Dear Aen,
I don't live in singapore but I have been to singapore many
times. I live in Bangladesh but go to KL, SG and BKK quite often. I
understand when you say practic while in MRT. But I was wondering
for a person, who has not come across any teaching at all. Who has
only himself at his disposal, then putting effort to be non dual
can only start with intention of gaining. I have a running
commentary inside. I am not too sure, but I feel like I am in the I
am phase. My work load does not let me spend too much time on these
matters.
However, regardless of how much time I spend on comtemplation on
these matters, I was wondering why run away from the voice/the
commentary inside? Why follow the breath or listen to the traffic
i.e. why dwell in sensations which we call "non dual"? I know you
have talked about it and gave proper reason how it helps in terms
of understanding the nature of reality. But AEN, I was wondering,
if I don't do any meditation at all, neither sit in silence nor
dwell in the nondual sensations, instead never run away from the
sense of self inside, and investigate, go into, observe the
unfolding of of "what is" in the present moment, isn't that the
begining of self knowledge?
I have read jiddu krishnamurti and joko beck extensively. After
constantly fighting inside I always fall back to what he says which
is I can never escape from what is and
"why take a step away from the self to know the self" since no
matter what I do, the center is already here. To know myself, the
"book of oneself", as jiddu krishnamurti puts it, isn't is
sufficient to simply be here and look at my reactions and
relationships and the content of my consciousness...I am quoting
jiddu here
"Now
is there a means, a system, of knowing oneself? Any clever person,
any philosopher, can invent a system, a method; but surely the
following of a system will merely produce a result created by that
system, will it not? If I follow a particular method of knowing
myself, then I shall have the result which that system
necessitates; but the result will obviously not be the
understanding of myself. That is by following a method, a system, a
means through which to know myself, I shape my thinking, my
activities, according to a pattern; but the following of a pattern
is not the understanding of oneself.
The First And
Last Freedom 23 Jiddu Krishnamurti
CHAPTER5. CHAPTER4’SELF-KNOWLEDGE’
Therefore
there is no method for self-knowledge. Seeking a method invariably
implies the desire to attain some result - and that is what we all
want. We follow authority - if not that of a person, then of a
system, of an ideology - because we want a result which will be
satisfactory, which will give us security. We really do not want to
understand ourselves, our impulses and reactions, the whole process
of our thinking, the conscious as well as the unconscious; we would
rather pursue a system which assures us of a result. But the
pursuit of a system is invariably the outcome of our desire for
security, for certainty, and the result is obviously not the
understanding of oneself. When we follow a method, we must have
authorities - the teacher, the guru, the saviour, the Master - who
will guarantee us what we desire; and surely that is not the way to
self-knowledge."
and
"The
understanding of oneself is not a result, a culmination; it is
seeing oneself from moment to moment in the mirror of relationship
- one’s relationship to property, to things, to people and to
ideas. But we find it difficult to be alert, to be aware, and we
prefer to dull our minds by following a method, by accepting
authorities, superstitions and gratifying theories; so our minds
become weary, exhausted and insensitive. Such a mind cannot be in a
state of creativeness. That state of creativeness comes only when
the self, which is the process of recognition and accumulation,
ceases to be; because, after all, consciousness as the ‘me’ is the
centre of recognition, and recognition is merely the process of the
accumulation of experience.
"
AEN, have you read jiddu krishnamurti and joko beck? I find them
conflicting in the sense that joko beck clearly emphasizes practice
specially regular practice of being in silence but on the other
hand Jiddu krishnamurti completely oblitereates any kind of
practice at all. I get that having an experiential practice like
zazen/shikantaza may translate into "right view", which is nondual
experience pointing to "right view" instead of "right view"
pointing to nondual experience.
But as jiddu calls it, without having the right view of not only
"the self" "emptiness" "nonduality" but also everything else
like the right view of 'livelihood", "marriage", "sex",
"friendship" "society"; without having the right view of
everything that life encompasses
can an individual ever free from suffereing?
