If I am not a thing, then I cannot be either here nor there, neither inside nor outside.
If I am not a thing, there must be a rejection of all my beliefs and theories (including inside and outside, or that I must be a good/silent/aware/rich/clever person etc)
From the discrimination of inside and outside, silence good and thought bad, we are once again caught up in the motivation of movement between this and that.
Yes itâs total. There is no one (nobody no-thing) to ârejectâ or âacceptâ âŠthat is all part of the conditioning. I think that was the point when K spoke about the necessity for having a silent brain in order for it to âbeâ the âuniversalâ Mind âŠwas that the silence had to come from an âunderstanding â of the brainâs total âconditioning â, not a âdoingâ. The necessary silence couldnât come from the desire or will of one of the conditioned âIâs or fragments. The brain is totally conditioned, there is not one part (me) that is outside of that conditioning. The illusion is, (at any moment) that there is.
I sat for 5-10 minutes, eyes closed, not trying to do anything mentally. I experienced thoughts and feelings arising, sometimes coherent, sometimes chaotic. Things slowed down, but thought persisted, images, feelings. A few times I felt a pull towards sleep, unconsciousness. For a moment, awareness seemed revealed, but it faded quickly. Will repeat the experiment at various times throughout the day.
I think thatâs valid: My view, whatever it happens to be, is largely the result of my conditioning.
I wouldnât say thatâs why Iâm here, though I agree that following your conditioning, especially if you are unaware you are doing it, can lead to conflict on all levels, from individual to collective.
The reasoning is very simple: In order that X is seen (perceived, sensed), X must be an object. The seer is by definition not an object but a subject. X can only be seen if it is âcastâ as an object, as when the eye sees the eye cast as a reflection in the mirror, or a photograph, or a thought.
The presence of the I/me process creates the imaginary divisionâŠan imaginary reality, of which it is the center. I/me is a misplaced process of thought that occupies the brain and prevents it from being silent. Having heard of âsilenceâ, it can desire it, seek it, practice it etc but itâs attempts are all only more ânoiseâ.
The situation is âdamned if you do and damned if you donâtââŠunderstanding the situation may be the only way it ends.
If you think you can do this, youâre deceiving yourself because so much of the conditioned brainâs reactions are too subtle and subliminal for it to be aware of. The conditioned brain is dulled by its reactive response and psychological thinking, and is not aware of all of its reactions.
See that state of mind which is without conflict. You have discovered choiceless awareness which is not thought. An awareness which is not thought.
This is an example of what the conditioned brain can (and in your case, does) believe about itself.
Anyone have experiments to explore things Krishnamurti talked about? âExploreâ can have different meanings for different people. Exploring X might mean verifying X (for yourself), seeing what the key consequences of X are, directly experiencing X, finding out what happens when X is seen from different points of view.
This is actually what classical Buddhist meditation involves. They split this process up into distinct âdhyÄnasâ (or âjhÄnasâ) - as you have implicitly done here - in which there is progressively less and less cognitive and affective activity; until the mind is completely empty (sometimes referred to as ânirodha samÄpattiâ, a state of âcessation of perception, feelings and consciousnessâ).
I guess âsamadhiâ is being used in the context of Advaita or Yoga here?
I havenât really studied the usage and meaning of the term âsamadhiâ, but I take it to mean a state of contemplative absorption. If so, then nirodha samÄpatti might be understood to mean the ultimate or most complete state of contemplative absorption (though people may object to the word âabsorptionâ in this context).
In the language of the Yoga tradition asamprajñata samÄdhi (or nirvikalpa samÄdhi) would be the equivalent of nirodha samÄpatti. This would make sense because there is strong evidence that Patanjaliâs Yoga system was influenced by Buddhism.
Experiment:
If there is a strong feeling or emotion in the mind, then thought is not able to solve it, escape from it or supress it.
In silence the emotion flowers, moves. In silence the feeling or emotion does not have an effect on the mind, otherwise if thought is active, thought is affected by the feeling. Observer is affected by psychological observed, experiencer is affected by experience psychologically.
In silence there is no effect, no observer.
We feel cause is the observed. Cause and effect is observer. Without observer, without thought, without psychological centre there is no cause and effect, the observed flowers in the space of silence
I would delete step 2 because the PC brain canât âobserve without thought, memory, or analysisâ.
What the PC brain can do is stay with the feeling instead of reflexively escaping, and see what happens. Thatâs an experiment anyone can do at any time.
Experiment:
If you ask question, Who am I?
What is answer to this question?
Who is asking the question?
Who is answering the question?
Is it thought asking the question?
Is it thinker answering the question?
If it is thought asking and answering, then that is the ego, identity.
Answer will be out of conditioning.
I am Indian, Hindu, Muslim, American, Russian or what not.
That is ego, conditioning.
If answer is not thought but awareness, space, silence, then that is not ego.
Who am I?
Awareness that is not thought.
Perception silence that is not thought.