That is why we have created a society in the hands of myriad experts (and driven leaders, like the new U.S. President, Barack Obama).
We distrust simple things and people who have no authority, academic standing or established social position. Can we take in the statement that by actually paying full attention and listening to what is being said (ie, to the reflected mirror of the talks) that we can change?
Is not someone who is actively listening, also learning? You cannot learn by accumulating knowledge, as life is new all the time. This is a very difficult aspect to see — that all knowledge, even from past experiences, must end so that one can see anew in the present. The accumulator is the self, and the self is the antithesis of learning.
To learn, the state of mind has to be in a position where it doesn't know, where it demands to find out.
All the past is a burden that holds back this state of mind.
The word means: 'the quality of unselfish concern for the welfare of others.' (Not to be confused with empathy, which is a feeling of closeness to another whose feelings are recognized and identified with.)
Can a self-centered mind take a premeditated action that is entirely unselfish?
Do the carers, charity workers, social workers, doctors, psychologists, and philanthropists do their work out of unselfish concern, or is there always the taint of what do (can) I get out of this?
For instance, if a social worker says he feels good by tending to or giving his time to others, is not the primary motive this reward of feeling good about themselves — which is pleasure?
The minute you start mulling over or delaying whether to take action or not, behind this thinking process — whether overt or hidden — is the primary motive:
'What can I get out of this'?
Even so-called necessary practical thought about everyday life matters — does all this have an element of gain in it, an ambition to achieve something, or live up to an idealized image?
Indeed, can thought be without motive at all?
Do we not listen in order to get something out of it?
With the talks, are we listening without any desire whatsoever, or is there something we want at the end of it — enlightenment, freedom from suffering, becoming an authority, etc?
Can we listen completely and dispassionately, which means to listen entirely objectively, indifferent to any desire or bias? [source]
Killing the Messenger
Is Thought Aware of Movement?
From a Wider Perspective
Arise from the Illusion