Why do we talk and think about freedom? Do we know what freedom is? Was I ever free? And if I was, why am I not free now?
Why do we think we’re afraid of freedom when we really don’t know what it is, or if freedom is just a fantasy? Why don’t we just stay with what we live with every moment, i.e., conflict and confusion?
Why don’t we just remain with what we are and find out what we can about our actual ongoing condition instead of thinking and talking about what isn’t actual?
Can you say more about “remaining with” and “finding out” about our actual condition?
What do we mean by “remaining with”? What does it mean to “find out”? What do these processes look like in practise from a first person perspective?
Depends what you mean by I and free.
Let’s assume ‘free’ means free from psychological conditioning. Well the ‘I’ construct is built upon a foundation of psych conditioning, thus is never free, can’t be. But there is (possibly) another ‘I’ or self or identity which is never not free: pure awareness, prior to thought, untouched by thought (true?), beginningless/endless.
Is the notion of a true(r) I too speculative and woo-woo for yous guys? It’s kind of foundational for me, though I rarely talk about it here, doesn’t really ‘fit.’
Yes, those are what seem to be accurate descriptions of what is not our reality. We could spend the rest of our lives perusing these maps.
Every thought the brain has and everything the brain says is one brain’s expression. So it doesn’t matter what pronoun the brain uses for itself, so why not “I”?
I knew a guy who never used any pronoun. He always referred to himself by his name, and did the same for others. He never said I, me, mine, yours, you, etc.
Recently I listened to a recording of Krishnamurti talking to a small group. He posed the question, Why do you compare?
Attempts to answer the question were all batted away by K. No one was able to respond to the question in a way K considered serious, but everyone had to remain with the question because K remained with it.
Why not ‘brain’? “Brain missed seeing you at the party.” Or “Brain is in a bad mood today.” By referring to the organ as the source there isn’t the ‘personal’ collection (?) that ‘I’ has…? (Not that brain is recommending using ‘brain’ instead of ‘I’.)
K used ‘speaker’, I don’t think any of us could get away with that!
Do we think we are afraid of freedom, or do we think we are afraid of the possible losses and the sense of insecurity that embarking on a quest for a so-called “freedom” that we do not know what it is, and where we are asked to give up anything we can hold on to in order to feel secure, creates in us?
What would we be talking about then when we talk about someone who for whatever reason is able to live constantly aware, and in whom thought is only used functionally? What would we call such an entity?
An awakened human being?
Yes, externally we would call it an awakened human being, but what would we call the inner entity that is awakened?
No, the ‘inner entity’, the self/me/mine structure that was occupying the brain has dissipated leaving the brain free of the past. No new ‘entity’.
Psychological security has no meaning because there is nothing or no one to defend. Only the need for physical security.
So there is nothing there, not-a-thing, is that it?
Long ago when the first experiments with LSD were happening, I had occasion to take it. My major memories of those few times was the intensity of the colors around me. I was also struck how people in the street seemed to be ‘acting’…I thought something like : ‘my god, they are good at this!’ The policeman directing traffic in his uniform and his white gloves…I wanted to go up to him and congratulate him on the wonderful acting job he was doing as a ‘policeman’!
Happily my friend convinced me that congratulations weren’t necessary and that I could just enjoy the show!
So I can’t answer your question. What I think K was pointing at though, with “nothing not-a-thing” , was that what we ‘actually’ ARE is pure unmixed awareness.
The brain has memory, recorded experience needed for practical - not psychological - reasons.
Yes for sure! But the me and the mine ‘structure’: the ‘individual’ edifice and its memories may fade. Who knows?
I suspect the memories won’t fade, but that the meaning and significance of them changes when it is clear that the sense of self was imagined.
You were “lucky.” When I was young (18-19 years old) I was also interested in experimenting with LSD, but every time I met up with my friends to do it, something always happened that prevented me from doing it. And as an adult I no longer felt the need to do it.
Did you also feel part of that “acting” or did you observe if you were also acting, or did you simply feel totally outside of that “acting” of others?
Do you mean a pure and unmixed consciousness coexisting with thought?
It seems what K meant by nothing- not a thing is there is awareness of things all around but with no centre being present, there is no labeling or recognising - just what ever is IS. As he once put it in anotherway by saying everything in me and me in everything.