Is It Possible to Be Free of the Meditator? Pupul Jayakar: You Have Still Not You to Perceive That Totality
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
KRISHNAMURTI FOUNDATION INDIA July - October 2016 Rs.2/- VOL. XII ISSUE I1 Teachers wanted .......... 3 Annual Gathering............... 4 New books............... 6 Is it possible to be free of the meditator? Pupul Jayakar: You have still not you to perceive that totality. answered my first query whether Then they ask me, ‘What is your there has been a deep change in next instruction, what am I to the teachings. do?’ To which the natural reply Krishnamurti: None at all would be, ‘Don’t do anything, He talked about authority, he but listen.’ Have you listened still talks about authority. He accurately to the statement talked about fear, he still talks that time, preparation, the about fear. He talked about whole process of evolution is consciousness in different sets unnecessary? Have you listened of terms, he still talks about it. to that statement? Not that you Thought must end, what is the must accept that statement, not nature of desire—you know all that you must take it and absorb it that he talked about then. and say, ‘Yes, I have understood PJ: May I ask you a question, it.’ But have you listened to that? Krishnaji? Do you think there If you so listen, you have the has been any inner change in you instant perception. The point is during these years? I am asking this really: our whole attitude First published in 1995 to this very seriously. and whole way of life is based on commemorate the birth K: Just a minute, let me observe evolution—becoming, growing, centenary of Krishnamurti, it. I have never been asked this achieving, finally reaching Fire in the Mind consists of question before, to be truthful godhead, and so on. I think that fifteen dialogues between and accurate. Your question is: basic assumption, that basic Krishnamurti and his close has there been a deep change conditioning is radically false. associate Pupul Jayakar. Held in you from thirty years ago or Now, when you say that, do I see between the years 1978 and from the beginning? No! I think the falseness of it instantly? Or 1984, these dialogues cover a that is accurate. There have been vast range of concerns: fear, do I say, ‘Now wait a minute’ changes in expression, there sorrow, time, death, and the this, that and the other? have been changes in vocabulary, ending of the self. They also PJ: No, sir, I would say I see the language, and gesture, you truth of that. know, all that; but there has been explore subjects central to no fundamental change from scientific research today, such K: Go slowly. What do you mean the beginning till now. That is as the questions of biological you see the truth of it? immobility. Got it? survival and the nature of PJ: I can listen to that without a consciousness. So let’s go into this. Someone ripple in consciousness. listens to this statement that Second, revised edition K: If you so listen, what takes perception of the total is published by KFI. Pp. xvi + place? What takes place if the immediate, time is not necessary, 300. Price Rs.350. Excerpts Buddha—I am in his presence— preparation is not necessary, from the book are published says to me, ‘The ending of examination, exploration will here. sorrow is bliss or compassion.’ not get you there, will not help He says that to me. I am one of 1 July 2016 October 2016 Is it possible to be free of the meditator? his audience. I don’t examine giving any meaning to anything, K: Absolutely. That means the statement, I don’t translate is that a state of mind which there is absolute freedom— the statement into my way of is out of time? Is that the state from problems, from conflicts, thinking, I don’t question it, I of real, profound meditation, sorrow, fear. That state of don’t analyse it, I don’t say, ‘What a meditation in which there is meditation has come about do you mean by it?’ I am only in no sense of achieving? All that because there is complete a state of acute, total attention of rubbish goes out of it completely. ending. So the beginning may be listening, nothing else, because And this meditation may be the the eternal process. Beginning, that statement has enormous ground, the origin of all things— you understand? truth and tremendous content. not the meditator. PJ: Yes, sir. That’s enough. Then I would PJ: The meditator is not the ground. K: It may be the eternal begin- ask the Buddha, ‘Please, sir, I K: Of course not. Throw him out. ning. Now, how is this possible? am not capable of such intense PJ: But without the meditator, Is it at all possible for a brain, activity of listening, or non- can the ground be? for a human being to be so activity, whatever it is, so please K: Without the meditator, yes. If completely, utterly, free of the help me.’ So he says, ‘I will. First the meditator is there, the ground meditator, which is essentially listen to what I have said—that is not. the self? The meditator is trying no outside agency or the agency PJ: But without the meditator. to meditate to get somewhere, which the mind, thought, has to find something in order to K: I said very carefully, medi invented, nothing will help you put his life right, or to put his -tation without the meditator. to have that tremendous insight.’ life in order. You meditate to PJ: Meditation is a human And I listen and I say, ‘My God, put your life in order, or you process. I am frightened.’ That means I watch and put your life in order must give up everything that I am K: No, no. and then meditate—it is still the attached to. And then I ask, ‘Sir, PJ: Meditation cannot be free of meditator. Is it possible to be how am I to be detached?’ You the individual. free of the meditator? Then there follow? My reasoning is false, the K: The meditator—keep to the is no problem. Then there is no listener’s reasoning is false. The meditator. question of whether there is God moment I ask, ‘How am I to be word or no God. Who cares? Then that detached?’ I am lost. He says, ‘Be PJ: There is no meditation meditation is the meditation of detached’, but I am not listening. without the meditator. You may the universe. Is it possible to be I have great reverence for him say the meditator is not the so utterly free of the meditator? and so on, but I am not listening ground. Now I am asking that question. because attachment has been a K: As long as I am trying to Don’t reply, don’t react; keep tremendous thing in my life. And meditate, meditation is not. it, hold it, let it operate. In the he says that in one stroke you Right? holding of it, energy is being must throw it out. And you must PJ: Yes. accumulated, and that energy is throw it out in one instant. K:Following systems, methods— beginning to act, not you acting. Questioner (Q): Is that instant throw it all out. Therefore there * * * also the instant of perception? is only a brain, a mind, which K: Yes, sir. is in a state of meditation. Now, PJ: You mean to tell me that * * * that is the ground. The universe with the death of the body of Krishnamurti, the consciousness K: I have no anchors. Suppose is in a state of meditation. Sorry! of Krishnamurti will end? I have no anchors at all, either [Laughs] And that is the ground, Please, I am putting a great deal in belief or in knowledge; all that is the origin of everything. of weight into this. that is absolutely meaningless That is possible only when the to me. I am a stranger. I have meditator is not. K: There are two things you have come to that point, I see it has PJ: And that is possible only said—the consciousness of K and no meaning. This sense of not when there are no anchors. the ending of the body. The body 2 3 2 July 2016 October 2016 Is it possible to be free of the meditator? will end; that’s obvious. Through the movement of thought. Ugly, point. No, sir, I will not accept it. usage, accident, disease and so noble, all that. It is the movement K: First of all, it is not yours or on, that will end. So, what is the of thought. mine. Right? consciousness of that person? PJ: Yes. PJ: I only know that it is manifest PJ: This enormous, unending, K: It is the movement of time. in the person of Krishnamurti. abounding compassion. PJ: Yes, I see that. K: Yes. K: Yes. But I wouldn’t call that K: See that very clearly. That is, PJ: Therefore when you say it consciousness. human consciousness, as we know has no place, I cannot accept it. PJ: I am using the word it, is that. When thought, after K: Naturally. consciousness because it is investigating and so on, comes to PJ: It has a place. associated with the body of an end, not in the material world K: . .because you have identified Krishnamurti. but in the psychological world, K with that. K: Yes, but it is not. consciousness, as we know it, is PJ: But K is that.