This is edging towards the nub of the matter here, in that the matter of the end is not in my control, which is my illusion of control, which is an element in my comfort ordinarily. For the brain psychologically to truly put aside everything it ordinarily is when considering the end of all that ails it, and face completely what actually is for it, is tantamount to having no end, to there being no end. That is, no end to the chronic isolation which is fueling all the escapes and avoidances, all the comfort seeking, all the bonding psychologically, the partisan relationships, the friendships. All the prescription drugs and all the other drugs and alcohol, all the wealth and power, all the everything. Take away the end psychologically and the brain is left with a lock-in ,with nothing at all to offset the things that are there underneath all the behaviour.
The train is leaving the station, and I am running to catch it, but the train is going to leave without me. This is what is happening. It is competitive. A strategy of disengagement. I struggle to keep up with this illusion of life. The catch-up is what we think is required of people. In this race for life there is no love, and will not become love.
Mixed metaphors, disjointed statements, assumption, etc. What is the reader to do with this? Thereâs no competition between you and a train. If the train is disengaging with you itâs not because the train has a strategy. What are you trying to say?
This is a head-scratcher. Can you find a way to say it that makes sense?
Yes, thatâs the question, but the questioner canât answer it because he/she is what must be emptied, and is helpless to do anything more than acknowledge its own depravity.
Talking about the mind, and actually seeing all these matters for oneself, or not, and not competing, not being clever, not making it his or her problem, then there is understanding.
A response completely out of touch with this discussion called Speaking Freely. It seems the mind is automatically working to use its skills, memories, etc, and to present itself, repeats the strategies of its self, and the self image is its guiding force. The image is a disengagement with actuality. Then disjointed by this, there is fear. To fix the fear, the mind afraid of connecting, it has a strategy, a sophisticated culture, of disengagement. It is fear, avoiding connecting.
Yes sorry, it was a bit convoluted. What I am trying to point out is, if I take the things which are ordinarily considered problematic in human living, which are the source of endless discussion here, and I look at them deeply and come to the consideration of whether they can end, and how they might end, I must eventually find that I am only looking at these things with the safety harness of a possible end to them being. When I am only looking with the psychological comfort afforded by a possible end to the issue I am not really looking.
If underneath all the forms of comfort seeking and security is fear, and if out the back of fear, is isolation, and that isolation is never ending, then that is what I have to contend with fully. The sense of it is that Krishnamurti could have told everyone this to their face, but that he was trying to break it to them gently, to have them see it for themselves naturally.
Can I sit with the fact of isolation, with no notion it can end, and have that as a jewel I look at, without being troubled by it? When I am troubled by it, and in flight from it, I cannot look obviously.
You mean that - when one try to observe, there is always a notion to end it automatically arise. So âwho wants to end itâ? - The part âIâ(which seek pleasure) wants to end another part âIâ(isolation,sufferings,etcâŚ)? - and so there is trouble?
âIsolationâ is a cold word. A cold word to describe the situation of everything in the universe. Every living thing here. Every planet, sun , galaxy, etc. all âaloneââŚwhy âisolatedâ?
Yes that, and having that prior to looking, as a condition of looking at all, which means something separate from what is looked at, which in the case of fear or isolation makes for more trouble as you say.
A thing which is isolated, like a circuit for example, is something that prevents a current flowing. There is a correlation here between, isolated set against connected, between being a centre with a periphery which however expansive remains as a measurable, as set against immeasurable. Ordinarily a human being who is deeply embedded in the system may feel they are not at all isolated, but their behaviour gives them away, as it forms part of something which has a baleful effect on the rest of humanity, and on the rest of nature. What has brought about all these corrosive effects if not a disconnection which is isolation? And naturally this is not directly felt a lot of the time, since that is the power of the evasion.
So, can âoneâ observe this fear,isolation,sufferings,etc⌠as a whole?
i.e. without any trouble/conflict/fragmentation - can âoneâ observe the whole movement of the âselfâ/âIâ?
It isnât a question of feeling, it is so. The flower the bird the deer in the wood are all alone. And on a larger scale, the worlds, the suns, etc. .Isnât it possible that with our new brain, we are able to do what the others around us canât: understand that this physical body as well as everything else, will one day disappear? That it can imagine an illusory âfutureâ? And reflect on that? And that not being able to reconcile that fact , of the disappearance, and also not able to grasp the interconnectedness (one-ness) of everything, it is left with the false conclusion of âisolationâ? But it is actually just fear and confusion, created by the presence of this âselfâ? Thought, acting and concluding where it ought not be acting?
This mind you describe is an ideal. Perhaps such minds do existâŚI certainly hope soâŚbut it does not describe any mind I know or have familiarity with.
All of us can imagine such a mind and aspire to having such a mind, but Iâve seen no evidence of such a mind anywhere, with the possible exception of Krishnamurti and a few others.
Is isolation a conclusion or the fact of disconnect, which is the outcome of the process self as a centre is? One can call self is an illusion, but that is only a sideways step in the sense that it is a very persistent thing which is also remarkably resilient.
This feels similar to seeing my own conditioning rather than just the effect of it in other. It also raises the question of the true nature of ourselves as beings which are not just conscious, but sub-conscious, and unconscious. The conscious elements which meet, in the sense of having an experience of one another, and who exchange views using language, seems only a part of things.
The fact is perhaps that the âselfâ is incapable of real âconnection â because it is an illusory âentityâ. It is the source of suffering. k has lamented that we live and die without touching the âimmensity â! Maybe you are saying that although the âselfâ doesnât actually exist, it canât be ignored?
âThe mind you describe is idealistic.â
Reading with the descriptive is the mind of ideals. There is no flow of intelligent reading/listening. This tendency to hold to the self interpretation is the mind we are familiar with, and it is so stuck in its way of thinking, it has no understanding of sharing a free flowing awareness.
I read/listen to what someone says. Do I get it? Not digest the words and expressions, and respond with what I think. Actually share the reading/listening in the movement of a mindful communication. With an understanding not involving time and place, not of ideas, not of images. It is in the nature of thought. Not my or your thoughts, divided, and in conflict, but something blowing in the wind.