But there can be no image without the word. There is a tree outside in the garden. It is a magnificent cedar tree, a hundred feet tall. The words and the images of this tree may exist in my mind, which I then call my consciousness. So I have made the tree part of my limited consciousness. But the tree itself is part of an unlimited consciousness, which exists free from both words and images.
Hi inquiry
I observed thoughts are rooted in music, visual art, and imagery as you said. I mentioned that out of them, music and visual art are again created by thought. In the previous reply, my question was not clear, of course.
I felt that images are a natural aspect of the mind, which happens for elephants too. But âMUSICâ and âVISUAL ARTâ, are created by thought.
Why our thoughts are rooted in such kinds of aspects, which are created by thought again?
Hope my explanation is clear.
Hii paul
I have a question, as you mentioned that there can be no image without the word. 
How do animals like elephants, dogs, and other pets recognize their owner?
Our thinking stays near the question, but not fully with it. We jump around quite a bit.
Youâve got it backwards. A word means nothing if it doesnât refer to something. Words are formed to represent that which already exists.
You use a tree to make your point, but trees existed long before the human brain formed a mental image of a tree and gave it a name.
What is the totality of thought? It is not the contents of memory and knowledge, because those contents can expand and contract; therefore they can never be complete. So what is the totality of thought?
This is a brand new question. Thereâs no answer to it in any book. But if we put the question seriously, with heartfelt desire to find out, the question itself will lead us to the answer. If we are just playing around with a lot of different questions, however, weâll come up with a lot of different answers, all of them from the incompleteness of thought.
Can you conjure up an image, any image at all, without getting caught in the words that are attached to the image?
Ask the animals. We are talking about the human brain.
Yes and no. We canât do anything without knowledge, and knowledge is always of what was true yesterday or ten thousand years ago. So it depends on whether the knowledge upon which one acts is still valid or not. Krishnamurti said that our minds are disorderly because they operate on the assumption that I exist as I imagine myself, and not as I actually am at this moment.
Your answer is silly and I can assume that you do not know the answer.
We human beings are social animals, evolved out of monkey. We think human beings only will have emotions, memory and intelligence. For example, elephant will have similar emotions to human being. An elephant can remember a person and recognize him after years.
My point is that there will be image, without word. I have observed inside my mind, many times. Which is quite opposite to your conclusion.
âBut there can be no image without the wordâ
No, and thatâs because the word becomes inextricably attached to the image - not because it has prior existence or significance.
It has significance to thought, thatâs the point. Thought is rooted in the verbal. And thought is you.
You donât have to assume a thing: I donât know the answer. The animals may know, so leave them to it.
So youâve said, repeatedly. Iâve explained to you why this is not true, but you always stick to your guns, regardless of what is true. You have an image to uphold.
Charley used to be able to visualize; now, canât form an image for beans - yup, Iâve tried! (lol) Thought creates images as well. And, the root of thought is fear⌠Intellectually, one may think that the root of thought is the word (which is like saying that the root of thought is thought !!! - silly, eh?), but the fact is that the root of thought (or the image) is fear. Charley has seen that. Everyone forgets that the brain will say anything, do anything to maintain a sense of security. Does anyone ask why? Because it is afraid⌠All one has to do is look inside. Of course, any thought is composed of words, but the word itself is not the root of the thought, it is fear. Of course, one can also look outside, around oneself as well, see how people maintain thought and images of others so as to keep their illusion of relationships operating, even if and especially if those relationships are dysfunctional.
You have been missing the point. There is something wordless before thought takes it over. But the very moment one is aware of the wordless, that awareness is the origin of the self. We are exploring the nature of this reality. There is no right or wrong, true or untrue. Those are merely the verbal indicators that keep us separate in this kind of enquiry.
The entire universe is a wordless phenomenon, vast, infinite, beautiful, wild, unexplored and dangerous. It is neither connected nor separate; it is the whole of existence; it is one whole wordless consciousness. Thought breaks it up - thatâs all. In the breaking up, consciousness then becomes an adjunct of thought, a personal and limited series of experiences put and held together in memory as words and images. I am rooted in that. Whereas to talk of being rooted in the wordless is an absurdly arrogant suggestion.
The âwordâ is the separator. âBeing rootedâ separates that which is ârootedâ from what it is rooted in. But the âtreeâ is not separate from the earth, or the light or the airâŚThe words âtreeâ, âlightâ, âairââ are creations of the human brain. There are no such things.
The statement:
is what is known as moral relativism.
K said:
âPut it differently. What is virtue, morality? Is morality transient? Is morality relative? Or is it absolute? For us, in the modern world, morality is relative, and that relativism is nearly destroying us.â
Public Talk 3 Saanen, Switzerland - 18 July 1974
âAt present, all political, religious, social and economic life and moral relativism - which is rampant in the world now - are based on thought, which is divisive, contradictory and breeding misery.â
Public Talk 2 Saanen, Switzerland - 16 July 1974
Anyone who holds such a belief ignores the facts of murder, rape, incest, genocide, etc. Holding such a belief exculpates those who do such things. It is thought that has invented/fabricated this idea, so as to avoid looking within. In other words, it is nothing more than what are known as rationalizations, excuses in order justify their behaviour. Tyrants and bullies use moral relativism to justify their lies.
Originally, when Charley saw this topic, the inner and the outer, Charley wondered whether the topic would be about a person seeing what is happening outside in the world, and then looking at what is happening inside, and perhaps about passive awareness, but no !!! All of this demonstrates an astonishing lack of awareness of what is happening in the world, and what is happening within.
No, you are taking a phrase out of context and making it fit your agenda.
Yes, and words are necessary when there is actual separation, which is the physical space between two objects. Otherwise, we would still be living in caves.