And if we can ‘end the self’ we can join some very illustrious company…! The self wants to end the self, but, just not right ‘now’.
Of course we are not the bird neither the dog, I hope so. So let’s say that awareness have to do with attention, as you said.
On the other hand, what we think , our drive to become something , our beleives , our conflicts etc , this is what we are, This is what the self is. We are that.
The bird and the dog is my interpretation. My interpretation of the world is by me, for me, in me.
Is me.
(This is not to say that there is nothing going on outside of me, just that our relationship with reality is bound by our subjective experience)
Guess you misread what I said. No worries. I’ll try and clarify my point for what it’s worth.
This was in reply to a post of your wherein you implied that you required confirmation that someone else has “ended the self” in order for you to embark on that journey yourself. (Apologies if I misunderstood.) In response to that, I was suggesting that understanding for oneself the correctness of that action is rather what is needed, not that there be a successful precedent.
If by agree, you mean seeing the importance of finding out for oneself that seeing the self for what it is, is “right” then I agree with you.
Not however, if by agree you mean “the self must end” because we accept K’s words or agree with him because we believe he has walked the talk.
I personally read K because the foundation of his teaching is to accept no authority, to take nothing he says at face value but rather to find out for ourselves if the concepts he proposes have merit. Again, not because he says so, but because, given the complex nature of the subject matter, anything else would mean we are settling for make-belief rather than attempting to get to the truth of the affair.
We may be positively disposed to the believe that K and the Buddha were “enlightened” but at the end of the day that is not neither here nor there. That kind of inspiration is of no consequence and dissipates soon enough in my experience.
I remember K saying something to the effect, “Of what value is it to you if I am happy and you are not?”
If you want argue that there’s no difference between your thoughts and the insect you just brushed off your sleeve, for instance, make your case.
One doesn’t have to be familiar with the teaching of Krishnamurti or the Buddha to realize that human egocentricity, the root cause of our misery and suffering, is the engine of rape and ruin that has brought about anthropogenic climate change, and that every living thing on earth would be better off without it.
“Live, dying every day.”
The very beginning is now, right now as we are talking with one another. It is not a historical event. That’s the whole point: the ‘self’ thrives in time and in knowledge. Can that be blown away from the start? Then there is no immediate and obvious answer to such a question, which would be an intellectual response based on prior evidence. Instead, we are asking for something else to take place. Or perhaps it would be better to say that we are inviting a totally different kind of enquiry into the nature of our relationship.
1 Like
I’m not looking for an argument. If you would like to explore the question together, I’d be happy to.
Its all about relationship. For example, are we relating to ideas in our head (about the insect for example) or to reality as it is?
Can the self come to an end?
There are moments, looking at the leaves fluttering, listening to a bird call, when there is timeless movement, moving along with the looking and hearing. It is a consummation with the senses, and there is no self. This is only temporary. The self didn’t come to an end, it was a discovery of a different nature.
2 Likes
What can you say about this “totally different kind of enquiry” that might help the reader to see what you’re getting at? Can the self be revealed for what it is without the years of meditation/inquiry that brings about the gradual transformation of the brain’s operating system? If so, can an unprepared brain receive such a revelation?
Yes. Without argument.
Awareness is simple. It is self that is complicated. Simplicity is immediate and threatens the existence of self. Resistance and the demand for explanation introduce time and sustain self. To expect the self to end in any other way than by insightful action in the present is indeed quite absurd.
1 Like
From the very beginning of what?
1 Like
The self either is or isn’t.
It is either colouring everything, or it is absent.
Its not something that wipes itself away slowly and laboriously over time.
From the beginning of now. And now. And now …
The ‘self’ is the product of time; it has both a history in the form of experiences and images and a future in the form of hopes and desires. Therefore to operate through time in the hope or desire of dissolving the ‘self’ after a period of reflection, meditation or any other kind of preparation is always going to be a fruitless exercise. Such activity merely perpetuates the very thing that one is trying to bring to an end.
So the revelation is at the start: that there is nothing we can do to make things better.
Now, let’s enquire into what this means. From this enquiry, as we are careful and affectionate, the revelation spreads as a living energy. It isn’t just one brief moment of revelation or insight and then a period of prolonged stagnation; that has always been our intellectual habit. Instead, something catches fire that can never be extinguished.
1 Like
But all the logical explanation of the futility of our efforts is not enough to bring the activity of seeking to an end apparently. The self refuses to quit and I for one have no idea why that is…other than the fact that fear is a major facet of the self. And fear leads to effort…effort to avoid…effort to change…all kinds of efforts and thinking.
Yet K talks of observing ourselves as we are…not doing nothing at all, right? Of living with ourselves as we are, but watching, being attentive…not supressing or condemning or judging. From today’s QOTD excerpt from July 1967, Saanen
" But to live with a living thing like jealousy, envy, means that I can never accept it, I can never get used to it - I must care for it as I would care for a newly planted tree, I must protect it against the sun, against the storm. So, in the same way, I have to live with this anxiety and envy, I must care for it, not get used to it, not condemn it. In this way I begin to love it and to care for it, which is not that I love to be envious or anxious, but rather that I care for the watching. "
" See whether you can look at yourself without any tremor, without any false modesty, without any fear, without any justification or condemnation - just live with what you actually are." QOTD
This “See whether…” involves time however, doesn’t it?
Yes, that is why I am suggesting that we enquire into this question of what it means to do nothing. Is there an observation of our own nature without any accompanying noise or judgement? And we shall include in this the observation of fear, which is, as you say, a major facet.
You see, there are two things involved in this: first, the logical explanation of the futility of our efforts and, second, the actual ending of our efforts. The explanation takes time; this much is obvious. I am not sure that the actual ending of our efforts takes any time at all. Because what is a psychological effort? It is only ever a movement away from what I am. And what am I other than a lot of explanations?
1 Like
Yes…BUT, not only that… I am the actual thoughts and emotions and fear and desire…violence etc.