We did not have the pavilion room available to us due to a scheduling mishap, and the group decided to sit outside on a nearby picnic table. This afforded the group a greater intimacy due to the close quarters of the picnic table, as well as the opportunity to relate to the beautiful trees surrounding us as we communed with one another. 

We began with a period of silence. One person remarked on the affectionate quality of the silence, and the palpable sense of heart presence – simply from silence. Beautiful, and if it had ended here it would still have been worth the while. 

We read a passage from Krishnamurti on the state of “I do not know.” We considered this statement and the fact that, as each moment is new, that this moment and all moments can inherently not be known, so this ‘not knowing’ is not a state of confusion but rather one of understanding. This lightens the propensity to want to cull from memory some bits of knowledge that might be mined in order to reconstruct past insights or understandings. Furthermore, the living and dying of each moment in the present brings forth the challenge of meeting death in the present rather than having it hovering around somewhere in the future, creating a fear of the unknown. 

Living with death is a central theme of Krishnamurti’s teaching, perhaps the most important to understand and to live, because without this all our actions are a substitution for or a distraction from this challenge. 

Also, time and the timeless came into the discussion, time as a psychological construction containing both the dead past and the imaginary future in the living present. Can we live without the challenges of past trauma and fear of death in the future invading the present? Is that what humanity is doing? No, and how is that working out on a global relationship scale both now and throughout history? So, the ending of time, which is putting away the past and meeting death in the present (this is the stopping point for most) was considered and why we might still resist it even in light of seeing the fact of its necessity. 

The beautiful day, the beautiful surroundings and the affection felt within the group: yes.

• John Duncan

The group considered the quote:

To Be Alone.

“Meditation is the act of being alone. The act is entirely different from the activities of isolation. The very nature of the “me” is to isolate itself, through concentration, through various methods of meditation, and through the daily activities of separation. But to be alone is not a withdrawal from the world.”

The group considered the meaning of “meditation”, including the two meanings of “meditation “ to be found in this passage; “Meditation” as an in-the-world act of whole observation vs sitting meditation; as an “isolating”/ separating activity of the “me”. Comparison was made to Buddhist practices and discussion of methods, goals, and “becoming” that may accompany various forms of sitting meditation.

The group pivoted to notice the difference between the content and the process of thought within the dialogue itself. Thought’s tendency to organize into “good”& “bad”  was observed. Also observed was our tendency to focus on the object or person that is viewed as “good or bad” vs a mind process that is organizing these categories.

Dialogue was viewed as a living opportunity to watch thought’s usual processes of analysis, comparison and organization.

Observation of these normally unseen movements within dialogue was felt to be “stunning”. Observations of the word “stunning” included shock, pause, and a disturbance of thought’s usual momentum.

The process of inquiry was seen as a “deconstructing” of thought through via negativa,

Discussion focused on thought’s frequent “building” process that enhances the “me” through building opinion, building identity, and building “nirvana” .

Observations included the constant opinion building on social media.

Other focus included thought’s unquestioned assumption that it can build a loving world,-in spite of the non-love right in front of us.

K’s statement that “Seeing the false as false is truth” was observed to be a wholly different understanding of love/truth in the world; The love lies in the seeing of the world as it is.

The group  concluded by contemplating the use of words in relation to insight experiences.

—Vala Kondo-Legan

Following prior decision to focus on “Truth” in this week’s dialogue, the group began by reading the quote from The Book of Life (Truth comes in a flash, October 6):

“Truth or understanding comes in a flash, and that flash has no continuity; it is not within the field of time. Do see this for yourself. Understanding is fresh, instantaneous; it is not the continuity of something that has been. What has been cannot bring you understanding. As long as one is seeking a continuity—wanting permanency in relationship, in love, longing to find peace everlasting, and all the rest of it—one is pursuing something which is within the field of time and therefore does not belong to the timeless.”

The group began with a questioning of the sentence, “What has been cannot bring you understanding”. It was observed that, contrary to the quote; an understanding of life’s mistakes, allows one to avoid mistakes in the future.

This led the group to define what is meant by “understanding”. It was noted that there is a belief that we can learn to avoid the pain of mistakes, and that this is doable. This led to observing the consistent creation of “should”s that avoid discomfort.

ie: “I should understand this quote!”

An awareness of a “pressure to understand” was identified in the present moment; which resonated with the group.

The group then swung to address more sweeping questions of the nature of “the ground”/ and Intelligence as a whole; which was noticed as a possible collective avoidance of the discomfort of the aforementioned pressure.

Further exploration of “the pressure” [to understand] led to disclosures about desire to receive“understanding” from a dialogue, and excitement to add something to dialogue, and thereby “build the me”. A group member mentioned the excitement with which K spoke, which was not affiliated with ego, along with his admonishment, to notice that “the house is on fire!”

The two variant views caused a slight opposition. The group then discussed  thought’s reliance upon“agreement”;  including the seeking to resolve discord and seek  equilibrium for safety.

—Vala Kondo-Legan

As previously decided, he group continued with the quote from The Book of Life (Love is dangerous, November 25):

“Love is the most dangerous and uncertain element in life;

and because we do not want to be uncertain,

because we do not want to be in danger, we live in the mind.

A man who loves is dangerous…”

The group began with a strong objection from a group member that the quote had been excerpted from a longer entry in “The Book of Life”. The excerpting was seen to have invalidated the meaning the quote, despite the entries themselves being excerpted from larger speeches.

There was some short discussion of the role of a quote in a dialogue, with emphasis on the living interpretation of a quote vs it’s exact content or context. The role of the editor of a book, as an authority, as well as Krishnamurti as authority was also mentioned.

After the objector was observed as “violent” by another group member; The subject of love becoming conflict , both in the macrocosm of the world as well as the microcosm of the dialogue, was discussed.

Also observed were efforts to divert attention away from the group conflict, due to discomfort.

The group discussed love as an underlying constant, which was challenged as potentially having a conceptual origin. Observation was made that in spite of a possible larger field of love, daily life that may not include love. Attention was put on the energy in the room, and it was observed that there was “not much!” [love] in the present moment!

Also discussed was the assumption by thought that it “knows love”.

The group discussed continuity of love in light of Krishnamurti’s comments about “dying every day”; and there was comment that the “alive-ness” of love, lies in “dying”.

—Vala Kondo-Legan