#phylosophy — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #phylosophy, aggregated by home.social.
-
Jei žmogus nori suprasti visą pavydo procesą, jis turi į jį įsigilinti labai giliai, o ne vien priimti ar atmesti pavydą, bandyti jam priešintis ar vietoj jo ugdyti kokią nors dorybę.
Kai dorybė yra ugdoma, ji jau nebėra dorybė. Žmogus, kuris stengiasi ugdyti gėrį, jau nustojo būti geras. Gėris yra visai kas kita.
Jeigu bandau išsivaduoti iš pavydo ugdydamas proto būseną, kurioje nėra pavydo, aš vis dar esu pavydus, nes pats siekis ugdyti nepavydžią būseną kyla iš pavydo.
Jeigu noriu visiškai išrauti jausmą, vadinamą pavydu, privalau suprasti visą šią problemą taip giliai, kad protas galėtų atsiskirti nuo visų žodžių, įskaitant ir patį žodį „pavydas“.
Ir jeigu tai įvyksta, ar tada dar yra pavydas?
Tačiau vien atsikratyti žodžio, kaip gudrios priemonės, kad nebūtum pavydus, dar nereiškia turėti visiškai tylų protą, kuriame nėra žodžio.
Tik protas, kuris yra visiškai tylus – be žodžio, be jokio judesio, be jokio vaizdinio, kuris nebeveikia iš centro, vadinamo visuomene, – tik toks protas yra laisvas nuo pavydo ir todėl gali veikti visiškai kitoje dimensijoje.
Man toks protas yra religinis protas.
From Collected Works, Vol. 10
-
If one would understand the whole process of envy, one must go into it very deeply and not merely accept or reject envy, or try to resist it or cultivate a virtue in its place. When virtue is cultivated, it is no longer virtue. One who tries to cultivate goodness has ceased to be good. Goodness is something entirely different. If I try to free myself from envy by cultivating a state of mind in which there is no envy, I am still envious, because the drive to cultivate a state of non-envy is based on envy. If I were to eradicate the feeling called envy, I must understand this whole problem, so that the mind can dissociate itself from all words, including that particular word ‘envy’. And if it does, is there envy? But merely getting rid of the word, as a clever trick in order not to be envious, does not bring about a mind that is completely still, without a word. Only the mind that is completely still, without a word, without a movement, without an image, that is no longer functioning from the centre which is society, only such a mind is free from envy, and can therefore function in a totally different dimension. To me, such a mind is a religious mind.
From Collected Works, Vol. 10
-
If one has gone so deeply in discovering for oneself, then the religious mind does exist, and it does not belong to any individual. It is the mind, it is the religious mind apart from all human endeavours, demands, individual urges, compulsions, and all the rest of it. We have been describing the totality of the mind, which may appear divided by the use of different words, but it is a total thing in which all this is contained. Therefore, such a religious mind can receive that which is not measurable by the brain. That thing is unnameable; no temple, no priest, no church, no dogma can hold it. To deny all that and live in this state is the true religious mind.
From Meeting Life
-
If one has gone so deeply in discovering for oneself, then the religious mind does exist, and it does not belong to any individual. It is the mind, it is the religious mind apart from all human endeavours, demands, individual urges, compulsions, and all the rest of it. We have been describing the totality of the mind, which may appear divided by the use of different words, but it is a total thing in which all this is contained. Therefore, such a religious mind can receive that which is not measurable by the brain. That thing is unnameable; no temple, no priest, no church, no dogma can hold it. To deny all that and live in this state is the true religious mind.
From Meeting Life
-
Jeigu žmogus taip giliai tyrinėjo ir atrado pats sau, tuomet religinis protas iš tiesų egzistuoja, ir jis nepriklauso jokiam individui. Tai yra tiesiog protas – religinis protas, nepriklausantis nuo visų žmogaus pastangų, troškimų, asmeninių paskatų, vidinių prievartų ir viso kito.
Mes aprašinėjome proto visumą. Dėl skirtingų vartojamų žodžių ji gali atrodyti suskaldyta, tačiau iš tikrųjų tai yra viena nedaloma visuma, kurioje visa tai telpa.
Todėl toks religinis protas gali priimti tai, ko smegenys negali išmatuoti.
Tai yra tai, ko neįmanoma įvardyti. Jokios šventyklos, jokie kunigai, jokia bažnyčia ar dogma negali to aprėpti.
Visa tai paneigti ir gyventi tokioje būsenoje – štai kas yra tikras religinis protas.
From Meeting Life
-
Tikras religinis protas nepriklauso jokiam kultui, jokiai grupei, jokiai religijai ar organizuotai bažnyčiai. Religinis protas nėra hinduisto, krikščionio, budisto ar musulmono protas.
Religinis protas nepriklauso jokiai grupei, kuri save vadina religine.
Religinis protas nėra tas, kuris lankosi bažnyčiose, šventyklose ar mečetėse. Jis taip pat nėra protas, kuris laikosi tam tikrų tikėjimų ar dogmų.
Religinis protas yra visiškai vienas.
Tai protas, kuris perprato bažnyčių, dogmų, tikėjimų ir tradicijų klaidingumą.
Nebūdamas nacionalistinis, nebūdamas sąlygotas savo aplinkos, toks protas neturi horizontų, neturi ribų. Jis yra sprogstantis naujumu, jaunas, gaivus ir nekaltas.
Nekaltas protas, jaunas protas, nepaprastai lankstus ir subtilus protas neturi jokio inkaro, prie kurio būtų pririštas.
Tik toks protas gali patirti tai, ką jūs vadinate Dievu, tai, kas yra neišmatuojama.
From Krishnamurti on Education
-
The true religious mind does not belong to any cult, any group, any religion, any organised church. The religious mind is not the Hindu mind, the Christian mind, the Buddhist mind or the Muslim mind. The religious mind does not belong to any group which calls itself religious. The religious mind is not the mind that goes to churches, temples, mosques. Nor is it a religious mind that holds to certain forms of beliefs and dogmas. The religious mind is completely alone. It is a mind that has seen through the falsity of churches, dogmas, beliefs and traditions. Not being nationalistic, not being conditioned by its environment, such a mind has no horizons, no limits; it is explosive, new, young, fresh, innocent. The innocent mind, the young mind, the mind that is extraordinarily pliable, subtle, has no anchor. It is only such a mind that can experience that which you call God, that which is not measurable.
From Krishnamurti on Education
-
The true religious mind does not belong to any cult, any group, any religion, any organised church. The religious mind is not the Hindu mind, the Christian mind, the Buddhist mind or the Muslim mind. The religious mind does not belong to any group which calls itself religious. The religious mind is not the mind that goes to churches, temples, mosques. Nor is it a religious mind that holds to certain forms of beliefs and dogmas. The religious mind is completely alone. It is a mind that has seen through the falsity of churches, dogmas, beliefs and traditions. Not being nationalistic, not being conditioned by its environment, such a mind has no horizons, no limits; it is explosive, new, young, fresh, innocent. The innocent mind, the young mind, the mind that is extraordinarily pliable, subtle, has no anchor. It is only such a mind that can experience that which you call God, that which is not measurable.
From Krishnamurti on Education
-
Religinis protas yra neprisirišęs, neįsipareigojęs jokiai pozicijai protas, nes tik toks protas gali atrasti, kas yra tiesa ir kas yra melas. Tik toks protas gali išsiaiškinti, ar egzistuoja tikrovė, Dievas, kažkas, kas yra anapus laiko. Tačiau to negali padaryti protas, kuris tiki arba netiki.
Akivaizdu, kad religinis protas nėra tas, kuris eina į šventyklą, atlieka pudžą ar užsiima įvairiais ritualais.
Religinis protas visiškai ir galutinai pamato viso to klaidingumą.
Todėl, būdamas laisvas ir neturėdamas jokios iš anksto paruoštos pozicijos, nuo kurios pradėtų tyrinėti, jis pradeda visą tyrinėjimą iš laisvės.
Toks protas yra nešališkas, objektyvus, sveikas, racionalus ir gebantis mąstyti logiškai – o tai, iš esmės, yra mokslinio proto savybės.
Tačiau mokslinis protas nėra religinis protas.
Mokslinis protas yra atsidavęs tam tikros egzistencijos dalies, tam tikro gyvenimo segmento tyrinėjimui. Todėl jis negali aprėpti visumos taip, kaip gali religinis protas.
Kad atsirastų toks religinis protas, būtina revoliucija – ne ekonominė ar socialinė, bet psichologinė revoliucija, revoliucija pačioje žmogaus sąmonėje ir pačiame mąstymo procese.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
The religious mind is the non-committed mind, because only such a mind can discover what is true and what is false. It is only such a mind that can find out if there is or is not a reality, God, a timeless thing – but not the committed mind, not a mind that believes or does not believe. Obviously, the religious mind is not the mind that goes to the temple, that does puja and all kinds of tricks. The religious mind sees the falseness of all that totally, completely. Therefore, being free and not having a platform from which to proceed to inquire, it begins all inquiry from freedom. Such a mind is dispassionate, objective, sane, rational, capable of reasoning – which is, after all, the scientific mind. The scientific mind is not a religious mind. The scientific mind is committed to examining a certain part of existence, a segment of life, so the scientific mind cannot understand the totality which the religious mind can understand. To have such a religious mind, there must be a revolution – not economic or social, but a psychological revolution, a revolution in the psyche, in the very process of our thinking.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
The religious mind is the non-committed mind, because only such a mind can discover what is true and what is false. It is only such a mind that can find out if there is or is not a reality, God, a timeless thing – but not the committed mind, not a mind that believes or does not believe. Obviously, the religious mind is not the mind that goes to the temple, that does puja and all kinds of tricks. The religious mind sees the falseness of all that totally, completely. Therefore, being free and not having a platform from which to proceed to inquire, it begins all inquiry from freedom. Such a mind is dispassionate, objective, sane, rational, capable of reasoning – which is, after all, the scientific mind. The scientific mind is not a religious mind. The scientific mind is committed to examining a certain part of existence, a segment of life, so the scientific mind cannot understand the totality which the religious mind can understand. To have such a religious mind, there must be a revolution – not economic or social, but a psychological revolution, a revolution in the psyche, in the very process of our thinking.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
Tai buvo jaukus namelis kaime, su veja, kuri daugelį metų buvo kruopščiai pjaunama, voluojama ir ravima. Visa vieta buvo prižiūrėta, klestinti ir pilna džiaugsmo. Už namo buvo nedidelis daržas; tai buvo nuostabi vieta, šalia kurios tekėjo ramus upelis, beveik negirdimai čiurlenantis.
Durys atsivėrė ir buvo prilaikomos Budos statulos, pastumtos koja į vietą. Namelio šeimininkas visiškai nesuvokė, ką daro; jam tai buvo tik durų atrama. Susimąstei, ar jis taip pat pasielgtų su statula, kurią pats gerbia, nes jis buvo krikščionis.
Tu neigi kitų žmonių šventus dalykus, tačiau saugai savuosius. Kito žmogaus tikėjimai tau atrodo prietarai, o tavo paties – pagrįsti ir tikri.
Kas yra šventa?
Paplūdimyje jis buvo radęs jūros nugludintą medžio gabalą, primenantį žmogaus galvą. Jis buvo iš kietmedžio, suformuotas jūros vandens ir nuvalytas daugybės metų bei sezonų.
Jis parsivežė jį namo ir padėjo ant židinio lentynos. Kartkartėmis pažvelgdavo į jį ir grožėdavosi tuo, ką buvo sukūrusi jūra.
Vieną dieną jis padėjo šalia gėlių. Vėliau tai kartojosi kasdien. Jis pasijusdavo nejaukiai, jei nebūdavo šviežių gėlių. Pamažu tas medžio gabalas tapo labai svarbus jo gyvenime.
Jis neleisdavo niekam jo liesti, išskyrus save. Kiti galėjo jį išniekinti. Prieš liesdamas jį nusiplaudavo rankas.
Tas medžio gabalas tapo šventas ir sakralus. Jis vienintelis buvo jo vyriausiasis kunigas. Jis atstovavo jam. Tas daiktas pasakodavo jam apie dalykus, kurių jis pats niekada negalėtų pažinti.
Jo gyvenimas buvo tuo užpildytas, ir jis sakė esąs neapsakomai laimingas.
Kas yra šventa?
Ne tai, ką sukūrė protas, ranka ar jūra.
Simbolis niekada nėra tikrovė. Žodis „žolė“ nėra lauko žolė. Žodis „Dievas“ nėra Dievas.
Žodis niekada neapima visumos, kad ir koks gudrus būtų aprašymas.
Žodis „šventa“ pats savaime neturi reikšmės. Jis tampa šventas tik savo santykyje su kažkuo – tikru arba įsivaizduojamu.
Tai, kas tikra, nėra proto sukurti žodžiai. Tikrovės, tiesos, mintis negali paliesti.
Ten, kur yra stebėtojas, tiesos nėra.
Mąstytojas ir jo mintis turi baigtis, kad būtų tiesa.
Tuomet tai, kas yra, tampa šventa.
Ten, kur nėra meilės, nėra nieko švento. Meilė yra visuma, ir joje nėra jokio susiskaldymo.
From The Beauty of Life – Krishnamurti’s Journal
-
It was a nice cottage in the country, with a lawn that had been mown, rolled and weeded for many a year. The whole place was well looked after, prosperous and joyful. Behind the house was a small vegetable garden; it was a lovely place with a gentle stream running beside, making hardly a sound. The door opened and was held back by a statue of the Buddha, kicked into place. The owner was totally unaware of what he was doing; to him it was a doorstop. You wondered if he would do the same with a statue he revered, for he was a Christian. You deny the sacred things of another, but you keep your own. The beliefs of another are superstitions, but your own are reasonable and real. What is sacred? On the beach, he had picked up a piece of seawashed wood in the shape of a human head. It was made of hardwood, shaped by the waters of the sea, cleansed by many seasons. He had brought it home and put it on the mantelpiece; he looked at it from time to time and admired what the sea had done. One day, he put some flowers around it, and then it happened every day; he felt uncomfortable if there were not fresh flowers every day, and gradually that piece of shaped wood became very important in his life. He would allow no one to touch it except himself; they might desecrate it; he washed his hands before he touched it. It had become holy, sacred, and he alone was the high priest of it; he represented it; it told him of things he could never know by himself. His life was filled with it, and he was, he said, unspeakably happy. What is sacred? Not the things made by the mind or hand or by the sea. The symbol is never the real; the word ‘grass’ is not the grass of the field; the word ‘God’ is not God. The word never contains the whole, however cunning the description. The word ‘sacred’ has no meaning by itself; it becomes sacred only in its relationship to something, illusory or real. What is real is not the words of the mind; reality, truth, cannot be touched by thought. Where the perceiver is, truth is not. The thinker and his thought must come to an end for truth to be. Then that which is, is sacred. Where there is no love, there is nothing sacred. Love is whole, and in it there is no fragmentation.
From The Beauty of Life – Krishnamurti’s Journal
-
It was a nice cottage in the country, with a lawn that had been mown, rolled and weeded for many a year. The whole place was well looked after, prosperous and joyful. Behind the house was a small vegetable garden; it was a lovely place with a gentle stream running beside, making hardly a sound. The door opened and was held back by a statue of the Buddha, kicked into place. The owner was totally unaware of what he was doing; to him it was a doorstop. You wondered if he would do the same with a statue he revered, for he was a Christian. You deny the sacred things of another, but you keep your own. The beliefs of another are superstitions, but your own are reasonable and real. What is sacred? On the beach, he had picked up a piece of seawashed wood in the shape of a human head. It was made of hardwood, shaped by the waters of the sea, cleansed by many seasons. He had brought it home and put it on the mantelpiece; he looked at it from time to time and admired what the sea had done. One day, he put some flowers around it, and then it happened every day; he felt uncomfortable if there were not fresh flowers every day, and gradually that piece of shaped wood became very important in his life. He would allow no one to touch it except himself; they might desecrate it; he washed his hands before he touched it. It had become holy, sacred, and he alone was the high priest of it; he represented it; it told him of things he could never know by himself. His life was filled with it, and he was, he said, unspeakably happy. What is sacred? Not the things made by the mind or hand or by the sea. The symbol is never the real; the word ‘grass’ is not the grass of the field; the word ‘God’ is not God. The word never contains the whole, however cunning the description. The word ‘sacred’ has no meaning by itself; it becomes sacred only in its relationship to something, illusory or real. What is real is not the words of the mind; reality, truth, cannot be touched by thought. Where the perceiver is, truth is not. The thinker and his thought must come to an end for truth to be. Then that which is, is sacred. Where there is no love, there is nothing sacred. Love is whole, and in it there is no fragmentation.
From The Beauty of Life – Krishnamurti’s Journal
-
Kas yra šventa? Ar tai atvaizdas šventykloje, simbolis, žodis? Kur slypi šventumas? Ar tame medyje, ar toje moteryje, nešančioje sunkų nešulį?
Jūs suteikiate šventumo daiktams, kuriuos laikote šventais, vertingais ar prasmingais. Tačiau kokią vertę turi atvaizdas, išdrožtas ranka arba sukurtas minties?
Tuo tarpu ta moteris, tas medis, tas paukštis, visi gyvi dalykai, atrodo, jums turi tik laikiną ir menką reikšmę.
Jūs padalijate gyvenimą į tai, kas šventa, ir tai, kas nešventa; į tai, kas moralu, ir tai, kas amoralu.
Toks padalijimas gimdo kančią ir smurtą.
Arba viskas yra šventa, arba niekas nėra šventa.
Arba tai, ką sakote – jūsų žodžiai, mintys, giesmės – yra rimta ir tikra, arba visa tai tėra priemonė užburti protą, panardinti jį į tam tikrą susižavėjimą, kuris tampa iliuzija, ir todėl nėra rimta apskritai.
Yra kažkas šventa, tačiau tai nėra žodyje, nėra statuloje ar atvaizde, kurį sukūrė mintis.
From The Only Revolution
-
What is sacred? Is it the image in the temple, the symbol, the word? Where does sacredness lie? In that tree, or in that woman carrying a heavy load? You invest sacredness in things you consider holy, worthwhile, meaningful, but what value has the image, carved by the hand or by the mind? That woman, that tree, that bird, the living things, seem to have but a passing importance for you. You divide life into that which is sacred and that which is not, that which is immoral and that which is moral. This division begets misery and violence. Either everything is sacred, or nothing is sacred. Either what you say, your words, your thoughts, your chants are serious, or they are there to beguile the mind into some kind of enchantment, which becomes illusion, and therefore not serious at all. There is something sacred, but it is not in the word, not in the statue or the image that thought has built.
From The Only Revolution
-
What is sacred? Is it the image in the temple, the symbol, the word? Where does sacredness lie? In that tree, or in that woman carrying a heavy load? You invest sacredness in things you consider holy, worthwhile, meaningful, but what value has the image, carved by the hand or by the mind? That woman, that tree, that bird, the living things, seem to have but a passing importance for you. You divide life into that which is sacred and that which is not, that which is immoral and that which is moral. This division begets misery and violence. Either everything is sacred, or nothing is sacred. Either what you say, your words, your thoughts, your chants are serious, or they are there to beguile the mind into some kind of enchantment, which becomes illusion, and therefore not serious at all. There is something sacred, but it is not in the word, not in the statue or the image that thought has built.
From The Only Revolution
-
Kas iš tikrųjų yra šventa? Ar apskritai egzistuoja toks dalykas? Kas yra šventa, ir kas yra šventas veiksmas? Veiksmas juk ir yra gyvenimas.
Norėdami tai išsiaiškinti ne žodžiais, bet visa savo širdimi, protu ir visa savo esybe, nes suvokiate šio klausimo svarbą, turite atidėti į šalį žodį, vaizdinį, simbolį, teoriją ir žinias, kurias laikėte šventomis.
Visa tai turi būti visiškai ir galutinai palikta nuošalyje.
Galite akmenį paversti šventu ar sakraliu daiktu. Mintis gali bet ką paskelbti šventu ir sakraliu, tačiau nuo to tas dalykas nebūtinai tampa šventas.
Ar pati mintis yra šventa, kad ir kokia subtili, rafinuota, graži ar kilni ji būtų?
Ar ji nėra tik mechaninis procesas – reakcija į įvairias atminties, patirties ir žinių formas, todėl iš esmės mechaninis ir materialus reiškinys?
Galite ką nors vadinti šventu ar sakraliu. Žmogaus protas, turintis didžiulį troškimą atrasti kažką nepraeinamai gražaus, gali net pačią mintį pavadinti šventa.
Tačiau ar ji tokia yra?
Norint iš tikrųjų tai atrasti, ne tik protu, bet ir širdimi, reikia atmesti viską, ką mintis sukūrė kaip šventa: viską, ką ji sudėjo į knygas, viską, ką sukūrė žmogaus protas ar ranka.
Visa tai turi būti palikta nuošalyje, nes žmogus save apgaudinėja be galo.
Pati iliuzija tampa šventa, nes žmogus ją myli.
Mintis gali tai, kas negražu, paversti nepaprastai gražiu. Net tai, ką vadiname blogiu, ji gali paversti nuostabiu ir didingu dalyku.
Todėl, jei protas ir širdis nori atrasti, kas yra iš tiesų šventa ir kas yra iš tiesų šventas gyvenimo būdas, visa tai turi būti visiškai ir galutinai atmesta.
From Can the Mind Be Quiet?
-
What really is sacred? Is there such thing? What is sacred, and what is action that is sacred? Action being living. To find this out, not verbally but with your heart, with your mind, with your whole being, because you understand the significance of it, you must put aside the word, the image, the symbol, the theory, the knowledge that you have considered sacred. You must put aside all these completely and utterly. You can make a stone into a holy or sacred thing. Thought can make anything sacred and holy, but it is not necessarily then holy. Is thought in itself sacred, however subtle, however refined, however beautiful or noble it may be? Or is it merely a mechanical thing, a response to various forms of memories, experiences and knowledge, and therefore quite mechanistic and of matter? You can or may call something holy or sacred. The human mind, with its tremendous longing for something imperishably beautiful, may call thought itself holy. But is it? To really find out or come upon it with your heart, one must discard everything that thought has created as sacred, everything that it has put together in the form of a book, and everything it has made by the mind or by the hand. All that must be set aside because man deceives himself so endlessly. The very illusion becomes sacred because he loves the illusion. The ugly can be made most beautiful by thought. The very evil, if one can use that word, can be made the most marvellous thing. So if the mind and heart are to find what is the most sacred thing and the most sacred way of living, one must set aside all this utterly and completely.
From Can the Mind Be Quiet?
-
What really is sacred? Is there such thing? What is sacred, and what is action that is sacred? Action being living. To find this out, not verbally but with your heart, with your mind, with your whole being, because you understand the significance of it, you must put aside the word, the image, the symbol, the theory, the knowledge that you have considered sacred. You must put aside all these completely and utterly. You can make a stone into a holy or sacred thing. Thought can make anything sacred and holy, but it is not necessarily then holy. Is thought in itself sacred, however subtle, however refined, however beautiful or noble it may be? Or is it merely a mechanical thing, a response to various forms of memories, experiences and knowledge, and therefore quite mechanistic and of matter? You can or may call something holy or sacred. The human mind, with its tremendous longing for something imperishably beautiful, may call thought itself holy. But is it? To really find out or come upon it with your heart, one must discard everything that thought has created as sacred, everything that it has put together in the form of a book, and everything it has made by the mind or by the hand. All that must be set aside because man deceives himself so endlessly. The very illusion becomes sacred because he loves the illusion. The ugly can be made most beautiful by thought. The very evil, if one can use that word, can be made the most marvellous thing. So if the mind and heart are to find what is the most sacred thing and the most sacred way of living, one must set aside all this utterly and completely.
From Can the Mind Be Quiet?
-
Ar norite, kad jūsų tikėjimas būtų sustiprintas, ar norite iš tikrųjų pamatyti tikrovę – ne ją patirti, bet iš tikrųjų ją pamatyti protu ir širdimi, kurie yra itin budrūs ir aiškūs?
Tikėjimas yra viena, o matymas – visai kas kita.
Tikėjimas, kaip ir aklas pasitikėjimas, veda į tamsą. Jis nuveda jus į bažnyčią, į tamsias šventyklas ir į malonius ritualų pojūčius.
Tačiau tuo keliu nėra tikrovės; ten yra tik vaizduotė, tik įsivaizduojami papuošimai, kurie užpildo bažnyčią.
Jei nėra baimės, tikėjimas tampa nereikalingas. Tačiau jei laikotės įsikibę tikėjimo ir dogmų, baimė visada ras kelią veikti.
Tikėjimas nėra vien religinių mokymų dalykas. Jis atsiranda net ir tada, kai nepriklausote jokiai religijai.
Galite turėti savo asmeninį, išskirtinį tikėjimą, tačiau tai nėra aiškumo šviesa.
Aiškumas ateina ne iš tikėjimo, o iš tiesioginio matymo.
From The Only Revolution
-
Do you want your belief to be strengthened, or do you want actually to see reality – not experience it, but actually see it with a mind and heart that are highly attentive and clear? Belief is one thing, and seeing is another. Belief leads to darkness, as faith does. It leads you to the church, to the dark temples and the pleasurable sensations of rituals. Along that way, there is no reality; there is only fancy, the imaginative furnishings that fill the church. If you deny fear, belief is unnecessary, but if you cling to belief and dogma, fear has its way. Belief is not only according to religious sanctions; it comes into being though you may not belong to any religion. You may have your own individualistic, exclusive belief, but it is not the light of clarity.
From The Only Revolution
-
Do you want your belief to be strengthened, or do you want actually to see reality – not experience it, but actually see it with a mind and heart that are highly attentive and clear? Belief is one thing, and seeing is another. Belief leads to darkness, as faith does. It leads you to the church, to the dark temples and the pleasurable sensations of rituals. Along that way, there is no reality; there is only fancy, the imaginative furnishings that fill the church. If you deny fear, belief is unnecessary, but if you cling to belief and dogma, fear has its way. Belief is not only according to religious sanctions; it comes into being though you may not belong to any religion. You may have your own individualistic, exclusive belief, but it is not the light of clarity.
From The Only Revolution
-
Norėdamas išsiaiškinti, ar Dievas yra, ar jo nėra, turi nušluoti į šalį visą informaciją, kurią esi gavęs apie Dievą. Žmonės, kurie tau suteikė tą informaciją, galėjo klysti; todėl turi išsiaiškinti pats.
O kad galėtum išsiaiškinti pats, turi atsikratyti visų autoritetų ir suprasti visą autoriteto struktūrą bei prigimtį – ar tai būtų policijos autoritetas, valdžios autoritetas, guru autoritetas, ar tavo paties troškimų autoritetas. Visi jie turi savo vaidmenį.
Nesupratus viso to, vien tik ieškoti to, ką vadini Dievu, neturi jokios prasmės.
Dievas, jei toks yra, yra kažkas nepaprasto, ko negalima įsivaizduoti per tikėjimą ar įsitikinimus.
Tai turi atrasti pats.
Aš nesakau, ar Dievas yra, ar jo nėra.
Norėdamas tai išsiaiškinti, pirmiausia turi būti laisvas.
Londonas egzistuoja; tai faktas, fizinis faktas, kurį galima patikrinti ir ištirti, kaip kažką, ką galima pamatyti per mikroskopą.
Tu tiki Dievu todėl, kad buvai taip išauklėtas ir užaugintas tame tikėjime.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
To find if there is God or if there is no God, you must wipe away all the information you have received about God. The people who have given you information might be mistaken; you will have to find out for yourself. And to find out for yourself, you must get rid of all authority, understand the whole structure and anatomy of authority, whether the authority of the police, the authority of the government, the authority of the guru, or the authority of your own desires; they all play a part. Without understanding all this, merely to seek what you call God has no meaning at all. God is something amazing, not to be imagined by some kind of belief. You have to find out. I do not say if there is or there is not. To find out, you must be free first. There is London; it is a fact, a physical fact, like that which can be examined by a microscope. You believe in God because you have been brought up in that belief.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
To find if there is God or if there is no God, you must wipe away all the information you have received about God. The people who have given you information might be mistaken; you will have to find out for yourself. And to find out for yourself, you must get rid of all authority, understand the whole structure and anatomy of authority, whether the authority of the police, the authority of the government, the authority of the guru, or the authority of your own desires; they all play a part. Without understanding all this, merely to seek what you call God has no meaning at all. God is something amazing, not to be imagined by some kind of belief. You have to find out. I do not say if there is or there is not. To find out, you must be free first. There is London; it is a fact, a physical fact, like that which can be examined by a microscope. You believe in God because you have been brought up in that belief.
From Collected Works, Vol. 13
-
Žmonės visada ieškojo kažko, kas būtų anapus fizinio pasaulio, anapus kasdienio skausmo, kančios ir malonumo egzistavimo. Jie ieškojo kažko aukščiau – iš pradžių debesyse: griaustinis buvo laikomas Dievo balsu. Vėliau jie garbino medžius ir akmenis. Kaimų žmonės, gyvenantys toli nuo bjaurių ir brutalių miestų, iki šiol garbina akmenis, medžius ir mažus atvaizdus.
Žmogus nori sužinoti, ar egzistuoja kažkas švento. Tuomet pasirodo kunigas ir sako: „Aš tau parodysiu“, lygiai taip pat, kaip tai daro guru.
Vakarų kunigas turi savo ritualus, kartojimus, puošnius drabužius ir savo konkretaus atvaizdo garbinimą. O jūs turite savus atvaizdus.
Arba jūs niekuo tuo netikite ir sakote, kad esate ateistas.
Tačiau jūs ir kalbėtojas norite išsiaiškinti, ar yra kažkas, kas galbūt yra anapus laiko, anapus visos minties. Todėl kartu tyrinėsime, naudosime savo smegenis, protą ir logiką, kad išsiaiškintume, kas yra religija, kas yra religinis gyvenimas ir ar įmanoma gyventi religinį gyvenimą šiame šiuolaikiniame pasaulyje.
Tad išsiaiškinkime patys, kas iš tikrųjų yra religinis gyvenimas.
Tai galima suprasti tik tada, kai suvokiame, kas iš tikrųjų yra religijos, ir visa tai atidedame į šalį – nepriklausome jokiai religijai, jokiai organizacijai, jokiam guru ar vadinamajam dvasiniam autoritetui.
Nėra jokio dvasinio autoriteto. Tai vienas iš nusikaltimų, kuriuos žmonija padarė: mes išradome tarpininką tarp tiesos ir savęs.
Kai pradedate tyrinėti, kas yra religija, jūs jau gyvenate religinį gyvenimą – ne jo pabaigoje, bet pačiame tyrinėjimo procese.
Pačiame žiūrėjime, stebėjime, aptarime, abejojime ir klausimų kėlime, neturint jokių tikėjimų ar dogmų, jūs jau gyvenate religinį gyvenimą.
From Meeting Life
-
Human beings have sought something beyond the physical, beyond the everyday existence of pain, of sorrow and pleasure. They have sought something beyond, first in the clouds: the thunder was the voice of God. Then they worshipped trees, stones. Villagers far away from the ugly, beastly towns still worship stones, trees and small images. Man wants to find out if there is something sacred, and the priest comes along and says, ‘I will show you,’ just as a guru does. The Western priest has his rituals, his repetitions, his fancy dress and worship of his particular image. And you have your own images. Or you don’t believe in any of that; you say you are an atheist. But you and the speaker want to find out something that may be beyond time, beyond all thought, so we are together going to inquire, exercise our brains, our reason, our logic, to find out what religion is, what a religious life is, and whether it is possible to live a religious life in this modern world. So let us find out for ourselves what is really, truly a religious life. That can only be found out when we understand what religions actually are and put aside all that, not belonging to any religion, to any organisation, to any guru, to any so-called spiritual authority. There is no spiritual authority whatsoever; that is one of the crimes we have committed; we have invented a mediator between truth and ourselves. When you begin to inquire into what religion is, you are living a religious life – not at the end of it. In the very process of looking, watching, discussing, doubting, questioning, having no beliefs or faith, you are already leading a religious life.
From Meeting Life
-
Human beings have sought something beyond the physical, beyond the everyday existence of pain, of sorrow and pleasure. They have sought something beyond, first in the clouds: the thunder was the voice of God. Then they worshipped trees, stones. Villagers far away from the ugly, beastly towns still worship stones, trees and small images. Man wants to find out if there is something sacred, and the priest comes along and says, ‘I will show you,’ just as a guru does. The Western priest has his rituals, his repetitions, his fancy dress and worship of his particular image. And you have your own images. Or you don’t believe in any of that; you say you are an atheist. But you and the speaker want to find out something that may be beyond time, beyond all thought, so we are together going to inquire, exercise our brains, our reason, our logic, to find out what religion is, what a religious life is, and whether it is possible to live a religious life in this modern world. So let us find out for ourselves what is really, truly a religious life. That can only be found out when we understand what religions actually are and put aside all that, not belonging to any religion, to any organisation, to any guru, to any so-called spiritual authority. There is no spiritual authority whatsoever; that is one of the crimes we have committed; we have invented a mediator between truth and ourselves. When you begin to inquire into what religion is, you are living a religious life – not at the end of it. In the very process of looking, watching, discussing, doubting, questioning, having no beliefs or faith, you are already leading a religious life.
From Meeting Life
-
Religija, kaip ją paprastai suprantame, yra tikėjimų, dogmų, ritualų ir prietarų visuma. Tai stabų, talismanų ir guru garbinimas, ir mes manome, kad visa tai nuves mus į kokį nors galutinį tikslą.
Tačiau tas galutinis tikslas yra mūsų pačių projekcija; tai yra tai, ko mes norime, tai, kas, mūsų manymu, padarys mus laimingus, suteiks garantiją nemirtingai būsenai.
Įstrigęs šiame tikrumo troškime, protas sukuria religiją iš dogmų, kunigų valdžios, prietarų ir stabų garbinimo, ir ten jis sustingsta.
Ar tai yra religija?
Ar religija yra tikėjimo reikalas? Ar tai kitų žmonių patirčių ir teiginių priėmimas arba žinojimas?
Ar religija tėra moralės praktikavimas?
Juk būti moraliam yra palyginti lengva – daryti vienus dalykus ir nedaryti kitų. Galima tiesiog mėgdžioti tam tikrą moralinę sistemą.
Tačiau už tokios moralės dažnai slypi agresyvusis „aš“ – augantis, besiplečiantis, siekiantis dominuoti.
Ir ar tai yra religija?
From Life Ahead
-
Religion, as we generally know it, is a series of beliefs, dogmas, rituals, superstitions; it is the worship of idols, of charms and gurus, and we think all this will lead us to some ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is our own projection; it is what we want, what we think will make us happy, a guarantee of the deathless state. Caught in this desire for certainty, the mind creates a religion of dogmas, of priestcraft, of superstitions and idol worship, and there it stagnates. Is that religion? Is religion a matter of belief, a matter of accepting or having knowledge of other people’s experiences and assertions? Is religion merely the practice of morality? You know, it is comparatively easy to be moral – to do this and not to do that. You can just imitate a moral system. But behind such morality lurks the aggressive self, growing, expanding, dominating. And is that religion?
From Life Ahead
-
Religion, as we generally know it, is a series of beliefs, dogmas, rituals, superstitions; it is the worship of idols, of charms and gurus, and we think all this will lead us to some ultimate goal. The ultimate goal is our own projection; it is what we want, what we think will make us happy, a guarantee of the deathless state. Caught in this desire for certainty, the mind creates a religion of dogmas, of priestcraft, of superstitions and idol worship, and there it stagnates. Is that religion? Is religion a matter of belief, a matter of accepting or having knowledge of other people’s experiences and assertions? Is religion merely the practice of morality? You know, it is comparatively easy to be moral – to do this and not to do that. You can just imitate a moral system. But behind such morality lurks the aggressive self, growing, expanding, dominating. And is that religion?
From Life Ahead
-
Ar žinote, kas yra religija? Ji nėra giesmėse, ji nėra pudžos ar kitų ritualų atlikime, ji nėra skardinių dievų ar akmeninių stabų garbinime, ji nėra šventyklose ar bažnyčiose, ji nėra Biblijos ar Gitos skaityme, ji nėra švento vardo kartojime ar kokio nors kito žmonių sugalvoto prietaro sekime.
Nė vienas iš šių dalykų nėra religija.
Religija yra gerumo jausmas, ta meilė, kuri yra tarsi upė – gyva, tekanti ir amžinai judanti.
From Think on These Things
-
Do you know what religion is? It is not in the chant, it is not in the performance of puja or any other ritual, it is not in the worship of tin gods or stone images, it is not in the temples and churches, it is not in the reading of the Bible or the Gita, it is not in the repeating of a sacred name or in the following of some other superstition invented by men. None of this is religion. Religion is the feeling of goodness, that love which is like the river, living, moving everlastingly.
From Think on These Things
-
Do you know what religion is? It is not in the chant, it is not in the performance of puja or any other ritual, it is not in the worship of tin gods or stone images, it is not in the temples and churches, it is not in the reading of the Bible or the Gita, it is not in the repeating of a sacred name or in the following of some other superstition invented by men. None of this is religion. Religion is the feeling of goodness, that love which is like the river, living, moving everlastingly.
From Think on These Things
-
Tai gali įvykti tik tada, kai žinios baigiasi ir lieka grynas stebėjimas be jokios krypties. Tokia įžvalga nėra nuolatinio tyrinėjimo ar kasdienės analizės rezultatas; ji yra staigus visų žinių sustojimas ir tiesioginis kažko pamatymas.
Ši įžvalga sukelia esminį pokytį pačiose smegenų ląstelėse, kurios neša atmintį.
Kai turite įžvalgą apie prisirišimą, jūs peržengiate patį žodį, peržengiate savo reakcijas – pritarimą ar nepritarimą. Jūs matote ir stebite, kaip protas sukūrė visą šį prisirišimo procesą.
Ir jūs galite tai stebėti tik tada, kai nenorite jo atsikratyti.
Stebėti galima tik tada, kai matote, kad stebėtojas yra tai, ką jis stebi.
Stebėtojas sukūrė prisirišimą, o paskui atsiskyrė nuo jo ir mėgina jį keisti, kontroliuoti, formuoti, neigti, pakeisti ar peržengti.
Kai atsiranda tokia įžvalga, iš jos gimsta intelektas.
Nuolatinė įžvalga, neturinti formulės, neturinti išvados, kuri ją užbaigtų, yra kūrybingas veiksmas.
Nuostabu ir nepaprastai įdomu matyti, kad tada, kai yra įžvalga, minties nėra.
Mintis negali turėti įžvalgos.
Įžvalga atsiranda tik tada, kai protas neveikia mechaniškai minties struktūroje. Tik tada įmanoma tiesiogiai pamatyti.
From To Be Human
-
can take place only when knowledge has come to an end, and there is pure observation without any direction. That insight is not the result of constant examination, constant analysis day after day; it is a sudden cessation of all knowledge and seeing something directly. That insight brings about a fundamental change in the very brain cells that carry memory. When you have an insight into attachment, you go behind the word, you go behind your reactions of asserting and not asserting; you see, observe how the mind has built up this whole process of attachment. And you can only observe it when you don’t want to discard it. You can only observe when you see that the observer is that thing you are seeing. The observer has created the attachment and then disassociated himself from it and tries to change, control, shape, deny, alter, go beyond. Now, when you have an insight of that kind, out of that insight comes intelligence. This constant insight without a formula, without a conclusion that puts an end to that insight, is creative action. It is astonishingly beautiful and interesting how thought is absent when you have an insight. Thought cannot have an insight. It is only when the mind is not operating mechanically in the structure of thought that you have an insight.
From To Be Human
-
can take place only when knowledge has come to an end, and there is pure observation without any direction. That insight is not the result of constant examination, constant analysis day after day; it is a sudden cessation of all knowledge and seeing something directly. That insight brings about a fundamental change in the very brain cells that carry memory. When you have an insight into attachment, you go behind the word, you go behind your reactions of asserting and not asserting; you see, observe how the mind has built up this whole process of attachment. And you can only observe it when you don’t want to discard it. You can only observe when you see that the observer is that thing you are seeing. The observer has created the attachment and then disassociated himself from it and tries to change, control, shape, deny, alter, go beyond. Now, when you have an insight of that kind, out of that insight comes intelligence. This constant insight without a formula, without a conclusion that puts an end to that insight, is creative action. It is astonishingly beautiful and interesting how thought is absent when you have an insight. Thought cannot have an insight. It is only when the mind is not operating mechanically in the structure of thought that you have an insight.
From To Be Human
-
Our brains are damaged. For thousands of years, we have been hurt psychologically, inwardly, and that hurt is part of our brain cells, remembered hurts: the propaganda for two thousand years that I am a Christian, that I believe in Jesus Christ, which is a hurt; or I am a Buddhist, which is a hurt. So our brains are damaged. To heal that damage is to listen very carefully, to listen, and in the listening to have an insight into what is being said. Therefore, there is immediately a change in the brain cells. Therefore, there is no identification, complete and total.
From Reflections on the Self
-
Our brains are damaged. For thousands of years, we have been hurt psychologically, inwardly, and that hurt is part of our brain cells, remembered hurts: the propaganda for two thousand years that I am a Christian, that I believe in Jesus Christ, which is a hurt; or I am a Buddhist, which is a hurt. So our brains are damaged. To heal that damage is to listen very carefully, to listen, and in the listening to have an insight into what is being said. Therefore, there is immediately a change in the brain cells. Therefore, there is no identification, complete and total.
From Reflections on the Self
-
Mūsų smegenys yra pažeistos. Tūkstančius metų mes buvome psichologiškai, viduje, žeidžiami, ir tas sužeidimas yra mūsų smegenų ląstelių dalis. Tai prisimenamos žaizdos: du tūkstančius metų trunkanti propaganda, kad aš esu krikščionis, kad tikiu Jėzumi Kristumi – tai yra žaizda; arba kad aš esu budistas – tai taip pat yra žaizda.
Todėl mūsų smegenys yra pažeistos.
Išgydyti šį pažeidimą reiškia klausytis labai atidžiai – tiesiog klausytis. Ir tame klausymesi atsiranda įžvalga į tai, kas yra sakoma.
Tuomet iš karto įvyksta pokytis smegenų ląstelėse.
Todėl nebelieka tapatinimosi – visiško ir absoliutaus.From Reflections on the Self
-
Ar gali protas pamatyti, įžvelgti visą šį sąlygotumo reiškinį – temperamentą, savitumus, tai, kaip protas yra praeities ir evoliucijos rezultatas? Ne rytoj, bet dabar, akimirksniu, įžvelgti save, ir todėl leisti tam įžvalgumui atnešti savo energiją, kuri pakeičia „tai, kas yra“.
Įžvalga turi savo milžinišką energiją, kuri nepriklauso nuo jokių išorinių paskatų, ir todėl ji pakeičia tai, kas yra stebima – šiuo atveju prisirišimą.
Ar jūs turite tokią įžvalgą ir todėl tą nepaprastą energiją visiškai pakeisti savo prisirišimą?
Kad protas nebesemtų energijos iš prisirišimo, konflikto ir visų su tuo susijusių dalykų, bet turėtų savo gyvybingą energiją, nepriklausančią nuo aplinkos, kultūros ar kitų žmonių?
Pagalvokite!
Tuomet gyvenimas reikštų visai ką kita nei tai, kaip gyvename dabar – gyvendami konflikte.
From Facing a World in Crisis
-
Can the mind see, have an insight into, this whole business of conditioning, temperament, idiosyncrasy, how the mind is the result of the past, of evolution? Not tomorrow, but now, instantly, have insight into ourselves, and therefore that insight brings its own energy to transform ‘what is’. Insight has its own tremendous energy, which is not dependent on any stimuli, and therefore it transforms what is observed, which is attachment. Have you got that insight, and therefore that tremendous energy to actually change your attachment totally? So that the mind doesn’t derive its energy from attachment, from conflict, and all that, but has its own vital energy, independent of environment, of culture, of people? Come on! Then living means something quite different from the way we live now, which is in conflict.
From Facing a World in Crisis
-
Can the mind see, have an insight into, this whole business of conditioning, temperament, idiosyncrasy, how the mind is the result of the past, of evolution? Not tomorrow, but now, instantly, have insight into ourselves, and therefore that insight brings its own energy to transform ‘what is’. Insight has its own tremendous energy, which is not dependent on any stimuli, and therefore it transforms what is observed, which is attachment. Have you got that insight, and therefore that tremendous energy to actually change your attachment totally? So that the mind doesn’t derive its energy from attachment, from conflict, and all that, but has its own vital energy, independent of environment, of culture, of people? Come on! Then living means something quite different from the way we live now, which is in conflict.
From Facing a World in Crisis
-
Žmogus suvokia – jei pakankamai objektyviai save ištyrė, be jokio smerkimo ar vertinimo, jei save stebėjo – kad yra sąlygotas, tiek paviršutiniškai, tiek labai giliai.
Ir kyla klausimas: ar apskritai įmanoma išsilaisvinti ne tik iš gilaus sąlygotumo, kuris gali būti šeimos, rasės istorijos, daugelio kartų sukauptų įtakų pasekmė, tų poveikių, kurie nebuvo akivaizdūs, bet vis dėlto prasiskverbė labai giliai?
Ar protas kada nors gali būti visiškai laisvas nuo viso to?
Tai vienas klausimas.
Ir jei protas yra sąlygotas, ar jis gali pats save visiškai išlaisvinti iš sąlygotumo?
Arba – ir tai gali būti ne mažiau svarbus klausimas – ar protas gali užkirsti kelią tam, kad būtų toliau sąlygojamas, ne pasipriešinimu, ne gynyba, bet visiškai kitu būdu?
Krishnamurti čia kelia ne klausimą, kaip pakeisti vieną sąlygotumą kitu, bet ar įmanoma būti visiškai laisvam nuo viso sąlygotumo proceso. Jis kviečia ne ieškoti atsakymo teorijoje, bet pačiam tiesiogiai stebėti, kaip sąlygotumas veikia kasdieniame gyvenime – santykiuose, baimėse, troškimuose, įsitikinimuose ir reakcijose.
From The Awakening of Intelligence
-
One is aware, if one has sufficiently examined oneself quite objectively, not with any kind of condemnation or judgement, if one has observed oneself, one realises one is conditioned, superficially or in great depth. And is it at all possible not only to be free of the deep conditioning, which may be the result of the family, the whole racial accumulation, the influences which have not been obvious but nevertheless have penetrated very deeply, whether the mind can ever be free of all that? That is one question. And if it is conditioned, can the mind uncondition itself totally? Or – this may be a relevant question – can the mind prevent itself, not through resistance, from being conditioned ever?
From The Awakening of Intelligence
-
One is aware, if one has sufficiently examined oneself quite objectively, not with any kind of condemnation or judgement, if one has observed oneself, one realises one is conditioned, superficially or in great depth. And is it at all possible not only to be free of the deep conditioning, which may be the result of the family, the whole racial accumulation, the influences which have not been obvious but nevertheless have penetrated very deeply, whether the mind can ever be free of all that? That is one question. And if it is conditioned, can the mind uncondition itself totally? Or – this may be a relevant question – can the mind prevent itself, not through resistance, from being conditioned ever?
From The Awakening of Intelligence
-
If one observes that one is conditioned and says, ‘One cannot uncondition the mind,’ the problem ends. If you start out with a formula that one will never be unconditioned, all inquiry ceases; one has already resisted and answered the problem, and there it ends. Then one can only further decorate the conditioning. But if one goes into this fairly deeply and becomes aware of the whole problem, what is one to do? How does one respond if this is a very, very serious challenge, not something one just brushes aside? If it is something vital and tremendously important in one’s life, what is one’s response? If you have discovered this conditioning, what is the manner of your observation? Have you observed it for yourself, or has somebody told you about it? This is really quite an important question to answer. If you have been told about it and you say, ‘Yes, I am conditioned,’ then you are responding to a suggestion; it is not real, only a verbal concept which you have accepted, with which you agree. That is quite different from the discovery of it for yourself, for then it is tremendously vital, and you have the passion to find the way out of it.
From Beyond Violence
-
Language really doesn’t condition the brain; what does is the theory of the language, the abstraction of a certain feeling and the abstraction taking the form of an idea, a symbol, a person – not the actual person but a person imagined, or hoped for, or projected by thought. All those abstractions, ideas, conclusions, however strong, condition the brain. But the actual, like the table, never does. Take a word like ‘suffering’. That word has a different meaning for the Hindu and the Christian, but suffering, however described by words, is shared by all of us. Suffering is the fact, the actual. When we try to escape from it through a theory, or through an idealised person, or through a symbol, those forms of escape mould the brain. Suffering as a fact doesn’t, and this is important to realise. Like the word ‘attachment’: to see the word, to hold it as if in your hand and watch it, feel the depth of it, the whole content of it, the consequences of it, the fact that we are attached – the fact, not the word – that feeling doesn’t shape the brain, doesn’t put it into a mould, but the moment one moves away from it, that is, when thought moves away from the fact, that very movement away, movement of escape, is not only a time factor but the beginning of shaping the brain in a certain mould.
From Krishnamurti to Himself
-
Through self-awareness, the pattern, the copy, the habit, the conditioned thought is discovered. This perception begins to free thought-feeling from bondage, from ignorance. Through constant awareness and self-knowledge, which bring about right thinking, there is that creative stillness of reality. The craving for security brings about conditioned thought; to seek certainty is to find it, but it is not the real. Highest wisdom comes with that creative stillness of the mind-heart.
From Collected Works, Vol. 3