Posts tagged Krishnamurti
Enquiry
Feb 1st
Ali,
I feel that a few words about enquiry are necessary. It’s very easy to fall into the trap of opinions, beliefs, and views based on one’s experiences and conditioning. Even if one doesn’t want to engage in this way, it’s very hard to remain in a questioning mode, and come from ‘I don’t know.’ It’s very difficult, and apparently exceedingly rare, to question together with another human being, to hold open a space and keep a question going, so that there may be shared insight. We may not be able to achieve that, but that is one’s intent. At present, we aren’t communicating in this way.
It seems that you’ve set up a bit of a straw man in saying that in “talking about other people’s expectations, dreams, problems, sorrows, etc, is far easier than doing something about yourself.” We aren’t doing that, or “promising people leadership, guidance and eventually happiness.” We are looking at the actual
I feel that a few words about enquiry are necessary. It’s very easy to fall into process of thought, sustained by the observer, within oneself, and asking: What is right observation, which quiets the chattering mind, and puts the mind, emotions, brain, and body in natural order and proper balance, and allows transmutation to occur?
Can the people who have “a natural talent to quiet their thoughts and clean their mind, not by effort and struggling, but only through insight” point the way for others? Certainly they can, though each person has to do so for themselves. It simply isn’t true that “as soon as you try to put this experience into words, which is within the very limit of the known, your real experience and insight start fading away and the thought invades back the mind.” Words aren’t the problem, nor writing. Did Rumi lose his insight because he wrote beautiful poetry? Of course not. One can indeed lose insight by writing, or speaking, but only if one makes the words more important than the things, out of a desire to make a name for oneself or some other motivation. But as long as one is enquiring, asking questions within oneself, insight is not lost. Indeed, it is nurtured.
Also, I don’t accept the starting position of self. If we start from self we will end with self. ‘Myself’ is an illusion, a separation made by thought that seems to have permanence. For most people, the feeling of ‘myself’ lasts a lifetime, with no true break. For people who actually meditate, the continuity of self ceases, at least for a some timeless moments or minutes.
So yes, the question of meditation is of the highest importance, what we are really talking about. As you say, for you meditation is an idea, but for me it is an actuality, the most important action a human being is capable. Meditation isn’t a matter of talent, though it may come easier for some people than others. So let’s not play with words like ‘meditation,’ since the word is not the thing, just as the map is not the territory.
You said, “I have no intention to question thought. What I want to is to follow it to the where it takes me.” What is the ‘I’ that has this desire, and the ‘me’ for which the desire is supposedly leading? These are constructions of thought at a very subtle cognitive and emotional level. It is precisely this structure that has to be observed, without division, so that meditation can ignite. It is in that sense we ‘start with self.’
In other words, the ‘I’ cannot analyze or follow thought because it is thought, and the ‘me’ ends up exactly where it started, as ‘me.’ “To dissolve thinking, I will definitely use thinking” is a vicious circle.
You said that “following thought where it leads me…has nothing to do with observation because the observer is separate from the source.” This seems very mistaken and confusing. Let’s be as simple as possible. Is there an observation in which there is no observer? Clearly, yes. It is possible for the brain simply to observe, holistically, not from the thought-made entity ‘I.’ One simply has to observe the observer, and in doing so, the deep habit of thought splitting off from itself as ‘I’/’me’/the observer ends. Then there is just observation. This is an actual fact for one, not a theory, or idea, or method. There is no method, there is only right observation.
So if you “do not want to observe [that] which is thinking,” then there can and will be no quieting of thought, because as long as the thinker continues, thought will continue, obviously.
Essentially this is true: “When there is thought there is no meditation and when there is meditation, there is no thought.” But that can also be a clever abstraction. And it isn’t so black or white. One may have a deep insight into the observer, but the movement of thought may continue, both during a given sitting, and in the brain. But a deep insight into the observer means it no longer dominates in the brain.
Without implying time, transmutation is an arduous process. It may happen quickly in one person, and take lifetimes in another. One has to take a playful, experimental attitude. It simply isn’t so that one has “nothing to do about meditation but thinking and talking about it.”
As Evrim said, it is “vital the observer be negated.” This is the heart of the matter of meditation, by whatever name we call it. What is the Turkish word? Perhaps it is better. What I mean by the word is the effortless state of awareness that comes into being when the observer has been negated.
Someone might still ask, but how do you negate the observer? ‘How’ implies a method, and the first thing is to be done with all methods. It isn’t a matter of avoiding judgments, evaluations, analyses, or reactions. One simply observes them as they arise, with the understanding that they are part of the entire field of thought and emotion. Judgments and evaluations are secondary reactions, and when one observes them as such, they become part of the whole movement of thought/emotion, and fall away without one doing anything.
It’s an interesting question—is there judgment or evaluation or analysis without an observer? When the observer dissolves, isn’t there just the movement of thought and emotion as they arise?
Then, if one keeps passively watching, observing, listening, attention quiets the entire movement of thought/emotion. It seems accurate to say that meditation begins the moment the observer ends, even though attention has to gather greater energy for thought to fall essentially quiet in the brain.(The ‘I’ doesn’t gather attention; it simply gathers with passive watchfulness!)
Evrim clearly states a painful truth: “Without clearing the human mind from all limiting beliefs, the modern age epidemic of self-righteousness will prevail.” She asks, “What would happen if man started meditating? Would he get rid off this epidemic?”
One feels so. If even one tenth of one percent of the people in the world ended the observer through regularly sitting quietly and passively observing the movement of thoughts and emotions as they arise, humankind would be “prepared for the next leap,” and effortlessly take it.
Kind regards,
Martin
Meditation… Is it really what we are talking about?
Jan 13th
Martin;
It’s good to re-start the enquiry.
I agree with you that one’s highest capability of change is within the context of himsels. You can only ask, hope, wish or force others to change. But it is totally up to their own choice, decision and initiative to do something about that, regardless how good or bad the consequences will be for them.
So, our starting point is our very self which seems to me the most challenging. This is so, because when I talk about myself, it brings about some questions to be answered and responsibilities to be undertaken by nobody but myself.
Look at many people,ü who seems to be very influential on people, promising them leadership, guidance and eventually happiness. Most of them does not seem to have even the average level of balance, integration and wholeness in their own lifes, while they promise a heaven to the others. On the contrary, many of them live a very conflicted and fragmented life on their own. You can include many famous philosophers, ideologists, politicians, writers in that category.
For me, this is not surprising, because if you have certain level of talent to create ideas, abstractions and to put them into words and express fluently against people, you may have an audience to follow you, regardles how capable you are to apply what you say to your own life.
But talking about other people’s expectations, dreams, problems, sorrows, etc, is far easier than doing something about yourself.
Let’s take the example of a doctor advicing his patient to quit smoking because it kills. He can very effectively present the arguments to her, and eventually can convince to commit to be a non-smoker. However; it is not very surprising to see the doctor smoking himself, even he tells just the opposite to the others.
We have a saying in our society which is : “Do what the Imam (priest) says; not what he does.”
This is to say: Saying is easy while doing is a big challenge 
Coming back to the topic of meditation; I have no question with people who practice various methods for meditation. I use the word “method” on purpose, with that I mean the way you used to (or prefer to) follow to reach the level of quiet state of mind.
I am sure there are many people who have a natural talent to quiet their thoughts and clean their mind, not by effort and struggling, but only through insight.
The key word here is “insight” which reminds me the famous quote of K which is “Truth is a pathless land”.
What I think is; brain is a very skillful device and thought is nothing but one function on brain.
What I think about meditation is nothing but an abstraction because it is all about the known; words, definitions, actions, etc. We can talk about meditation; but what we talk about is just a word what we created to make an unknown thing, recognizable by us. But what we recognize is the word or the label; not the real think which is still unknown.
The un-thinking or still state of mind, by definition, should not be reachable by thinking about that. We can talk about it endlessly, without getting anywhere.
My humble point against this challenging quesition is; I have no idea neither I could; about that state of mind. Some people tells interesting and appealing stories about that, but these do not help me, either. The difficulty is the definition which eliminates any option to use technniques, recipes, maps, etc, to get where, if it really exists.
You may have experienced on your own, the so-called transfornation of mind through some process. But, as soon as you try to put this experience into words, which is within the very limit of the known, your real experience and insight start fading away and the thought invades back the mind.
Can we agree on the following state: “When there is thought there is no meditation and when there is meditation, there is no tought.”
So meditation and thought can not exist at the same time. Mind has only one state amongst them.
I wonder if I am clear enough on my point to question “meditation” by definition, only.
If I surrender to the fact that, I have nothing to do about meditation but thinking and talking about it; I have only one solid key left to deal with. That isthe thought, which makes me, in the simples expression. I also agree that I have no natural talent to switch my mind from one state to the other, with or without using some methods.
I am made of thoughts and unless I understand the structure and nature of thought I can never go beyond.
Understanding thought is nothing but understanding how the brain functions to create thought.
Once, I am able to catch a clue about the way brain functions, it may take me to the further understanding of what happens beyond.
To understand thought, I do not have to wait until I find an isolated place, a peaceful natural scene, a place to retreat, etc. Thought is with me and operates at any given time, providing me with countless opportunities to diagnose it.
To do this I can only rely on my brain who creates the thought.
If I can follow the process of thought backwards, this can hopefully take me to it’s origins.
There is a must to take that trip which is “take the thought as it is; without judgement.” This is to say; thought is just a function of my brain. It is neither good, nor bad. It just is! I have no intention to question thought. What I want to is to follow it to the where it takes me.
This is nothing to do with observation because the observer is seperate from the source. I do not want to observe which is thinking.
Does a diagnostic device think about the object, when it functions?
It is inevitable that, to observe thought you will use the means of thought, again. This may seem as a paradox and it actually is when we start. However; the key is: It does not help to negate thinking if we really want to understand it. Neither negate, nor favor. Just follow it.
To dissolve thinking, I will definitely use thinking which is the most powerful function of brain, as we know it.
For me the brain first needs to be discovered, in order to liberate it from the invasion of thoughts.
Take the example of a physician fighting cancer. She needs to understand the cancer first, not to hate it. Cancer is bad for the patient, but not for the Doctor, for whom it is just a problem to be solved. Doctor’s hating the problem could even make her handicapped against it, eventually resulting in failure.
I believe I should stop here; looking forward to hear from you.
Best regards;
Ali
Letters from Martin (2): What is the meaning of meditation in a serious life?
Jan 6th
Dear Ali,
I’m glad you posted part of our correspondence, and am happy to continue the enquiry. Let’s withhold our investigation of the ‘political’ expression of a psychological revolution until we have a strong foundation in enquiry, and there are signs and evidence that the revolution in human consciousness is igniting. (By political expression, I don’t mean the low art of politics, but rather the unavoidable necessity of collectively prioritizing and intelligently managing the multi-faceted self-made crisis of humankind–ecological destruction, economic disparity, growing conflict and terrorism, etc.)
Whether the breakthrough in human consciousness is near or not, whether this is the darkest hour of humanity before the dawn of a new human being, or the beginning of a global dark age, we cannot know. There is great urgency for psychological revolution, but all we can really do is question alone and together, awakening insight within ourselves, and, through enquiry, ignite insight with like-minded, self-knowing friends in the work.
There are two questions that have come up in which I’m keenly interested. Let’s see if they strike a chord in you and others. The first is the place of meditation in one’s life, and in this violent and rather insane world. The second, which comes after the foundation of true meditation is clearly established within us, is the question of conscious transmutation and revolution in consciousness.
You posed the challenge by saying that you don’t meditate (in the sense of taking daily walks and sittings in the mirror of nature whenever possible, with the intent of passively observing the movement of thought/emotion in oneself) because, “I would have put my life into the trap of fragmentation while seeking wholeness thru meditation. Fragmented because if you take the meditation as the essence, what will happen when you do not (or can not) meditate? If you feel balanced when you meditate, isn’t it true that you are out of balance when you do not practice it?”
This is to my mind a most important question. I understand your meaning and concern, and share it, although one has come to the opposite conclusion–if I can use that word without implying a fixed position.
Beyond the unforced ‘practice’ of taking daily walks and sittings in nature (which I’m fortunate to be able to do year around here in California, even during winter when it isn’t raining), what is meditation? That word, like ‘dialogue,’ means many different things to many different people. Almost always, however, meditation to most people’s minds involves some method, technique, and ritual. To me these things are inimical to awakening the meditative state, since they are products of the very mechanism we want to quiet—the mind as thought.
Meditation, I submit, is the brain spontaneously letting go of the dominance of thought through the passive observation of the movement of thoughts and emotions as they arise. It is an unwilled fundamental alteration in consciousness, as the brain goes from living in terms of symbols (words, images, ideas, imaginings etc) of content-based consciousness, to direct perception and insight. Meditation spontaneously occurs when the observer is negated. One negates the observer by ‘catching thought in the act’ of splitting itself off from itself, which takes many forms–judgment, evaluation, analysis, or reaction of any kind to thoughts and feelings as they arise.
For me, it’s necessary to take time each day to sit and observe this movement, with intent but without goal, in order to ‘clear the decks’ and allow the brain using thought to fall silent and come into order. We all experience the chattering mind. I’ve found that to take the time to really listen to the mind, without interference, giving special attention to the divisive habit of the observer, thought grows quiet and a deep balance is restored. There is also new insight, and a regeneration of the brain’s energy and a growth of its capacity.
So I find it quite ironic that you ask: “If you feel balanced when you meditate, isn’t it true that you are out of balance when you do not practice it?” One does indeed sometimes feel out of balance when the meditative state ‘wears off,’ but that illuminates the areas of one’s life that are out of balance and in need of attention. (Why it ‘wears off,’ and what is the breakthrough of illumination in which the brain presumably does not return to thought, are questions requiring further enquiry.)
In short, without taking time to ignite meditation, doesn’t one adapt to society and becomes habitual in one’s daily routines, no matter how much one is self-aware, because the sweep of events and experiences is too much for the brain to gather sufficient attention to slow down and quiet the whole movement of thought?
It’s essential of course to be self-aware during one’s activities and in one’s relationships. Without self-awareness, meditation cannot ignite. But is self-awareness during one’s activities enough? I feel not.
Many people can only take half an hour from their busy days to sit quietly and passively observe, but that, plus some contact with nature, are minimal requirements for transformation, aren’t they? Taking one’s seat, the first question that comes to one, after becoming attuned to one’s environment (sitting outdoors whenever possible, even just in one’s backyard or patio), is: Is the observer operating? When the observer ends in passive awareness of the mind’s divisiveness, attention gathers and becomes as quick as a hummingbird’s wings. As Krishnamurti so often pointed out, the act of attention, in itself, deeply quiets the mind, and opens the door to insight and the sacred. Does this ring true for you?
With the foundation of quieting thought in ourselves through passive observation, we can then take up the question Evrim, one of your readers, picked up on: “Is man’s self-made fragmentation ever more urgently driving a conscious transmutation in the human brain, allowing us to make the next evolutionary leap?”
I look forward to your response.
Warm regards,
Martin
Letters from Martin (1): WHERE DID MAN GO WRONG?
Dec 24th
In May 2009 I have been contacted by Martin LeFevre, who is a political philosopher and writer. He seemed to me as deeply involed in humankinds most challenging questions like “A psychological revolution and transformation of human mind; freeing from the boundries of the known, etc.”
Please click the following link to read one of his interesting columns. “Where did man go wrong? http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0904/S00160.htm) You can also find an archive of my work at http://www.fountainoflight.net/”
Today, I start publishing fist two letters between Martin and me; which is, so far, more than just a provocative and brain teasing enquiry towards truth.
I hope you find this dialogue interesting and would like to receive your comments on any part of this discussion.
Ali
Letters from Martin: 1
On 8th May, 2009; Martin wrote:
Dear Ali Bulut,
I’m glad I reached you in Istanbul. As I said on the phone, I used to go to K’s talks in the 70’s and 80’s in Ojai California, and studied his teachings for many years. I have known the director of the K Foundation of America, Mark Lee, for 35 years, but am not affiliated with the KFA.
I’m a religious and political philosopher and writer, and my column, “Meditations,” is widely read around the world. I’m looking for people who can question together at spiritual, philosophical, and political levels. The questions I am keen to explore with you and others there are these:
Can the revolution in consciousness that K spoke so often about ignite and manifest at this point in human history?
Though it would be a global phenomenon, can this psychological revolution ignite first in Turkey?
Can Turkey be a base for a Global Council (GC) of world citizens in the evolutionary birthplace of humankind, East Africa?
I have been doing capacity building with East Africans for over 15 years, having shared this vision with the late Odera Oruka of Kenya, who was considered the leading philosopher on the African continent. My view is that the main support, leadership, and base for a GC should come from a Muslim country, and most people agree Turkey is best situated. I have a friend in Brussels who worked for the EU, a woman who is a serious student of the teachings, that will help there.
With respect to the Global Council Initiative, an institute I am considering contacting is The Istanbul Policy Center (http://ipc.sabanciuniv.edu/eng/?Hakkimizda/VizyonMisyon.html).
I hope that we can think together at this critical juncture on human history, especially given the spiritual and political crossroads that Turkey represents. I believe even only a prominent tradition like sufism provide us with high level of confidence to think so.
Kind regards,
Martin LeFevre
PS Here’s a url for one of my recent columns, “Where did man go wrong?” ( http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0904/S00160.htm) You can also find an archive of my work at http://www.fountainoflight.net/. (Meditations)
On 5/8/09 7:43 AM, “ali bulut” wrote:
Dear Martin;
Thanks your your e-mail.
Actually whom you have spoken with on the phone is my brother.. He has forwarded your message to me.
I have been in touch with various K organisations worlwide, since more than 15 years.
He, for me, is a unique philiosopher and teacher whose adorable works have not been dicovered and understood by people in the exact manner, yet.
Based on his teachings I developed my way of relationship management with everything besides me. Those are actually the things who makes me and there would not be any me without them.
I define myself in relationship to the other things but me, as they do the same with regard to me.
I consider “me” as an acquired entity whom has no meaning without the other things beyond him.
So the question is what is beyond me and all the others whom I seem to be related.
Is there any other reality beyond known which is limited within the boundries of thought?
How can an acquired quality overcomes the source just like thought does against the brain.
Can brain free itself from its function which is thought?
Can we learn how to de-condition our brains, thru understanding the structure of conditioning.
Can we just look at the process of thinking without thinking about it?
These are some of the questions I am trying to find answers.
***
It is very interesting for me to meet other people and discuss with them about the topics including but not limited to the above.
I appreciate your search to start an ignition of transformation of humanity in order to stop all these confilcts, and sorrow.
It will definitely be my pleasure to share ideas with you.
Sufism is a religious sect with strong roots; getting more and more popular by the time, in Turkey. Although, many religious leaders like to be somehow related to this discipline, one need to seek deeper to understand it’s real meaning beyond what we like to see.
Like Kaballah and Taoism it is widely speculated, abused and manipulated by the people who seek power and influence on the others
I personaly seek no leaders or gurus, neither mean to be so against the others. I do not suggest other peoples to follow them, either.
I just like to have fellows to walk together.
***
Regarding your quest to fire-up the process from a Muslim Country, there are cons and pros to be discussed.
Muslims are amongst those who has suffered most amongst all the religions. There should be a reason beyond this. I would really like to know, if I could.
To end up, I welcome your ideas anytime and anywhere.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
with best regards;
ali
Son Yorumlar