← Back to Kinfonet

"The house is on fire"/Deceptive concern-compassion for the world

On account of Krishnmaurti harping on world compassion and world peace we have a bunch of copycats, who, for their own purposes have been using it for a myriad of agendas. It seems this one’s recent post on the thread “:house is on fire” either wasn’t understood or went through some serious efforts towards detraction (albeit unsuccessfully) simply because of personal dislike by one or two…and you know who you are.

As one was saying in that thread and therefore walking the talk as one should, unlike others as observed, this one will provide references so it’s clear there is no attempt to fudge up Krishnmaurti’s words, unlike others who often fudge it for their own agenda and benefit by saying “he said”, without any references.

"The house is burning" — It was said in the above mentioned thread the adage “house is burning” primarily means our own house, i.e. what’s going on inside the person, and secondarily what’s going on in the world. The former taking precedence over the latter. It was also said, there is no point talking about the world when our own house is burning. It was suggested to get off the proverbial and aptly true personal “horse” of arrogance, and instead with humility observe and fix our own house, instead of propagating delusions of world concern, which in any case is almost impossible to work on since we lack the strength that comes from personal order, clarity, a religious mind, and compassion, since we haven’t put out the fire in our own house. Here is what K says about that:

I see the fire in the world, and the fire inside myself - the misery, the confusion, the idiocy, the pettiness, my arrogance, and all the rest of it. Until - the questioner says - until I radically transform myself it is not possible to put the fire out.” 1st Public Dialogue in Saanen July 1977

"And we have to be serious because the house is burning, not somebody else’s house but our own house is on fire. We have to be very serious, not only to put the fire out, but also to bring about a different kind of house that cannot catch fire at any time, which means living a life of absolute inward order where there is no war, no fear" . 1st Public Talk 10th March 1968 Rome

"K: The house on fire, we think it is out there - it is in here. We have to put our house in order first, sir. " Dialogue at Los Alamos, March 1984

"Compassion" – On the above mentioned post the theme of compassion was introduced by someone with a history of demonstrating it’s absence, perhaps in an effort of joining ranks, forgetting his own advice to another person at the “comparison is a form of violence” thread, who, as recent as few days ago was bashing the virtue of “modesty” (a great virtue btw) as being “hot air” in the same thread.

Krishnmaurti has made it perfectly clear. and this one agrees, there can be no compassion without resolving personal sorrow. Sorrow, which is compassion. Compassion isn’t an emotion, or an act/action someone undertakes. It’s not sentimentality. It’s more than that, and has to do with sorrow. I could post K references supporting this but will urge you towards your own diligence so that it might help a humble learning.

Disclaimer: No responses are being sought. Please read this with some salt and stay away from the kitchen if you can’t handle the heat. This post is simply information for anyone interested.

1 Like

Indeed. K used the outer merely as a starting point to move inwards for investigating the self. Even during the War years and immediately thereafter he was focused on our inner chaos that ultimately results in war and refused to point to a few individuals as the cause of it.

It is much easier to be sucked into the outer and dedicate oneself to fixing problems there.The self also feels good about such activities to reform society, improve the environment etc. By doing so one escapes from self investigation without even realizing it.


Is it for a fact or is it an opinion?

Follow the course of any of his talks and the answer is obvious. But you can also keep the mind argumentative with such questions. No more from me on this.

Therefore, it was said in the OP, a reference helps in weeding out interpretations from facts, the false from the true. A simple question such as the one asked above is sometimes enough to establish non-facts.

To finish what was said in op: One starts by being responsible to one’s thoughts/actions as was discussed in op. The person holds himself accountable for his/her actions and not escape into ideological delusions like world concern or metaphysical speculations on the nature of thought. This is the beginning of right accounting.

The other part of the accounting is to realize that the person has accepted his/her own state of consciousness or mental standards as the test of reality; all outside its orbit tends to become false or non-existent. This is the sign of the original ignorance which is the root of the ego, that it can only think with itself as center as if it were the All, and of that which is not itself accepts only so much as it is mentally disposed to acknowledge or as it is forced to recognize by the shocks of its environment. This myopic view prevents us from drawing the right and full value from life and indeed is the most widespread aliment of humanity.

But if the human can find in himself/herself the strength to hold themselves responsible to their actions, owns up without escaping, then one may find themselves not alone and separate from the ALL, but as a part of an Infinite movement, and that, it is this infinite which we have to know, to be conscious and to fulfill faithfully, is the commencement of true living. This is the second part of the OP.

Such a person having resolved the false accounts and having put them in order has now earned the right to voice his/her concerns on what’s going around him/her as in “the world is burning”. Without this in-‘person’ order any concern for the world is most likely an escape from seeing the fact that one’s own house is burning.

Note: The disclaimer in op is still in effect and applies to this post as well.