← Back to Kinfonet

Image, imagination

For Krishnamurti, image means something that is not real, image is not what it is. It seems to me that this meaning of the word image is difficult for us to understand, perhaps because of the widespread use of that word in technology, that has led to its evolution following the changes in the technological world. Since the 1970s or 1980s we have lived in a world of images —TV, the internet, computers, smartphones — but most of the time we believe that images are representations of something real. We see and talk to images online, but behind these images we think there is someone real.

I wonder if the meaning of ‘image’ was much closer to ‘imagination’ before the 1970s. So when Krishnamurti says ‘The husband has images of his wife and the wife has images of her husband’, we should translate this as 'The husband imagines things — what she should be or do — about his wife and the wife imagines things — what he should be or do — about her husband.’ Now, we have an imaginary relationship, not a real one. That is, our relationships are based on imagination.

For the conditioned mind, everything is “based on imagination”.