The now is the silence of yesterday

Jay:
The past is a progression…without it there would be no today…..there is no objective reality out there….its all relative…so, to me, my past matters…

Me:
What we call “past” is basically memory. All these bundles of memories – which make the separated Ego, the “me” – become so heavy, and in the long run “defend” us from being in seamless connection, really, in touch with the freshness of the Present Moment…

I am not in the least attempting to contradict your viewpoint, I just wonder:

If our Past has such a crucial importance as to how we define ourselves, then in what relation are we to this fresh and “never-happened” Now?…

Advertisements

Self-knowledge can come only through relationship, not through isolation

Relationship is action, and self-knowledge is the result of awareness in action.
– Krishnamurti

Courtesy of Monica Cassani

What is the right solution to the problem of livelihood?

Questioner:
The same question would arise with regard to so many professions.

Krishnamurti:
Sirs, what do we mean by livelihood? It is the earning of one’s needs, food, clothing, and shelter, is it not? The difficulty of livelihood arises only when we use the essentials of life – food, clothing, and shelter – as a means of psychological aggression. That is, when I use the needs, the necessities, as a means of self-aggrandizement, then the problem of livelihood arises; and our society is essentially based, not on supplying the essentials, but on psychological aggrandizement, using the essentials as a psychological expansion of oneself. Sirs, you have to think it out a little bit. Obviously, food, clothing, and shelter could be produced abundantly; there is enough scientific knowledge to supply the demand, but the demand for war is greater, not merely by the warmongers, but by each of us, because each one of us is violent. There is sufficient scientific knowledge to give man all the necessities; it has been worked out, and they could be produced so that no man would be in need. Why does it not happen? Because, no one is satisfied with food, clothing, and shelter; each one wants something more, and, put in different words, the ‘more’ is power. But it would be brutish merely to be satisfied with needs. We will be satisfied with needs in the true sense, which is freedom from the desire for power, only when we have found the inner treasure which is imperishable, which you call God, truth, or what you will. If you can find those imperishable riches within yourself, then you are satisfied with few things – which few things can be supplied.

But, unfortunately, we are carried away by sensate values. The values of the senses have become more important than the values of the real. After all, our whole social structure, our present civilization, is essentially based on sensate values. Sensate values are not merely the values of the senses but the values of thought because thought is also the result of the senses; and when the mechanism of thought, which is the intellect, is cultivated, then there is in us a predominance of thought, which is also a sensory value. So, as long as we are seeking sensate value – whether of touch, of taste, of smell, of perception, or of thought – the outer becomes far more significant than the inner, and the mere denial of the outer is not the way to the inner. You may deny the outer and withdraw from the world into a jungle or a cave and there think of God; but that very denial of the outer, that thinking of God, is still sensate because thought is sensate; and any value based on the sensate is bound to create confusion – which is what is happening in the world at the present time. The sensate is dominant, and as long as the social structure is built on that, the means of livelihood becomes extraordinarily difficult.

So, what is the right means of livelihood? This question can be answered only when there is a complete revolution in the present social structure, not according to the formula of the right or of the left, but a complete revolution in values which are not based on the sensate. Now, those who have leisure – like the older people who are drawing their pensions, who have spent their earlier years seeking God or else various forms of destruction – if they really gave their time, their energy, to finding out the right solution, then they would act as a medium, as an instrument for bringing about revolution in the world. But they are not interested. They want security. They have worked so many years for their pensions, and they would like to live comfortably for the rest of their lives. They have time, but they are indifferent; they are only concerned with some abstraction which they call God, and which has no reference to the actual; but their abstraction is not God, it is a form of escape. And those who fill their lives with ceaseless activity are caught in the middle, they have not the time to find the answers to the various problems of life. So, those who are concerned with these things, with bringing about a radical transformation in the world through the understanding of themselves, in them alone is there hope.

Sirs, surely we can see what is a wrong profession. To be a soldier, a policeman, a lawyer, is obviously a wrong profession because they thrive on conflict, on dissension; and the big businessman, the capitalist, thrives on exploitation. The big businessman may be an individual, or it may be the state – if the state takes over big business it does not cease to exploit you and me. And as society is based on the army, the police, the law, the big businessman – that is, on the principle of dissension, exploitation, and violence – how can you and I, who want a decent, right profession, survive? There is increasing unemployment, greater armies, larger police forces with their secret service; and big business is becoming bigger and bigger, forming vast corporations which are eventually taken over by the state, for the state has become a great corporation in certain countries. Given this situation of exploitation, of a society built on dissension, how are you going to find a right livelihood? It is almost impossible, is it not? Either you will have to go away and form, with a few people, a community – a self-supporting, cooperative community – or merely succumb to the vast machine. But you see, most of us are not interested in really finding the right livelihood. Most of us are concerned with getting a job and sticking to it in the hope of advancement with more and more pay. Because each one of us wants safety, security, a permanent position, there is no radical revolution. It is not those who are self-satisfied, contented, but only the adventurous, those who want to experiment with their lives, with their existence, who discover the real things, a new way of living.

So, before there can be a right livelihood, the obviously false means of earning a livelihood must first be seen – the army, the law, the police, the big business corporations that are sucking people in and exploiting them, whether in the name of the state, of capital, or of religion. When you see the false and eradicate the false, there is transformation, there is revolution; and it is that revolution alone that can create a new society. To seek, as an individual, a right livelihood is good, is excellent, but that does not solve the vast problem. The vast problem is solved only when you and I are not seeking security. There is no such thing as security. When you seek security, what happens? What is happening in the world at the present time? All Europe wants security, is crying for it, and what is happening? They want security through their nationalism. After all, you are a nationalist because you want security, and you think that through nationalism you are going to have security. It has been proved over and over again that you cannot have security through nationalism because nationalism is a process of isolation, inviting wars, misery, and destruction. So, right livelihood on a vast scale must begin with those who understand what is false. When you are battling against the false, then you are creating the right means of livelihood. When you are battling against the whole structure of dissension, of exploitation, whether by the left or by the right, or the authority of religion and the priests, that is the right profession at the present time because that will create a new society, a new culture. But to battle, you must see very clearly and very definitely that which is false so that the false drops away. To discover what is false, you must be aware of it; you must observe everything that you are doing, thinking, and feeling, and out of that you will not only discover what is false, but out of that there will come a new vitality, a new energy, and that energy will dictate what kind of work to do or not to do.

Time to move on

Despite my huge gratitude and love to Krishnamurti, I sometimes truly and passionately hate him. His intellectual exactitude becomes a fucking curse.

He is so overly verbal and what´s worse is that in most cases he is unarguably right.

Precision sometimes needs to be utterly vague…Inexact. To be precise doesn´t always entail intellectual accuracy. But this form of cerebral “rightness” is in the long disruptive – it wounds the soul.

Yes…

Krishnamurti is the total opposite of creative madness, of pathos and effusion. Of Dionysian ecstasy.

No one can ever harm that which you are deep down

The only thing which can be harmed is the image of you.

– Krishnamurti

Our new God – the “like” button

A real validation and acknowledgement create a flow of energy, which in its turn, create even more mutual inspiration. A “like” doesn´t have that energy, apart from a mental virtual satisfaction.

As you know, we have all become masters of virtual reality. Modern man fears contact, fears real commitment, he suffers from the misconception that he “doesn´t have time”. And so he takes “the easiest way.”

I got many likes – it is nice to see that my texts have been appreciated BUT WHAT REALLY COUNTED, were the shorter or longer comments, which were incredibly rewarding and forward-pointing.

Jane:
Not only does the like button lack originality, but overuse of the “like” button also threatens our engagement with information online and in real life. When we compose a comment, we are compelled to actually think about why we feel a need to respond to an image or message. Liking a post “allows us to bypass this thought process.” It is all the sentiment without the thought, the online equivalent of the conversational “that’s nice” that we sometimes halfheartedly throw out when we are not really listening.

Thinking requires us to perhaps state, ” I do not understand what you are talking about.” Pushing the “like” button is another form of societal conditioning by corporations to force us to behave in a certain way.  We say we are not prejudiced, but prejudice IS part of our conditioning, and now we are discussing the prejudice of pushing the like button.

We are losing our sensitivity and ability to form complex thoughts and ideas, write them down, discuss, and perhaps come out of a discussion reframing a perspective. NO! I do not like the “like” button. It is the dumbing down of the masses. I tried it out for a while, but I am glad you brought this point up, Julien. I consider it the lazy way out. Most of the time, I do not think people are even reading what others write…they S C A N and press the like button…onward to more consumption…F A S T E R.

There is a flow to life. We will never be able to keep up with the exponential rate of data doubling every week on the internet. My song of existence requires me to be real – not a clone. I hope others will join in this “discussion.” We are here not to prove who or what is right or wrong. We are here to inquire.

We are caught in the web of society. Pushing the like button keeps us in our little cave, not stating what we feel or do not feel, afraid to be NOT LIKED! The like button is destructive. Conforming is imitation. A quote from Krishnamurti: The quality of seriousness is to pursue to the very end a thought, an idea, a feeling; to go to the very end of it whatever may happen to you. Seriousness consists of seeing things clearly, in finding out, not accepting.

You can follow your genuine intention, or the default plan of your ego-mind

It is clear that the Egotic Mind operates through time and thinking.

Although I have this very clear, I am still caught in this Ego drama, it still has me in its grip.

My real sense if I-ness as it were, can only partially release itself from this inertial energy.
Whatever I do, I encounter this conditioning in innumerable guises.

It seems almost an inhumanly impossible task to arrest these insidious energies.

Is there a way though to subdue this insidious entity, and have it obey you and not
vice-versa?

Sometimes I “manage”, – in the sense that all of a sudden I am set free, yet not knowing how it happened – while as I try to consciously free myself from it, I totally fail.

There seems to be no method, as whatever method reinforces the ego´s cursed agenda.

He:
Perhaps there is no method. Yet there is choice, focus and intentional action. If you see and allow it  to be “impossible” then your limiting belief will merely reinforce and keep it as such.

Me:
When you make whatever choice, it´s very hard to differentiate whether the ego-mind is in charge, or your “true” voice. How do you know which one talks within you…?

What I meant with “impossible” is the senselessness of trying to challenge the ego-mind directly. In a direct confrontation, It will invariably win, as this entity is incredibly cunning and disposes over an incredible arsenal of psychological setbacks.

I guess Krishnamurti puts it very well: you have to learn to heed everything with a very alert, yet, passive attention.

Not always an easy task…