u/agitatated_mind-

Thought creates the thinker. The energy required, the physical ‘ resources ‘ as the sensation which is this, what is, “ mental self masterbation as an idea of who I am “ necessarily is the conflict we are. The maintaining of the ID is always a struggle and always taxing to the body. So thought seeking a way to end this turmoil comes upon K ( those that at least have the ability to go beyond belief ). K talks about this structure which is what we merely are consciously while we are consciously merely that ( consciousness is its content ). K talks about an ending. We read,  we see to an extent which is the intellectual logic of what he is saying and so the thinker seeks to end but ! thought as the thinker IS thought continuing as it’s supposed end.

K said this about a thousand times in his lectures he gave over the period of about sixty years and there were people who followed him around for sixty years still treating his teachings from some standpoint. There are people here in this subreddit treating K discussions as if they are this mere discussion from that individuals standpoint of view. What is the standpoint ?  It is the self trying to work out the self from the standpoint of the self and which has nothing to do with the cold hard fact of actually seeing the nature of the ‘ standpoint’ nor the structure of the standpoint and is it all merely the standpoint ( thinker thought has created ) looking after and continuing as  it’s own safe space ? 

It’s the whole action that’s the problem ( but don’t look at it ( thought ) as it is a problem… that needs a looker ). What can one do. K has mentioned again a thousand times nothing which is not nothing from some ‘ standpoint ‘ of some idea of nothing. It’s to see the whole movement, all that energy, all that learning we have acquired individually and via this collective stream of consciousness is itself, it’s to see the thinking animal thing human consciousness is as the separate thinker IS it’s own continuation. It’s to see this little bubble of comfort which the centre is, this feeling of who we are ( until some sh1t hits the fan and then it’s a case of the bubble needing to readdress it’s self as some new learnt  action ) as the action of thought it actually is. Our standpoint, our living feeling of who are are is just this action of thought even continuing as its attempts to end itself as per some conversation you have accepted as right from a Krishnamurti book video. It’s the whole action that’s the ‘ problem’ including the ‘ standpoint ‘ ( centre ) of the action. 

Now let’s consider this from a standpoint of yet another post by this deranged annoying ars3hole agitated\_mind ( I don’t mind if you do ) and if choose to read this rambling mess then to consider from some standpoint of what he is on about. 

“ Now, is the thinker different from his thoughts? Does the thinker exist without thoughts? Is there a thinker apart from thought? Stop thinking, and where is the thinker? Is the thinker of one thought different from the thinker of another thought? Is the thinker separate from his thought, or does thought create the thinker who then identifies himself with thought when he finds it convenient and separates himself when it is not convenient?That is, what is the ‘I’, the thinker? Obviously, the thinker is composed of various thoughts which have become identified as the ‘me’. So the thoughts produce the thinker, not the other way round. If I have no thoughts then there is no thinker.“   
JK

https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/meditation-total-release-energy-0/Total%20energy%20

“Meditation is bringing about order in life and thereby gathering great energy, and ending the conflict between the observer and the observed, adding further energy.”

Talk 6 in Ojai, California, 18 April 1976

Just sharing a Video 1:30 hr min grind.

“ In listening and seeing there is no learning from which you accumulate knowledge, as you accumulate knowledge in mathematics or physics. Here there is only seeing and listening; there is no learning. The brain is beginning to free itself from the known. Man has never been free from the known - the brain has always recorded, which becomes knowledge, and knowledge is limited. Therefore man, whatever he does, is limited. He is limiting himself, making himself fragmentary, broken up. When you listen very carefully, without any motive, see without any distortion, there is no accumulation so that the next time you listen and see, the previous knowledge does not interfere and you listen each time afresh, see each time anew. The tree is never the same, the sea is never the same, but if you look with your knowledge and words, the tree is just a tree. But if you perceive the nature of fear, listen to it so completely to the last page of its story, you will find that fear comes to an end. Not that you become courageous, not that you become something beyond fear. The ending is important, not what lies further. If you are inquiring what lies beyond fear, you are not listening to fear. If you listen so completely, with your heart, with your whole being, fear ends, and the brain becomes extraordinarily active and alive.”

Talk 4 in Bombay (Mumbai), 1 February 1981

Simply this ! For god sake no upvotes no replies for this.

For some reason a book I read some 50 years ago came to mind. “The Day of Triffids “. People blinded by spectacle of a meteorite shower. I think it came to mind via my own time spent staring at phone via this subreddit, the games I often play with the excuse they are a good exercise for my aging brain .. etc ..etc. Here we are looking at a screen and not being as ‘ here ‘ as ‘ now ‘ and our looking at a screen in a whole number of ways is adding to this sheer unbelievable blindness to the urgency of the situation the world faces at the moment. You can’t be looking AND being here because the looking demands a concentrated attention and a directing of the eyes and which is not to be passively aware, to be ‘ listening ‘ … ‘ watching without the watcher ‘. So to ponder what part of our ‘ spiritual endeavours ‘ are just an action which is just more p1ssing into this stream of consciousness which is itself limited and blind by it’s limit and which is just adding to a bunch of sensations ( experience) of sharing of a type ( that conscious stream ) and is a continuation of what is our avoidance of simply looking at that which is; the ‘ what is ‘ of our self’s.

Are we just watching the ‘ light show ‘, are we absorbed in ‘ light show ‘ or are we here and now ….suggest we  can’t be both. It’s for us to find out I guess ? 

Just Simply 

“Here is an immense problem which my petty mind has not confronted. My petty mind tries to find an answer which is not only recognisable but must also satisfy the petty mind in its answer. But the problem is too vast for the petty mind. Whatever answer it tries will be a response according to its pettiness. So it says, ‘I am petty, this is too big,’ or it leaves it alone. Or it says, ‘I must stop being petty. My pettiness must go.’ The problem is not important now, but the pettiness itself. If there is any movement in any direction, at any level, the mind remains petty. If you see that, then the petty mind says, ‘I won’t do a thing; any movement from my centre of pettiness will still be petty, whether towards God or towards anything.’ It realises that and is quiet. That’s all. Begin with that.” 

Public Discussion 6, Saanen, 9 August 1964

And more complex

“ In total silence, there is nothing; you are nothing. If you are something, there is no silence but noise. When there is noise, you cannot hear or see. When there is nothing, there is complete stability, complete security. Then only can the mind find out if there is or is not something nameless, something that is beyond time. All this is meditation.”

Talk 4 in Ojai, California, 20 April 1975

But just the Simply

As another user has mentioned. What is it to not ‘ betray the moment ‘.

What you are now you will be…. (K)

We live as this experience of ourselves and that experience is basically fear rationalised as an action of thought as memory and sensation as this observer of what is itself as the separate centre as a sensation of self and which is necessarily the separate conflict and energy and the use of bodily resources the self ( as thought ) IS,  and which necessarily means death of body ( resources ) and death by limitation ( of the action which it is ). 

In a state passive awareness ( the intelligence which that is ) then there is only an experiencing for there is nothing ( no self no watcher ) ‘ there ‘ to make the experiencing into an experience. A boundless state ( ignore the paradoxical words ) of a different order to that state of experience. The self however exists to drag that ‘ experiencing ‘ into an experience. A remembered event. Thought as a memory. A method a name a word.

“In awareness there is no becoming, there is no end to be gained. There is silent observation without choice and condemnation, from which there comes understanding. In this process when thought and feeling unfold themselves, which is only possible when there is neither acquisition nor acceptance, then there comes an extensional awareness, all the hidden layers and their significance are revealed. This awareness reveals that creative emptiness which cannot be imagined or formulated. This extensional awareness and the creative emptiness are a total process and are not different stages. When you silently observe a problem without condemnation, justification, there comes passive awareness. In this passive awareness, the problem is understood and dissolved. In awareness there is heightened sensitivity, in which there is the highest form of negative thinking. When the mind is formulating, producing, there can be no creation. It is only when the mind is still and empty, when it is not creating a problem—in that alert passivity there is creation. Creation can only take place in negation, which is not the opposite of the positive. Being nothing is not the antithesis of being something. A problem comes into being only when there is a search for result. When the search for result ceases, then only is there no problem.” 
Book of Life June 20 

“What is an experience? To get drunk is an experience. To hurt somebody is an experience. There is sexual experience, there is the experience of climbing mountains, the experience of sailing a boat. But need you go through any experience? Think about it. Then you depend on experience to teach you.”

Interview by Hanspeter Gschwend, Gstaad, 28 July 1983

“When one recognises an experience as an experience, it is already the old.”

Discussion with students at the Happy Valley School, Ojai, 7 November 1966

“Does experience teach me to learn? We have had a thousand wars and still go on killing. Thousands of people have said the division between the poor and the rich is terrible, and yet we keep on. “

Students Discussion 3 in Amsterdam, 13 May 1969

“It is necessary to understand the nature of experience. Only the mind that is without experience, and that is not seeking experience, is in a state of complete profundity.”

Public Talk 9, Saanen, 30 July 1964

“We all want deeper, wider, nobler, vaster experiences. That is our craving. Everybody wants a transcendental marvellous experience because our own life, the daily life, is so petty, so small, so shallow, so meaningless. You want deep experiences but when you do experiencesomething, unless you recognise it as an experience, it has no validity to you. The moment you recognise it, it is already the old, so it is not an experience in freedom.”

Public Talk 5, Sydney, 29 November 1970

“Capacity, as we know it, is based on experience: I have built several houses and I have the capacity to put things together. This capacity is the accumulation of experience, which has given me knowledge. Is there a capacity which is not based on experience? I can only answer that question when the brain is free from knowledge. Then it has capacity, probably untold capacity.”

Small Group Discussion, Madras (Chennai), 19 January 1984

“What are you? A bundle of memories, experiences, knowledge, information. That you carry on all day long, all through the years. That bundle of memories keeps the mind dull, stupid, not fresh. But if you put away all your bundles each day, your mind is extraordinarily alert.”

Discussion 2 with students, Thacher School, Ojai, 9 November 1966

“There is no experience at all; there are only remembrances. I don’t experience truth; there is no experience of illumination. The word ‘experience’ has no meaning because experienceimplies remembrance, which is the past, and therefore there is no reality in it.”

Discussion with Geetha Varadan in Madras (Chennai), 23 January 1984

“Experience demands recognition. If I didn't recognise it, I wouldn't know I'm experiencing. And I recognise it because of the past. The past has had memories of that and says, ‘That is that.’ That's fairly sane, clear. Now, when the mechanical process of recognition comes to an end, in the sense that it is to be used but has no significance when something totally new takes place, you cannot recognise it. The recognising process cannot interpret the new, which you have never, under any circumstances, seen and therefore you cannot experience it. The experience means recognition; recognition means a memory of which you have already been told or experienced, or you are conditioned to respond, react to it. Therefore, when there is no recognising process, there is nothing to experience, and therefore the thing is totally, completely new.”

Small Group Discussion 8 in Saanen, 6 August 1963

We rely upon sensation ( good … bad )to teach us. The experience as sensation. Experience then stored as memory which we live as. The good the bad is nominally good or bad depending experience. This drug taking wasn’t as good as the last so I’ll up the hit. That person didn’t reward me from my bunch of likes in the way I like so my experience of that person is the remembered experience of dislike. I know that person in that way. So we build a ‘ field ‘ of known experience as memory.The experience of meditation which is not actually Meditation ( K). The experience of what is to contribute on Reddit as the experience it is in the responses we receive. To live in such ( as and via experience), what is, a very base level of action really is stupidity in action is it not ? ( OP)

Question: What is true creativity and how is it different from that which is so considered in popular culture?

“What is generally called creativity is man-made – painting, music, literature, romantic and factual, all the architecture and the marvels of technology. And the painters, the writers, the poets, probably consider themselves creative. We all seem to agree with that popular idea of a creative person. Many man-made things are most beautiful, the great cathedrals, temples and mosques; some of them are extraordinarily beautiful and we know nothing of the people who built them. But now, with us, anonymity is almost gone. With anonymity there is a different kind of creativity, not based on success, money – twenty-eight million books sold in ten years!
Anonymity has great importance; in it there is a different quality; the personal motive, the personal attitude and personal opinion do not exist; there is a feeling of freedom from which there is action.
But most man-made creativity, as we call it, takes place from the known. The great musicians, Beethoven, Bach and others, acted from the known. The writers and philosophers have read and accumulated; although they developed their own style they were always moving, acting or writing, from that which they had accumulated – the known. And this we generally call creativity.
Is that really creative? Or is there a different kind of creativity which is born out of the freedom from the known? Because when we paint, write, or create a marvellous structure out of stone, it is based on the accumulated knowledge carried from the past to the present. Now, is there a creativity totally different from the activity that we generally call creativity?
Is there a living, is there a movement, which is not from the known? That is, is there a creation from a mind that is not burdened with all the turmoils of life, with all the social and economic pressures? Is there a creation out of a mind that has freed itself from the known?
Generally we start with the known and from that we create, but is there a creative impulse or movement taking place that can use the known, but not the other way round? In that state of mind, creation, as we know it, may not be necessary.
Is creativity something totally different, something which we can all have – not only the specialist, the professional, the talented and gifted? I think we can all have this extraordinary mind that is really free from the burdens which man has imposed upon himself. Out of that sane, rational, healthy mind, something totally different comes which may not necessarily be expressed as painting, literature or architecture. Why should it? If you go into this fairly deeply, you will find that there is a state of mind which actually has no experience whatsoever. Experience implies a mind that is still groping, asking, seeking and therefore struggling in darkness and wanting to go beyond itself.
There is a complete and total answer to the question if we apply our minds and our hearts to it; there is a creativity which is not man-made. If the mind is extraordinarily clear without a shadow of conflict, then it is really in a state of creation; it needs no expression, no fulfilment, no publicity and such nonsense. “

14th Question Q&A Ojai 13th May 1980

…Perception is instantaneous: you understand something instantly or not at all: seeing, hearing, understanding are instantaneous. Listening and looking have duration….

…Perception can only be out of silence, not out of a chattering mind. The chattering may be the wanting to get rid of it, reduce it, escape from it, suppress it or find a substitute for it, but it is only a quiet mind that sees….

….Perception, which is intelligence, is then operating….. 

https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/perception/Perception%20

“Order is the perception of things as they are, and as you are, not my conclusion of what you are.”

Small Group Discussion 2, Rishi Valley, 24 January 1971

“Truth is the perception of ‘what is’ without the interpretation of thought or thought interfering with it. “

Scientists Seminar 1, Brockwood 

And a talk :Madras talk 17 1971

https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/dialogue-17-madras-11th-january-1971-‘object-knowledge-and-perception’/Perception%20

And the link to jkrishnamurti.org type perception if you want to explore.

https://jkrishnamurti.org

I wonder how many of us could be so vulnerable so as to stand without any knowledge of and knowledge as their own being as identity. Maybe the great problem is none of us can simply be vulnerable. Beautifully and delicately and alertly aware as nothing ( ‘ naked ‘ ) and so be totally open to another ( as nothing ) and to the all.

“ It had rained heavily during the night and the day, and down the gullies the muddy stream poured into the sea, making it chocolate-brown. As youwalked on the beach the waves were enormous and they were breaking with magnificent curve and force. You walked against the wind, and suddenly you felt there was nothing between you and the sky, and this openness was heaven. To be so completely open, vulnerable to the hills, to the sea and to man is the very essence of meditation. To have no resistance, to have no barriers inwardly towards anything, to be really free, completely, from all the minor urges, compulsions and demands, with all their little conflicts and hypocrisies, is to walk in life with open arms. And that evening, walking there on that wet sand, with the seagulls around you, you felt the extraordinary sense of open freedom and the great beauty of love which was not in you or outside you but everywhere. We don't realize how important it is to be free of the nagging pleasures and their pains, so that the mind remains alone. It is only the mind that is wholly alone that is open. You felt all this suddenly, like a great wind that swept over the land and through you. There you were denuded of everything, empty and therefore utterly open. The beauty of it was not in the word or in the feeling, but seemed to be everywhere about you, inside you, over the waters and in the hills. Meditation is this.”

Meditations 1969

“There is nobody to answer questions, even though you may ask the right question. In the right question itself is the answer. If you ask of another and accept what they say, you have become a foolish person – then you live on faith and hope, and therefore you invite despair, anxiety and fear. But as you are walking, moving, acting, you discover for yourself the whole meaning of existence. That can be discovered only when there is the state of observing, listening, never resisting, never suppressing, never defending. Because when the mind is vulnerable, when the brain is no longer the animal – the animal being greed, envy, ambition, aggression, violence – when it is no longer that, it is capable of listening totally, and therefore discovering and seeing for itself. What you discover is not what you want to discover.”

Public Talk 10, Saanen, 31 July 1966

Maybe it all gets down to ( and even all the spiritual BS ) our inability ( unwillingness) to be this so ‘ vulnerable ‘. Happy to be corrected.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=b_spfKqaVAQ&list=PL1n30s-LKus6YrCTizVVRNZIeex5WLk2Q&index=12&pp=iAQB&ra=m

“Just listen, watch all the activities of yourself: the way you talk, the way you eat, the way you walk. Don’t correct the walk, don’t correct the way you eat, just watch it, so that by the very watching, you become astonishingly sensitive. This requires great sensitivity and therefore great intelligence. Not conclusions, not experience, but intelligence. To be intelligent you need tremendous sensitivity. There can be sensitivity only when the body is also sensitive – how you observe, see, hear. Then, out of that minute observation, without any choice, without any evaluation or judgment, condemnation or comparison, just to observe – out of that observation, you will see that your body becomes extraordinarily alert, sensitive, and therefore the whole of your brain, the mind, the whole of your entity becomes sensitive.”

Public Talk 2, Saanen, 12 July 1966

The highest form of sensitivity is intelligence. Intelligence has nothing whatsoever to do with knowledge. You may not have read a single book and be extraordinarily intelligent, because you are aware of what is going on in the world, highly sensitive to all the movements of your thoughts and feelings.

Public Talk 2, New York City, 3 October 1968

Thought is matter. There is energy and there is matter. That is all life is: energy and matter. We think thought is not matter, but it is. Thought is matter, as an idea, as an ideology. Energybecomes matter, so matter and energy are interrelated; one cannot exist without the other. Matter cannot exist without energy and energycannot exist without matter; the two are completely interrelated. The more there is balance, harmony between energy and matter, the more the brain cells are active – not as an idea but actually active; much more.

 School Talk (Students) 3, Rajghat, 7 January 1967

When the observer is the observed, there is only the observed, not the observer. When there is division as the observer and the observed, there is conflict and the desire to control, suppress, conquer. That is a waste of energy. When there is only the observed, not the observer observing that which he is seeing, there is energy to go beyond the observed, beyond what is. So it is very important to find out how to observe. Don’t go to classes or some community to learn how to observe or how to become sensitive. For God’s sake be simple. It is very important to understand this for yourself, not from my explanation. See it for yourself. Then the conflict in yourself comes to an end, and you have no violence. The truth, the understanding, not intellectual but the fact that the observer is the observed, brings about a totally different freedom in which there is no conflict whatsoever.

ublic Talk 1 in San Francisco, California, 20 March 1975

 “ Thought shattering itself against its own nothingness is the explosion of meditation. “ ( K )

In intelligence, there is complete, total security. Intelligence comes when you have observed all those things which are unintelligent.

Talk 4 in New Delhi, 19 November 1972

The intelligence that does not accumulate and the intelligence that accumulates are two different things.

Group Discussion 6 in Gstaad, 20 August 1964

In being aware of that which is false, there comes intelligence. Intelligence is not yours or mine. It operates when any incident, propaganda, challenge or demand is put before us. Intelligenceis the perception of what is false and what is true.

Talk 2 in Santa Monica, California, 17 March 1974

The very attention you give to a problem is the energy that solves that problem. When you give your complete attention – with everything in you – there is no observer at all. There is only the state of attention which is total energy, which is the highest form of intelligence. (K)

What brings about total attention? Not any method nor any system; they bring about a result, promised by them. But total attention is not a result, any more than love is; it cannot be induced, it cannot be brought about by any action. Total attention is the negation of the results of inattention but this negation is not the act of knowing attention. What is false must be denied not because you already know what is true; if you knew what is true the false would not exist. The true is not the opposite of the false; love is not the opposite of hate. Because you know hate, you do not know love. Denial of the false, denial of the things of non-attention is not the outcome of the desire to achieve total attention. Seeing the false as the false and the true as the true and the true in the false is not the result of comparison. To see the false as the false is attention. The false as the false cannot be seen when there is opinion, judgment, evaluation, attachment and so on, which are the result of non-attention. Seeing the whole fabric of non-attention is total attention. An attentive mind is an empty mind.” ( K’s Notebook ) 

This meditation cannot be learned from another. You must begin without knowing anything about it and move from innocence to innocence. The soil in which the meditative mind can begin is the soil of everyday life. The strife, the pain and the fleeting joy. It must begin there and bring order and from there move endlessly. But if you are concerned with only making order then that very order will bring about its own limitation and the mind will be its prisoner. In all this movement you must somehow begin from the other end/the other shore and not always be concerned with this shore or how to cross the River. You must take the plunge into the water not knowing how to swim and the beauty of meditation is that you never know where you are, where you are going, what the end is.’

Meditation comes only to a life that is totally harmonious. That meditation means a mind that is completely still. Stillness is not cultivated; it cannot be manufactured by thought. It comes naturally, sweetly, without any effort, if you have understood clearly how to observe without the interference of an image, conclusion or opinion. Then the mind becomes extraordinarily still. Now the mind can go much further – it is like opening a door to something totally unknown. But to come to that door, you must understand yourself completely, and in the very understanding of yourself comes this harmony. And when you come to the door, what lies beyond can never be put into words. What is nameable and can be put into words is not the real. What is described is not the describable. So, the mind that can live totally, which means with love, with compassion, the mind that doesn’t divide death, love and living, only to such a mind can there be this tremendous quiet, harmony, beauty and love.

Public Talk, Rome, 29 October 1972

So  for me, there is no learning; there is only seeing. Seeing is not accumulative; it is not a process of gathering-in or of denying. Seeing `what is is destructive', and in destruction there is peace, not violence. Violence, revolution, or change exists in the process of accumulating, maintaining the centre. But when one sees the whole of that process totally, completely, with all one's being, then the fact, that which is, is completely destructive; and what is destruction is creation.

Public Talk 4 Saanen, Switzerland - 01 August 1961

The word is not the thing.

Jiddu Krishnamurti

"The craving to become causes fears; to be, to achieve, and so to depend engenders fear. The state of the non-fear is not negation, it is not the opposite of fear nor is it courage. In understanding the cause of fear, there is its cessation, not the becoming courageous, for in all becoming there is the seed of fear. Dependence on things, on people, or on ideas breeds fear; dependence arises from ignorance, from the lack of self- knowledge, from inward poverty; fear causes uncertainty of mind-heart, preventing communication and understanding. Through self-awareness we begin to discover and so comprehend the cause of fear, not only the superficial but the deep casual and accumulative fears. Fear is both inborn and acquired; it is related to the past, and to free thought-feeling from it, the past must be comprehended through the present. The past is ever wanting to give birth to the present which becomes the identifying memory of the “me” and the “mine,” the “I.” The self is the root of all fear.'

Book of Life march 31

...........The observer is always casting its shadow on the thing it observes. So one must understand the structure and the nature of the observer, not how to bring about a union between the two. One must understand the movement of the observer and in that understanding perhaps the observer comes to an end. 

We must examine what the observer is: it is the past with all its memories, conscious and unconscious, its racial inheritance, its accumulated experience which is called knowledge, its reactions. The observer is really the conditioned entity. He is the one who asserts that he is, and I am. In protecting himself, he resists, dominates, seeking comfort and security. The observer then sets himself apart as something different from that which he observes, inwardly or outwardly. This brings about a duality and from this duality there is conflict, which is the wastage of energy. To be aware of the observer, his movement, his self-centred activity, his assertions, his prejudices, one must be aware of all these unconscious movements which build the separatist feeling that he is different. It must be observed without any form of evaluation, without like and dislike; just observe it in daily life, in its relationships. When this observation is clear, isn’t there then a freedom from the observer?...........

.......Learning is its own action. What generally happens is that having learnt – we act upon what we have learnt. So there is division between the past and action, and hence there is a conflict between what should be and what is, or what has been and what is. We are saying that there can be action in the very movement of learning: that is, learning is doing; it is not a question of having learnt and then acting. This is very important to understand because having learnt, and acting from that accumulation, is the very nature of the “me”, the “I”, the ego or whatever name one likes to give it. The “I” is the very essence of the past and the past impinges on the present and so on into the future. In this there is constant division. Where there is learning there is a constant movement; there is no accumulation which can become the “I”.

........Yes, that is what we mean. Meditation is not a state; it is a movement, as action is a movement. And as we said just now, when we separate action from learning, then the observer comes between the learning and the action; then he becomes important; then he uses action and learning for ulterior motives. When this is very clearly understood as one harmonious movement of acting, of learning, of meditation, there is no wastage of energy and this is the beauty of meditation. There is only one movement. Learning is far more important than meditation or action. To learn there must be complete freedom, not only consciously but deeply, inwardly – a total freedom. And in freedom there is this movement of learning, acting, meditating as a harmonious whole. The word whole not only means health but holy. So learning is holy, acting is holy, meditation is holy. This is really a sacred thing and the beauty is in itself and not beyond it.

https://kfoundation.org/krishnamurti-opinion-and-judgement-distort-observation-from-the-urgency-of-change/

Just sharing a couple of quotes. Don't have photoshop nor the brains to use it so no pictures of clouds, the sky, mountains or an old man looking nobly into space who was the vehicles for these words.

Why do we ( or can we ) become so enamoured with our insight ? Is it a self reinforcement not seen for what it is ….. subtly shouting at ourselves while shouting at others…  that self we are discussing so insightfully as being nothing, still as our fear of nothing, finding warm ( identity) in the something of our precious insight and the sharing ( pontificating ) of it to others. 

*The watcher shattering itself against its  own watching is the explosion of  meditation in which there is no meditator no narcissist no self love as fear no accumulation, cause the watcher’s ( the accumulator ) watching ( not separate) is the watched  🤔 …. that source of self as thought ….. and which is actually an ending ?

*a  variantion of K quote 
 “ Thought shattering itself against its own nothingness is the explosion of meditation. “ ( K ) 

… just a disjointed OP and question ?

We have any number of people ( including me) suggesting what is the correct way of looking at, what is the correct of understanding K or in fact spirituality, awareness, the soul,  God, a way of out the mess we are .. etc,  be it in YouTube here in Reddit or in whichever social media platform is your ‘ poison ‘ basically. 

Suggest there is only actually one ‘ correct ‘ and there will only ever be one correct and that is the ‘ correct’ which is the true insight which is order and which is the meditation ( as an action) ‘ one ‘ actually is as an action, and it is the ‘ correct’ only the individual himself can see and be as that ( intelligent) action. 

  ‘ Correct ‘ doesn’t belong to anyone because it’s only something the individual is to come upon as true insight as intelligence ( which is meditation as action) and which is to bring true order and true order doesn’t belong to anyone because the that order ( which IS when self is not ) is itself !  It is ‘ it’s’ sacred self and while one can live as and of that truth; it ain’t yours because the ‘ you ‘ has ended ( there is no you for it to be anyone’s and it is itself. 

‘ Correct ‘ cannot be given to another. One can talk about awareness till the cows come home but if that awareness is not also the perception ( the intelligence that is the total energy ( no waste) ) which IS the action which IS the perceiving of the unfolding moment then one may as well just be aware of the boil on your ar3e.

Insight, intelligence, order cannot be made correct as a method, or as a standard, or as a description because that makes it real and partial and nominal and separative. 

Someone’s authoritative words ( even if correct and including K ) will never be that living action of ‘ correct ‘ as true insight as intelligence as true order as the Meditation ( as an action) which it is. 

Happy to be corrected or told I’m indeed making a correct about correct !  🤷‍♂️

Truth is a pathless land ! 

https://kfoundation.org/dissolution-speech/

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCdF4nyq\_CE&pp=ygUoSXMgdGhlcmUgYW4gYWN0aW9uIG5vdCBiYXNlZCBvbiB0aG91Z2h0IA%3D%3D&ra=m

A quite animated K ‘ firing up ‘ in this discussion. To actually find out obviously can’t involve thought can it ? 

We have made reality real ( the word … the thing which something is to us ) and ‘ derealing ‘ ( to end the something that something.. a thing .. means ( attachment) to us ) can be a bugger of a task.

Can take fair bit of energy … but if we stop wasting energy then that energy is there.

Maybe takes a sensitively … an actute awareness.. of the what is ( the structure and nature) of the ‘ word ‘ … but sensitivity ‘ breeds ‘ sensitivity so learning ( insight ) is hopefully to ever more be insightful.. 🤔 ( happy to be corrected on that ).

“Only in discovery can there be joy - the discovery from moment to moment of the ways of the self. The self, at whatever level it is placed, is still of the mind. Whatever the mind can think about is of the mind. The mind cannot think about something which is not of itself; it cannot think of the unknown. The self at any level is the known; and though there may be layers of the self of which the superficial mind is not aware, they are revealed in the action of relationship; and when relationship is not confined within a pattern, it gives an opportunity for self-revelation. Relationship is the action of the self, and to understand this action there must be awareness without choice; for to choose is to emphasize one interest against another. This awareness is the experiencing of the action of the self, and in this experiencing there is neither the experiencer nor the experienced. Thus the mind is emptied of its accumulations; there is no longer the "me," the gatherer. The accumulations, the stored-up memories are the "me; the "me" is not an entity apart from the accumulations. The "me" separates itself from its characteristics as the observer, the watcher, the controller, in order to safe- guard itself, to give itself continuity amidst impermanency. The experiencing of the integral, unitary process frees the mind from its dualism. Thus the total process of the mind, the open as well as the hidden, is experienced and understood - not piece by piece, activity by activity, but in its entirety. Then dreams and everyday activities are ever an emptying process. The mind must be utterly empty to receive; but the craving to be empty in order to receive is a deep-seated impediment, and this also must be understood completely, not at any particular level. The craving to experience must wholly cease, which happens only when the experiencer is not nourishing himself on experiences and their memories.
The purgation of the mind must take place not only on its upper levels, but also in its hidden depths; and this can happen only when the naming or terming process comes to an end. Naming only strengthens and gives continuity to the experiencer, to the desire for permanency, to the characteristic of particularizing memory. There must be silent awareness of naming, and so the understanding of it. We name not only to communicate, but also to give continuity and substance to an experience, to revive it and to repeat its sensations. This naming process must cease, not only on the superficial levels of the mind, but throughout its entire structure. This is an arduous task, not to be easily understood or lightly experienced; for our whole consciousness is a process of naming or terming experience, and then storing or recording it. It is this process that gives nourishment and strength to the illusory entity, the experiencer as distinct and separate from the experience. Without thoughts there is no thinker. Thoughts create the thinker, who isolates himself to give himself permanency; for thoughts are always impermanent.
There is freedom when the entire being, the superficial as well as the hidden, is purged of the past. Will is desire; and if there is any action of the will, any effort to be free, to denude oneself, then there can never be freedom, the total purgation of the whole being. When all the many layers of consciousness are quiet, utterly still, only then is there the immeasurable, the bliss that is not of time, the renewal of creation.”

https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/series-i-chapter-29-meditation/Arduous%20

Just sharing a talk which has a lot in it ( they all do I guess ). Not much to say about it. I guess there is hearing about meditation which you have probably heard a hundred times and there is that which the word is about. Let the old fellow do the talking ( just trying to get the 100 letters up 😂).

Also a link to the written.

https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/meditation-flowering-has-no-motive/Negation%20flower

Featuring Graham Bonnet’s just insane vocal ability.

….. coz that’s what it sounds like …. or maybe an attempt at Krishnamurti in a paragraph.

Let one’s own understanding ( insight as an action ) be your light. Not understanding according to anyone else and that includes K. And for that understanding be Truth. That Truth can’t be if one is living ( as an action ) according to separate ideas ( as being true ( belief ) ) as a concept of what is and what you should be ( as learnt ideas in growing up in your life or historic ideas garnered from and as human consciousness ( as an action of thought ) ) and so to see ( that action ) the truth of that.  And in this there is, what seems to be, the incongruity of the fact that there is only one Truth which is maybe exemplified as this ‘ dynamic ‘ ‘ action ‘ ? .. or is it an energy of type ? … or both ? of ‘ *being* ‘ as Love and intelligence. 

“There is a way of learning, which is insight. When one has insight, it is not remembered. Each new insight is something fresh. Action then is not repetitive but constantly creative.”

Public Talk 4 in Madras (Chennai), 1 January 1978

Happy to be corrected.