Less Psychology, More Philosophy

Last night, after drinking my tea, I opened one of the question-and-answer sessions of Jiddu Krishnamurti. By chance, the question asked was a concern I had carried for ten years. I took notes on the 45-minute session, to summarize it for myself as a simple narrative.

Krishnamurti has a fascinating approach to addressing a question. He breaks down a large question into smaller ones, answering each by asking still more questions. Finally, he zooms out and concludes. I find this interesting, convincing, and a helpful way to understand the core of his spiritual philosophy.

I am a teacher, and I am constantly in conflict with society's patterns and the education system. Should I give it all up? What is the right choice of living?

His answer begins with the teacher's profession, the conflict with society, and the struggle to make the right choice about how to live.

There is no simple “right living” in a society full of conflict. Society itself contains corruption, injustice, hunger, poverty, and disease. So the question becomes: can I live in a society full of conflict, while also having conflict within myself, and still live rightly? Is there a way of living without conflict?

He suggests that it is possible only when we understand the significance of living. What is living?

Living consists of two things: actions (movements) and relationships — shallow, deep, intimate, friendships, and everything in between. To understand right living, we must ask what right action and right relationship mean.

1. Relationships

What is a right relationship? Think of your typical relationship with someone. Is it right? Many people might say no, but continue in it because they do not seriously investigate why.

Why are we dependent in so many forms of relationship? Is it because we feel lonely? Because we do not trust? Dependence brings a sense of security and protection. We want to possess and be possessed. In this, Krishnamurti sees conflict.

The moment we are tied to a person, an idea, or a concept, conflict can arise. Why am I dependent on anything — a person, idea, concept, or place? To feel encouraged? To feel fulfilled?

Can we live together — maintaining our relationships — without being dependent or tied?

I love the part where he says that life is relationships. We need relationships because they are life. But how can we have relationships without dependence? His invitation is to observe objectively, without motive, the consequences of attachment.

Attachment is not simply the opposite of detachment. If we are attached and struggle to become detached, we create another conflict. There is only attachment to observe. Our minds have been conditioned to look for opposites and act according to them.

Remain with “what is,” rather than pursuing “what should be.”

For example: What is: I am angry. What should be: I should not be angry. Instead of suppressing the anger, escaping it, or chasing its opposite, simply observe the fact of it.

Consider a parent whose son has died. The parent had placed hopes in the son and now feels loneliness and despair. The philosophical invitation is to remain with the fact of the loss, and observe the attachment and loneliness without fleeing from them.

2. Actions and movements

What is right action? Is it based on principles, values, morals, projected concepts, or past experience?

We often act from the past, allowing what has happened to dictate the present and future. But is that truly action? Krishnamurti describes real action as arising from complete freedom — freedom from the weight of past and future. This is not permission to do whatever one wants, or to hurt others.

Understanding right relationship and right action brings a kind of intelligence beyond intellect. This profound intelligence, he suggests, is within everyone. It can guide how we live.

Without it, our livelihood is dictated by circumstances. With it, one can be a gardener, farmer, cook, singer, engineer, doctor — whatever one may be — without being imprisoned by status or position.

At the end of the video, he sadly asks the audience whether they will do something about it. He shakes his head: no. It demands a great deal of enquiry.

There is a way of living without conflict; and in that freedom from conflict, intelligence can show us the way to right living.

After the video

I kept thinking: How can I eliminate conflict? How can I loosen my dependence on thoughts, concepts, people, ideas, tools, and things? How can I remain with “what is,” not “what should be”?

How can I stop creating opposites and stay with the facts? How can I observe objectively, without bias, and see everything as it is? How can I stop projecting past experiences onto the present? How can I act freely, without force or prejudice, so that my actions are right and my relationships are free from conflict?

To me, this is the ultimate step on the ladder of spirituality — perhaps a place human beings need to reach.

Rest in peace, Jiddu.