Seeing "what is"

Kinfonet Discussion
61

Something exists, thats for sure, but we mainly see aspects of it that pertain to fitness (whether I will make babies that survive to make babies). For example I don’t see microwaves and ultraviolet because these things don’t usually kill me when I’m young, and don’t help me find a mate.

Thats why most people see K as either someone who can provide some useful info (for power and security), or just a useless con artist or madman.

In some ways we are alone in our heads - I think thats why there is this fascination with the special/magical dialogue on kinfonet - because we crave relationship and also because true relationship could be construed as a kind of psychological death.

If I think that K has seen the truth and can give it to me - this is an act of faith - it is not reasonable.
The best is to listen to what K says, without any aprioris - and if you find he never says anything wrong, then either he is a magic being (and a special type of magic being that is never wrong) or your ears and brain are biased.
and if I feel confused by what he is saying, its because it doesn’t fit in with what I already know (the comparison is what confuses) - and if I think I know what he’s taliking about this can mean that I have recognised it as something I already know (doesn’t mean thats actually what he meant) - the most important thing is to listen without motive (difficult) understanding is secondary, belief is not advisable :grinning: :crazy_face:

PS- nearly everything he says is great.
PPS - he was pointing at us (and asking if we can see what is)

62

Hi Sean,

Yes, indeed, that seems to be a more than accurate observation, just look at the incredible amount of differing bios on K - from those who met and believed they “knew” him…

Actually, I find this query quite funny. One could also ask: Is this guy (K) for real? And, I’m certain there are/were quite a few people who thought. “no”!!! (lol) Remember UG Krishnamurti and his book “Thinking allowed”…
Seriously, it is only the content of what K said that is important and relevant - to be tested, experimented with, tried, etc., mainly because one is encouraged to be skeptical.

Well, many consider K to have been a “guru”, and the word “guru” only means the one who points… the one who points at the one who asks the question. In that sense, “I” don’t have to understand what he was pointing to… only to take the word “guru” literally, - in other words, as a referent.

Hence, what he was pointing to in your question, Sean, would be that he would be pointing at Sean, right? Funny, eh?

So, the interesting and relevant question would be, Does one understand oneself? Right?

1 Like
63

Here JK has split the area of thinking knowledge into 2 areas or functional domains.

  1. Physical Knowledge/Thinking 2. Psychological Knowledge/Thinking.

As JK realized that any amount(quantity and quality)of past knowledge has absolutely “no use” in psychological space, which happens in our human relationships ( and also with nature), human interaction, activities in that human relationships, recording of those experiences as knowledge store and use of those knowledge as a reference to interact with fellow human beings.

All future interactions that are NOT based “what is” but “what it should be”, which is based on inferences and conclusions about our earlier experiences/information stored in memory/knowledge, inevitably create division, and allows thought taking over awareness and ability of being in present. Here any amount of interference by thought which is product of knowledge, allways influences the right action and the impurities in results. Thought/knowledge in human relationships can never be pure, it is pitfall awaiting in future actions.

Then, Physical knowledge and physical actions, which again JK says is relevant. Now if you look at the animal world, they only act in this space. And all their actions based what is and for survival of natural ecosystem. No One can exceed doing actions beyond a limit. However, humans in the name of their pride in thinking machine attitudes, believes that he is superior in comparison to other species.

Human actions and creation in physical space are beyond their natural needs. Hence, becomes a burden to existence of rest of the planet.

Thought is single most reason for savagery, havoc, confusion, division, and so on this planet. A lion kills only for survival after this it is not particularly bother if their prey is around or not. On the other hand see what Human beings have done WW1,WW2, Hiroshima and Nagasaki etc.

1 Like
64

Suppose one sees what is ? What would happen? The action based what is will be always the right action. It is just action.

Let us say, one does not see what is, then the result of that action will not be the right action, that produces impurities which are due to interference in seeing what is.

Now the question, what is that interferes or prevents seeing what is ? Is it thought from previous knowledge or is it inattention creeping in due to references to previous knowledge while seeing what is ? Is it x (ego, selfish, insecurities, insensitive, irresponsibility, indifference, lack of seriousness etc) that is product of thought coming from previous knowledge of experiences.

Now animals do not particularly store knowledge for references, they use knowledge for learning, and immediately unlearning goes for fresh perception. Due to this they see what is and their actions are always based on present, not based on the past knowledge.

For animals, every time they are able to see what is because there is no interference in action of seeing what is.

Same thing Human beings are not able to do it every time.when ever they see what is , all those milli seconds, seconds or minutes, days, weeks, etc, or occasionally, his actions are right actions. When human is NOT seeing what is for a second or not seeing occasionally, his actions are not right actions. Seeing what is helps being present and being aware (or) being aware or being in present helps in seeing what is.

If we add more words(delusion), knowledge of language ( developed over many centuries with wide variety of descriptions). We would complicate the message. Why animals have limited language and communication, because they do not need such huge wealth knowledge, as right actions do not need previous references. To see always what is, all actions inevitably have to be right action. When actions based what is then there is no recording takes place and information about those actions is not necessary for storage, because they are always dynamically happening in present.

1 Like
65

Thank you Karne for your explanation.

I am confused about the difference between Psychological and Physical knowledge. Are you saying that if I react to save my body this is physical knowledge in action (so its okay) but if I react to save the image I have of myself this is psychological knowledge in action (so not okay)? I am wondering if these are not actually the same reactions.
The need to save myself (whether I think of myself as physical or psychological) is dependant on a self image.

Maybe not so important - but when you say animals are not so destructive as humans - did you know that clans of chimpanzees have been known to kill all the members of neighbouring tribes? Also, one of the greatest extinctions of life on the planet was carried out by cyanobacteria (when they started to produce oxygen)? Of course they did not mean to do harm they were just doing what they needed to do to survive - but humans when they attack others are also just doing what they think they need to do to survive.

PS - I just thought of something else (speculative) about who’s good and who’s bad (humans or non-humans) : humans are the only animals with the potential to be the conscious guardians of this planet (not saying we will succeed - but we could control the weather, manage ecosystems, protect from asteroids etc)

66

Hello Charley. Thanks for commenting on my post. I think that this is indeed an interesting and relevant question.

Krishnamurti certainly pointed the way for the rest of us as regards observing with a silent mind, looking inwardly in tremendous depth and understanding complex processes which cannot be understood by analysis and thought. He seemed to go to the roots of anger, fear, attachment etc and in doing so reach great understanding. One could see how watchful and attentive K was and how quickly he became aware of these things arising in himself. That’s what I understand, anyway. However, K was a human being and as such was surely liable to making the kind of mistakes we humans do from time to time.

I’m not sure where this leaves us all, but effortless observation with a silent mind seems to be a way to see with great clarity and to observe oneself and learn.

67

Impossible. To listen is to select something in particular from the cacophony of ambient sound, or to widen your listening to include everything. Either way, it’s intentional.

68

It might have been more accurate to say : “the most important thing is to listen without selfish motive”. The motive of being receptive/open to what is being communicated/shared is fine.

As long as our intention is not self defense or aggrandisement/accumulation (aka fear) but rather the intent to hear what is being said - then no problemo.

Actually - maybe there should be no motive at all if motive implies effort/concentration. Its like the difference between relaxed breathing by consciously being attentive to the breath, and relaxed breathing due to being generally at ease.

1 Like
69

Coming back to seeing “what is” - and maybe to address what @DanMcD & @Sam mentioned earlier (above) re: the is of here & now (aka spacetime) :~

Physics has always essentially been about describing the fundamentals of Spacetime.

Some Physicists now feel that they have to question whether Spacetime really is a fundamental part of reality. Due to the fact that 95% of the universe is unaccounted for (so called dark matter/energy), quantum entanglement (action at a distance), quantum uncertainty (the problem of measurement/observation/interpretation), quantum relativity (time flowing backwards) etc… (see S. Carroll, L. Smolin - theoretical physicists)

Add D. Hoffmann’s (evolutionary psychologist) idea that perception is an evolutionary delusion and we could surmise that Spacetime is also an emergent property of consciousness.

I feel that I am an object/entity taking up space here & now, but this too could just be due to sense and perception.

70

Psychedelics might help by altering how we sense and perceive, giving us a taste of a dramatically different point of view.

1 Like
71

Drugs,

Drugs are a very bad idea… the damage they do to the brain cells will cause changes that will eventually prevent the possibility of insight later on…

72

Are you speaking from your experience or from something you read or were told? I ask because it may or may not be true, but if you’re convinced that your brain cells have undergone “changes that will eventually prevent the possibility of insight later on”, your warning can’t be easily dismissed.

73

Psychedelics can of course be dangerous - we are not all equal in the face of mental health problems.

Their interest stems from the experience of altered consciousness that they offer - usually this experience is useless because we lack the psychological maturity (or innocence?) to let go of any deluded conclusions we inevitably try to grasp - as usual we are scarred rather than refreshed by our experiences.

The main message of psychedelics is that experience is a question of brain chemistry.

74

Which is why I’ve never monkeyed around with them. But I’d consider giving psilocybin or MDMA a try.

75

It is interesting that you have not even considered the possibility that I have known more than one person who has used psychedelics and suffered irreversible brain damage. Your suggestion betrays how you constantly seek to tarnish anything that I have posted. And you always assume the worse scenario.

77

MDMA is merely a party drug - very effective for having a happy good time, but thats about it.

Even with LSD or psylocybin its a good thing to be grounded in the knowledge that experience is subjective/conditioned (even when affected by added chemicals) - so no conclusions - apart from the conclusion that different states of consciousness are possible (which can be a big insight)

78

I was surprised to learn that it’s being researched as a treatment for depression, anxiety, and other disorders.

79

I nearly suggested that (ie for depression) in my comment but wasn’t sure of its long terms effects - its all a question of dosage I suppose

80

Yeah I think it’s early days in MDMA research, still tons they don’t know.

81

So the premise for this thread was :

and the reason for sharing this idea (or fact of our biology and psychology, if it is one) is because the best knowledge is knowledge that shines a light on our ignorance - for ignorance offers an infinite & the only source for discovery.

If knowledge does not provide a ton of additional mystery - its because you’re doing it wrong.

“Thoroughly conscious ignorance is the prelude to every real advance in science”
James C Maxwell