The teaching has been to DO something to become “better” in Life. That conditioning entails to negate who we ARE to pursue what “should be.” It is thought that DOING (some goal oriented action) will attain a “better” state of BEING.
Observe how our society supports this view. We encourage young people to obtain more, gain more, acquire more to become “better.” We encourage greed through the separation of “I” vs. “you.” We call that “ healthy competition.” Our society is founded on that principle. We need to compete and win, to become “better,” but nowadays as the amount of “competitors” have increased tremendously, to “win” is even necessary to survive. Paradoxically, the most “intelligent” species of the planet basically lives Life, to survive.
That ideology has ill consequences for society and the common good.
The same principle is applied into religious teachings and spirituality for the “masses.” Here, the prize is in the afterlife, whereas in society; the prize comes in this lifetime after some years of “sacrifice.”
That “prize,” whatever it may be; becomes the motivation. Therefore, every action that we take to pursue something “better” has a motive; a “because” when someone asks “why?”.
J. Krishnamurti observed:
“How do you observe the fact that you are conditioned? Do you observe it with the desire or motive that you must be free of it? If so, you have created a contradiction. So can you be free to observe without a motive? Motives are born out of your conditioning.”
When we create a contradiction from “what is” into what “should be,” then; our actions are goal oriented; nevertheless, the goal is an ideal, and the ideal is never “real.”
“I want to be humble.” That is the ideal. There will be some actions to follow as to accomplish the ideal of “humble.”
Our idea of “humble” cannot be the full extension of BEING humble no matter how much we practice. Thought out actions cannot attain what is in the realm of BEING. Without deep observation, understanding, acknowledgment of “what is”, the outcome will bring fake transformation. In short, deep observation is action.
To observe, to become deeply aware is the “true” action, and that brings change without motive, thus; true change, for observation is not concerned with labels or moral standards.
Observation requires attention, it has to occur without motive; that is without the mental explanation: “I am doing this because…”
On attention, J. Krishnamurti pointed out:
“Attention may last a second. That is good enough. Don’t be greedy to have more. In the greed to have more, you have already created the centre, and then you are caught.”
There is a motive which brings the conditioned “I” to the surface; that is the one who “wants to be better,” but that wanting is the reason why we cannot BE.
Observe that this “self-improvement” of “not wanting,” is the complete opposite of what our society has conditioned us to believe.
Awareness and deep observation has been replaced by the pursue of an empty ideal, which may bring “economical progress” to our society, but where quality of life is lacking.
A world taught to compete by dividing itself into little groups and little flags is deep sleep, as it is incapable of realizing that those divisions are illusions, which participants are unable to break free from. It is a strong conditioning.
For them, “freedom” is merely to comply with the ideal of “going away from one country flag to stay in another,” without realizing that we are still slaves of the illusion of division which is fueled by competition, which in turn; provides a motive, a purpose to live Life in society, which is bound to exist in contradiction with the ideas and illusions of other human beings.
Krishnamurti “found me” at the college library back in my early 20s when I picked up a random book “The Network of Thought,” while waiting for my next class. I was getting a Masters degree in International Business at the time. Once I finished the book, I knew that I wasn’t cut for “business.” Never used that college degree at all. However, that time was well spent to get a “degree” on a different world view.
Most of what “K.” explained, made plenty of intellectual sense. However, I wasn’t able to put it into practice. It was good theory but nothing practical to me. Why?
It was after many years in my “spiritual career” that I discovered that, what I wanted to “practice” was my own intellectual understanding of an ideal. I will always be short of an ideal. That is a trap. In other words, BEING does not come about through practice. It is not a muscle to exercise. Nevertheless and paradoxically, it is necessary to “practice” to realize this. Otherwise, it becomes another understood mental idea. Paraphrasing what my father used to say: “we become just theory.”
After a couple of years, Krishnamurti went away for many years. I just recently got in touch again as someone asked me for a “spiritual book” to read. I recommended “K” knowing that this person was of intellectual nature; aka “living in the mind.”
Now, I can realize that “K” was only sharing his own experience. He wasn’t necessarily interested in meeting the “spiritual” level of others, or playing teacher; however, at the mental level he may be convincing for the majority of intellectuals out there.
K. said: “Meditation is the denial and negation of all systems because you see the truth and understand the full significance that you must be your own light. This light cannot come through another or be lit from the candle of another. If you once see the truth of this, you will not follow any guru, saviour or priest with their doctrines, traditions and rituals. That is going to be difficult because we are afraid to stand alone.” (NY 4/28/74.)
Intellectuals may misunderstand the above: “I don’t need anybody. I don’t believe or follow anyone. I must be my own light. That is what “K.” said and I agree with that.” Basically, they will follow “K” in that; but he will be misunderstood.
Although the above is true for someone with the consciousness of “K.” it is false for the vast majority of humans at this time. I can now say that “we” are always following something even if that is not a person. We follow our mind, heart or gut feeling. Most follow the mind with its conditioning and say: “I think.” That is delusional.
To follow in the beginning, is the way to stand alone at the end. That is the process. It doesn’t come as a mental decision, a practice or a value, but it is the natural consequence of being aware as we process life experiences.
Without the experience of being a follower, we cannot pretend to be our own light. Inasmuch as we only know and express through the conditioned mind, we are destined to be deluded. We need to be aware of where we stand in this process, that is inner honesty.
Note that “K.” gives a different meaning to the word “meditation” as it is traditionally used. He says: “Meditation really is a complete emptying of the mind. The continuous seeing of what is without any kind of distortion naturally empties the mind of all thought and yet that very mind can use thought when it is necessary. Thought is mechanical and meditation is not.” (excerpts from the “beginning of learning” London 1979.) Thus, for “K” meditation is on-going in Life. It is not a practice, it is not something to DO for 45 minutes or 1 hour in a day.
Because Meditation (as K explains) lacks any structure, method or practice; then it is the antithesis of all systems and structures given in society. Empty of the contents of the conditioned mind, we become our own light without the need of having a purpose or goal to be so. Empty of “Me,” we become our own light without desiring it, without effort, without purpose.
To stand alone means to be empty, and most are afraid of that.
The experience of Life is typically seen as duality: Going up means to go down.
There is day and there is night. Can we select one without the experience of the other?
Those selecting or being attached to only day or only night haven’t understood this.
Do you look for success? There must be failure. Do you look for truth? There must be the experience of falsehood. Do you want good? There must be the experience of evil.
Thus, how insane is to place high regard, high value on one side of a duality and reject the other, when both are complementary. Both come together as a “package.” Therefore, it is ONE.
Our society is suffocated by the experience of a misunderstood duality. There is no “two” opposites but “one” complementary experience.
Life is not concerned with human morality. It merely presents the whole range of experiences. That is a strong reason to observe that most religions do not fit the way of Life itself, but will support the conditioning of human morality, that is; one side of a duality. Life constantly will show us the whole experience.
If the above needs further clarification, I will add this example.
Are you familiar with the teachings of J. Krishnamurti and Osho Rajneesh ?
Most “spiritual seekers” are. Both are like day and night. “Dawn” (between day and night) is the rebellious attitude which they have in common.
Krishnamurti says that there is no method to reach the “truth.” Osho will give plenty of methods for that. Krishnamurti did not follow any books. Osho gave some of his teachings using some books that he had read. Krishnamurti did not want followers. He did not choose someone to replace him. Osho had followers. It is said that he picked before his death, someone to continue with his “dream.”
Both observed that we live in a sick society. That is “dawn” again for both. Krishnamurti, supported to look deep within and inquire within to freed yourself through a new consciousness. He believed in the change of the individual. Osho wanted to build a “Noah’s ark” with followers who would be living outside society in a new paradigm, with a new consciousness. That is collective change.
Since their teachings were opposite of each other, who is “right” and who is “wrong”? Isn’t that the typical conditioned question which we cleverly ask to side with something and be “right”?
Because they are opposite, it doesn’t mean that one of them has to be “wrong”. That is the old conditioning. Rather; because they are opposite, they are complementary of each other. They are ONE.
Both teachings will show us the complete Life experience.
Do you want a “method” to reach “truth”? Osho is the man for you. Once you have gone through that, you’ll be ready for Krishnamurti and you will have no more methods. If you start with Krishnamurti without going through Osho; you will not be ready. Do you want to know the extent of love? Start with Krishnamurti to end up with Osho.
What is my point?
Embrace both opposites in Life. This is not a question of morality. It is a matter of knowing Life. Not from the conditioned “intellectual” perspective of society, but without the parameters which are holding us back to be open to the uncertainty of Life.
Life is not interested on who is “right” or “wrong”. Why should we? IT IS as IT IS. It is not a matter of “choosing one” over the other. It is a matter of accepting both and OBSERVING honestly, where you fit within that range, and go from there.
There are more “teachers” than Osho and Krishnamurti. A person may go through many of those teachers. Some may even embrace religions which will be necessary for a particular path. The “Yes” and the “No” will need to be experienced for a complete experience. This cannot be only intellectual information. There must be experience.
We need to go through it. That is when there is true change. That is your unique path.
1.”I want to ask a question. If my destiny is already decided that I will fail in an exam. I pray to god to fulfill my wishes. I worshiped him …but I failed in the exam, because it was written in my destiny. I also worked hard to pass that exam..where I am wrong. Please help me…”
Thank you for your question.
Who is that “I” that you are referring to?
Is it your body? Is it your mind? Search for that “I” in all places first.
If you find it, then observe how “failing” or not failing in an exam will affect that “I.” Why is an exam so important for that “I”?
The “Office world” has priorities that are deep inside our minds. But, those priorities are only valid depending on what we decide the “I” to be.
Most will not go into this basic thing. Most will take it for granted that “I have to achieve to become better”. This is compliance with a dream which we believe to be the only “reality”. Whether you “have” (achieved) money, power, love, enlightenment, happiness and any other “good” label that you can imagine; observe if your Life is fulfilling for you, if you are enjoying it. Passing a test is not part of this. You can pass it or fail it, but fulfillment is not a consequence of that.
You “know” that destiny is already made. What is the reason to pray to a God then? Change in Life is done through DOING, but that is not done by someone’s ego. You studied “hard” and did not pass. The “I” was trying to get his agenda of “success” going. It did not happen. Someone else may not have studied as hard as you did; but he passed. Then we believe that “Life is not fair” when it doesn’t move according to our conditioned wishes.
The “I” feels “bad” when hearing about destiny being already made, but it may be that this “I” is just another creation of the mind, an illusion even though compelling, even though it appears “real”, it is an illusion.
Your destiny is woven together with others, with the Totality. We are together in this, although it appears that we are separate just because of our separate bodies and conditioned minds.
Please observe that the problem created by your mind is inferred in the words: “failed, work hard, and wrong.” Those words are creating hell in your mind. Failure does not exist in Life when there is a fixed destiny. Failure is an invention of the “office world.”
It is a game my dear. Don’t take it seriously. “You” are still alive, breathing. Passing an exam could give you more money, more “office world stuff,” to enhance the illusion of the “I.” That is not “bad”. But if you believe that game to be “real” rather than a game, then you are destined to suffer.
That is why, awareness is the key. Awareness is the help that you may be looking for.
2. “I am so appreciative of your rare sense. Krishnamurti (no followers please) comes to mind. The spiritual supermarket grows larger and more insipid daily. You are refreshing.”
Thank you for your kind and honest words. Some individuals have seen Alan Watts in these writings. Others, have seen Osho and yet others, Krishnamurti. We align with a particular writer because we understand their viewpoint as they put words to our own realizations. Many will try to put Ahnanda’s sharing into a bottle of a well known label: Ahnanda is Non-duality, Hinduism, Osho-ism, and any other “truth.”
Ahnanda does not share “truth” for that conveys falsehood as well. He shares his experiences and a different perspective. These perspectives may have encountered other writer’s paths, but at the end of the road, Ahnanda’s path is unique, just like everyone else’s.
Yes, the “spiritual supermarket” is filled with salesman offering “solutions” when there are no “problems”. Offering “Life changes” when Life is change by itself.
However, the spiritual supermarket has a role in Life. They give hope and inspire others to get out of their comfort zones, although with a “small/large fee” attached. For most that is part of the conditioning that “you get what you pay for”.
In Ahnanda’s experience, anything that has been of great value in his Life, has always been free of charge.
Whenever there is a strong recognition of something or someone who appears for the “first time” in our lives; there is something that we already know about them or that.
We may not be able to explain what it is. We may not be able to give a “reason.”
That strong recognition is insight.
We could read the words written by someone. We may feel aligned with those words for they allow us to remember something that we knew.
That is insight.
As our consciousness changes in our life time, we will be able to recognize things as “true” for us.
The mind could be deceiving. Our senses deceptive, but that insight is the driving force in our destiny if we recognize it.
The piece of the puzzle in life will fit as it is meant to be if we learn to listen to that insight.
Nothing happens out of a random whim. There is a script already going that will allow us to reach our destiny in life.
The clues are out there. Every experience, every encounter, every step is getting us closer to it.
That magic of “fitting in” gets disturbed through unnecessary thinking and by blindly following our emotions.
Thinking and emotions are the 2 extremes of human behavior.
It is in the above realization, when we could understand the necessity to allow our intuition, our insight to evolve in us, for that is the stamp, the mark that life has placed in us to uncover life itself through our own experiences.
That is how to “know the self” means to recognize that we are a piece of the “big puzzle” which moves harmoniously by flowing with the calling of that insight.
That is how we could be “true to ourselves.”
The mind collects information to figure out life. Many may think that the most information we acquire, the better off we are.
“I read all the books from Chopra, Dyer, Tolle, Krishnamurti, Osho, Lao Tzu, Plato, St. Augustine and Einstein.”
Did we recognize something in those books about ourselves which will help us to find ourselves? 🙂
To be a walking library of “self-help” authors does not mean that we could live life with joy.
“I have joined many religions throughout my life. I am very experienced in Spirituality.”
So what? 🙂
To bring a “Spiritual” resume with us does not mean that someone has found joy in his life. Joining a group does not mean joy. “Joining” and “Joy” are 2 different words. 🙂
When the piece of the puzzle fits the Totality, Joy is the only avenue. We have “arrived.” 🙂
Everything is already in us.
Why can’t we see it?
Why do we look out there for that insight which is in us already?
That may be another paradoxical aspect of life: To go out to search for something, which is inside. So much for that cliché.
However, that “inside” is only a door, a passage to recognize the outside as being the inside as well. 🙂
“In one of your write-ups you mentioned about J Krishnamurthi..I have read quite a lot of his works..and i always felt his underline “idea” has always been to be free from all the beliefs and then one can know truly about oneself. But I fail to understand, how can one do that…isn’t getting rid from the beliefs also a belief in itself?
I agree that one should constantly question their beliefs and “work” on them, but how can one not have a belief?
This question has been on my mind for quite sometime now…”
This question could be applied to the “common good.”
Thank you for your question! Please place your undivided attention into this writing and a new insight may develop. 🙂
Intellectual understanding is very limited for things which are related with “living life to the fullest.”
Avyakt7 is not saying that “intellectual understanding is bad.” No.
Intellectual understanding is “good” for “another day at the office, honey…” type of scenario. 🙂 Intellectual understanding is “good” to get your certification in Cisco routers and to successfully complete a test in a school setting, etc.
If we are trying to use our intellectual understanding to “get” what J. Krishnamurti is conveying, we will have a very vague idea, no matter how many of his books we read.
J. Krishnamurti is usually labeled as a “thinker…”
Aristotle was a thinker. Voltaire was a thinker. Descartes was a thinker. A philosopher is a thinker…we cannot say the same for men who have experienced a different level of consciousness.
“Thinking” is not the adequate word, for that thinking comes from “conditioning,” that is from the past.
Krishnamurti had insight and so, many others so-called “spiritual teachers.”
For example, whenever a person uses his intellectual ability to understand “God,” he will be like Epicurus.
His philosophy departs from a preconceived idea of who “God” is.
God is omnipotent. God is omniscient. God is this and that…
That belief “defines” his “God.” Every religion has a different belief, a different definition of their “God.”
Atheists could jump in the “bandwagon” for Epicurus has demonstrated “logically” that there is no God needed.
Epicurus have only negated his own definitions and ideas by using the game of words.
God is not a definition. A definition is not the thing.
That is the tricky aspect about relying in the logic and reasoning of intellectual understanding.
Logic and reasoning are part of the “office” environment. That is part of the “man made” artificial world of squares and triangles, cement and computers…
What is the shortest path between point A and point B?
Intellectually, we repeat. A straight line.
Bravo! That conditioning works great. However, there are no straight lines in Nature.
You may be able to pass your exam at the College near you, but at the same time; we need to be aware that we are dealing with “Disneyland knowledge,” that is something which only exists in our imagination… 🙂
With the above little preface, we could go into your question.
isn’t getting rid of beliefs also a belief in itself?”
The intellectual answer is “Yes and No.”
Do you like that? 🙂
Let us try the Zen method for intellectuals.
First get rid of all your beliefs…
Now, get rid of the belief that “getting rid of beliefs is a belief in itself…”
No more beliefs…
Now that our minds are clean from intellectual cluttering, perhaps we could share something meaningful…
When Avyakt7 refers to “get rid of beliefs,” Avyakt7 is constrained by language. The simple but dangerous “black or white” understanding may arrive for some.
“Pink pigs are able to fly.” It is a belief.
If someone tells you: “NO…you are wrong.” How do you feel about it? Do you defend yourself?
If yes. Get rid of that belief. If No… it wasn’t a belief. It was a thought… 🙂
Now, that we understand the game of beliefs, we could go further to push our own beliefs.
“Abortion is good”
What do you think?
If you disagree with me, that is fine as long as that statement does not move you, that is as long as you don’t put your energy to defend yourself or your position.
The issue with beliefs is not whether they are “right or wrong” that is debatable intellectual morality. The issue is to discover what moves you into some uncomfortable setting, something that gets you out of a peaceful self.
Let us try another one.
“God does not exist.”
Did it move you? Do you feel like defending God or rather your belief about God? 🙂
The opposite holds true. If you tell an atheist (someone who has labeled himself as “not believing in God”) that “God exists,” that person may strongly argue with you if he has identified with his beliefs.
On the other hand, if not he will carry on as a “normal” peaceful person, acknowledging your statement without “believing” in it…
How is that possible?
We shouldn’t forget that we are dealing with “perceptions of reality” and everyone is entitled to their beliefs. The problem is when we identify with them by REJECTING anything else.
That rejection in life will bring a lesson from life to learn to be open. ( As many other articles here explained that.)
Because there is oneness in openness. If we reject a part of life, we reject ourselves.
One more time, life is not interested in how “right or wrong” we are in our beliefs. That is of no consequence once we understand that we are dealing with perceptions.
Now… comes Mr. Intellectual and asks:
“You are saying that reality is a perception, right? Isn’t that another perception?”
And then… Avyakt7 will reply like his friend Mathias taught him:
“Yes and No.”
And if that doesn’t do the trick, then Avyakt7 will go back to the “Zen method” for intellectuals….
Any teaching that comes from insight is not to be taken intellectually. We could get lost in words, concepts and definitions by doing so.
Those teachings are meant to be used as a mirror to look at ourselves. Once we do that, we could “understand without understanding…”
Paradoxes are beyond logic and reasoning.
Life is a beautiful paradox. 🙂
Sharlene is in a relationship with Paul. It is known that Paul is a “good person.” Paul has great qualities to become a great husband; however; Paul is not spiritual enough for Sharlene. “He does not bring much spirituality with him;” she says.
They have been together for 3 years now and she is hoping for a turn around. Even though, Paul is a “nice guy,” Sharlene feels that she doesn’t want to settle for something which is not fulfilling for her.
For most people, it is about seeing the “good qualities” that someone brings into this “relationship.”
However, no matter what the other person brings to the table, there is no totality in Sharlene’s love.
Sharlene feels what she feels and there is no turn around unless her feelings change. The issue is with her.
Sharlene had different experiences in life before her relationship with Paul. She had an idea in her mind on how love should be. Her previous relationship ended because Jann wasn’t in love with her. There was not totality in Jann’s love. However, Sharlene wasn’t 100% into it either. There was something that she kept with her, for even though Jann was spiritual; Jann had his “own issues” which bothered Sharlene.
When there is that lack of totality or wholesomeness in love, there always will be a room for “wanting for more,” wanting for that which is not there, which is lacking; and then, the search for another one who brings those qualities will continue on. The mind keeps yearning for something which does not exist.
This is the story of most divorces, from the “wealthy and famous,” to the infamous and poor ones. 🙂
The above, is a “normal” situation nowadays. Many people feel lonely. Many people feel that they are “getting old,” and better “take the first fish who bites the bait” before being empty handed. Some people are looking for someone to “make them happy.” Others, are hoping for a “Hollywood movie with a happy end,” to unfold in their lives. Many hopes, many dreams; but no knowledge of the spiritual laws in life. No one looks at themselves first.
A castle made up of a deck of cards is waiting to collapse. It will happen. It is just a matter of time.
Totality in love comes when our love is wholesome, when it is a complete love from “head to toe,” towards someone who is willing to share his/her life with us. If this feeling is lacking, if there is something telling us inside that “this is not it,” then that wholesomeness will be missing for sure. Then, the uncommitted “let us see what happen,” will be there for sure. This is the time when the mind starts compromising, the mind starts believing things that are not there, the mind hopes for changes to accomodate your own will. Forget about the other. At the end, it is about “me.”
This commitment does not come out of “thinking.” It is something that we can feel from the beginning and unless we change, things will remain the same. That is, the other person will never be “spiritual enough.”
There is a very important point to remember: We can only get to this point of knowing, when any type of “neediness” is gone from our system. If loneliness is there, if there is any unfulfilled desire which we want for another to fulfill, then; we are just wasting our time, for that totality in love will not be there, it will never be experienced.
As long as we are in a state of neediness, we will only look for someone to fulfill our own emptiness. We bring to that relationship our emptiness; and this inner emptiness will become a demanding voice sooner or later which will destroy that relationship through dependency or through lack of satisfaction.
Totality of love in a relationship, that kind of love where there is no need to sign a piece of paper to demonstrate commitment, that type of love which is wholesome, which is looking to share without any further motives; that type of love can only come across when we have resolved our own “ghosts,” our own issues, when we have fulfilled that emptiness with the fragrance of victory by facing loneliness without escape; that is when “true” spirituality has been used to work in the self.
Through the law of karma, we will get what we deserve. Thus, it is in our hands, to make that “movie” a beautiful one. One emotional needy person plus another needy person does not equal happiness in the math of life.
“Love can not be thought,
love can not be cultivated,
love can not be practiced.
The practice of love, the practice of brotherhood,
is still within the field of the mind,
so it is not love.
When all this has stopped,
then love arises,
then you will know
what is love.
Then, love is not quantitative but qualitative.
You do not say: “I love everybody”
but when one knows how to love,
knows how to love all.
Because we do not know how to love one
our love for humanity is fictitious.
When you love, there is neither one nor many:
there is only love.
It is only when there is love
that all our problems can be solved
and then we will know
its joy and happiness.”