Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
General Discussion | moderated by Dev Singh

Clive aren't you being presumptous?


Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 111 in total
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #61
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3155 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
By paying full attention to it rather than trying to find an escape (like alcohol, drugs, entertainment, beliefs, ideologies etc)

Why do thoughts and emotions continue even when one makes an effort to pay 'full attention'? This isn't an intellectual game. It's an honest question. Most of us here, I'm sure, can vouch for this fact. We want to smoke or over eat or have another beer. We tell ourselves to pay attention....to be silent or choicelessly aware. But making effort to be silent only increases our conflict....leading us to condemn ourselves for our thoughts, emotions, actions when we fail to find silence.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #62
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Most of us here, I'm sure, can vouch for this fact. We want to smoke or over eat or have another beer. We tell ourselves to pay attention....to be silent or choicelessly aware. But making effort to be silent only increases our conflict....leading us to condemn ourselves for our thoughts, emotions, actions when we fail to find silence.

These are very good points and very interesting. Any movement away from what is is thought. Thought attempts to escape the pain by believing it can move into silence. Silence when it is chosen by thought is a concept, an idea, another escape.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 23 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #63
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3155 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Silence when it is chosen by thought is a concept, an idea, another escape.

Right! Silence as a goal is an absurdity.... a denial of 'what is'. That's why I'm asking Jean how silence enters the picture when the fact(what is) is the noise of conflict. Does it even make sense to talk(or think) of silence when thought and emotion is present?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Fri, 23 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #64
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3155 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Thought attempts to escape the pain by believing it can move into silence.

Yes....well described. That's why meditation practice is a big business...or was, back when I was young in the hippie era. I imagine it's still pretty big business parts of the world where Buddhism is practiced.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Fri, 23 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #65
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
That's why meditation practice is a big business...or was, back when I was young in the hippie era.

Yes, me too. Back in the early '70's I was invited to attend a Transcendental Meditation (TM) sales pitch being presented at a private home. The whole deal was laid out. Pay for a mantra and how to meditate. And if you are good enough you may even be able to levitate yourself. Which was the latest claim of TM at the time. By that time I had already discovered K and I was unimpressed.

Then on April 1, 1978 I attended my first K group discussion in Ojai or "gathering" as it was called. TM came up in the discussion and K referred to it as "Transcendental Trash". Most of us laughed. K deplored the big business of Indian "gurus" coming to the US and making millions selling crap to gullible Americans. I trust this sidebar will not derail the discussion or send it off on a tangent.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #66
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3155 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
TM came up in the discussion and K referred to it as "Transcendental Trash".

In a discussion with a famous guru (chogyam trungpa rinpoche), K called it 'transcendental, nonsensical, meditation'. I laughed out loud when I heard that when watching the video on youtube.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #67
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Why do thoughts and emotions continue even when one makes an effort to pay 'full attention'?

Thoughts and emotions do NOT continue when you really pay attention to them ... see this by yourself Tom instead of making lots of intellectual speculations ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #68
Thumb_stringio David T United Kingdom 124 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Hay guys it's Christmas,
Time to give up your endless bickering and love one another.

I am a figment of my and your imagination

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #69
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3155 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
Thoughts and emotions do NOT continue when you really pay attention to them ... see this by yourself Tom instead of making lots of intellectual speculations ...

I would rather ask, why do we lack this real attention? Then we're talking about the fact...what actually is. Not speclating about something we don't have. What’s keeping one inattentive to one's fears, cravings, anger, violence? Are we even attentive when our friend or neighbor is speaking....or to the posts here? That's not speculation...to look at what's actually going on rather than speculating about something else.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #70
Thumb_stringio Brian Smith United Kingdom 212 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

David T wrote:
Hay guys it's Christmas,
Time to give up your endless bickering and love one another.

Yes David, that's what it should come down to. The thing is they've got to define love first. When they do that they'll be able to convert it into action.

This post was last updated by Brian Smith (account deleted) Fri, 23 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #71
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Brian Smith wrote:
The thing is they've got to define love first. When they do that they'll be able to convert it into action.

lol ... quite simple indeed :-)

... and btw what is love exactly ?

Why resist 'what is' ?

This post was last updated by Jean Gatti Fri, 23 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #72
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I would rather ask, why do we lack this real attention?

because we are looking for easy escapes (alcohol, drugs, medication etc) instead of facing our painful emotions (most of those coming from a very early age, sense of being abandoned, of being abused etc)

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #73
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3155 posts in this forum Offline

Brian Smith wrote:
David T wrote:

Hay guys it's Christmas,
Time to give up your endless bickering and love one another.
Yes David, that's what it should come down to.

It's not just bickering David. Man is at war in many parts of the world. And he lives with violence in almost all. Man says that love 'should' be, yet he doesn't live it. To discuss why this might be so isn't bickering. Though it might seem "endless" :)

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #74
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Man is at war in many parts of the world. And he lives with violence in almost all.

People everywhere being manipulated and conditioned by ideologies, religions, nationalism etc ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #75
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3155 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
People everywhere being manipulated and conditioned by ideologies, religions, nationalism etc ...

Well, I can't argue/bicker about that ;) Merry Christmas Jean, if you celebrate the Christian holiday. I only do it myself because of family. If it was up to me, I'd stay home and read Robbie Robertson's amazing autobiography which I just purchased to read on my tablet. He was the principal song writer for the group the Band, who were very popular back in the late 60's. They also backed Dylan when he first went electric. He wrote the enduring rock classic, "The Weight"

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #76
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Merry Christmas Jean, if you celebrate the Christian holiday.

Thanks Tom, Merry Christmas to you too ... and yes I celebrate with my family, however not for 'religious' reasons :-)

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #77
Thumb_stringio Brian Smith United Kingdom 212 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Tom Paine wrote:
It's not just bickering David. Man is at war in many parts of the world. And he lives with violence in almost all. Man says that love 'should' be, yet he doesn't live it. To discuss why this might be so isn't bickering. Though it might seem "endless" :)

I think they enjoy the bickering. They'd rather face each other than face reality.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 23 Dec 2016 #78
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

David T wrote:
Hay guys it's Christmas,
Time to give up your endless bickering and love one another.

Oh hell yes. Everyone knows how much love Christianity has spread throughout the world in the last 2000 years. More people have been killed in the name of Christianity than died from Bubonic Plague. Many times more.

Christian conditioning is a hard to break from isn't David? And David, there is absolutely no evidence what so ever that there was ever a Jesus Christ. Almost all prominent biblical scholars have come to this conclusion.

So let's gently reach for that bottle of scotch and slowly pour one and salute the solstice which was two days ago and toast life in the present. And may we all survive Donald Trump. And when I say survive I mean out live as well as not having the world destroyed.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 23 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 24 Dec 2016 #79
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 794 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
So let's gently reach for that bottle of scotch

If it's going to be scotch, better make sure it's a single malt. I'd recommend Lagavulin, which means "hollow by the mill" and is made on Islay, a small island off the west coast of Scotland. To be taken in small quantities and savoured on special occasions.

Happy winter solstice/Christmas to all!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 24 Dec 2016 #80
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Well thank you Sean for the recommendation. And if I ever actually do start drinking scotch or any other kind of whiskey I'll keep it in mind.

I wonder if people who react automatically to holidays, Christmas and New Year, to tradition are aware of it? It is no less important to be aware of your conditioned responses to traditional holidays than it is to be aware of your other conditioned responses.

Christmas, of course, is a complete fabrication. An invention of the early Christians. One of the reasons Christianity was so successful is that this religion appropriated existing pagan holidays tweaked them a little and made them into Christian holidays.

For example, the Christmas holiday appropriated the pagan celebration of the winter solstice. As we all know this is the beginning of the days getting longer. Easter was the appropriation of the pagan fertility celebration which coincided with the spring equinox and the rebirth of life in the northern hemisphere. This was symbolized by the Christians inventing the myth of Jesus rising from the dead at this time of the year when the crops were starting to grow or rising from the ground. It's all symbolic and all just a myth.

Another thing Christians were famous for was destroying the pagan temples and raising their churches on top of where the temple used to stand.

And once the Roman Empire accepted Christianity, I think that was under the emperor Constantine to boost his sagging popularity, then Christianity was spread to the furthest reaches of the decaying Roman Empire. Somewhat like how a virus or other pathogens are spread, infecting the people ruled by the Romans with the disease of organized religion.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 24 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 24 Dec 2016 #81
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1357 posts in this forum Offline

Hello everyone !

Let's go back to the nature of things:

I wish after the solstice everyone
and special to those who are not of good will
the light of truth and love
and in any case somewhere a crack
that's where the light comes in !

Truth will unfold itself to those who enquire their own actions.

This post was last updated by Wim Opdam Sat, 24 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #82
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Now that Christmas is over for another year are all of you closet and openly Christian people good for awhile? Have your usual conditioned responses been appeased for awhile? You know, of course, that many of the traditions of Christmas are fairly recent. Like gift giving. Something started in the 19th Century and perpetuated with great enthusiasm by the merchants who now have become dependent on these expanded sales at the end of the year.

You have a few months before your conditioning is once again stimulated into causing you to react by rote. A great many of you will find yourself dying hard boiled eggs and buying jelly beans and chocolate eggs and "Easter Baskets" with green cellophane fake grass upon which to place the colored eggs. Some of you who never go to church will go on Easter Sunday without having a clue as to why in the hell you are sitting there in church in new clothes you bought for the occasion.

Have you ever wondered why Easter is symbolized by rabbits and eggs? Most of you know I'm sure. It's symbolic of fertility. Nothing to do with the mythical Jesus but more in line with the pagan celebrations of Spring and new life.

If you can't see these obvious examples of conditioning which appear harmless how can you ever see much deeper into how your mind, your thinking is conditioned?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #83
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Ken B wrote:
The vast majority of scholars who write on the subject agree that Jesus existed,[5][6][7][8] although scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[9][10][11][12]"

Oh Ken do you really believe this crap? All you got is Wikipedia? And how old is your information. I saw one thing on there that was from the 18th Century. See below for a recent article enumerating the reasons most biblical scholars don't thing there was ever a Jesus Christ. Also you might want to read these two books (yes I know that would require that you not use your computer, gasp!):

PAGAN CHRISTS by Robertson, Which discusses how many other religions use essentially the same tenets to describe their savior as the Christians are now using. The Christians never had an original thought as far as can be seen. Virtually all of their dogma is borrowed from somewhere else.

GOSPEL FICTIONS, by Randel Helms. This book discusses the gross and widespread inconsistent and conflicting gospels. There are many more books you could read on the subject. Do try to broaden your outlook to something more involved and factual than Wikipedia.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #84
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Here are some compelling reasons biblical scholars don't believe Jesus Christ ever lived. I am reposting this for an earlier thread I started:


  1. No first century secular evidence whatsoever exists to support the actuality of Yeshua ben Yosef.

In the words of Bart Ehrman (who himself believes the stories were built on a historical kernel):

“What sorts of things do pagan authors from the time of Jesus have to say about him? Nothing. As odd as it may seem, there is no mention of Jesus at all by any of his pagan contemporaries. There are no birth records, no trial transcripts, no death certificates; there are no expressions of interest, no heated slanders, no passing references – nothing. In fact, if we broaden our field of concern to the years after his death – even if we include the entire first century of the Common Era – there is not so much as a solitary reference to Jesus in any non-Christian, non-Jewish source of any kind. I should stress that we do have a large number of documents from the time – the writings of poets, philosophers, historians, scientists, and government officials, for example, not to mention the large collection of surviving inscriptions on stone and private letters and legal documents on papyrus. In none of this vast array of surviving writings is Jesus’ name ever so much as mentioned.” (pp. 56-57)


  1. The earliest New Testament writers seem ignorant of the details of Jesus’ life, which become more crystalized in later texts.

Paul seems unaware of any virgin birth, for example. No wise men, no star in the east, no miracles. Historians have long puzzled over the “Silence of Paul” on the most basic biographical facts and teachings of Jesus. Paul fails to cite Jesus’ authority precisely when it would make his case. What’s more, he never calls the twelve apostles Jesus’ disciples; in fact, he never says Jesus HAD disciples –or a ministry, or did miracles, or gave teachings. He virtually refuses to disclose any other biographical detail, and the few cryptic hints he offers aren’t just vague, but contradict the gospels. The leaders of the early Christian movement in Jerusalem like Peter and James are supposedly Jesus’ own followers and family; but Paul dismisses them as nobodies and repeatedly opposes them for not being true Christians!

Liberal theologian Marcus Borg suggests that people read the books of the New Testament in chronological order to see how early Christianity unfolded.

Placing the Gospels after Paul makes it clear that as written documents they are not the source of early Christianity but its product. The Gospel — the good news — of and about Jesus existed before the Gospels. They are the products of early Christian communities several decades after Jesus’ historical life and tell us how those communities saw his significance in their historical context.


  1. Even the New Testament stories don’t claim to be first-hand accounts.

We now know that the four gospels were assigned the names of the apostles Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, not written by them. To make matter sketchier, the name designations happened sometime in second century, around 100 years or more after Christianity supposedly began.

For a variety of reasons, the practice of pseudonymous writing was common at the time and many contemporary documents are “signed” by famous figures. The same is true of the New Testament epistles except for a handful of letters from Paul (6 out of 13) which are broadly thought to be genuine. But even the gospel stories don’t actually say, “I was there.” Rather, they claim the existence of other witnesses, a phenomenon familiar to anyone who has heard the phrase, my aunt knew someone who . . . .


  1. The gospels, our only accounts of a historical Jesus, contradict each other.

If you think you know the Jesus story pretty well, I suggest that you pause at this point to test yourself with the 20 question quizat ExChristian.net.

The gospel of Mark is thought to be the earliest existing “life of Jesus,” and linguistic analysis suggests that Luke and Matthew both simply reworked Mark and added their own corrections and new material. But they contradict each other and, to an even greater degree contradict the much later gospel of John, because they were written with different objectives for different audiences. The incompatible Easter stories offer one example of how much the stories disagree.


  1. Modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the real historical Jesus depict wildly different persons.

They include a cynic philosopher, charismatic Hasid, liberal Pharisee, conservative rabbi, Zealot revolutionary, nonviolent pacifist to borrow from a much longer list assembled by Price. In his words (pp. 15-16), “The historical Jesus (if there was one) might well have been a messianic king, or a progressive Pharisee, or a Galilean shaman, or a magus, or a Hellenistic sage. But he cannot very well have been all of them at the same time.” John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar grumbles that “the stunning diversity is an academic embarrassment.”

For David Fitzgerald, these issues and more lead to a conclusion that he finds inescapable:

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Thu, 27 Oct 2016.

Sign in to recommend

Back to Top

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #85
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Christianity is unraveling. Not only is church attendance down but more and more biblical scholars are doubting that the mythical person, Jesus Christ ever lived. It is important because who among us have not accepted the myths of Christianity and who has not been deeply conditioned by them?

A growing number of scholars are openly questioning or actively arguing against whether Jesus lived.
By Valerie Tarico / AlterNet
August 22, 2014

For over 200 years, a wide ranging array of theologians and historians grounded in this perspective have analyzed ancient texts, both those that made it into the Bible and those that didn’t, in attempts to excavate the man behind the myth. Several current or recent bestsellers take this approach, distilling the scholarship for a popular audience. Familiar titles include Zealot by Reza Aslan and How Jesus Became God by Bart Ehrman.

By contrast, other scholars believe that the gospel stories are actually “historicized mythology.” In this view, those ancient mythic templates are themselves the kernel. They got filled in with names, places and other real world details as early sects of Jesus worship attempted to understand and defend the devotional traditions they had received.

Most antiquities scholars think that the New Testament gospels are “mythologized history.” In other words, based on the evidence available they think that around the start of the first century a controversial Jewish rabbi named Yeshua ben Yosef gathered a following and his life and teachings provided the seed that grew into Christianity. At the same time, these scholars acknowledge that many Bible stories like the virgin birth, miracles, resurrection, and women at the tomb borrow and rework mythic themes that were common in the Ancient Near East, much the way that screenwriters base new movies on old familiar tropes or plot elements. In this view, a “historical Jesus” became mythologized.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #86
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Ken B wrote:
Incidentally, PAGAN CHRISTS by ROBERTSON, was written in 1911, for heaven's sake, so it doesn't contain any recent scholarship.

Well we're talking about a legend that is 2000 years old so for that mythology to have taken something from existing myths these myths would have to be more than 2000 years old. So what difference does it make if the book was written in 1911?

Also, the term "historical Jesus" is often used in the context that history is full of a person named Jesus Christ. That doesn't mean there actually was a person by such a name. King Arthur was an historical person but there is no evidence that he existed either.

Read down through the five points I referenced for there not being a Jesus Christ. They are compelling to say the least. Explain the five points away.

And then when you are done with all of the above use your reasoning to examine the probability that none of the myth of Christ is real. Do you think Krishna, Brahma, Visnu, Shiva or other Hindu gods really existed? Do you think Thor and Woden existed in the Norse religion? Why is it only "Jesus" existed and all the rest of these legends don't? Because you have been conditioned to believer all of your life that Jesus was real and all the other gods are false. Wake up!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #87
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Ken, do you believe in the Christian, or anyone's, concept of heaven and hell? Do you believe a woman who was a virgin gave birth because god got her pregnant.?* Do you believe there is a god, a big daddy in the sky? There has been a debate for years if there was a person who actually lived at the supposed time of Jesus around whom the myth of Jesus Christ was spun? If you don't believe any of the above then why do you believe the Jesus part?

There could be a person around which the myth was built but as of yet biblical scholars have not agreed on anyone. And what about the grossly inconsistent gospels which not only didn't agree on key points of Christianity but some were completely ignorant of basic Christian dogma at the time of their respective writings. For example, it was at the time of the Roman Emperor, Constantine, that the leadership of the budding Christian movement decided to go with the virgin birth and son of god thing. There was a huge debate between opposing sects of Christians before one side won. The Christian dogma is very arbitrary. It's mostly based on which sect won the debate or killed more of the other group than they lost themselves.

*What would you do if your girlfriend came to you one day and said "Darling, Sweetheart. I'm pregnant but I'm still a virgin. God did it! You know I would never go out on you sweetheart." Are you going to believe her? So 2000 years later it still stinks. I don't believe it. And if I had of been Joseph I would have started to worry about STD's. No antibiotics back then brother. When you got the clap or worse, that was it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #88
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

Ken B wrote:
Having no credentials as a Biblical historian, I wouldn't attempt to.

Well that's the silliest argument I've ever heard. So if you are not an "expert" in something you're not qualified to read about it? What are your credentials to read Krishnamurti? Reading things and applying what we have learned is the way we learn to do things and understand things. How do you think people "get credentials" in some field? You think they are just handed out to special people?

Are you going to wait for the experts to tell you what is right or are you going to find out for yourself? Don't worship authority. Most authorities have no idea what they're doing.

Ken I would enjoy continuing this debate but tomorrow I leave the Rockies for Ojai. I'm taking two days to get there so I will be out of contact. Take it easy.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Tue, 27 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #89
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 541 posts in this forum Offline

Jack : "If you can't see these obvious examples of conditioning which appear harmless how can you ever see much deeper into how your mind, your thinking is conditioned? "

Can you see for yourself Jack how much deeper your mind and thinking is conditioned ? And yes it's certainly easy to read about few facts and figures and forming judgements about any issue unde the sun and to advice , speak about another . But to speak about oneself , observe , study ... Is the most difficult work isn't it ?
No less authoritative you are sounding in your posts in response to Ken. And so often you admonishing people at your will and whim dismissing their posts as if you have become an authority on what K pointed out . It looks you have made an image in your brain of what K pointed out and by all means you need to defend that image ... It's indeed pity you always come out with posts of inconsequential issues and show your expertise . But the extraordinary work of K which is the study of 'oneself ' as one represents the entire humanity is sadly missing in your posts .

The thrust on ' inquiry ' ' dying to the known ' seeing and acknowledging the qualities of anger, hurt, desire, attachment, jealousy, and so much more which is composite mass of human being and our common human condition ... which comprises the k teaching is not much inquired into .

I very well remember appreciating your posts when you used to deal firmly with the voices of trolls,and various other people who do not know what they are writing . But you are not observing and not even wondering the changes in people . lot of people have moved on ... But again seeing anything is possible only when we ourselves keep a check if and whether we are looking from the past images made by our brains.

( I'm quite sure this post is not to your liking and you will come out with most angry terminology . But well all these points are very much in my mind since long and thought might as well express them )

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #90
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
Can you see for yourself Jack how much deeper your mind and thinking is conditioned ?

Well that's the question isn't it? Can any of us see how deeply we are conditioned. Pavani you live in a country that has deep roots in religion for thousands of years. Can you see how these religious views have conditioned you? Arguably organized religion is one of the strongest forces of conditioning most of us have. I think this is true because organized religion tries to deal with the eternal, the "afterlife" "god" and all that. I am aware of that conditioning to some extent in my life.

pavani rao wrote:
It looks you have made an image in your brain of what K pointed out and by all means you need to defend that image ...

Not sure why you are saying this based on the context of what I wrote. I haven't mentioned K. I saw religion for the fraud it was and is when I was about ten years old which would have been 18 years before I became aware of K and his views on organized religion. I think I may have touched a nerve when I mentioned Hindu gods in one of my posts. Sorry if you were offended.

What I have written on this thread about organized religion is based mainly on nearly a lifetime of observing organized religion, it's deeply committed worshippers and it's deeply conservative and resistant policies toward change.

pavani rao wrote:
I very well remember appreciating your posts when you used to deal firmly with the voices of trolls,and various other people who do not know what they are writing .

Yes I know you did Pavani. Many times you complimented me on being the "protector of what K was saying". An image I never felt comfortable with and one I didn't share with you. But I like you Pavani and I didn't want to say anything. Now your image has changed to one more critical. I don't agree with that one either but I still like you and I hope we will remain friends.

I think you judged me too favorably before and I think you are judging me too harshly now.

In closing I want you to know that I passionately believe in what I have written about organized religion. It is a curse of mankind and has caused more wars than any other institution except possibly nationalism. Organized religion is undeniably one of the deepest and most resistant conditioning that most of us have to deal with in our lives. If we can't see the conditioning of organized religion will we be able to see the deeper, more subtle conditioning in our lives?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 111 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)