No. It’s not insensitive - it is being fully sensitive. We can observe/understand every feelings etc… of others - and only try to show them ‘how they being caught in ;I’ (i.e. fear/etc.)’. This is not a want. This is ‘Love’ - as we are psychologically one (as brothers and sisters).
And for fear - as I said - when we observe the ‘I’ carefully without describing/etc… we can see the whole movement and get to the root of it. Then the ‘I’(i.e.sufferings,pain,fear,etc…) ends. No sufferings/fear returns in any other form next day/second - as K is ‘Choiselessly aware’
Note:- I used this example - Avenger movie - to show you that - describing/etc… does not arise during ‘observation’ - as you asked. It’s not actuality - it’s just to bring the feeling of
“‘observation’ without interference”.If it mislead by any other notion - please forget/drop it.
The animal brain has automatic processes which the conscious part conceives of as unconscious, and there may be other parts lying unused or dormant. The conditioned brain is in the position of the dreamer who can only end when the brain wakes, but the dreamer cannot shake the sleeper awake. Is there anything consciousness can do in this situation?
There are three states - we know - waking,dreaming and deep sleep.
In deep sleep - no thought/dreams arises - we know.
But - in dreaming state - there is no difference between dreamer and what-is dreamed (i.e. no difference between observer and observed) - we are carried by the dream as ‘actuality’ and only observation happens.
Had you observed - what makes us wake up from/stop the dream? As there is no observer there - we cannot stop it. But the senses reacts there. When we are in a moment being injured/killed/fear/etc… or someone shakes us - immediately senses reacts and immediately brain comes to know about this reaction - it stops the dream.
In waking state - we can observe that - we are distinguishing between observer and observed. As you asked - “can consciousness awake the dreamer/etc…?” we can only ‘observe’ what happens in the whole brain, whole movement of ‘I’ (i.e. sufferings,pleasure,etc…) without differentiating observer (part/fragmented ‘I’) and observed (another part/fragmented ‘I’) - and stop the creation of dreamer stage. Only when we see the movement till the root - one may end the “I” - so in that end - K said that as choice-less awareness(i.e. one can be conscious and not be caught of thoughts/sub-c./un-c.)
It’s my view - please bring forward if you have anyother view - we can discuss.
But this isn’t necessarily so since there can still be the dreamer fleeing a threat which it doesn’t have as itself, and it is only on waking in what is ostensibly a ‘higher’ state that the dream state is resolved and it is seen that the dreamer, and what it flees are all one thing. But then the exact same state of affairs then continues in the waking state with the fact of conditioning, with it seems nothing there to make the brain snap out of it, even when there is a conscious or intellectual appreciation of the situation, similar to the senses waking the animal from its dream.
So then is observation, or choiceless awareness, or insight or whatever I may call it, a faculty of the brain like a so called third eye, or a sixth sense? Ordinarily such a capacity seems dimmed by the effect of conditioning, and it is strange how conditioning takes hold at all to begin with.
When Dominic was a young child, he was exposed to the Roman Catholic tradition, and at his infant school he was taught entirely by nuns, one of whom in particular was very violent. She took as for singing lessons and was responsible for organising the annual Christmas concert. She could fly into a violent rage at the merest slip or misstep striking us very small children with a very thick wooden coat hanger, and throwing us around physically. The prospect of being hit was one thing, but the having to stand witness to other children being attacked was shocking too.
But here’s the thing that matters. Though the young child had language, he did not have a word ‘anger’ or ‘rage’, he did not have a word ‘fear’ or ‘anxiety’. All there was was experiencing obviously, and the very strong physical sensation of energy being. Krishnamurti has mapped out the process saying, contact, sensation, recording, memory or knowledge, thought or thinking as a response to memory. The young child is obviously recording, and the events stored as memory, which are strongly associative in nature, so association with the upheaval, the whelming up of energy. Then only later comes the constructs or labels such as anger or fear attached to them, which is where conditioning has to take root.
The other aspect of this, is that the parents are experienced by the young child as being something which just is, but it is only later that there comes an awareness or consciousness of the father responding from a world of work, and pressures and factors there, and from a whole history and background of influences making him the thing the child experiences him to be, and likewise the mother. They are two constellations of factors and influences which were there all along, and no spontaneous happening, just as out the back of them is a whole society and world of shaping and influence. The brain of the child is inhabiting an environment akin to a wasteland poisoned by nuclear radiation, with constant exposure to that radiation seeping into it from everything it comes into contact with.
Trauma is as much a part of me, as are my experience of pleasure.
And our individual memory is only one layer of our conditioning - the brain is made up of the contents of our conditioning materialised. Our primitive conditioning as fish and reptiles is still with us as the brain stem and cerebellum, and still affecting our behaviour and perception.
Our cultural conditioning being a more recent layer that determines what we see. A Masaï herdsman and a wall street trader will not see the same thing when looking at the same scene.
My question is thus : When we listen to the Teaching, (or subjective opinions about the teaching) or some other Guru - are we merely adding to our conditioning? Does awakening/enlightenment arise as some kind of magic?
Yes.
See - in dreaming state - the moments are created none other than the conditioned mind (with all its memories/experiences/etc…). And so, we see in both stage - there is same - nothing difference from it.
But why the consciousness in human is not useful on conditioned mind is - this conditioned mind is a wicked magician. It gives pleasure second for second - and keeps the whole mind within its control from consciousness.
It’s not third eye or sixth sense.It cannot be expressed what it is actually/wholly - many say it as truth/unlimited/etc… even @alistair described in his post today.
But in many Hindu scriptures - they say that - “‘that’ thought itself to create all this. ‘That’ created this ‘body’ for Every Individual soul (‘I/self/ego’) - so that each soul (‘I/self/ego’) can have it’s own pleasure/pain/etc… - and if it sees the truth about ‘that’ by deep enquiry/etc… - the individual soul realizes that, it had lived the whole life in ignorance and found that - ‘it’ is ‘that’(there is no individual/limited/etc…).”
See - this all are words in scriptures - and discussing now creates an ‘image’ about it. So let’s keep it aside ‘that’ - and observe the ‘I’.
As I’m from India - I just came to know about this by watching the movie of “fantastic beasts and where to find them” in which Mary violent on Credence. It’s sad to hear that it’s not story - it’s real fact going on in the world we live in.
One way or another - many uses their power to do anything they want. They are caught in a belief that - everything they know/say is the only truth and if someone doesn’t obey/against them - it becomes an unforgettable disaster for them.
Absolutely. These fear/anxiety/etc… are all recorded from the surroundings. That’s why K cannot accept these kind of education/surroundings - and started K schools/foundations worldwide - to provide a good environment and teach and learn with children.
If we go deeper, the root of ‘I’ starts from the senses start to hear/feel/see something and start to create an attachment with.
The best situation is the ‘toys’. The child creates every feelings(sufferings,fear,etc…) with that toy. If someone takes/grabs a ‘toy’ from the store - the child gets angry and says “It’s ‘mine’”.
This was taught by the parents/relatives/etc… as - “Surprise. Here is a gift. It’s all ‘yours’”. Then child replies “Mine?”. And parents replies - “Yes yours.” And attachment starts - and as continuation every feelings as pleasure/pain/sufferings/etc… continues from it.
Then the child grows up - seeks security for pleasure - heard that “Money,position,fame,girl,car,house,etc… can give pleasure” and starts to dream about it - make it as a goal - run for it, work hard for it, suffer for it - and after getting it - be attached with it - on it’s leave - pain,stress,anxiety,etc… comes - creates another goal - and this circus continues never-ending.
It depends on 'what makes one to listen to teachings?"
If it because for,
intellectual pleasure by hearing/discussing new teachings
to become another guru/guide - for fame,money,etc…
for a ‘part/fragmented’ inquiry of recent moment/pleasure/pain
then, it’s another conditioning.
But - if one is so serious and sees this whole world/universe is full of pleasure/sufferings/conflict/fight/etc… and frustrated about all this and doesn’t know what to do next,
then - these teachings/observations may serve him.
But - you know - the followers or guru or person - who teaches without finding out/seeing what the truth/etc… is - then it’s an utter failure both for ‘him’ and ‘other’ - as the disciples accept it as it is - without enquiring/observing. And so K couldn’t digest this ‘scriptures’ & ‘teacher/disciple’ concept.
More like self-absorbtion. Unless you’re observing everything the movie-makers have done to lull you into a complacent, compliant mindless stupor of satisfaction, you’ve observed nothing because you’ve fallen under the spell the movie-makers cast to serve your need to escape reality.
I say I can’t know one way or the other when there is not a true sense of what the condition in conditioning truly is in my own case. Obviously I can see something of the impact of conditioning on another, yet seeing the actuality of it in my own case in real time is something else. Are any views or opinions worth the price of admission when the price paid is the brain being out of the moment, and with that the only thing which is actual?
Magic can either mean some supernatural force, or something for which there is not yet the understanding, but the promise held out by Krishnamurti is that what he spoke about is an actuality which is realisable as an untapped potential the human brain is.
That thing called conditioning undoubtedly dominates the brain, but that doesn’t explain how precisely it comes about at all, what the very first instance of it is.
But the point is not the overt expression of violence or aggression since that is everywhere in humankind and no child can escape it. Even the children at these schools are undoubtedly conditioned, as are all the adults.
Not just the brain, but also the body and society and the planet.
One hypothesis is that if we can pinpoint the first instance of this present universe, we will have pinpointed the first instance of one moment conditioning the next.
Another hypothesis is that this present instant is the only thing that is conditioning its existence.
When aware, listening, to the mind activity, memories, thoughts of the past, there is obviously a division. In the mind thinking about the past, and thinking about some prospect, some idea, some possibility, there is the division, in thought, and it is unresolved. Why am I thinking about this; what am I trying to do; what am I searching for? Isn’t there a perception of incompleteness, a failure to fulfil, or a dissatisfaction, a disappointment, which we want to amend? Psychologically we are looking for a completeness. Of course in daily life there are all kinds of tasks and duties that need to be done, and to be finished. But in the conditioned mind there is a world of sadness and futility.
I wouldn’t call it a promise. Only sales people, politicians, and newlyweds make promises.
At the beginning of his work, K felt there was potential for the conditioned brain to awaken from its self-limiting condition. But at the end, he had his doubts.
Ironically that which created the sense of incompleteness now searches for ways to end it. Can thought be aware of this? Can it ‘face up’ to what it has done and what it is doing?
Well yes, I didn’t mean Krishnamurti promised anything, I meant more that many people purchased the books, and went to the time and expense of travelling to hear him speak, and that naturally spoke to a sense they were, snd still are, that there is something to it all.
Something that springs to mind, is that in the case of someone like Einstein and general relativity, even though he discovered the theory, he did not fully appreciate all the implications of it, and it was left to others to see things in it and communicate them to their peers, so sometimes the one who sees a thing is not always the best at communicating it.
Perhaps so, but what I was trying to get at is the notion of a condition speaks to a constraint being, which might otherwise not be the case, and so it is a question of what it means when the activity of the human brain is constrained as consciousness or content, and what its natural ‘state’ is otherwise. We are so accustomed to the notion of consciousness, of being conscious, and considering that the principal thing, that it is difficult to conceive of that being an abberation.
Trump and other deranged, mendacious maniacs have millions of avid followers, so I wouldn’t give any significance to the size or the devotion of K’s followers.
Trump’s appeal is purely to the emotional to get others to react isn’t it? Krishnamurti was trying to have others examine their reactions. Different crowd, same humanity admittedly, with possibly some crossover via persons who want a saviour or someone to follow.
