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

Was Buddha's sathipattana meditation originally same as what K taught?


Displaying posts 91 - 120 of 146 in total
Sun, 22 Apr 2018 #91
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
on pourrait parler de cette cristallisation

tout ceci m'intéresse, j'y reviendrais dans la semaine...

là je vais fainéanter au soleil par vocation...pas si chaud le soleil en Irlande mais l'orientation de la maison plein sud et protégée des vents en fait un endroit remarquable pour cela..

sur ce bises..@+

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 #92
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1105 posts in this forum Offline

Daniel Paul. wrote:
so talk to you soon and thanks again..;-)

Sure. Thank you for the responses.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 #93
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
mais on distille de bonnes choses... on essaie

Salut Richard

avant de continuer j'ai besoin de savoir ce que tu mets derrière le mot cristallisation car c'est vital pour essayer de bien saisir ton propos..

je mets dessous des définitions du Larousse pour aider:

Amener une substance à l'état de cristaux, lui donner la contexture régulière des cristaux : Cristalliser du sucre.
Faire que quelque chose qui était diffus, inorganisé, imprécis devienne fort, cohérent, précis ; concrétiser : Ces attaques ont cristallisé la résistance.
Faire converger (en soi) des éléments épars : Cristalliser des inquiétude....

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 #94
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Dan wait, first there is the statement that someone is an idiot. Then the brain first sees the meaning of that sentence. Then it is met by the self image, is it not? It is the self image that gets hurt, is it not? So the question here is can we be free of the self image which is the psyche we have built up? Now although we may end the image still the brain must function & recognize the meaning of the sentence, is it not?

So we cannot consider whether the statement is a fact or not.Because then we allow the image to come in & is the image a truth or a comparative notion we have built up? If so how to ascertain whether the statement is a fact?-if comparative it is fictitious.

Well I do not really know about all that , this is a part of k's words and explanation-descriptive I naturally skip as it does not speak to me...it does not mean anything in terms of good/ not good or right / not right...this all thing about an image does not appeal either, it leaves me blank...again it means nothing more. So I cannot say about that you know.

I still see that I can consider whether a statement is a fact or not as it is really what matters most in my view, well so far that is the way I see that..

I started doing so when kind of 14 years old ish, as since childhood I was loaded with heavy suffering as well as with a very "good " sort of energy , I had to play by facts like "I am very down = fact ", OK that is a fact then I do what I find necessary in that matter...etc

See my own way often had been to be directed by what is wrong and somehow by doing something right in some ways about it..

What is wrong being something which hurts and-or does not function.
The joy we know contains also sadness ad fear of continuity so is wrong because it hurts...etc

As long as analysing is concerned there always will be comparing, because this is the way it simply is , the way it is functioning, it is a relative world which sees itself as an absolute world....and the only referent thought has is ...itself..then in a complex snowballing situation from cause to effects, thought ends up to perceive itself as absolute...etc

thought, although vital, is what (will) destroys us if we do not do the proper action about all that, it is so clear..

I will come to your other post later on..;-)

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. Mon, 23 Apr 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 #95
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

Daniel Paul. wrote:
derrière le mot cristallisation

on pourrait dire réification c'est plus approprié....

en fait l'exemple concret de "cristallisation", c'est par exemple, tu vois ce qui est sous tes yeux là, ton écran d'ordinateur, tes mains, la souris, etc... et bien on considère de manière innée que c'est à l'extérieur de soi, alors qu'en fait c'est une image cérébrale fabriquée via des signaux électriques provenant des 5 sens.

cette image (ce que l'on considère comme "à l'extérieur") est dans le cerveau. jusque là y'a pas de soucis (bien que ça commence déjà à remettre beaucoup de choses en question! LOL). le fait que le cerveau ai fait en sorte (à force d'expériences vécues test etc) de considérer cette image cérébrale comme extérieure est normal aussi si non on ne pourrait se mouvoir mais c'est ce que j'appelle une cristallisation de quelque chose de virtuel en une réalité absolue...

là ou ça se corse, c'est que par dessus cette cristallisation de base, il va y avoir d'autres cristallisations ayant pour nature l'attachement ou l'aversion...

mais en fait quand on y regarde de plus près c'est l'attachement et l'aversion de quoi??? puisque la substance réelle que l'on attribue aux choses y compris aux sensations (puisque celles ci se posent sur des "cristallisations) n'est pas absolue...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 #96
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
on pourrait dire réification c'est plus approprié....

Salut,merci de l'explication

je reprends une définition car ce mot m'est inconnu ne l'ayant jamais vu donc lu nulle part

réification: Tendance à rendre statique ce qui est mouvant, mobile.

bon pour moi même je vais utiliser des mots usuels donc je vais utiliser le mot "figé" qui de ce que pense saisir semble correspondre à ce que tu veux exprimer...

je ne sais pas ou ce que je vais dire mène...on verra .

Ainsi par exemple la mémoire va figer (réifier,cristalliser..) ce qu'elle a enregistré d'une expérience x, qui n'est plus l’expérience elle même qui est finie en même temps que elle se déroulait mais est une photo statique de l’expérience qui peut être alors analysée ou pas d'ailleurs..

bon l'image de l'ordi dans le cerveau je vois cela oui...avant que tu m'en parles c'était un "truc" dont je n'avais pas conscience , pour le moment cela ne change rien à ma perception, j'augmente juste la connaissance à ce sujet, qui pour le moment reste un sujet de connaissance cumulative qui comme dit K est liée à l’ignorance..ni bien ni mal mais on continue..

le fait que le cerveau considère cette image comme extérieure et je rajouterais aussi comme séparée du corps qui regarde, quelque soit les outils-capteur pour regarder oui est vital ,sinon je tombe de la falaise..

on peut remarquer que déjà là il y a séparation..est elle celle que l'on retrouve dans le conflit humain en soi contre soi, un soi factuel et un soi désiré, et aussi contre les autres ?? je ne cherche pas de réponse là consciemment, j'ai appris à ne plus analyser là à ce moment précis..

tu rajoutes: c'est ce que j'appelle une cristallisation de quelque chose de virtuel en une réalité absolue..donc le virtuel devient figé par la mémoire, là je peux analyser et fonctionner à partir e cela..enfin en gros

richard viillar wrote:
là ou ça se corse, c'est que par dessus cette cristallisation ( fixation) de base, il va y avoir d'autres cristallisations ayant pour nature l'attachement ou l'aversion...

oui l'analyse, le désir + oo - , etc tout cette analyse va produire des conclusions basée sur je veux/ je veux pas etc et le système de la pensée analytique se met a fonctionner par rapport à ces mémoires figées, comme n'importe quelle de nos machines pseudo intelligentes en fait..

richard viillar wrote:
mais en fait quand on y regarde de plus près c'est l'attachement et l'aversion de quoi??? puisque la substance réelle que l'on attribue aux choses y compris aux sensations (puisque celles ci se posent sur des "cristallisations) n'est pas absolue...

Pour fonctionner de ce que je vois la pensée analytique construit une somme de conclusions x, y ou z, , et ce que j'en sais à ce jours la plupart ne nous sont même plus connues à cause de ce que notre pensée est devenue c'est a dire basée sur le superficielle, elle en perd de vue que il n'y a pas que cela...

il y a donc une somme immense de conclusion diverses et variées souvent en contradictions les unes avec les autres, qui est en fait l'intervention de l'analyse s'aidant de la mémoire, ce qui est de l'ordre de ses capacités, s'aidant des mémoires enregistrées , pour à la fois comparer ce qui est fait ou perçu comme tel avec cette banque de donnée ,avec une mission majeure : la quête d'un état absolu parfait ou je suis bien..parfaitement bien ..

bon j'ai plus le temps mais juste pour finir car je dois partir: la quête de cet état parfait ou je suis bien est pour moi la tentative de fuir par opposition intellectuelle stupide la souffrance d'une vie seulement basée sur la mémoire t l'analyse de celle ci.

en clair je suis malheureux, je cherche donc le bonheur..plus con tu..oui on sait ;-))

etc..à suivre je pense..bon je file..

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 #97
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

je reprends le truc car effectivement tout le reste en découle... ;-)

Daniel Paul. wrote:
une définition

plutôt dans ce sens là

"Dans la pensée, la réification (du latin res, chose) consiste à considérer une idée abstraite comme une chose concrète" (réelle)

Daniel Paul. wrote:
Ainsi par exemple la mémoire va figer (réifier,cristalliser..) ce qu'elle a enregistré d'une expérience x, qui n'est plus l’expérience elle même qui est finie en même temps que elle se déroulait mais est une photo statique de l’expérience qui peut être alors analysée ou pas d'ailleurs..

c'est surtout le fait que ce qui a été réifié, soit pris comme quelque chose de concret, existant réelement alors que ça n'est qu'une "photo/tableau" qui non seulement fige mais qui ne fait que re-présenter, traduire de... on ne sait quoi. et non quelque chose d'existant en tant que tel...

enfin voilà... tout ceci ne sont que des mots qui n'arrivent qu'après avoir vécu vu une infime poussière peut être de ce que l'on nomme réalité..? tout ça pour dire que ci on tergiverse la dessus ça fait pas avancer le chmilblic... non le fait est qu'il y a souffrance pour les individus chaque jours dans notre petit quotidien d'humain et que la porte est à portée de tous pour peu que l'on "s'arrête", qu'on laisse et qu'on regarde...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 23 Apr 2018 #98
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

Les sensations révèlent beaucoup.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 #99
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1105 posts in this forum Offline

Hi Dan,

This is not so important but for interests sake. We talked about greater beings which both of us said is there.

Now Leadbeater said when on the way back to his apartment after discovering K that the great being was repeatedly saying, 'You found the boy, I've already started manifesting'.

Then many many years later Mrs.Zimballist asked K (Years of Fulfillment-so he was old, may be in his 80s), 'If the masters talked to you when you were young, why is it that they don't talk to you now?'.

K's answer was, 'There is no need. Lord is here now'.

That's the manifestation they talked about when TS organized & found K.

In 'Open Door' K said if you live the teachings it is possible to get in touch with that(with what he was)
(I'll get you the exact statement)

You see K said not to take him as an example(it's a different case-that his mind was vacant even as a boy etc). But he said other people,ordinary people like us, can do it if we understood the teachings.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 #100
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
"Dans la pensée, la réification (du latin res, chose) consiste à considérer une idée abstraite comme une chose concrète" (réelle)

Salut Richard, ah oui cela me rappelle mes années latin, res-rei comme dans res publiqua , la chose publique qui donna république mot qui n'a plus aucun sens..res mot qui avait aussi le sens de propriété dans le sens avoir, j'ai...etc car en latin les sens d'un seul mot sont souvent nombreux et connus de tous bien sur...pas comme aujourd'hui avec la destruction volontaire par la fine équipe du langage pour des raisons de rendre la discussion de + en + difficile comme d'exprimer les choses clairement etc..

tout ceci donne donc si je me fie au latin donne que l'abstrait et le concret sont considérés comme des choses toutes les deux, et que cela a aussi un sens en plus d'avoir , de posséder ...on retrouve donc ce
"moi je" possessif aussi dans ce mot, intéressant...ah le latin c'était quelque chose quand même..

richard viillar wrote:
c'est surtout le fait que ce qui a été réifié, soit pris comme quelque chose de concret, existant réellement alors que ça n'est qu'une "photo/tableau" qui non seulement fige mais qui ne fait que re-présenter, traduire de... on ne sait quoi. et non quelque chose d'existant en tant que tel...

bon je continue sur ton propos, prenons la souffrance mot abstrait en opposition à chaise mot concret, je fais juste une sorte de logique facile pour voir ici si cela va quelque part, souffrance devient concret, devient une chose, un objet quasiment mais aussi est ma propriété si je suis le sens latin de res/rei, ma souffrance qui est alors ma propriété si je eux dire...ici on est toujours dans la séparation il y a un possédant, moi , et une possession la souffrance..deux choses donc ..

Par ce chemin on retrouve là aussi la même faille car il y a un seul état ou une seule chose qui est je souffre..avec deux abstraits réifiés, moi et souffrance..car quand nous disons moi ce n'est plus par rapport au corps mais au mental, genre moi je centre du monde, le meilleur etc

tout ceci comme tu dis ne fait que re-présenter quelque chose et non quelque chose existant en tant que tel...cela montre d'ailleurs je viens juste de voir cela que la pensée qui de ce que l'on voit bien est un outil pour la chose pratique, va tout transformer y compris ce qui est abstrait et sans substance en chose concrète donc va tout réifier...

la pensée ne peut aborder ce qui est abstrait en fait semble suggérer tout ceci, comme c'est la seule capacité qui nous reste et que l’abstrait genre souffrance etc doit être abordé car c'est impératif , tout ce qui est grossier ou subtil va devenir grossier donc matière, je n’utilise pas grossier dans le sens d'aujourd'hui mais le sens matière, le subtil est au delà de la matière..

finalement ceci semble mettre en évidence la faute majeure et grave de la pensée qui envahit les champs abstraits ce qu'elle ne devrait pas faire du tout..la souffrance d’ailleurs signale cette faute de suite pour qui sait repérer cela ....

richard viillar wrote:
enfin voilà... tout ceci ne sont que des mots qui n'arrivent qu'après avoir vécu vu une infime poussière peut être de ce que l'on nomme réalité..? tout ça pour dire que ci on tergiverse la dessus ça fait pas avancer le schmilblick... non le fait est qu'il y a souffrance pour les individus chaque jours dans notre petit quotidien d'humain et que la porte est à portée de tous pour peu que l'on "s'arrête", qu'on laisse et qu'on regarde...

certes mais cela a permis de clarifier ce que tu essayes d'avancer, que je voyais à ma manière d'une certaine façon donc exprimée différemment, les deux vues se compétant bien sur

souffrance = faute = quotidien oui bien sur là est le point central en tous les cas dans ce que l'on perçoit ici, et là au regard de ce qui a été dit précédemment, la pensée ne peut , ne doit pas réifier la souffrance pour essayer de l'analyser, ceci est de suite une deuxième faute majeure qui va en entraîner des milliers d’autres à suivre etc donc ..

ce qui est aussi plus que important est que ceci comme tu soulignes est à la portée de tous...universel donc.......

solution et porte il y a donc...mais elle ne concerne pas la pensée dans sa mise en œuvre surtout pas , quoique la pensée est la première porte, c'est elle en tant que programme qui doit voir quoi faire en premier donc regarder sa propre défaite et responsabilité, la souffrance est là aussi pour amener cela si comme tu le dis on "s’arrête et regarde..

bises...@+

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 #101
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Hi Dan,

This is not so important but for interests sake. We talked about greater beings which both of us said is there.

Good morning Kapila

yes we did, I may have been?? in touch with such being but this is not sure that this was the case, when this kundalini took place some 45 years ish ago, whatever was the "contact" she is the one who triggered this kundalini, triggered the telepathic conversation from brain to brain in real time and told me not to try to do it as it would not work..of course I tried and of course it did not work..I am repeating this to be precise on the subject..

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Now Leadbeater said when on the way back to his apartment after discovering K that the great being was repeatedly saying, 'You found the boy, I've already started manifesting'.

Then many many years later Mrs.Zimballist asked K (Years of Fulfillment-so he was old, may be in his 80s), 'If the masters talked to you when you were young, why is it that they don't talk to you now?'.

K's answer was, 'There is no need. Lord is here now'.

That's the manifestation they talked about when TS organized & found K.

In 'Open Door' K said if you live the teachings it is possible to get in touch with that(with what he was)
(I'll get you the exact statement)

You see K said not to take him as an example(it's a different case-that his mind was vacant even as a boy etc). But he said other people,ordinary people like us, can do it if we understood the teachings.

Well one cannot take anyone as an example simply seems to be thee nature of things, you can take example even must take example in practical matter but not in non practical matters..

having said that one can listen to someone like k in such matters as a sort of dialogue with oneself..of course in the days we live and since a long time one would mainly but not only find charlatans, impostors and mythomaniacs and this in any "compartment" of the society ..

it seems to me that we all are ordinary in fact and it may be because some want to play the game to be extra-ordinary that many problems occur..

k possibly in his view but this I do not know could have perceived himself as an ordinary man too...some of his words seem to convey that

so what is left ? K mentioned the understanding of the teaching , can this be a lead ? I do not know, possibly it is for some , I guess it is yes...but having said that when he stated:

What is the good of my asking if there is happiness when I am suffering? Can I understand suffering? That is my problem, not how to be happy. I am happy when I am not suffering, but the moment I am conscious of it, it is not happiness. So, I must understand what is suffering. Can I understand what is suffering when a part of my mind is running away seeking happiness, seeking a way out of this misery? So must I not, if I am to understand suffering, be completely one with it, not reject it, not justify it, not condemn it, not compare it, but completely be with it and understand it?
The truth of what is happiness will come if I know how to listen. I must know how to listen to suffering; if I can listen to suffering I can listen to happiness because that is what I am.

J. Krishnamurti, The Book of Life

for me this is one of those first and last step in one direction then one will play by ear and see what is there next if this is lived, sometimes, rarely, often ,powerful , mild , never etc etc a libitum but whatever is there the interest is about what does not come from thought , so beyond that if one may put it that way with our too limited words etc

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 24 Apr 2018 #102
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

Daniel Paul. wrote:
certes mais cela a permis de clarifier

c'est clair mais je ne disais pas ça pour notre échange car depuis le temps qu'on cose tous les deux on sais de quoi il en retourne.. non je disais ça parce que la plus grande partie des échanges intellectuels sont des fuites inconscientes pour ne pas mettre le pied à l'étrier...

de ce que je vois la sensation physique constitue une belle "porte"...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 25 Apr 2018 #103
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
non je disais ça parce que la plus grande partie des échanges intellectuels sont des fuites inconscientes pour ne pas mettre le pied à l'étrier...

de ce que je vois la sensation physique constitue une belle "porte"..

salut, oui un tel dialogue sur un clavier par l’intermédiaire d'un écran le tout d'une manière indirecte ne met aucun pied à l'étrier, le pied à l'étrier se produira , ou pas, si je vois le symptôme d'erreur appelé entre autre souffrance, et le vis en le laissant être..

que veux tu dire par "la sensation physique constitue une belle porte ?

à+

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 25 Apr 2018 #104
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

Daniel Paul. wrote:
"la sensation physique constitue une belle porte ?

du coup là j'en reviens à ce que je disais plus haut:

" je pense, que le point de départ est une question de sensations (5 sens), qui sont traitées sous l'attachement (agréables), l’aversion (désagréables) et neutres. "moi/je" est aussi une sensation" malgré le fait que l'on s'attache à ne le voir que comme de la pensée...

du coup, je constate que derrière et après chaque vécu entant que "moi" ou "je" il y a une sensation physique si l'on observe bien... même sans rien faire de particulier, simplement le fait de sentir que "j' " existe ... c'est une sensation, "j'ai" mal, c'est une sensation etc...

la porte est là en observant la sensation le voile du "je, j', moi" tend à se dissoudre...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 #105
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1105 posts in this forum Offline

Daniel Paul. wrote:
told me not to try to do it as it would not work..of course I tried and of course it did not work..I am repeating this to be precise on the subject..

What's that please Dan?-that is if it's something you are willing to reveal. I am just curious.

Daniel Paul. wrote:
it seems to me that we all are ordinary in fact and it may be because some want to play the game to be extra-ordinary that many problems occur..

k possibly in his view but this I do not know could have perceived himself as an ordinary man too...some of his words seem to convey that

Yes. Nobody is special. Usain Bolt is also not special. The speed is not his. It's human muscles, human speed.

However K's life was rather unusual.The TS, the discovery, the expectation of a world teacher etc., etc.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 #106
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:

Daniel Paul. wrote:

told me not to try to do it as it would not work..of course I tried and of course it did not work..I am repeating this to be precise on the subject..

What's that please Dan?-that is if it's something you are willing to reveal. I am just curious.

Hello Kapila

well I mentioned it to say that it is from experiment that I was talking, as about this specific moment, well for the brain all of a sudden one is connected and all the usual parameters given by thought are gone...all is equal, there is no small big all all that..gone...as soon as thought is not interfering misery is gone...etc of course..only that will solve our main human problems ...what produces it is the turning on by itself of some of our other capacities, that area is forbidden to thought yet some of it can be memorised but very superficially only under the form : yes it happened..

As to this person talking , there is a specificity in such telepathic talk that I do not mention now anymore on purpose as I came across too many mythomaniacs , then I know if someone is repeating, inventing or not..I have read it nowhere, yet it must be somewhere of course in very old scriptures like in some Chinese or Indian old scriptures as for me of course the history we are told is false and after some very extensive researches in the matter I see that my view is right...as a serious joke even tomorrow history is false..
Then I agree with k somehow and mentally there is no change since our beginning which is unknown to us...the only change is in what we have become and since for me and some we have lost capacities in fact not only we are not evolving at all mentally but we are even dangerously regressing..I think that our existence as a species is now at stake ..as a potential possibility..etc

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
However K's life was rather unusual.The TS, the discovery, the expectation of a world teacher etc., etc.

agreed yes.The entire k's life is totally uncommon...and rather deeply interesting by all aspects and means...including these contacts with "spirits" or masters when younger..

I will come back to one of your post I did not read just realised it...cheers for now

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 #107
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
la porte est là en observant la sensation le voile du "je, j', moi" tend à se dissoudre...

Salut, oui je comprends mieux merci...oui effectivement..

cheerio

Dan...

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 #108
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:

Daniel Paul. wrote:

Well I do not get this point I think.

I mean memory of incidents we have & we can use it for day today functioning.

For example K took Rajagopal to courts for transferring property donated to K for R's personnel ownership. K's point was he was responsible to the people who donated the money to use it for the purpose they donated it for. Otherwise it would be cheating the donors. So he said to recover the money.

Now the court case went on for years. K had the memory of what happened, that R embezzled. He took action. But the difference will be , without the image, any action will be without hatred, aversion or anger but out of necessity.

You know K even said that had he known R was still a member of TS he wouldn't have involved him with his work. This is what I am saying. Memory of what happened, of all the incidents, will be there. You can objectively think considering everything & act. But without hatred or repulsion.

Surely a known thief you cannot recommend to guard a bank. If you don't have the image you will help him, help him get over all that, but you can consider his actions & take decisions.

Is it possible to function without chaos otherwise?

Well kapila about a known thieve guarding the bank, actually this is what is taking place in the western world for sure, the thieves have won and the federal bank in the us and the one in Europe is run by gangsters...from the same "team" .

that would not take place if the people of earth were aware, conscious, etc..so would voluntarily cooperate and share.

So memory exists as a fact...it could be that there is memory as such and memory as a hindrance to the situation..

when a situation is lived fully as k mentions often, then it leaves no scars, yet a memory of what took place can still be there but won't bring any nasty effects.When saying that I have in mind so in memory a specific very tragic moment which could or even should have left to my death by ..someone and because somehow it was fully lived then it left no mental scars...that is what I mean...

now what does it practically mean to fully live would be one of those excellent questions ..

What if k mainly talks from those moments where memory if there is not an hindrance ? then one sees the memory as it is , it is so not loaded with hindrances whatever they are..

then when one is obviously doing something wrong to you,or to humanity etc factually doing so, well to be able to see that already needs some sort of clarity about oneself and about the situation like to be able to instantly know if I am not wrong, so it needs a very swift mind, and we have that in store but usually we do not use it as it is not turned on and the masters have some vague clue here and they control that in us ..

but say we have such tool at hand because we have done the proper thing , then what ? one meets the situation, instantly understand most if not all of the the whys and wherefores of it...then immediately acts out of this clear "vision"..

if we only have thought ,well good luck is needed as it will be some sort of totally random action based on my desires and those being mostly unconscious..well..

So I would not know about the rajagopal case , only k and concerned people may say, and yet some may lie; as far as you say here it seems quite straight forward to me anyway. but I understand that you brought that case here as a matter of understanding about memories hindrances...so I see it that way and have applied it many times, whether in casual everyday petty problems or not...at the level where one meets the violence of others or one's own violence towards oneself...

thought for me and some if not many will always function in chaos as long as out other capacities are not turned on, it does not need to be fully turned on to create a radically different relation to oneself and the world ..thought is only a tool, it is vital for practicality ONLY, as a tool it must be guided by a "hand"...we have that in store too...
not using it brings heavy pain and nonsense...heavy pain and nonsense are suffering, suffering being a catalyst is there to help when it is fully lived..

this is what we do not do any more...

quite simple , anyone can understand that..it does not need any level , any studies...

cheerio

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. Thu, 26 Apr 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 26 Apr 2018 #109
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

Then k as often gave us more hint in the today's quote about that and bringing the unconscious into this must be absolutely done somehow ...this is what does by itself the fact to properly live suffering as a catalyst, as to solve problems it will include what is unconscious as well , I know that as a fact by experiment, of course as usual involuntary experiments..as in the matter there is no possible prediction at all..

Krishnamurti Quote of the Day

Ojai, California | 2nd Public Talk 21st May, 1944

To understand any problem we must give our undivided attention to it. Both the conscious and the unconscious or the inner mind must take part in solving it, but most of us unfortunately try to dissolve it superficially, that is, with that little part of the mind which we call the conscious mind, with the intellect only. Now our consciousness or our mind-feeling is like an iceberg, the greater part of it hidden deep down, only a fraction of it showing outside. We are acquainted with that superficial layer but it is a confused acquaintance; of the greater, the deep unconscious, the inner part, we are hardly aware. Or, if we are, it becomes conscious through dreams, through occasional intimations but those dreams and hints we translate, interpreting according to our prejudices and to our ever limited intellectual capacities. And so those intimations lose their deep, pure significance.

If we wish to really understand our problem then we must first clear up the confusion in the conscious, in the superficial mind, by thinking and feeling it out as widely and intelligently as possible, comprehensively and dispassionately. Then into this conscious clearing, open and alert, the inner mind can project itself. When the contents of the many layers of consciousness have been thus gathered and assimilated, only then does the problem cease to be.

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. Thu, 26 Apr 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 #110
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1105 posts in this forum Offline

What do you mean here please?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 #111
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1105 posts in this forum Offline

Interesting quotation Dan.Thanks.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 #112
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
What do you mean here please?

Good morning, can you be more specific as as I do not know what point you are mentioning?

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 #113
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

So Kapila I am going to extrapolate from your question and possibly guess about your question because such question can't wait the day after for a response and so on and as I have time...

first again I bring the daily quote here as it remarkably fits the all subject in my view..
Krishnamurti Quote of the Day

Madras, India. | Public Talk 22nd October, 1947

What I feel important in this is that each one of us should solve this problem and not leave it to the leaders. This problem, this catastrophe requires, not static thinking but revolutionary thinking, a thinking which is not based on any ideology, whether of Hinduism, Nationalism or Capitalism. It requires a change in our thinking. And so, the approach to the problem becomes all important. The "how' is more important than 'action'. So, to know how to approach this catastrophe is more important than what to do about it. **That"how' can only be understood, when we are capable of looking at the problem through ourselves and not through formula. That is, as it is a world catastrophe, it requires a mind that is capable of looking at it without any prejudice. You cannot look at it as a Brahmin or as a Mussalman, as a Christian or as a Buddhist. Because we have looked at it in the past in this way we have brought about this crisis. Because of tradition and other absurdities among us, we have brought about this problem and if we approach the problem with the same mentality, we shall not clarify or understand it, but only further it. It is as if we were standing near a precipice with our minds biased, and we have come to that bias through centuries of division, communal and social, rich and poor; divisions of formulae, organized religious divisions and so on have brought us to this appalling misery and `confusion'. If we would understand it, we must go away from the precipice and look at the problem. We cannot stand at the precipice, at the edge of the precipice and try to solve the problem. On the contrary, we must completely abandon those causes which have brought us to that stage and look at the problem from a distance and that is where our difficulty is.**

We know the catastrophe, we know the sociological causes of the wars that have been fought and the wars that are going to be fought. Preparations are going on with marvellous skill for the third war and you and I know that is the edge of the precipice. I do not think India is going to escape from it. Most of us realize, how comparatively serious the whole thing is. We read about it all in the papers but are distracted away by our immediate demands and pleasures and pains. But the catastrophe is enormously serious and that is why if we would salvage something out of this catastrophe, we would become very serious and feel sorry for the absurdities of class divisions and the like. If the problem were serious enough we would do something about it. If you had a toothache you would do something immediately. But this pain is much greater and more grievous than a toothache. It is more continuous, more distant and that is why we are doing nothing. We are looking to leaders, gurus, formulae, systems, etc., we look either to Moscow or to Washington. So, we are at the edge of it and we have to confront it.

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 28 Apr 2018 #114
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

then all this is the very same which is of course taking place in one's life, the global disaster started in one's mind first of all..

and the outer disaster is brought by the side effects on not properly living suffering, by sorrow's running away side effects , by the running away of all of us etc so by the total ignorance of what it is, so of its roots, all one is usually trying to do is to try to run away and forget..which does not work at all because out of many reasons our unconscious mind is much more powerful than the superficial mind ..in clear one does not know what is happening, one does not understand it at all..caught between desires, fears, hopes,despairs,suffering, sorrow, refusal of death, and so on..

and I say that for myself I have seen ,practically since childhood how suffering, so called suffering, plays an important part in all that...we have no clue about it, especially psycho bla bla....

if one does nothing about that, like if we as a group do nothing about the outer decomposition of societies all over the planet which is the case, then our fate is known ( in our case we are not aware of it) from the beginning, the first step is the last step works in this case as well...

Chronologically speaking I see that OK I am born, and quite immediately thrown out in a ruthless world which is mankind choice and creation, not a destiny nor a fate but an insane will of desire and ignorance, quite immediately life becomes conflict, violence, a bit of joy to have what ones wants etc

life is pain , k says above in the quote: But this pain is much greater and more grievous than a toothache. It is more continuous, more distant and that is why we are doing nothing.

one more time he pinpointed it as often if not usual..

adding : We are looking to leaders, gurus, formulae, systems, etc.,. So, we are at the edge of it and we have to confront it.

talking about WW3....and the fact that pain must be "confronted" ..

and we do nothing in that matter...

chronologically pain must be lived, understood, solved...

that is the start and anyone on earth can relate to that...

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. Sat, 28 Apr 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 #115
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

Salut Dan, Kapila,

En ce qui concerne une éventuelle comparaison entre B (et non pas le bouddhisme) et K (et non pas le Krishnamurtisme), j'aurais tendance à prendre les choses dans l'autre sens... qu'a dit K que B n'ai pas dit?

This post was last updated by richard viillar Sun, 29 Apr 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 #116
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

Hello Dan, Kapila,

As for a possible comparison between B (and not Buddhism) and K (and not Krishnamurtism), I would tend to take things in the other direction ... what did K say that B n did not say?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 #117
Thumb_2018-01-20-120616 Daniel Paul. Ireland 89 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
Hello Dan, Kapila,

As for a possible comparison between B (and not Buddhism) and K (and not Krishnamurtism), I would tend to take things in the other direction ... what did K say that B n did not say?

hello Richard, well first chronologically what you bring is is obviously right

Yet as we have not the original words from B, it is hard to be define

Actually my reading knowledge of what B taught is limited, yet I would be absolutely interested in knowing more about that, up to me then...this was the idea of the thread started by Kapila..I guess that is why you bring that here of course.

I would seriously guess that bearing in mind the differences of words and culture of their time, they should be on the same wavelength because in this matter we talk about there really seem to be some identical patterns all over the place..if and when it is about dukkha ,wrongly translated by suffering.

etc of course...cheerio..

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. Sun, 29 Apr 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 #118
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 68 posts in this forum Offline

Daniel Paul. wrote:
if and when it is about dukkha ,wrongly translated by suffering.

The Sanskrit term "du?kha" probably comes from the following: "su" and "du?" are prefixes that indicate that something is "good" or "bad", "correct" or "incorrect"; the word "kha" meant "hole" and specifically represented the "hub of a wheel" or the location where the axis of a wheel was located. The original Sanskrit word "sukha" therefore means "that turns perfectly", and so "du?kha" is often compared to a wheel that does not rotate properly. We could therefore translate it as "that does not go wrong", "unpleasant" or "unsatisfactory"

Je trouve cette traduction correcte

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 #119
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1105 posts in this forum Offline

richard viillar wrote:
As for a possible comparison between B (and not Buddhism) and K (and not Krishnamurtism), I would tend to take things in the other direction ... what did K say that B n did not say?

Hello Richard,

As Dan said Buddha's exact words are not known. So your question becomes tough. However K himself says in Questioning Krishnamurti' that something very definite from the Buddha has come down through Buddha's disciples. I think so too.

K would say why compare! Well I started the thread.

K talked of another tool. Said thinking cannot do it.Other tool is awareness which is not tainted with thinking.B taught 'sihiya' which is awareness.Both K & B said the cause of suffering is the 'self'.

Buddha has four (present scriptures) foundations of mindfulness. This is awareness K talked about.

Buddha has 3 types of awareness- manasikaraya , yonisomanisikaraya & sati samprajanna.

K talked about awareness(observation), then seeing observer is the observes(= yonisomanisikaraya I think.Which is awareness at the beginning of a thought)

Then K talked about attention. This is awareness without a center. (in the first the center is not abolished. This is sathi sampajanna I feel)

Then B has four changes- 1)sothapanna 2)sakurdagami 3)anagami 4) arahat.

K said there are no stages. In 'Ending of Time' he discusses with Dr. Bohm & said-

1) the particular dies into the general.(dismantling the image building process)
2)then general dies into emptiness.(K said we can put a stop here. However inquired further)
3)beyond emptiness there is energy. This is compassion which is intelligence.
4)then insight into energy is 'sacred' or truth.

So as far as I can make out the two teachers taught the same.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 29 Apr 2018 #120
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1105 posts in this forum Offline

However Richard according to Buddhist scriptures there is something called 'karma'.

Sciptures say enlightened people can get 6 different seeings.It says not all the enlightened beings get all the 6! Karma is one. Compassion is one.

I don't know about that. I just repeated here something which I know nothing about.

I think K was only interested in talking about ending sorrow. He was certainly not interested in anything else.I think the liberation K & B talked about are the same including meditation.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 91 - 120 of 146 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.)