Home | Culture | * * *

* * *

image
 What does it mean to see the totality of something?  Is it ever possible to perceive the totality of something which is moving?

 

 

 

 

Krishnamurti 

 

 

 


QUESTION: What does it mean to see the totality of something?  Is it ever possible to perceive the totality of something which is moving?

You understand the question?  A good question?  Shall we do it together?

As we said in the previous question in going into it, to perceive the totality of our consciousness, that consciousness is centred as the 'me', the self, the egotistic activity, self-centred movement, which is the totality of our consciousness.  Right?  Now can we see that completely?  Of course we can. Is that difficult?  That is, one's consciousness is made up of all its content.  Right?  Is that clear?  That is, my jealousy, my nationality, my beliefs, my experiences and so on and so on and so on, that is the content of this thing called consciousness.  The core of that is me, the self. Right?  To see this thing entirely now. Right, sir?  Can you do it?  Of course you can.  Which means giving complete attention to it.  Again we rarely give complete attention to anything. Now we are asking each other: give complete attention to this content which is at the very core of the self.  The self, the 'me', is the essence of that, and give attention to it, and you see the whole, don't you?

Now the questioner says also, which is interesting, which is, is it ever possible to perceive the totality of something which is moving?  Is the self moving?  Is the content of your consciousness moving?  It is moving within the limits of itself.  Right sir?  Are you following all this?  Am I talking to myself?

Sir, look, what is moving in consciousness?  Attachment, the fear of not being attached, the fear of what might happen if I am not attached?  Which is what?  Moving within its own radius, within its own limited area.  That you can observe.  So you can observe that which is limited.  I want to go into this a little bit, don't be shocked.  Is our consciousness with its content living?  You understand my question?  Are my ideas living?  Your belief living? So what is living?  Are you following this?  One has an experience, pleasant, unpleasant, noble, ignoble, so-called enlightened - you cannot have experience of truth, of enlightenment - that's irrelevant.  So is the experience that you have had living?  Or the remembrance of that experience is living?  Right?  The remembrance, not the fact.  The fact has gone.  But the movement of remembrance is called what is living.  You follow?  Come on, sirs, move.  So the experience, which has gone, of course, that is remembered, that remembrance is called living.  That you can watch, but not that which is gone.  I wonder if you see this?

So what we call living is that which has happened and gone.  See, sir, what you are doing.  That which has gone and dead, our minds are so dead, and the remembrance of all that is called living.  That is the tragedy of our life.  I remember the friends we have had, they have gone, the brothers, the sisters, the wives that are dead, the mothers, I remember.  The remembrance is identified with the photograph and the constant looking at it, remembering it, is the living.  You understand, sir?  And that is what we call living.

From Questions and Answers : Krishnamurti Foundation Trust Ltd, UK
 

Subscribe to comments feed Comments (0 posted)

total: | displaying:

Post your comment

  • Bold
  • Italic
  • Underline
  • Quote

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Captcha
Share this article
Tags

No tags for this article

Rate this article
5.00