This blog is not my desire to write in any spirit of argumentation, which has always seemed to me a futile thing. There is, however, much to be said for genuine discussion which is far from being a polite exchange of foregone conclusions. In my view, discussion is an earnest and candid effort on the part of those so engaged to push beyond fixed notions and repetitive theories into fields of fresh vision, so that each one presently finds himself approaching new and hence uncertain ground. When there is the interest and even a modest capacity to do this (and although there may be, and frequently is, radical disagreement), discussion can degenerate into combative argument. One should not be combative when one is uncertain and makes no attempt to hide it; but one may suddenly see something that would not have been seen had there already been certainty. This kind of discussion can be very unsettling, sometimes even painful; but if faithfully and fearlessly persisted in, it leads to new insights for all concerned. It is at once painful and enlightening because it is self-revealing, as one’s ego exposes itself. Argumentation and debate, on the other hand, usually arise when the relative mind has not ceased to be; that is, when the mind has attached itself to, and is set upon defending, a fixed position, such action is a waste of energy and time. Expression in words is never the real thing. Words as we know, have different meanings to different people. We need observation of our thought process so we can enquire more deeply into the subject which is important to understand relative mind from the Universal Mind that is formless, that we delude ourselves with such objective concepts. All such dualistic concepts as relative mind and Universal Mind, pure and impure are still obstructions.
Krishnamurti does not invent, he discovers. He does not reason, he describes. He propounds no theories and builds no systems. He enquires and discusses. No blueprint of such a life can be given.
We inquire how does this shift or rediscovering a sense of the Sacred occur? Why does the mind turn from one state to another? What is it that hears and sees? What is it that listens and looks? Is it because the relative mind thinks that the unconditioned is ‘better’ than the conditioned? Again, Krishnaji warns us that ‘desiring’ awareness or the unconditioned state is a reversal to the conditioned mind and leads to a deeper and more tenacious conditioning. It is only in full awareness of ‘what is’, that the relative mind might turn round leaving all conditioning behind and to enter a new way of life in a new relationship with the world with no center. Awareness cannot be willed and secured with effort and struggle. Apparently Krishnaji means is that life in awareness is so unusual for us, our habits and habitual values are so deep-rooted, and we are so eager to verbalize and formalize it that our psycho-somatic organism finds it hard to understand it and adapt itself to its promptings. In the clear light of awareness, it can take care of itself and needs no help from the conditioned mind. For its own clarity, goodness and beauty not degraded to a means for something else. Anything else than awareness will create the same conditioning over and over again, and back to duality we go. Setting forth the principle of duality and showing how it is a necessary part of manifestation and necessary for man to learn its nature and function is being aware of the foundation before he can proceed into lifting himself and his fellow beings into the spiritual destiny of non-being.
Abstention from giving rise to thoughts, but the very idea of so abstaining is also a thought.
The essential understanding is that in truth nothing is. This is obvious that it is not perceived. Krishnaji points from the beginning not a thing is without apprehending its full significance. Referring to the void or emptiness without realizing what is implied. What it is pointing to is just what is said that nothing is, that nothing alone is what is, not that no-thing is real in something, positive being is not to be assumed, but negative being, non-being. It is only in function of non-being that being seems to be truth.
Maybe, we should have a growing sense of the need to just listen without any movement of thought, to see, not what is true, but what is false. When the false is not understood, we make a creed of the true; but when there is an understanding, ‘insight’ of the false, the true becomes increasingly self-evident, thus rendering creeds superfluous. If this is a correct principle, it cuts at the very root of the whole organized religious system, including the current almost universal theosophical outlook.
Can one describe the Silent Mind? Or can we have no difficulty in getting a feeling of its working, the “perfume” of truth in action.
Let us make it plain that words cannot communicate experience to another. It must be born anew in each one of us.
No previous preparations or exceptional talents are required. It is quite clear, that all self-centered activity is at the service of the ego, ‘I’, for truth to be, the ‘I’ must go.
We are unhappy human beings because we are thoroughly conditioned, and we do not realize it. We lack ‘self-knowledge’, which is Krishnaji’s sole remedy to all our ills. We need a clear insight into the nature and workings of our relative mind. We have made the world what it is and do what we may, we cannot change it by the mere re-arrangement of existing factors. It is only in direct insight of our thought process.