Does it bring relief and silence?
Good point. Krishnamurti was saying that our inadequate response to the human condition is perfectly appropriate. The house has been on fire for so long that we’re incapable of acknowledging the significance of it. We have psychologically adapted to the situation instead of responding intelligently.
1 Like
Is that what you’re looking for?
Your consciousness is its content. When the mind is emptied of that content, consciousness is radically different, no longer “your” brain, seeing as how “you” were the content.
1 Like
No human consciousness is the same for all of us: troubles, anxiety, fear, worry, joys, hopes, aspirations, greed, etc…the contents are different of course but it is not ‘my’ consciousness as opposed to ‘your’ consciousness…it is the “book of mankind” as K called it I think.
K “… if one sees one’s consciousness as universal - if we can use that word, such a large word - that the consciousness which exists in me is the consciousness of all human beings - right? - if you accept that, after logical examination and investigation, then our whole activity of perception changes. Right?”
Would that not be the sign that the self has come to an end? (at least for a moment)
An intellectual conclusion devised by thought would just be a continuation of the self. And would just lead to more thought and judgement.
That seems to be what happens after an insight but first their has to be an ‘acceptance’ at least that things are ‘not what they seem’ …as he says here: (bold mine)
K"… if one sees one’s consciousness as universal - if we can use that word, such a large word - that the consciousness which exists in me is the consciousness of all human beings - right? - if you accept that, after logical examination and investigation, then our whole activity of perception changes. Right?"
Your contents are not the same as anyone else’s contents. What divides us is how contents differ from one brain to another, and what unifies us is the insight that all contents are self-centered concerns.
I think it goes deeper than that. The self-image is the same “evil” for all of us …yours may be that of a saint and mine a sinner but there is no ‘unity’ between us unless the self is understood and gone beyond. The ‘self’ can’t ‘relate’ to another ‘self’.
As Dominic put it “simply the self, is a great kaleidoscopic fractal”.
This is no “deeper” than what I’ve said…just more verbose.
So what is your point? Point in the sense: it is the whole reason one is here.
Yes - an intellectual understanding or a strong belief brings faith into the game - this can help give us courage. To give up or to make mischief only depends which way our conditioning points us
Dominic is exploring the landscape his brain inhabits, its myriad selves, and the belief many of them are about contact with an external reality.
Why? (Sorry it is so short a question. Apparently, the system doesn’t like short questions; hence these parentheses.)
Because it’s what thinking would have itself do, and because there’s no non-self it can be.
So thinking is exploring its own imaginary landscape. That’s a fool’s errand, isn’t it?
Or, perhaps, the brain has no inner landscape at all to explore. Have you considered this possibility? Therefore thought doesn’t waste its time going to look inside. Then thought doesn’t get lost in any semblance of a self or in a myriad of selves, which are the same thing because the self is always composed of many fragments.
Very good - I would like to propose the term “circular self-delusion” a bit like the religious person who uses his holy book to prove that his religion is true - the self uses its own beliefs to prove itself right (or to confuse itself) 
However, Asceticism is not the antidote to Narcissism. I cannot make myself dissapear.
But in whose reality is all of this the case, Paul’s or Dominic’s? Is Dominic deemed by Paul to inhabit his reality, which is the one, true reality, and what is Dominic’s status in that reality, given he is thinking exploring an imaginary landscape?
Good posts…thanks. Can’t think of any response or question/s to ask at the moment…waking up with morning coffee first.
First of all, what is the case? What is the actual thing you are doing? Are you exploring an imaginary landscape? If you are, either it is because you gain satisfaction from such an exploration or it is because you don’t see that it is imaginary. Which is it?