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

K's superstitions


Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 180 in total
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #61
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1191 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
I have seen, I have arrived and I know I have arrived because I'm at peace."

You know Huguette, it is possible to be clear about somethings. Not only me there are others who seen to be clear about some things. Such as thought cannot solve this etc., etc.

Yes, self knowledge is endless inquiry.Perception (seeing) is now & from moment to moment.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #62
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Perception sees, but does not turn that perception into truth. If I turn perception into truth, it becomes knowledge, experience.

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
What do you mean here? Did you mean to type memory & typed truth there? If not what does it mean?

I mean something like this: one minute ago, or a week or a year ago, there was an insight, a perception. And a minute, a week or a year later, the intellect remembers it and thinks, "I have perceived the truth of that, and now I still perceive the truth of it". Whereas now it is only memory, not perception. Now it is experience. The intellect - not understanding the nature of self - has turned the memory into "perception", thinks the memory IS perception. It is not perception itself doing this, but the intellect mistaking the remembered perception for truth. So there is now no perception, no understanding. Only experience.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Thu, 28 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #63
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5119 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
For those of you suddenly compassionate for me, who wish for me to look at myself, as if I hadn't

Have you? You put it in the past. You're not looking anymore is what you're implying. And it's not about you personally or sudden compassion. Knowledge conditions. We need technical knowledge in order to do all the things we need to do to live. The problem is psychological knowledge. The knowledge that conditions us psychologically and stifles understanding of who we are from moment to moment.

Have you decided to pursue this quixotic quest to uncover the "real" K because you feel you have failed at understanding what the man pointed out? You know it's not a question of succeeding or failing but just watching, being aware of your thoughts. But with the acquisition and accumulation of knowledge, whether correct or not, is just conditioning your mind making it so much more difficult to see yourself. Are you aware of why you have set out on this quest? Is it so you can be someone? The person who exposed the "real" Krishnamurti?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #64
Thumb_k2 Ken D United States 72 posts in this forum Offline

There's the past you recall, and there's the past you've lived. You cannot erase the second one with some trick of the mind or awareness. Choices produce consequences in the real world, in life. Disconnecting from the past doesn't erase it. Krishnamurti traveled and spoke, basically doing the same thing over and over again for 50 years. He did not walk away from that past activity and become a barista or an auto mechanic.

"The 'I' is not contaminated by society; it is the contamination." Krishnamurti

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #65
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

Jack,

It seems to me that you’re doing the same thing as idiot by focusing on another's behaviour, as he/she is doing. Am I mistaken? I don’t want to make you angry but to speak frankly just as you are speaking frankly. As I see it, this is too important to pussyfoot around. Being frank does not mean to blindly attack each other out of anger, out of conditioning, the very thing we are intersted in learning about. We’re all interested in self-understanding, I think. And, ultimately, to understand we must face our inner self.

Where anger (or fear, etc.) is triggered by someone else’s behaviour, it is still the inner anger I must face in order to understand the human being.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Thu, 28 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #66
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

Ken,

“The past you’ve lived” is erased by life itself, as I see it. Artifacts and accounts of it may remain, but they are not the actual past. The past itself no longer exists.

The only past there is IS the past we remember. The issue is not whether to erase, deny, suppress, repress, rewrite or revise the past but to understand it. There is the need to understand it - not historically, cynically, analytically, not to condemn, justify it or commemorate it, but to understand the mental processes and nature of the past. To see that knowledge conditions the mind is not to disconnect from the past. To observe the mind which holds the past is not to disconnect from the past. No?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #67
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 350 posts in this forum Offline

I wonder if we can deal directly with just one of the things K did?

According to Mary Zimbalist, K drew circles around places where he stayed for protection. I think this was true for both temporary sojourns like hotel rooms and for more permanent abodes like Arya Vihara in Ojai.

Is this a teaching? As someone interested in K teaching, should I draw a circle around my residence? Will I and any others who reside with me gain protection? What would we be protected from?

If this is not a teaching, why not? It is something he did.

How does this relate to the important question of self? On the surface, it seems that concern for protection boosts the self, boosts division. Drawing a circle is division, isn't it? So is this activity at odds with K teaching?

Here are some of my own thoughts (yes, thoughts, god forbid) to get the conversation started.

Drawing circles was not a public teaching but was something K did in private. Nevertheless, it is certainly something that can be investigated.

K was extraordinarily sensitive. Sensitive to what? Well, for one thing to people. And most people have quite a bit of interior conflict. I believe it could be quite tiring for K to be exposed to the non-stop inner and outer violence of people. So he would take retreat. He would take walks in nature, alone or with a close friend or two. He would rest.

In addition, K was raised in Theosophy to be sensitive to various occult phenomena. Something like astral travel to the Masters, to me, likely involved imagination and taking that imagined experience as real. It would not be surprising if he felt that there were good and evil spirits, and possibly this came from occult training. In fact, in Mary Z's book he seemed to feel that since he was doing important work for good that he was a particular target for bad entities. To me, there are no masters, no spirits, no psychic entities. Experiencing them is just projection. As far as I know, K never did repudiate masters, spirits, or psychic entities. He very likely considered them to be real.

To me, this is just weird stuff K believed, either under the influence of his upbringing, or that he arrived at on his own, or both.

It is reasonable to take care of your practical necessities, like food, shelter, etc. Such activity is, in a way, selfish but also necessary. But creating psychic shelter is, to me, superstition, and unnecessary.

I welcome your thoughts.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Thu, 28 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #68
Thumb_k2 Ken D United States 72 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
“The past you’ve lived” is erased by life itself, as I see it. Artifacts and accounts of it may remain, but they are not the actual past. The past itself no longer exists.

The past is not simply memory or recollection. Your body houses so many years of biological living. If you've taken drugs or drank in excess, the body reflects those activities at this very moment. If the past no longer exists and is irrelevant to the present moment, then why must there must be freedom from the known?

"The 'I' is not contaminated by society; it is the contamination." Krishnamurti

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #69
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:

The past itself no longer exists.

Ken D wrote:
The past is not simply memory or recollection. Your body houses so many years of biological living. If you've taken drugs or drank in excess, the body reflects those activities at this very moment. If the past no longer exists and is irrelevant to the present moment, then why must there must be freedom from the known?

Ken,

The physical consequences of past abuses are a fact in the now. The intellect may or may not know the past behaviours which caused today’s consequences, but whether or not it knows, the biological consequences are now. The intellect may think things like, “if only I hadn’t done that”, but that thinking, its dwelling on those memories, IS the psychological past.

The known, the past, dictates my behaviour, thoughts and emotions and causes me distress NOW. I'm a slave to my compulsions, fears, anger, hates, habits, and so on.

There doesn’t HAVE TO BE freedom from the known. Who says there “must be”? But, observing our bondage, isn’t that what we want? If I don’t want freedom, I’m free not to want it.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Thu, 28 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #70
Thumb_k2 Ken D United States 72 posts in this forum Offline

"In the morning, K said he had slept badly, had nightmares. “Evil ones were trying to push me, fight me, and I was trying to make a circle around myself but it didn’t work and finally I woke up. I was trying to make a circle around the house. I knew you were in there, and I was trying to a make circle.” When I asked him about why the circle didn’t work, he said, “Well, it did, because I woke up.” He had cramps in his right foot and had to crawl on the floor with it. Then he went to sleep, and the other foot had a cramp and again he had to crawl to relieve it. Then we started to talk again about making the circle, and he said it was something he didn’t want to talk about. I said was it magic? He said, “Yes, sort of it.” I asked if he had learned it— was he taught it? He said no, but he knew things like that. I asked why it shouldn’t be told to other people. I said I wasn’t asking him the magic itself, but why it shouldn’t be told? He said, “I have an instinct about it. I’ve never talked about it.” Then he said, “Do you remember when we first came to this house? [Pine Cottage] I wanted to run from it, it was bad, it was all wrong. And then we came and stayed and it became all right and it got better. Do you remember that?” I remembered. And out of this he told me he does this thing whenever he comes to a house— Brockwood, Malibu, the cottage, or presumably Chalet Tannegg, or a hotel room, he does what he called drawing a circle around the place, and he said that when he is not with me it is difficult for him to do it— when I am traveling or away, yet even when I go to town in the car alone he does it to some degree to protect me. In this there was what I gathered was the crux. One does not protect, as he put it, “Maria or one’s self. There is no self in this because there is no opposition. The intrinsic part is the non-self and non-opposition.”

Zimbalist, Mary. In the Presence of Krishnamurti: Mary's Unfinished Book. Holistic Education, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

"The 'I' is not contaminated by society; it is the contamination." Krishnamurti

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #71
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 533 posts in this forum Offline

" In other words, if you are deeply invested in K, does that affect how you feel about some of these matters? " ( #43 idiot?)

When one is deeply affected by K , the man and the teaching .... these are the matters one is least bothered with . Frankly speaking it feels like one is leaving the majestic elephant with all its elegance, grace to pass by and holding on to the least important foot steps ... Sorry the intent is not to point fingers at any body but that is the analogy that came to mind while reading about this blog .
In fact I was searching for some extract posted by Ken ( now it's not seen ) where in K expressing his extreme unhappiness at being called , pointed out so often when people used to address him as ' messiah ' and such other names . Still how he continued relentlessly in his ' work ' giving his entire life and everything for it . How can one not touched by such 'humanness ' and such dedication for that self assigned job of his which had taken away the one important quality which we all enjoy and which he was deprived of in his life . The anonymity and joys of being what we are and leading lives the way we like ....

Major thrust and crux of K teaching is very well brought out by Jack and especially by Huguette in their eloquent posts to a great extent.

This post was last updated by pavani rao Thu, 28 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 28 Jun 2018 #72
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1191 posts in this forum Offline

Sir,(Idiot)
I have to repeat. I don't think this circle drawing by K can be explained unless we investigate ourselves to the level K did.

As you know in 1922 he underwent some pains. This went on for 1 year & continued thereafter in milder degrees throughout his life. It is at this point I believe he started telling some entities to leave etc., who were not visible to others.

So how to know what happened to the body with those pains? Did it come to a different level of sensitivity? You say it was some abnormality? The great Buddha who seemed to have spoken something very similar to K also had a headache & a bach ache according to the scriptures. It is said sometimes he would leave in the midst of a discussion telling Sariputtra to continue. So possibility is there that the Buddha also experienced these pains. By the way a similar account is mentioned in Indian scriptures. They call it kundalini.

So I feel you are putting the cart before the horse. I myself thought after reading the biography by Mary Lutyans that I wouldn't have read K if I had read these biographies first. (Gosh, I am glad things didn't happen that way)

So we have to take the journey. You cannot say at the starting point that midway there is a beautiful tall tree or not. For that you must go that distance.

Personally , since I am 40-42 I think Masters are there.I think this eternal dimension K talked about is there although I know very little as to how etc. I think it's a question of the mind coming to different subtler energies.

Personally I wouldn't say drawing circles is superstition unless I walk to the very end of things.200 years ago if we were told of an unmanned craft sending images from Mars we would have dismissed it as wild imagination.

You know Sir, once I met a man who said firmly that he doesn't accept man went to moon!!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #73
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1191 posts in this forum Offline

You know according to the great Buddha there are all kinds of beings. Spirits, apparitions, etc. Some type called opapathika also. Those are some type that come into being without a male & a female getting together!!

I am not saying to accept this. Accept the Buddha or K. But I feel we cannot answer this unless we perceive life itself directly-what causes life- & see what causes moving life.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #74
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 350 posts in this forum Offline

I'm surprised at the reaction here. It really seems like many people want to look away and not face this. Or else they want to rationalize it, or minimize it.

This is the kind of reaction I would expect from a devout Christian asked about the part of the bible that says, "Blessed is the man who takes your babies and bashes them against the rocks." Yes, it really is in the bible: Psalm 137:9. (It reflects a vengeful point in Jewish history where they were very angry at what their enemies had done.)

K was a bit kooky, in some respects. Some of you are, too, evidently. Lots of people on this planet are convinced about ridiculous things, so welcome to the club.

When I first discovered K decades ago, I was amazed at how free of trappings the teaching was. Just what actually is. And some of what he says is remarkably free of baggage. But there are some interesting oddities if you open your eyes and look honestly. I am not afraid to do so.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 29 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #75
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1167 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
To me, this is just weird stuff K believed, either under the influence of his upbringing, or that he arrived at on his own, or both.

It is reasonable to take care of your practical necessities, like food, shelter, etc. Such activity is, in a way, selfish but also necessary. But creating psychic shelter is, to me, superstition, and unnecessary.

It's your freedom to think as such, but The question stay if It's true.

Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #76
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1273 posts in this forum Offline

Apart from whether one can actually 'know' the truth about any of this, it is 'comforting' in a way isnt it, to realize that if one is in this other 'realm' of reality, and one comes up against evil or harmful spirits or forces,... that all that's really needed for 'protection' is a simple, drawn, circle! ;)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #77
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5119 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
It seems to me that you’re doing the same thing as idiot by focusing on another's behaviour, as he/she is doing

I don't care what it seems like to you. I wasn't talking to you. I am asking idiot questions about his motives and conclusions. He, on the other hand, is making positive statements about someone based largely on his, idiot's, own conditioning which distorts his perception and makes one question his motives. I am questioning his objectivity and the appropriateness of his going after K instead of trying to understand what K pointed out. K, himself, said many times that he, the man, is not important only what he has pointed out. Let's stick with that and not start and old woman's rumor mill here on Kinfonet.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #78
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5119 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
I'm surprised at the reaction here. It really seems like many people want to look away and not face this. Or else they want to rationalize it, or minimize it.

Maybe it's because the rest of us may not have the petty mind required to look at this?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #79
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
It really seems like many people want to look away and not face this. Or else they want to rationalize it, or minimize it.

This is the kind of reaction I would expect from a devout Christian

in the context of this forum, in the context of hungering for the truth about the meaning of life - which is essentially what the forum is about, isn't it? - have you asked yourself why you care about what many people want to look at? Have you asked yourself why you have expectations of others?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Fri, 29 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #80
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
I don't care what it seems like to you. I wasn't talking to you. I am asking idiot questions about his motives and conclusions. He, on the other hand, is making positive statements about someone based largely on his, idiot's, own conditioning which distorts his perception and makes one question his motives. I am questioning his objectivity and the appropriateness of his going after K instead of trying to understand what K pointed out.

Of course you don't have to care about how things seem to me. But don't you want to understand what K pointed to --- which is the necessity to understand oneself, one's own mind? Isn't that what he pointed out?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #81
Thumb_k2 Ken D United States 72 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
In fact I was searching for some extract posted by Ken ( now it's not seen ) where in K expressing his extreme unhappiness at being called , pointed out so often when people used to address him as ' messiah ' and such other names.

"As I go about the street the people nudge each other and point me out; the other day one chap said to the other, 'There goes that chap printed in the papers, the Messiah!' Then they burst out laughing. I should have laughed too if I hadn't been there or involved in any way...The other day as I was walking along, someone said, 'Hallo, there goes that fellow with 30 lives'. I nearly collapsed on the floor. Lord how I hate it all and I dislike all the publicity and I shall have it all my life. Heavens, what have I done to deserve all this." letter to Lady Emily June 2, 1922

"The 'I' is not contaminated by society; it is the contamination." Krishnamurti

This post was last updated by Ken D Fri, 29 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #82
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1191 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Apart from whether one can actually 'know' the truth about any of this, it is 'comforting' in a way isnt it, to realize that if one is in this other 'realm' of reality, and one comes up against evil or harmful spirits or forces,... that all that's really needed for 'protection' is a simple, drawn, circle! ;)

There can be some reason for this. K said he speaks to the tiger consciousness etc. Also walking with Mrs.Zimballist he said once that someone started coming behind & he said firmly to stay where it was.

So I think he had been drawing circles & talking to the consciousness of these beings & saying not to enter it.

For God's sake, I don't know this level of things. Just attempted some explanation.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #83
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1191 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
I'm surprised at the reaction here. It really seems like many people want to look away and not face this.

Not reaction. We came up with responses.

How to face this? You are trying to pre judge the behaviour of someone who was saying the mind can undergo radical transformation without investigating what that transformation is.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #84
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5119 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Not reaction. We came up with responses.

How to face this? You are trying to pre judge the behaviour of someone who was saying the mind can undergo radical transformation without investigating what that transformation is.

Excellent response and very complete. Thank you.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #85
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 350 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
in the context of this forum, in the context of hungering for the truth about the meaning of life - which is essentially what the forum is about, isn't it?

No, sir, this forum is about Krishnamurti. Someone interested in the truth or the meaning of life from the perspective of Socrates or Kant would probably do well to look elsewhere. We're here to discuss K. That's what I have been doing: discussing some of K's actions and if and how they relate to his teachings.

Did K discuss "hungering for the truth about the meaning of life?"

He discussed the futility of seeking, another word for hungering.

He discussed how truth is inclusion not exclusion. And how truth is seeing the true in the true and the false in the true, the true in the false and false in the false. Those are very important and actually relevant. While some may want to exclude some of his actions or statements from discussion, such exclusion is avoidance of the truth.

He discussed how life is it's own meaning, how living is meaning itself.

Most importantly, he talked about awareness outside of time, where there is no perception from a center, where the sacred, the actual is.

But he also talked about drawing circles. Discussing that is to look at something in his life, something that to me is quite silly. K had no difficulty dismissing nonsense others believed in. If Joe Nobody believed in drawing protection circles, many people here would probably dismiss it as nonsense. But because we're talking about K, there is a great rushing to his defense.

Huguette . wrote:

have you asked yourself why you care about what many people want to look at?

Have you asked yourself why you assume that I care? I don't. I am here to have conversation, to interact, to look together with others. If that is impossible, I have no problem with going away for a while. I bear no grudge. But it is a wonderful thing when we can explore together. That is dialogue. At its best, it can lead to understanding, insight, discovery.

Huguette . wrote:

Have you asked yourself why you have expectations of others?

Have you asked yourself why you assume that I do? While some here do in fact exhibit patterns, I am always open to them radically transforming, or even changing a little.

I don't expect anything. But I am surprised because the response is so contrary to K. K taught to completely - yes, completely - discard belief. Apparently, many here nod when K says that. Until it is a belief like drawing protection circles. Wait a minute! K did that. Maybe we can't discard it.

But I say, discard belief! It only colors and distorts what is.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 29 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #86
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Have you asked yourself why you have expectations of others?
idiot ? wrote:
Have you asked yourself why you assume that I do?

I understood it from this:

idiot ? wrote:
This is the kind of reaction I would expect from a devout Christian

Is this not expressing an expectation? Isn't it important to see one's own mindset or expectations and to find out how to respond to the mindset or expectations of others honestly but without divisiveness? Aren't we together in facing these things?


idiot ? wrote:
No, sir, this forum is about Krishnamurti. Someone interested in the truth or the meaning of life from the perspective of Socrates or Kant would probably do well to look elsewhere. We're here to discuss K.

That’s interesting. It's not MY understanding of what this forum is about. It’s certainly not why I’m here. As far as I’m concerned, this forum is not about K but about life itself. I do not “hunger” to know what the meaning of life is according to Socrates or Kant. What is the point of knowing what Socrates and Kant thought about the meaning of life if I despair over its meaninglessness?

Now that this is cleared up, I also have no problem with going away. You are not here to talk over the human condition in the way that friends talk things over, but to discuss K. My mistake.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Fri, 29 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #87
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1273 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
For God's sake, I don't know this level of things.

True, same here. Castaneda felt no compunction in going into all this in his books about the Yaqui Indian, Don Juan. K. obviously thought it would be a distraction from his message to dwell on any of it. But still in his remarks to others and Mary Z. he let it be known that there was 'something'.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #88
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 465 posts in this forum Offline

I forgot, I meant to post the following quote. I don't expect it to change anything, but it's meaningful to ME.

[Saanen 1981, Q&A #3, 5th question: “Who are you?”]:
Is that an important question? Or would you say, ‘Who am I’ – not who you are, who am I? And if I tell you who I am, what does it matter. It would be out of curiosity, wouldn’t it? It is like reading a menu at the window, you have to go into the restaurant and eat food. But merely standing outside and reading the menu won’t satisfy your hunger. So, to tell you who I am is really quite meaningless.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #89
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 350 posts in this forum Offline

Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
You are trying to pre judge the behaviour of someone who was saying the mind can undergo radical transformation without investigating what that transformation is.

Why assume that idiot has made no investigation? The implication in what you are saying is that you have investigated radical transformation and that you have undergone radical transformation. Is this what you are saying?

The further implication is that I couldn't possibly be saying the kinds of things I have been saying had I investigated radical transformation. Is that also what you are saying?

Now is transformation something that someone can claim ownership of? Can someone be transformed and say it's happened, it's done? Or is it quite free of an individual self that could make any claims for it? To me, saying Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe transformed or idiot transformed is ridiculous. Right now, free of you and me, the possibility of transformation is.

Is transformation an event that happened or will happen after which I won't be the same? Or is transformation not an event at all? Is it moment to moment? Or is it outside of time altogether, time being a process of thought?

Although the word "transformation" implies change, which implies time, in reality it is something quite beyond that, quite beyond words, which are thoughts, which is time.

Nothing to do with you and me. Nothing to do with an event, or an accomplishment, or an experience. Can this really be investigated, or is that the mind fooling itself, trying to grab what it cannot? It cannot be investigated in the sense of the mind getting a handle on it. The mind will only hold an image, a description.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 #90
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 350 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette quoted K:
[Saanen 1981, Q&A #3, 5th question: “Who are you?”]:
Is that an important question? Or would you say, ‘Who am I’ – not who you are, who am I? And if I tell you who I am, what does it matter. It would be out of curiosity, wouldn’t it? It is like reading a menu at the window, you have to go into the restaurant and eat food. But merely standing outside and reading the menu won’t satisfy your hunger. So, to tell you who I am is really quite meaningless.

Yes, again and again K said the speaker is unimportant. But then he also went and had people, like Mary Zimbalist, write biographies.

Is the man and what the man said something that can be separated?

Reading the menu won't satisfy your hunger. But eating the food won't tell you everything about the menu. You can read the menu and eat the food. It doesn't have to be either/or.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 29 Jun 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 180 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.)