Analysis Paralysis

I believe all of us need to slow down. Not just this forum, but humanity as a whole. Think carefully with me about what krishnamurti said for a moment. Carefully. What was he really trying to get across? It’s definitely not one thing, one idea circled around one aspect of his “teachings”. So the answer to that isn’t in analysis of something particular. If your mind starts imagining things because you have a motive to answer then your mind responds with thought, and is not beyond thought at all. So the answer to my question is in how we frame the question (in our minds). How we frame it is the same thing as the “information in the background” which we use to try answer the question. But why are we so quick to try imagine? What K tried to point out was very simple, not a complex idea we need to think about. That’s a never ending journey my friend. And I see so many people here writing novels, all using analysis. I’m not trying to downplay any of you, but that is what I see. So what’s your mind really imagining in any moment? What is actually taking place within you? What happens to us after what he wanted us to see took place is what he was describing, like choiceless awareness, no attachment. desire, or motive. But if you analyze those things then you’re not seeing what he wanted you to see. Understand this carefully, it’s fact. I remember hearing krishnamurti talk about what it really means to just admit to yourself that you “don’t know”. And just by really seeing that you don’t, you’re freeing yourself

To not have any chain reactions of thought is quite freeing


Howdy Mr. Openness, welcome.

So how does choiceless awareness translate here in terms of dialogue on kinfonet?
What might be the “golden rule” for a useful dialogue of ideas and opinions?


Just a wee ‘analysis’ before we come up with a “Golden Rule” for posting here:

Re ‘I don’t know ‘…if I ‘know’ that I don’t know, then I do know that I don’t know so it’s not true that I don’t know, right? So the trick seems to be knowing that I don’t know, but not knowing that I know that…

1 Like

Then I wonder if it is possible for us to look and see exactly what it is that is being freed.

I would say that the golden rule is nothing more than careful listening. Which must imply careful observation. We have a tendency of wanting to claim that we ourselves are the ones who know already. I’ve done this a lot, so I’d say choiceless awareness might manifest as a kind of respect, as a freedom from knowing something the other person may not. Thanks for the welcome

1 Like

So it’s not a state of knowing that you don’t know? I’ve edited this a few times because I’m a little confused by this. Is it that we just don’t know, period? And therefore the process to figure out has ended?

If we intellectualize what “it” is too fast then we might get lost. At any given moment in any given time, what is it that we’re looking for? That’s where I start. I start to see that I can’t possibly find it, so it must already be here

1 Like

Do I know what knowing is? If what I know is not always true, I may know nothing until truth puts knowing in its place and I know nothing that isn’t now, since now is all the truth there is.

So perhaps it is more about what we are looking at, than about what we are looking for. Freedom then is in the present moment, in the presence of one another, not in some imagined future. Can we look at one another and at the world around us without any chain reactions? And what does this mean?

Very few people ever seem to want to go into this very deeply and very seriously. Maybe you are one of them who does.

1 Like

Isn’t this ‘process’ desire? To be, to become, to change? Desire has to be understood. It was brought from the outside practical eg. food , clothing, shelter to the inside psychological. To the ‘what is’ now, in its search for the ‘better’, the ‘nobler’, the more pleasant and secure? And along with it, the fictional time when these things will come to pass?To the benefit of a fictional center or ‘me’?


And the me is old. It’s been put together by thought which is old. So we get to the image, the center like you say. But this is weird, because how do we look at our actual image that we have rather than structures put together by this image? And what would it mean to throw it away altogether? What do I hold closest to me? Hurts, personal beliefs about myself and others, attachments to what I like and dislike? What would it mean to look at it without any preconceived notions put together by thought? All the things ive gathered through time must end?

And if I store all this as knowledge, what am I doing? Aren’t I doing the same thing as everyone else?

We may have definite motives for coming here - varying degrees of stronger and weaker motives - but whatever these motives are, they must surely have within them or beneath them a much deeper hidden thing that can only emerge when we talk together. In other words, what I want will always be different from what you want. Therefore, when we remain at the surface, obsessed with or caught up in the vagaries of our desires, there must always be conflict in human relationships. However, when we slowly or suddenly start to see that nobody can ever really know what they want - that such ways of operating clearly make very little sense - then there is already a sense of tremendous freedom not in what we see but in the very manner of our observation.

An image can’t “put together” anything. Images are put together by the brain conditioned to create and sustain a false sense of security. So it would seem that if the brain can be aware of its image-making, conclusion-drawing, etc, and sees that it is creating the problem it’s searching for the solution to, it will immediately stop doing it.

1 Like

An image can’t put together anything? It can, certain thoughts revolve around that image. You said it yourself, it creates and sustains an unreal security. So in a way, it does “put together” something, including all the other images. I’m not sure what the significance of the line you’re trying to draw has, if any at all

Is the image an entity with agency ? Are you into the tulpa model of reality?

It isn’t the image doing anything but what it represents, signifies, i.e., the illusion of I, me, mine, that compels thought to sustain the illusion. Thought is just a mechanism using images, words, and thoughts, some of which have tremendous influence and authority because they are never questioned.

And so too is the exact opposite of that: there is just as much freedom in the chain reactions of thought as anywhere else.

Now, will you respond to this? Unknowingly, openly, true to the name you have picked, will you respond to this, to me?

Is ANY prerequisite necessary to be in the present?

Since there’s no other place to be but here now, the only escape is to do it badly, dysfunctionally, by means of distracting thoughts of past and future, making one inattentively present, incompletely here now. This ongoing attempt to escape from the eternal present is the human condition, and if a human is interested in why we practice it, the only thing to do is be increasingly aware of doing it.

1 Like

So awareness of the inattention (escaping, etc) IS attention?

1 Like