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

Choiceless self-awareness


Displaying posts 181 - 210 of 233 in total
Fri, 26 Jan 2018 #181
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5660 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
Aren't you making it more complicated Dan.

This is my impression too, Rich.

Dan would you mind pointing out where K talked about "new brain", "old brain". I looked on Jkrishnamurti online and didn't find anything. I'm not familiar with that particular duality. I thought there was just the "human brain" regardless of what country or culture we are from not your brain or my brain, new brain or old brain.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 26 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jan 2018 #182
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 329 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
The challenge of humanity is this: How is humanity going to get these two brains to work together?"

And how are we gona do that, if I may ask ? How will this integration happen and by who ? Is really this is the challenge of humanity ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jan 2018 #183
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 329 posts in this forum Offline

Well, we have a hard time dealing with one brain, what about dealing with 2 or 3 brains ? This is still to complicated for me. Wasn't the question : how to appraoch anger or envy or fear in a non-dualistic manner ? Or was it the lack of integration of two brain, which raise the problem of how integration can be achieve ?

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Fri, 26 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jan 2018 #184
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 329 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D wrote:
http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamurti-teach...

Thanks Ken.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Sat, 27 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 #185
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 329 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Yes sorry didn't mean to distract. I have much respect for Bohm's mind and his relationship with K. Thought it would be valuable to mention this here since he was so definite about what he sees as the root of our main problem.

His appraoch seems quite different though. Ken just put a link of K.'s appraoch on the subject of the old brain. Good reading, if you're interested.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Sat, 27 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 #186
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 1165 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
And how are we gona do that, if I may ask ? How will this integration happen and by who ? Is really this is the challenge of humanity ?

Is the brain biologically flawed? Clearly some of us are born with pretty severe brain defects, aren't we all more-or-less flawed in some way?

Is it the interaction between biology and culture which is the problem? Take the same brain and give it two different environments, in one it flourishes, and in the other it becomes self-obsessed and destructive. Is that the answer? And who are we to judge? Some people would argue a bit of self-obsession is necessary and a good thing.

Or the answer lies outside of genetics and environment? And if the answer lies beyond us somehow, why doesn't this intelligence just get on with it and act?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 #187
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5660 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Krishnamurti used the reference to coming together as friends because people came to him to worship as an idol. So he frequently tried to calm people down. But he did not intend it as a model or method for his followers 30 years after his death.

This is just another one of your fantasies. Have you ever actually attended a talk where K spoke? In all of the ones I attended I never remembered seeing anyone being a worshiper.

In fact because of who he was K made it nearly impossible for those who were around him to "worship" him. His whole demeanor denied that sort of behavior from others. Please don't spread these kinds of baseless rumors about K.

Why don't all begin now to discuss what K pointed out and not what we think he was pointing out? Forget yourself for awhile. Read that whole link that Ken put up. It's extremely interesting.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sun, 28 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jan 2018 #188
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5660 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
It is D. Bohm's contention

Dr Bohm was a brilliant man. I heard him talk several times after a K talk. I even went to a talk he gave on Quantum Physics in Santa Barbara and didn't understand a thing he was saying.

Sometimes he would talk extemporaneously to a small group of people who would gather around him in the soccer field adjacent to the Oak Grove after one of K's talks. I have read the record of his talks in Ojai attended by a small group of people who were interested in K and part of the Foundation and/or school; Joe Zorski, Lee Nichol and others. The book is entitled, THOUGHT AS A SYSTEM, which was very interesting. Also, of course, Dr Bohm was in dialogue with K in several very interesting books; ENDING OF TIME, FUTURE OF HUMANITY, etc.

But I would not study what Dr. Bohm thought or wrote to better understand what K was pointing out. Dr. Bohm was, after all, a theoretical physicist first and foremost. He appeared to love theories and ideas and because of that I don't think he ever really grasped the essence of what K was saying. He had some very interesting things to say but I think he went off on tangents that weren't what K was pointing out.

If you want to understand what K pointed out then read what K had to say.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sun, 28 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 #189
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 1165 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Intelligence comes into being when the brain discovers its fallibility, when it discovers what it is capable of and what it is not capable of.

So what prevents the brain from seeing its own fallibility? Is it culture? Is it genetics? Is it something else?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 #190
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 862 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
What have you to say about it Sean? Can you be aware of the spark/flush of anger as it begins?

Hello Richard. I would say that there are times when I am relatively quick in seeing my anger arise and times when I don't see this at all. I find my attention level can vary a lot. I would say that in seeing something like anger arise there is indeed an immediate change. As soon as you see it you act. Attention would seem to be the key here wouldn't you say?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 #191
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 329 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Then of course there is the sheer momentum of time behind it...

If I may Dan, what do you mean by that ? Do you mean that it leave a trace, a trace as memory ? Or did I miss your point.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jan 2018 #192
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Sean Hen wrote:
Attention would seem to be the key here wouldn't you say?

I would just suggest that rather than a word, in this case "attention", what is more fundamental would be a clear unbiased comprehensive understanding of how Krishnamurti used it.

Do we have that?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 #193
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 862 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
I would just suggest that rather than a word, in this case "attention", what is more fundamental would be a clear unbiased comprehensive understanding of how Krishnamurti used it.

Do we have that?

That is something you have to find out for yourself. One can experiment with "attention" in everyday life surely. When someone is talking, are you attentive to what is being said or is thought wandering all over the place and you are not really listening? When you are walking down the street, are you attentive to sights, sounds and smells around you or are you lost in your own thoughts? When you hear a bird sing, are you paying attention to the sound or do you not even hear it because you are thinking about what you will have for lunch? Is this not what is meant by attention?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 #194
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Sean Hen wrote:
That is something you have to find out for yourself.

Yes, quite so.

I just realized your thread has over 4000 views in a very short span. The people have found your topic quite interesting apparently. Keep up the good work.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 #195
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 862 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
I just realized your thread has over 4000 views in a very short span. The people have found your topic quite interesting apparently. Keep up the good work.

Thanks Richard but everyone who has contributed so far is responsible for this. I've certainly found many of the contributions to be very interesting.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 #196
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 329 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
That we've always been like we are. With our anger, confusion, loneliness, fear etc. In that 'stream' and trying to 'make the best of it'. Dave's question was " what prevents the brain from seeing its own fallibility?" And I was suggesting that ( beside the fact that that question itself was never seriously asked) that just the amount of 'time' we've been this way is probably also a factor. In other words, we have been able to 'get along' somewhat but now things seem to be reaching a new point of violence, greed, division, suffering etc.

O.k. I see. The sheer momentum of time behind it. But the question remain: what prevent the brain from seeing its own fallibility ? Another thing is that maybe it has never look at it? We could ask: why is it that the brain doesn't see that it is conditioned ? Isn't the fact that it is conditioned is his fallibility ?

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Mon, 29 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jan 2018 #197
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 329 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Yet here we have this 'audacious' proposition that for the 'new' brain to operate in us without the disharmony, division, fear, suffering, the 'old' must be silent. That according to K.( among others) is the only way that there can be 'freedom from the known'.

That seems clear.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Mon, 29 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 #198
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 649 posts in this forum Offline

Krishnamurti said in the video that started this thread:

One has to be tremendously aware of every movement of thought. That’s very easy, don’t complicate it.

It's easy. It's hard.

As we have seen, it is vital, urgent. Otherwise, we continue to be part of the ongoing violence and brutality. Unwatched, our thoughts continue to divide, which causes division in relationship. Unwatched, our mind never quiets down to clear openness, love.

The first step is the last step.

One has to be tremendously aware of every movement of thought.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Wed, 31 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 01 Feb 2018 #199
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1382 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Unwatched, our thoughts continue to divide, which causes division in relationship. Unwatched, our mind never quiets down to clear openness, love.

The first step is the last step.

thought in itself is not the problem,
but the way it is used by the thinker is !

It's neither easy nor hard,
one does it or not being aware in the moment itself.

 ON God | Fourth Talk in Bombay, February 8, 1948

Thought can be modified, changed; but the thinker remains apart. 
The thinker is the thought. They are not separate, they are a joint phenomenon and not separate processes.
 The thinker, by manipulating, modifying, changing thought according to circumstances, safeguards himself by this action. The picture remains; only the frame is changed, but the picture is the problem and not the frame.
Thought is not the problem, but the thinker.
This action of modification, change, of his thought, is a clever deception on the part of the thinker, leading him to illusion and endless misunderstanding and conflict. So, only when the thinker ceases is there being, and it is only the state of being that can bring about radical transformation.

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 01 Feb 2018 #200
Thumb_stringio richard head United States 332 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

Ken D wrote:
I was a bit shocked to find out the variations in the claimed transcripts of this talk and probably in many of the talks

I cannot understand why, with the available technology, Krishnamurti's talks were not filmed. As important a person as he was, nothing from his early period was accurately recorded. Sorry, but transcribing from memory (even K's memory) is not sufficient. It's almost laughable that no one (of his handlers) from that period thought about the importance of doing this. He should have had a full-time professional film crew documenting his public talks.

Many consider that K is different/more relevant than most historical sages because his words are written/recorded accurately. I don't see how such a claim can be made with a straight face.

His later talks, that were filmed/video taped (as reflected on you-tube), are a pale shadow of how he must have been as a younger man.

Make no mistake, I say all this as a devout follower of Mr. Krishnamurti "the speaker". To me, he is one of the most important historical figures of all time. I am not complaining about or degrading anyone who reads or posts at Kinfonet. In the scope of all things in life, this isn't at the top of the list to discuss but Damn......

This post was last updated by richard head (account deleted) Thu, 01 Feb 2018.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Feb 2018 #201
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1382 posts in this forum Offline

cite>Ken D wrote:

Interesting. I was a bit shocked to find out the variations in the claimed transcripts of this talk and probably in many of the talks in India in the late 40's. Shortly, I will start a thread on what I've found and the questions I have about all this.

Hi Ken D

Yes this could be very interesting to found out the differences between what is on tape and what is on text.
I also have found differences in 'Fire in the Mind's from Pupil Jayakar.

There is also a suspicion that 'the ending of time' is not the full dialogue of all talks between Bohm and K.

The first two tapes would have been left out because of two different arguments 'bad quality' and another 'Bohm was too prominent in lecturing K.' (From " Infinite Potential" David Peat' s biografy about David Bohm.

Saral Bohm in "the essential David bohm" is saying that some information should not be made public but remain private.

But all this is THOUGHT And as such incomplete and subjective as well in the description as well in the interpretation.

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Feb 2018 #202
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 862 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
As we have seen, it is vital, urgent. Otherwise, we continue to be part of the ongoing violence and brutality. Unwatched, our thoughts continue to divide, which causes division in relationship. Unwatched, our mind never quiets down to clear openness, love.

We seem to be able to clearly see, intellectually at the very least, the urgency in needing to bring about an end to violence in ourselves and the world. However, this urgency doesn't seem to be present when it comes to being aware of our thought process. I wonder what Krishnamurti would have thought about the recent popular explosion of mindfulness. Will this contribute to a greater awareness of the importance of being "present"? Will it help us to be more attentive to the "now" and to every movement of thought? Or is it just another technique with all the consequent problems?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Feb 2018 #203
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1382 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
I wonder what Krishnamurti would have thought
about the recent popular explosion of mindfulness.
Will this contribute to a greater awareness of the importance of being "present"?
Will it help us to be more attentive to the "now" and to every movement of thought?
Or is it just another technique with all the consequent problems?

But Sean are we realy in need of an imagination what Krishnamurti would have said or thought about this subject ??

In seeing there is a goal in sight and will is involved , what more is needed to see ego is at work.

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Feb 2018 #204
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 862 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
In seeing there is a goal in sight and will is involved , what more is needed to see ego is at work.

Hi Wim. Is there a goal in sight? When K says, "One has to be tremendously aware of every movement of thought" is that a goal?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Feb 2018 #205
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1382 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Hi Wim. Is there a goal in sight? When K says, "One has to be tremendously aware of every movement of thought" is that a goal?

So where is awareness - even small - to not seeing that I was talking about "Mindfulness" and not of the words of K.?

Don't you see that only the name is already a wrong indication for awareness to be, because that needs emptiness and silence !!

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Feb 2018 #206
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 862 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
So where is awareness - even small - to not seeing that I was talking about "Mindfulness" and not of the words of K.?

Don't you see that only the name is already a wrong indication for awareness to be, because that needs emptiness and silence !!

Wim, you sound angry. Were you aware of that anger as it was arising?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 03 Feb 2018 #207
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1382 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Wim, you sound angry. Were you aware of that anger as it was arising?

Sean, it is always surprising how some people interpret words completely opposite in their meaning.

but let me explain it.
You wondered what K. would have thought about mindfulness and I replied that to see it for yourself because what K. thought would be superfluous because one can see it for yourself !

Isn't that what the teaching is all about, investigate it and not following the interpretation of others not even K.

But if you want to play the game of suggesting me feeling angry instead of looking into your own reflections of feelings, even then you are not New, that game is played already so long by someone who is no longer with us.

Have a nice day.

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

This post was last updated by Wim Opdam Sat, 03 Feb 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 03 Feb 2018 #208
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 862 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
Sean, it is always surprising how some people interpret words completely opposite in their meaning.

How very true Wim!

but let me explain it.
You wondered what K. would have thought about mindfulness and I replied that to see it for yourself because what K. thought would be superfluous because one can see it for yourself !

Well, this does sound like a bit of a lecture Wim. You seem to be in the role of a teacher here. No offence meant. I was asking a question in a playful kind of way and didn't really expect a lecture on "see it for yourself". Surely we all know that we have to "see it for yourself" by now, don't we?

Isn't that what the teaching is all about, investigate it and not following the interpretation of others not even K.

Again, hasn't this been said thousands of times on this Forum?

But if you want to play the game of suggesting me feeling angry instead of looking into your own reflections of feelings, even then you are not New, that game is played already so long by someone who is no longer with us.

I'm not sure what you mean here Wim. I thought you sounded angry. Are you saying you weren't angry?

Have a nice day.

You too. A very summy day here with a temperature of around 12 degrees. Will you manage to get out for a bike ride today?

Wim Opdam wrote:
Don't you see that only the name is already a wrong indication for awareness to be, because that needs emptiness and silence !!

The word "mindfulness" in English can be defined in the two following ways below:


  1. the quality or state of being conscious or aware of something.
    "their mindfulness of the wider cinematic tradition"

2.a mental state achieved by focusing one's awareness on the present moment, while calmly acknowledging and accepting one's feelings, thoughts, and bodily sensations, used as a therapeutic technique.

I am neither in favour or against mindfulness but you seemed to dismiss it because you thought the word "mindfulness" meant the mind being full rather than empty. That is how I understood your comment above. Also, the two exclamation marks at the end of your quote above gave me the impression of anger or frustration. I just think that when any of us start a sentence with "Don't you see ..." it does not foster the atmosphere of exploring together as equals.

Anyway, always nice to debate with you Wim.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 03 Feb 2018 #209
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

richard head wrote:
Ken D wrote:

I was a bit shocked to find out the variations in the claimed transcripts of this talk and probably in many of the talks

I cannot understand why, with the available technology, Krishnamurti's talks were not filmed. As important a person as he was, nothing from his early period was accurately recorded. Sorry, but transcribing from memory (even K's memory) is not sufficient. It's almost laughable that no one (of his handlers) from that period thought about the importance of doing this. He should have had a full-time professional film crew documenting his public talks.

Very odd that this was allowed to happen....writing down the talks from memory. K approved of it? I know that K didn't allow filming of the talks until the mid '60's however. At least this is what is stated in the documentary on K done by PBS in the U.S. back in the mid 1960's. They claim that their documentary is the 1st time K allowed one of his talks to be filmed. This took place in Ojai around 1966 or thereabouts. Why he waited so long to allow this is anybody's guess. You can view in on YouTube as The Only Revolution, I think it's titled. Will check for a link later. K is indeed on fire in that talk.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 03 Feb 2018 #210
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3169 posts in this forum Offline

Here's the 1st filmed talk: https://youtu.be/lQVzDTzpHXA

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 181 - 210 of 233 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.)