Am I actually interested in finding out what is true, whatever the consequences?
What is consciousness? Is mental life just the product of the brain? Or is consciousness unique, fundamental, revealing a hidden reality? Understanding what consciousness is, why and how it evolved, is perhaps the greatest mystery.
If we were asked what lies at the root of our consciousness, what would we say? We might say that there is an undeniable sense of a “my” consciousness, separate from “your” consciousness. In other words, by focusing on all the various unique experiences that each of us have undergone creates the sense of having an individual consciousness that is separate from everyone else’s. Are we missing something here?
Is our consciousness actually separate, or is it a movement of experiencing ourselves as having a separate consciousness, even as it is happening in a shared way in all of us? This turns the whole sense of ourselves on its head, as the falseness of this “shared experience of separateness” is revealed.
At the same time, we can see the personal and global suffering and violence that this separative movement of consciousness is creating. And the very fact that together, we are unavoidably part of this river of consciousness means that when one suffers, fundamentally we all suffer. There is no real separation in this consciousness and suffering, no truly personal suffering. In fact, the sense of it being personal may be the nature of this suffering.
The sad irony is that all of this may be based on a deeply-held but mistaken assumption that the inward experience of being separate is how things actually are.
The content of my consciousness is my unhappiness, my misery, my struggle, my sorrow, the images which I have collected through life, the frustrations, the pleasures, the fears, the agony, the hatred – that is my consciousness. Can all that be completely emptied? Not only at the superficial level but right through? – the so-called unconscious. If it is not possible, then I must live a life of misery, I must live in endless, unending sorrow. There is neither hope, nor despair, I am in prison. So the mind must find out how to empty itself of all the content of itself, and yet live in this world, not become a moron, but have a brain that functions efficiently. Now how is this to be done? Can it ever be done? Or is there no escape for man?
Krishnamurti in discussion with Prof Needleman in Malibu, 1971
from Awakening of intelligence
Listen to the full discussion here:
Exploring Resistance and Change
Is awakening to the nature of our consciousness something purely intellectual or reasoned out? And can reasoning alter the movement of our consciousness? Krishnamurti pointed out that exploring our reasoning cannot bring about a fundamental change in thinking itself. He spoke of a different action, born of insight, revealing what is false.
So what does this actually mean? Is there any way out of the confusion and conflict that tends to be our lives? Is there anything we can “do” to change any of it? And is change not what we think it is?
Watch this 2-minute video on consciousness and its fragmentation.
Fear and Learning
There was a time when I felt my life was supposed to be “spiritual”, which meant that I needed to become more self-aware, etc. And yet, the more deeply I focused on this, the more I seemed to be in conflict with myself. There were all these thoughts and feelings that were so “unenlightened”, and I couldn’t bring this to an end. Like the Chinese finger puzzle, the more I struggled with myself, the more entangled I seemed to become. In this was both fear and resistance: the fear that I may not be what I thought I “should” and wanted to be, and tremendous resistance to this fear: it might be true!
The more resistance there was to this fear, the more intense the fear became. At a certain point, it could no longer be resisted. There was just the actuality of fear, like a tidal wave overtaking and flowing through me.
But this fear was not my idea of fear, which was just resistance to fear. It was something actual, non-verbal. There was no longer resistance to the feeling of fear, to not being what I thought I was. So whatever this word fear referred to, it fully expressed itself. This fear was myself, it was not separate from me.
What then remained? Just myself as I was; just my inner movement and ideas about myself as they were.
The Possibility of True Self-Knowledge
So is it possible not to seek results (what “should be”), but instead discover our inward movement as it actually is? This is learning itself, which is not acquiring anything.
We assume we know ourselves, and therefore we tend to look through these ideas we have about ourselves, as if we already know. In so doing, we don’t look directly. But to see that we actually don’t know, we only assume we do, is to see ourselves as we are. What we thought we knew about ourselves was just an idea.
So what is moving within us right now may not be what we assume it to be, it may actually be unknown to us. And it may be more alive than anything we could ever conceive of.
In the end, it seems it is up to each of us to find out what is actually true, and to not depend on our ideas or the words of others. To start afresh, which means to realize that what we think we know may be what is hindering us.
Maybe it is worth starting with the above as a question: am I actually interested in finding out what is true, whatever the consequences?
By Daniel Kilpatrick
Associate Professor of Microbiology,
Physiological Systems & Neuroscience
University of Massachusetts
Interesting. Firstly what is life? It is discernment of an outside object? Seeing , hearing etc. This means at the beginning it is reaction? Reaction discerns something outside. This is then to be conscious of something. So the brain, the organism & thought is discerning objects, is conscious of objects. This then would be the consciousness. Then thought develops to a point in which there is the consciousness of ‘being’, At what point & why does thought develop into this? I would say danger, the fact that animal hunts animals & harsh weather etc., made thought look for safety. It is the challenge of living that made thought take this plunge. That is, it made the image. Where exactly is this taking place. Krishnamurti told Dr. Bohm that it is taking place in space & that sum of all the brains are causing it. Can that be substantiated? Thought as we know is based on memory of what we discern. So an actual object or incident is recorded. However when we say somebody is nice chap or not nice the brain uses available past information & makes an image. This image not there actually in the physical world. So here an imaginary object is made. Where is this imaginary object taking place? That has to be in space with thought & brain functioning like a projector. So self consciousness then is still the brain & thought functioning together. Now what happens when this is abolished? Because to make an image of another , thought makes the fundamental error that another is basically different from you. So once this is seen the consciousness is abolished. Then what is there? Is there experiencing without an experiencer? An undivided state? Well Krishnamurti says once the consciousness is ended then the brain is in contact with what he calls the THE MIND. This is outside of the brain. However in the 2nd talk in Future of Humanity he says this “The Mind’ is not everywhere!! (if I recollect accurately. So that has to be explained too!! Sorry….too long a comment…….
An excellent and cutting edge book looking on consciousness and “the hard Problem” is: The Ancient Origins of Consciousness: How the Brain Created Experience by Todd E. Feinberg and Jon M Mallatt.
A couple of clues left by K are short but very interesting. In a reel-to-reel movie made sometime in the 20’s or 30’s filming K made a rather amazing statement that I never found elsewhere (although he might have). He said that what the audience wanted to know from him was something very simple, Then he added that because it was simple was why they would miss it. This must mean that one does not need to be a genius to understand it because it IS simple. But, of course this does not mean it is easy, and because most people, including the very bright, find K difficult must mean that it is logical another question must follow this enigmatic statement, mainly, what is it that prevents us from understanding and seeing something K was describing even though it was simple? Some type of blockage or something within us encumbering perception must be in operation. It also follows that if one truly wants to understand K one must first attend to this blockage.
The other clue was found in one of K’s books where he was having a discussion with a group of Buddhist monks. The discussion was marked with the same difficulties that most of us experienced when participating with K. A lot of confusion. However, at some point as the discussion progressed one of the monks spoke to K saying: “So, you have lived a life of observation.” K replied: “Quite right, sir.” This was an amazing exchange but it is hard to appreciate it unless one stops to examine the totality of the monk’s statement and the ready agreement from K. “. . . a life of observation.” Does that imply that observation was the preoccupation of K’s consciousness? Could it be that observation and not willful determination via the ego is the sole function of consciousness? Does it mean that right action, something that K frequently discussed, comes from someplace other than conscious choice?
“right action… comes from someplace other than conscious choice” I think that is exactly it.
ME PREGUNTO SI EL ESTADO DE CONSCIENCIA, QUE ESTA MAS ALLÁ DE LA QUE CONOCE NUESTRO PENSAMIENTO, SERA O ES ENTRAR EN EL ESTADO QUE LLAMAN AHORA CUÁNTICO… PARECE QUE CON LAS ENSEÑANZAS DE K. PODREMOS COMPRENDER CON MAS PROFUNDIDAD LO QUE ES EL MUNDO CUÁNTICO.
LO QUE ES ASOMBROSO ES QUE K DIO CON ESTE ESTADO A TRAVÉS DEL SILENCIO…PERO LO BELLO ES QUE LAS ENSEÑABAS DE K NOS SEÑALO QUE HAY QUE DEJAR LAS ARANDELAS PARA DESCUBRIR ESTE ESTADO
O MAS BIEN QUE ESTE DESCUBRIR NOS DESCUBRA A NOSOTROS SIN ESFUERZO ALGUNO…Y QUE SOLO PUEDE ENTRA EN VERDADERA LIBERTAD…
QUE PERCEPCIÓN O QUE CONEXIÓN EXISTE ENTRE LAS ENSEÑANZAS DE K SIN COMPARAR, NOS PUEDE ENSEÑAR Y A COMPRENDER SI HAY ALGUNA CONEXIÓN O ALGUNA COSA ASÍ…
“Observation with consciousness results Judgement.
Judgement leads to Conflict. Conflict results into Unrest(absence of Peace).
Absence of peace leads to Desire for for Peace”.
Desire triggers Action to Search for peace.
Peace can be obtained by identifying the Self.
Identification of Self requires realisation.
Realisation is only the result of observation without Judgement.
Consciousness and energy are the fundamental properties if the universe they existed in living cells long before brains and animate life came into being.
what’s the point of pointless existence