That may or may not be what he meant to say. I replied to what he said.
What happens when we use word or thought? There is separation. If there was no word American and Russian, they would not fight. Is separation at all real. You are the world. The mind believes in words and separation and so there is me separate from the world, me judging the world, but if there is no separation, there is no mental movement as me in silent passive awareness which is the world
1 Like
Yes, we feel certain that our subjective experience has some sort of existence in our absence.
We feel that what we know is an exact reflection of the world, that our model of reality exists somehow outside our brain.
So Krishnamurti was creating separation when he spoke to his audience?
If there was no word American and Russian, they would not fight.
A very naive belief.
Krishnamurti spoke only in terms of negation so that does not create separation. He only pointed the danger.
He did not speak about ideas. Some people might have listened partially and reacted in terms of thought as idea so that created separation, not Krishnamurti
Then you need to go back and revise your statement that words create separation by saying the exceptions to your rule are: when speaking âonly in terms of negationâ, when pointing to danger, when speaking of ideas.emphasized text
The test is if there is any sense of separation or not. Krishnamurti spoke from silence. When the mind is silent there is no sense of separation.
This is what we assume because (if weâre honest) we are never silent. But the constant noise we maintain isnât always or entirely words, and we need words to communicate, so why pick on words? Why not just stay with the fact that we canât be silent because we are conditioned to be I, me, mine, rather than nothing but awareness?