How is it that Krishnamurti did not “mind what happens”?
How is it possible to never be shocked, stunned, surprised, disarmed, disappointed, perturbed, bewildered, bemused, caught off guard or taken aback by what happens? Wouldn’t one have to be prepared for what happens by having foresight enough to see where events are going before they get here?
Was Krishnamurti always prepared for what happens because his brain was free, in communion with intelligence which involves foresight?
Did the response I quoted by the lady on the other thread not click with you at all? :
“I don’t mind what happens” doesn’t mean I am heartless, that I don’t care - it means that I am “not applying my acquisitive mind” to my experience.
To me it meant (not-minding) that his “secret” was that ‘he’ was free of the body / brain and its ups and downs… and this fits (also to me) with what his response to Bohm was when Bohm mentioned the death of the body; K called it trivial! To me that meant, rightly or wrongly, that ‘he’ no longer ‘minded’ or partook (?) of what happens to the body / brain in the way the ‘self’ does.
He was the ‘world’, not K…. because he saw that “there is no division”. (And stated so, emphatically!)
What’s to “click”? That’s just her belief, theory, speculation.
Is “my acquisitive mind” not I? Is there an I that has control over its “acquisitive mind”? Or is there only the conditioned response to acquire, and at best, awareness of doing so?