" Now can there be an awareness, an observation of the tree, without any judgement, and can there be an observation of the response, the reactions, without any judgement? In this way we eradicate the principle of division, the principle of “me” and “non-me”, both in looking at the tree and in looking at ourselves… All that you have to do is to be aware from the beginning to the end, not become inattentive in the middle of it. This new quality of awareness is attention, and in this attention there is no frontier made by the “me”. This attention is the highest form of virtue, therefore it is love. It is supreme intelligence,…" The Urgency of Change
“No frontier made by the “me””
Dan, I don’t understand what is meant here, either. Would this definition of frontier be helpful in anyway? * the extreme limit of understanding or achievement in a particular area." E.g. “the success of science in extending the frontiers of knowledge”.
One starts on the other shore (if one is lucky enough - ), where attention has no frontier. Eventually, there is the realization that there is no this shore or that shore - there is just observation.
It is only thought (the “me”, the “I”, the “self” - whatever name you give it) which invents a frontier, so as to feel safe, secure.
In superficial awareness there is the ‘other’ and ‘my’ reaction to the ‘other’. In “attention” that ‘frontier’ between ‘me’ and the ‘other’ dissolves.
The average person has a pile of memories and thoughts about those memories, that is their inner territory, and like any psychological territory, it duplicates what it sees outside in the world and and applies what it sees outside and invents inner psychological boundaries; you know, that word “boundaries”, in other words a boundary that separates “us” and “them”, that defines who “I” am as opposed to who “you” are.
When you look outside yourself, you see a world with incredible definitions, maps which separate countries with lines, boundaries. You also see people own property, and have boundaries, fences where they consider everything within that boundary line as “mine”, and everything outside that boundary as “yours”. You see animals in the wild who have just given birth, and there is an area where they protect their young if anyone else intrudes close to the perimeter (boundary) where their youngins are.
So you see people have boundaries where they hold onto their ideas vs. the ideas of others. and all these boundaries separate us; they cause division, conflict.
The life that we have in 2022 is a new challenge to every human being. We are facing problems that are more psychological than physical.
By frontier he means predisposition. A predetermined view which alters the attention. To be fixated on something rather than just being attentive without distortion.
I appreciate the clarifications of the word “frontier”. What stood out for me was that this was a “how”. Krishnamurti gave very few “hows”. Sounds much like his “Choiceless Awareness”, but in today’s terms, many would call it “mindfulness”, present moment attention without judgement. Sustaining such a state requires self-monitoring, self-correcting when one is inattentive or being judgmental.
Actually, one may spend one’s entire life being attentive to every reaction just to end the division of the “me” and “not-me” and still not have completely ended it, because it takes time to do that. It can be done instantly with an insight: the observer is the observed. Then it’s over, Finished.
K. All that you have to do is to be aware from the beginning to the end, not become inattentive in the middle of it. This new quality of awareness is attention ,
Attention is a “different dimension “ of awareness he said elsewhere.
K asks if one can do this, and of course, one cannot because one responds conditionally, not directly. Then, as if one says Yes to his question, K says, "In this way we eradicate the principle of division, the principle of “me” and “non-me”, both in looking at the tree and in looking at ourselves… “All that you have to do is to be aware from the beginning to the end”, which, of course, one cannot deliberately do because if “I” can do it, it’s just more “I”, more conditioned response. That which must end cannot bring about its end - it can only perpetuate itself.
So why did K put it like this? He seems to be saying it’s a technique, something you or I can do while looking at a tree, when in fact, it’s what one is not doing that is the radical departure from conditioned response.
Then instead of trying to do the impossible, maybe just deal with the obvious.
That would be the obvious thing to say, but why put it in a way as to be easily misconstrued?
The observer is the observed,
The seeing of what is, no matter what that happens to be, is crucial here. When one gives all of one’s energy to stay with what is, the line between “me” and “not me” disappears. Having said this, one can ask, why can’t this be done, easily, without effort?
And in observation of “the other” (others), there is the understanding that unless there is harmony within, that appears to be something that is difficult to do, or even understand. And so, it becomes even more crucial to understand why there is no harmony within, or perhaps expressing this differently, whether or not there is disorder within. You see, the whole thing must be approached negatively, because cultivating harmony, etc. is the wrong approach. It must begin with the seeing of what is preventing “the seeing”, and staying with that. So first, one must find out/discover what it is within that is not in order, whether or not everything within is in disorder, whether the fact that “I” itself is disorder, and staying with that. You see, to give all of one’s attention to what is requires harmony - not a certain degree of harmony, not a partial degree of harmony, but complete harmony within. Any and all dissonance within… is an indication of a lack of harmony, a lack of clarity.
If one could put it this way: the ‘gift’ of these human eyes and ears, hands and mouth, is not only to behold and partake of all that has been wrought but with the brain to also ‘ponder’ the Creation. Total ‘clarity’ is necessary for this. No ‘I’ can come between, no ‘frontier’ between an ‘observer’ and the Observed.
Ah, yes, the brain delighted in this statement, all the energy in the brain moved around, held it’s breathe, and stopped into a large sense of “intensity”, when you posted that… lol, still haven’t “found” the source… lol the intensity is there, getting glimpses of it… chuckles