The Conditioned, Agitated, Brain / "Where You Are, the Other Is Not"

K: You asked: What is the teaching? Right? I’ll say it in a few words, and that is: Where you are, the other is not. How do you receive that statement? You see, when you drop a stone from very close above the water, there will be no ripple. It will go gently down to the bottom. Now, does that take place, or are there a lot of ripples which are agitations? And, do you say, “My God, what does that mean?” How am I to get rid of it? Now, how do you receive the statement?

RM: We are reminded of similar statements made earlier.

K: Therefore, you are creating ripples. You are soaked in tradition and, when this statement is made, you say, "The Upanishads say that" or “The Bible says that.” That has no meaning; it only shows that you have not listened.

RM: It is not necessary to understand every statement.

K: Pupul asked me a question. She asked: What is your Teaching? I said, to put a very complex issue simply, “Where you are, the other is not.” How do you receive that? When you listen to that, what has taken place in you? Are there ripples, or does the statement sink in?

I am trying to say something which is very simple. Can you listen without all the ripples? I think this is a clue, namely, that you don’t really know the art of listening.

You know a lot and, so, your mind is crowded. Therefore you are not capable of listening directly. Isn’t that so? - Krishnamurti at Rajghat


That means listening to my fearful, isolated being. What fearful, isolated being the protagonists will say.

By dealing with my problems, at least I am of use - luckily I exist, so that I can deal with my problems.

Krishnamurti -
“I am trying to say something which is very simple. Can you listen without all the ripples? I think this is a clue, namely, that you don’t really know the art of listening.”

It does indeed seem very difficult for most of us to listen attentively in almost any situation. Whether we are here on this forum, walking in a wood, sitting around a table with others or listening to music, our minds are full of thoughts which interfere with our ability to truly listen. Isn’t this the case?


Our dogma is our security - and our security is more important than our relationship with the outside world.
(delusion built upon delusion is our whole world)

1 Like

**I hear similar statements to this frequently, and as you suggest, that appears to be delusion. What security is created by creating conflict in our relationships? And security for what? An image of ‘me’? The security for the image of being an American, Russian, or Chinese? Is that really making anyone secure? The culture propagates this belief that you need a good self-image to face the challenges of life. You would think it would be rather obvious that an image isn’t going to be any help in this regard, it’s an image. In the observation of the cultural thought conditioning we’re all programed with, it becomes clear that this shared system of thought is full of similar incoherence. And this inner incoherence results in this outer behavior incoherence. Like defending divisive images.


Krishnamurti -
"…you don’t really know the art of listening.”

Does our contact with K’s teachings actually help us to develop the arts of observation and listening? I mean it should, but I’m not sure it does.

1 Like

I meet K’s words with the same brain with which I meet Trump’s words.

Could you say the same part of the brain, rather than implying that the whole organ is firing on all cylinders? :face_with_monocle:

Contact with the teaching won’t “actually help us to develop the arts of observation and listening”. All it can do is turn your attention to the way you listen. Do you do it artfully? Dutifully? Opportunistically? Are you aware of the way you listen? Can you tell if it serves your ambition or your love of self-knowledge?

Yes, the brain is the same, but if the way you listen to a well-known bald faced liar is the same as the way you listen to a well respected teacher, you’re not listening to either of them

When I listen to a known liar, I’m interested in why he has a large audience. Is it because they’re so removed from reality that they can believe anything? Or is it because they just love lies and how easily they accrue power from mere repetition? Does it seem magical to them?

When I listen to a respected teacher, I want to know what he can show me, help me understand, demonstrate.

Or because they’re so desperate to believe in something?

You have to be desperate to believe anything. It’s better to act on what you don’t know than what might not be true.

An example of acting on what you don’t know: you’re in the woods and you’ve lost the trail you came in on, and because you can’t climb a tree to get a view of the landscape, you can’t tell which direction you came from.

You can’t tell what direction you came from, or how far away you are from the trail you lost, and you can’t just wait for someone to rescue you. What do you do?

Dial 911 (in the US) of course…

You have no direction and you can’t get reception, but you have to get out off the woods. You know you’re within walking distance to the beginning of the trail because it took about two hours to walk this far, but you’ve lost the trail. You must act, but you don’t have the information or the instinct you need to proceed. Your phone battery is dead.

I understand that you’re saying that contact with the teachings might help us reflect on the way we listen or our motives for listening. That may well be true. But surely listening, like looking, brings its own dynamic if we learn to truly listen or look with great attention.

Are you saying that what I hear should be influenced by what I know? (Dependance on the known?)

PS - This is probably already the case. We think we see the Trump or the K “out there”, but we are probably only relating to the images held “in here”.

Whatever you know or believe about K or Trump can be set aside as you listen to what is said and how it is spoken, but you’ll judge it by your experience and beliefs and values because that’s all you have to work with. The conditioned mind can’t bypass or transcend itself. The brain has to be free to operate as a whole, and that can’t happen until the effect of the conditioning is negated by the exposure of the partitions and compartments.

The art of listening, if I understand well, is listening without all the ripples.

K. also often say that the answer is in the question.

Beside the ripples, the question remains : what is the teaching? K. put it simply: Where You Are , The Other Is Not.

We can’t say about the other, but what is the you? That’s the question.

That’s a big “if”.

Are we learning “to truly listen or look with great attention”? Judging from what goes on in these discussions/dialogues, we are not - we’re registering K’s words and phrases to serve our need for words and phrases to live by. We’re seeking guidance, a clue, something, anything, to awaken us to what-is.