In the earlier posts, I dealt on the Memory gaps or failures leading to Fragmentations. But here I would deal with cognitive failures, before taking up more memory failures in the future posts.
When an ordinary person becomes Aware of a new Mango tree without fruits, he will recognize it as a mango tree without fruits, even though he had only seen Mango trees with fruits earlier, and in his memory those images and words are there to compare and to recognize. This recognition is the thinking, as "This is a Mango tree, without fruits", backed by the words and images in memory. He may not feel that his thinking as a Condition of the past, nor he would feel Divided within, leading to insecurity, fear and suffering.
But it is not the Situation for K. Why K feels Divided, when he sees a tree and when 'thoughts' do arise, which he sees as a Condition? What exactly a Condition?
According to K's explanation, the past knowledge in the memory acts as the Condition, that is past words, images, knowledge, etc., are the Conditions. What does the 'Condition' do? It makes one rigid, making one unable to see the things, one becomes aware of, as it is.
Did the ordinary person above, who became aware of the mango tree, is conditioned? Was he unable to see the new Mango tree 'as it is'? He was able to see the mango tree 'as it is', without fruits. Before, I explain this situation, let us look at a 'Conditioned' thinking of a mango tree by K.
Example of a 'Conditioned' thinking, by K.
Young K is with his friends out side. K becomes aware of a Mango tree, without fruits. The present image of the Mango tree does not appear in his mind as the present image (K is non-Cognitive, the Gap), to compare with old memory items of mango trees. Hence, there is no recognition of the present as it is. But past image of the mango tree arises as the 'Thought', as the present mango tree, which K become aware of, where that past memory image and the words, had mango fruits in it, but not the present mango tree.
K - (pointing) Look, lets go and pick those mangoes.
Boy -1 - Where?, is there any mangoes? I cannot see.
Boy -2 - K is dreaming or his eye sight have gone bad.
All - (Laugh). (K starts to doubt his thinking.)
Hence, if one cannot capture the present image of the mango tree, (be cognitive), to first to recognize it, in relation to the past, that it as a mango tree, and to retain the present image (a cognition can last for some duration as one requires it, or he can refresh it by observing it many times more, until he complete his thinking of it) to see the tree does not have mango fruits in it, to see as it is, then his thinking is entirely will be based on the past image and words, which is a Condition, a rigidity, which makes the movement of the mind impossible.
An ordinary person who recognizes, present image of the mango tree by comparing it to past knowledge and image of mango trees, sees the present mango tree as it is, having no fruits in it.
But on the other hand, K was unable to retain the present image (Cognition) of the mango tree, he became aware of, thinks in terms of a past image and knowledge, and thinks the tree as having mangoes. he is Conditioned by the past, rigid, and does not see as it is.
When he discloses his thinking to others, who have the normal thinking, their reactions to K is negative. Hence, K does not want to own, his own thinking. So 'thinking' becomes an alien thing, 'Not Me'. To avoid this perpetual condition of Thinking, as 'Not me', is to not to think. The solution, therefore is a thought-less state.
In a thought-less state, there would be awareness of the present tree, as it is, hence no Fragmentation.
Unable to retain the present image of anything K becomes aware of, that is unable to be cognitive in the mind, to compare the present image with that of past to understand the present, K's mind is Conditioned to bring up the past image and words only, in trying to understand the present, and K understand the present as the past. K was not able to escape from this Condition, Hence he was trying to Respond to the present, the tree, since the present image is not there, his response from the past is 'Not Me', meaning that is not what he want to do. That is he does not want to respond from the past, which is erroneous.
This error, which K becomes aware of, generates insecurity, fear and sufferings, because of the bad experiences he had, when he tried to communicate his thoughts with others, which brought negative reactions from the others.
Since, he knew, starting from his childhood experiences, his thinking is flawed, the Thinking itself brings in insecurity, fear, sufferings, as he could not have a positive relationship with others, and he feels his Thinking as 'Not Me', an alien thing, hence K was torn, Divided and fragmented. This he generalizes for others as well, and was trying to offer solution of the Pathless, he found, to others as well.
Responding To A Tree, A Door And A Flower, By Krishnamurti.
Quote Krishnamurti:
So there is the superficial awareness of the tree, the bird, the door, and there is the response to that, which is thought, feeling, emotion. Now when we become aware of this response, we might call it a second depth of awareness. There is the awareness of the rose, and the awareness of the response to the rose. Often we are unaware of this response to the rose. In reality it is the same awareness which sees the rose and which sees the response. It is one movement and it is wrong to speak of the outer and inner awareness. When there is a visual awareness of the tree without any psychological involvement there is no division in relationship. But when there is a psychological response to the tree, the response is a conditioned response, it is the response of past memory, past experiences, and the response is a division in relationship. This response is the birth of what we shall call the "me" in relationship and the "non-me".
Chapter- Awareness. Book- The Urgency of Change.
End of Quote.
When an ordinary person, after becoming aware of a tree, door and a flower, he may choose to think about it. But he would not consider the thinking as a Response, to what he has seen. When thinking, he will not consider the thinking as an activity not done by himself, as Not Me. He will feel that he is choosing or not choosing to think. Thinking about a tree, door or a flower is a choice for him.
But on the other hand, when Krishnamurti become aware of a tree, door and a flower, two things can happen to him.
1. The awareness ending itself, without causing or forcing a Response from Krishnamurti,
2. Or K is forced to Responded, which is 'Thinking', as there is no way where K can make a choice here as to 'Think' or 'not to Think'.
So if K is 'Responding', that is if K is 'Thinking', then it is 'Not Me' who is thinking. It is a Condition therefore, which K cannot choose to avoid. It is a Condition based on the past images, words and knowledge purely,
Then this Thinking or Response, apart from creating 'Not me', which is the Thinking itself, which is the Division or Fragmentation of the mind, there is an outcome of this Division. That is insecurity, fear and sufferings.
So let us examine Why this happens to Krishnamurti, but not to an ordinary person.
An ordinary person, even if he becomes aware of his 'Thoughts', the Response, he would not consider it as a Response, but would take it as, "I am thinking". So this shows Krishnamurti is not thinking on his own, but forced to think, To Respond, which he has no control, but only can be aware of this 'Thinking', The Response, which he calls the second depth of awareness.
An ordinary person would reveal his thinking to others, communicate with others, about the tree or anything, without receiving any negative comments or denials. Hence, he would not feel insecure in thinking. No doubt would arise of what he has thought. No fear would arise to communicate, what he thinks. All these thinking applies to practical nature of one's activities. But for a person like Krishnamurti, because of the Gaps in the mind, may be it a cognitive gap or memory gap or both, all the problems arise, leading to insecurity in thinking, as thinking happens to oneself, having no control over it. Then doubt arise, whether the 'Thought' is correct. Hence, fear arise to communicate it. This situation leads to suffering.
Let me give an example of a Memory Gap, where K tries to Respond to the Door.
Example:
Krishnamurti at the back of the class. The door to the class is at the back of the class, near to K. Someone is knocking at the door, which is closed, and has to be opened by turning the door handle and pulling inside.
Teacher - Krishna, go open the door.
K goes to the door. He is aware 'open' and 'door' of the words of the teacher. These awareness of the two words, brings into the Memory of him 'opening' a 'door' by pushing outward, in his house. The memory of 'Turing the handle' and pulling inwards are absent.
Hence, he pushes the door outward, even does not touch the handle.
Children - Krishna, turn the handle and pull the door in!
Krishnamurti trying to Respond to the awareness of the words, "Krishna, turn the handle and pull the door in!", but in trying to respond to those words he becomes aware of, the only memory which crops into his mind is, pushing the door open at his house. Hence, K even without touching the handle, pushes the door outwards,again.
All the children laugh and one child gets up and comes to open the door.
Hence, unable to think correctly and act correctly, that is Respond correctly within and without, K start to be insecure in his acts of thinking as well as actions and speech, based on the thinking. He starts to disown his own thinking as 'Not Me'. So when there is 'Thinking' he feels it a s a response to what he became aware of.
This response brings in 'Doubt', whether it be correct. The 'Doubt' creates fear, insecurity. All this cause sufferings and continued experiences like this cement the Condition, which is Thinking in terms of past, without being able to compare the past to the present cognition, as cognition is absent as well as memory, and thus without being able to Cognize the present and think accordingly.
The Advantage of Knowing the Gap for Krishnamurti.
Thinking or Thoughts, which arise on its own, according to Krishnamurti, is the Response to an object one becomes aware of. Since these thinking or thoughts brings a Division or fragmentation, they cause insecurity, doubt, fear and sufferings.
Once, this Fragmentation get established in the mind, and become known to oneself, of one's Fragmentation, it brings about the Thinking or Thoughts as Responses to the object one become aware of. That is, when there is a real need to 'Think' about an object, one feels that he is trying to Respond to the object one became aware of.
An Example: A Flower.
Krishnamurti always keeps his study locked, even when he is in the study. So if anyone knock at he door, K has to open it. One day Maid comes and knocks at the door. K opens it, and the maid comes in and places a big flower in the vase and leaves. Then K closes the door and locks it.
After a while, K goes out locking the study. Then K comes back one hour later. He finds the Big flower in the vase. Krishnamurti thinks, (Responds to the flower), "Who have come to my study in my absence and have kept this flower? How could have they opened the door, as I am the only one having the Key? There is someone having a duplicate key. He is spying on me!"
This type of Memory Gaps, which may not be regained, would create insecurity and suspicion of everyone, as they were spying on him. In this situation, one may not suspect the accuracy or correctness of his thinking, but he may be much more sure, that what he thinks is to be correct. But if he communicates his idea of someone spying on him, then there would be denials, laughs, ridicule, etc., which can create doubt in, in his thinking as well as doubt in everyone, suspecting everyone. Hence, one would feel 'Lonely' and abandoned. Hence, the inner Division would bring a Division, without as well.
An Example: A Bird.
Krishnamurti is in the garden with his brother. K sees a beautiful bird in a tree, and he was 'aware' of it. After a while, K want to tell his brother to look at the bird, and wanted to tell about the beauty of the bird and wanted to find out what type of bird is that, as brother is a bird expert.
So, K tries to think a suitable sentence to address the brother about the bird. That is, K was trying to Respond to the Bird. But when he tries, the past memory of the word 'Bird' does not come, as well as the past images of the birds does not come, as memory. What comes into the memory is the words of 'cat' and the images of cats. Hence, K tries to dispel these words and images and, tries again and again to think about the 'bird' he became aware of.
Then he silently gets up and walks up to his brother, drawing brothers attention to the bird in the tree, by pointing out by the finger. Brother after looking at it says, "Don't worry, that tree snake is harmless".
So disturbed and confused by his awareness and trying to 'Think' of a bird, which was denied by his brother, with a feeling of doubt about his thinking, K silently walks towards his room.
The Advantage of Knowing the Gap.
Krishnamurti had looked into his mind very attentively to identify, how it works. He recognized that his mind is Divided, Fragmented, when he Thinks. K also found if he does not think, the problem of Division does not arise, leading to insecurity, doubt, fear and sufferings. The solution he found for this situation is to remain 'Thoughtless', and this state K could not achieve as a goal or as an aim, but it has to happen, as 'Thinking' is happening to him, rather than K is thinking. Since, Krishnamurti was able to recognize the problem, and it had an advantage for him, bringing in a solution to the problem, which is Thoughtless, and which is Pathless as well.
So 'Thoughtless' is Pathless, that it has to happen, in the same way the 'Thinking' also for K is Pathless, just happens.
But what K could not detect in his mind are the attributes of the mind, which are missing creating a Gap, leading to Division and Fragmentation within, which K tries to relate to superficial Divisions and Fragmentations which exists in the society. When one has forgotten something of the past, then it is a Memory Gap, which makes an inability to compare the present object one becomes aware of, to the past similar objects in the mind to identify and recognize the present. Hence, K feels, that he is trying to Respond to the object he became aware of, which brings in erroneous details of the past, which do not have any relevance to the present object, K becomes aware of. K was able to detect this error, but he could not detect the attribute which is missing. When K has forgotten, how he can detect that he has forgotten, unless after a while the remembrance get restored, which never happens to K.
Apart from this Memory Gap, which happens to Krishnamurti, there is Cognitive Gap as well, hence what K become aware of cannot be compared with the similar objects of the past to recognize the present. Usually when we become aware of a tree, and if we want to think about the tree, we retain an image of the present tree we became aware of in our minds. That is by looking at the tree many times, we can enhance the Present Image, which is the Cognition of the tree, then we bring into the mind past similar images from the Memory store, and compare and recognize. This recognition is the Thinking, which may came as, "Oh this is a mango tree" by comparison or, "Oh, what is this tree? I have never seen this before", as there is nothing similar to be compared in past memory.
Hence, this Cognition of the present object, which takes place in the Mind, prior to the Thinking (Recognition), and Krishnamurti never discussed this cognition, as it is absent from K's mind creating a Gap between the Awareness and the Thinking. Hence for Krishnamurti, thinking is purely based on the Past memory alone, and gives rise to incorrect, erroneous thinking, which he therefore feels as a Response to the Awareness, rather than an act of continuity of flow of events, without having any gaps, division and fragmentation.
This brings in the end of the discussion of the Gaps and attributes of the Gaps, where I have only taken two attributes of the mind as constituting the Gaps. But there are other mind attributes, which are missing from K's mind, which I would not discuss at present, as these what I have taken is enough to explain the Gaps.
Hallucinations In Krishnamurti, Is The Result Of The Cognition Gaps.
Absence of cognition in one's mind forces one to think in terms of past, without being able to relate to the present, the present being what one cognizes (the image of the present object one becomes aware of) . When this becomes a habit, where one cannot cognize the present image, hence only thinks in terms of Past, it would lead to Hallucinations. How?
Mind always tries to compare its past knowledge, words, visual images, sound images, etc., stored in the memory, that with the cognitive words and images which mind temporarily captures of the present, to be compared with and to think. When mind fails to do this, due to cognitive Gaps, where one cannot be cognitive to the present just as Krishnamurti, Mind will play a trick. Mind will produce the past Images of visuals, sounds, etc., as present images of Cognitions, making one to feel that he is 'seeing' things, hearing things, etc., which are taking palace at present. Then the mind will interact with such false cognitions, with that of the past to recognize them and to think of them as present cognition, which is false. This is hallucination, where the Gaps in cognition itself is 'not present objects', but is filled by the past memory objects itself and recognized by the past itself, as thinking.
This happened to Krishnamurti.
Quote:
In 1903, the family settled in Cudappah, where Krishnamurti had contracted malaria during a previous stay. He would suffer recurrent bouts of the disease over many years. A sensitive and sickly child, "vague and dreamy," he was often taken to be intellectually disabled, and was beaten regularly at school by his teachers and at home by his father. In memoirs written when he was eighteen years (1923) old, Krishnamurti described psychic experiences, such as seeing his sister, who had died in 1904, and his late mother.
Source: Wikipedia
End of Quote.
What are the outcomes of Hallucinations? It is same as Division or Fragmentation in thinking. When one communicate such experiences, others would understand that such a thing did not happen. So he would be denied by others, ridiculed, laughed at, etc., which would cause, insecurity, doubt, fear, sufferings, etc.
This will lead to one to seclude oneself from the society, work, with friends and family. Such one needs care, love and understanding by others to overcome this situation of fear and insecurity, but not to cure oneself from the problems within.
Kriahnamurti was lucky to have this care, love and understanding, thanks to Theosophical Society, which took care of him. Otherwise what would have happened to Krishnamurti?
Quote:
Following his discovery by Leadbeater, Krishnamurti was nurtured by the Theosophical Society in Adyar. Leadbeater and a small number of trusted associates undertook the task of educating, protecting, and generally preparing Krishnamurti as the "vehicle" of the expected World Teacher. Krishnamurti (often later called Krishnaji) and his younger brother Nityananda (Nitya) were privately tutored at the Theosophical compound in Madras, and later exposed to a comparatively opulent life among a segment of European high society, as they continued their education abroad. Despite his history of problems with schoolwork and concerns about his capacities and physical condition, the 14-year-old Krishnamurti was able to speak and write competently in English within six months.Lutyens says that later in life Krishnamurti came to view his "discovery" as a life-saving event. Often, he was "asked in later life what he thought would have happened to him if he had not been 'discovered' by Leadbeater. He would unhesitatingly reply, 'I would have died'.
Source:Wikipedia
End of Quote.
Since, these love, care and understanding took care of Krishnamurti, he was able to concentrate on the problem he had and able to understand the Division within him, without suspecting anyone around him of as spying on him or to fear them, though fear, insecurity arise in him.
So, K was able to look at these inner problems, with much attentiveness and was able to explain them with much accuracy, choosing unambiguous words and also not mixing up with similar words. But only he was not able to detect the missing attributes of the Mind, which gave rise to the Gaps in the mind, which is understandable, as how one can guess of a missing item, since there is no way to detect them.
But the Krishnamurti's attempt to relate the inner Division with that of superficial division which exists in the outside world, leads to an erroneous lot of explanations, which covers 95% of his discourses. Hence, it is evident, that the reader or listener of Krishnamurti, usually who don't have this problem of inner Division or Fragmentation in his thinking, mislead by these grand explanations of the superficial, without being able to understand the factual Division within Krishnamurti.
It is evident, that misled by this superficial explanations of Krishnamurti of his inner Division, and when K says this problem of Division can be ended, when one understand the division, thus one comes to the realization of the Unknown, The Thoughtless, which is Pathless. Though, it has happened as it is, to Krishnamurti, since he had the Division or Fragmentation of the mind, will it would happen to a person who is not fragmented in his thinking? But many who understand Krishnamurti, superficially, seems to expect this to happen to them, and they wait 'without expectation', or 'without desire' that to happen, as K said that one cannot desire or expect it, then it would be perpetuating the division further. But for these people, who don't have the division, it would not be a perpetuation to desire or expect, but even if they "desire and expect" or "not desire and expect", it would not happen to them, since they don't have the Division within.
Is The Pathless, Only For Krishnamurti And The Fragmented? Yes.
Is it really Pathless?
No it is not Pathless, but Krishnamurti feels as such, as his mind is Divided and Fragmented, K could not detect the Path he went through, with the missing Mind attributes playing the role, constituting the Path, and in leading along a path to that of The Thoughtless, Unknown.
We all know and have experienced, that when we desire something, and when we don't know how to get it, and then we forget about it, even may drop the desire, to search for it. Then comes the moment of revelation or knowledge or encounter someone with the necessary information, etc., leading us to get that thing we desired. Or we may have experienced, that the obstacles which were standing in the way preventing us to get the thing we desire has gone away. This situation or happening is true for the inner desire of getting an understanding of something or remembering something, as well as outside material objects.
Once I was walking along in a road in a different town and remembered that there was a friend living in that town, whose name I had forgotten. I tried to remember his name in many ways, but could not. Then I made a 'resolution' that his name would come into my mind. And I walked a few yards ahead, and forgot about the 'resolution' and the desire and the expectation to remember his name. The Name cropped up in the mind, immediately. I did this because I had this experiences earlier, where I used to do this and get the results.
When I was practicing Buddhist Bhavana, that is The Development Of The Mind, one of the important and the main method I used is this Resolutions, which is known as Adishtana, in Pali. There at the beginning of the Bhavana practice, I would make about 5 to 7 resolutions (Adistana) relating to the difficulties in Bhavana which I want to overcome and to reduce them, as well as the positive aspects I have already achieved, and to increase the intensity and the duration of such positive things. But what I have understood here is one has to totally forget the 'Resolutions', while practising and totally must not expect them to happen. But there will be the expectation and desire for them to happen, remaining in a subdued way in the mind , but the 'Resolutions' won't happen until one has the desire and the expectation. The moment one drops the desire and the expectation, being tired of it or else, the 'Resolutions' take place.
So, what does happen in the mind, for the 'Resolutions' to materialize, or to take effect?
When, one makes a 'Resolutions', it is out of desire and expectation one does it. The 'Resolution' goes to the subconscious mind as well, where that subconscious mind has the knowledge and means to provide for the solutions, to make it happen. When we decide and desire for something, we do it in the conscious mind. What goes and reside in the subconscious is not the what we have decided as it is, but it get transformed as an 'Intentions', instead of as 'Decisions'. Intentions belongs to only to subconscious, where those intentions are without any desire and expectation, because desire and expectations are conscious mind attributes.
In the subconscious mind there is no Expectations, Desires, Anger, ill will, ideas, opinions, Ego, etc., hence, it is 'Non-Discrimination', which is Love, Methta. (Normal lustful love and relationships are not Love, as it is discriminatory and gives rise to anger, when the lustful love is nor reciprocated by the other).
So as long as one expects and desires the results for his Resolutions, which are stored in the subconscious as 'Intentions, the intentions cannot materialize, as conscious mind is holding onto the Decisions and the desire and expectations of such decisions. Once these are cleared from the conscious mind, The Path is cleared for the subconscious mind to come into action, making the intention to take place.
So this is what happened to Krishnamurti. He had this insecurity, doubt, fear and suffering arising from the 'Thinking' as he understood it. Hence, Krishnamurti felt, that if he can stop the 'Thinking' which give rise to fragmentation and other related sufferings, he would be free from the agony he was undergoing. Since, he was given instructions in Meditations, there even they try to put away the thinking, and these also would have added to his expectation and desire to do away with the 'Thinking'. He struggled for years, (1922 to 1925), because he could not practice mediation, with an expectation and desire, as the expectation and the desire in the form of 'Thinking', perpetuates the Division, Fragmentation, adding more to the sufferings. So one final day in 1925, 12 days after Nitya's death, he dropped the hopes, desires and expectations in meditations to get rid of the 'Thinking', and that moment the 'Thinking' stops, as a result of the 'Intentions' he had loaded into the subconscious, thus Intentions taking effect.
Krishnamurti was able to detect the result, and to experience the same, that is 'Thoughtless', but could not detect the Path of conscious desire and expectations leading to subconscious 'Intentions, which enabled the 'Thoughtless', hence he concluded that it is Pathless to the 'Thoughtless', erroneously.
So,there are others who understand Krishnamurti well and factually, because their minds are being Divided and Fragmented, just like K, but if they hope (without hoping) to get into the Thoughtless, then they must undergo the same great sufferings as Krishnamurti experienced, and to desire and expect the Thoughtless to take place, and then to drop all the expectations and desires one has built up, after the desires and expectations get rooted in the subconscious as 'Intentions', and the moment they drop all hope, they would experience the 'Thoughtless'.
Is It Unknown To Krishnamurti Due To Missing Attributes Plus Ignorance? Yes.
When Krishnamurti came to Thoughtless state, due to great struggle he underwent, having doubt, fear, insecurity and sufferings, etc., and when Thoughts persistently arose, be it due to Awareness of neutral thing such as tree, door, bird or flower, and after abandoning any hope for any escape from thinking. Then K decided that 'Thoughtless' is Pathless. That is one comes to it without any method or any practice of mediation or any attempt involving expectation and desire.
Krishnamurti came to to this conclusion, that one comes to Thoughtless without any Path, is erroneous, because he could not detect all the mental attributes which constitutes the mind, as those attributes were not functional in Krishnamurti's Mind, having Gaps, Divisions, Fragmentations. Since he could not Meditate due to this fragmentation, which if he tried, would further perpetuate the Fragmentation, instead of dissolving the Division, increasing the sufferings. When one meditates successfully, he would go deeper into the mind and detect all the mind attributes as well as defilements of the mind, and would remove the defilements to be free from the sufferings and in that process transcend the mental attributes one by one to go deeper, understating the functions of each attributes. Since Krishnamurti did not speak about 'cognitions' and other attributes of conscious mind, it is evident he did not detect them, not because his attentiveness failed to detect, but due to the fact, that they were absent from his mind, thus contributing to the Gaps, hence Division. Failing to meditate deeply due to this Gaps, he never was able to detect subconscious attributes of the mind, which can be only detected by one who have Samadi in meditation, such as 'Intentions' of the subconscious.
So Krishnamurti was not aware of the Path he went through to come to the 'Thoughtless'. This 'Thoughtless' is an Unknown for K, because:
A. Krishnamurti did not know, how did he come to the Unknown or Thoughtless, in the first instance, due to the Gaps in his mind, hence it is Unknown.
B. Secondly, Krishnamurti did not know that meditators come to this 'Thoughtless' state, which according to Buddhism is the Second Samadi, and those attributes of the 2nd Samadi is explained and its outcomes are also well explained, but the one who comes to that state, only can understand them.
C. Even in his 'Thoughtless' state, since many mind attributes were missing, he could not fully understand the 'Thoughtless' state, and the 'Thoughtless' state did not constitute all attributes it should have.
But in 'Second Samadi' state of mind absorption, only the 'Thoughts' are absent, hence one who comes to that state by meditation having a Whole mind, but not a Non-Fragmented mind, is constantly aware of the all the mind attributes which constitutes, Second Samadi state.
At this 'Thoughtless' state there is Love, which is known as Maithree plus Karuna, which is not lustful love. Krishnamurti says there is love when one comes to 'Thoughtless', but clearly fails to say that it is not lustful love, fails to indicate that is is not a Relationship, but says it it not directed to a particular person, where K is correct. But then Krishnamurti failed to realize that it is no more an Unknown, as it can be explained, as he did, showing one attribute of Unknown, that is Love. He was also unaware, and not knowledgeable about this 'Thoughtless' state of Second Samadi, being explained already.
Though Krishnamurti says that this 'Thoughtless' state is an Unknown state. But it is not so from his point of view itself, as he says there is Love in this state, thus making it a Known things as per 'Second Samadi'. Then he says there is Peace, indicating that there is no sufferings, which also accords with the 'Second Samadi', still making this Unknown, Thoughtless state, a more of a Known thing, adding a second attribute to the Unknown. Only Krishnamurti's ignorance of this 'Second Samadi', which explained elsewhere, made him to conclude that the 'Thoughtless' state as an Unknown thing plus the two attributes of it, imagining his listing of two attributes of the Unknown, that is Love and Peace, are also to be unknown things to his listeners, thus for Listeners of Krishnamurti, both the 'Thoughtless' state plus its two attributes explained by K, i.e. Love and Peace, also are Unknown things, Making the entire thing an Unknown. How ignorantly Krishnamurti concluded, is astonishing.
Since there were missing mind functions in Krishnamurti, he only was able to feel Peace and Love in this 'Thoughtless' state of the Known, which was Unknown only to Krishnamurti. But in 'Second Samadi', there are Happiness and Joy in addition to Love and Peace. Krishnamurti did not feel Happiness and Joy due to some missing attributes of the Mind as well as Body, it is evident. Then there is 'Poise and Balance' in the Awareness, when one comes to this 'Thoughtless' state, which Krishnamurti did not explain as an attributes of the same, due to the missing mind function of 'Cognition'.
Krishnamurti Expands 'The Core Of The Teaching' To Superficial.
In the previous posts, I have analyzed how Krishnamurit's Mind is Fragmented. And due to that reason, how Krishnamurit was suffering, and as the cause of this Division within, which give rise to doubt, fear, insecurity, etc. Then how did Krishnamurti, came to the solution of Thoughtless, which he named as Unknown and how K concluded this as Pathless, as he could not see the Path he went through, due to the same reason for which he could not see the Mind attributes which constitutes the Gaps, the Division. So it is evident that the ignorance of the attributes of the Gaps, which could not be detected by K, made Krishnamurti to declare the 'Thoughtless' as Pathless.
This is the Core of the Teaching of Krishnamurti, the Fragmentation and how to end it. The rest of the teaching is based on this Core, and how Krishnamurti was trying to relate the Division within to without, to the superficial divisions of the outside world, which have noting to do with the inner divisions.
Since this explanations relating to outside world's divisions, which are superficial, constitute K's 99.9% of his discourses, when we consider that the 'Core' of his teaching can be expressed in a paragraph, having a few lines.
This 'Core' of the teaching was expressed by Krishnamurti himself in a few lines in a paragraph, which I have highlighted in 'Bold' letters below, in one of his summations of his teaching as requested by his biographer Mary Lutyens.
Quote:
The Core of the Teachings
Written by Krishnamurti in 1980 at the request of his biographer Mary Lutyens.
The core of Krishnamurti’s teaching is contained in the statement he made in 1929 when he said, “Truth is a pathless land”. Man cannot come to it through any organization, through any creed, through any dogma, priest or ritual, not through any philosophical knowledge or psychological technique. He has to find it through the mirror of relationship, through the understanding of the contents of his own mind, through observation and not through intellectual analysis or introspective dissection.
Man has built in himself images as a fence of security—religious, political, personal. These manifest as symbols, ideas, beliefs. The burden of these images dominates man’s thinking, his relationships, and his daily life. These images are the causes of our problems for they divide man from man. His perception of life is shaped by the concepts already established in his mind. The content of his consciousness is his entire existence. The individuality is the name, the form and superficial culture he acquires from tradition and environment. The uniqueness of man does not lie in the superficial but in complete freedom from the content of his consciousness, which is common to all humanity. So he is not an individual.
Freedom is not a reaction; freedom is not choice. It is man’s pretence that because he has choice he is free. Freedom is pure observation without direction, without fear of punishment and reward. Freedom is without motive; freedom is not at the end of the evolution of man but lies in the first step of his existence. In observation one begins to discover the lack of freedom. Freedom is found in the choiceless awareness of our daily existence and activity.
Thought is time. Thought is born of experience and knowledge, which are inseparable from time and the past. Time is the psychological enemy of man. Our action is based on knowledge and therefore time, so man is always a slave to the past. Thought is ever limited and so we live in constant conflict and struggle. There is no psychological evolution. 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 experiencer and the experience. 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. This timeless insight brings about a deep, radical mutation in the mind.
Total negation is the essence of the positive. When there is negation of all those things that thought has brought about psychologically, only then is there love, which is compassion and intelligence.
Source : J.Krishnamurti ONLINE
End Of the Quote.
What is astonishing here, in the Krishnamurti's summing up of his teaching, as the 'Core', also constituting a little more than half of it, as a superficial explanation of his core of teaching, in trying to relate the teaching to the outside things, having no relevance. The highlighted 'bold', is the Core, which has a few lines of three para, having 188 words, 916 characters.
But many say, that after reading and listening to Krishnamurti for years, that they find it difficult to understand him. Yes, it would be the case, if one does not have the same Fragmented mind as K, or if one having a Whole mind, and first to understand one's whole mind in complete, by Bhavana (Buddhist mind Development), and with that understanding of the Whole to understand and acknowledge the Fragmentation of the mind.
So What is this Core of the Teaching having 188 words? it is the same thing which I have already explained. That is Krishnamurti's mind is fragmented, causing insecurity, doubt, fear and suffering. Without having a choice, and not knowing how to end the fragmentation, when one remains aware of the suffering, it get ended, due to subconscious solution given by the mind, just like amnesia, which Krishnamurti concludes as Pathless.
The 'Core of the Teaching', which constitutes of 188 words, is true for Krishnamurti, and would be partially or nearly be true for a few people, who have similar fragmented minds. But it will not be wholly true for, even to any one having fragmented mind, as no two people having Fragmented minds will be similar in their fragmentation, as it would be a very rare coincidence, if it to be so.
So in the future posts I would be mainly dealing with this Superficial explanation of without, in trying to relate the factual inner division to that, which are erroneous. Also I would be dealing with some factual explanation of the Fragmentation within, as Krishnamurti had taken different examples to explain the same, other than taking Tree, Birds, flowers and Door, as examples.
The Mirror Of The Relationship - Putting The Core, Differently.
Krishnamurti used the metaphor 'Mirror' and the 'Relationship' to describe the Mind and the Division Within, the Fragmentation within. K describes the Division within as having no Relationship, when one looks into one's Mind, which is the Mirror. The Mirror itself is being broken into two, having at least a Gap or it is Fragmented, having more Gaps, if there is no Relationship ,if there is Division.
If the Mirror is not broken, that is from K's own wording, "or it can be 'as is', reflecting that which is.", then there is no problem, which is the solution he found, where it is the 'Thoughtless' state. Because, that it is the 'Thinking', which divides the Mind, the Mirror, not to have a Relationship (Division within), as K made the metaphoric of the word Mind, by using the word Mirror, instead.
Quote K:
Relationship, surely, is the mirror in which you discover yourself. Without relationship you are not; to be is to be related; to be related is existence. You exist only in relationship; otherwise you do not exist, existence has no meaning. It is not because you think you are that you come into existence. You exist because you are related; and it is the lack of understanding of relationship that causes conflict.
Now there is no understanding of relationship, because we use relationship merely as a means of furthering achievement, furthering transformation, furthering becoming. But relationship is a means of self-discovery, because relationship is to be; it is existence. Without relationship, I am not. To understand myself, I must understand relationship. Relationship is a mirror in which I can see myself. That mirror can either be distorted, or it can be 'as is', reflecting that which is. But most of us see in relationship, in that mirror, things we would rather see; we do not see what is. We would rather idealize, escape, we would rather live in the future than understand that relationship in the immediate present.
J. Krishnamurti The First and Last Freedom
Chapter 14 'RELATIONSHIP AND ISOLATION'
End Of The Quote.
But people who don't understand this Krishnamurti's explanation of the same core teaching, that the mind being fragmented, try to understand this by comparing their own experiences, where their minds are not fragmented, and fall into the superficial understanding.
This is what Krishnamurti was doing. having a small experience of relief from his problem of divided thinking, and concluding it as a Pathless solution, of that relief he gained, which is similar to amnesia, K expresses the same idea in many different ways, making a vast looking philosophy. Also he relates the same experience of Division and the solution, to that of the outside world's problems, making superficial explanations, still adding more and more to his expanding philosophy, which is nothing, but leads to much confusions in the mind of listener and reader of Krishnamurti. As well as some are inspired and getting astonished by his words, just because they could not comprehend anything of it. Some people do not go for meaningful, practical things. But they want grand pronouncement with grand words. But it is evident that Krishnamurti was not doing this with an intention of creating a grand philosophy, but he was trying merely to understand his own division, himself, of the fragmentation, by relating that to superficial division without. to the outside world' divisions.
Quote K:
Self-knowledge is not according to any formula. You may go to a psychologist or a psychoanalyst to find out about yourself, but that is not self-knowledge. Self-knowledge comes into being when we are aware of ourselves in relationship, which shows what we are from moment to moment. Relationship is a mirror in which to see ourselves as we actually are. But most of us are incapable of looking at ourselves as we are in relationship because we immediately begin to condemn or justify what we see. We judge, we evaluate, we compare, we deny or accept, but we never observe actually what is, and for most people this seems to be the most difficult thing to do; yet this alone is the beginning of self-knowledge. If one is able to see oneself as one is in this extraordinary mirror of relationship which does not distort, if one can just look into this mirror with full attention and see actually what is, be aware of it without condemnation, without judgment, without evaluation - and one does this when there is earnest interest - then one will find that the mind is capable of freeing itself from all conditioning; and it is only then that the mind is free to discover that which lies beyond the field of thought. After all, however learned or however petty the mind may be, it is consciously or unconsciously limited, conditioned, and any extension of this conditioning is still within the field of thought. So freedom is something entirely different.
What is important, then, is self-knowledge - seeing oneself as one is in the mirror of relationship. It is very difficult to observe oneself without distortion because we are educated to distort, to condemn, to compare, to judge; but if the mind is capable - which it is - of observing itself without distortion, then you will find, if you will experiment with it, that the mind can uncondition itself.
FirstTalk in Sydney, 1955
End of The Quote.
Here again, Krishnamurti is saying the same, of his 'Core' of the teaching. By 'thinking', that is by, "educated to distort, to condemn, to compare, to judge" one becomes Fragmented, having no relationship, that is not "seeing oneself as one is in the mirror of relationship."
One must be able to understand now, how Krishnamurti was expanding his 'Core of the Teaching' by using many different ways of explaining of the same, and expanding further by relating the same to that of superficial outside divisions which have no relevance at all.
Is it not a great feat by Krishnamurti, an ability to create such a vast looking philosophy, just by using his experience of his Divided thinking and a mere solution coming from subconscious, which is similar to that of amnesia, which is expressed only by 188 words as The Core Of The Teaching, and also to make stubborn adherents of his Philosophy, who call themselves as 'We don't follow Krishnamurti' and when confronted with an arguments, always quote K, without having their own ideas,coming from their own experiencing of the mind, which may not be fragmented?
Beginning Of 'I', Ego, For Krishnamurti Is Memory.
Quote Krishnamurti:
Now, each one tries to immortalize the product of environment; that thing which is the result of the environment we try to make eternal. That is, the various fears, hopes, longings, prejudices, likes, personal views which we glorify as our temperament - these are, after all, the result, the product of environment; and the bundle of these memories, which is the result of environment, the product of the reactions to environment, this bundle becomes that consciousness which we call the "I".
Talksand Answers to Questions by Krishnamurti
Ojai Camp, 1 1934
First Talk in The Oak Grove,
Ojai, California
End Of The Quote.
What does Krishnamurti say here? He says, that 'this bundle becomes that consciousness which we call the "I".'
What is this bundle he speaks of? It is the, 'bundle of these memories.'
What are those memories? They are the, 'the various fears, hopes, longings, prejudices, likes, personal views which we glorify as our temperament.'
How those things come into being as a memory? It is the 'result of the environment.' or 'the product of environment.'
Hence, environment causes bundle of memory related to oneself, and these memories in turn produces the consciousness of 'I'. Here one may feel that Krishnamurti was erroneous. It is not so, because in Krishnamurti, the mental process start with that of Memory.
Krishnamurti says, that after being Aware of a Tree, if it ends there with the Awareness, then no thinking takes place. But if thinking takes places, then it is with the past memory of the tree, which is the 'Thought', which is 'Not Me', and the person who become Aware of this 'Not Me' or the 'Thought' or the 'Observed' is the 'Me' (or I in Response which K calls as for 'Me'. ), which that 'Me' is also is created by these past memory of oneself, that is the 'bundle of memories' of oneself.
We perpetually have the consciousness of 'I' or Ego, whether we think or not, while we are awake, due to mind attributes, which functions always with us, and I don't want to discuss those attributes here, as it is not necessary, because of the fact that we continuously feel the 'I' is enough to prove that those attributes are functioning with us.
Since, these mind attributes which creates continuous consciousness of 'I' in most of us, is missing from the mind of Krishnamurti, creating a Gap, a Division, the consciousness of 'I' starts with the First mind attribute which starts to function in the mind of K, that is memory.
Hence, for Krishnamurti the consciousness of 'I' has to be continuously stimulated by the memory of the past of himself, by becoming aware of something in the environment. Otherwise K is not in a 'selfless' position, but he is in a 'Sleep' like state. When K becomes aware of the environment, it awakes K's memories of himself in relation to the past, and he become conscious of 'I'. But if thoughts arises of the things he becomes aware of, then this 'I' in response becomes Me, the Observer of the 'Thought' and the 'thought' being the 'observed', and not that outside thing being the 'observed'. And the 'observed' is the 'Not Me', which is the 'Thought'.
Therefore normal people have the consciousness of 'I', throughout the wakeful state. Krishnamurti is in an unconscious state of 'I', while awake, and only memory of the past of oneself creates the consciousness of 'I', in K, time and off.
So this unstable mind creates, doubt, insecurity, fear and sufferings in Krishnamurti.
For a normal person, thinking is an activity he does, hence, he perceives this act of thinking as, 'I am thinking'. For Krishnamurti, thinking may take place as a Response from 'Me', which is unavoidable by 'Me' and therefore this thinking is 'Not Me', creating a division within, creating doubt, insecurity, fear and suffering. But a normal person may enjoy 'thinking' and indulge in 'day dreaming', where he would not feel doubt, insecurity, fear and suffering in thinking.
Hence, normal people when seek to end their sufferings, do not seek solutions for doubt, insecurity, fear as the cause of their sufferings. They don't seek solutions to inner fragmentation or division in thinking.
And the spiritual teachers never speak of inner division and doubt, insecurity, fear as the causes of sufferings. Lord Buddha has stated, that Anger, desire, lust and Ignorance (ideas and opinions) as the causes of suffering.
Followers Of Krishnamurti, Don't Follow K.
All most 100 percent of Krishnamurti followers would say, that they are not following K. But this is not due to the fact, that they understand Krishnamurti, when he said, "Don't follow me!", but because, that they have taken the advice given by K, as to not to follow him. But when confronted with any arguments about spirituality or religion, they would only quote Krishnamurti. Then it is evident that they are following Krishnamurti, for sure. But this following of Krishnamurti, as such, is in a way, does not amount to following of Krishnamurti, in comparison to, one who follows a certain religion out of believing in it, or following a Path of spirituality to free oneself from suffering, as in Buddhism.
Then, what is that following of Krishnamurti by some people, which does not amount to following K?
It is where one get inspired by Krishnamurti's Teaching, by listening and reading, but not understanding any of the Teaching, but then thinking and imagining, that one understands it. But here he remembers most of the advises given by K, and would quote the same in a discussion, when confronted with a different opinion.
For instance, Krishnamurti insists that Meditation practices cannot take one to free oneself from the problems one faces. Here I use the word, 'Problems' as it is evident from K explaining as such, of his problems, coming out of his Divided mind, which are not the problems of Sufferings, as which are explained in Buddhism, for instance. So for his Problems, coming out of his Divided, Fragmented mind, Krishnamurti was lucky to encounter a simple solution of 'Thoughtless' state, which dissolves the problems, not permanently, but intermittently. Though Krishnamurti is aware that his mind is divided, and Fragmented, leading to a type of suffering, which are caused by the Division, that is, insecurity, doubt, fear, etc., but he is not aware that 99% of the population don't have this division, within, hence they don't feel doubt, insecure and fear, when they 'think', even of a neutral object like 'door'. Also Krishnamurti was not aware, what has caused the mind to be fragmented, but only knew, that the mind is fragmented. Then he clearly assumes for others, that their minds are fragmented, and because of that the others also have the problems of doubt, insecurity, fear, etc., casing suffering in them.
Then this generalization, leads to Krishnamurti to suggest that solution is pathless one, as to others as well, as he concluded the same for himself. But the ignorance of the Gap, which applies only to Krishnamurti, and the ignorance of what constitutes the missing attributes of the mind, which creates the Gaps, has lead to this erroneous conclusions from K. So Krishnamurti followers would insist that meditation practices cannot achieve any results, just remembering Krishnamurti, on his insistence of the solution being pathless, without understanding, what he meant by it.
But the unfortunate thing here is, this believing in K, that the solutions is Pathless, have conditioned these followers not to try practicing of meditation, where their problems are not of the Division of the Mind, causing, doubt, insecurity, fear, etc., coming out of 'thinking', but they have sufferings coming out of Anger, Desire, Ego, Ignorance, etc., and they have Whole minds, but not fragmented minds. So for them the practice of meditation would be a solution, which they would never find out, unfortunately.
So this is the first type of following of Krishnamurti, where they follow him without understanding him, hence it is not 'following Krishnamurti.'
Then there are the ones who follow Krishnamurti, with an understanding of what K speaks about, who are only 1% of the population. Why do they are able to understand K?
They are able to understand Krishnamurti, because they have Divided, Fragmented mind as of K. But one cannot tell these fragmentation of their minds are exactly similar to that of Krishnamurti. When things are whole, it will be similar in nature with all the individual items of the Whole. The fragmentations of the Whole cannot be identical with each other. For instance, when people are healthy, the 'healthy' attributes would be same with all individuals. But when people are 'sick', the attributes of 'sickness' would not be same. Anyway, the most of the symptoms of the 'sickness' would be same with the most of the sick people, to certain extent.
It is here, the people who have fragmented minds, understand Krishnamurti. Being Fragmented in their 'thinking' they have developed, doubt, insecurity and fear, in their early life, when they try to interact and communicate their 'Thoughts' with others. So when Krishnamurti explains, even using neutral examples of a door, a tree, a flower, a bird, etc., and how doubt, insecurity, fear comes about, when one tries to 'Respond', When one tries to 'Think', about these, once one has become aware of the same. So when Krishnamurti explains that the solution to overcome these doubts, fears, and insecurity, is to stop thinking, these people would understand him perfectly, When K suggest that the solution as pathless, they have to accept him, unless, they themselves embark on a journey to find an alternative way to find a solution for themselves. So it seems that these people get so conditioned by Krishnamurti's Teaching, they would not ever embark on a such a journey.
The other reason why these people who have fragmented minds like K, would not try to find a solution for their 'doubts, insecurity, fear, etc.', on their own is, since their minds are fragmented, any 'thoughts' or 'thinking' of a solution also would involve 'thinking', thus furthering or perpetuating the Division or the fragmentation, as clearly explained by Krishnamurti. So one who understand this situation, because of his mind is fragmented, how can he start 'thinking' of a solution, without perpetuating the fragmentation, thus increasing his doubt, insecurity and fears, causing more sufferings?
So these people who have the same problems as that of Krishnamurti, cannot follow Krishnamurti, for a solution to free themselves from suffering, but only wait in expectation of the same Pathless solution of 'Thoughtless-ness' to come about. Hence, it is not Following Krishnamurti, either, as there is nothing to do, to get a solution.
Then there are a third type of followers of Krishnamurti, who follow his teaching as something deep, and as a philosophy of life. Since, Krishnamurti's Teaching is nether a philosophy of life, nor a spiritual path leading to overcome suffering caused by Desires, Angers, Lusts and Ignorance, as in Buddhism and other spiritual paths, these people who take K's teaching as such also don't follow Krishnamurti, by not understating him, where K Only speaks about his inner Division, inner Fragmentation, as the problem of the entire humanity.
Therefore all these followers of Krishnamurti, were and are created by his Teaching of his inner fragmentation, which is not understood by people who don't having such a fragmented mind, or having a fragmented mind and understanding K, or trying to understand his Teaching intellectually as a philosophy, don't or can't follow him as there is nothing to follow .
Hence, none of them are Followers of Krishnamurti, as K understood as it would be as such, and declared that 'none can follow me'.
No comments:
Post a Comment