Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Dan McDermott's Forum Posts

Forum: General Discussion

Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 1453 in total
Topic: What is the true function of the brain? Taken from A Quiet Space Thu, 24 Oct 2019

Jack Pine wrote: it is not thinking real hard that is going to lead to "truth".

Investigating, inquiring, experimenting is not "thinking real hard" (though it could be) but when someone tries to share those questions, insights,etc., using words, it might sound like that. And also this idea of something or other "leading" to the truth needs to be questioned in oneself doesn't it? Truth like freedom is always at the beginning not the end as K. so often said.

Topic: What is the true function of the brain? Taken from A Quiet Space Thu, 24 Oct 2019

Jack Pine wrote: K. The question is not with what should the mind be occupied but can the mind free itself from trivialities?

First it has to realize its own "triviality", doesn't it? Without that happening, it will always find a 'hiding place' in itself that it feels is not trivial...and will peek out from that place making judgements, condemning, feeling righteous, etc. A perfect example of this in the news yesterday is this 'brain' with a canister of bear spray attacking a peaceful group of brains and justifying it by calling them, "libtards and commies"...Pretty trivial and pretty dangerous.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Wed, 23 Oct 2019

idiot ? wrote: But discussing how to get rid of it with people would be helpful for resolving it.

Hire a 'snake charmer'... they supposedly know how to do it, don't they?

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Mon, 21 Oct 2019

Sean Hen wrote: Are there other ways in which we can expand our consciousness without running the risk of experiencing trauma?

I'm looking at this in myself Sean as not a matter of the "expansion" of consciousness which would be somehow improving it but seeing it as it is now in what you could call its limited state, with the pettiness, fears, anxiety, conflicts, etc. By not seeing how I am, the whole picture, I don't see how there could be a radical change. Without that 'totality', there could only be attempts to make myself more 'secure', more protected...Anyway that, wrong or right, is how I'm approaching this idea. So, I can't 'know' what radical change means but k.'s idea of 'negation' rather than 'inflation' say, seems right: a dissolving of the 'structure', the self-protective 'wall' that the brain has mistakenly assembled and fortifies in itself. Regarding exercise , I think stretching the muscles of the body to keep them supple is very important and I recall K. saying when asked about his daily yoga routine that that was his reason for doing it.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sun, 20 Oct 2019

One Self wrote: Is that not a wastage of energy and time to register everything that happens during the day?

I'm not clear what it means for the 'brain to register'...does it mean to store into memory? If so why is it doing that? Is it some sort of self-protective action?

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sun, 20 Oct 2019

One Self wrote: Is there a way of life that attachments don't form in the first place.

I don't think there is a way of life since we can become 'attached' to anything it's the 'spice of life'. And it seems that to not be attached would be a very dull, very cold, lonely life. So attachment gives much pleasure, much comfort and security as well as pain but why talk about giving it up? I'd say the reason for that lies in the fact that the attachments are the work of the 'self'. It is the 'self', the 'me and mine' that craves these connections, The 'attachment' is there but is there any true relationship? Is the self capable of real relationship or are its reasons to be attached and identified, ones of fear of loneliness, possession, greed, etc? If the brain clearly saw the 'mistake' of being identified with anything, like with a poisonous snake, it wouldn't go there. But it obviously doesn't, it puts up with the pain to have the pleasure...So as K. I think is saying, running from ones attachments, conditionings, whatever they are, only strengthens them.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sun, 20 Oct 2019

idiot ? wrote: And the particular conditioning being discovered is relevant to the present situation. That's part of what K is saying in Commentaries On Living, isn't he?

Isn't it our main conditioning, that we 'must' be attached somehow, somewhere always to (or against) something or someone? To not be attached, identified with, (or against) anything is 'un-thinkable' isn't it? But that is what K. is proposing, is he not, that our attachment is 'slavery', our identification with the 'known' is bondage, the 'self' (the 'I' "unit") is "evil"...'Thought' continues its relentless movement rather than face the 'void' it imagines there will be if it were to become silent, if it ceased to no longer strengthen the illusory 'self'. Fear of the unknown?

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sun, 20 Oct 2019

Jack Pine wrote: Dan, if we're going to discuss this then let's discuss this without constant interruptions of inane comments. OK?

I didn't see what was posted as an interruption Jack, it's all connected: conflict, attachment, identification, all a result of a conditioned brain.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sun, 20 Oct 2019

Attachment is key isn't it? The 'conditioning' we underwent was the attempt to 'attach' us to this or that person, ideal, religion, ism, etc.,...and what K. is saying is that any attempt to escape our conditioned state is futile. That is where there needs to be vigilance, I'd say, because we attempt to escape without realizing that we are doing so. And it is a strange moment to not escape but just be with yourself, as you are...

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sun, 20 Oct 2019

Can my brain, your brain or the Spanish or English or Dutch brain discard the safety and security it has settled for? Seeing that the 'holding on' to what it has settled for, has and is, causing such destruction? Society has allowed a place for all the mischief, even lauded it...but can we question it? Can we look at the whole situation in a different light?... That we, each of us, have settled for these tiny 'prisons' we inhabit and perpetuate and live out our lives in.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sat, 19 Oct 2019

Jack Pine wrote: do you have any comment to the information you posted about neuro-connections and my response to it. I thought it was a fairly interested subject to inquire into a bit further. What do you think?

Thank you for your response to my post about the brain's part in all this. Rather than a neurologist's view on all this, I was interested in a layman approach. We both (all) have a brain(s) and it's pretty much the same one. We've always heard since childhood that only 10% percent of it is used. Did we ever ask "why" is that so? Why such a small amount? And why do these brains bring about such differences in each of us? Is it that they have become small conditioned 'boxes' and that brings about these differences? And without these 'boxes', these individual 'I's, this narrow, limited circuitry, would humanity have the possibility to not be all over the place: killing, cheating, torturing, grabbing, loving,helping etc.? Can we go into this as first-hand 'owners of these three organs: the reptilian, the animal, and the neo-cortex, (intellectual) brains? And leave the scientific work of the 'experts' out?

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sat, 19 Oct 2019

Sean Hen wrote: If we just repeat truths that we don't understand then the original truth of the statement is diminished, surely.

Dan: This is obviously true Sean and I think that it is a temptation for all of us interested in these teachings. That by repeating something you've heard or read, that that means that you've understood it. Or that by repeating something, that that will 'lead' to understanding...But when there is an actual understanding or 'insight' into the meaning of something and is actually 'seen' in yourself, that's where the discernment between 'repeating' something and 'seeing' the actual truth in oneself comes clear. I may see something and use K. words to express it. Because perhaps they describe the thing seen so perfectly...and then they are 'my' words...I think that it's a waste of time to judge whether what one says is actual or from imitation. We can't know that about another, hard enough to discern it in ourselves.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Sat, 19 Oct 2019

I would state it simply: 'transformation' is ceasing to meet the present moment ( the "what is") with psychological baggage, judgements, likes, dislikes, etc. from the past. Transformation is the ending of the thinker/thought duality.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Thu, 17 Oct 2019

Here is something different but related to 'transformation' I think. I watched recently a report about psilocybin being administered in a controlled medical environment...I was struck with the result one woman had who had stage 3 cancer of some kind. To look and listen to her after her experience was over, the session under the drug had 'transformed' her. As a result of what she had experienced psychologically, her intense anxiety had disappeared and she saw life and her own situation in a new way...My guess (and from my own personal experience) is that her transformation will not last. Why I'm bringing this up is what the researchers found with these experiments. That under the psilocybin the brain made more connections within itself. There was a side by side of a before and after brain scan photos and there was this dramatic increase in connections after the drug. The question that arose in me and maybe others have a view on this, the 'before' brain on the left is 'stuck' in certain grooves and patterns. It functions but it suffers, it fears etc. The 'after' brain is 'freed' from its usual routines, ruts, etc and seeing 'things' in new ways, frees itself from the fears and anxieties that were the result of its limited functioning that the 'before' brain lived and 'put up' with...So is it that 'freedom' then lies in the physical brain not being as limited as it has been conditioned to be? If that is so and given that drugs are not the way, how does this increased connectivity happen? If I can connect K. to is that by seeing totally the 'limited' functioning of our brain without any judgement or desire to 'change' it, these new connections will take place naturally by the brain itself? Because any judging or desire to change what is choicelessly seen is simply another 'pattern' by the limited patterns already formed? So unless the 'self/psychological thought' is seen in its 'actuality', the brain stays 'stuck' there...its 'potential' stifled?

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Thu, 17 Oct 2019

idiot ? wrote: Full, complete seeing is transformation, is change. And my saying so says zero about me.

Can I listen to another speaking about all this without any judgement whatsoever? Not because 'judgement is 'bad' and I want to be 'nonjudgmental', but because judgement (and defending my judgement) is what I've been conditioned to do since childhood. Because I understand that 'judging' comes between what is being said (posted) and the simple awareness of the words themselves. If I understand that the 'description is not the described', that the 'words' can never convey the 'truth'... Having an 'insight' and using K. words to convey it to another can be 'judged' as 'imitation' but you can't know, you can be suspicious and challenge the speaker, call him or her a phony. But why? Why not listen and let it go? Point out how you see it and let it go? It occurred to me this morning that 'defending' a 'teaching', any teaching, is how the bloody, tortured trail of 'heresy, 'blasphemy' begins. The Crusades, the Inquisitors, the Isis fighters, the Nationalists... all the self-righteous killing.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Wed, 16 Oct 2019

Sean Hen wrote: It's all very well for Krishnamurti to say this, but if someone else says it, what does it imply? I don't know the answer to this question.

Well why doesn't it 'imply' that they have indeed seen the 'truth' in a particular moment and wish to share that with others?

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Wed, 16 Oct 2019

Jack Pine wrote: I think most of us understand what K is pointing out but is it an actual reality for us as it apparently was for K?

I question using K. as a model for what we ordinary humans are capable of. I see him as a very special case. A child who somehow escaped being conditioned and then was treated by those around him in a very unique manner. He 'pointed out' what he saw as Man's problem, as he said he didn't bring a 'message'. But he said experimentation, investigation was essential into oneself because without self-knowledge, we would stay in the 'security' of the traps we had grown up in and assimilated. That the only possible freedom would come from that awareness and understanding of the 'walls' we had unwittingly built around ourselves...I don't care what others do or say...I can't know anything about them. It just seems a shame to waste time on anything other than getting to the bottom of oneself.

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Wed, 16 Oct 2019

idiot ? wrote: Of course. And that is why the question, "Are you transformed?" both contains false assumptions and is accusatory.

Yes I'm not disagreeing with you but wanted to state that this false 'understanding' of transformation and enlightenment has existed since time immemorial and has been used as a means, in the case of 'religious' beliefs, to exploit and to confuse. Especially in the sense that : "if you do this, you'll get that"...

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Wed, 16 Oct 2019

Jack Pine wrote: K was not teaching transformation but understanding which may lead to transformation.

It's good I'd say to air this thing about 'transformation' out. A good use of the forum. We've gotten from the culture that 'transformation' is a state to be attained. That it is out there waiting and that if you came upon the 'right' teaching, 'right' guru, etc., you might 'become' transformed, enlightened...the trouble with that notion as I now see it is, that it admits 'time', psychological time. But transformation can only be in the moment, the moment the truth is seen, the moment the false is seen...there is no-one or nothing that can 'teach' me to see that, do can be pointed out to me but the seeing can only be done by me. So no-one can truthfully say that "I am transformed" because as someone pointed out here, that is already in the past and transformation, as the truth, can only be found can only exist, in the moment

Topic: On Relationships and Conflict Thu, 10 Oct 2019

idiot ? wrote: One more thing: to notice that you are in conflict is touch your own conditioning. Conflict always points to your conditioning if you look really, really closely. But we don't like to do that, do we?

Yes, any 'things' in the consciousness will be a source of conflict. Because they will be the past meeting the 'what is', the now. That is the radical teaching we stumbled upon. But the 'teaching' or maybe better, the 'pointing out' doesn't empty the consciousness, that is left to us. 'Holding on' IS conflict. Holding on IS fear.

Topic: Meetups in Brussels Mon, 07 Oct 2019

It seems irresponsible, negligent, that 'kinfonet' has for some reason allowed this general forum to exist without someone who cares about Krishnamurti's work, to be overseeing, moderating, what is being posted here. This is all too childish, it needs to be attended to. Or so it seems to me.

Topic: Meetups in Brussels Wed, 18 Sep 2019

As I'm seeing it, the most insidious 'authority' is oneself when I say "I know" in regards to the 'truth'...what I 'know' is the past and the past is not the 'truth'. The truth is , must, always be the immediate present, mustn't it?

Regarding the other forms of 'authorities' like the traffic controller, forum moderator, etc, maybe a more accurate way to see them would be as 'flow facilitators'? They are tasked with trying to keep things from 'bumping' into one another?

Topic: Meetups in Brussels Wed, 18 Sep 2019

Sean Hen wrote: When you join a forum there are usually a set of guidelines which you agree to respect.

The 'authority' that K. was speaking about was the one that said "this is the method to be free of the known". Do this, read this, listen to this, follow what I say, etc. and that will 'set you free'... He wasn't speaking about the 'authority' of the air traffic controller or the traffic cop or a forum moderator, was he?

Topic: How does one go to the very source of thought? Fri, 02 Aug 2019

Sean Hen wrote: Can we communicate here without always using past experience and knowledge as the source of what we write?

There is an interesting discussion regarding "negative thinking" going on on Clive's forum. 'Negative thought' can't be understood in the usual way or even defined but K. went into it at great length. What I get from it, that is new for me is the suggestion that the mind is enslaved in what he calls "positive thought"....And the 'seeing' of that enslavement is negative thought. Also that the mind can 'think' when freed from 'positive thought'...but it is a different kind of thought. And nothing can be done (in a positive sense?) to bring this about. Interesting and baffling. This from today's QOTD probably refers to it:

K. The mind is cunning and subtle in its self-defence, and it must discern for itself the illusory nature of self-protection. This means that you must think and act completely anew. You must liberate yourself from the net of false values which environment has imposed upon you. There must be utter nakedness. Then there is immortality, reality.

Topic: How does one go to the very source of thought? Wed, 31 Jul 2019

Sean Hen wrote: So absolute clarity does seem crucial in thought coming to an end for a given moment.

For psychological thought to come to an end, which also means for psychological time to come to an end, doesn't there have to be an 'absolute clarity' as to what thought/time is? And how it creates the chaos we live in. How it divides us through the creation of an individual 'me', a 'self'? Does that 'clarity' come about through 'insight'? From outside of thought? Or does thought become aware of itself, of its own movement?...To communicate here, we have to think, to use words, but can we do that and not get lost in them...remember that they, whether Spanish or English, are only symbols?

Topic: How does one go to the very source of thought? Wed, 31 Jul 2019

Sean Hen wrote: When you actually say I don't know, and you mean it, not say "Well, I'll find out" ....... But when you are absolutely clear that you don't know, what happens to the movement of thought? ....... The activity of thought comes to an end for the moment."

So he seems to be speaking of a clarity that is not of thought. He talks of this quality of absolute clarity. There is a clear seeing that "I don't know". Isn't this what he is saying?

That is the way I see it, that thought when it realizes it definitely does not have the answer, it doesn't search...It is that "absolute clarity" that is missing then, isn't it? because thought starts right up again, oblivious to the fact that it is in the 'wrong place' and creating conflict and misery...oblivious to the fact that it is the source of chaos.

Topic: How does one go to the very source of thought? Wed, 31 Jul 2019

Sean Hen wrote: After so many years of living in the field of thought and the known, how can we suddenly not know? We understand, at least intellectually, that thought is always limited and an obstruction to being in contact with "what is". Perhaps that is the starting point.

Thought can never "not know' can it?... in the same way that water can never be dry...thought is knowing and no matter how it twists and turns it will always be what it is, the past. Can it cease when it realizes that it is a 'screen' between one's perception and the world. That it distorts the world according to how we have been conditioned from childhood to now. It has created itself as an 'entity', an ongoing concern like a "corporation" (Bohm's comment in the latest John R. post) and there is no reason that it can't dissolve itself totally and be still. But it has made itself 'self-perpetuating' and any attempt it makes to be 'still' only creates another movement in a different direction. So as is suggested, is it fear of its own demise that keeps the wheels spinning? The 'image' of itself (me) as 'not-being' that is so terrifying that we put up with it?

Topic: How does one go to the very source of thought? Tue, 30 Jul 2019

Way better than those Bohm and Shainberg discussions.

Topic: How does one go to the very source of thought? Wed, 17 Jul 2019

Huguette . wrote: But it only shows the strength of the belief, not the truth.

That is the 'problem' with 'truth'. K. has said it is 'what is'. But for most I think, it is that 'truth' is what one believes it to be. We have imbued, invested the world with 'meaning', there was none here before us... What is of 'value' and 'significant' is what we say, think, believe is of value and significance. It is completely subjective. That has led to great division and bloodshed among us. 'Truth', the word, implies something fixed, but we know, if the word is to have any sense at all, it can't be that. 'Truth' has to be 'alive', vibrant, moving, timeless etc. K's "What is", seems to point at that.

Topic: How does one go to the very source of thought? Wed, 17 Jul 2019

When it comes to the 'psyche', there always seems to be a pointing at the necessity of a 'vacancy' there, or non-occupation, or a 'not-knowing' or 'silence' which is impeded by the activity and occupation of thought. Is self-knowledge then an awareness of what is taking up the 'space' of the psyche at any given moment? It makes logical sense doesn't it that one is not meeting and cannot meet the moment if one is occupied, hence seeing the Now through the filter of past experience (thought)?

Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 1453 in total