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

What is passion?


Displaying posts 91 - 120 of 146 in total
Tue, 05 Mar 2019 #91
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam: Are you not going too fast by beginning with a statement instead of a question?

I am asking if you accept the statement. Do you accept that you are conditioned? Keep it as simple as this.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 05 Mar 2019 #92
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5440 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
Yes, this is basically the point. So what is the energy that breaks through all our conditioning? What is its source?

Paul, stick with observing, being aware of conditioning in daily activity, in thought, in the thinking process. If your question is legitimate then by observing it will become clear. If, on the other hand, you are setting a goal from something your thought, your conditioning has invented then that may become obvious too.

Do you see that the question; "....what is the energy that breaks through all our conditioning?", is a conclusion? Have you completely understood conditioning and how it manifests itself?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 05 Mar 2019 #93
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine: Have you completely understood conditioning and how it manifests itself?

Look, there is only conditioning. There is no entity outside of it who understands and observes, or who is capable of understanding and observing. It is not about understanding. What we are saying is that the conditioned entity is a dead entity. If you don't like the word 'dead' then use another word like 'mechanical', though that word is less of a shock when you hear it. But when you are being told, 'You are dead,' it is not so easy to make an intellectual jump away from it.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 05 Mar 2019 #94
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5440 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
What we are saying is that the conditioned entity is a dead entity.

Maybe this is where your confusion lies. There is conditioning both physical and psychological. Is an entity dead because that entity has been conditioned to drive a car, build a house, etc? Conditioning is learning. The problem is that an image of a being is formed, psychologically, from past experience. Is there awareness of how past experience and knowledge affects, changes, colors the present? Instead of being in the present, seeing what is the seeing is colored by the past. That is the conditioning that makes the conditioned a "second hand person" as K used the expression.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 05 Mar 2019 #95
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1304 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:

Wim Opdam: Are you not going too fast by beginning with a statement instead of a question?

I am asking if you accept the statement.
Do you accept that you are conditioned? Keep it as simple as this.

Wim Opdam wrote:
To begin with; describe what you mean by conditioning, entity and death !

If you want K. out of it you can't start with what he found out, can you ?
If you want me to accept what you're stating we don't explore this together, are we ?

Tell me how i can answer your question if you don't explain what you mean by those words. If you say you mean the same as K. than you refer by your own definition to death conditioning.

Do you see my problem in going with your way of reasoning ?

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  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 05 Mar 2019 #96
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine: Maybe this is where your confusion lies. There is conditioning both physical and psychological. Is an entity dead because that entity has been conditioned to drive a car, build a house, etc? Conditioning is learning.

No, there is no confusion. Thought is a dead response. Put it that way. Thought has its right place when we need to access the past and recover something from memory. Then it is a correct response to delve into the storehouse of knowledge. But we are not dealing here with knowledge; we are talking about the relationship between two human beings. We are exploring together in an area which has never before been explored. Otherwise, what on earth are we doing?

This post was last updated by Paul Dimmock Tue, 05 Mar 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 05 Mar 2019 #97
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam: Tell me how I can answer your question if you don't explain what you mean by those words.

Look, you think, don't you? Not you personally but each one of us is conditioned by our society, by our upbringing, to meet the problems of life with thought. That is our conditioning. Wouldn't you agree to that?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Wed, 06 Mar 2019 #98
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
Not you personally but each one of us is conditioned by our society, by our upbringing, to meet the problems of life with thought. That is our conditioning. Wouldn't you agree to that?

No, do you realize that with your above statement you have justified your behavior and call it conditioning. Go only by what Krishnamurti means by conditioning because he was the only one who brought your attention to what he meant by the word conditioning. Let's not confuse people who read us anymore by opposing each other. Lets try to say something wise instead of teaching each other . You will not receive flowers from someone who you keep insulting and foul mouthing (you in general.). This is what has been going on in this unfortunate forum.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 06 Mar 2019 #99
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1304 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
Look, you think, don't you? Not you personally but each one of us is conditioned by our society, by our upbringing, to meet the problems of life with thought. That is our conditioning. Wouldn't you agree to that?

What is going on here, is not something fundamentally wrong here?

You want to research together but by asking: 'do you agree/accept?' there is the implication "I know and you do not" by doing that the collective has already been broken!

facts are facts whether I accept them or not is completely unrelated to them, what is not independent is whether I understand them.

when I agree/accept things I believe that the other person is right and that creates dependence and at the same time the commonality of understanding is broken, do you understand me?

mainly because of the dialogues between K. and David Bohm, I understand that we are conditioned and because of that understanding it is not dead but alive every moment of life.

i wonder if you understand what is said.

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.

This post was last updated by Wim Opdam Wed, 06 Mar 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 4 readers
Back to Top
Wed, 06 Mar 2019 #100
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5440 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
No, there is no confusion. Thought is a dead response. Put it that way.

Well no, I prefer not to put it that way. It's too confining, too definite. Also, I feel that there is a great deal of confusion here. Calling thought "dead" is not only an incorrect conclusion but one that narrows and limits understanding of thought.

You say thought is a dead response yet everything you have written about thought being dead is the product of that same dead thought. We're going in circles here.

Paul Dimmock wrote:
We are exploring together in an area which has never before been explored. Otherwise, what on earth are we doing?

Do you really think that this has never been "explored" before? You are the first to ever bring this subject up? How do you know that? It seems more than just a little arrogant to say something like that don't you think? Also, that statement says a great deal about how you perceive your own thinking. Yes, what are we doing here?

I strongly suggest you read a book called THOUGHT As A SYSTEM, by David Bohm. You may recall that Dr. Bohm was a close friend to Krishnamurti and they shared many a dialogue together which have been recorded in several very interesting books.

Dr. Bohm was a theoretical physicist at Birkbeck College, London University. Beginning in 1986, after K's death, Dr Bohm would come to Ojai to hold what became known as the David Bohm seminars.

It is a fascinating book that I would recommend to anyone interested in what thought is and how it works. It was a very in depth, serious discussion about thinking and not particularly easy reading at times.

For my own part I'm going to take a leave from this forum for a week or two to finish a project that I started here in Ojai last year.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Wed, 06 Mar 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 06 Mar 2019 #101
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 81 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
do you understand me?

Understanding is the breaking of barrier as internal and external, any thing which qualifies as internal understanding has to necessarily resolve itself externally into dialogue and communion, and as that is happening, semantics shouldn't be a matter of separation.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 06 Mar 2019 #102
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1344 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
each one of us is conditioned by our society, by our upbringing, to meet the problems of life with thought. That is our conditioning.

In that sense, each one of us has a 'unique' way of going about life. Our thoughts and feelings are a unique patterning composed by the experiences, beliefs, fears, joys, etc. If we leave it there and not judge it in any way, not depend on anyone's word for 'what' it is, or 'what' it should be, then there is, I think, the possibility to 'know ourself'... but only if there is the "passion". That must be a passion without a goal, without an aim. When I am listening to a piece of music by Bach for example, I realize that each note/chord reaches my ear in the immediate present and then the intervals and spaces, all are separate from one another... but then memory binds together the present and past, and an 'effect' of 'beauty' is created. Likewise with the passion to follow ones thinking, this pure state of 'listening' has no motive, no judgement, no demand,: it listens to the unfolding 'composition' of thoughts as they arise in the moment, with no effort. And when in relationship to 'others', it can listen in the same way...but only if (and when) there is this pure passion to 'hear'... as I see it.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Wed, 06 Mar 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 06 Mar 2019 #103
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam: when I agree/accept things I believe that the other person is right and that creates dependence and at the same time the commonality of understanding is broken, do you understand me?

It is not about me being right. It is about finding a place to start where we are both looking at the same thing. Maybe it is also our two different languages which are making this more difficult for us. But I am happy to start again even if we have to start a new topic.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 06 Mar 2019 #104
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine: Do you really think that this has never been "explored" before? You are the first to ever bring this subject up? How do you know that? It seems more than just a little arrogant to say something like that, don't you think? Also, that statement says a great deal about how you perceive your own thinking. Yes, what are we doing here?

No, it is far from an arrogant statement. Please follow it carefully. A man who says, 'I have been here before; I have read all the books; I know all about it,' that would be arrogance. But I am saying something quite the contrary, which is that we are both being offered the opportunity of encountering a totally new and unfamiliar aspect of relationship. Or, at least, that is our challenge: to meet one another without the traditional, conditioned responses and remarks.

Forget about my thinking; that you may never fathom. But my passion for enquiry is something that is open to all of us; except very few seem to have it or to want it. I have made it very clear from the start: this is my sole passion. But you haven't got the same passion; for you this is not something sacred; so you are always going to get bored and go off to something else. I am saying there is nothing else; nothing else matters as much as this relationship. Because life is relationship.

And we have discovered something. We have discovered that deeply, internally, psychologically, we are dead. It is a tremendous fact. And either it triggers a thousand other dead responses; or, there is merely one simple non-response, which is to listen to the fact. And in the listening is the birth of something else, something far more tremendous than this fact. But we don't listen; we just respond; or we give excuses why we can't listen, which is our favourite response. Because response is our habit; response is our conditioning; response is our security; response is our whole identity and being. So we never meet death simply by being dead. We pretend instead that we are full of life. And so the game goes on.

The sermon is over. Take from it what you want.

This post was last updated by Paul Dimmock Wed, 06 Mar 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 07 Mar 2019 #105
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

So there are two points of view here. One claims that thought is dead. And the other claims that thought is not dead. The issue is the meaning of the word "dead". When an animal does not breath or or move we say it is " dead". Now when we say that thought is is "dead" what does it mean. To a scientist or a philosopher or a poet thought is everything. It is the soul of people and that is how they relate to people. But when it comes to daily living the memory that I have from someone is surely dead and doesn't exist outside of my imagination. He may be the same or he may not be the same as I recall him. So in the second situation thought creates a division between the past which no longer exists except in my mind and the present which is unknown. We can clearly say that my memory of you(in real life not in here) is a dead and useless thing that can only interfere with relationship .

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 07 Mar 2019 #106
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

And it all depends on which context we use the word "death" in. In one sense death is the greatest thing(in Krishnamurti's terms ) and in another sense death means destruction of human lives. So let's not use the word " death" without a context in here.,.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 07 Mar 2019 #107
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

I think that the only way that this website can be beneficial to all of us is to focus on the teachings and not to get caught up in second handed stuff . life is too short and it ends soon so Let's not waste it on too much talk without any action anymore . let's be factual like K.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 07 Mar 2019 #108
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1304 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
It is not about me being right. It is about finding a place to start where we are both looking at the same thing. Maybe it is also our two different languages which are making this more difficult for us.

it is good to hear that it was not about being right, at the same time little things matter to understand each other, to find common ground so to say.

I see commonality in the love of searching after the truth and it is beautifully expressed by:

natarajan shivan wrote:
Understanding is the breaking of barrier as internal and external, any thing which qualifies as internal understanding has to necessarily resolve itself externally into dialogue and communion, and as that is happening, semantics shouldn't be a matter of separation.

There is this difference between discussion and dialogue and this is mostly based on attitude, so to me it seems that we didn't succeed to reach the level of dialogue.

Was it the wrong start, the stating, the formulation or the wrong attitude ?
This is something we each of us have to investigate honestly and seriously by ourselves.

anyway, Thanks for the honest attempt.

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  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 07 Mar 2019 #109
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam: Was it the wrong start, the stating, the formulation or the wrong attitude?

At the start there was the question: what is passion? And I said that this is my passion: the enquiry through dialogue into the nature of human relationship. Now, if this equally your passion too, then everything is right or correct from the start. That is why I said to those who joined in: what is your passion? Is all of this that we are doing here the only thing that matters to you? Or do you have other passions, which means you can only ever be partially involved here? I think this is a fairly clear and obvious starting point, don't you?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 07 Mar 2019 #110
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

One Self: We can clearly say that my memory of you (in real life not in here) is a dead and useless thing that can only interfere with relationship.

Why do you differentiate between real life and in here? I don't quite follow what you mean.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 08 Mar 2019 #111
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

jamie f: Are you not concerned that these are the first steps towards forming a clique?

They may be; they may not be. Join me and find out. I am sure that they are not, but you will only know with the same kind of surety once you join in. From the sidelines it will always be a limited view.

This post was last updated by Paul Dimmock Fri, 08 Mar 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 08 Mar 2019 #112
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5440 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
you will only know with the same kind of surety once you join in.

Join in what? Join? Think like you do is what you mean. You're not here to discuss what K pointed out. You're here to push your conclusions and opinions on others.

Paul Dimmock wrote:
From the sidelines it will always be a limited view.

The classic "them and us" scenario. Is seems to me you are the one with the limited view.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 08 Mar 2019 #113
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

Then don't join in. It is up to you. If you are happy with your assessment, stick with it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 08 Mar 2019 #114
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

jamie f: I freely admit that I am not as passionate about discussion as you. Life is rich and varied and complex and human relationships are only a part of it - and a very small part at that.

I am not interested in discussions: they bore me. I am talking about exploring the nature of relationship, of which this forum may be just one tiny fragment. But in this fragment is also the whole of life; they are not two separate spheres. Probably, we are deeply afraid of really exploring relationship because it may open a Pandora's Box of unknown difficulties and embarrassments. We don't ever seem to escape this fact except by going off to strange idealistic conclusions. If we are honest about it, life is not rich and varied; that is just a pleasant, convenient idea. Mostly life on this planet stinks: it is a violent, loveless and greedy affair. Our own eyes and ears tell us this daily; and yet our brains prefer to live in the clouds.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 08 Mar 2019 #115
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
Mostly life on this planet stinks: it is a violent, loveless and greedy affair. Our own eyes and ears tell us this daily; and yet our brains prefer to live in the clouds.

The planet is full of glory and beauty but the Brain lives in the past or in the future therefore blind to 'what is' . .

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 09 Mar 2019 #116
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
One Self: We can clearly say that my memory of you (in real life not in here) is a dead and useless thing that can only interfere with relationship.

Why do you differentiate between real life and in here? I don't quite follow what you mean.

So the only part of what was said by oneself that interested you was the one in the parantisis? Forget that part it is not important but the rest of what was said was important that you apparently ignored. In real life we don't choose to quote part of what we say and argue over endlessly. In real life people who argue endlessly together don't associate with each other because the world is big. But in this small place we have to tolerate vulgarity and double- talks. In here we are like inmates . We have to tolerate everyone. So there is a great difference between the real life and what happens in this virtual chat room with virtual people who put different masks every now and then and who knows what is behind those masks..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 09 Mar 2019 #117
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

One Self: So the only part of what was said by oneself that interested you was the one in the parantisis? Forget that part it is not important but the rest of what was said was important that you apparently ignored. In real life we don't choose to quote part of what we say and argue over endlessly. In real life people who argue endlessly together don't associate with each other because the world is big. But in this small place we have to tolerate vulgarity and double- talks. In here we are like inmates . We have to tolerate everyone. So there is a great difference between the real life and what happens in this virtual chat room with virtual people who put different masks every now and then and who knows what is behind those masks..

Then remove first your own mask. Throw away the anonymity of a pseudonym. Find out what happens. You talk about this problem but you also perpetuate it by your own actions and choices.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sat, 09 Mar 2019 #118
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
Then remove first your own mask. Throw away the anonymity of a pseudonym. Find out what happens. You talk about this problem but you also perpetuate it by your own actions and choices.

You are not very creative are you? You just repeat what was said already. Try to use your own brain not mine..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 09 Mar 2019 #119
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 189 posts in this forum Offline

One Self: You are not very creative, are you? You just repeat what was said already. Try to use your own brain not mine.

I am not interested in being creative. You are complaining about people using different masks while they are here on this forum. But you are using a mask, just like them. Why?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 09 Mar 2019 #120
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 990 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
But you are using a mask, just like them. Why?

What makes you say that I put up a mask? Do you accept what I said therefore mechanically turn things around in defence? I also said use your Brain not my Brain. Can you use your Brain instead of merely using your thought that is a reflection of other thoughts . Forget the mask thing .It is not important. What is important is using your head instead of reacting to a word all the time. Can you understand this important thing and not get defensive?

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.)