Navin shares
A friend of mine with whom talking philosophy has always been a "see-beyond-mundane" experience. For the last few months he has been talking about J.Krishnamurthy and sharing his thoughts about "quest for I". Here is something that he shares about Krishnamurthy's thoughts -
"So, to talk over together, what is religion? Man has always sought something beyond all this pain,anxiety and sorrow. Is there something that is sacred,eternal, that is beyond all the reaches of thought. This has been a question from the most ancient of times. What is sacred? What is that which has no time, that which is incorruptible, that which is nameless, that which has no quality, no limitation - the timeless, the eternal. Is there such a thing?
So are we asking, what is religion? Not only what is religion, but what is the religious brain, the religious mind? To enquire into that deeply, there must be total freedom. Not freedom from one thing or the other, but freedom as a whole, per se. So we are asking, when there is that freedom, is it possible, living in this ugly world, to be free from pain,sorrow, anxiety, loneliness?
Then you have to find out what is meditation: contemplation in the Christian sense, and meditation in the Asiatic sense. Does it just amuse you or do you want to really go into it?" Is meditation a form of entertainment? First let me learn meditation and then I'll act properly. You understand the game one plays? But if there is order in one's life, real order,as we explained, then what is meditation?
What is meditation? If it is determined, if it is following a system, a method, practised day after day, what happens to the human brain? You repeat, repeat, repeat - it may be the wrong note, but you repeat. So, is meditation something like this? It has nothing to do with method, system, practices, therefore it can never be mechanical. It can never be conscious meditation. Do please understand this. It's like a man consciously wanting money and pursuing money. Consciously you meditate, wanting to achieve peace,silence and all that. Therefore, arent they both the same : the man who pursues money,success,power, and the man who pursues so-called spirituality?
So, is there a meditation, which is not determined,practised,organized? There is, but that requires enormous attention. That attention is a flame and that attention is not something that you come to much later, it is attention NOW to everything, ever word, every gesture, every thought: to pay complete attention, not partial. If you are listening partially now, you are not giving complete attention. When you are completely attentive, there is no self, there is no limitation.
The brain is full of information, cluttered up, there is no space in it, and one must have space. Space means energy, when there is no space, there is very very little energy. The brain is so heavily laden with knowledge, with theories, with power,position, so everlastingly in conglict and cluttered up, that it has no space. And freedom, complete freedom, is to have limitless space. That brain is extraordinarily capable, has infinite capacity, but we have made it so small and petty.
When there is that space and emptiness and therefore immense energy - energy is passion, love and compassion and intelligence(all terms misused) - then there is that truth which is most holy, most sacred and which many have sought from time immemorial. That truth does not lie in any mosque, in any church or temple. And it has no path to it except through one's own understanding of oneself, enquiring, studying,learning. Then there is that which is eternal."
Questioner: I have listened to you for many years and I have become quite good at watching my thoughts and being aware of every thing I do, but I have never touched the deep waters or experienced the transformation of which you speak. Why?"
Krishnamurti: "I think it is fairly clear why none of us do experience something beyond the mere watching. There may be rare moments of an emotional state in which we see, as it were, the clarity of the sky between clouds, but I do not mean anything of that kind. All such experiences are temporary and have very little significance. The questioner wants to know why, after these many years of watching, he hasn't found the deep waters. Why should he find them? Do you understand? You think that by watching your own thoughts you are going to get a reward: if you do this, you will get that. You are really not watching at all, because your mind is concerned with gaining a reward. You think that by watching, by being aware, you will be more loving, you will suffer less, be less irritable, get something beyond; so your watching is a process of buying. With this coin you are buying that, which means that your watching is a process of choice; therefore it isn't watching, it isn't attention. To watch is to observe without choice, to see yourself as you are without any movement of desire to change, which is an extremely arduous thing to do; but that doesn't mean that you are going to remain in your present state. You do not know what will happen if you see yourself as you are without wishing to bring about a change in that which you see. Do you understand?
I am going to take an example and work it out, and you will see. Let us say I am violent, as most people are. Our whole culture is violent; but I won't enter into the anatomy of violence now, because that is not the problem we are considering. I am violent, and I realize that I am violent. What happens? My immediate response is that I must do something about it, is it not? I say I must become non-violent. That is what every religious teacher has told us for centuries: that if one is violent one must become non-violent. So I practise, I do all the ideological things. But now I see how absurd that is, because the entity who observes violence and wishes to change it into non-violence, is still violent. So I am concerned, not with the expression of that entity, but with the entity himself. You are following all this, I hope?
Now, what is that entity who says, 'I must not be violent'? Is that entity different from the violence he has observed? Are they two different states? Do you understand, sirs, or is this too abstract? It is near the end of the talk and probably you are a bit tired. Surely, the violence and the entity who says, 'I must change violence into non-violence', are both the same. To recognize that fact is to put an end to all conflict, is it not? There is no longer the conflict of trying to change, because I see that the very movement of the mind not to be violent is itself the outcome of violence.
So, the questioner wants to know why it is that he cannot go beyond all these superficial wrangles of the mind. For the simple reason that, consciously or unconsciously, the mind is always seeking something, and that very search brings violence, competition, the sense of utter dissatisfaction. It is only when the mind is completely still that there is a possibility of touching the deep waters."
"So, to talk over together, what is religion? Man has always sought something beyond all this pain,anxiety and sorrow. Is there something that is sacred,eternal, that is beyond all the reaches of thought. This has been a question from the most ancient of times. What is sacred? What is that which has no time, that which is incorruptible, that which is nameless, that which has no quality, no limitation - the timeless, the eternal. Is there such a thing?
So are we asking, what is religion? Not only what is religion, but what is the religious brain, the religious mind? To enquire into that deeply, there must be total freedom. Not freedom from one thing or the other, but freedom as a whole, per se. So we are asking, when there is that freedom, is it possible, living in this ugly world, to be free from pain,sorrow, anxiety, loneliness?
Then you have to find out what is meditation: contemplation in the Christian sense, and meditation in the Asiatic sense. Does it just amuse you or do you want to really go into it?" Is meditation a form of entertainment? First let me learn meditation and then I'll act properly. You understand the game one plays? But if there is order in one's life, real order,as we explained, then what is meditation?
What is meditation? If it is determined, if it is following a system, a method, practised day after day, what happens to the human brain? You repeat, repeat, repeat - it may be the wrong note, but you repeat. So, is meditation something like this? It has nothing to do with method, system, practices, therefore it can never be mechanical. It can never be conscious meditation. Do please understand this. It's like a man consciously wanting money and pursuing money. Consciously you meditate, wanting to achieve peace,silence and all that. Therefore, arent they both the same : the man who pursues money,success,power, and the man who pursues so-called spirituality?
So, is there a meditation, which is not determined,practised,organized? There is, but that requires enormous attention. That attention is a flame and that attention is not something that you come to much later, it is attention NOW to everything, ever word, every gesture, every thought: to pay complete attention, not partial. If you are listening partially now, you are not giving complete attention. When you are completely attentive, there is no self, there is no limitation.
The brain is full of information, cluttered up, there is no space in it, and one must have space. Space means energy, when there is no space, there is very very little energy. The brain is so heavily laden with knowledge, with theories, with power,position, so everlastingly in conglict and cluttered up, that it has no space. And freedom, complete freedom, is to have limitless space. That brain is extraordinarily capable, has infinite capacity, but we have made it so small and petty.
When there is that space and emptiness and therefore immense energy - energy is passion, love and compassion and intelligence(all terms misused) - then there is that truth which is most holy, most sacred and which many have sought from time immemorial. That truth does not lie in any mosque, in any church or temple. And it has no path to it except through one's own understanding of oneself, enquiring, studying,learning. Then there is that which is eternal."
Questioner: I have listened to you for many years and I have become quite good at watching my thoughts and being aware of every thing I do, but I have never touched the deep waters or experienced the transformation of which you speak. Why?"
Krishnamurti: "I think it is fairly clear why none of us do experience something beyond the mere watching. There may be rare moments of an emotional state in which we see, as it were, the clarity of the sky between clouds, but I do not mean anything of that kind. All such experiences are temporary and have very little significance. The questioner wants to know why, after these many years of watching, he hasn't found the deep waters. Why should he find them? Do you understand? You think that by watching your own thoughts you are going to get a reward: if you do this, you will get that. You are really not watching at all, because your mind is concerned with gaining a reward. You think that by watching, by being aware, you will be more loving, you will suffer less, be less irritable, get something beyond; so your watching is a process of buying. With this coin you are buying that, which means that your watching is a process of choice; therefore it isn't watching, it isn't attention. To watch is to observe without choice, to see yourself as you are without any movement of desire to change, which is an extremely arduous thing to do; but that doesn't mean that you are going to remain in your present state. You do not know what will happen if you see yourself as you are without wishing to bring about a change in that which you see. Do you understand?
I am going to take an example and work it out, and you will see. Let us say I am violent, as most people are. Our whole culture is violent; but I won't enter into the anatomy of violence now, because that is not the problem we are considering. I am violent, and I realize that I am violent. What happens? My immediate response is that I must do something about it, is it not? I say I must become non-violent. That is what every religious teacher has told us for centuries: that if one is violent one must become non-violent. So I practise, I do all the ideological things. But now I see how absurd that is, because the entity who observes violence and wishes to change it into non-violence, is still violent. So I am concerned, not with the expression of that entity, but with the entity himself. You are following all this, I hope?
Now, what is that entity who says, 'I must not be violent'? Is that entity different from the violence he has observed? Are they two different states? Do you understand, sirs, or is this too abstract? It is near the end of the talk and probably you are a bit tired. Surely, the violence and the entity who says, 'I must change violence into non-violence', are both the same. To recognize that fact is to put an end to all conflict, is it not? There is no longer the conflict of trying to change, because I see that the very movement of the mind not to be violent is itself the outcome of violence.
So, the questioner wants to know why it is that he cannot go beyond all these superficial wrangles of the mind. For the simple reason that, consciously or unconsciously, the mind is always seeking something, and that very search brings violence, competition, the sense of utter dissatisfaction. It is only when the mind is completely still that there is a possibility of touching the deep waters."
posted by Rashmy at 6:52 PM
<< Home