The ultimate Krishnamurti teaching is to be free from Krishnamurti teachings.
???
(I am going to keep working on the koan wording till it feels right.)
If Krishnamurti was as selfless as we assume he was, he was surrounded and hounded by insane, miserable humans and had no choice but to direct our attention to the human condition, and what, if anything, we could do about it.
What I am suggesting with the OP statement is that these are incompatible:
Deeply grokking Krishnamurtiās insights into the human/world condition.
Treating these insights as scripture and/or Krishnamurti as a guru.
The notion of no-path-fulness needs to go all the way.
Could it be that the pathological brain knows only paths and, knowing this, Krishnamurti leads one down the path that demonstrates why there is no path to self-knowledge?
This would be quite brilliant pedagogically. Work with what your āstudentsā can do and use this ability (whatever it is, even if itās āpathologicalā) to present your insight/point.
Yes, when itās obvious to you what the other doesnāt see or understand what they need to see and understand, all you have to work with is what they do see and understand.
Thatās what Krishnamurti was doing, but we donāt know if he was successful. All we know is that a lot of people take his teaching seriously, but we donāt how many - if any - came out the other side.
Is possible for us to use this approach with thought? Thought is good at, at home with ideas. How about āinceptingā the idea into our thought engines that thought is limited and often results in horrible unnecessary suffering? What will thought do with this?
I personally know a handful Iād say have truly deeply āgotten itā out of hundreds Iāve had the opportunity to observe.
This much we know, and this knowledge transforms confidence into diffidence, certainty into doubt.
What will thought do with this?
Thought is just the tool. The question is what the self-knowing brain does with what it learns about its abuse of thought.
What are good skillful ways of speaking to the āself-knowing brainā? Ways that would use the brainās inherent strengths and abilities to get the message across: āDude you really should take a look in the mirror, see what youāve wrought!ā How do you deliver this message in the brainās native language?
May I help here? ā¦ The ultimate understanding of emptiness is to see that the understanding of emptiness is itself empty.
1 Like
This works well when emptiness is understood in the Buddhist context: sunyata.
Please help me understand why those of us still on āthis sideā devote our energy to finding out how many have made it āto the other sideā.
Messaging is all we have, and thatās why thereās no seeing, no awakening.
As long as the stream of content keeps streaming, I donāt see how the brain can do anything but acknowledge its activity.
Thatās why it also works with Krishnamurti, as he also uses the word āÅÅ«nya(tÄ)ā to refer to the core of his own teachingā¦ minute 4:26 in this short video (link starts right at that minute)
1 Like
But how can you know who has āgotten itā if you havenāt got it? I canāt honestly say Krishnamurti had āgotten itā - I just choose to assume he knew what he was talking about.
Hope springs eternal?
Itās my best guess, based on intuition, and intuition is fickle.
The self-aware brain has a degree of intelligence, or it wouldnāt be self-aware. Perhaps this provides possibilities for getting it to pay profound attention. Is there a way for us to make the brain truly deeply aware of its potential for good and harm?
This brainās question is whether the brain can turn off the bubble machine to see what happens?