We the people shattered all over the place in so many I’s and than wonder what just happened and denying it again….and than these people in the seminar are interested, can we please work together, think together, looking out the window, please ❤️
The world you seem to see, is a projection from mind, the observer is looking at “his own” projection, we humanity, the mind we share, one mind ❤ we are trained conditioned in the I mode, parents, teachers, church tell us what to see.
You may like to read the full transcript of this Seminar, which is available at www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamurti-teachings/view-text.php?tid=1349&chid=1048&w=
I don't mean to be a gadfly here, but there are some unpleasant issues to be considered. I'm not endorsing what I'm about to say, but it behooves us to consider it. Are you sure that violence, pure and simple, is something to be eliminated altogether? How can you be sure? If you look at nature, we see much that is violent, and there seems to be some kind of order which may be intimately linked with violence. It may be unpleasant to see animals killing each other, feeding off of one another. Bot not only does it ensure their survival, but a certain balance is maintained thereby. For example, if certain insects didn't kill other insects, our cities may be a lot worse off, since we'd have an excess of insects. (Or some such thing. Killing reduces excess and furthers life in a way.) Moreover, Krishnamurti has stated on numerous occasions that compassion is the highest intelligence? How can he be sure of that? Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the highest intelligence is beyond both compassion and violence, and may see that both are necessary for the continuation and harmony of life. Not everything in creation is about kindness, preservation, and so on. Destruction and killing are simply part of the natural order of things, and it may be just a human limitation that emphasizes compassion above all other things. Now again, I'm not suggesting that this is all necessarily true, only that Krishnamurti seems to base a lot (about the ending of violence) on assumptions. Also, Krishnamurti makes the assumption that the world is full of disorder. Well, it certainly seems so to many people. But even about that I'm not so sure. For example, one may say that cancer is a disorder where the human body is concerned - but it may be part of a wider order (beyond the body) about which we have little or no understanding as yet. Krishnamurti at times strikes me as a little overconfident about his statements concerning as to what disorder is.
I read your comment. Violence in our world and in our personal life brings about mental anguish and fear and such sadness that it’s not just violence that he is addressing- it’s how it affects our living. Our culture. How it is perhaps accepted. How it is reality in all countries. I’m learning how to see life for what it is ( ugliness and violence exists)rather than wanting more peace in life and thinking it to be out of balance because of all the violence. That is why your comment drew me in. I have to wonder why I am paralyzed sometimes due to human violence and why the system keeps ticking on and our world hasn’t collapsed yet due to the human violence? K is brave to question the violence we have created. His dialogues are direct and he doesn’t avoid the unpleasant. Now that America has daily mass shootings we are at a level beyond the violence of cancer and the animals acts of killing and the violence of weather disasters like earthquakes- if we don’t discuss this and question this with people like K……. What then?
I think K wouldn't admit that an animal killing another animal is violence (or evil). It's the way they eat their food, which seems to be an absolute necessity for them. We often see human bullying (and hunting) animals, and deriving pleasure in it, for fun. It seems to me entirely unnecessary. That would be evil (and violent). In other cases, when someone hurts us, we immediately retaliate through certain remarks or by acting in a certain manner with them. In my personal opinion, the whole relationship (when we build up the hurts and pleasures) becomes more and more complex . To hurt another in this seems to me to be entirely unnecessary. The process of building up hurts and pleasures and then acting in accordance with it in our relationship is so quick that we have very little time to observe it unfold in ourselves. All our relationships become dull eventually because we form fixed images and then get used to the whole thing. We also tend to derive pleasure from competition, and ambition (which is a subtle sense of power over another). That too, seems unnecessary and perpetuates conflict in society. Students do get hurt when they get lower marks, and then we tell them to use the hurt as a motivation to study more. K seems to be suggesting a different way of learning altogether, which doesn't depend on competition and ambition of becoming great. Even if we assume that dullness, hurts, and violence (in speech, deed and action) are part of nature (which I still doubt greatly), there seems to be no plausible reason to continue with it endlessly. Especially when we can observe that a certain human being (say, for example, Buddha) lived completely non-violently (in speech, thoughts and action), and having deep consideration for all human beings. It shows that it may be possible to live that way. I agree that it may be entirely foreign to us (due to the way we live our lives today). But the indication of possibility of living that way, and seeing someone living that way is enough of a reason to pursue this matter in great depth especially when all other social and political reforms have failed to reduce our suffering!
