The theme of the event was “The Art of Seeing.” I used a quote from one of K’s early talks in England… “The eagle in its flight does not leave a mark; the scientist does. Inquiring into this question of freedom there must be not only the scientific observation, but also the flight of the eagle that does not leave a mark at all; both are required; there must be both the verbal explanation and the nonverbal perception.” In this “Headless Way” workshop we explored the Freedom that ‘K’ talks about, using both the “Science of the 1st-person,” and nonverbal perception (seeing) through hands-on (head-off) self-enquiry. In the morning, twelve of us where were treated to a live, interactive, Skype session with Richard Lang in the main house where J Krishnamurti held talks when he visited. In the afternoon we investigated whether or not K’s teaching of self-inquiry had similarities with Douglas Harding’s method of “non-verbal” direct enquiry. We watched a short video interview of Alan Rowlands; one of the K’s long time students and founding staff at the Brockwood Park School in England. Alan described how he used Harding’s experiments to “See” clearly who he really, really was and that after this, K’s teachings and those of the great Zen masters began to make complete sense. A video clip of a one-to-one discussion between noted Physicist, David Bohm and K was also shown. After which a group discussion ensued. We then broke into groups of two and explored the face-to no-face experiment using what Douglas refers to as the Science of the First-Person Singular present tense and the tube. A non-verbal, non-wow experiment directing one’s attention 180 degrees back to the Source of Attention. In closing, Shannon guided the group through the “Heaven and Earth” experiment… All of the friends get in a circle facing inwards. A friend gives instructions, along these lines: Put your arms around one another and close in, making the circle as small as you can. Keep looking down at that patch of carpet … surrounded by that ring of headless bodies … Look down into that realm of birth and ageing and death, from this realm of no birth or ageing or death … Look down from this Heaven which, though infinitely high and clear and self-luminous and unchanging, not only embraces but is that earthly scene which is so shallow and limited and ever-changing … Look down from where you are Alone, yet All … From where you are beyond Life and Death, yet are the Source of both …  

Am I free? Can I answer this question without simply agreeing with a preconceived notion of what freedom is? Outwardly, it seems I am free—I can go where I wish, interact freely with others, and express myself freely. So it seems I can act freely. But are my values and perceptions, which guide the choices behind my actions, actually a result of my own free will? Or are they perhaps the result of sociocultural conditioning? If I see that inwardly I am not free, could this lead to an understanding that gives rise to true freedom?  If I look at my internal world and question whether or not I am free inwardly, I can’t declare with certainty that my thoughts are rooted in values and perceptions that I personally formed of my own free will. Instead, I see that I have internalized the values of a society that values hierarchy, competition and material success above all else, and that even in subtle ways these values have shaped my perceptions—they heavily influence the way I relate to the world, to others and to myself. This isn’t a matter of accepting a truth that allows me to avail myself of personal responsibility, or to solidify an identity as some sort of enlightened outsider or proudly informed cynic. It’s certainly not a matter of finding a new reason to feel bad about myself. Rather, I’m really asking the questions: “Why am I unhappy?” and “Why do I feel so disconnected from other people most of the time?” Since I was young, I was fed this notion that in order to be happy in life, I need to achieve a certain degree of material success; I was taught that happiness is a matter of status, achievement and acquisition. Even while many parents and teachers try to teach cooperation and respect to children, the overall educational system and the greater culture ultimately emphasize competition, status, and deference to authority. Externally, these things ultimately serve to perpetuate a power structure that is a modification of older dynastic and imperialist systems. Internally though, how do these values affect us? How are they playing out in our lives as individuals on a daily basis? Is the basic truth of my experience the same for others? Here I am, 34 years old, and feeling quite lost in this world. The course of my life has thus far deviated from the prescribed path that apparently leads to success and happiness, and I find that I am dissatisfied with my life. But is the reason for my dissatisfaction really that I haven’t achieved certain things, that I haven’t become a certain person, or is it that I’ve internalized a false paradigm that dictates the conditions for my happiness? In other words, is my dissatisfaction actually rooted in the fact that I am conditioned, that I am not truly free inside? Furthermore, while I cherish moments of true connection with others, I often find myself measuring my own worth in comparison to those whom I perceive to have achieved and acquired more than I have. This perception is a very narrow one that excludes the complexity of both my life and theirs, and even though I can see how silly it is when I really look at it, the fact remains that this pattern is here, inside me. Could this perception be connected to the paradigm of competition that is so emphasized in this society? I have come to perceive myself in a number of ways that cause me to contract and shut down around others, and wear a mask to protect myself in social situations. I’ve taken on very narrow perceptions of others and myself, which prevent me from relating to them in a truly connected way. Are these really my perceptions, which I have chosen of my own free will, or do they reflect something that I’ve unconsciously adopted from my environment—from my upbringing, my education, and my culture? Those are just some observations of my current experience as an individual and a member of this society. When I look at my inner world in relation to the outer world, I can’t help but question the true nature of my perceptions and what I take for granted as simply being “my” thoughts (which include “my” fears, hopes and dreams). I am grateful to have many kind and loving people in my life, but this is an exploration into why, among other things, I feel so disconnected despite that fact; this is an exploration into why I find it so hard to be happy without buying into some superficial notion of happiness or success. So, am I free? And if I am not, can I look at myself in a way that brings about an understanding that is not rooted in the same conditioning that binds me? Can I then begin to have deeper compassion for both others and myself? Can I step back and ask myself, “What’s really happening here? What’s at the root of both my dissatisfaction and my search for happiness?” Could I perhaps find contentment in living my life as it is, without always measuring my own value against some pre-existing paradigm—without, perhaps, measuring or judging at all? Would this be freedom? JR “It seems to me that before we set out on a journey to find reality, to find God, before we can act, before we can have any relationship with another, which is society, it is essential that we begin to understand ourselves first… Now without knowing yourself, without knowing your own way of thinking and why you think certain things, without knowing the background of your conditioning and why you have certain beliefs about art and religion, about your country and your neighbour and about yourself, how can you think truly about anything? Without knowing your background, without knowing the substance of your thought, and whence it comes—surely your search is utterly futile, your action has no meaning, has it? Whether you are an American or a Hindu or whatever your religion is has no meaning either. Before we can find out what the end-purpose of life is, what it all means—wars, national antagonisms, conflicts, the whole mess—we must begin with ourselves, must we not?” J. Krishnamurti, The First and Last Freedom

It was my pleasure to host another Meetup at UVic on spiritual awakening this week. The theme was “Non-Duality: The Illusion of Separation and other Non-Dual Perspectives”. Fifteen Awakeners attended. The topic is a fairly challenging one for me, but I was happy to share my current understanding, and pleased to be conversing with others who shared their insight and questions. We started with an audio clip of Alan Watts speaking about duality, the Hindu concept of God as the one true Self, and the possibility that both the world and we as individuals are simply projections in a cosmic dream being dreamt by a “cosmic dreamer or actor”. We discussed separation, both why it seems like such a substantial aspect of our experience, but also why such a belief may be a false premise, an illusion. I shared how, despite our experience of seemingly separate static objects, in reality individual objects are actually unfolding processes that are all intrinsically connected to other processes, ultimately all being part of what might be called the total process of the universe. Our bodies and minds are not separate from this total process. This is something I’m just coming to understand myself, but the basic truth of it seems undeniable to me. We also touched on the primacy of consciousness, the ego, and the witness state talked about in many different spiritual teachings. We read a simple but powerful quote on stillness by K, which I’ll share at the end of this post, and finished with a Mooji video called “Beyond the Concept of Oneness”, which was much appreciated by a number of Awakeners. This is the last Meetup to be held until September. This last year has been a very eventful one for me in many ways, on both the spiritual front and also where relationships and the nitty gritty of the human experience are concerned (it’s all the same thing, really). This Meetup has been a very valuable experience for me, and I hope to continue it in the fall, as a part of my own evolution and as a way to connect with intelligent and interesting individuals. JR “A still mind is not seeking experience of any kind. And if it is not seeking and therefore is completely still, without any movement from the past and therefore free from the known, then you will find, if you have gone that far, that there is a movement of the unknown that is not recognized, that is not translatable, that cannot be put into words; then you will find that there is a movement which is of the immense.” J. Krishnamurti, The Book of Life

K talks about the nonsense of re-incarnation. And no wonder… In the modern era, it was the works of Madame Blavatsky, co-founder of the Theosophical Society, which brought it a new found popularity of re-incarnation, especially in the West – and coddled a young Jiddu from his teens to become the new Spiritual messiah of the world. But – to elaborate from my perspective… Although, there’s a good deal of evidence that certain people recall their ‘past lives’ as I did in a “Past life regression session” with a well-known devotee of the famous clairvoyant Edgar Cayce. The ‘apparent’ time-honoured doctrine of karma and rebirth – one’s so-called ‘reincarnation’ as a higher human or “godling” if one has behaved admirably throughout life, as a lower human or higher animal if one has behaved badly, as a lower animal or demon if one has behaved appallingly? As humans, there’s nothing here that cannot be ascribed to clairvoyance or telepathy – for which there’s a great deal of evidence. So that when I imagine I’m remembering my experience as a Roman centurion, what I’m doing is picking up large areas of his experience. And witnessing to the fact that deep down we all merge. Indeed the trouble with reincarnation is that it doesn’t go nearly far enough. If it told me that ultimately all consciousness is my consciousness, or that consciousness is ultimately indivisible, I would have no quarrel with it. As for the claim that one can recall one’s subhuman lives, what’s to show this isn’t what it looks like – futile daydreaming? In fact this dogma of reincarnation (though in its time a brave and ingenious attempt to account for life’s injustices) makes no sense to me at all. Or, if it’s not necessary for memories to bridge the gaps between reincarnations, what else does so? And in what sense are they my reincarnations? Millions of intelligent people go on paying lip-service to this hallowed myth; clearly few take it seriously enough to go into it. The real solution of all such problems about one’s past and future lies in one’s present. Besides, one isn’t incarnate anyway – I as Awareness (the First Person Singular) isn’t in a body now – so what’s all this fuss about reincarnation?  

Krishnamurti Study Group Saturday, May 2, 2015 Nine people met to begin the study of chapter 5 in The First and Last Freedom by J. Krishnamurti.  It was a beautiful day for enjoying the property and the spectacular view while at the same time looking into some serious questions.   The chapter is entitled “Action and Idea” and it starts off looking into the relationship between action, the “actor”, and the anticipated result of the action.  K says that action with an end in view creates the “actor”, which is the source of conflict in action.  The reading led to an interesting exploration of these ideas and the possibility suggested by K of action without idea. Inquiry Sunday Sunday, May 3, 2015 The morning session on Sunday included a video interview with Dr P Krishna, former principal of the Rajghat Krishnamurti School in India.  Dr. Krishna had a long time association with K and is very familiar with his teachings.  He is also an excellent speaker who can clearly present his understanding of the ideas that K was attempting to communicate.  Over the course of the interview a range of topics was covered, with a particular focus on the difference between thought and awareness.  Dr. Krishna emphasized that while psychological thought is strongly conditioned, awareness is not conditioned and is able to observe or look directly at the creations of thought and see whether they are true or not.  This is the key to living with clarity and harmony.   Also discussed was the challenge of running Krishnamurti schools with the intention of learning about ourselves and not just about the subject matter required to pass exams and get a job.  Dr. Krishna will be leading a weekend retreat at the Centre in May. The Sunday afternoon session began with a video of K answering the following question during a Saanen gathering in 1980:  “Is our sitting quietly every day to observe the movement of thought by your definition a practice, a method, and therefore without value?”  He began by asking the questioner about the motive for this activity.  Was there a seeking of some experience or achievement, some exalted state of consciousness?  Without seeing what one’s motive is any activity will lead to illusion.  If one’s motives can be observed as part of the inquiry then sitting, standing or walking quietly is significant and necessary.  Then the mind may come upon a silence and depth without being forced or manipulated in any way. Participants then engaged in dialogue on the front lawn of the main house, including some stories of personal meetings with Krishnamurti.