Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Jidduh Krishnamurti: Thinking together
#11
You could be right in saying that I perhaps am not understanding you properly, and I don't wish to push this too much further, as my intention is not to start a heated argument. I am, however, very familiar with K's life and teachings. And so, here is something I learned and know... which I can share.

K talked about observing without a center or observer. It is supposed to be a state of pure observation, without the movement of thought. If thought is memory, as K put it, thought is therefore the past. Observation cannot be pure if one is looking at something through the filter of the past. K felt if you could learn to simply watch and see without the interference from the activity of thought, one could see the truth without the past conditioning the present.

The problem with this is that without thought, you can't recognize what you are seeing (or hearing, touching, smelling, etc.), and you have no way of knowing whether it is the 'truth' or not. In cognitive neuroscience this would be known as a pathology of the brain called agnosia. Now, obviously this medical condition is not something K was talking about with respect to pure observation, since he always implied that quieting the activity of thought was a voluntary meditative process meant to merely hold thought in the background temporarily, but K's basic underlying premise is that the 'truth' or true nature or objective fact of something can be revealed through this process of pure observation. However, for any objective fact to be revealed, it needs to be recognized as such, and that requires thought. After many years of self inquiry and going deeply into this, I realized there is no such thing as pure observation. Thought is almost never completely still. The few instants in which thought is completely still, nothing can be articulated as being any sort of observation. When the observer (i.e. thought) is there, observation is not pure. And when the observer (i.e. thought) is no longer there, nothing is observable, since nothing is recognizable. One can therefore never say, "I have seen or realized the truth", for that itself would be a thought. In other words, and to make a long story short: observing without thinking is impossible, or at least impossible to talk about. And so the idea of 'thinking together' also seems to go against the point of trying to observe without thinking.

This is but one of many things about K's teachings I found to be problematic. There are more, but I will stop here for now.
Reply
#12
I will not push you to push further, but please note that I have not observed any ill-faith intentions from you, and that if you've seen any from my part, I apologise profusely. I only want to have a friendly conversation in which we can both learn from each other. I would like to thank you for engaging this so far, as it has been illuminating to me (and Bellamy, apparently).

I understand the problem you put forward. But the way in which I engage with K's teachings has not lead to this problem realising itself. Whenever I am faced with something I want to truly understand, I journey inwards to peel away ideas and conclusions, and try to observe it without the movement of thought. I am unable to observe it completely without thinking, but I am often successful in understanding something for what it is without any bias or notion of implication on my established thought.

Now, being a person, I have thoughts, and ideas and conclusion, and all the rest of it. Consequently I must reconcile what I have learned with what I already know at some point. Here I find K's teachings very useful. Because I do not embody any idea or conclusion. I do not submit to the authority of anyone's ideas or conclusions — including my own. There is no reason for me to accept any authority. As a result, I can journey inwards and see for myself what I find to be true. I do not have to reconcile anything with any ideological framework or indoctrination or whatever else. I find this immensely useful.

Of course I am not without bias, without indoctrination, and so on. But I think that K's teachings empower me to fight them more viciously.

I hope this makes sense. And, again, thank you for making this such a gratifying thread for me.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)