10:35 "I'm Blind!" See the pain in the voice of K in this specific sentence. He's not talking of himself, he's talking of the whole humanity. Humanity is blind, how are they to see the light? What a compassionate fellow he was! What great love he had! How can I also he that great? I want to, really.
Go into nature until you are the indivisible. And remain in that awareness with in the insanity of humanity or normal living as we've been conditioned to be and compassion will come forward
This interaction is very interesting, since it denotes one of the many nuances between a knowledgeable spiritual teacher and an enlightened being. For the guy full of Buddhist philosophy knowledge and predetermined views that he probably have read somewhere (not his own findings), it is almost a quarrel, a struggle - always trying to find a point where he can interrupt J.K. and win the knowledge battle (in his head). It's also interesting to see how the ego can seem to disappear, through meditation, yoga, buddhist knowledge, this and that, and still come from the backdoor, unconsciously as "I am a spiritual guide and I know a lot about that". And almost mimic the enlightened one, it is in altercations like this that it is possible for even unenlightened people to draw the difference. For Krishnamurti this whole exchange is a finding, an opportunity to investigate and go into the questions revolving around meditation and awareness, he is not interested in coming up victorious in knowledge, for that he knows its uselessness - he wants to dive deep into the matter, like an inner scientist.
@henriquetomio I love what you wrote Because I was about to write the same thing. The monk does not realize what krishnamurti is asking, the Monk is being triggered himself by krishnamurti. Krishnamurti is just asking what does the feeling feel like, what is the action of being aware, seeing oneself rise up, so that can be shared in the discussion. It's a fascinating interaction, and very cool that you also noticed in the nuance.
Arent you judging this interaction based on your bias ? He is asking a question which has no answer. Neither you or I can answer what is awareness because of the nature of it. If you could answer it, duality exist. I can not tell you the taste of an apple, you can know only by finding out. Awareness is our nature whether we are aware of it or not, which means there is not finding out what we already are. Followers of anyone turn themselves into retarded people. It's important to watch who is commenting rather than the topic on which the its commenting on. I hope I made you uncomfortable.
. Choiceless awareness is a good phrase. This is when the awareness has no agency like ‘I am doing this’. Awareness and attention has been taken up by K here. He did not take up mindfulness, maybe he doesn’t need to, as he is not into it. R should have taken it up but did not (or the content cut). IMHO, Mindfulness is when you are just letting the thoughts and senses come into your mind without resistance, not fighting it, observe it and let is go, as they come and go, you maintain awareness of the mental phenomena as mental phenomena. It is not concentrating on an object, as ‘R’ wanted to stress apart form the minimal concentration needed for anything. When ‘R’ says no concentration, I guess he means no concentration on a single object which is a form of yoga meditation. So let all objects like thoughts and ideas come and go, and you are just aware of it. One kind of Advaitic meditation goes beyond the ‘let all thoughts come in and go and just observe’. In this also you let any thought come in and go, but you witness it to realize that you are aware of that particular thought. Then that thought goes, and another thought comes in, again you are aware of the new thought. You can have a million thoughts, and in every one of them, there is the constant awareness of all those thoughts. This awareness is always one and same, and this Awareness per se is fundamental and the I, (not the agent / identity I). Since awareness is there, it exists, so Existence per se is also a fundamental truth like Awareness per se. Thus you realize Existence-Awareness as Fundamental. In another kind of Advaitic meditation, you look at things outside. Any and all things. Every thing that you see (or hear / touch / smell/ …) makes you aware that it exists, and this is true for a million things that you sense. You can sense a million things, and in every one of them, there is the constant existence of all those things. This existence is always one and same, and thus Existence per se is fundamental as the Awareness. Since the Existence per se is in awareness, Awareness per se also becomes a fundamental reality. Thus you realize Existence-Awareness as Fundamental. Epistemology, pedagogy, a pointing out is required. Else it will be a trap that only a handful realize the fundamental reality. Here one thing both K and R seem to agree on is the ‘no need for a system’. This is a trap from which realisation becomes difficult. It is like, I am looking for a person called john in the room. Now R/K says you are looking at him, he is in the room. But I see 25 people, which one is john? All 3 of us know that all 3 of us are looking at john; I don’t know which one is john; R/K knows which one is john; but R/K cannot point out to me who is john, because they abhor systems, pedagogy; he is there in the room; and they could have pointed him out to me; but I remain ignorant of who is john. .
Have you ever created without any idea what it is and then it takes a form and is undescribed or even remembered? Yet the muscle memory remains as it is deeply satisfying to drink of this pure state of being that can not be attained by thought
The language "enters into" is brittle because awareness can fall upon choice as a separate event from the mind, just as the sun falls upon people where language would describe people entering the sun.
"Like mushrooms, all over the place!" LOL! This short video gives a clear picture of the difference between the use (and exhibitionism) of knowledge vs the ability of natural exploration to examine experience. The former lacks the right ingrediënt. If you continue to refer to types of knowledge you destroy the spirit of curiosity and discovery. Awareness implies no choice, no division, no measurement and no borders in our attention. Beautiful!
There’s no separation in awareness - no division - no right or wrong - no good or bad - no past or future - no choice of the ego - awareness is merely the perception of the now
awareness is not perception. It is not describable. It is just there. It is happening. All we know of it is the knowing of it. Awareness is aware of itself :)
When choice enters into awareness, there is no awareness. Perception involves interaction between the subject and object. A choice is made here. You perceive something to be red or hot. In awareness, there is no choice, it is all there.....no judgement, no nothing, it is just there.
Awareness maybe seen as a kind of “allowing”. Not resisting or escaping anything…just allowing everything. Good and bad. Just recently I experimented on it. I tried to be aware of all my thoughts as well as my actions. Simply noticing without judgment. Found it quite interesting, same time, arduous. When I did this I found myself being completely in the present. Also there were no conflicts. End of the day, my mind felt very peaceful. Despite some wrong reactions and thoughts that came about during this time….…usually I would battle with it, like….gosh! I wish I didn’t say that or …no! I should not think like that. There was no time for such conflicts because my actions were moving smoothly from one to another…without judgment. And interestingly, there was a sense of deep awareness behind it all. Like as if every action and thought whether orderly or disorderly was being attended to…giving it equal importance. Throughout this process I felt so peaceful. But bringing this about did require some degree of alertness…although I made a few slip ups, but overall it was good. For the first time I saw what choiceless awareness is really like. However I was not able to keep up with it for more than one day. The old mind came back. But at least I had a taste of what awareness really is, and how beautiful it’s outcome felt. And so I shall keep trying it.😊
once I was thinking about that's Buddhist man as egoistic and judged him , and now after few months I have watched the same video again but Im not thinking about him at all. im able to listen more deeply this time. thanks .
there are so many comments that judges this conversation...i don't know why at the time of conversation there are conflict between two...what a lovely communication would be happen if there were no division and attachment ( of Buddhist) take places between them. both are true, having insight, but in effort to prove themselves right the flower of awareness gone...even in j.k...at least at the time of conversation...love you both and budhha too..all are right, only conflict take place when they try to prove others statement wrong...which is after all ego...doesn't matter how much they have denied it cleverly...i'm really sorry but thats what i've observed...i've been listening jk for 5years and love him too...❤
5:19 Awareness in its purest form is just being aware.🙏🙏🙏🙏 That is the default setting what makes us human🙏🙏🙏 We are all already there we just want to keep reminding us of the same,
One of the best things I learnt from JK is the “negation”. When we are aware of jealousy, fear , anger etc that is enough. Our awareness of inattention is the beginning of attention.. and we shouldn’t aspire to be “aware”; just keep being aware when we are not. In Vipassana meditation, we are just guided to be aware of body sensations from continuous sitting, Morning to night ( however pleasant or painful ) with equanimity (I.e. “Choice less awareness , in JK’s language). It is just amazingly mind boggling how Jiddu Krishnamurti gives the BEST ( very nuanced) theory for what the Buddha gave as meditation “practice”. JK is also a Buddha , just like Gautama was. From first principles and looking at their own minds and bodies, they both came at the same understanding of how the universe works. And both tell us to turn inward, and not listen (accept blindly) “even to them”…
Awareness is another thought… a wordless thought… you can experiment for yourself… notice the subtle difference between awareness and the live sensation that simply exist of its own volition as the living organism … the living body. You may notice awareness is a dead thing and a separation, as all thought is… ware as sensation is the immediate fullness of life itself. awareness is both a copy and a seperartion from immediate life … awareness is where many or most serious meditators etc accidentally fall entrapped in… awareness is not it
I enjoy these. K gets a run for his money often with this Buddhist gentleman. I’m often surprised how if I apply modern sensibilities from 2023, it becomes apparent K was pretty ahead of his time 🤣✌️👍.
It's like awareness is open and borderless, and attention is focussed and borderless. Attention is awareness less a degree of freedom. If we remove one dimension from a three dimensional world we still have two borderless dimensions. It takes effort to focus. It takes effort to attend.
Even the inwardly directed spiritual beliefs are very black and white when it comes to words. Krishnamurti is great with this. Words are a medium for ideas and not an exact translation
Even such teaching, things achieved by great sages but in every era successive followers has to follow an evolving path to achieve or regain, again, as they have achieved at first place...
Yes. At first I found it a bit trying. But it gets better. About halfway through I began to enjoy it more, and it ends quite nicely. I wish the audio quality was better. Part of the difficulty was that.
So, When there is Attention there is no division. This means there is no thought. On the other hand, If Awareness implies no choice; it means again no thought! So, they are the same
The Buddhist is talking from his background - Theravada tradition. Krishnamurthy's expression of awareness is coming from his background which is nondual. That's why they are disconnected.
First there is a superficial awareness. Then there is awareness of the conditioned response. Then there is the realization that the mind is the past, the mind is this conditioned response. Then there is the question whether this mind can free itself from the past. And all this is a unitary act of awareness because there is no conclusion in it. When we say that the mind is the past, this realization is not a verbal conclusion but a real perception of the fact.
Understanding JK is the most difficult thing there is. If we try to understand the literal meaning of his words, then we are not ready at all to 'listen' to his words of wisdom.
It can be frustrating....if one is coming from no self ...or conceptual thought ...! There is duality were one is non duality ..!.. choice less awareness...! But we must go through the non revolving door of the conceptual Mind.. namista 🙏
How I see awareness is When I zoom out, zoom out from my body, something like coming out of my own shoe, and placing myself outside of it. May be i can enter someone else shoe, may be i dont want to enter. So, when i enter from someone's else shoe, i see myself from that person's pov But when i dont enter into someone's shoe but can still observe myself, my activities, my thoughts my emotions, that for me is awareness. This is where i am not mixed with myself but am outside of it and just observing. I dont know if I am making any sense.
Very insightful examination & analysis of the term "awareness", which is in keeping with the traditional teaching of Gautham Buddha (to examines and analyze)! Very informative discussions!
@10:01 You can be aware of your pettiness only when you be yourself - your conditioned self not some higher self but your everyday self. Your spontaneous self, your conditioned self then you can be aware of your pettiness. To be yourself without any control and watch and perceive.
I would like to know the name of the boudist, as he's quitte interesting too, why is that not mentionned as he's in other video extracts too, can someone tell me who he is Please?
As far as my knowledge of the Krishnamurti Teachings is concerned, there's no difference between the two. K often uses them interchangeably. I don't know why K said "me attending" here. That's a bit confusing and misleading. But I think he meant "no division, (no) me attending." Listen one more time. In fact, in this very video, at the end, we can see him saying that both awareness and attention have no sense of measurement, of course at different places in different ways.
It would be so good of you, if you guys can comment on what you understood from when JR said he doesn't like the words like dhyana and samadhi. Even After thinking alot, I couldn't comprehend or get a sense of why he said so.
What he meant was that these words and the techniques become so prominent that the real essence of being aware is lost... awareness is choiceless...when we say we want to become aware through any of these techniques therein arises division and conflict and there is no awareness
Obviously the scholar has listened to JK's talks. He is using JKs words to explain to JK.😂😂. There is a difference between speaking with realisation and with knowledge.
in the satipatthana sutta, the Buddha uses this refrain multiple times, "yathabhutam pajanati" and "yathabhuta jnanadassana" which translate to "observes [objects] as they are", "watching as it is" Well, the point is the same, was the same as the same... I think so much time, translation, context changes can create confusions like this. But the essence has always been the same.
The meaning of Khrisnamurti's statement is this: 'If self-awareness must be obtained through certain systems & techniques, then it means that the soul is not free as is its nature. The Buddhist, not understanding Khrisnamurti's question, thought he was being criticized, so he answered digressing. Please let me answer it: "Self-awareness has a level of faculty that is trained accidentally through sensory experience. In every phenomenon it encounters. However, not all existential sensory experiences can be experienced by everyone. Trainings such as meditation, yoga, semedi and/or "prayer in Islam is a system to accelerate spiritual experience. That is if people do it correctly. For example, praying in Islam. If you don't do it correctly, it's the same. It doesn't increase states of spirituality. Except for just physical exercise." 😁🙏
Not to bring this man down but he himself doesn’t seem to be aware of his egotism when talking to J.Krishna. He presents his Belgium accolades but was not able to explain awareness. He needed help doing so. It could be stage fright, it could be mind block.
Even JK falls victim to his ego from time to time you can tell. Does that make the one better than the other? No. There is no comparison to make. No one is superior to the other. It’s just another act of the divine dance of shiva.
When someone says "you are using my words", it clearly shows that there is a deep ignorance. We do not invent things. They are always present. We just came to know. That's it. Just like, "wood is never a podium but a podium is not separate from wood." 😌
No no but when you listen to these "teachings" for long enough, you learn the language but stop actively experiencing the depth and dimension of the words. Hence why one can sound smart by quoting many great masters and have no inner experience. I think he was making sure that was not what was happening here
@@kartik8704 With great power great responsibilities come. I never heard such claims from any realised being. These claims automatically goes away. Claims like "my" words, are nothing but ignorance. Now, I can say that he is not present to justify the inner situation of himself and ignore that thing. He has said many things that are helpful and we need to take that part for our benefit. Rest will rott itself. 🙏
we just dancing with the words. how can explain this if you don't know what exactly is it? and anything your feeling is limited in the words? Looks like the story, A fish who met a turtle in the water. “Where have you been for so long?” asked the fish. “I have been on dry land,” said the turtle. “Is there such a thing as dry land?” asked the fish, “Is this dry land nice and cool?” The turtle said, “No, it is not.” “Can I swim in it?” asked the fish. The turtle said it would not be possible to swim in it. “Does it have waves and white foam?” asked the fish further. The turtle said he had never seen waves rise up in it. “There is no such thing as dry land, then,” said the fish. “Just because you have never experienced it, it does not mean it does not exist. There is always more to learn,” said the turtle.
Goeenka ji and a few of the assistant teachers of Vipassana would have been able to have a beautiful conversation with JK. Interestingly what JK says is awareness or attention is exactly what flowers during Vipassana. The practice involves simply observing body sensations ( however painful because of the continuous sitting, OR however pleasurable) with equanimity. This is basically choiceless awareness …. From that awareness, one normally has a sense of being present and continuously the psychological thought process gets weakened… Jiddu krishnamurti has the perfect theory for Vipassana meditation practice , even better than Goenka ji,s.
Such a egostic budhist guy , trying to prove himself better than K. Because he is insecure and jelouos of K K is like a threat for his knowledge . And how beautiful of K , not judging the guy or his intention and trying to find like always !!! How can we ask for more !!!
Buddhist concept of Self is speaking of the 7th consciousness. Thats not the real self. There is a self. Siddhartha never denied the self. Non self is not no self
I think it is figurative. We should not consider it literally. Of course, I do feel that it is not a suitable example for the point K is trying to convey.
KM is right, the minute you introduce method or technique it is not awareness anymore because you are back in the mind practising the method. This is the reason KM never gave any method. All religion will condition the mind in one way or another therefore remain in "I don't know" and the state will reveal itself.
The one wearing the glasses has not yet fully let go of his ideology which means he not able to see clearly. He is still following a programme based off an idea. This means he is blind to that which is. To see, hear, feel, touch and smell without judgment of anything we sense. Judge and you will be judged!
At times JK acts like a child, trying to refute every single statement the other person says. Let the monk complete at least and not interrupt in the middle.
10:35 "I'm Blind!" See the pain in the voice of K in this specific sentence. He's not talking of himself, he's talking of the whole humanity. Humanity is blind, how are they to see the light? What a compassionate fellow he was! What great love he had! How can I also he that great? I want to, really.
make yourself free and give your life to find out who you really are, what freedom is ...........
Go into nature until you are the indivisible. And remain in that awareness with in the insanity of humanity or normal living as we've been conditioned to be and compassion will come forward
This interaction is very interesting, since it denotes one of the many nuances between a knowledgeable spiritual teacher and an enlightened being.
For the guy full of Buddhist philosophy knowledge and predetermined views that he probably have read somewhere (not his own findings), it is almost a quarrel, a struggle - always trying to find a point where he can interrupt J.K. and win the knowledge battle (in his head). It's also interesting to see how the ego can seem to disappear, through meditation, yoga, buddhist knowledge, this and that, and still come from the backdoor, unconsciously as "I am a spiritual guide and I know a lot about that". And almost mimic the enlightened one, it is in altercations like this that it is possible for even unenlightened people to draw the difference.
For Krishnamurti this whole exchange is a finding, an opportunity to investigate and go into the questions revolving around meditation and awareness, he is not interested in coming up victorious in knowledge, for that he knows its uselessness - he wants to dive deep into the matter, like an inner scientist.
🕉️📿🕉️ Namasté 🕉️📿🕉️
You are so spot on ... its proof of how we connect at soul level ... the way you picked it all up....
i feel like you are projecting alot into this comment
@henriquetomio I love what you wrote Because I was about to write the same thing. The monk does not realize what krishnamurti is asking, the Monk is being triggered himself by krishnamurti. Krishnamurti is just asking what does the feeling feel like, what is the action of being aware, seeing oneself rise up, so that can be shared in the discussion. It's a fascinating interaction, and very cool that you also noticed in the nuance.
Arent you judging this interaction based on your bias ? He is asking a question which has no answer. Neither you or I can answer what is awareness because of the nature of it. If you could answer it, duality exist. I can not tell you the taste of an apple, you can know only by finding out. Awareness is our nature whether we are aware of it or not, which means there is not finding out what we already are.
Followers of anyone turn themselves into retarded people. It's important to watch who is commenting rather than the topic on which the its commenting on.
I hope I made you uncomfortable.
.
Choiceless awareness is a good phrase. This is when the awareness has no agency like ‘I am doing this’.
Awareness and attention has been taken up by K here. He did not take up mindfulness, maybe he doesn’t need to, as he is not into it. R should have taken it up but did not (or the content cut).
IMHO,
Mindfulness is when you are just letting the thoughts and senses come into your mind without resistance, not fighting it, observe it and let is go, as they come and go, you maintain awareness of the mental phenomena as mental phenomena. It is not concentrating on an object, as ‘R’ wanted to stress apart form the minimal concentration needed for anything. When ‘R’ says no concentration, I guess he means no concentration on a single object which is a form of yoga meditation. So let all objects like thoughts and ideas come and go, and you are just aware of it.
One kind of Advaitic meditation goes beyond the ‘let all thoughts come in and go and just observe’. In this also you let any thought come in and go, but you witness it to realize that you are aware of that particular thought. Then that thought goes, and another thought comes in, again you are aware of the new thought. You can have a million thoughts, and in every one of them, there is the constant awareness of all those thoughts. This awareness is always one and same, and this Awareness per se is fundamental and the I, (not the agent / identity I). Since awareness is there, it exists, so Existence per se is also a fundamental truth like Awareness per se. Thus you realize Existence-Awareness as Fundamental.
In another kind of Advaitic meditation, you look at things outside. Any and all things. Every thing that you see (or hear / touch / smell/ …) makes you aware that it exists, and this is true for a million things that you sense. You can sense a million things, and in every one of them, there is the constant existence of all those things. This existence is always one and same, and thus Existence per se is fundamental as the Awareness. Since the Existence per se is in awareness, Awareness per se also becomes a fundamental reality. Thus you realize Existence-Awareness as Fundamental.
Epistemology, pedagogy, a pointing out is required. Else it will be a trap that only a handful realize the fundamental reality. Here one thing both K and R seem to agree on is the ‘no need for a system’. This is a trap from which realisation becomes difficult. It is like, I am looking for a person called john in the room. Now R/K says you are looking at him, he is in the room. But I see 25 people, which one is john? All 3 of us know that all 3 of us are looking at john; I don’t know which one is john; R/K knows which one is john; but R/K cannot point out to me who is john, because they abhor systems, pedagogy; he is there in the room; and they could have pointed him out to me; but I remain ignorant of who is john.
.
This conversation is very important and right.
Have you ever created without any idea what it is and then it takes a form and is undescribed or even remembered? Yet the muscle memory remains as it is deeply satisfying to drink of this pure state of being that can not be attained by thought
That is the best explanation I have heard that when choice enters into awareness there is no awareness.
The language "enters into" is brittle because awareness can fall upon choice as a separate event from the mind, just as the sun falls upon people where language would describe people entering the sun.
"Like mushrooms, all over the place!" LOL!
This short video gives a clear picture of the difference between the use (and exhibitionism) of knowledge vs the ability of natural exploration to examine experience. The former lacks the right ingrediënt. If you continue to refer to types of knowledge you destroy the spirit of curiosity and discovery.
Awareness implies no choice, no division, no measurement and no borders in our attention. Beautiful!
There’s no separation in awareness - no division - no right or wrong - no good or bad - no past or future - no choice of the ego - awareness is merely the perception of the now
U are Cute , 😚👌😊
Can I put it this way: Awareness IS ‘now perception’. 😊🙏🏼
awareness is not perception. It is not describable. It is just there. It is happening. All we know of it is the knowing of it. Awareness is aware of itself :)
When choice enters into awareness, there is no awareness. Perception involves interaction between the subject and object. A choice is made here. You perceive something to be red or hot. In awareness, there is no choice, it is all there.....no judgement, no nothing, it is just there.
Awareness maybe seen as a kind of “allowing”. Not resisting or escaping anything…just allowing everything. Good and bad. Just recently I experimented on it. I tried to be aware of all my thoughts as well as my actions. Simply noticing without judgment. Found it quite interesting, same time, arduous. When I did this I found myself being completely in the present. Also there were no conflicts. End of the day, my mind felt very peaceful. Despite some wrong reactions and thoughts that came about during this time….…usually I would battle with it, like….gosh! I wish I didn’t say that or …no! I should not think like that. There was no time for such conflicts because my actions were moving smoothly from one to another…without judgment. And interestingly, there was a sense of deep awareness behind it all. Like as if every action and thought whether orderly or disorderly was being attended to…giving it equal importance. Throughout this process I felt so peaceful. But bringing this about did require some degree of alertness…although I made a few slip ups, but overall it was good. For the first time I saw what choiceless awareness is really like. However I was not able to keep up with it for more than one day. The old mind came back. But at least I had a taste of what awareness really is, and how beautiful it’s outcome felt. And so I shall keep trying it.😊
👍 great, doingit for one full day itself require great alertness
once I was thinking about that's Buddhist man as egoistic and judged him , and now after few months I have watched the same video again but Im not thinking about him at all. im able to listen more deeply this time. thanks .
Wow! I feel I am in front of them explaining about this AWARENESS. THANK SO MUCH.
there are so many comments that judges this conversation...i don't know why at the time of conversation there are conflict between two...what a lovely communication would be happen if there were no division and attachment ( of Buddhist) take places between them.
both are true, having insight, but in effort to prove themselves right the flower of awareness gone...even in j.k...at least at the time of conversation...love you both and budhha too..all are right, only conflict take place when they try to prove others statement wrong...which is after all ego...doesn't matter how much they have denied it cleverly...i'm really sorry but thats what i've observed...i've been listening jk for 5years and love him too...❤
5:19 Awareness in its purest form is just being aware.🙏🙏🙏🙏 That is the default setting what makes us human🙏🙏🙏 We are all already there we just want to keep reminding us of the same,
to remind yourself about anything = Memory < Knowledge < Past < Time < Effort < Loss of Energy.
One of the best things I learnt from JK is the “negation”.
When we are aware of jealousy, fear , anger etc that is enough. Our awareness of inattention is the beginning of attention.. and we shouldn’t aspire to be “aware”; just keep being aware when we are not.
In Vipassana meditation, we are just guided to be aware of body sensations from continuous sitting, Morning to night ( however pleasant or painful ) with equanimity (I.e. “Choice less awareness , in JK’s language).
It is just amazingly mind boggling how Jiddu Krishnamurti gives the BEST ( very nuanced) theory for what the Buddha gave as meditation “practice”.
JK is also a Buddha , just like Gautama was. From first principles and looking at their own minds and bodies, they both came at the same understanding of how the universe works.
And both tell us to turn inward, and not listen (accept blindly) “even to them”…
@@sabithavuppala5202 I don't understand how practice Choicelss awareness
Awareness is another thought… a wordless thought… you can experiment for yourself… notice the subtle difference between awareness and the live sensation that simply exist of its own volition as the living organism … the living body. You may notice awareness is a dead thing and a separation, as all thought is… ware as sensation is the immediate fullness of life itself. awareness is both a copy and a seperartion from immediate life … awareness is where many or most serious meditators etc accidentally fall entrapped in… awareness is not it
I enjoy these. K gets a run for his money often with this Buddhist gentleman. I’m often surprised how if I apply modern sensibilities from 2023, it becomes apparent K was pretty ahead of his time 🤣✌️👍.
This is the video i am searching for
Thanks for putting these short videos perfectly.
Thanks a lot ❤
It's like awareness is open and borderless, and attention is focussed and borderless. Attention is awareness less a degree of freedom.
If we remove one dimension from a three dimensional world we still have two borderless dimensions.
It takes effort to focus. It takes effort to attend.
This is gold..
K is just peels layers of intelligence taking the listener along with it
JK made so much sense ! ❤
I wish we had such geniuses today, I could relate and understand every word. 😊
Even the inwardly directed spiritual beliefs are very black and white when it comes to words. Krishnamurti is great with this. Words are a medium for ideas and not an exact translation
At 0:28 during the pause after repeating the question "The purest form of Buddhist meditation is..." I was wishing he would shout "BUMBLETUNA!!!!!!!!"
This person in front of Krishnamurthy is like a lamp in front of the sun...He is no more than a Pandit of Buddhism .
Intelligence is attention and Awareness is the mother of attention. 🙏🏽
it is like the opposite of concentration, an allowing of emptyness, a deep opening of vulnerabilities
i love how krishnamurti gets mad and immediately comes back into critical thinking
I have felt this way my whole life and have been called a narcissist and the devil...
I know who I am
Even such teaching, things achieved by great sages but in every era successive followers has to follow an evolving path to achieve or regain, again, as they have achieved at first place...
Wonderful discourse....
Yes. At first I found it a bit trying. But it gets better. About halfway through I began to enjoy it more, and it ends quite nicely.
I wish the audio quality was better. Part of the difficulty was that.
Self-inquiry seems to be a good place to begin with awareness
As JK says... "it's the seeing that frees."
JK you Rock it 😅
Gold
So, When there is Attention there is no division. This means there is no thought. On the other hand, If Awareness implies no choice; it means again no thought! So, they are the same
The Buddhist is talking from his background - Theravada tradition. Krishnamurthy's expression of awareness is coming from his background which is nondual. That's why they are disconnected.
Aware is sentient being. Sentient is rational being. Świadomy jest byt rozumny. Rozumny jest byt racjonalny.
First there is a superficial awareness. Then there is awareness of the conditioned response. Then there is the realization that the mind is the past, the mind is this conditioned response. Then there is the question whether this mind can free itself from the past. And all this is a unitary act of awareness because there is no conclusion in it. When we say that the mind is the past, this realization is not a verbal conclusion but a real perception of the fact.
Understanding JK is the most difficult thing there is. If we try to understand the literal meaning of his words, then we are not ready at all to 'listen' to his words of wisdom.
Awareness is having no choice. When we are trying to be aware still their is choice, soo don't get illusion that ur aware,when ur trying to be aware
Truth can’t be discussed. It’s a futile discussion leading us nowhere 😮
It can be frustrating....if one is coming from no self ...or conceptual thought ...! There is duality were one is non duality ..!.. choice less awareness...! But we must go through the non revolving door of the conceptual Mind.. namista 🙏
As Ramana Maharshi pointed out... "we use a thorn to remove a thorn."
How I see awareness is
When I zoom out, zoom out from my body, something like coming out of my own shoe, and placing myself outside of it.
May be i can enter someone else shoe, may be i dont want to enter.
So, when i enter from someone's else shoe, i see myself from that person's pov
But when i dont enter into someone's shoe but can still observe myself, my activities, my thoughts my emotions, that for me is awareness.
This is where i am not mixed with myself but am outside of it and just observing.
I dont know if I am making any sense.
In dzogchen you are introduced to the nature of mind directly.
Awareness just is.
We are only human, the only time to look down on someone is to reach down and lift them up
I don't understand how awerness comes in overthinking condition.
Sense of 'I' create 'my' and all conflicts begin from there. So knowing of 'I' is only awarness we need. puppeteer should be removed . Not puppets
Where can I watch the rest of this talk please?
Notice the forms without judgment without conception
🙏🏻
❤
Can see why Bruce Lee look up too him.
Where can I find the whole video? Can anyone help please?
th-cam.com/video/np57tASzQyc/w-d-xo.html
"J. Krishnamurti - Brockwood Park 1979 - Discussion 5 with Buddhist Scholars - Death"
Starts around 1:20:00
WOW! Thank you ❤
Very insightful examination & analysis of the term "awareness", which is in keeping with the traditional teaching of Gautham Buddha (to examines and analyze)! Very informative discussions!
@10:01 You can be aware of your pettiness only when you be yourself - your conditioned self not some higher self but your everyday self. Your spontaneous self, your conditioned self then you can be aware of your pettiness. To be yourself without any control and watch and perceive.
Krishnamuri is giving examples of unrelated things like blindness mathematics
K is the bomb
Better not said❤
Full video
Awareness is “Awareness Of Attention to Attention, No Comment, No Time!?
I would like to know the name of the boudist, as he's quitte interesting too, why is that not mentionned as he's in other video extracts too, can someone tell me who he is Please?
Walpola Rahula
In awareness there is no choice that means there is no room for I, whereas attention needs I to attend. Is that it?
Awareness is the "background" where all the sense organs report/ deliver their inputs.
As far as my knowledge of the Krishnamurti Teachings is concerned, there's no difference between the two. K often uses them interchangeably. I don't know why K said "me attending" here. That's a bit confusing and misleading.
But I think he meant "no division, (no) me attending." Listen one more time.
In fact, in this very video, at the end, we can see him saying that both awareness and attention have no sense of measurement, of course at different places in different ways.
JK.Master of Masters
but he still havnt figured it out..
@@danielboomerslook within yourself.
@@danielboomersWake up young man.
@@danielboomerswhat?? Please explain....
He is using buddhs word choiceless awareness
Upload fuul video. It's not clear.....
Need more videos like this really insightful
With all due respect to Buddhist monk but, JK ne phaad diya Bro.
It would be so good of you, if you guys can comment on what you understood from when JR said he doesn't like the words like dhyana and samadhi.
Even After thinking alot, I couldn't comprehend or get a sense of why he said so.
What he meant was that these words and the techniques become so prominent that the real essence of being aware is lost... awareness is choiceless...when we say we want to become aware through any of these techniques therein arises division and conflict and there is no awareness
It means they are a lot of mushrooms
I think listening is important in this conversation I love it jk
Obviously the scholar has listened to JK's talks. He is using JKs words to explain to JK.😂😂. There is a difference between speaking with realisation and with knowledge.
Absolutely right.
in the satipatthana sutta, the Buddha uses this refrain multiple times, "yathabhutam pajanati" and "yathabhuta jnanadassana" which translate to "observes [objects] as they are", "watching as it is" Well, the point is the same, was the same as the same... I think so much time, translation, context changes can create confusions like this. But the essence has always been the same.
The meaning of Khrisnamurti's statement is this:
'If self-awareness must be obtained through certain systems & techniques, then it means that the soul is not free as is its nature.
The Buddhist, not understanding Khrisnamurti's question, thought he was being criticized, so he answered digressing. Please let me answer it:
"Self-awareness has a level of faculty that is trained accidentally through sensory experience. In every phenomenon it encounters. However, not all existential sensory experiences can be experienced by everyone. Trainings such as meditation, yoga, semedi and/or "prayer in Islam is a system to accelerate spiritual experience. That is if people do it correctly. For example, praying in Islam. If you don't do it correctly, it's the same. It doesn't increase states of spirituality. Except for just physical exercise." 😁🙏
It is quite clear that whoever that person is clearly does not Know The Truth
The conversation is not over. Where can I see its sequel?
th-cam.com/video/np57tASzQyc/w-d-xo.html
Thank you❤@@KFoundation
Not to bring this man down but he himself doesn’t seem to be aware of his egotism when talking to J.Krishna. He presents his Belgium accolades but was not able to explain awareness. He needed help doing so. It could be stage fright, it could be mind block.
Even JK falls victim to his ego from time to time you can tell. Does that make the one better than the other? No. There is no comparison to make. No one is superior to the other. It’s just another act of the divine dance of shiva.
No.. he doesn’t want to say that Buddhism or anything is a sham bc it’ll ruin the whole thing. U have to go through it to realize it though
They are speaking 2 diff languages for sure though
yes but we should not judge😂☺️😇
jiddu himself is using Buddhas word differently put as choiceless awareness
Be aware, once either of them came into our mind, there is judgement and division, we picked side
When someone says "you are using my words", it clearly shows that there is a deep ignorance. We do not invent things. They are always present. We just came to know. That's it. Just like, "wood is never a podium but a podium is not separate from wood." 😌
No no but when you listen to these "teachings" for long enough, you learn the language but stop actively experiencing the depth and dimension of the words. Hence why one can sound smart by quoting many great masters and have no inner experience. I think he was making sure that was not what was happening here
@@kartik8704 With great power great responsibilities come. I never heard such claims from any realised being. These claims automatically goes away. Claims like "my" words, are nothing but ignorance. Now, I can say that he is not present to justify the inner situation of himself and ignore that thing. He has said many things that are helpful and we need to take that part for our benefit. Rest will rott itself. 🙏
Can someone please explain attention?
I believe, when you awareness is focused on a particular direction ❤️🙏
Drop a brick on your toe?
He is talking to a buddha itself and im not shure he realised that.
3:25 Surprised K said that Zen has a system when in one of his talks he quoted a Zen koan (joke) about meditation will not get you anywhere.
Both look to me as intelectually enlightened only, not experientially. Otherwise, they would just smile, no petty debate.
That wouldn’t be fun
❤
we just dancing with the words. how can explain this if you don't know what exactly is it? and anything your feeling is limited in the words?
Looks like the story,
A fish who met a turtle in the water.
“Where have you been for so long?” asked the fish.
“I have been on dry land,” said the turtle.
“Is there such a thing as dry land?” asked the fish, “Is this dry land nice and cool?”
The turtle said, “No, it is not.”
“Can I swim in it?” asked the fish.
The turtle said it would not be possible to swim in it.
“Does it have waves and white foam?” asked the fish further.
The turtle said he had never seen waves rise up in it.
“There is no such thing as dry land, then,” said the fish.
“Just because you have never experienced it, it does not mean it does not exist. There is always more to learn,” said the turtle.
Where can I watch the full interview?
Goeenka ji and a few of the assistant teachers of Vipassana would have been able to have a beautiful conversation with JK.
Interestingly what JK says is awareness or attention is exactly what flowers during Vipassana.
The practice involves simply observing body sensations ( however painful because of the continuous sitting, OR however pleasurable) with equanimity. This is basically choiceless awareness ….
From that awareness, one normally has a sense of being present and continuously the psychological thought process gets weakened…
Jiddu krishnamurti has the perfect theory for Vipassana meditation practice , even better than Goenka ji,s.
could we have the continuation? 🙏❤
th-cam.com/video/np57tASzQyc/w-d-xo.html
Thank you ❤
The two gentlemen are stuck in words and crowding out the essence of what they are seeking to understand. Words are a human construct and limit
JK ❤, BUDDHA❤, Buddhist is a different glass/ follower type people, i.e. they are far from freedom and we can say it bonded awareness.
Such a egostic budhist guy , trying to prove himself better than K.
Because he is insecure and jelouos of K
K is like a threat for his knowledge .
And how beautiful of K , not judging the guy or his intention and trying to find like always !!!
How can we ask for more !!!
brilliant..is there more of that ? both struggle not understanding non duality
Yes it is very long discussion. Just search j.k with Buddhist monk and you will find discussion.
Not both ... just the egomaniac ... Krishnamurti is sorted as sorted itself...
Buddhist concept of Self is speaking of the 7th consciousness. Thats not the real self. There is a self. Siddhartha never denied the self. Non self is not no self
what is... a shellacking?
How is a blind person aware of his blindness?
I think it is figurative. We should not consider it literally. Of course, I do feel that it is not a suitable example for the point K is trying to convey.
Lots of people talking from his own ego are still look the finger instead
to look the moon.
KM is right, the minute you introduce method or technique it is not awareness anymore because you are back in the mind practising the method. This is the reason KM never gave any method. All religion will condition the mind in one way or another therefore remain in "I don't know" and the state will reveal itself.
KM might not have realised it while he was alive but he was giving a method even though it seemed he wasn't.
The one wearing the glasses has not yet fully let go of his ideology which means he not able to see clearly. He is still following a programme based off an idea. This means he is blind to that which is. To see, hear, feel, touch and smell without judgment of anything we sense. Judge and you will be judged!
Keep guessing
The monk cannot explain anything besides quoting someone else..thats the pb of scholars
vippasana
That guy is not even paying attention to JK
Who is this another guy abbreviated as R???
Walpola Rahula
At times JK acts like a child, trying to refute every single statement the other person says. Let the monk complete at least and not interrupt in the middle.