Sorry to keep posting this quoted text, but it is forcing me to rethink a few things:
from: http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamur ... 58&w=truth
There is a great deal more from the page above, but I am only 1/6 of the way through and my brain is smoking.
Jiddu Krishnamurti wrote:
When we say that learning or knowledge is an impediment, a hindrance, we are not including technical knowledge - how to drive a car, how to run machinery - or the efficiency which such knowledge brings. We have in mind quite a different thing: that sense of creative happiness which no amount of knowledge or learning will bring. To be creative in the truest sense of that word is to be free of the past from moment to moment, because it is the past that is continually shadowing the present. Merely to cling to information, to the experiences of others, to what someone has said, however great, and try to approximate your action to that - all that is knowledge, is it not? But to discover anything new you must start on your own; you must start on a journey completely denuded, especially of knowledge, because it is very easy, through knowledge and belief, to have experiences; but those experiences are merely the products of self-projection and therefore utterly unreal, false. If you are to discover for yourself what is the new, it is no good carrying the burden of the old, especially knowledge - the knowledge of another, however great. You use knowledge as a means of self-protection, security, and you want to be quite sure that you have the same experiences as the Buddha or the Christ or X. But a man who is protecting himself constantly through knowledge is obviously not a truth- seeker.
For the discovery of truth there is no path. You must enter the uncharted sea - which is not depressing, which is not being adventurous. When you want to find something new, when you are experimenting with anything, your mind has to be very quiet, has it not? If your mind is crowded, filled with facts, knowledge, they act as an impediment to the new; the difficulty is for most of us that the mind has become so important, so predominantly significant, that it interferes constantly with anything that may be new, with anything that may exist simultaneously with the known. Thus knowledge and learning are impediments for those who would seek, for those who would try to understand that which is timeless.
This honestly blows my mind. I'm pretty certain that this falls in line to some degree with being open minded and skeptical, but maybe not exactly.
This causes me to rethink my approach. Meditating with the notion (even if only at some subconscious level) that I will eventually be able to have OOBEs at will, or exist in two states at once, or experience NPMR, meet guides, etc... this assumes that these things are real, truth (arg, language is somewhat limiting). In reality though they are only assumptions and expectations. So, if one of these things does occur, is it real or is it created/projected? That fact that I did have an OOB experience (10 years before I had ever heard of them) that correlates with the experiences of many others is interesting, but if I really take a close look, it also correlates with my expectations. For example, I had read Raymond Moody's book Life After Life (among others of a similar nature) and was carrying much of that information somewhere in my brain (ie: tunnel, lightness, etc). One could call such things facts or real because X number of people have had similar experiences, but I'm not so sure that this is the correct approach in seeking Truth. I suppose this is the question then: what experiences have not been tainted by expectations or self-projected from the information already residing in my brain or from my thoughts? It would seem that they all have been. This is where I find it difficult to see Truth as something that is attainable (from my current perspective).
Jiddu Krishnamurti wrote:
Suppose you had never read a book, religious or psychological, and you had to find the meaning, the significance of life. How would you set about it? Suppose there were no Masters, no religious organizations, no Buddha, no Christ, and you had to begin from the beginning. How would you set about it? First, you would have to understand your process of thinking, would you not? - and not project yourself, your thoughts, into the future and create a God which pleases you; that would be too childish. So first you would have to understand the process of your thinking. That is the only way to discover anything new, is it not?
This is truly something that must be considered. If I wiped all such knowledge from my brain, understanding the process of my thinking would in fact seem to be the place to start. It seems that the fact that I think and have thought is the one thing that I can call real. As Descartes noted, "I think, therefore I am." Starting there, with that one thing, would seem to be the approach toward truth. The problem is of course doing a data dump of the brain. I'm pretty sure Tom, at some point, mentioned having no expectations in regards to meditation, right? Perhaps the only way to experience/find/know Truth is to fully shut down the one thing that can be called real, thought. That would seem to be the only way to have a clear, untainted view (again, language...) of Truth. (it is no wonder spiritual leaders talk in proverbs, metaphors and models! Even "spiritual leaders" does not seem like the right phrase. Anyway...)
Shutting off the brain/thoughts is no easy task, but certainly a theme within many forms of meditation.
Stating, "take me to my guides", in a lucid dream seems somewhat appropriate. But the idea that the resultant experience is a projection of my thoughts and expectations and maybe not just an interpretation of data (no offense fellow MBTers) makes me wonder if I should just close my lucid dream eyes and try
to shut off all thought. In reality, I will probably be giddy as usual and say to myself, "wow, this is amazing! Fly!" Something to work on I suppose :)
Truth seeking seems to be a sticky business. The brain (VR or not) and our thoughts are powerful things that are not easily controlled. I, being a seeker, having both brain and thoughts, am not so sure that I can be fully trusted.
When does experience fully precede thought? When is it not tainted by expectations, information, and our collective past?
P.S. Please understand that I am attempting to challenge MBT in all of this. That is not my goal. Off the record, my hunch is still that the core purpose or importance of MBT is not so much related to the model, but instead in the notion of finding out for ourselves with an attitude of open minded skepticism. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure this dose not imply going out and proving the model right or wrong. It seems to serve as a spark to lite the fire under our backsides to seek Truth. That's just my humble opinion though. Thanks to Tom and MBT, my biscuits are burnin'!