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

Understanding and insight (article by Dev Singh)


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 32 in total
Tue, 19 Feb 2019 #1
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 328 posts in this forum Offline

An article which I found very interesting from Dev Singh, which can be found in the Articles tab on Kinfonet. Here is a quote from the beginning of the article.

A few years before his death, prompted by his biographer Mary Lutyens, Krishnamurti wrote a summary of his entire message. In this piece, entitled The Core of the Teaching, Krishnamurti writes:

When man becomes aware of the movement of his own thoughts he will see the division between the thinker and thought, the observer and the observed, the experience and the experiencer. He will discover that this division is an illusion. Then only is there pure observation which is insight without any shadow of the past or of time. (End of quote)

Krishnamurti here seems to suggest that the human mind is not limited to the familiar state of consciousness characterized by a clear separation between a subject (the experiencer) and an object (the experience). In addition to this everyday way of experiencing, Krishnamurti claims that the human mind also has the capacity for perceiving reality purely , that is to say in a direct, non-personal manner, one that is not processed through an egocentric consciousness.

Although it's possible to imagine what such a state of non-duality might resemble, these musings rarely go beyond the realm of the intellect. For us, the separation between the observer and the observed lies at the heart of our actual experience, unquestioned and unquestionable. In fact, the sense of separation is so real that we find ourselves in a state of constant tension with our environment. We view the environment as an external agency, one that has the power to shape and influence who we are. Despite our strong intuitive feeling to the contrary, Krishnamurti nonetheless keeps on insisting that the individual and its environment are in fact one and the same thing.

Understanding and Insight
by Dev Singh | December 2011

For those interested, the whole article is here :

http://www.kinfonet.org/articles/37-understandi...

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Wed, 20 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Wed, 20 Feb 2019 #2
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 640 posts in this forum Offline

Yes, the unsayable when there is no subject/object, the non-dual, or however you want to say what cannot be said, is central to K.

Is K the only one in history to ever discover this? Of course, not! The core of Zen Buddhism is the same thing. But it comes with a bunch of baggage such as bowing, taking vows, conforming to strict rules, rituals, etc. On the other hand, in Zen there is an emphasis on sitting meditation, meditation in work, and a de-emphasis of intellectual discussion. Its approach is a lack of freedom. The self is squashed by the non-stop schedule, conformity to the form: get up early, tea ceremony, chanting, zazen, work, ritual meals, silence, etc. Survive the pain of sitting cross-legged. Attention! Attention! Attention!

Whereas K is free of the baggage of Zen, but people interested in him seem to get stuck in the intellectual. They love reading the menu but never eat the food.

There are also Advaita, Dzogchen, and other traditions which at the core are about dissolution of the self, no separation of self and surroundings. They too have their baggage.

You must free yourself of baggage whether you're in a tradition or not. K tried to not make a tradition but here we've gone and made one anyway. We argue in conflict. We think intellectually but don't change fundamentally. We accept complacently the conflicts we live. We don't transform! We are not joyfully discontent with everything. People don't even know this last teaching of K.

Without the core of K teaching, the dissolving of the self, the end of division and separation, the flowering of love, there really is no understanding and the violence goes on.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Wed, 20 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Wed, 20 Feb 2019 #3
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 328 posts in this forum Offline

Wecome back Idiot? You say that people don't even know this last teaching. Not sure that it wasn't there since the beginning. Maybe for some it goes unnoticed.

You say that without the core of K.'s teaching, the dissolving of the self, the end of division and separation, the flowering of love, there really is no understanding and the violence goes on. Yes it is so. Though merely an intelectual understanding will not do it. That is , I think, what Dev is pointing out in his article: understanding and insight.

Dev: Although it's possible to imagine what such a state of non-duality might resemble, these musings rarely go beyond the realm of the intellect. For us, the separation between the observer and the observed lies at the heart of our actual experience,

(And further in the same article) Most definitely then, the understanding Krishnamurti speaks of is of a wholly different order than what we normally understand as understanding. The "understanding" he speaks of is a flash of insight that instantaneously does away with illusion. And that is the end of the story. No further action is required. There is nothing to oppose, nothing on which to act, to change, to control.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Wed, 20 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Wed, 20 Feb 2019 #4
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 640 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
The "understanding" he speaks of is a flash of insight that instantaneously does away with illusion.

Yes, but at the same time K goes into questions slowly and carefully, all the while guided by the instant insight. As you know, it is possible to jump to a conclusion and to believe you have instant insight. To avoid this, one references real insight. What is real insight? It's just what we have been discussing: self dissolves and no longer separates from surroundings, the busy thinking mind stills, naturally and is alert, sensitive, aware.

If you look extremely closely, you can see K giving a lecture on video tape, and he poses a question or one is posed, and he too seems momentarily not to know just like us. He holds for just a moment the unknowing. Then he instantly references the true, which is the unsayable ending of thought/time/self, and then answer is there, and all that remains is to go into the numerous angles that the brain will want to bring up. And he doesn't mind taking a nice long time to go into all those different angles and considerations.

Rich Nolet wrote:
No further action is required. There is nothing to oppose, nothing on which to act, to change, to control.

The situation MAY require action. Love is its own action, its own transformation. Someone needs help, it is seen, and help is. This can only happen when the thinking mind is still, when there is clarity and openness. As long as the self is busy with its thoughts, one can't even see that someone needs help, let alone manifest what's appropriate.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Wed, 20 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Feb 2019 #5
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 328 posts in this forum Offline

Of course the situation may require action . But I think that this statement(...no further action is required, etc ) concern the realisation of the fact of this division .

And yes, love is it's own action. That is important because love is in the absence of the self

idiot ? wrote:
As long as the self is busy with its thoughts, one can't even see that someone needs help, let alone manifest what's appropriate.

That's right.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Thu, 21 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Feb 2019 #6
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 640 posts in this forum Offline

Thank you for bringing Dev Singh's article to our attention and also for your comments about it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Feb 2019 #7
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
What is real insight? It's just what we have been discussing: self dissolves and no longer separates from surroundings, the busy thinking mind stills, naturally and is alert, sensitive, aware.

This might be true. I'm not sure though. In my experience, for insight to occur, the mind needs to go to a place it hasn't been before. Sometimes there is a comment here on this forum that makes me reflect. There is reflection over a perod of time then something new is discovered. I realise something I didn't realise before. I'm not sure I am articulating this well and I am aware that this perhaps goes against the whole idea of instant realisation as time is involved but this has been my experience.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Feb 2019 #8
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 328 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Thank you for bringing Dev Singh's article to our attention and also for your comments about it.

I was surprise not only in that he is an excellent writer, but also by his relevent comments. Thanks to you too for your relevent comments.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Feb 2019 #9
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 640 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
In my experience, for insight to occur, the mind needs to go to a place it hasn't been before.

The mind is always in a place it hasn't been before.

But without insight, it doesn't realize it and stays mired in thought, the past and future. Same old, same old.

Is it not so?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Feb 2019 #10
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
The mind is always in a place it hasn't been before.

But without insight, it doesn't realize it and stays mired in thought, the past and future. Same old, same old.

Is it not so?

What I meant is that insight is new and is not "same old, same old". Insight seems to be a seeing that brings about understanding. It's akin to a light being thrown onto a dark place and this illumination allows us to see what we couldn't see before and to understand it. This understanding surely brings about an instant change in action.

My previous post was an attempt at exploring the possible conditions which foster the emergence of insight. I mean, insight doesn't just come out of nowhere, does it? Reading Krishnamurti may well help us to experience insight but certainly doesn't lead directly to insight, does it?

Rich, thanks for posting the article by Dev which I look forward to reading.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Feb 2019 #11
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 640 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
the possible conditions which foster the emergence of insight. I mean, insight doesn't just come out of nowhere, does it?

That's the problem. We want insight, but...

There is no method! That's the K catch 22! The core of K is the dissolving of the self, the observer is the observed, the natural quieting of thought, awareness of what is, the flowering of love. But there is no how, no attaining, no technique, no method. Are we stuck?!

No. And this is so, so important for those interested in K but stuck in the catch 22, for those who just accept the endless conflict rather than transforming, for those fascinated by the menu but unable to eat - there is meditation!

Meditation! The thing K talked about last on multi-day talks because of its utmost importance and because the groundwork needed to be laid. Meditation!

Not a method, not a means to attain something, but actually what is. To sit quietly in silence. To be aware, alone. And in activity. And in relationship. Mindfulness. Self knowledge, following every thought. Until the thoughts die down and silence emerges. What is.

K sat quietly in silence. His body sat up straight in the early hours of the morning every day. Do we?!!!!

We who are deeply interested in K, do we do the one absolutely vital thing that K did? Meditation! Of course, you must clarify what real meditation is. You must not fall for the many things that real meditation is not. And K discusses this.

I once heard someone say, "For Krishnamurti meditation is just thinking about things." WHAT???! No!!!! It's really important to understand what K did say about meditation. But it is even more important to discover for yourself, to do it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 #12
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
That's the problem. We want insight, but...

There is no method! That's the K catch 22! The core of K is the dissolving of the self, the observer is the observed, the natural quieting of thought, awareness of what is, the flowering of love. But there is no how, no attaining, no technique, no method. Are we stuck?!

I don't know if we are stuck but here are a few observations. Firstly, you said "we want insight". Is this a bad thing or not? If we are not highly interested, inquisitive and devote energy to this, surely we will never understand anything. Secondly, we do all have insights from time to time. It might be useful to explore how insight comes about if it ever does in our lives. Sometimes suffering seems to push people down a road they would otherwise never have travelled and this leads to insight. Thirdly, we are talking about Dev's article which explores understanding and insight into the self and how we are unable to realise that "the observer is the observed".

idiot ? wrote:
Meditation! The thing K talked about last on multi-day talks because of its utmost importance and because the groundwork needed to be laid. Meditation!

Not a method, not a means to attain something, but actually what is. To sit quietly in silence. To be aware, alone. And in activity. And in relationship. Mindfulness. Self knowledge, following every thought. Until the thoughts die down and silence emerges. What is.

K sat quietly in silence. His body sat up straight in the early hours of the morning every day. Do we?!!!!

No, we probably don't. Perhaps there is an imbalance here in most of us. We are maybe too ready to jump in intellectually instead of working on important physical conditions which foster the increase of attention and awareness. Is that the point you're making idiot? Are we maybe missing something else?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 #13
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 640 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
we do all have insights from time to time. It might be useful to explore how insight comes about if it ever does in our lives. Sometimes suffering seems to push people down a road they would otherwise never have travelled and this leads to insight.

Yes. Often suffering gets us to reconsider and re-evaluate our lives and opens us to the possibility of insights. Reading K, looking carefully at our lives will also reveal things of importance. These are all valid.

But there is a core insight that K writes about, that Dev Singh refers to in his article, and that we are discussing. It is quite beyond the thinking mind. With careful thought we can go right up to the brink, but thought can never make the jump. We can ponder "the observer is the observed" and so on. But at root, we still feel like a separate self apart from the environment. As long as the mind is busy with thought, various contradictions and separations exist. And the fundamental separation of self and surroundings exists.

We all glimpse the ending of self. A bird cuts through sky. A tree captivates. For a moment, thought suspends. In that moment, the question of whether or not there is a self has not yet come up.

Before you know it, I am back in my self. I am separate from the bird and the tree. Me here. Them over there.

So meditation is truly key. It's not that meditation will get you something. Getting something, including insight, is the opposite of meditation. Getting something is wanting to change what is into something else. If we lack insight, we want to change what is, to fill that hole and gain insight. Meditation is not a means to change what is into what is desired. Meditation IS what is. Awareness of what is now. What is now is not stagnant. It is in motion and cannot be captured by thought. Meditation is awareness of what is. And awareness of what is IS insight! It is transformation.

Can the teachings of K be made more practical, less intellectual? That's not necessary. The practical IS in what K spoke about. It is meditation. Meditation is beyond the mind and beyond the body, those being dropped. Yet it is the mind and the body and everything, the whole.

If you have gone into what K says, you know he talks about meditation and the centrality of it. You have only to sit down quietly and observe, to see what happens, to discover what is.

Most everything we do is for a reason. To change what is into something else. The most important activity of all is for no reason. Quietly, right here and now, what is?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 #14
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1185 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
Krishnamurti writes:

When man becomes aware of the movement of his own thoughts he will see the division between the thinker and thought, the observer and the observed, the experience and the experiencer. He will discover that this division is an illusion. Then only is there pure observation which is insight without any shadow of the past or of time. (End of quote).

So are we there yet? Do we see that the division between the thinker and his thought is a fictitious one?
Are we there yet? Do we see that the observer is the observed. Have we ended conflict in ourselves yet? If not, why?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Feb 2019 #15
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 328 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
So are we there yet? Do we see that the division between the thinker and his thought is a fictitious one?
Are we there yet? Do we see that the observer is the observed. Have we ended conflict in ourselves yet? If not, why?

If not, it is maybe because, as pointed out by Dev:

Although it's possible to imagine what such a state of non-duality might resemble, these musings rarely go beyond the realm of the intellect. For us, the separation between the observer and the observed lies at the heart of our actual experience

I must say that I see things the same way, for what it's worth.

And if we realise that the separation between the observer and the observed is but an illusion, that the experiencer is no different from the experience, the thinker no different from thought, then it is just the beginning of an observation in which there is a different quality, in which there is no conflict, no division.

As pointed out by Idiot?, all this is meditation. Or should we say the beginning of real meditation ?

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Sat, 23 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 #16
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1185 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
One Self wrote:

So are we there yet? Do we see that the division between the thinker and his thought is a fictitious one?
Are we there yet? Do we see that the observer is the observed. Have we ended conflict in ourselves yet? If not, why?

If not, it is maybe because, as pointed out by Dev:

This is not so complecated. The observer is the observed is not a matter of meditation. When there is fear or greed and one is disturbed by that feeling then the question of the observer and the observed becomes important. Is greed different than the one who wants to get rid of greed? No .The observer of greed is greed which is the observed . That is all.

This post was last updated by One Self Sat, 23 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 #17
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
So are we there yet?

I don't know if you are "there" yet as I know nothing about you and your life. What I do know is what you post in this forum. It's hard to ignore the fact that you are in conflict with several people here and that you post with great frequency. That is not a good place to be. This is not said to be hurtful but we must take responsibility for our actions. If we are to communicate here, we need to establish a civil relationship with our fellow posters first.

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Sat, 23 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 #18
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote (quoting Dev Singh):
Although it's possible to imagine what such a state of non-duality might resemble, these musings rarely go beyond the realm of the intellect. For us, the separation between the observer and the observed lies at the heart of our actual experience

What do we understand by "the realm of the intellect"? Is the point here that we understand intelectually that thought is clearly the cause of the separation between the observer and the observed but cannot actually stop our minds from constantly chattering? Isn't this in itself strange? You would have imagined that we'd be watching thought like a hawk, paying great attention every time a thought popped into our heads. If thought, which contains all our conditioning and separates us from the world around us, is the real problem, why do let it wander all over the place when it appears? Is it simply a problem of lack of attention?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 #19
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1425 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
If thought, which contains all our conditioning and separates us from the world around us, is the real problem, why do let it wander all over the place when it appears? Is it simply a problem of lack of attention?

Wouldn't the answer to that be that any 'effort' to control the "wanderings" of thought, is just thought now engaged in a different pattern of wandering? That any 'motive' or goal brings the 'self' (the darkness) into play?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 23 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 #20
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Wouldn't the answer to that be that any 'effort' to control the "wanderings" of thought, is just thought now engaged in a different pattern of wandering?

It might be. But then if we do nothing it just wanders. How aware of thought are we? When it pops into our head, do we even notice? Is that the problem?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 #21
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1425 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
But then if we do nothing it just wanders.

But if we 'do' anything, that is thought trying to act upon thought, isn't it? And the goal behind that effort is to bring about some kind of silence that we think is more desirable as opposed to the 'wandering'...thought's 'trick' is to create a 'me' who is separate that wants to get something done about this wandering thought...that way it can keep on wandering!

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 23 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Feb 2019 #22
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1185 posts in this forum Offline

sean wrote:

One Self wrote:

So are we there yet?

I don't know if you are "there" yet as I know nothing about you and your life.

How about you? Do you know about your life? Let's hear it. And me being against the masses should not be something of anybody else's concern. To obay and conform to the rutten society is to be violent.

This post was last updated by One Self Sat, 23 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #23
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1185 posts in this forum Offline

Sean, plus I didn't ask that question from you but you have to devert my question into my conflict with you. You are not the hope of the world and you are in conflict with me. I am not in conflict with you. I Don't have any question from you and never had. Try to answer questions that are asked from you . Answering for otheres is a form of aggression in a civilized world.
My comment was directly related to this discussion but your response to my question was a troll and had nothing to do with the topic of this forum which is about the observer is the observed and so on.

This post was last updated by One Self Sun, 24 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #24
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 640 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
If thought, which contains all our conditioning and separates us from the world around us, is the real problem, why do let it wander all over the place when it appears? Is it simply a problem of lack of attention?

Most people, when they sit down quietly for the first time to see what might happen in silence, notice that their minds are going like crazy with thoughts. One of the first things that happens for many people is they discover a very busy brain. Sometimes they throw up their hands and give up. They think, "I cannot do this. I'm supposed to have a silent mind and my mind just goes willy nilly everywhere non-stop."

But meditation works in ways we don't even know. We need to stay with it. We need to discover first hand the answers to our questions to the extent that we can. Why do I let my mind wander all over the place? Do I lack attention? This can be investigated. That's way more important than someone else's answer.

Here's what K says:

Krishnamurti, Think On These Things, Chapter 5:

HAVE YOU EVER sat very quietly without any movement? You try it, sit really still, with your back straight, and observe what your mind is doing. Don`t try to control it, don't say it should not jump from one thought to another, from one interest to another, but just be aware of how your mind is jumping. Don't do anything about it, but watch it as from the banks of a river you watch the water flow by. In the flowing river there are so many things - fishes, leaves, dead animals - but it is always living, moving, and your mind is like that. It is everlastingly restless, flitting from one thing to another like a butterfly...

try sitting very quietly without fidgeting, without moving your hands or even your toes, and just watch your mind. It is great fun. If you try it as fun, as an amusing thing, you will find that the mind begins to settle down without any effort on your part to control it. There is then no censor, no judge, no evaluator; and when the mind is thus very quiet of itself, spontaneously still, you will discover what it is to be gay. Do you know what gaiety is? It is just to laugh, to take delight in anything or nothing, to know the joy of living, smiling, looking straight into the face of another without any sense of fear.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Sun, 24 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #25
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1425 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Is the point here that we understand intelectually that thought is clearly the cause of the separation between the observer and the observed but cannot actually stop our minds from constantly chattering? Isn't this in itself strange?

Made stranger still Sean in that there actually is no-one who can " stop our minds from constantly chattering".

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #26
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 328 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
What do we understand by "the realm of the intellect"? Is the point here that we understand intelectually but cannot actually stop our minds from constantly chattering?

Intellectual understanding ...one understand the statement, the wording.

Sean: Thought is clearly the cause of the separation between the observer and the observed

As Dev put it: . For us, the separation between the observer and the observed lies at the heart of our actual experience.

Is this observable ? Can it be perceive? Perception is of a different nature. But can there be perception when the mind is chattering ?

As long as it is not observed, that one is not aware of the phenomenon in itself,the fact of the division, create by thought, when it is happening in the instant, it remains intellectual, isn't it ?

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Sun, 24 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #27
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
Sean, plus I didn't ask that question from you but you have to devert my question into my conflict with you

One Self, I am not looking to divert anything into conflict with you. I was being honest when I said that the fact that you seem to be in conflict with several people on this forum and the fact that you post many times and with such frequency has a negative effect on communication with me. I mean, I find it hard to ignore those things. Perhaps that is my problem.

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Sun, 24 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #28
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Made stranger still Sean in that there actually is no-one who can " stop our minds from constantly chattering".

Hi Dan. Our minds constantly chatter. I don't think anybody would argue that "somebody" can stop this. What about awareness that brings about immediate action, where the seeing is the action? Have you ever experienced this? I am inattentive and I become aware of my inattention. This awareness brings about attention.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #29
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
As long as it is not observed, that one is not aware of the phenomenon in itself,the fact of the division, create by thought, when it is happening in the instant, it remains intellectual, isn't it ?

Hi Rich. I don't really understand this. Is it ever not intellectual only? Do we ever move beyond the intellectual with this?

This post was last updated by Sean Hen Sun, 24 Feb 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Feb 2019 #30
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 842 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
But meditation works in ways we don't even know. We need to stay with it. We need to discover first hand the answers to our questions to the extent that we can. Why do I let my mind wander all over the place? Do I lack attention? This can be investigated. That's way more important than someone else's answer.

Yes, good advice. Thanks for the quote from K on this as well.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 32 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.)