Understanding and Insight -Superficial Understanding - Part-1.

Quote Dev Singh:

Understanding and Insight by Dev Singh

A few years before his death, prompted by his biographer Mary Lutyens, Krishnamurti wrote a summary of his entire message. In this piece, entitled "The Core of the Teaching", Krishnamurti writes:

When man becomes aware of the movement of his own thoughts he will see the division between the thinker and thought, the observer and the observed, the experience and the experiencer. He will discover that this division is an illusion. Then only is there pure observation which is insight without any shadow of the past or of time.

Krishnamurti here seems to suggest that the human mind is not limited to the familiar state of consciousness characterized by a clear separation between a subject (the experiencer) and an object (the experience). In addition to this everyday way of experiencing, Krishnamurti claims that the human mind also has the capacity for perceiving reality "purely", that is to say in a direct, non-personal manner, one that is not processed through an egocentric consciousness.
Although it's possible to imagine what such a state of non-duality might resemble, these musings rarely go beyond the realm of the intellect. For us, the separation between the observer and the observed lies at the heart of our actual experience, unquestioned and unquestionable. In fact, the sense of separation is so real that we find ourselves in a state of constant tension with our environment. We view the environment as an external agency, one that has the power to shape and influence who we are. Despite our strong intuitive feeling to the contrary, Krishnamurti nonetheless keeps on insisting that the individual and its environment are in fact one and the same thing.
--End of quote.

This is the beginning part of the article. Dev Singh has arranged this article, where he begins with a Krishnmurti quote and states his understanding on them.

It is surprising with the beginning of his explaining of K, Dev says, "Krishnamurti here seems to suggest", showing his lack of understanding, instead of starting the sentence as "Krishnamurti here clearly shows" and to explain it with some examples to make us understand, what K has meant.

Next Dev says in the same para, "Krishnamurti claims that the human mind also has the capacity for perceiving reality "purely". Be it what K claims or not, what is the Dev's understanding of that "perceiving reality purely"? If at least, in experiencing the reality, if Dev have "perceived reality purely" to some few seconds at least, then he would have explained it using his experience of the reality.  Hence, he does not understand K, but only analytically imagines what K may have meant.    

Next in the next para he begins with, "Although it's possible to imagine..". Who is interested with what Dev imagines? Reader should be enlightened to of what his understanding of K by examples, of Dve experiencing the same.

Dev says. " For us, the separation between the observer and the observed lies at the heart of our actual experience, unquestioned and unquestionable." So Dev without proving that there is a separation of "observer and the observed", and not elaborating on the "his experience of the 'separation", by at least with one example of his own, he makes a sweeping statement of a conclusion not only for himself, but for, 'For us' of the 'our' actual experience. Does this throw any light on what K says about this separation? Even a grade 5 student would agree that there is a separation between him and the rest, which is the superficial consciousness of a separation everyone experience. Does K talks about this superficial separation, without?

Next Dev says, "In fact, the sense of separation is so real that we find ourselves in a state of constant tension with our environment". K does not speak about a 'sense of separation', but he speaks about the actual 'experience of separation', not with the "our environment" , but within oneself. This Dev has not understood, not only because he failed to experience the same, but he even did not read K closely.

Dev says, "Krishnamurti nonetheless keeps on insisting that the individual and its environment are in fact one and the same thing." Again wrong. What K says is, the 'Division is entirely a matter of seeing that one is divided within, and to end that division making a relationship of oneself with himself, thus ending the conflict within'. This Dev has to understand, just reading K carefully.

Dev must understand that when K speaks about the "environment", it is in relation to being Aware of the same. Being of Aware of the "environment", if that ends with that  Awareness, then there does not arise a "separation", within, i.e. Observer and Observed.

So the main theme of the quote of K, i.e the division of observer and observed, was not brought into light, since Dev has a superficial understanding of K.

(There is a possibility of Dev removing the article from the site, hence I have saved it, fully. Next post will be Part-2 of the same).

                                                         

< Previous                         First                            NEXT ->