On self-knowledge without desire and will | J. Krishnamurti 

Nicely put but I'm so glad and I'm sure you agree that they recorded it so now in today's age a man like me can listen to this and change his life😁👍!! I've been following him for over 10 years. Is there something you don't understand or confused about? The only thing that I wish is that they group talks together that apply you know what I mean?

@Jan Olsen You appear to be looking for miracles ! to set man absolutely free is his mission; and if you dont see that, then .... take as you like it !

Well K himself has asked why no one is listening because mutation is instantaneous if one is listening and seeing and so on as he says it's serious business so don't play with it he would say

Natalia Campos yes once fear is removed only love remains

Lyonel Pirandello: "looking at fear, that extraordinary jewel"...

Love you, Natty.

He is the meaning of love

You are not alone so am I

Truly speaking there could never be any knowing of the self Only a dead thing can be known The self is all one All that could ever there be was or will be the nameless THAT या dn

Pure and absolute awareness, as you put it, is dualistic, since it implies the existence of an impure or partial awareness. Try to let go absolutes thinking, and try to see that to let go all conditionings it is a HUGE effort that needs patience and dedication and support. And remember that what in us is built upon fears, will fight hard to not let go its certainties and securities

Awareness ,awareness leads to attention😁 that is only half the problem /solution!! Its attention with no Center😉 meditation!!😎

Wow you have an imagination buddy😁👍

@@mikewright902 Well it all depends on what exactly he means by "manipulating reality".

The sleep walking part is true as also in India it's believed

lucasgmsilveira to

fake I'd s?

I just got what j krishnamurti has said, but u have understood it 3 year's ago than me, So did it really help you in 3 years?

So true and are still making millions

No mind no problem

very good

My concern is putting this knowlege into practice. How much can we becone something extraordinario of our drives...

People busy watching songs with half naked girls and alcohol

1/2: Without the operation of desire and will how does one move in the direction of self knowledge? Is not the very urgency of change a part of the movement of desire? If so, what is the nature of the first step? I hope you don’t mind if I read it twice. That is, the questioner is asking: is desire and will necessary or required to understand the depth of self-knowledge? Is not desire itself a movement towards self-knowing? That is the question. First of all to understand this question, not only superficially but also at depth, we must understand the nature of desire and will, and the structure and the nature of self-knowledge, knowing - you understand? First desire, will, and what does it mean if there is no desire, the movement of self-knowledge? If one has not the urge, which is part of desire and will, how can this flowering take place in knowing oneself? Right? That is the question. Oh, it’s hot! As we went into the question the other day: what is desire? And what is the relationship of desire to will? I’ll go into it very carefully, you have probably heard it ten times, but please don’t get bored with it, but look at it. How does desire come into being? One can see actually perceptions, visual seeing, contact - touching, sensation - right? Then thought comes, creates an image out of that sensation and desire is born. Right? I’m not an oracle. Delphi has gone long ago. But you can see this for yourself. You can see for yourself when you watch through a window a dress, or a shirt, specially a blue shirt (laughter), and the seeing, entering into the shop, touching it, the material, then the sensation, then thought comes along and says, ‘How nice it would be if I had that shirt’ - or that dress, creates the image - right? You having the blue shirt and putting it on, or the dress, and at that moment desire arises. Is this somewhat clear? No, please, clear to yourself, not understanding the explanation. This is the movement of perception, contact, sensation. That is natural, healthy. Then thought creates the image, you sitting in the car and driving it. When thought takes possession of sensation, creates the image, then desire is born. Right? And will is the summation of desire, the strengthening of desire, the stability of desire, the urge to achieve, the urge to express one’s desire and acquire, which is the operation of desire but strengthened as will. Right? So desire and will go together. Right? And the questioner says, asks, if there is no desire or will, why should one seek self-knowledge? What is self-knowledge? Let’s examine that first. What is self knowledge? That is, the ancient Greeks, and the ancient Hindus talked about knowing yourself. It is as old as the hills - that Socrates and others in Greece and in India talked about knowing yourself. What does it mean to know yourself? Can you ever know yourself? Please I am exploring together, you are doing this together. What is the self? And you must know about it. You understand my question? What is the self that apparently it is necessary to know it? Now what do we mean by the word ‘know’? Sorry to be so careful about this, otherwise we shall be misleading each other if we do not understand the words. What do we mean by ‘know’? I know Gstaad because I have been there for twenty two years. I know you because I have seen you here for twenty years or more. I don’t know why, but you are there, and I am here. And when we say ‘I know’, we mean by that not only recognition but also the remembrance of the face, the name. Right? Which means recognition, remembrance, and association. Or rather association, remembrance, which is, I met you yesterday, I have recognised you today, that is the memory operating. So when I say, ‘I know’, it is the past expressing itself in the present. I hope you are following all this. Does it interest you, all this? So the past is the movement of knowledge. Right? I study, go to college, one goes to school, college, university, acquire a great deal of information. Then I say I am a chemist, or a physicist and so on, so on. So when we say one must know oneself, do you come to that knowledge about the self afresh, or do you approach it already having knowledge about it? You see the difference? You understand my question? Oh, for goodness sake. Am I making it difficult? No. That is, I want to know myself. Do I approach myself through the knowledge I have acquired, which is, I have studied psychology, I have been to psychotherapists, and I have read a great deal, and I approach the understanding of the self through the knowledge I have acquired? Bene? Or, do I come to it without all the previous accumulation, knowledge about oneself? Right? You understand the question? We have explained what is desire, what is will, and when we say, ‘I must know about myself’, I am already acquainted with myself. And so this acquaintance, this knowledge, dictates how I observe myself. Right? This is very important if you want to go into this carefully. So having previous knowledge about myself I use that knowledge to understand myself, which becomes silly - right? It is absurd. Which is, I have understood about myself from the knowledge of others - Freud, Jung all the rest of it, the modern psychologists and so on.

2/2: So can I - please listen - can I put aside all that knowledge because I am looking at myself through other people’s eyes? Therefore can I put all that aside and look at myself afresh, anew? You have understood my question? Now, the questioner asks: is desire, will necessary in observing myself? Right? Now see what happens. I have acquired knowledge about myself through others, and the actual fact, what I am. You see the difference? The knowledge I have acquired through study about myself, and the fact of myself, what it actually is. Right? So there is a contradiction between ‘what is’ and ‘what I have acquired’. To overcome this contradiction you exercise will. I’ve got it! You have understood this? How marvellous that is. You have understood that? One has studied - I have not, I have not studied any of these things, thank god - one has studied, let us say, the latest psychologist, the latest - what do they call them? - psycho-therapists. And, went to him, talked with him, discussed, and he gives me certain knowledge about me, about myself and I acquire that knowledge, take it home and discover that knowledge is different from me. And then begins the conflict: to adjust ‘what is’ to ‘what I have been told’. Then in that conflict, to suppress it, to overcome it, to accept it the desire and will comes into being. Bene? Gosh, sirs! Is this clear? So that is the question. Now we are saying: is will and desire necessary at all? It only comes into being when I have to adjust myself to a pattern, to a pattern of the guru, whatever, all that stuff. And then the struggle, the conflict, to overcome, to control, all that begins. Right? I am a seeker - you understand? I am a seeker, which is, I am questioning; therefore in my questioning I reject all that. I reject completely what others have told me about myself. Will you do it? You won’t. Because, you won’t do it because it is much safer to accept authority, then you are secure. Whereas if you reject completely all that - authority of everyone, you don’t become a follower, you don’t become a disciple, you are absolutely out of that field altogether, then how do you observe the self? You understand? The movement of the self. The self is not static, it is moving, living, active. Now how do you observe something that is tremendously moving, active - urges, desires, ambitions, greed, romanticism, all that - how do you observe? You follow all this? Which means, can I observe this movement of the self, the me: the desires, the fears, you know, all that, can I observe it without any knowledge acquired from others, or the previous knowledge which I have had in examining myself? Vous avez compris? You understand what I am saying? I will show you something. One of the activities of the self is greed. Right? Or comparison, comparing myself with another. That is the activity of the self. Now when I use the word ‘greed’, I have already associated that reaction, or that reflex with a memory which I have had of that reaction previously. You understand what I am saying? I am greedy. I use the word ‘greed’ to identify that sensation. The identification of that is, I have already known it. So I use that word to identify it. Right? So can I look at that reaction without the word, and therefore without the previous acquaintance with it? You are following this? Am I making this clear? Can I look at that reaction without a single movement of recognition? The moment that recognition takes place I have already strengthened that reaction because I recognise it and take it back into my memory. You are following? Now can I observe myself without any direction, without any comparison, which is, ‘I have had this before’ - you follow? - just to observe without direction and therefore without motive. That is learning about yourself afresh each time. Not that you have accumulated knowledge about yourself and you know about yourself. If you go into it very, very seriously into this question you will find that it is not little by little by little, first step, second step, third step, first initiation, second initiation - but to see the truth of this instantly - you understand? To see the truth that the moment recognition takes place you are not knowing yourself at all. Is that clear? That requires a great deal of attention. And most of us are so slack, so lazy, we have got all kinds of ideas, that we must be this, we must be that, we must not be this. So we come to it with a tremendous burden. And so we never know ourselves. That is, to put it differently: as we said the other day, we are the rest of mankind - mankind whether they live in Asia, here, in America, suffer, go through a great deal of anxiety,

@@KFoundation Thank you so much

As long as you keep observing, you will follow experiences happening and it's all new all different, so since it's infinite possibilities, they don't become finite, they can't be accumulated. You can only accumulate partial aspects of the experience, but it will always be partial. It can work for simple things like tools, practical things, technical, engineering, etc, but it can not work for life itself. We are life that happens and happens but we try to treat ourselves like tools

Yes! By just letting yourself observe for as long as possible, without any judgement or intense wanting --- just watching things happen, especially yourself --- MAGIC happens through your own perception!! I'm not joking. You begin to witness a cohesive understanding of EVERYTHING even without knowledge. That's why it's so hard for him to explain this. I used to almost demand that someone "tell me" exactly what to do etc......but then a wise teacher showed me :::how to observe::: so that the impressions are pure. Observation is the most powerful.

@@nelmezzodelcamminooo we are only our heart.. everything is related to heart. But what is wrong with viewing as a tool, as long as it doesn't interfere with your heart.

is that bad?

Sir, What is being talked about here is how not to accumulate psychologically. Now in which religious book is this written ? No where. So the assumption that the speaker has acquired this from reading or from others is fundamentally flawed. And therefore no contradiction. One can also see that the self knowledge that the speaker talks about has to be a continual process because accumulation is also continual. It is like a river passing though a big town where it is being inundated by garbage, industrial waste and so on. The moment the river leaves the town, the process of cleaning itself begins. Now can the river say that why should I clean myself continually ? If it asks this question, it is no longer a river. It dies. By the way, this simile is not my invention. It was given by K in some other talk. Hope this answer your question to some extent.