«You can only discover what love is by knowing what it is not. Not knowing intellectually, but living, leaving aside what is not: jealousy, ambition and greed, all the division in life, me and you, us and them, black and white ... ». (Krishnamurti in Stuart Holroyd. Krishnamurti: The Man, the Mystery & the Message, 1991).
A person wants to know himself, investigate, discover ("explore" is the most neutral expression I find) and, at first glance, that seems like something that is fine. I remember Socrates in his "Know yourself" and I tell myself that I am in tune. Closer in time, I go back to Krishnamurti with "if one does not know oneself, one cannot go beyond the illusions projected by my own mind "(1) and I tell myself that I am well. I see all my purpose, my vision, my objective in good direction and I say that the approach is absolutely correct.
But no. Sorry. I must say that if someone wants to know himself too (like me), that does not exist.
For the purposes of what I mean, the Ego is a bubble in which lies what oneself is, both within the sphere of attention and within the unconscious. The Ego is basically an intact soap bubble that has movement inside. In there everything moves: a belief (the inclination of mind to say that one thing is in a certain way and not in another); a wish (the movement of the will that wants to get something); a thought (produced by memory with its record characteristic that the human brain has), and so on. The Ego has a movement in its interior that "trembles" (vibrates) over an intact, rigid structure that does not move beyond some limits. Thus, its movement is of emergence and appearance over an already established orbit that ultimately does not move too much.
Wanting to know oneself is, in itself, a movement that is not observed by anyone, not even by that Ego that wants to know itself. In this way, one puts the intentions in what could give him some data but not in the engine that makes this same "desire" possible, this wanting to know oneself. Bypassing all of the above, it really seems a very healthy and sensible expression to affirm "I want to know myself." If you look at the detail of the first expression of the first paragraph of this post, you do not question why you want something, whatever, how to know yourself: why would anyone want to know oneself? Why would my Ego propose such an initiative? Even so, without that questioning, one has the tendency (the point where their joints go somewhere) to modify the periphery, which in this case is the word ('exploration' instead of the others) and not the structure itself of the language tool and its implementation through thought.
Thinking is a tool as is a screwdriver and can a screwdriver treat itself? Shouldn't it be something different, get out of itself (or something similar) to get tackled? If all that is my Ego is in the creation of thought, is it sensible to approach my thoughts with more thoughts? One supposes, in all this speculation, that the exploration of oneself must take place in a way that there are no more movements (in the words of Krishnamurti: Only when the mind does not give continuity to the thought, when it is silent, in a silence not -induced, and without any causality, it is only then when there may be background release [2]) and I suppose that it is a requirement to understand all those movements first (or at least see them).
More personally, I yearn to know myself because I consider that I am currently uneasy. I want to know myself because I am not satisfied and I believe that, once I have achieved my own knowledge, I can have some control over my discontent. I am unhappy about the thoughts I say to myself in my mind, however, wouldn't it be a "more of the same" to treat my discontent with what caused it, the thought? Screwdriver with screwdriver, thought with thought? So what is necessary for the exploration of the Ego? How can one approach oneself without creating more movement than there is already? I really expect something, I expect a result with the satisfaction of the approach of wanting to know me. I suppose, from a place in my mind that, knowing myself, I will get something in return and that this is the objectively satisfying. But isn't this assumption arbitrary? And I wonder again, what is the base framework that places in my own imaginary the assumption of satisfaction once my Ego is known? And I continue, what sustains my proposition by the affirmative of saying that what has been produced will be objectively satisfactory for me? Where does all this come from? What is the intimate criterion by which my Ego considers (in advance) that obtaining self-knowledge will be something "happy"? I have asked myself several times. What is inside, what is there? And I find a blank wall. I don't know why I have the idea that knowing myself will give an answer to my current discontent.
(1) Krishnamurti: Talks in California 1949 - 3rd Public talk 23rd July 1949 http://jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1949/1949-07-23-jiddu-krishnamurti-3rd-public-talk
(2) Krishnamurti: The First and Last Freedom. Question 20 - On The Conscious And Unconscious Mind http://jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/the-first-and-last-freedom/1953-00-00-jiddu-krishnamurti-the-first-and-last-freedom-on-the-conscious-and-unconscious-mind
 |
| Exploration by singhaniket255. pixabay.com |
A person wants to know himself, investigate, discover ("explore" is the most neutral expression I find) and, at first glance, that seems like something that is fine. I remember Socrates in his "Know yourself" and I tell myself that I am in tune. Closer in time, I go back to Krishnamurti with "if one does not know oneself, one cannot go beyond the illusions projected by my own mind "(1) and I tell myself that I am well. I see all my purpose, my vision, my objective in good direction and I say that the approach is absolutely correct.
But no. Sorry. I must say that if someone wants to know himself too (like me), that does not exist.
For the purposes of what I mean, the Ego is a bubble in which lies what oneself is, both within the sphere of attention and within the unconscious. The Ego is basically an intact soap bubble that has movement inside. In there everything moves: a belief (the inclination of mind to say that one thing is in a certain way and not in another); a wish (the movement of the will that wants to get something); a thought (produced by memory with its record characteristic that the human brain has), and so on. The Ego has a movement in its interior that "trembles" (vibrates) over an intact, rigid structure that does not move beyond some limits. Thus, its movement is of emergence and appearance over an already established orbit that ultimately does not move too much.
Wanting to know oneself is, in itself, a movement that is not observed by anyone, not even by that Ego that wants to know itself. In this way, one puts the intentions in what could give him some data but not in the engine that makes this same "desire" possible, this wanting to know oneself. Bypassing all of the above, it really seems a very healthy and sensible expression to affirm "I want to know myself." If you look at the detail of the first expression of the first paragraph of this post, you do not question why you want something, whatever, how to know yourself: why would anyone want to know oneself? Why would my Ego propose such an initiative? Even so, without that questioning, one has the tendency (the point where their joints go somewhere) to modify the periphery, which in this case is the word ('exploration' instead of the others) and not the structure itself of the language tool and its implementation through thought.
Thinking is a tool as is a screwdriver and can a screwdriver treat itself? Shouldn't it be something different, get out of itself (or something similar) to get tackled? If all that is my Ego is in the creation of thought, is it sensible to approach my thoughts with more thoughts? One supposes, in all this speculation, that the exploration of oneself must take place in a way that there are no more movements (in the words of Krishnamurti: Only when the mind does not give continuity to the thought, when it is silent, in a silence not -induced, and without any causality, it is only then when there may be background release [2]) and I suppose that it is a requirement to understand all those movements first (or at least see them).
More personally, I yearn to know myself because I consider that I am currently uneasy. I want to know myself because I am not satisfied and I believe that, once I have achieved my own knowledge, I can have some control over my discontent. I am unhappy about the thoughts I say to myself in my mind, however, wouldn't it be a "more of the same" to treat my discontent with what caused it, the thought? Screwdriver with screwdriver, thought with thought? So what is necessary for the exploration of the Ego? How can one approach oneself without creating more movement than there is already? I really expect something, I expect a result with the satisfaction of the approach of wanting to know me. I suppose, from a place in my mind that, knowing myself, I will get something in return and that this is the objectively satisfying. But isn't this assumption arbitrary? And I wonder again, what is the base framework that places in my own imaginary the assumption of satisfaction once my Ego is known? And I continue, what sustains my proposition by the affirmative of saying that what has been produced will be objectively satisfactory for me? Where does all this come from? What is the intimate criterion by which my Ego considers (in advance) that obtaining self-knowledge will be something "happy"? I have asked myself several times. What is inside, what is there? And I find a blank wall. I don't know why I have the idea that knowing myself will give an answer to my current discontent.
Originally published on August 24, 2011.
(1) Krishnamurti: Talks in California 1949 - 3rd Public talk 23rd July 1949 http://jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1949/1949-07-23-jiddu-krishnamurti-3rd-public-talk
(2) Krishnamurti: The First and Last Freedom. Question 20 - On The Conscious And Unconscious Mind http://jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/the-first-and-last-freedom/1953-00-00-jiddu-krishnamurti-the-first-and-last-freedom-on-the-conscious-and-unconscious-mind
Comments
Post a Comment