J. Krishnamurti & Iris Murdoch - Brockwood Park 1984 - Dialogue 2

[@jaabaadaabaaadoo]

Sir K is just another dimension and a wonderful ego-free, beautiful human being.

[@Sidtube10]

Interesting to see K acknowledge here that he may be recipient of a special grace! And soon after tgat he says why can't all be open to receiving that grace! Very sweet!

[@evanstj5]

So interesting. Unlike most of K's other notable interlocutors, Iris Murdoch shows no sign of awe in the presence of the "master". Earnest and eager to understand, she questions respectfully. She doubts, probes and explores in ways I haven't seen the others do. And it's made all the more fascinating and useful because she does it from a Western philosophical perspective. It has to be said she struggles at times. "You are the world ..." challenges the individualistic "framework" of her thought. But bear in mind that back then in 1984 this thought would have been much less easy to comprehend - the stuff of hippy dreamers. I commend these dialogues (discussions is a better description). They might be an excellent way in to his teachings for western people especially, who concern themselves with such issues but don't know K. Easterners too, may glean something by watching a brilliant, reductive but creative European mind hard at work, trying sincerely and doggedly to fit K into her carefully crafted frames of reference. And to admirers of her work, it will doubtless enrich their appreciation of her novels and other writings.

[@juliangiulio3147]

yes, and I am sure K. appreciated this! :)

[@2808879]

Iris comes with her philosophical mindset and that's exactly what K wants her to drop and observe for herself! She's too quick and mobile. She still ends on a platonic note. Thank you.

[@bennjmin]

That remark is so nonsensical. Iris comes with her very realistic view of the world, a world in which very many people are also influencing the world in negative ways - and she sees a certain potential naïveness in ignoring that. She admires JK's approach, but what makes her beg to differ is not her "philosophical mindset" but her sense of reality.

[@kooroshrostami27]

​@@bennjmin Nevertheless you can tell she brings her traditional philosophical learnings to the conversation, subject-object dichotomy and idealism. She does acknowledge however the non-dualistic state in watching a beautiful painting and also in the Christian notion of altruistic love (the way god loves you), which rly is the same as compassion, but she relies on these traditions in order to follow. The whole point is to see anew without relying on any traditional concepts, and you can tell she is struggling to give up certain traditions of thought. For instance, she keeps insisting in the previous talk that behind the selfless state of attention must be the motive to achieve that state in order to become better. This again is contradictory: If there is the motive to achieve that state, this implies that there is the I projecting that state as a means of self-improvement, so consequently there is no selfless state. All that being said, it would be arrogant to criticize Iris for this, since we all suffer from this. She is very realistic, after all there have been a lot of people who have said in essence what K. is saying, they didn't try to be teachers or gurus, then others came along and put them up as a statue formed a religion. None of this has changed anything, the world is as chaotic and fragmented as ever, so why should it now? We have very little evidence that the human condition can be changed. It could be genetic and irreversible. In that sense she is realistic and a good sceptical counterpart to K. I know that K is often criticized for suggesting a fantastic harmonious state which is naive and goes completely against human nature, but one must not disregard the fact that K. is merely asking questions 90% of the time. We acknowledge that the human condition is that of great suffering and the question of putting an end to it is naturally of utmost importance. Then really one must either continue to ask questions or delude oneself constantly by thinking that suffering could ever end by virtue of gradual self-improvement.

[@FelippeMedeiros]

I haven’t seen him so patient

[@mikedsa]

It's amazing how different this video is from the last

[@Gaurav.P0]

@@mikedsa what last ?

[@ergobenchlab-linhazugi2320]

There are at least 200.000 years of history of human thinking.

[@ergobenchlab-linhazugi2320]

The fact is "we" never die.

[@Gaurav.P0]

Beautiful video 🤩

[@JUN2J]

Thank You !

[@nzmpa1]

love

[@katalinguakoeln]

Sie ist so kopflastig… aber wunderbar , wie das ganze Gespräch ♥️☀️

[@robertopuccianti8498]

🙏😊❤🌻

[@Ponk_80]

I wish more people could understand what he is all about.

[@Olga8888]

❤

[@nicolasdelaforge7420]

Iris is saying that if you stepped out of the stream of time/ psychology, who would be building up the world and for what reason? This is a lack in Hinduism. That's why one has to think of it as "sometimes I live the everyday life" and "sometimes there is the Atman" (or whatever you want to call it). as the Beatles said: "We can't be out of the stream. We're human".

[@inspiregrow2336]

💕💕💕💕

[@transmogrifiers]

"I am mankind." "Come and join me!" JK sounds like a math professor who went into teaching math because he was good at it and grasped it in a very young age, and cannot understand the struggle of less inclined students. A good teacher for struggling students is often one who struggled himself and remembers his struggles. In order to entirely abandon a "progressive" thinking and see the value to just keep quiet and see, and in order to understand what "keep quiet" and "see" mean, maybe we need to point out how thinking leads to going in circles and nowhere, and not only how unsuccessful it has been for solving some recurring mankind problems, but also how thinking assimilates the physical world with objective reality, and that in fact the physical world is not objective reality. The physical world and the laws of physics depend on perception and language in order to exist; perception evolves together with language; and perception and language obviously stem from the physical world. So it's all intertwined, emerging and evolving together. And so assimilating the physical world with objective reality is a mistake and an anthropocentrism. Once we see that we can be radically less confident in our physics and our logic for addressing questions about reality, then we can start to accept the possibility of different approaches.

[@Sidtube10]

Nice!!

[@Knowthyself0101]

Please provide full conversation

[@KFoundation]

This is the full conversation

[@MyPoulsen]

K seems to be quite upset for a person with a clear mind, at peace with it all. Being free of time, of all the troubles of existence, is easy, I'd say. You just leave the sordid thing. It's so easy, people do it every day, but strangely enough most folks choose to continue living no matter how incredibly hard, painful, horrible their lives are. One day all life will have vanished for sure. Problem solved. Meanwhile we all try to make the best of it for ourselves and our loved ones. K seems to have been doing all right, nice sweather and all, and will be free of time in not so long a while.

[@evanstj5]

Open your eyes and mind, my friend.

[@LordyByron]

Upset---or passionate?

[@gencshehu]

Can something eternal not be present?

[@vincent3177]

Maybe Nothingness

[@LordyByron]

I think that to be eternal is to be formless, present everywhere, always, unfathomable.

[@curewish574]

So far, everything that Krishnamurti has raised - is a difficult concept for Iris Murdoch. Why ?

[@Henort_101]

probably because, the greater the mind the more difficult it might be to break free from it. as you can see, madame stuck to figures, especially the figure of plato without giving herself a chance at merely looking without judgment at what sir krishnamurti had said .

[@evanstj5]

See my comments above. To me this is a meeting of eastern and western minds, of ways of looking at philosophy, religion, morality and so forth. K had already throughout his life, absorbed and integrated the western part, whereas Iris Murdoch seems very light on eastern thought beyond knowing "about it". However, she should not be lightly dismissed by K disciples. Neither is "better" than the other.

[@legalcenterchicago.c]

he likes for us to figure it out. 🤔 think it thru. be our own lite 💡

[@kooroshrostami27]

Some might say because evidently Iris Murdoch is influenced heavily by dualistic thinking. She often quotes plato, plato basically said that there is the sensory, perceptive world which is illusory and then there is the world of ideas which is eternal. This is the exact opposite of K.'s view. But rly we are all victim to this, our very language works like this. There is always a subject being different from the object. In every language. Pretty much everybody finds it extremely difficult to follow K. in these dialogues. They might manage, but only after having talked to him a couple of times before.

[@nicolasdelaforge7420]

what? You're his equal then? Iris is a genius.

[@ashrafulhaque8759]

Can you please let JK talk? I understand you good at asking questions.

[@Gaurav.P0]

1 % JK talking.

[@ThePianist-yt9wo]

💚