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

Why do we want to dominate others?


Displaying all 23 posts
Page 1 of 1
Wed, 26 Sep 2018 #1
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

This seems to come from our animal past.... deep conditioning.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 27 Sep 2018 #2
Thumb_1507053_1_ Jayaraj Kapila Kulasinghe Sri Lanka 1208 posts in this forum Offline

Is it coming from the fight for survival? Is it fear that otherwise we would be run over, perish?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 27 Sep 2018 #3
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 443 posts in this forum Offline

Obviously domination is the action of the self. The self feels righteous, feels self justified, feels like someone is deserving of being squashed and then it commits violence, dominating over the other and thereby it boosts itself, justifies itself and expands itself.

Submission and rebellion are other actions of the self that reinforce the self and that are different ways of engaging in violence and conflict.

Only when the self is thoroughly understood do its activities stop. Only then can there be the activity of love. Only then no arrows go out and all incoming arrows pass right through because there is nothing to stop them.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 27 Sep 2018 #4
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Only when the self is thoroughly understood do its activities stop.

Has that worked for you? Have you stopped the activities of the self?

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Thu, 27 Sep 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 27 Sep 2018 #5
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 679 posts in this forum Offline

There is nothing about the self to be understood because the self is a bundle of memory and reactions. Thought is the creator of the self therefore it is thought that needs to be understood and transformed.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #6
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Only when the self is thoroughly understood do its activities stop.

I wasn't being sarcastic when I asked you if you had. I am serious. K is the only one I have ever felt sure was not conditioned. I read somewhere where K thought he might be a mutant or something. If you read the biographies by Mary Lutyens it appears that K was never psychologically conditioned and had trouble even learning some common things. When he was a boy his teachers thought he was retarded or something. He just couldn't retain anything and was beaten and made to sit alone in school. Nitya would take him home after school.

Is there anything to do? Or is there just watching without choice? I don't know.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #7
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 443 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Have you stopped the activities of the self?

I'm just a person like anyone else.

I don't know if you see the trick or trap in the question.

Let's say that X is free of self. Y asks, "Are you free of self? Are you without conditioning?" Or some such question.

If X says "Yes," then X is in contradiction. It's an assertion of a self that is free of self. That makes no sense. "I" cannot be free of self.

Nevertheless, some people do fool themselves and believe they are free of self when they actually are not. This is a trick of the self. The self learns a bit about the activities of the self, by reading K and observing or whatever, and then it fools itself into thinking it understands and is free. This self-fooling self ignores the conflicts it continues to find itself in, which are indicative of conditioning and lack of freedom from self.

Now, let's say X is free of self and completely dissolved into Y. Being one with Y, who is not free of self, X answers, "No, I am not free of self." Wow! How about that?!

On the other hand, X may not be free of self, realize the fact, and honestly answer the same way: "No, I am not free of self." The very same answer!

So any "yes" answer is contradictory and self-deceiving, and any "no" answer is ambiguous.

Now why do we ask the question? Either we want to put someone to the test, or we are convinced that someone is not free and is fooling himself or herself, or we want to put them on a pedestal and make a guru out of them. None of these are very good reasons for asking and none of them will really help Y or X.

Whether X or anyone else is free of self is unimportant. What is important is to investigate if it is possible to be free of self and what that means. If being free of self means being a comatose vegetable, what good is it? But if it means being truly alive and caring and vibrant, then it's worth investigating, at the same time realizing that is not something that can be sought or achieved.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 28 Sep 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #8
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 443 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Is there anything to do? Or is there just watching without choice? I don't know.

Not knowing.

That's really key, isn't it?

Have you ever noticed that when we ask ourselves an important question, there's a little space for a brief moment, there's a pause of not knowing, there's a silence before the brain starts spinning its answers.

Don't know.

Do we pay attention to this beautiful space of not knowing?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #9
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 679 posts in this forum Offline

If one finds out that he has a deadly snake(the self) in the house does one ask how am I to be free from the poisonous snake or one immediately removes or kills the snake before the snake kills him. In the same way if one realizes that the self is the cause of death and destruction both in the world and in one's daily relationships then one sanely abandons the self. By abandoning the self I mean not giving it importance or strength. You may ask who is it that abandons the self? It is the realization of the truth about the self. Then one may ask how is one to stop the snakes coming to the house in the future? In that case one has to see how thought creates the poisonous snakes and what for.

This post was last updated by One Self Fri, 28 Sep 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #10
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

Goodman B wrote:
If one finds out that he has a deadly snake(the self) in the house does one ask how am I to be free from the poisonous snake or one immediately removes or kills the snake before the snake kills him. In the same way if one realizes that the self is the cause of death and destruction both in the world and in one's daily relationships then one sanely abandons the self.

You have made the common mistake people new to K make. We all make it. You divide the "self", "center", "ego" into two entities. All of the pronouns and nouns in dark black above are different names for just one thing. Who is it exactly that abandons the self? There is nothing separate from the self that can act on the self. There is only the self, the center.

Do you understand what I mean? Thought has invented the self and then it goes on to invent other entities who "end" the self. It's all an illusion.

There is nothing to do, nothing to accomplish, nothing to gain. Here we are. This is us and there is not a damn thing we can do about it but watch as attentively as possible or not.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Fri, 28 Sep 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #11
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
I don't know if you see the trick or trap in the question.

I was not trying to be tricky or to trap you. Until you pointed it out it did not occur to me that what I wrote could be as you described.

Believe it or not I asked you the question if you had...etc, etc because I was curious.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #12
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 443 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
I was not trying to be tricky or to trap you.

I didn't mean to accuse you of anything. I just wanted to point out that the question itself has all these implications. The question itself is tricky in an interesting way.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 28 Sep 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 28 Sep 2018 #13
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Jack Pine wrote:

Have you stopped the activities of the self?

I'm just a person like anyone else.

I don't know if you see the trick or trap in the question.

Let's say that X is free of self. Y asks, "Are you free of self? Are you without conditioning?" Or some such question.

If X says "Yes," then X is in contradiction. It's an assertion of a self that is free of self. That makes no sense. "I" cannot be free of self.

Nevertheless, some people do fool themselves and believe they are free of self when they actually are not. This is a trick of the self. The self learns a bit about the activities of the self, by reading K and observing or whatever, and then it fools itself into thinking it understands and is free. This self-fooling self ignores the conflicts it continues to find itself in, which are indicative of conditioning and lack of freedom from self.

Now, let's say X is free of self and completely dissolved into Y. Being one with Y, who is not free of self, X answers, "No, I am not free of self." Wow! How about that?!

On the other hand, X may not be free of self, realize the fact, and honestly answer the same way: "No, I am not free of self." The very same answer!

So any "yes" answer is contradictory and self-deceiving, and any "no" answer is ambiguous.

Now why do we ask the question? Either we want to put someone to the test, or we are convinced that someone is not free and is fooling himself or herself, or we want to put them on a pedestal and make a guru out of them. None of these are very good reasons for asking and none of them will really help Y or X.

Whether X or anyone else is free of self is unimportant. What is important is to investigate if it is possible to be free of self and what that means. If being free of self means being a comatose vegetable, what good is it? But if it means being truly alive and caring and vibrant, then it's worth investigating, at the same time realizing that is not something that can be sought or achieved.


Hello, This is Peter,

I would like for us to consider another possibility:

I suggest that there are transitions. At times there is self and its movement. At other times there is the absence of self. When there is the absence of the self, it is seeing that acts. To any question whatever the reply is, whatever the responce is, it will be correct. This is what happens here.

When the self is present and when that is painful, there is an attempt from that state to get back to the other state. But there is no way to do this. It is the self trying to do something. The self is the doer there, and in that situation, there is no escape. The absence of self comes only from the place that is without the self. It comes when there is an abandonment of the action of the self. It comes from the dropping of all protection. It seems that that dropping also arises out of that other, out of the field where there is no self. It is a jump that is instantaneous, and that seems to be not understandable, understanding being of time.

I think this is the way it happened for K. There were transitions but that state beyond was there much more of the time then it is for the rest of us, and in much more difficult situations.

This post was last updated by Peter Kesting Mon, 08 Oct 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #14
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
I didn't mean to accuse you of anything. I just wanted to point out that the question itself has all these implications. The question itself is tricky in an interesting way.

I didn't think that you did. No problem. Everything is fine. I appreciated your response in post #7.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 29 Sep 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #15
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 679 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
You have made the common mistake people new to K make.

You are so ignorant. I wrote that I talked to k about 40 years ago. Can you even read English? I doubt it.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #16
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 679 posts in this forum Offline

The question is why do we want to dominate others? Can we answer that question or are we retards who can't proceed ? We are mostly over sixty years old. Our brains are worn out and we are practically finished. But some of us are deceivers and want to show off that they can speak English. But the facts cannot be hidden for long. The facts pop out eventually. So never deceive your selves.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #17
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 679 posts in this forum Offline

Goodman B wrote:
If one finds out that he has a deadly snake(the self) in the house does one ask how am I to be free from the poisonous snake or one immediately removes or kills the snake before the snake kills him. In the same way if one realizes that the self is the cause of death and destruction both in the world and in one's daily relationships then one sanely abandons the self. By abandoning the self I mean not giving it importance or strength. You may ask who is it that abandons the self? It is the realization of the truth about the self. Then one may ask how is one to stop the snakes coming to the house in the future? In that case one has to see how thought creates the poisonous snakes and what for.

I have to post the above paragraph. Jack cut it up and distorted it as usual and responded to that distortion.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #18
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

Goodman B wrote:
You are so ignorant. I wrote that I talked to k about 40 years ago. Can you even read English? I doubt it.

Yeah, but you seeing K 39 years ago was probably pure BS unless of course you are 60 something years old in which case I would still like to know why you would try to belittle others for being "elderly"?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #19
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

Goodman B wrote:
I have to post the above paragraph. Jack cut it up and distorted it as usual and responded to that distortion.

I didn't cut it up I high-lighted all the pronouns that represent the same thing: The center. There is no division of the center in that one thing is ending another thing. They are all illusions invented by thought. I see you missed that point too. One that people new to K usually miss. Just trying to point out a common fallacy.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #20
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5305 posts in this forum Offline

Goodman B wrote:
But some of us are deceivers and want to show off that they can speak English.

Oh, don't be so hard on yourself. Now that you see the problem maybe you can move past it?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #21
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 679 posts in this forum Offline

Jack ,you do need to go and visit a psychologist and tell him that you distort what you read and always respond from that distortion. And also tell him that you get off from sending nasty personal messages to people you don't know. And tell him that at the same time you want to have a decent conversations with others but you always fail..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #22
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 679 posts in this forum Offline

Here is jack's other nasty personal message he sand me.
" Are you really as stupid as you appear to be? Does your mommy know you are spending all this time on a discussion forum for adults?"

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 29 Sep 2018 #23
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1241 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
But if it means being truly alive and caring and vibrant, then it's worth investigating, at the same time realizing that is not something that can be sought or achieved.

.

Peter Kesting wrote:
There were transitions but that state beyond was there much more of the time and in much more dificult situations.,

To me it seems that both of you gave a possible correct description of what is going on.

in the end, it can only be established afterwards that the ego has missed something, which, in addition to the disturbing activities of the ego, can just as well be the absence of it.

it happens to me sometimes that somebody thanks me extensively for something that I really can not recall but was very important to them.

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
Displaying all 23 posts
Page 1 of 1
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.)