aware of all of our subconscious mind. I doubt that is possible anyway. I think the subconscious can be regarded as effectively infinite, carrying memories, experiences, fears, longings, of the whole human race, stretching back perhaps millions of years.

But sometimes these memories drift to the surface (it may be that the subconscious is the source of ALL our thoughts, I don't know). For those that do appear, then there can, there may be, awareness of them. I am not suggesting that we make any conscious effort to do this. But such awareness, if allowed to be, may 'open up the mind', may expose things to the light of understanding. Without our chasing understanding.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #48
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5946 posts in this forum Offline

Jose Roberto Moreira wrote #38:
. So did K. For instance, he said we have to definine what is meditation BEFORE attempting to meditate or attending a meditation course!

Did K suggest attending a meditation course? That sounds very odd! I have often read him saying that mediation cannot be taught, or guided

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #49
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5946 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote #39:
But also, following an authority may cause confusion. It is fixed, based on set past ideas, whereas the situation right now is fluid and dynamic. Trying to bring to bear fixed principles from an authority to a situation that is in motion will generate conflict, suffering.

And illusion.

Yes, this is an important point, Id. As you say, it is the function of thinking to be fluid, dynamic. And creative. Once any conclusion has been formed - and all forms of authority must be based on conclusion, no? -
this corrupts the natural thinking process. It is like building a damn across a river.

idiot ? wrote:
o I look. Am I following an authority? Are there certain patterns, certain ideas, certain leaders or teachers, that I just accept without questioning?

Yes, one looks, there is awareness that reveals the conclusions that we have drawn, accepted. And then the damn is swept away, and the river can flow freely again.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #50
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5946 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Reading all of the above, I want to mention a very recent occurrence and hear from you all whether it relates to the terms like: unconscious authority, fear, anger, crisis, etc.

Such experiences certainly arise in me from time to time. The origin of them seems to be frustration. That is quite an interesting state to examine. As you say Dan, it is very much related to image formation. And formation of an image of another, or holding to an ancient image, is very much an act of violence, I feel.

More generally, sometimes a definite violent "energy" seems to take hold of one. The origin of this energy may lie in the other person, but it envelopes us. But it is amazing how completely it evaporates at some point, if left alone. Perhaps it has "flowered" as K puts it?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #51
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 99 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Is conscious anger just the tip of an iceberg? If so the 'authority' of its existence is also always there as Nat said (the root of ?) "psychological security'? (It will literally kill to keep itself intact, to preserve itself?) An illusion that can kill.

And I recall K.,rather than 'throwing' it away,...holding it up as a "jewel"

Yes, having experienced that myself if not with more intensity, the hostility which at first is held against one person will extend to society as a whole. It’s a crisis as long as it leaves us nowhere to turn to outside it. Both acting out and not acting will be experienced as non-options, and any attempt to rationalize and sidestep will move the thing to sub(un)conscious. Such angers have depth and extends to as you have said to childhood hurts and neglects. We can’t do anything about them and as many pointed out here it’s between the false entities of self-image and the environment, but will be experienced as real because of the split in the psyche (as evidenced by anger) and the psychological security it engenders. In my view, the implication of such events are the opening up of pathways to evolve, ‘jewels’ so to speak, provided it could somehow reveal us the split of our psyche, then the fusing of it in the face of crisis and yet failing to deal with it ‘successfully’.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #52
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette: Where the authority of the psychological memory is accepted, it engenders action which is irrational, divisive, conflicutal, conflicted and so on. No?

A simple sentence, but a HUGE point, Huguette. Do we actually perceive this? It can''t be an intellectual understanding alone. Total denial of all the psyche...of the 'me'... doesn't come unless this is perceived as a FACT...totally. Then there's the emptying of consciousness that K spoke of. Freedom from the 'center'. Freedom from the known.

Does the intellect have to try to solve every problem engendered by memory to understand that it can't?

No...of course not. But this 'it can't' is not usually understood. The fact that the intellect is impotent here is not something that most of us see as a fact. I don't know if I've seen it totally myself...or perhaps I do at times.

Does the mind not realize that it doesn't have the ability to solve such problems?

Not when one feels (rightly or wrongly) that his/her very survival is threatened. It's a feeling, not just a thought. An immensely powerful feeling of threat....like Dan described above related to his outburst of anger.

Does the mind not understand the danger of authority, one's own or another's?

The danger of 'one's own' authority is the part that eludes most of us. At the moment this strikes me as very curious. Why can't we see that? It's the danger of human consciousness, isn't it? Whether it's our neighbor, the politician or priest, or ourselves.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 21 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #53
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

"How can you organize a human being according to a pattern?" K. on organized religion. Obviously that makes his behavior mechanical and NOT free....if he's conforming to a set pattern.

https://youtu.be/ssEZDhLgiwE

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 21 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #54
Thumb_open-uri20151228-18124-1kyi3s7-0 Jose Roberto Moreira Brazil 117 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Did K suggest attending a meditation course? That sounds very odd! I have often read him saying that mediation cannot be taught, or guided

No, he did not. What I wanted to say is that if someone asks what is medidation before, then he will not attend it!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 May 2020 #55
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5946 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Does the mind not realize that it doesn't have the ability to solve such problems?

As Tom pointed out above, this is an immensely important question.

Such a suggestion would be an absolute horror, I venture to say, for most people. "Oh my god, there's nothing I can do about my problems!". That idea would be sufficient to bring about deep depression. And any psychologist who suggested such a thing would not last long in his job.

Actually the question came up in a group discussion that I was participating in just recently. As I remember it, the question put was: in the physical world, I can usually deal with the problems that arise, I can mostly solve them, or adjust to them. Action comes fairly easily. But how come the same does not happen in the mind, with psycholoogical, emotional, 'spiritual' problems? it was pointed out that instead of just ACTING, the mind THINKS about the problem. And such thinking is not acting.No matter how sophisticated the thinking, no matter how much erudition, how much knowledge is behind that thinking, it is still not action. It does not solve the actual problem. And looking rationally, one is lead to stating that it never will.

Why is this? Why can the mind not find complete solutions to its repeating fundamental problems? One does indeed begin to suspect, as Huguette implies, that it simply doesn't have the ability to do so. Although it seems that for thousands of years, there has been the assumption that it DOES have that ability, if we try hard enough.

I want to examine this carefully, because it might be that if the mind sees utterly clearly and irrevocably that it cannot solve its psychological problems, that might have a profound effect on the mind.

i am asking myself this question: if the mind CAN solve its problems, what is the mechanism of this? What is the nature of the process?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 May 2020 #56
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

Clive: Why can the mind not find complete solutions to its repeating fundamental problems?

Because the problems are created by he mind? Is that it? The mind by its very nature is creating fear and desire and attachment...conflict...division.

One does indeed begin to suspect, as Huguette implies, that it simply doesn't have the ability to do so. Although it seems that for thousands of years, there has been the assumption that it DOES have that ability, if we try hard enough.

The very division (of knowledge and authority) that created the problems in the first place will now solve them?

I want to examine this carefully, because it might be that if the mind sees utterly clearly and irrevocably that it cannot solve its psychological problems, that might have a profound effect on the mind.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Fri, 22 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 May 2020 #57
Thumb_open-uri20151228-18124-1kyi3s7-0 Jose Roberto Moreira Brazil 117 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Does the mind not realize that it doesn't have the ability to solve such problems? Does the mind not understand the danger of authority, one's own or another's?

I try to avoid quoting K very much, but I cannot help doing that here. I think K answered this fundamental question. He said thought should realize that, not the thinker.

Of course we cannot understand that. It has no logic and yet it seems to me to be the way out this mess we live in.

How on earth can thought realize something, without involving the thinker? How can thought realize its role and the thinker not?

I am not sure if this question is intellectual or makes sense, but it came to my mind now. Clive said "such thinking" is not action. So, the question is: if thought realizes something without the thinker, is that thought? Is that action? Is that pure observation?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 May 2020 #58
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 891 posts in this forum Offline

re: #55 and #57

Clive and Jose,

We often acknowledge on the forum that thought has its proper place, for example in the solving of problems related to technology, science, learning techniques, and so on. There, analysis, measure, comparison, calculation, hypothesis, imagination, devising processes and tools, testing, experimentation, making blueprints and flowcharts, and so on, are useful.

As an example, here is a simple problem: I need to feed 20 people, which I’m not used to doing. So I have to imagine and plan a meal from start to finish, adapt recipes, calculate the amounts and cost of the food, measure the space and time needed to transport and store it, determine the equipment and time needed to prepare, cook and serve it, and so on. In this case, thinking is actual action. Ultimately, thought's action actualizes (hopefully) a meal for 20.

It can be observed that there is no “me” involved in the calculations, imaginings, planning and preparing for the meal. That is, there is no imagining of “me now” and “me later”, of "smart me" or "stupid me", and so on. The only imagining involved is related to the transformation of the food into a meal. It’s only about the meal. “I” am not in the picture at all. So in such a case, thought is undivided and thought can accomplish the transformation of food into a meal for 20, without the image of the thinker being involved at all in the process. In carrying out this task, thought is not concerned with “me”. This is the operation of thought as needed. The thinker is not involved in it. There is only undivided thought.

But in trying to solve sorrow, there is a division between the image of “unhappy me” and the image of “future happy me”, between sorrow and joy. This division into multiple images cannot result in the transformation of “me”. It is only thought divided into 2 separate images of “me” at 2 separate times, and it has no ability to transform. "Unhappy me" (thought) is imagining itself transformed into "future me" (still thought). This is not a transformative process. And in its imaginings, thought is also fragmenting itself into "the victim" of other people, on the one hand, and "the others" who victimize me, on the other hand. So the transformation of “unhappy me” cannot be actualized by thought’s image of and desire for “future me”. Whereas the meal CAN be imagined and actualized or brought to fruition by thought.

So if my problem is discontent with my life of fear, conflict, compulsion, obsession, sorrow, and so on, what is the “action” that thought actually takes to solve it? For the most part, it’s repetition, isn’t it? --- repetitively revisiting my problems in imagination and thought --- repetitively imagining what action I might take tomorrow ---- repetitively remembering what happened before --- repetitively imagining what I might become. But this thinking is not really “action”, is it? Obsessing is not ACTION. Nothing is actually done or accomplished other than to dig the hole I'm in deeper.

Or I might decide that I SHOULD take “action” in order to become happy. But this is like gambling at the casino. There is no insight or understanding in that, only desire. There is nothing transformative in such thought. There are no meaningful calculations and measures for producing happiness, as there are in the case of preparing a meal. The “calculations” for happiness are merely obsessive repetitions of a mind driven by fear - that is, a mind divided into “me as I am now” and “me as I will be after I take action”, as I see it.

Hate, violence, fear, anger, conceit, shame, anxiety, greed, a sense of meaninglessness, insensitivity, dependence on pleasure, attachment to the past, and so on - cannot be solved by thought, in the way that problems in science and technology can be. The problems which arise in relationship are engendered by the divided mind and so cannot be solved by that same divided mind. No?

Then, can the conditioned mind be transformed so that it is no longer enslaved by its emotions and compulsions, by its own conditioning?

In science, technology and technique, there are also NEW problems which have never been experienced or solved before. Established knowledge and techniques cannot solve such new problems. For a new problem which has not previously been encountered, a new solution is needed. Only insight can provide that. For right action in relationship, insight is also needed. Something new is needed, not the endless repetition of the old actions. Insight cannot be pursued or produced by thought. Thought is old, insight is new. Insight is not engendered by thought or effort.

One has had little insights, and so it is seen that there is such a thing as insight. The quality of insight is understood - that it is only insight, not thought, not effort, which can solve new problems.

Can one do anything other than live in one’s understanding, whatever it is, however incomplete? In the light of that understanding, striving and seeking end. Is there anything to do but observe, be alert, vigilant to one’s actions, thoughts, emotions? And live. As long as one does not end one’s end life, there is no choice in living, in being alive. There is pain and sorrow. And there is beauty, affection and humour. Living and action are choiceless and choicelessly observed. Whatever arises is observed. Then life is very simple. There is both austerity and beauty in simplicity. Isn’t it so?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Sat, 23 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 May 2020 #59
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 99 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Then life is very simple

Good post#58.

Huguette . wrote:
here is a simple problem: I need to feed 20 people, which I’m not used to doing.

Insight you speak of should turn us to this ever NEW, and the new is there in most simplest of the circumstances; to win stability there with a spirit of sacrifice of 'I'/or the identification with results of action requires a great deal of understanding, especially as the action being undertaken is likely going to be of the nature of a breaking of patterns so far held secure by the mind.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 May 2020 #60
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3474 posts in this forum Offline

natarajan shivan wrote:
to win stability there with a spirit of sacrifice of 'I'/or the identification with results of action requires a great deal of understanding,

Exactly. Because without understanding/self-knowledge, the I is alwAys active. Almost, anyway. Or it's in abeyance temporarily only to regain control once the selfless action ends. So there needs to be understanding of the nature of the separative and isolated 'I'...in other words, self-knowledge, as K. had emphasized almost continually in his talks. "You work hard for your daily living...but to work so that the mind is free is much more arduous." K. From "A Light to Yourself" collection.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 23 May 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 31 - 60 of 121 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.)