The treasure is inside of you @sherrysmoon - Tumblr Blog

Enlightenment, peace, and joy will not be granted by someone else. The well is within us, And if we dig deeply in the present moment, The water will spring forth.

Thich Nhat Hanh (via spiritualgateway)

Beeing free

J. Krishnamurti Questions and Answers 1st Question Brockwood Park 1st Question & Answer Meeting 28th August 1979 `The Self'

Question: Is it possible ever to be free of self-centred activity? Is there a real self apart from the self-created image?

What do we mean by the self? If you ask somebody what the self is, he would say, ``It is all my senses, my feelings, my imagination, my romantic demands, my possessions, a husband, a wife, my qualities, my struggles, my achievements, my ambitions, my aspirations, my unhappiness, my joys'' - all that would be the self. You can add more words but the essence of it is the centre, the `me', my impulses - ``I am impelled to go to India to find truth'' and so on. From this centre all action takes place: all our aspirations, our ambitions, our quarrels, our disagreements, our opinions, judgements, experiences, are centred in this. This centre is not only the conscious self acting outwardly but also the deep inner consciousness which is not open and obvious; it is all the different levels of consciousness.

Now the questioner asks: Is it possible to be free of this centre? Why does one want to be free of it? Is it because the centre is the cause of division? That is, the-'me' is the active element that is operating all the time; it is the same `me' with different names, with a different coloured skin, with a different job, with a different position in the hierarchical social structure - you are Lord so-and-so, somebody else is a servant - it is the same `me' dividing itself into all these different categories - socially, economically and religiously.

Where there is this division there must be conflict - the Hindu as opposed to the Muslim, the Jew, the Arab, the American, the English, the French. That is physically obvious and it has brought about tremendous wars, great agony, brutality and violence. The self identifies with an ideal - noble or ignoble - and fights for that ideal. But it is still `the ego trip'. People go to India trying to find spirituality; they put on different fancy dress but they have only changed the garb, the clothes; essentially they are each the `me' operating, all the time struggling, endeavouring grasping, denying, being deeply attached to their experiences, ideas, opinions and longings. And as one lives one observes that this centre, this `me', is the essence of all trouble. Also one observes that it is the essence of all pleasure, fear and sorrow. So one asks, ``How am I to get rid of this centre so as to be really free - absolutely, not relatively?'' It is fairly simple to be relatively free; one can be a little unselfish, a little concerned with social welfare, with the difficulties of others, but the centre is always there biting hard, brutal.

Is it possible to be absolutely free of that centre? First of all see that the greater the effort that is made to be free of the centre, the more that very effort strengthens the centre, the self. For those who go off into meditation of various kinds, trying to impose something upon themselves, the `me' that identifies with that effort is captured by that and says: ``I have achieved'', but that `me' is still the centre.

To be free there must be no effort; which does not mean doing what one likes, for that is still the movement of the self.

So what is one to do? If you are not to make an effort, because you see the truth that the more effort you make the greater the travail of the centre, then what is one to do?

The questioner asks: Is there a real self apart from the self created by thought with its images? Many people ask that. The Hindus have said that there is a highest principle which is the self. We imagine also that there is a real self apart from the `me'. You all, I am sure, feel there is something else beyond this `me', which has been called the higher self, the sublime or the supreme self. The moment we use the word `self', or use any word to describe that which is beyond the self, the `me', it is still the self.

Is it possible to be free of the self? - without becoming a vegetable, without becoming absent-minded, somewhat mad? Which means: is it possible to be totally free from attachment? - which is one of the attributes, one of the qualities, of the self. One is attached to one's reputation, to one's name, to one's experiences. One is attached to what one has said. If you really want to be free of the self it means no attachment; which does not mean you become detached, indifferent, callous, shut yourself away, which is another activity of the self. Before, it was attached; now it says, ``I won't be attached. That is still the movement of the self.

When you are really, without effort, deeply, basically, not attached, then from that deep sense of no attachment comes responsibility. Not responsibility to your wife, to your children, but the deep sense of responsibility. Will you do it? That is the question. We can talk everlastingly, put it into different words, but when it comes to testing it, acting, we do not seem to want to do it; we prefer to go on as we are, with the status quo slightly modified but carrying on with our quarrels.

To be free from your own experience, from your own knowledge, from your own accumulated perception - it is possible if you go at it. And it does not take time. That is one of our excuses. We must have time to be free. When you see that one of the major factors of the self is attachment and you see what it does in the world, and what it does in your relationship with another, quarrels, separation, all the ugliness of relationship - if you see the truth of attachment, then you are free from it. Your own perception sets you free. Will you do it?

jiddu-krishnamurti

Is it possible not to record that hurt at the moment when I am called an idiot? Is it possible not to record at all, not only the hurt but flattery? Is it possible not to record either? The brain has been trained to record, for in that record there is safety, security, a sense of vitality; in that recording the mind creates the image about oneself. And that image will constantly get hurt. Is it possible to live without a single image about yourself, or about your husband, wife, children, firm, or about the politicians, the priests, or about the ideal—not a single shadow of an image? It is possible, and if it is not found you will always be getting hurt, always living in a pattern in which there is no freedom. When you give complete attention there is no recording. It is only when there is inattention that you record. That is: you flatter me; I like it; the liking at that moment is inattention, therefore recording takes place. But if when you flatter me I listen to it completely without any reaction, then there is no centre which records.

Jiddu Krishnamurti (via jiddu-krishnamurti)

jiddu-krishnamurti

The religious mind is something entirely different from the mind that believes in religion. You cannot be religious and yet be a Hindu, a Muslim, a Christian, a Buddhist.

Jiddu Krishnamurti

jiddu-krishnamurti

“If we are not gullible, if we want to question, if we want to find out, if we want to enquire, penetrate, you have to have scepticism, you have to doubt your own experiences, your own standards, your own conclusions, your own prejudices. But we don’t. We question, doubt what others are saying. Right? Now when one is questioning out of one’s own innate enquiry, penetration, doubt, then it has importance, then it has vitality, it clears the brain of its prejudices.

— Jiddu Krishnamurti

fuckyeahjiddukrishnamurti-blog

Jiddu Krishnamurti : The unconscious mind (article).

Krishnamurti: The Unconscious Mind

1933 4th Public Talk, Norway

From these prejudices there arises conflict, transient joys and suffering. But we are unconscious of this, unconscious that we are slaves to certain forms of tradition, to social and political environment, to false values.

1934 2nd Public Talk, Ojai

Conflict can exist only so long as there is reaction to that environment which produces the “I”, the self. The majority of people are unconscious of this conflict - the conflict between one’s self, which is but the result of the environment, and the environment itself; very few are conscious of this continuous battle. One becomes conscious of that conflict, that disharmony, that struggle between the false creation of the environment, which is the “I”, and the environment itself, only through suffering.

1934 3rd Public Talk, Ojai

So let us decide whether you want a shelter, a safety zone, which will no longer yield conflict, whether you want to escape from the present conflict to enter a condition in which there shall be no conflict; or whether you are unaware, unconscious of this conflict in which you exist. If you are unconscious of the conflict, that is, the battle that is taking place between that self and the environment, if you are unconscious of that battle, then why do you seek further remedies? Remain unconscious.

1935 5th Public Talk, Rio de Janeiro

You follow a system or mould yourself after a pattern because there is fear, the fear of right and wrong which has been established according to the tradition of a system. If thought is merely functioning in the groove of a pattern without understanding the significance of environment, there must be conscious or unconscious fear, and such thought must inevitably lead to confusion, to illusion and false action.

1935 Public Talks in Argentina

You have this mould, this environment of which almost all of us are unconscious, for it is part of us; it is the very expression of our desires, fears and hopes. While you conform consciously or thoughtlessly to this system, you are not individuals.

1948 2nd Public Talk, New Delhi

So, to understand this environment and be free of it in ourselves, not only is it necessary to know all the hidden, stored up influences in the unconscious, but to know what we are in conflict with. As we have seen, each one of us is the result of environment, and we are not separate from environment.

1955 1st Public Talk, Amsterdam

Surely the contradiction is part of the environment, it is not separate from it. We are part of the environment, - which is, religion, education, social morality, business values, tradition, beliefs, various impositions of churches, governments, the whole process of the past: those are all superficial conditionings; and there are also the inward unconscious responses to those superficial conditionings.

1957 3rd Public Talk, Colombo

So it is very important to understand not only the conscious, but also the unconscious mind. The unconscious mind is much more powerful, much more insistent much more directive and conservative than the conscious mind; because the conscious is merely the educated mind which adjusts itself to the environment. He is adjusting himself, as you do, to the environment, to the pressure from outside, but inwardly he is the same - that is, the unconscious is still the residue of the past.

1964 4th Public Talk, Saanen

How is the unconscious to be cleansed immediately of the past? The analysts think that the unconscious can be partially or even completely cleansed through analysis - through investigation, exploration, confession, the interpretation of dreams, and so on - so that at least you become a `normal’ human being, able to adjust yourself to the present environment.

1965-66 2nd Public Talk, Madras

When we observe - without reading psychologists, the Freuds, the Jungs, and all the rest of the modern philosophers and psychologists - we know what the unconscious is: the racial residue, the experience of the race, the social conditions, the environment, the tradition, the culture - culture being political, religious, educational - which are all deeply embedded in the unconscious.