Hopefully we can agree that there is something rather than nothing. “You” and “me” are what we call certain movements of this something.
Yes, we sometimes say : “fear is the past struggling to become the future”. In other words : imagination moved by memory. What we call the conditioned self (conditioned by natural selection aka survival)
All this is happening now, and this process is reflected in what comes next.
Fear and desire cannot be separated, they are the same movement.
Our desire for progress and security cannot be separated from time, we call this hope, or suffering, or the movement away from what is.
Are we saying the same thing Mahesh? Or am I reading too much into your questions?
And do you and I exist outside of time, outside of fear, outside of thought? Physically, we may be occupying the same space. Psychologically, however, it is only when we look to time that we have any existence. Otherwise there is only the space of here and now.
I exist only as the central subject of concern, in order to give meaning to suffering.
Because if there is no movement away from what is, I has no meaning (it has been transformed into something else)
The problem that people usually raise at this point is that there’s a huge difference between saying the words and deeply living the fact.
— To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.
All we can “know from K” is what he said, and what we think it means.
When Krishnamurti spoke of silence, emptiness, choiceless awareness, of the observer is the observed, the thinker is the thought, the seeing is the doing, and consciousness is its content, he spoke of things we neither know nor can imagine.
Why are you raising this point? Are we really concerned about bridging a gap? Surely, if we are in this space together, we do not need to raise such a hypothetical point, do we? There is no gap. It doesn’t matter what other people are doing or thinking.
Look, you say, ‘Wonderful!’ Is it merely that you are caught up in the excitement of a wonderful idea? Or we are facing something truly wonderful and new for which there are no guidelines or templates because there is no you or me to be bothered about such things.
You can’t imagine silence without being silent, and you can’t be silent because you are a stream of consciousness, i.e., continuous thought.
You can’t imagine emptiness because you are the content of consciousness, and you will continue as such until/unless the brain negates its psychological content.
You can’t imagine choiceless awareness because you are conditioned response, reaction to awareness, and the distortion it creates.
Yes - I was happy with the idea that you were agreeing with something someone said.
I was happy for you.
I once knew a man who started all his sentences with the word “Non!” (he was French) - I hoped that he would one day be able to say “Oui!” - he never did. I may still be reacting from this traumatism from this sadness.
You seem to have an instant answer, which one must assume comes from the same stream of consciousness. Therefore, why do you bother with an answer at all? You already know that it is worthless, by your own admission. You are merely giving voice to your own mendacity, never mind trying to foist it on to someone else.
So what happens when there are no ideas and no answers? What happens? This is not about what might or might not happen. What actually happens? To find out one has to live with it first, not just present excuses for not doing so.
