Transcript: And also there is the art of learning. This is a little more complex, I’ll go into it. When we go to schools and colleges and universities we are learning, we are acquiring information, which is called knowledge, about various subjects in order to have a good career, a good job, or if you fail, you go to - you know, so on, so on, which is the accumulation of knowledge during a certain period of time, from boyhood till you leave university, which is the accumulation of knowledge, which can be used skilfully or otherwise. If you want to be a plumber, if you want to be a professor, if you want to be a scientists, if you want to be a mathematician, the whole process is the same: to learn, which is to accumulate knowledge, and from that knowledge act. Right? And there is also, act and from that action learn, which is also there. Isn’t that clear? Of course. Which is, accumulated knowledge and act; act and learn; after acting, learning, accumulating knowledge, act. Both are the same essentially. But also there is another kind of learning which is a little more difficult. These two we know: accumulate knowledge and act; act and having acted learn from your action, which becomes the knowledge: so both are the same. Now we are saying something entirely different because this is mechanical. Are you following all this? Because this is a process of acting from the known - the conductor, the pianist, the plumber, the fiddler, the professor, the scientist, all these have accumulated knowledge and act. Therefore they are moving from the known, to the known, to the known, to the known, modifying all the time. Right? Now we are saying there is a different way of learning. I don’t know if you are interested in this, because this requires a little more thinking together. One sees the accumulation of knowledge is necessary, to drive a car and so on, so on. If you want to build a bridge you must know the whole, the stresses and the strains and the quality of the earth and so on, so on. That is, our mind has been informed, acquired knowledge and acting from there. This is the everlasting movement of man. You understand? That is, gather information, knowledge, act. So the knowledge is the past. Of course. And from that knowledge you act. This is clear, isn’t it? Right? We must meet together otherwise I am talking to myself, which is no good, I can do that in my room. So we are saying there is a different kind of learning which hasn’t its root in the known. Right? ‘In the known’ in the sense, knowledge, and acting. See the difference. I am going to point out carefully this. There is acquiring knowledge and then acting from it; so action modifies the knowledge, the knowledge modifies the action. This is what we are doing all the time, therefore it becomes routine, mechanical, there is never a freedom to enquire into something which is not known, a freedom from the known to observe something you do not know. You follow? I wonder if you are… Are we meeting each other, a little bit? So to the speaker, the ascent of man does not lie in the accumulated knowledge. Right? Listen to it first, don’t agree, or disagree, first listen. People who are scientists, others have said, man can only evolve by having more, more and more knowledge - climbing, ascent. But knowledge is always the past. And if there is no freedom from the past, his ascent will be always limited. Right? It will always be confined to a particular pattern. So we are saying: look - I mean we are saying there is a different way of learning, which is, to see comprehensively, wholly, holistically the whole movement of knowledge - right? - where it is necessary, because otherwise you couldn’t live. But the very understanding of its limitation is to have insight into the whole movement of knowledge. I don’t know if I have conveyed anything at all. I’ll explain, I’ll go into it. Probably most of you have never thought even about this. We have taken knowledge as factual, and live with knowledge and go on functioning with knowledge for the rest of our life. But we have never enquired what is knowledge itself, what is its relationship to freedom, what is its relationship to the actual happening? You understand? We have taken all this for granted, that’s part of our educational conditioning. So we are saying: when you begin to enquire into the whole movement of knowledge, which is time, which is thought, and see the limitations of knowledge, for knowledge is always in the past, and therefore fragmentary. You can add to it, take away from it, enlarge it, or limit, but it is always the movement of the past modifying itself. And so in that movement there is never freedom. You may not have gone into this - right? - so this may be new to you, so please kindly listen to find out, not to agree or disagree, find out. We are saying in that field there is no freedom for man. He may be able to have better bathrooms, better heating system, solar and so on, so on, so on, but psychologically, inwardly there is no freedom if the mind is constantly being driven, or held, or in bondage to the past. So is there a way of learning which is not merely acquiring knowledge? You understand my question? I wonder if you see. Please listen. Is there a way of looking, learning, hearing which is not the constant accumulation of knowledge from which to act? Is there an action which is not bound by the past? I’ll put it this way, then perhaps we will understand each other. You understand? That is, I have acquired knowledge - there is the acquisition of knowledge and from that knowledge act. And in that action, that very action is limiting itself, it is not holistic, it’s not the whole - there are regrets, all kinds of travail in that action come into being. Now we are asking: is there an action which hasn’t its roots in the past, because if my action is born of the past it is always limited, it is always broken up, it is never complete, whole. So is there an action which is free from the past? You understand my question? Just understand the question then we can go into it. You may say, that question is silly, it has no meaning, but it has meaning when you see the whole complexity of knowledge and its limitation. And the action that is born out of this limitation must be limited and therefore confusing, and therefore out of this knowledge a good society can never come into being. You get it? So we are saying, asking: is there action without the movement of the past? I say, there is. Which is, to have an insight into the whole structure of knowledge - insight, a deep understanding, a total comprehension of this whole thing: knowledge, action, limited, no freedom, therefore out of that there can be no good society. To see that, the truth of it, the perception of that truth is the release of a different kind of learning which is holistic.
This is not making sense at all. The audience should have been more responsive. I have a feeling that he wanted to talk more on this, but did not see enthusiasm from the listeners so he just concluded it saying understand it yourself. I wish if I could talk to him.
J's words sound provocative at first, and then you feel they are difficult to understand, and it becomes enjoyable and simple, and you feel so gracious...a great teacher...
The explanation clearly given by K to show the distinction between fragmented processes of thinking that underpin all forms of conventional academic pursuit into getting knowledge for the purpose of understanding inter-relationships and human behaviour on one hand (formal reasoning) and the action of holistic thinking on the other is an important insight into a wholly new approach to learning about the human psychological world which the mainstream of society is not even remotely interested in. Never the less, the few people who are capable of capturing the truth of this new learning will bring about a new consciousness that heralds answers not otherwise forthcoming from knowledge gleaned from the reformation of existing sources of information which are so highly regarded by conventional intelligence professionals.
Very deep that you need full attention to understand… I felt his disappointment but if i may listen before don’t get it also but im curious, all his teaching bit by bit im with him. It’s a process as we conditioned from a small child. Amazing Man, his serious because we want us to really transform to find our being.. Aliveness & joy of life when you understand Him.. Beautiful❤❤..
@@domcallori I get what you are saying, but its not that, because it just means you are not aware of the cause, doesn't mean it can't trigger you. like hate, fear, if you aren't aware of them even not thinking of them but they trigger you to an action. and fear and hate are powered by memory, therfor the past.
"So there is knowledge, which is the past continually being added to, and there is intelligence. Intelligence is the quality of the mind that is very sensitive, very alert, very aware. Intelligence does not hold on to any particular judgement or evaluation, but is capable of thinking very clearly, objectively. Intelligence has no involvement. Now, how is this intelligence to be cultivated? What is the capacity of this intelligence? You are living here, being educated in all the various disciplines, in various branches of knowledge. Are you also being educated so that intelligence comes into being at the same time? You may have a very good knowledge of mathematics or engineering. You may take a degree, enter a college and be a first class engineer. But at the same time, are you becoming sensitive, alert? Are you thinking objectively, clearly, with intelligence, understanding? Is there a harmony between knowledge and intelligence, a balance between the two? You cannot think clearly if you are not sensitive; sensitive to nature, sensitive to all the things that are happening around you, sensitive not only to what is happening outside you but also inside you. If you are not sensitive, if you are not aware, you cannot think clearly. Intelligence implies that you see the beauty of the earth, the beauty of the trees, the beauty of the skies, the lovely sunset, the stars, the beauty of subtlety. If you have no intelligence, no sensitivity, then knowledge can become very dangerous. It can be used for destructive purposes. This is what the whole world is doing." ~ Excerpt from: Chapter 3 - On Knowledge And Intelligence, 'One Education', by Jiddu Krishnamurti
No, you're not understanding.. Action is not modifying anything. It's also not food for thought. You can't use what Krishnamurti says, you can only unlearn what you've known or see clearly what you've realized
My learning: The knowledge we take is all written and dictated by someone else, so it's old knowledge or learnings and anything that is in the past, is limited & this limitation doesn't bring freedom. In the sense that when we learn ourselves ( with intelligence ) not from just knowledge ( knowledge is what others have told + what you have learnt) So if we can see that living life this way isn't fulfilling enough, and very limited. We can also look at freedom as confidence , then we let our mind and intelligence LEARN from intelligence that is, it's not influenced by old texts or people, it observes "holistic" means - independently -with no prior conclusions - not giving importance to what we already know about it ( v imp) - and just observing it to learn from our own understanding and experience - In short, As i learn something, I can say confidently this is my learning - Not what just Jiddu Krishnamurti told me, but how I could see it in my life. This makes me free to learn and then I act. or learn from the act. It's the same but I do it holistically and myself.. If this made sense to you kindly respond or correct.
''-and just observing it to learn from our own understanding and experience''' isn't understaning and experience also in the past isn't it a kind of contradiction to everything else you said bcs as long as you learn from something other then observing this moment you are still in an illusion. But I think you meant that but you just worded it into an ironic way I guess?
ye I read it again you 100% meant that but still you can take my reply as a challanging thought xd what I'm wondering is does this mean we can aquire knowldge without a thought process?
@@ThomasMayer123-f8f take it slow. K's language (not talking about english) is from the source to decondition your brain, so naturally a complex brain filled with ideas and methods can't understand K at first.
Rajesh Vhanbatte wasn't expecting someone listening to Krishnamurthi identifying other human being anything other than a human. Did you ever try freeing yourself of religion or nationality, or rise above all this? K has never propounded a religion. How does this make Mizanur religious?
Initially a person pretends that he is awake. Because he thinks that ,he knows more, he talks more , he struggles more he ask more, he does more. Then one day he sits deeply engrossed into him , Then suddenly he found that he is actually sleeping but not awake .Once someone in reality found that he is sleeping , then sound of wind, then sound of word, then small action,then small gesture make him awake. This sleep is very near to awakening.
If one always acts and lives based on the past experiences and knowledge, then one becomes robotic, mechanical. What we call living in auto pilot. Get it? Of course at a basic level, some routine is almost inevitable, let’s say having a job. That doesn’t mean one should act only on habit. That’s the essence of mindfulness and being totally present. Being physically and mentally, exactly where you are, doing whatever. Being present makes one spontaneous and not acting with automatic reactions which are learned through repetition. Being mindful almost negates accidents and mistakes, which are product of mechanical thus dull action. Also being mindful therefore totally present, comes from a place of love and respect for all. Imagine drivers, driving focused only on driving, not letting themselves get distracted or easily angered….
The knowledge that is from the past (either written in texts, or heard) is also acquired by people who were wise in their times. They have acquired wisdom and let the world gain further knowledge from it. I think there is no harm by accepting this knowledge from the past. Can't we base our present actions depending on the knowledge gained? If we don't rely on knowledge / actions of people from the past, then are we not re-inventing the same wheel? thoughts ?
Es un principio neurocientífico que debe de prestarse atención, Krishamurti plantea la evolución real de la mente, siguiendo claro la teoría de que el mismo cerebro muta así como muto en los últimos 50000 años.
So knowledge has a binding quality to it in that the typical knowledge was conditioned and acquired in the past. We accumulate knowledge from the outside and then act based off of what we know. So does this comprehension of the process of knowledge lack that binding quality? If I'm following this correctly to know the knowing nature of the mind is a knowledge that was in a sense reflected inside rather than out. The outside world is conditional and governed by causality of action reaction. On the inside there is also these same principles but if you get to the core of what is actually knowing it all and see the process then there is the possibility of disenchantment... just my interpretation... Very interesting talk.
Accumulation of Knowledge is not Knowing. There is something which is not get affected by this Knowledge and Action dilemma and that must be "The Absolute Truth". Which is entirely different from what we have known so far. There will be no prejudice, Boundation can be fused in or inherited from that.
How can any action not have its roots in the past? Surely any action is directed towards an outcome. And the outcome is projected based on what I know certain causes are likely not achieve.
I tried to understand but does not seem he answered clearly what could that way be to learn without acquiring knowledge. I think our acquired knowledge prevented us from learning how to learn without acquisition of knowledge :)
So, the new way of meaning is in the ability one can see the whole structure of knowledge? And from that, one learn by seeing the whole and acting from the wholistic view of reality?
Transcript:
And also there is the art of learning. This is a little more complex, I’ll go into it. When we go to schools and colleges and universities we are learning, we are acquiring information, which is called knowledge, about various subjects in order to have a good career, a good job, or if you fail, you go to - you know, so on, so on, which is the accumulation of knowledge during a certain period of time, from boyhood till you leave university, which is the accumulation of knowledge, which can be used skilfully or otherwise. If you want to be a plumber, if you want to be a professor, if you want to be a scientists, if you want to be a mathematician, the whole process is the same: to learn, which is to accumulate knowledge, and from that knowledge act. Right? And there is also, act and from that action learn, which is also there. Isn’t that clear? Of course. Which is, accumulated knowledge and act; act and learn; after acting, learning, accumulating knowledge, act. Both are the same essentially. But also there is another kind of learning which is a little more difficult. These two we know: accumulate knowledge and act; act and having acted learn from your action, which becomes the knowledge: so both are the same. Now we are saying something entirely different because this is mechanical. Are you following all this? Because this is a process of acting from the known - the conductor, the pianist, the plumber, the fiddler, the professor, the scientist, all these have accumulated knowledge and act. Therefore they are moving from the known, to the known, to the known, to the known, modifying all the time. Right? Now we are saying there is a different way of learning. I don’t know if you are interested in this, because this requires a little more thinking together.
One sees the accumulation of knowledge is necessary, to drive a car and so on, so on. If you want to build a bridge you must know the whole, the stresses and the strains and the quality of the earth and so on, so on. That is, our mind has been informed, acquired knowledge and acting from there. This is the everlasting movement of man. You understand? That is, gather information, knowledge, act. So the knowledge is the past. Of course. And from that knowledge you act. This is clear, isn’t it? Right? We must meet together otherwise I am talking to myself, which is no good, I can do that in my room. So we are saying there is a different kind of learning which hasn’t its root in the known. Right? ‘In the known’ in the sense, knowledge, and acting. See the difference. I am going to point out carefully this. There is acquiring knowledge and then acting from it; so action modifies the knowledge, the knowledge modifies the action. This is what we are doing all the time, therefore it becomes routine, mechanical, there is never a freedom to enquire into something which is not known, a freedom from the known to observe something you do not know. You follow? I wonder if you are… Are we meeting each other, a little bit?
So to the speaker, the ascent of man does not lie in the accumulated knowledge. Right? Listen to it first, don’t agree, or disagree, first listen. People who are scientists, others have said, man can only evolve by having more, more and more knowledge - climbing, ascent. But knowledge is always the past. And if there is no freedom from the past, his ascent will be always limited. Right? It will always be confined to a particular pattern. So we are saying: look - I mean we are saying there is a different way of learning, which is, to see comprehensively, wholly, holistically the whole movement of knowledge - right? - where it is necessary, because otherwise you couldn’t live. But the very understanding of its limitation is to have insight into the whole movement of knowledge. I don’t know if I have conveyed anything at all. I’ll explain, I’ll go into it. Probably most of you have never thought even about this. We have taken knowledge as factual, and live with knowledge and go on functioning with knowledge for the rest of our life. But we have never enquired what is knowledge itself, what is its relationship to freedom, what is its relationship to the actual happening? You understand? We have taken all this for granted, that’s part of our educational conditioning.
So we are saying: when you begin to enquire into the whole movement of knowledge, which is time, which is thought, and see the limitations of knowledge, for knowledge is always in the past, and therefore fragmentary. You can add to it, take away from it, enlarge it, or limit, but it is always the movement of the past modifying itself. And so in that movement there is never freedom. You may not have gone into this - right? - so this may be new to you, so please kindly listen to find out, not to agree or disagree, find out. We are saying in that field there is no freedom for man. He may be able to have better bathrooms, better heating system, solar and so on, so on, so on, but psychologically, inwardly there is no freedom if the mind is constantly being driven, or held, or in bondage to the past.
So is there a way of learning which is not merely acquiring knowledge? You understand my question? I wonder if you see. Please listen. Is there a way of looking, learning, hearing which is not the constant accumulation of knowledge from which to act? Is there an action which is not bound by the past? I’ll put it this way, then perhaps we will understand each other. You understand? That is, I have acquired knowledge - there is the acquisition of knowledge and from that knowledge act. And in that action, that very action is limiting itself, it is not holistic, it’s not the whole - there are regrets, all kinds of travail in that action come into being. Now we are asking: is there an action which hasn’t its roots in the past, because if my action is born of the past it is always limited, it is always broken up, it is never complete, whole. So is there an action which is free from the past? You understand my question? Just understand the question then we can go into it. You may say, that question is silly, it has no meaning, but it has meaning when you see the whole complexity of knowledge and its limitation. And the action that is born out of this limitation must be limited and therefore confusing, and therefore out of this knowledge a good society can never come into being. You get it?
So we are saying, asking: is there action without the movement of the past? I say, there is. Which is, to have an insight into the whole structure of knowledge - insight, a deep understanding, a total comprehension of this whole thing: knowledge, action, limited, no freedom, therefore out of that there can be no good society. To see that, the truth of it, the perception of that truth is the release of a different kind of learning which is holistic.
Thank you for uploading this transcript along.
🙏🏻✨
The act of understanding the process of understanding is the learning he talks about
This is not making sense at all. The audience should have been more responsive. I have a feeling that he wanted to talk more on this, but did not see enthusiasm from the listeners so he just concluded it saying understand it yourself. I wish if I could talk to him.
J's words sound provocative at first, and then you feel they are difficult to understand, and it becomes enjoyable and simple, and you feel so gracious...a great teacher...
The explanation clearly given by K to show the distinction between fragmented processes of thinking that underpin all forms of conventional academic pursuit into getting knowledge for the purpose of understanding inter-relationships and human behaviour on one hand (formal reasoning) and the action of holistic thinking on the other is an important insight into a wholly new approach to learning about the human psychological world which the mainstream of society is not even remotely interested in. Never the less, the few people who are capable of capturing the truth of this new learning will bring about a new consciousness that heralds answers not otherwise forthcoming from knowledge gleaned from the reformation of existing sources of information which are so highly regarded by conventional intelligence professionals.
Very deep that you need full attention to understand…
I felt his disappointment but if i may listen before don’t get it also but im curious, all his teaching bit by bit im with him. It’s a process as we conditioned from a small child. Amazing Man, his serious because we want us to really transform to find our being..
Aliveness & joy of life when you understand Him.. Beautiful❤❤..
Great excerpt, thank you.
Thanks you 😊
is there an action that is free from the past? so good.
yohenson laughing for no reason?
@@tienqueen dont think its what he meant.
@@domcallori I get what you are saying, but its not that, because it just means you are not aware of the cause, doesn't mean it can't trigger you. like hate, fear, if you aren't aware of them even not thinking of them but they trigger you to an action. and fear and hate are powered by memory, therfor the past.
"So there is knowledge, which is the past continually being added to, and there is intelligence. Intelligence is the quality of the mind that is very sensitive, very alert, very aware. Intelligence does not hold on to any particular judgement or evaluation, but is capable of thinking very clearly, objectively. Intelligence has no involvement. Now, how is this intelligence to be cultivated? What is the capacity of this intelligence? You are living here, being educated in all the various disciplines, in various branches of knowledge. Are you also being educated so that intelligence comes into being at the same time? You may have a very good knowledge of mathematics or engineering. You may take a degree, enter a college and be a first class engineer. But at the same time, are you becoming sensitive, alert? Are you thinking objectively, clearly, with intelligence, understanding? Is there a harmony between knowledge and intelligence, a balance between the two? You cannot think clearly if you are not sensitive; sensitive to nature, sensitive to all the things that are happening around you, sensitive not only to what is happening outside you but also inside you. If you are not sensitive, if you are not aware, you cannot think clearly. Intelligence implies that you see the beauty of the earth, the beauty of the trees, the beauty of the skies, the lovely sunset, the stars, the beauty of subtlety. If you have no intelligence, no sensitivity, then knowledge can become very dangerous. It can be used for destructive purposes. This is what the whole world is doing."
~ Excerpt from: Chapter 3 - On Knowledge And Intelligence, 'One Education', by Jiddu Krishnamurti
Beautifully stated quotation.
Thanks for uploading this. Very helpful.
@ Dipti Sharma Awasthi but always remember Madam that "THE WORD IS NOT THE THING"....... Don't you agree??????
As a mechanical engineer, designer, for most people i came from another planet....
So true!! 🙏
Highly highly appreciated, perfectly truth.
Thank you so much😊
Action modifies the knowledge and the knowledge modifies the action. Thank you for this food for thought!
No, you're not understanding.. Action is not modifying anything. It's also not food for thought. You can't use what Krishnamurti says, you can only unlearn what you've known or see clearly what you've realized
@@KAiROS_717 It is not important what he says but what is happening in you when you listen to him. if this is their process then let it be
My learning:
The knowledge we take is all written and dictated by someone else, so it's old knowledge or learnings and anything that is in the past, is limited & this limitation doesn't bring freedom.
In the sense that when we learn ourselves ( with intelligence ) not from just knowledge ( knowledge is what others have told + what you have learnt)
So if we can see that living life this way isn't fulfilling enough, and very limited.
We can also look at freedom as confidence ,
then we let our mind and intelligence LEARN from intelligence that is, it's not influenced by old texts or people, it observes "holistic" means
- independently
-with no prior conclusions
- not giving importance to what we already know about it ( v imp)
- and just observing it to learn from our own understanding and experience -
In short,
As i learn something, I can say confidently this is my learning - Not what just Jiddu Krishnamurti told me, but how I could see it in my life.
This makes me free to learn and then I act. or learn from the act. It's the same but I do it holistically and myself..
If this made sense to you kindly respond or correct.
''-and just observing it to learn from our own understanding and experience''' isn't understaning and experience also in the past isn't it a kind of contradiction to everything else you said bcs as long as you learn from something other then observing this moment you are still in an illusion. But I think you meant that but you just worded it into an ironic way I guess?
ye I read it again you 100% meant that but still you can take my reply as a challanging thought xd what I'm wondering is does this mean we can aquire knowldge without a thought process?
Knowledge is always limited thus action Bron out if knowledge is also limited and fragmented. There is no freedom when we act from our past.
5:11
6:50 Knowledge is always the past, limited. Understanding, having knowledge of that limitation - being an observer of it, you can go past it.
yes!
@@gheorghefalcaru thanks
You cannot sink your teeth in the flowing water, but thought arrests the flow, freezes it and turns us into an icicle - numb and paralyzed.
Thank you 🙏🏿💞🌹😘💖😍
So pity to see, there are so few people interested in all of this...
I am interested, but i dont understand a big part of his talks.
@@ThomasMayer123-f8f take it slow. K's language (not talking about english) is from the source to decondition your brain, so naturally a complex brain filled with ideas and methods can't understand K at first.
Knowledge modifies action and action modify knowledge. What a great msg. 🙏
That's not the message at all.
Wonderful philosophy.
🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹🙏🙏🙏
Knowledge is limited by itself. to have an insight into it is a learning....Thanks for uploading this video..
Even born in Muslim community, you listen to krishnamurty. You must be the real religious person.
Rajesh Vhanbatte wasn't expecting someone listening to Krishnamurthi identifying other human being anything other than a human. Did you ever try freeing yourself of religion or nationality, or rise above all this? K has never propounded a religion. How does this make Mizanur religious?
Initially a person pretends that he is awake. Because he
thinks that ,he knows more, he talks more , he struggles more he ask more, he does more. Then one day he sits deeply engrossed into him , Then suddenly he found that he is actually sleeping but not awake .Once someone in reality found that he is sleeping , then sound of wind, then sound of word, then small action,then small gesture make him awake. This sleep is very near to awakening.
Thought is Past ✅
🙏
If one always acts and lives based on the past experiences and knowledge, then one becomes robotic, mechanical. What we call living in auto pilot.
Get it?
Of course at a basic level, some routine is almost inevitable, let’s say having a job. That doesn’t mean one should act only on habit.
That’s the essence of mindfulness and being totally present. Being physically and mentally, exactly where you are, doing whatever.
Being present makes one spontaneous and not acting with automatic reactions which are learned through repetition.
Being mindful almost negates accidents and mistakes, which are product of mechanical thus dull action.
Also being mindful therefore totally present, comes from a place of love and respect for all.
Imagine drivers, driving focused only on driving, not letting themselves get distracted or easily angered….
agreed, but as long as you live in society, past knowledge is the guide to future.
@@domcallori sir what a reply
Meanwhile it’s all happening now. All time past, present and future, is contained in the now…
The knowledge that is from the past (either written in texts, or heard) is also acquired by people who were wise in their times. They have acquired wisdom and let the world gain further knowledge from it. I think there is no harm by accepting this knowledge from the past. Can't we base our present actions depending on the knowledge gained? If we don't rely on knowledge / actions of people from the past, then are we not re-inventing the same wheel? thoughts ?
Es un principio neurocientífico que debe de prestarse atención, Krishamurti plantea la evolución real de la mente, siguiendo claro la teoría de que el mismo cerebro muta así como muto en los últimos 50000 años.
So knowledge has a binding quality to it in that the typical knowledge was conditioned and acquired in the past. We accumulate knowledge from the outside and then act based off of what we know. So does this comprehension of the process of knowledge lack that binding quality? If I'm following this correctly to know the knowing nature of the mind is a knowledge that was in a sense reflected inside rather than out. The outside world is conditional and governed by causality of action reaction. On the inside there is also these same principles but if you get to the core of what is actually knowing it all and see the process then there is the possibility of disenchantment... just my interpretation... Very interesting talk.
Accumulation of Knowledge is not Knowing. There is something which is not get affected by this Knowledge and Action dilemma and that must be "The Absolute Truth". Which is entirely different from what we have known so far. There will be no prejudice, Boundation can be fused in or inherited from that.
How can any action not have its roots in the past? Surely any action is directed towards an outcome. And the outcome is projected based on what I know certain causes are likely not achieve.
Please upload videos with discussion with students
I tried to understand but does not seem he answered clearly what could that way be to learn without acquiring knowledge. I think our acquired knowledge prevented us from learning how to learn without acquisition of knowledge :)
So, the new way of meaning is in the ability one can see the whole structure of knowledge? And from that, one learn by seeing the whole and acting from the wholistic view of reality?
That wasn’t the answer I was looking for
No ready-made answer, it is for us to see if there is any answer.
Just impossible 👆
plz translation of the videos too
arabic
An action which is free from the past???? Go into it as deep as possible..