When I look at you without any analysis of who you are, that’s also the negation of myself, isn’t it? I wouldn’t even call it awareness - I am just looking at you.
It’s alright - you will come back to it when you are ready.
Yes when I look without analysis, judgement, then the ‘I’ is not there. There has to be an awareness of what is in my ‘looking’ that is of the past in order for the negation of that to happen.
Why wait? Why not just look? In other words, it is much simpler to negate time.
When time as thought is ended there is only ‘now’.
1 Like
No, I don’t know what there is - thought has invented all these strange concepts, including ‘now and then’ and ‘you and me’.
There IS what is seen, what is heard, this body , that tree, that bird, that sound of the plane overhead…
1 Like
But, you see, thought is already at it. When I look at you, I am not sure what I see. Nor am I sure what is looking.
You are looking at words on a screen. These eyes are looking at a river, it is there. I am typing words of description.
You are awareness, be ‘sure’ of that.
No, please, I am not seeking certainty here. That is just a nasty trick. I am saying something very simple: I am just looking at you.
" What is negation?"
Negation
n.
- the act of denying: He shook his head in negation of the charge.
- a denial: a negation of one’s beliefs.
- something that is without existence; nonentity.
- the absence or opposite of something considered positive or affirmative: Darkness is the negation of light.
- a negative statement, idea, concept, doctrine, etc.; a contradiction, refutation, or rebuttal.
ne•ga′tion•al, adj.
Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright
But you are not looking at me. And you have used the word ‘nasty’. Inappropriate.
Of course I am. I have told you so. Why do you doubt it? You are the entity DanMcD. Who else is there to look at?
I have to break this off now so we’ll see.
Regarding the ‘negation’ of time. This doesn’t apply to ‘practical’ time, growth cycles etc but only to psychological time, the time needed to get rid of this or that etc. And psychologically there actually is no such thing as time only the movement of thoughts… So the negation of psychological thought is the negation of time.
The questioner asks , what is negation?
What is his intention when he asks that question?
Does he want to know the English meaning of that word which has no value in Krishnamurti forum.
If he wants to know what the teachings has to say (which I think he is not interested) then the answer is that Krishnamurti doesn’t define negation but he says negation of the negative is positive. He doesn’t say negate everything like what some do in K’s forums.
Come back to it when you are ready. It doesn’t matter that we are not visually or audibly here; there is already plenty to look at.
Is it? I said I am not seeking certainty. It is the idea or the belief or the assumption that there can ever be certainty in this area which makes us plump for such words as ‘awareness’ or ‘intelligence’ or any one of a dozen others. That’s the nasty trick we play on ourselves whenever we begin to search for definite answers about our own essential nature. These words then generate a lot of arguments between us. Or, even worse, we both might agree on one particular word and then feel we have achieved some sort of synthesis or connection. We are too easily mesmerised by words - that’s all I am saying.
But when we are just looking at each other, everything is there. Any words we might then add to it don’t come from the looking but from the looking away.
There is truly something immense here - here being the utter simplicity of you and me together - but it is very rare that any two people stick with it right to the end. I feel that the whole of the teachings is in this, not in all the usual silly words we throw at each other. You may agree or disagree - and I may be right or I may be wrong - but the only way to discover if there is any truth in all of this is to meet it head-on.
For myself I would say yes it has. Thank you.
Excerpt from K’s: “Letters to a Young Friend”
“The real thing is man’s discontent, the inevitable discontent. It is a precious thing, a jewel of great worth. But one’s afraid of it, one dissipates it, uses it or allows it to be used to bring about certain results. Man is frightened of it, but it is a precious jewel, without value. Live with it, watch it day after day, without interfering with its movements, then it is as a flame burning away all the dross, leaving that which is homeless and measureless “
1 Like
I am not interested in myself because I can deceive myself a thousand times over. Has our conversation changed the nature of our relationship? Are we able to look at one another without a trace of analysis, suspicion, desire - you know, without all the chicanery of thought? When this has happened, we’ll both know it together. Or are we still caught in time, waiting for this miracle to happen?