Quote of the night

IronFist

πŸ‰β›©οΈ π•Ώπ–π–Š 𝕴𝖒𝖒𝖔𝖗𝖙𝖆𝖑 ⛩️ πŸ‰
Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
48,495
Reputation
53,419
Daps
120,111
Krishnamurti is that dude oddly enough i got put on to him after reading John Coltrane Biography (im a jazz head too).

OSHO is another good one
 

IronFist

πŸ‰β›©οΈ π•Ώπ–π–Š 𝕴𝖒𝖒𝖔𝖗𝖙𝖆𝖑 ⛩️ πŸ‰
Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
48,495
Reputation
53,419
Daps
120,111
what book is that?

this



[ame=http://www.amazon.com/John-Coltrane-Bill-Cole/dp/030681062X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1368568126&sr=1-1&keywords=john+coltrane+cole]John Coltrane: John Coltrane: Bill Cole: 9780306810626: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]
 

KnowledgeIsQueen

Duality Duel
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
1,425
Reputation
280
Daps
2,081
Reppin
Brooknam
5-14-2012

"Understanding is not an intellectual process. Acquiring knowledge about yourself and learning about yourself are two different things, for the knowledge you accumulate about yourself is always of the past and a mind that is burdened with the past is a sorrowful mind. Learning about yourself is not like learning a language or a technology or a science - then you obviously have to accumulate and remember; it would be absurd to begin all over again - but in the psychological field learning about yourself is always in the present and knowledge is always in the past, and as most of us live in the past and are satisfied with the past, knowledge becomes extraordinarily important to us. That is why we worship the erudite, the clever, the cunning. But if you are learning all the time, learning every minute, learning by watching and listening, learning by seeing and doing, then you will find that learning is a constant movement without the past.

If you say you will learn gradually about yourself, adding more and more, little by little, you are not studying yourself now as you are but through acquired knowledge. Learning implies a great sensitivity. There is no sensitivity if there is an idea, which is of the past, dominating the present. Then the mind is no longer quick, pliable, alert. Most of us are not sensitive even physically. We overeat, we dot not bother about the right diet, we over smoke and drink so that our bodies become gross and insensitive; the quality of attention in the organism itself is made dull. How can there be a very alert, sensitive, clear mind if the organism itself is full and heavy? We may be sensitive about certain things that touch us personally but to be completely sensitive to all the implications of life demands there be no separation between the organism and the psyche. It is a total movement.

To understand anything you must live with it, you must observe it, you must know all its content, it's nature, its structure, its movement. Have you ever tried living with yourself? If so, you will begin to see that yourself is not a static state, it is a fresh living thing. And to live with a living thing your mind must also be alive. And it cannot be alive if it is caught in opinions, judgments and values.

In order to observe the movement of your own mind and heart, of your whole being, you must have a free mind, not a mind that agrees and disagrees, taking sides in an argument, disputing over mere words, but rather following with an intention to understand - a very difficult thing to do because most of us don't know how to look at, or listen to, our own being any more than we know how to look at the beauty of a river or listen to the breeze among the trees.

When we condemn or justify we cannot see clearly, nor can we when our minds are endlessly chattering; then we do not observe what is; we look only at the projections we have made of ourselves. Each of us has an image of what we think we are or what we should be, and that image that picture, entirely prevents us from seeing ourselves as we actually are."


Freedom from the Known


~*J. Krishnamurti

"In oneself lies the whole world and if you know how to look and learn, the door is there and the key is in your hand. Nobody on earth can give you either the key or the door to open, except yourself." ~*Krishnamurti
 

KnowledgeIsQueen

Duality Duel
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
1,425
Reputation
280
Daps
2,081
Reppin
Brooknam
"When we observe objective things like trees, clouds, the things outside of us, there is not only the space between the observer and the observed - the physical space - there is also the space of time. When we look at a tree there is not only physical distance, but there is also psychological distance. There is the distance between you and the tree, the distance created by the image as knowledge : that is an oak tree, or an elm. That image between you and the tree separates you.

But when the quality of the mind of the observer is without the image, which is imagination, then there is quite a different relationship between the observer and the observed. Have you ever looked at a tree without a single word of like or dislike, without a single image? Have you noticed what then takes place? Then, for the first time, you see the tree as it is and you see the beauty of it, the colour, the depth, the vitality of it. A tree, or even another person, is fairly easy to observe; but to observe oneself that way - that is to observe without the observer - is much more difficult. So one must find out who is the observer.

I want to watch myself, I want to know myself as deeply as possible. What is the nature, the structure of that observer who is watching? That observer is the past, isn't it? - the past knowledge which he has collected and stored up; the past being the culture, the conditioning. That is the observer who says, "This is right, this is wrong, this must be, this must not be, this is good, this is bad." So the observer is the past and with those eyes of the past we try to see what we are. They we say, "I don't like this, I am ugly," or "this I will keep." All these discriminations and condemnations take place. Can I look at myself without the eyes of the past? Can I watch myself in action, which is in relationship, without any movement of the past? Have you ever tried this? (I don't suppose you have.)

When there is no observer then there is only the observed. Please see this: I am envious, or I overeat, I am greedy. The normal reaction is, "I must not overeat", "I must not be greedy", "I must suppress", you know all that follows. In that there is the observer trying to control his greed, or his envy. Now when there is an awareness of greed without the observer, what takes place? Can I observe that greed without giving it a name, as "greed"? The moment I name it I have already fixed it as greed in my memory which says: I must get over it, I must control. So is there an observation of greed without the word, without justifying it, without condemning it? Which means, can I observe this thing called greed without any reaction whatsoever?

To observer is a form of discipline, isn't it? Not imposing any particular pattern, which means conformity, suppression and all the rest of it, but to observe the whole serious of actions without condemning, justifying or naming - just to observe. Then you will see the mind is no longer wasting energy. It is then aware and therefore it has the energy to deal with that which it is observing."

The Awakening of Intelligence

~*J Krishnamurti

"In self-awareness there is no need for confession, for self-awareness creates the mirror in which all things are reflected without distortion." ~*J. Krishnamurti
 

KnowledgeIsQueen

Duality Duel
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
1,425
Reputation
280
Daps
2,081
Reppin
Brooknam
The Observer Is The Observed

To communicate with one another, even if we know each other very well, is extremely difficult. Here we are; you do not know me, and I do not know you. We are talking at different levels. I may use words that may have to you a significance, different from mine. Understanding comes only when we, you and I, meet on the same level at the same time. That happens only when there is real affection between people, between husband and wife, between intimate friends. That is real communion. Instantaneous understanding comes when we meet on the same level at the same time.

There is an art of listening. To listen really, one should abandon or put aside all prejudices, pre-formulations and daily activities. When you are in a receptive state of mind, things can be easily understood; you are listening when your real attention is given to something. But, unfortunately, most of us listen through a screen of resistance. We are screened with prejudices, whether religious or spiritual, psychological or scientific; or with our daily worries, desires and fears. And with these for a screen, we listen. Therefore, we listen really to our own noise, to our own sound, not to what is being said. It is extremely difficult to put aside our training, our prejudices, our inclination, our resistance, and, reaching beyond the verbal expression, to listen so that we understand instantaneously. That is going to be one of our difficulties.


I am going to explain presently that truth can be understood instantaneously. It is not a matter of time, it is not a matter of growth or of habit. Truth can only be understood directly, immediately, now, in the present, not in the future; and it can be understood, felt, realized, when there is the capability of listening directly, in an open manner and with an open heart. But if our minds are engrossed, if our hearts are tired, then there is no possibility of receiving that which is truth. So our difficulty is to have that instantaneous capacity to perceive directly for ourselves and not wait for the medium of time. Time and life become a process of destruction when we are unable to understand directly; so it is obvious why I suggest that you should listen without any resistance.

If, during this discourse, anything is said which is opposed to your way of thinking and belief, just listen, do not resist. You may be right, and I may be wrong; but by listening and considering together, we are going to find out what is the truth. Truth cannot be given to you by somebody. You have to discover it; and to discover, there must be a state of mind in which there is direct perception. There is no direct perception when there is a resistance, a safeguard, a protection. Understanding comes through being aware of what is. To know exactly what is, the real, the actual, without interpreting it, without condemning or justifying it, is, surely, the beginning of wisdom. It is only when we begin to interpret, to translate according to our conditioning, according to our prejudice, that we miss the truth. After all, it is like research. To know what something is, what it is exactly, requires research - you cannot translate it according to your moods. Similarly, if we can look, observe, listen, be aware of what is, exactly, then the problem is solved. And that is what we are trying to do in all these discourses. I am going to point out to you what is, and not translate it according to my fancy; nor should you translate it or interpret it according to your background or training.

Is it not possible, then, to be aware of everything as it is? Starting from there, surely, there can be an understanding. To acknowledge, to be aware of, to get at that which is, puts an end to struggle. If I know that I am a liar, and it is a fact which I recognize, then the struggle is over. To acknowledge, to be aware of what one is, is already the beginning of wisdom, the beginning of understanding, which releases you from time. To bring in the quality of time - time, not in the chronological sense, but as the medium, as the psychological process, the process of the mind - is destructive, and creates confusion.

So, we can have understanding of what is when we recognize it without condemnation, without justification, without identification. To know that one is in a certain condition, in a certain state, is already a process of liberation; but a man who is not aware of his condition, of his struggle, tries to be something other than he is, which brings about habit. So, then, let us keep in mind that we want to examine what is, to observe and be aware of exactly what is the actual, without giving it any slant, without giving it an interpretation. It needs an extraordinarily astute mind, an extraordinarily pliable heart, to be aware of and to follow what is; because what is, is constantly moving, constantly undergoing a transformation, and if the mind is tethered to belief, to knowledge, it ceases to pursue, it ceases to follow the swift movement of what is. What is, is not static, surely - it is constantly moving, as you will see if you observe it very closely. And to follow it, you need a very swift mind and a pliable heart which are denied when the mind is static, fixed in a belief, in a prejudice, in an identification; and a mind and heart that are dry cannot follow easily, swiftly, that which is.


The Collected Works of J. Krishnamurti: 1945 - 1948: Volume 4: The Observer is The Observed

~*J Krishnamurti

"To observe 'what is', the mind must be free of all comparison of the ideal, of the opposite. Then you will see that what actually 'is', is far more important than what 'should be'." ~*Jiddu Krishnamurti
 

IronFist

πŸ‰β›©οΈ π•Ώπ–π–Š 𝕴𝖒𝖒𝖔𝖗𝖙𝖆𝖑 ⛩️ πŸ‰
Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
48,495
Reputation
53,419
Daps
120,111
he has one where he speaks on unified consciousness that i always like...going to have to find it
 

IronFist

πŸ‰β›©οΈ π•Ώπ–π–Š 𝕴𝖒𝖒𝖔𝖗𝖙𝖆𝖑 ⛩️ πŸ‰
Supporter
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Messages
48,495
Reputation
53,419
Daps
120,111
Question: What is our consciousness? Are there different levels of consciousness? Is there a consciousness beyond the one of which we are normally aware? Is it possible to empty the content of consciousness?

Jiddu Krishnamurti - One may use words and give descriptions, but what is named and described is not the fact; so do not be caught in the description.

What is our consciousness? It is to be conscious of, to be aware of, what is going on, not only outside but inside; it is the same movement. Our consciousness is the product of our education, our culture, racial inheritance and the result of our own striving. All our beliefs, our dogmas, rituals, concepts, jealousies, anxieties, pleasures, our so-called love - all that is our consciousness. It is the structure which has evolved through millennia after millennia - through wars, tears, sorrow, depression and elation: all that makes up our consciousness. Some people say you cannot change consciousness. You can modify it, you can polish it, but you have to accept it, make the best of it; it is there. Without the content, consciousness, as we know it, does not exist.

The questioner asks: Is it possible to empty consciousness of all content - the sorrow, the strife, the struggle, the terrible human relationships, the quarrels, anxieties, jealousies, the affection, the sensuality? Can that content be emptied? If it is emptied, is there a different kind of consciousness? Has consciousness different layers, different levels?

In India the Ancient people divided consciousness into lower, higher and yet higher. And these divisions are measured, for the moment there is division there must be measurement, and where there is measurement there must be effort. Whatever level consciousness may have, it is still within consciousness. The division of consciousness is measurement, therefore it is thought. Whatever thought has put together is part of consciousness, however you choose to divide it.

It is possible to empty the content of consciousness completely, The essence of this content is thought, which has put together the `me' - the `me' who is ambitious, greedy, aggressive. That `me' is the essence of the content of consciousness. Can that `me' with all this structure of selfishness be totally ended? The speaker can say, "Yes, it can be ended, completely". It means that there is no centre from which you are acting, no centre from which you are thinking. The centre is the essence of measurement, which is the effort of becoming. Can that becoming end? You may say: "Probably it can, but what is at the end of it, if one ends this becoming?"

First of all find out for yourself if this becoming can end. Can you drop, end, something which you like, that gives you some deep pleasure, without a motive, without saying, "I can do it if there is something at the end of it"? Can you immediately end something that gives you great pleasure? You see how difficult this is. It is like a man who smokes, his body has been poisoned by nicotine and when he stops smoking the body craves for it and so he takes something else to satisfy the body. So can you end something, rationally, clearly, without any motive of reward or punishment?

Selfishness hides in many ways, in seeking truth, in social service, in selling oneself to a person, to an idea, to a concept. One must be astonishingly aware of all this, and that requires energy, all the energy that is now being wasted in conflict, in fear, in sorrow, in all the travails of life. That energy is also being wasted in so-called meditation.

It requires enormous energy, not physical energy, but the energy that has never been wasted. Then consciousness can be emptied and when it is emptied one may or may not find there is something more, it is up to oneself. One may like something more to be guaranteed but there is no guarantee.

-Krishnamurti
 

opulence

Pro
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
3,215
Reputation
70
Daps
1,821
Reppin
peace
"When we observe objective things like trees, clouds, the things outside of us, there is not only the space between the observer and the observed - the physical space - there is also the space of time. When we look at a tree there is not only physical distance, but there is also psychological distance. There is the distance between you and the tree, the distance created by the image as knowledge : that is an oak tree, or an elm. That image between you and the tree separates you.

But when the quality of the mind of the observer is without the image, which is imagination, then there is quite a different relationship between the observer and the observed. Have you ever looked at a tree without a single word of like or dislike, without a single image? Have you noticed what then takes place? Then, for the first time, you see the tree as it is and you see the beauty of it, the colour, the depth, the vitality of it. A tree, or even another person, is fairly easy to observe; but to observe oneself that way - that is to observe without the observer - is much more difficult. So one must find out who is the observer.

I want to watch myself, I want to know myself as deeply as possible. What is the nature, the structure of that observer who is watching? That observer is the past, isn't it? - the past knowledge which he has collected and stored up; the past being the culture, the conditioning. That is the observer who says, "This is right, this is wrong, this must be, this must not be, this is good, this is bad." So the observer is the past and with those eyes of the past we try to see what we are. They we say, "I don't like this, I am ugly," or "this I will keep." All these discriminations and condemnations take place. Can I look at myself without the eyes of the past? Can I watch myself in action, which is in relationship, without any movement of the past? Have you ever tried this? (I don't suppose you have.)

When there is no observer then there is only the observed. Please see this: I am envious, or I overeat, I am greedy. The normal reaction is, "I must not overeat", "I must not be greedy", "I must suppress", you know all that follows. In that there is the observer trying to control his greed, or his envy. Now when there is an awareness of greed without the observer, what takes place? Can I observe that greed without giving it a name, as "greed"? The moment I name it I have already fixed it as greed in my memory which says: I must get over it, I must control. So is there an observation of greed without the word, without justifying it, without condemning it? Which means, can I observe this thing called greed without any reaction whatsoever?

To observer is a form of discipline, isn't it? Not imposing any particular pattern, which means conformity, suppression and all the rest of it, but to observe the whole serious of actions without condemning, justifying or naming - just to observe. Then you will see the mind is no longer wasting energy. It is then aware and therefore it has the energy to deal with that which it is observing."

The Awakening of Intelligence

~*J Krishnamurti

"In self-awareness there is no need for confession, for self-awareness creates the mirror in which all things are reflected without distortion." ~*J. Krishnamurti


Awesome. ..:thumbsup:
 
Top