Krishnamurti was asked the following question: "With what should the mind be occupied?"

Here is how i answered the same question.

------

Let me start out by saying that i "absolutely love" your question: "with what should the mind be occupied?"

I was sitting on my front porch one beautiful quiet afternoon looking out on nature, and i asked myself the same question.  I ended up writing a few "poetic sutras" that dealt with this one particular issue.  They follow: (the first one i belief i have already shared as part of this Krishnamurti series)

------ 

Consciousness

Once i was thinking upon the issue

"That all we know

Is nothing more Than the things 

That had passed previously

Through our consciousness"

Based upon that:

I began to wonder 

What my next thought should be.

But just at that same moment

A truck with a bad muffler

Drove past my serene environment.

After a few seconds, i began to laugh.

------

And that in a nutshell is the dilemma that Krishnamurti was talking about the mind.  It is always processing something additional, adding to our cornucopia of mind junk.  How can you, think ahead, when you are always getting bombarded from events outside of your purview?

Your question as to what the mind should be occupied, almost by the question itself, makes it sound like you understand that the mind is full of trivialities, just like Krishnamurti (and the truck with a bad muffle) were telling us.  And you want to know either (1) how to stop the flow of trivialities; or (2) how to focus through the trivialities to find the one thing that is important.

Well, let me tell you something.  You can do number one, but you cannot do number two.

-------

Experiences, which lead to memory, all come from the right side of the equation in the "universe of all things".  By their very nature, therefore, all experiences are less than pure (at least less pure than things on the left side of the equation), and thus by their very nature, experiences do not represent real truth, but instead some "trivial" (significantly less important) truth that is inappropriate with cosmos consciousness, the Buddha/Jesus/Mohammad mind, enlightenment.

So, in the end, Krishnamurti is right in his one way of thinking.  If your goal is enlightenment, you should not be thinking about what you should be thinking about, but instead you should stop thinking altogether.  That would seem to make sense.  A busy mind cannot be a "quiet" mind.  And a busy mind is not an enlightened mind.

I can accept that, but my rub is this.  If shutting down the mind is all that we have to do, why are we wasting all this time talking about all kinds of other things than simply shutting down the mind.  After all, in my scheme of things, all you have to do is recognize that there is a Creator and every living creature or thing has a smidgen of the Creator's spirit (i.e., a soul) that is attached to its body/mind.

In my scheme, you reach enlightenment by recognizing your soul and putting it in "sole" control, thus decoupling the mind from action, which is essentially the same thing as Krishnamurti's "slowing down the mind".

--------

All is good in the world when Krishnamurti and i agree on things, which is essentially all the time.  Just the same i did write other poetic sutras that i think answer your question in a different way than the above.  I would like to share those with you now (they are part of a section that i called Loose Ends -- Two, in my book called Before Monarchs Flap Their Wings):

Your next thought

Must be created.

It is not just sitting somewhere

Waiting to be picked up.

The foundation for any thought

Should be Love

The foundation for any thought

Is Love.

Love is a Pareto Optimum.

An investment in Love

Will Compound.

Love Lives.

Hate Dies.

------

I hope you find something from the above that serves to address your question appropriately.

.