Do a search for books on Amazon about death. You will not find much of substance. One other book of substance on the subject I did find is Deepak Chopra's "Death: The Burden of Proof," a wonderful book which looks at death via knowledge, theory, speculation, and mythological parables. Chopra clearly conveys the sense that death is now; it is just another dimension of now that is unavailable to immediate perception.
Krishnamurti agrees that death is now; but claims it IS available to immediate perception. Because we avoid immediate perception and instead are preoccupied with thought, death remains unknown. In other words: knowledge, theory, speculation, and mythological parables are actual hindrances in learning about death. It is because we cling to these forms of psychological continuity and avoid direct perception, which is momentary and has an end, that we do not directly perceive death, which is just another, and larger, ending. Note that K. is saying that it is psychological thought, thought as self concern, not technological thought, that is a hindrance to understanding death.
According to K., preoccupation with psychological continuity prevents us from knowing life as well as death. We are constantly ignoring the newness of the present and fitting it into the past. Another way we ignore the present is through psychological becoming: the present is important only as a means. I may not have or amount to much now; but in the future I will acquire, achieve. Obviously if I am to become something greater, then I don't want to even consider death until after I have fulfilled my dreams.
K. has nothing good to say about what continues in time. To him what continues is either dead, like memory, or in a process of decay. Although his language seems strong here, I don't think he's negating memory as such. It is just that memory or idea should not be more important than what is actually present and true. K. claims that there is no security and nothing permanent; therefore to cling to what continues creates fear of death.
But with the dropping of the continuing, K. claimed that life and death are no longer experienced as separate. There is constant renewal; and fear ends. K. claimed that, psychologically, death did not exist for him as a future event in time; only the present concerned him. One can find similar attitudes towards the future expressed in the YOUTUBE videos of Eckhart Tolle and Mooji. K. also claimed to have experienced what lies beyond time. In one talk he seems to negate the idea of reincarnation leading ultimately to union with the Hindu world-soul, Brahman; but to my mind, K.'s reality beyond time (and beyond all other categories) seems similar to Brahman as well as to Kant's noumenon prior to all phenomena. To K., this ultimate reality is always experienced as utterly new and cannot be captured by memory and described or analyzed.
"Being with Dying" by Joan Halifax is another very good work on death. "Being with Dying" is more practical in the sense of offering specific meditations to practice in a life-long preparation for dying. Her work also offers training in helping the dying in a hospice setting. Comparing "Being with Dying" to K.'s work might intensify the reader's doubts about how practical K.'s message is. At first glance, K.'s message sounds as radical as Christ's injunction "If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."
But I think what K. is saying relates well to Halifax' message. She is a Zen teacher. Talking about sitting meditation (zazen), she comments that students often start this practice full of ambition to attain special states of mind. As they mature, they come to realize that just sitting in awareness is the goal. Expanding on Halifax' comment: awareness is there at the beginning; but is conditioned by thoughts, many of them assumptions we are not even conscious of. Gradually our assumptions about life are discarded and the mind becomes quiet. Then there is a fresh response to circumstances based upon direct perception rather than habitual egoic thought patterns.
By all means read Chopra's and Halifax' works, which I highly recommend. That said, I believe K.'s work is a unique and inexhaustible masterpiece.
THE KRISHNAMURTI APPROACH TO INQUIRY AS APPLIED TO DEATH
Interesting as the book is, one is left feeling that the subject remains as nebulous as before. How exactly does one experience death while still alive?
K. had a well-defined approach to human problems such as fear, desire, and death; and for K., that approach was more important that the subject under examination; In this book K. does not specifically spell out his approach; but it is explicitly spelled out in his book "On Fear;" with important aspects of his approach mentioned in other of his works as well.
K.'s suggestions for looking at death are quite consistent; but are not a formal system or method, for systems and methods are analytical and step by step, while K.'s approach involves simple, direct, and immediate perception of the feeling-tone (not the associated thoughts) evoked by the consideration of one's ending. His suggested approach to a situation seems almost like the innocence of a child's, except that it involves sustained attention and passion (which is not the same as the application of effort through time towards a self-projected goal).
Here is his approach (this list contains suggestions from his other books as well as this one):
. We must learn to look at the situation directly, not with remembered associations or events.
. We must realize that we are not separate from the situation and that any attempt to control or run away from it will merely result in conflict
and/or fear.
. During each moment, we must look at the situation as a totally new and unknown phenomenon, not accumulating knowledge or experience, which is
fragmentary. When our awareness is not total, then the situation leaves a conditioning residue, such as an image in memory.
. We should approach the situation as concretely as if we were touching a table.
. We should approach the situation with some intimacy and warmth, not as if we are separate from what we are seeing. "The observer is the observed" is a
typical saying of his.
. We must stay in the moment, not imagining that we are progressing towards some goal whereby the negative aspects of the situation have been left behind
or banished. "The solution is in the problem, not away from it" is another saying of K.'s.
. We must approach the situation with receptive awareness, not concentration and effort. Concentration and effort are exclusive and progressive, while
receptive awareness is inclusive and immediate.
. We should observe our responses to the situation rather than trying to shape them. We can't get rid of our conditioning by trying to modify it
according to some idea or ideal. "Seeing is acting" and " The seeing of it is the ending of it" are two of his sayings that apply here.
Because his approach is so radically direct, there is nothing for the mind to grasp; so looked at from an analytical standpoint, it may seem nebulous. But K. would argue that grasping or apprehending are conditioned responses to projected images, not qualities of simple, direct awareness. Consider the fact that awareness is the alpha and omega of Eastern thought. If K.'s approach makes sense within that context, one can experiment with it; that is the only way one can understand it.
