|
home | what's new | other sites | contact | about |
||
|
Word Gems exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity
Reincarnation On Trial Jiddu Krishnamurti: “We think that by multiplying experiences
return to Reincarnation main-page
The above words of Indian mystic Jiddu Krishnamurti resonate squarely with archetechtonic philosophical errors of reincarnational theory. Jiddu's insights speak with Kant. Notice Jiddu's emphasis on how the man-in-the-street goes wrong with this subject: he believes that more experience will save him, rather than focusing upon an "immediate," timeless moment of "perception and discernment." See the full text of Krishnamurti's lecture on the "Choice" page.
an excerpt from Krishnamurti's lecture in Brockwood Park, England, September 1969 Questioner: One of the complexities of this line of thought you have pursued, for me is that if you are looking at the world as it exists today, and you want to live peacefully within yourself, and yet you feel as part of society you are responsible for what goes on in the world today, how can you ever live peacefully or even with any degree of happiness, knowing the terrible and heart-rending things that are going on in the world today? Krishnamurti: I hope you have all heard the question. If I am responsible for this whole mess, and I am - the war in Vietnam, the Middle East, the racial riots, the prejudices - I am responsible for that, because I am part of that, I have contributed to it, I have built it by my nationalistic - and all the rest of it. And the question is, how am I to live peacefully when I have brought about this mess, this confusion around me, for which I am responsible? That's the question, isn't it. Q: Yes, that is. K: I have to change myself, that's all. I have to totally and completely transform myself. Is that possible? As long as I consider myself an Englishman, a Hindu or whatever it is, or belong to a particular group, sect, belief, conclusion or ideologies, I am contributing to this mess, to this madness around me. And can I drop these conclusions, prejudices, beliefs, dogmas, completely from me? To drop it without effort, because if I make an effort I've got in again to this dualistic world I've entered. So can I cease to be completely a Hindu, not only in form but in essence? Outwardly and also inwardly end all sense of competitiveness, the hierarchical approach to life; compare myself with somebody who is more clever, more rich, more brilliant. Again without any sense of overcoming, without any sense of effort. Unless this is done, I am part of this mess. And this change is not a matter of time, it must happen now, immediately. If I say, 'I will gradually change,' again I have fallen into the trap of a division. Editor's note: Authentic change does not happen in "time," not in 10,000 lives or in 10,000 seconds, but in one moment of bursting cosmic clarity. The ego always wants more time to make itself into something "more," but the real me, and the real you, is already perfect with no need for enhancement.
an excerpt from Krishnamurti's lecture, London, England, March 1969 K. Are you waiting for the speaker to tell you what is the truth of the matter? We have shown the nature of analysis. We can see very well that the analyser, the entity, the observer, the thinker, says, I am going to analyse myself - anger, jealousy, whatever it is. And is the analyser different from the thing which he analyses? Surely he is not different; he is part of that anger, part of that jealousy, that fear. He is that fear, though he may pretend to be different, outside looking in. And if he is separate then when he analyses deeply, his analysis must be extraordinarily accurate, true, without any distortion, because if he analyses, if his analysis is somewhat distorted, then all future analysis becomes also distorted. And if we are going to analyse, then it takes time - days, months, years. Like a man who is violent, aggressive, brutal, he says, 'I will eventually become peaceful.' In the meantime he is sowing seeds of mischief and violence. And psychologically is there tomorrow at all? It is only pleasure and fear breed the idea that there is tomorrow, but actually is there tomorrow, psychologically not chronologically? So all these things are involved in analysis, and surely there must be a different way of understanding this contradiction in which... from which arises conflict, struggle, division between 'me' and 'you', and 'we' and 'they'. Is there a different way or a different eye, perception, that sees the thing immediately, in which there is no division as the observer and the observed? There is actually no division between the observer and the observed. The entity that says, 'I am jealous,' he separates himself from that field, but he is that field. And then when he proceeds to analyse his particular form of jealousy or envy or what you will, he separates himself and therefore gives more life to that from which he has divided himself. So to me, analysis is not the way. Editor's note: K is correct. Psychologically speaking, for the dysfunctional ego, there is no tomorrow, there is no "I'll be better later." Instead, the ego is like a King Midas, everything the ego touches turns to unsatisfactoriness. Why is this? - because the ego takes its unsatisfactoriness with it, wherever it goes. And if there were 100,000 reincarnational lives to live, each would be infected with "me-ism." There is no salvation in "tomorrow" - nor in 100,000 lives - for the ego. What is required, as K uses the phrase, is a "different eye, perception, that sees a thing immediately." This is the "one timeless moment of cosmic clarity." In this same lecture, a member of the audience began to discuss the value of experience, even a transcendental experience. K. One has to be a light [a teacher] to oneself. And to be a light to oneself there must be no [external] authority [no final authority other than one's sacred soul], no acceptance of any assertion or formula of anybody's, because truth is not to be found through another, or through any book or through any word. That word 'guru' means 'one who points out' - that's all, it has no other meaning, in Sanskrit. Not the one that will lead you to truth - that's too absurd... What does it mean to see [or to experience something]? Do I [truly] see anything? Do you actually see a tree or a cloud or a bird, or do you see the cloud, the tree or the bird according to the image you have already formed? This really quite a complex thing. Don't brush it off... ...seeing, listening [and experiencing] is not possible [in an authentic sense] if there is already [an egoic] conclusion, a formula, an opinion a prejudice. That prejudice you may call experience or any form of [mental] image - that you are superior, you are a better class than the other fellow, you know, all the rest of it [but this kind of experience will not help you]... You know, experience is one of the must dangerous things. No? ... the mind can experience anything. You know, by repeating a certain series of words the mind can become quiet, and in that state of quietness there is supposed to be a certain experience which is called transcendental. Now, you see, a mind eager for experience can deceive itself, can't it? ... Isn't there a relationship between our daily life, the quality of our daily life and that transcendental experience [for which you seek]. Which is more important, the transcendental experience or the quality of our life? Does the transcendental experience influence your life? If it does then you are dependent on something, on external agency, and that external agency may be your own projection. So don't brush it aside, go into it, you'll see. A mind that is seeking any form of experience - any form whether its sexual experience or transcendental experience, such a mind is not only escaping from its own peculiarities and insuffiency but it is projecting its own demands, its own conditioning. Sir, look: a life, the quality of living a daily life, doesn't depend on any external agency or influence [that is, any externally-based experience]. If it does, then any influence, whether the influence of a newspaper or the influence of a speaker or a guru, will affect your life. Therefore you are dependent, and when you are dependent on something, then fear begins... Krishnamurti highlights a primary, root dysfunction of reincarnational doctrine: it is the focus on external authority, a dependence on something outside of one's own being to offer evolvement. This is the core problem with elevating much experience, many lives, to the throne of salvation. Those who preach the effectiveness of 'external experience' are, in truth, saying -- as others from the afterlife have commented -- that they've not yet met the inner riches, the deeper life of the soul.
an excerpt from Krishnamurti's lecture, University of California, Santa Cruz, February 19, 1969 K. ... then you begin to invent theories; there must be a life after death; according to the Christians there is resurrection, while the whole of Asia believes in reincarnation. The Hindus maintain that it is impossible to die to everything while one still has life and health and beauty; so, fearing death, they give hope by inventing this wonderful thing called reincarnation, which means that the next life will be better. However, the "better" has a string attached to it; to be better in my next life, I must be good in this one, therefore I must behave myself. I must live righteously; I must not hurt another; there must be no anxiety, no violence. But unfortunately these believers in reincarnation do not live that way; on the contrary, they are aggressive, as full of violence as everyone else, so their belief is as worthless as the dead yesterdays. The important thing is what you are now, and not whether you believe or don't believe, whether your experiences are psychedelic or merely ordinary. What matters is to live at the height of virtue (I know you don't like that word). Those two words "virtue" and "righteousness" have been terribly abused, every priest uses them, every moralist or idealist employs them. But virtue is entirely different from something which is practised as virtue and therein lies its beauty; if you try to practise it, then it is no longer virtue. Virtue is not of time, so it cannot be practised and behaviour is not dependent on environment; environmental behaviour is all right in its way but it has no virtue. Virtue means to love, to have no fear, to live at the highest level of existence, which is to die to everything, inwardly, to die to the past, so that the mind is clear and innocent. And it is only such a mind that can come upon this extraordinary immensity which is not your own invention, nor that of some philosopher or guru.
an excerpt from Krishnamurti's lecture, December 10, 1970 If you depend on the environment for change, the environment which is created by you, and therefore when you depend on the structure of a society for you to change, then you are deceiving yourself, you are living in an illusion, because you have created this society. So how is this possible for the human mind that is so conditioned? If you observe your own mind, you will see that it is heavily conditioned as a Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, communist, Maoist or whatever it is. This mind which is the result of conditioning - and the conditioning is the past - how can such a mind bring about in itself a total change?
Postscript: Notice how Jiddu speaks with true authority, effectively teaching with a format of, "I say." He relies on no external guru to bolster his claim; he offers not belief but that which he knows. We will not seek for the mythical reincarnation, endless lives of experience, once we've known the inner sacred silence of enlightenment. **************************************
|
||
|
|
