I know and I understood what you were saying. But the culprit for this is the translator AND my inattention for forgetting to check that the translator had not modified the original quotes.
p.s.: I use different translators to check that I am really saying what I mean. By the way, I have found that most translators do not translate [DeepL mainly], but interpret what you tell them to translate. So if someone uses an online translator without knowing the language he wants to translate into, he might think he is saying what he means when he might not).
Can thought move without there being a thinker first?
If thought exists independently of a thinker, to what purpose does thought, as you say, project a ‘thinker’ separate from itself? Which might lead us to inquire into what exactly Krishnamurti meant when he told us “you are nothing because you do not exist”. What exactly is this ‘you’ to which he refers? Can we go into it?
Of course you do. You may not know it about others, but you know it about yourself. So let’s say I go to listen to Krishnamurti out of curiosity or because I think my life is a mess and maybe I can find something there to improve it. So I’m there listening to what he says, and I realise that he’s not talking about others, but about myself. What comes next?
p.s.: we are investigating, not telling each other what it is or it is not.
Oh, look, @DanMcD says the thought creates the thinker, and now you say the brain uses the thought to create the thinker. Let me ask then, who initially conditioned the brain if both the thought and the thinker, so you say, are its creations subsequent to that conditioning? Forget what Krishnamurti has said about it, we are investigating without prior knowledge of it.
p.s.: I’m sorry to have to interrupt this intense and interesting conversations but I must go to sleep. We will continue tomorrow. Good night or good morning depending on where you are in the world.