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

Being what one is


Displaying posts 31 - 60 of 64 in total
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #31
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
The cat has desires and suffers.

Yes yes, maybe you have something there. She is constantly saying "me-ow". ;)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #32
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
Maybe it just lacks imagination.

Which I think is the critical factor.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #33
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Why "should" they be attended?

Of course "should" is a difficult word here but as we are stuck with words as a means of conveyance we will try to find the point none the less. We attend the differences well enough. But to what end? Maybe we should try something somewhat less pleasant for a change in our actions/activities?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #34
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Is this commonality because you see that it is so for you as well, because it is something that you see in observing yourself? Or do you mean that it is common to most minds other than your own mind, but that your own mind is not like that?

Why fixate your response to my "me"?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #35
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 412 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Is this commonality because you see that it is so for you as well, because it is something that you see in observing yourself? Or do you mean that it is common to most minds other than your own mind, but that your own mind is not like that?

richard head wrote at 34:
Why fixate your response to my "me"?

Isn’t the point of all our deliberations to understand oneself, “MYself” ... “me” also being humankind? Does one understand oneself - does the mind understand itself - by looking outwardly at “others”?

Huguette . wrote:
Why do I concern myself with most minds?

richard head wrote at #24:
Commonalities should be attended.

richard head wrote at #17:
For most minds it is pretense.

Pointing out the errors made by "others", finding fault with “them”, looking outwardly at “others”, is not attending to commonalities of humankind. It is attending to our UNcommonalities, isn’t it? It is separating “myself” from “them”. It is saying, "I am not like them, and they are not like me".

It is only by looking inwardly at “my own mind”, that I am attentive to the commonalities of humankind. If I understand myself, I understand humankind. But if I ascribe specific positions or attitudes to “others”, I understand neither them or myself.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #36
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 412 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
But if we approach it without any predisposition or desire, if we ask “IS it possible”, then the enquiry is not tainted by thought, is it?

richard head wrote at #9:
We approach with no desire to achieve or posses. We simply want to find the reality behind the mythology. We cannot frame a term or concept (IS it possible) to help lead us.

richard head wrote at #4:
I can see that a mammal can exist without constant illusion. So why can't we? It must be possible.

Isn’t it rather the assertion “It must be possible” which is the framing of a term or concept “to help lead us”? And isn't it the expression of desire?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Tue, 24 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #37
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
It is separating “myself” from “them”. It is saying, "I am not like them, and they are not like me".

Any discussion at Kinfonet or even at a gathering addressed by Krishnamurti himself, is separation. That is the nature of communication. Many here worship communication which seems to be the only device used to find something true. This is a commonality. Pointing to the facts of a situation is not a deliberate act of "me-vs-you". That (me/you), is a side effect of the chosen/preferred mechanism (thought/knowledge).

This post was last updated by richard head Tue, 24 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #38
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
It is only by looking inwardly at “my own mind”, that I am attentive to the commonalities of humankind.

And so, having said that, why does one come to Kinfonet day after day year after year comparing and contrasting knowledge/information one has gathered about Krishnamurti and the things he has said?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Oct 2017 #39
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Isn’t it rather the assertion “It must be possible” which is the framing of a term or concept “to help lead us”? And isn't it the expression of desire?

If it is an expression of desire, in other words a repetition of something I/we have heard somewhere, then it is another feeble attempt down the path of knowledge.

This is what goes on quite frequently on these forums.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 25 Oct 2017 #40
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 412 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
how do you know it is there?

richard head wrote at #26:
How do you know it isn't? Simple observation makes many things in life clear. My actions my activities will tell me many things about myself. My mind will frequently deceive me.

Huguette . wrote:
Isn’t it rather the assertion “It must be possible” which is the framing of a term or concept “to help lead us”? And isn't it the expression of desire?

richard head wrote at #39:
If it is an expression of desire, in other words a repetition of something I/we have heard somewhere, then it is another feeble attempt down the path of knowledge.
This is what goes on quite frequently on these forums.

I don’t know that the passion isn’t in you. I’m not saying the passion to find out if man “can exist without constant illusion” is not there in your heart. Only you can know, by looking inwardly, directly ... just as only I can know what’s in my own heart and mind. But when you assert that “my” question is merely an expression of desire ... how do you know?

“Knowledge” and “fact” mean different things in different contexts, don't they? I know that 2+2=4. I know that Paris is the capital of France. Those are one kind of “fact” or “knowledge”. But I can’t know what another perceives directly inwardly. That direct perception is another meaning of “fact” or “knowledge”. Isn't that the knowledge we mean when we say, for example, "I know" that I have the passion?

As I see it, one problem for the mind is that it can’t always distinguish perception from thought. It thinks it sees a fact where it is only seeing its own ideas about the thing. So thought’s authority prevails and perception is ignored, and conflict ensues.

If it is to understand the matters we talk about here without straying into illusion and conflict, mustn't the mind doubt itself, proceed with caution, without certainty? Only then, as I see it, can minds look into these matters together, with the same intensity.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 25 Oct 2017 #41
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 412 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
It is only by looking inwardly at “my own mind”, that I am attentive to the commonalities of humankind.

richard head wrote at #38:
And so, having said that, why does one come to Kinfonet day after day year after year comparing and contrasting knowledge/information one has gathered about Krishnamurti and the things he has said?

I could be mistaken but I think that, for one thing, the passion IS there for most of us. Can it be that we have the passion to understand, but we are driven by our old habits? So that the passion is suppressed, commandeered or redirected by thought and, instead of being attentive to the matters that really concern us, instead of taking the opportunity to look together, we end up taking opposing positions and squandering our energy. Is this inevitable?

Of course, it is not essential to come here days after day year after year. But, as I see it, putting perception (or what I think is perception) into words forces me to doubt perception. It forces me to see whether there actually IS perception underlying the word or merely the assumption of perception. It facilitates the spotting of the assumptions, inconsistencies and contradictions of thought.

Can the mind ever be SURE that what is seen is the perception of “what is”, and not an illusion put together by thought?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 25 Oct 2017 #42
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 1162 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Which I think is the critical factor.

So humans get emotionally attached to images. I would guess cats do so too, but in a much more limited, 'healthy', fashion. But what is the problem here? It's a way of going about things with pros and cons. As long as the image is beneficial on a large scale (e.g. I want to find a cure for cancer), is this a problem?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #43
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
So humans get emotionally attached to images. I would guess cats do so too, but in a much more limited, 'healthy', fashion. But what is the problem here?

The problem is when images enter human relationships, isn't it? I'm not talking of practical images. I need to know who is the doctor and who is the plumber and not confuse the two. But when I have an image of the Jews or the Blacks and consider one superior and another inferior, well, you know how that turns out right? Or my wife doesn't conform to my image of her and I get angry or decide to look for my pleasure somewhere else and cheat on her. Or I don't conform to my image of myself as being good, brave, strong, etc. and there's strong inner conflict or self condemnation...self hate.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #44
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
But when you assert that “my” question is merely an expression of desire ... how do you know?

Every time I address a fellow poster I point out the "give away". Most people relate to how it makes them feel and generally miss the point of the encounter. You have some very good and genuine questions and so they are better not addressed/answered and left to simmer.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #45
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
I think that, for one thing, the passion IS there for most of us.

And I am pointing out how it is not, over and over.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #46
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Can the mind ever be SURE that what is seen is the perception of “what is”, and not an illusion put together by thought?

Being sure/certainty, are concepts of a mind searching (desire) for an answer. They imply "what is" as an illusory opposite (unsure/un certain). They (certainty, etc..) are the expression of "what should be". In other words, we want to be sure....because we are not. Psychologically speaking of course.

This post was last updated by richard head Thu, 26 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #47
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
As long as the image is beneficial on a large scale (e.g. I want to find a cure for cancer), is this a problem?

The problems start with the reliance on the authority of our image making capability.

As K and others have said, there is a time and place for thinking/thought/concepts/imagination.

I still contend that the mind of cat, is not in a state of becoming something other than what it is.

Most, if not all species pass along knowledge/information to the next generation and to others. We however, milk it for the pleasure it brings.

This post was last updated by richard head Thu, 26 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #48
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Can it be that we have the passion to understand, but we are driven by our old habits?

The pursuit of pleasure through desire is our old habit. It's like drug addiction, first kick the habit then see if there is something else. Otherwise it's just a cultivated passion.

Desire (though we may call it "passion to understand") is where the human mind dwells, generally. But we're very passionate about that! ;)

I am not trying to demean or degrade the things you are saying.

This post was last updated by richard head Thu, 26 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #49
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
there's strong inner conflict or self condemnation...self hate.

What if I said this activity was a form of pleasure?

This image (self hate) is not a one time phenomenon. It is built up over a lifetime. This is not an individual expression, this is a commonality to all humanity. And so when something new comes up (a new reason to hate oneself) it conforms to the already established base of knowledge/information is therefore accepted and adds depth and body to an already stout image. And since we all "know" that pleasure is accepted and pain rejected.......

This is why we continue the habit, it's like a snowball rolling down hill.

This post was last updated by richard head Thu, 26 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Oct 2017 #50
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

there's strong inner conflict or self condemnation...self hate.

What if I said this activity was a form of pleasure?

I'd question that. My childhood friend repressed his homosexuality because back when we were young gays were hated...condemned...ridiculed. He repressed his feelings to such a degree that after college he married a woman and had a child. Shortly thereafter he decided to 'come out'. His father almost beat him to death when he found out his son was gay. Where is the pleasure in this kind of self hate? Society hates him for what he is so he internalizes this by hating himself. Like the Blacks in the 1950's who used to 'process' their hair so they'd look more like white folk. https://youtu.be/-vDm1lomVHU

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 26 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Oct 2017 #51
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 1162 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But when I have an image of the Jews or the Blacks and consider one superior and another inferior, well, you know how that turns out right?

It's a fact that races and species are inferior/superior in some ways. Add in a lack of empathy and the pleasure we get from non-facts about ourselves and others, and you have a problem.

My point was about pleasure/emotion binding to images, and the consequences of that. This is not restricted to relationships and groups. It is how the human brain has evolved and it has a certain energy to it. This image pleases me and I will work towards it. And yes if I have to sacrifice lives to get there, maybe that is a price worth paying. That is how things are no? That is how the human brain works? Even if I am a scientist am I not driven by pleasure, how ever 'healthy' that pleasure might be?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Oct 2017 #52
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 1162 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
The problems start with the reliance on the authority of our image making capability.

Pleasure is what keeps that going, but that is how the mind works. And then you point out that this is a trap, and that is displeasing to me, and then I form images of freedom and so on that do please me.

This is how we have evolved. It's a big experiment, and maybe someday another species will come along with a brain structured so that basic drives don't bind with memory in the same way. I'd guess that nature will figure it out somehow, with or without us.

But, you seem to be indicating that the human mind already has the capability to restructure itself, and that we are not trapped in this by our biology. I don't know.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Oct 2017 #53
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
It's a fact that races and species are inferior/superior in some ways.

A fact? Hmmm...that would be a subjective judgement as I see it,, not a fact. One race may be taller or physically stronger, but superior? Why is taller or stronger superior to shorter or weaker?

dave h wrote:
My point was about pleasure/emotion binding to images, and the consequences of that. This is not restricted to relationships and groups. It is how the human brain has evolved and it has a certain energy to it. This image pleases me and I will work towards it.

Absolutely. I will work to acquire the pleasurable image. If I can't achieve my goal there's fear, anger, frustration, etc. In relationships the fact that this produces conflict is obvious. Yet K pointed out that it creates 'internal' conflict as well....conflict in the psyche. I have a pleasurable image of myself and another that causes displeasure....a negative self image or a positive one. When the pleasurable one is challenged I feel hurt. The pleasure we get from smoking, drinking, drugs, etc is also an area where conflict arises because the pleasure leads to pain and suffering. K. claims we can be transformed....that the brain can mutate (I think his exact word)...that we can be free of all the images, other than the practical images of how to cook dinner or drive a car, etc....therefore free of conflict.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Oct 2017 #54
Thumb_open-uri20171115-31086-13da1wu-0 Dan McDermott United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Absolutely. I will work to acquire the pleasurable image. If I can't achieve my goal there's fear, anger, frustration, etc.

The 'problem' is here isn't it, in the "image-making"? The negative ones I don't want and the positive ones I do. But it inevitably leads to conflict either way. And the search for psychological safety and security is behind this. The brain doesn't see that it has created a 'prison' for itself that it can't escape from. And when it attempts to escape through whatever means, religion, drugs, entertainment etc., it only stretches the walls of the prison... it's only when it totally realizes that any effort to escape is futile that it can give up.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Oct 2017 #55
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
it's only when it totally realizes that any effort to escape is futile that it can give up.

Futile, because we're escaping to another image...more fear/pleasure.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 30 Oct 2017 #56
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 1162 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
A fact? Hmmm...that would be a subjective judgement as I see it,, not a fact. One race may be taller or physically stronger, but superior? Why is taller or stronger superior to shorter or weaker?

Well one can compare things objectively. This species has better eyesight than that one. This one has a better verbal capacity. It is better not to have cancer than to have it. This phone has a better camera than that one.

As I see it, it is the the binding of concepts, factual or non-factual, to basic drives that is the critical factor.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 31 Oct 2017 #57
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
As I see it, it is the the binding of concepts, factual or non-factual, to basic drives that is the critical factor.

What about the concepts of my country...my religion...my house or car...my beloved possessions(leaving aside that we all need basic shelter and perhaps a car to get to the supermarket and work)....as well as 'me'...'you'...good/bad...right/wrong? Are these somehow related to our 'basic drives'?

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 31 Oct 2017 #58
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
. Where is the pleasure in this kind of self hate?

Where the pleasure comes in was pointed out very clearly Tom. Of course what we need to do is widen our notion/definition of the word pleasure.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 31 Oct 2017 #59
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I'd question that.

What is the basic "nuts and bolts" activity of questioning something Tom? I would suggest that it is not, relating personal/anecdotal experience.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 31 Oct 2017 #60
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
you seem to be indicating that the human mind already has the capability to restructure itself, and that we are not trapped in this by our biology.

I am simply suggesting that since we at some point emerged from the "Garden of Eden" we must have the capacity to return.

Protecting/defending the biological entity became protecting/defending the psychological entity. And probably, as you suggest, this was due to the overpowering urge towards pleasure.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 31 - 60 of 64 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.)