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

Are we really "progressing" in our understanding?


Displaying posts 91 - 120 of 148 in total
Fri, 10 May 2019 #91
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

Paul Dimmock wrote:
But this is just another thought imposed upon a lot of other thoughts: the transformation of thought. It is yet another obstacle to overcome. And while we are playing with all these thoughts, the clock of life is ticking away.

Do you realize that it is you who judges what is written instead of trying to understand the significance of what is written. Are you against thinking ? Should we just not think and go to sleep? Does that solve your problems? And if that is so one asks why do you write anything. After all everything that you write comes from your thinking which you seem to be so satisfied with and don't want to change it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 10 May 2019 #92
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Sean Hen wrote:

Is it contradictory for people who read the teachings of Krishnamurti to be in conflict with each other as much as we are?

Why should our thought not be in contradiction with each other? The way we think is essentially wrong. Our thinking constantly revolves about a fictitious self. We don't know how to think objectively and impersonaly like krishnamurti . As long as our thinking is based on fear or pleasure we must be in constant conflict with each other in this forum and in daily life. A wrong mean will not lead to a right end . It is our way of thinking that causes all the problem of fear and aggression and the rest of it and as long as we don't tackle the central problem in our thinking any act of kindness is from thought therefore not true therefore it can turn into violence.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 10 May 2019 #93
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 502 posts in this forum Offline

jamie f wrote at #88:
Have I progressed in my understanding during that time? Of course. It's been a remarkable journey. Fascinating and hilarious at times, frightening and frustrating at other times. Have I changed fundamentally over the years? Of course not. Underneath it all, I am still exactly the same person I was all those years ago.

Doesn’t the very question of whether “I have changed fundamentally” imply that I CAN change fundamentally? CAN I - the ego, the self, the psyche, consciousness - change fundamentally? As long as action, behaviour, relationship, and so on, are rooted in or determined by the accumulation of the past we call consciousness or the known - can there BE fundamental psychological change in me - “me” being that ever-expanding and modified consciousness made of memories, knowledge and all their variations? Can there BE fundamental psychological change as long as SELF “determines” (or as long as the particular mind is under the illusion that self determines) action, relationship, behaviour? Can there be fundamental change as long as the illusory self “is”, as long as the mind is governed by that illusion, that is so long as the mind’s fears, contradictions, desires, and so on, are not fully faced? Is self-separate-from-the-brain a psychological illusion ... or not?

Don’t the same questions also apply to “progress”? Is there a relationship between “progress” and “fundamental change”? Does one lead to the other? Is progress a step toward transformation? Isn’t the same illusory self - i.e. the mind caught in the illusion of a separate self - determining the answers? Can there BE fundamental change where self is “operating” or “acting”? Again, is self an illusion or not? Can self evaluate or measure “the progress I am making”? Doesn’t progress imply that I have determined an ultimate goal and that I act (whenever I feel like it) in pursuit of or in accordance with that goal? Does any such a goal - set by the confused mind - have true value and significance for action?

The mind sees (I see) that all its (my) reactions, actions, behaviours, opinions, conclusions, and so on, are rooted in the past, a product of memory and knowledge. But when I am faced with a problem and don’t know what to do about it, I close my eyes to that understanding, I deny that understanding and I am “carried away” by the pressures and current of the past, by fear, desire, attachment, anger, and so on. But there is no intelligence in the past, is there? The past is formulaic. It follows a pattern. The past is not fluid, it is not a living thing.

Seeing this, that my actions are rooted in the past, then a question arises spontaneously: What IS action which is NOT engendered by the past or the known? Is there such an action? Are action and relationship unavoidably limited to and by memory? Is there a living, fluid, creative intelligence - which is not tied to and limited by the known - which can act freely, rightly, appropriately, harmoniously in facing a problem? If there is no such intelligence, then we are stuck with what we have, with repeating the age-old patterns of millenia, but with superior technology and greater efficiency!

I say there IS such intelligence which, as K said, is not personal, not my intelligence superior to your intelligence or vice-versa, but it is the same intelligence which governs or pervades or is the universe. Of course, you may say otherwise.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 10 May 2019 #94
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 210 posts in this forum Offline

Jamie F: It was an attempt at honesty. 'Progression' implies time with all that it involves and in some ways I have changed with time but in other ways time has stood still for me. And the song we are listening to is life, surely?

Then what is life? What is the whole significance of life?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 10 May 2019 #95
Thumb_pd Paul Dimmock United Kingdom 210 posts in this forum Offline

One Self: Do you realize that it is you who judges what is written instead of trying to understand the significance of what is written?

No, I am meeting your statement that thought needs to be transformed; it is not a judgement. You have already made the judgement: you have already reached the conclusion that thought needs to be transformed. I am questioning it. And, also, I am questioning the assumption that we can’t do anything about the physical organism coming to an end. First of all, we can talk about it, open it up, find out what we feel about it and explore the reasons behind those feelings.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 10 May 2019 #96
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
I say there IS such intelligence which, as K said, is not personal, not my intelligence superior to your intelligence or vice-versa, but it is the same intelligence which governs or pervades or is the universe. Of course, you may say otherwise.

We can inquire into what intelligence is but we can't assume that intelligence is an entity that solves any problem and it is free from this world. It is very easy to slip into an illusion .

One has to be very careful not to let illusions to be formed in the mind

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 10 May 2019 #97
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 502 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
We can inquire into what intelligence is but we can't assume that intelligence is an entity that solves any problem and it is free from this world. It is very easy to slip into an illusion .

One has to be very careful not to let illusions to be formed in the mind

I maintain that intelligence is not a personal personal quality of "me" or "you". Based on observation - not by basing myself on time and thought - I see that there is a universal creative intelligence acting. I may be mistaken but - being careful and not making it a conclusion - this is what I observe - that whatever intelligence there is in our actions is not due to my or your personal qualities. Looking at the created universe and its contents on all levels and in all its forms, I see intelligence and order throughout. I may be wrong but that is my observation. I don’t say that there is an intelligent creative entity who solves all problems. I don’t know the nature or source of that universal creative intelligence, but I observe it. It is unknown, it cannot be known. K put it very well I think when he said that “The created cannot think about the Uncreated. ... It can only think about that which is known.”

By all means, one has to be hesitant. In observing, one has to question one’s own perceptions; one has to see one’s tendencies, compulsions, fears and desires: to draw conclusions, to engage in dialectical argument based on the authority of those conclusions, to protect the self-image, and so on. All that is after all part of what is being observed.

Of course one sees that it is easy to slip into illusion. One observes that tendency. So one is hesitant, vigilant, uncertain about one’s understanding. But there is no way not to “let” illusions be formed in the mind. In observing, one can make a mistake or take a wrong turn in a moment of inattention. But it it is not unfixable. It can be seen and understood at any moment. One has to be careful but not paralyzed. If an illusion slips in and is seen, then there is understanding. But if one rigidly “decides” not to let illusions slip in, this prevents understanding, as I see it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 10 May 2019 #98
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 502 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Doesn’t the very question of whether “I have changed fundamentally” imply that I CAN change fundamentally?

jamie f wrote:
Not necessarily. It is an open question.

I understand. K did put the question to his listeners - “why don’t you change?”

But isn’t there a distinction between putting the question without reference to time, without evaluating my progress through time, without comparing myself today to the person I was years ago? Is it an open question when I look at it, at "me", through the lens of time, when I make comparisons between then and now, when I evaluate my progress in time? Isn’t the question “open” where it is asked without seeking, comparing, formulating an “answer”, and so on?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Fri, 10 May 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 11 May 2019 #99
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 794 posts in this forum Offline

jamie f wrote:
It was an attempt at honesty.

Your attempt is appreciated and I found it communicative. Are we a bit scared to be honest on this forum? Perhaps it implies some vulnerability and leaving oneself open to being scolded.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 11 May 2019 #100
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 794 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
Why should our thought not be in contradiction with each other?

My point here was that Krishnamurti talked a lot about awareness and observation. On a Krishnamurti forum, there might just be some awareness around and some observation taking place. This awareness might just be able to look at the conflicts we have and learn something. Or is this just not possible?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 11 May 2019 #101
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

H:One has to be careful but not paralyzed. If an illusion slips in and is seen, then there is understanding. But if one rigidly “decides” not to let illusions slip in, this prevents understanding, as I see it.'

I don't know if one can be free from illusions in time. Once a poison is seen as a poison one doesn't let it to enter the body . In the same way if an image or an illusion is seen as a poison then one doesn't let it to be formed in the mind. This is too difficult to discus in here. We rather play with the images or the illusions. The images fill our voids. I wont get into that .

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #102
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
I don't know if one can be free from illusions in time. Once a poison is seen as a poison one doesn't let it to enter the body . In the same way if an image or an illusion is seen as a poison then one doesn't let it to be formed in the mind. This is too difficult to discus in here. We rather play with the images or the illusions. The images fill our voids. I wont get into that .

Words, words, words but not saying anything. You have your beliefs, ideas and opinions and others have theirs and on and on it goes. What a complete farce and waste of space.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #103
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
One Self wrote:

I don't know if one can be free from illusions in time. Once a poison is seen as a poison one doesn't let it to enter the body . In the same way if an image or an illusion is seen as a poison then one doesn't let it to be formed in the mind. This is too difficult to discus in here. We rather play with the images or the illusions. The images fill our voids. I wont get into that . '

Sean: My point here was that Krishnamurti talked a lot about awareness and observation. On a Krishnamurti forum, there might just be some awareness around and some observation taking place. This awareness might just be able to look at the conflicts we have and learn something. Or is this just not possible?

Unfortunately the mechanism of this forums is to mix the stupid and the wise and the fool all together in one room(virtually). So yes it is NOT possible.
If there was a possibility to upgrade this forums to a more efficient forum that everyone was constantly leaning. I don't see it coming . This forums is over 10 years. It is about due for software upgrade.(most likely nobody cares.). Until then the stupids and the fools keep taking over this forum:)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #104
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5517 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
Until then the stupids and the fools keep taking over this forum:)

Oh, One Self, don't be so hard on yourself. Just because others call you names is no reason to agree with them. Maybe if you had more relevant and intelligent posts, or fewer posts, or both the problems on this forum you describe above would correct themselves.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sun, 12 May 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #105
Thumb_kr2 Ken D United States 9 posts in this forum Offline

An observation from long ago by "Idiot"

"Whence should there be joy to a peaceless man?" Bhagavad Gita

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #106
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 523 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D. quoted idiot from 2003:
"The process" was a headache that lasted about 60 years. Dude, next lifetime take a little aspirin!

Ken, you made me laugh. Wait. I made me laugh.

Next, you can dig up the one I posted about the "Whirled Teacher." Or the one about itching powder.

Speaking of aspirin, I hope you all haven't been overdoing it with your birthday celebrations. What? You don't celebrate May 11 or 12?

This post was last updated by idiot ? Sun, 12 May 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #107
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

the sarcastic Jack Pine wrote:
Until then the stupids and the fools keep taking over this forum:)

Oh, One Self, don't be so hard on yourself.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #108
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

The cheapest and the most uncreative way to write comments is to copy what is being said and inject the word "you" it in a sarcastic way. Who wants to converse with a sarcastic person who is waiting to see what one writes and copies that!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 May 2019 #109
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

The cheapest and the most uncreative way to write comments is to copy what is being said and inject the word "you" it in a sarcastic way. Who wants to converse with a sarcastic person who is waiting to see what one writes and copies that!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 May 2019 #110
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 794 posts in this forum Offline

jamie f wrote:
Have I progressed in my understanding during that time? Of course. It's been a remarkable journey. Fascinating and hilarious at times, frightening and frustrating at other times. Have I changed fundamentally over the years? Of course not. Underneath it all, I am still exactly the same person I was all those years ago.

I think this is pretty much true for all of us. Perhaps Krishnamurti was pointing out something beyond the life of thought and the "me". Do we get glimpses of moments when we are not that "me"? When the mind is still and thought isn't there?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 May 2019 #111
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 502 posts in this forum Offline

jamie f wrote at 107:
I accept what you say, but the original post in this thread was a question about 'progression'. Progression is movement and movement is time and therefore you cannot discuss progression without involving time. Progression, therefore, is the comparison between where I was then and where I am now. Progression is also a movement forwards. It is not a regressive step. People rarely ask if we are more stupid today than yesterday, although the movement from Shakespeare to Nigel Farage would seem to place it beyond doubt. Society changes. Society is different today than it was in yesteryear. So, we change - with or without reading K for decades - and it makes sense to evaluate this change intelligently.

Yes, society IS superficially different today than it was yesterday, and also different in various geographical locations around the world. But is man different, has he progressed in the sense that we discuss here - psychologically, inwardly and outwardly in terms of joy of living and relationship? IS there a progressive movement which can culminate in THAT sort of change? In this sense, what is it that can “progress”? Can society progress if, inwardly, man remains violent, greedy, conceited, brutal, afraid, and so on? If those inner tendencies or qualities would actually completely end, society would be truly transformed, wouldn’t it?

What can change man in that way? What can end his fear, despair and brutality? Maybe nothing. It is clear, isn’t it, that coercion, laws, intellectual reasoning, effort, will, desire, belief, prayer, threats, science, medicine, pretense, practice or conformity to a method cannot do it. That is, nothing which arises from or which is put together by consciousness, knowledge, time or ego can do it. To me, this is not an evaluation, not a personal conclusion. It is a fact which can be observed. Of course, anyone can call anything a fact, and I may be wrong. Is it wrong? Isn’t it a fact?

Added:

Some might say that understanding can progress or evolve. I see that this is so scientifically and in various other fields of intellectual endeavour where accumulated knowledge is useful and necessary. But can one progress in understanding the root cause of discontent? Or is it a matter of actually seeing it in a “flash”?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Mon, 13 May 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 May 2019 #112
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1379 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
But can one progress in understanding the root cause of discontent?

There has to be 'inquiry', doesn't there? Not just a superficial looking into ourselves but deep and with no limit. It has been suggested that the root cause of our conflict, our fear, greed, violence is something that we have 'lost touch' with and that all we know about this sensation of 'disturbance' is our reaction to it i.e., we don't know 'fear' or 'sorrow' only the way in which we 'escape' from the sensation that we've named with those labels. Please check me if this is wrong. So only we can make this inquiry, it can't come from outside and its depth is determined by what? The passion to find out the truth? 'Progress' seems to have some meaning here perhaps in the 'refinement' (identifying the subjective, self-centered aspects) of the inquiry?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Mon, 13 May 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 May 2019 #113
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

"One of the most difficult things to understand, it seems to me, is this problem of change. We see that there is progress in different forms, so-called evolution; but is there a fundamental change in progress? I do not know if this problem has struck you at all, or whether you have ever thought about it, but perhaps it will be worthwhile to go into the question this morning.

We see that there is progress in the obvious sense of that word; there are new inventions, better cars, better planes, better refrigerators, the superficial peace of a progressive society, and so on. But does that progress bring about a radical change in man, in you and me? It does superficially alter the conduct of our life, but can it ever fundamentally transform our thinking? And how is this fundamental transformation to be brought about? I think it is a problem worth considering. There is progress in self-improvement: I can be better tomorrow, more kind, more generous, less envious, less ambitious. But does self-improvement bring about a complete change in one's thinking? Or is there no change at all, but only progress? Progress implies time, does it not? I am this today, and I shall be something better tomorrow. That is, in self-improvement, or self-denial, or self-abnegation, there is progression, the gradualism of moving towards a better life, which means superficially adjusting to environment, conforming to an improved pattern, being conditioned in a nobler way, and so on. We see that process taking place all the time. And you must have wondered, as I have, whether progress does bring about a fundamental revolution.
To me, the important thing is not progress, but revolution. Please don't be horrified by that word `revolution',"
Ojai 4th Public Talk 14th July 1955

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 May 2019 #114
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 502 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
'Progress' seems to have some meaning here perhaps in the 'refinement' (identifying the subjective, self-centered aspects) of the inquiry?

Dan, I see what you’re getting at, I think. I started out with no self-understanding at all, with no awareness of how I am responsible for my own misery, full of self-pity or self-castigation, with no awareness of the thought processes which produce the self and its difficulties in relationship. And now, there is the dawning understanding of the source of man’s misery.

Nonetheless, I question whether this is progress. Progress is a measure of time, a comparison between before and after, with a constant eye on an ultimate “goal”, isn’t it? And who does this measuring, comparison, goal-setting, who evaluates the progress that is made or not made?

Where there is a burgeoning of understanding, is it necessary to evaluate or measure progress? Is the awakening of awareness or intelligence also a PROCESS which can be measured, with a beginning and an end, step 1, step 2, step 3 and so on, until the final step? Is the passion to enquire part of such a process? If it is, then isn't the whole process still within the scope or confines of thought, a continuity of the past, nothing fundamentally new? Which means simply a modification in consciousness, not the revolution mentioned by K.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 May 2019 #115
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1379 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
And now, there is the dawning understanding of the source of man’s misery.

That to me sounds like a 'seeing' of the situation we are in. This morning I was thinking of the situation here on the Mexican border: people for whatever reason wanting to get out of where they are to something new, something they feel holds more promise, more security, etc. My response to all this is that the borders between countries should go, the earth is for all of us, the racial divisions between us are superficial etc, etc. But here in the house that I live in, there are a few acres of woods surrounding it where I walk each day. Legally, they belong to me. They have a definite 'border' surveyed and entered in some official place or other. When I asked myself how did I feel about people 'encroaching' those borders?...maybe setting up a tent or two?... my reaction was a definite "no"! So there it was in a nutshell, the whole 'me and mine' as K. calls it. The whole business of 'possession' was right there in front of me, in me. And unlike the territoriality instinct of the birds and animals which has its limits, this thing in me has proven in the world of Man, to have none. "Get as much as you can because you can never have too much.."

So I was blind to this and now it's seen. It doesn't mean that I will welcome others into my little space- I won't...but I can no longer self-righteously judge others for what they do.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Mon, 13 May 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 14 May 2019 #116
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 523 posts in this forum Offline

We interrupt this story for some court room drama:

Judge: The charge is murder in the first degree. Counsel for the defense is a Mr. Krishnamurti Jiddu, Esquire. How does the defendant plead?

K: Sir, can we go into this question?

Judge: No, we cannot. Guilty or not guilty?

K: The word “plea” means an appeal, a supplication. Which implies what? That there is an inequality of roles, does it not?

Judge: That’s right. I’m the judge. You’re the lawyer. I’m in charge here. Guilty or not guilty?

K: It is the small mind, is it not?, that sees matters in terms of black and white, in terms of yes or no, in terms of guilty or not guilty, in terms of…

Judge: Stop. Will counsel for the defense approach the bench?

K: Sir, what is a bench?

Judge: (Sigh) Very well. Let the record show that the defendant refuses to enter a plea. Therefore a plea of not guilty is entered on his behalf. Mr. Krishnamurti, you are qualified to practice law, sir?

K: From time to time I have been known to read a mystery novel.

(Later)

Witness: Da defendant over dere put four bullets in Bugsy’s head.

K: Now this murder… I wonder if we see the tremendous violence of it? The horrid lack of sensitivity. The appalling horror of it. Now, sir, this so called murder took place in the past, did it not?

Witness: Dat’s right. I don’t see nobody here now with a gun, do you?

Judge, muttering to himself: I could sure use one.

K: And being in the past, it is a thing of the mind, a mere thought, is it not?

Witness: Maybe for you. But last time I checked, Bugsy ain’t here no more.

K: Now sir, you are the observer, are you not?

Witness: Yeah, I’m the one that seen it.

K: And the observer is the observed.

Witness: Now wait a minute. Who you tryin’ to pin this on?

K: Sir, you are the world, are you not?

Witness: Look, buddy, I’m just the one what saw it.

K: Yes, you are the world. The observer is the observed. The seer is the seen. The doer is the done. The killer is the killed. The murderer is the murdered…

Judge: The nut is the nutty. Bailiff, remove Mr. Krishnamurti. Court will recess until a competent attorney can be found for the defendant.

K (being dragged out): The speaker is unimportant!

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 14 May 2019 #117
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1379 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Is the passion to enquire part of such a process?

If being a 'light unto oneself' means the discovering of the different aspects of the 'prison' of the self, it is only the self that would want to accumulate what is seen; what the light uncovers, isn't it? . Hold it in memory, 'possess it', build up an image of what insight reveals. So 'progress' has no place in this, as I see it. That is for the technical realm: a better this and a better that...But in the psyche, what is the motive to 'dig deeper', to see more? Tom in the other forum is asking how can one be a witness to what Man is doing in the world; the cruelty, the oppression, the killing and not seek to find out what is wrong with us? Is it the insights themselves that bring the energy to look deeper?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 14 May 2019 #118
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 502 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
But in the psyche, what is the motive to 'dig deeper', to see more? Tom in the other forum is asking how can one be a witness to what Man is doing in the world; the cruelty, the oppression, the killing and not seek to find out what is wrong with us?

"Any change which we desire is a modified continuity of the same thing as now exists." [https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/madras-1st-gr...]

Of course it hurts to witness the suffering in the world. Like hunger and thirst, that hurt is not rooted in thought, idea, opinion, knowledge or time, is it?

It is seen that imposing my will on the world, condemning, denouncing, vilifying and spewing hate at the perpetrators whom I view as being responsible, legislating, punishing, trying to convince - none of that end's the world's suffering. The fact is that there is no wisdom or intelligence in the actions of will or desire. Is there? Whenever I try to find the way to solve it, whenever I denounce and condemn it, does that act to solve it?

Isn’t it seen that only impersonal understanding and intelligence can act rightly? Isn't there is a division created by the mere desire and will to solve the world’s suffering, between the desire or will and the suffering itself?

In seeing the suffering without deciding to focus on efforts to solve it but facing it fully, isn't that action? Such action may or may not involve organizing, communicating with others, and so on, but it is selfless. It is not rooted in selfish desire.

Isn’t desire the “demand for self-fulfilment”? Where there is desire, there is the self. So is "wanting" to understand the source of it also "desire" - thought, knowledge, time? Is wanting to understand it a demand for self-fulfilment, or is it a movement of innocence, without knowledge, time, calculation? When I’m hungry or thirsty, when my heart aches for the world’s or one person's suffering, is that ache a demand for self-fulfilment? Or is it a living, innocent movement of the heart and mind, of the whole human being? Without seeing the root of the world's suffering in “me” - how can I find a solution to the world’s suffering? So there is a passion to understand. As I see it.

Dan McDermott wrote:
Is it the insights themselves that bring the energy to look deeper?

Isn't perhaps the other way around? That when energy is not squandered in desire and effort, there is the energy to look deeper?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 14 May 2019 #119
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1379 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Without seeing the root of the world's suffering in “me” - how can I find a solution to the world’s suffering?

That brings home the meaning of K.'s "you are the world".

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 15 May 2019 #120
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1101 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
I see that there is a universal creative intelligence acting. I may be mistaken but - being careful and not making it a conclusion - this is what I observe - that whatever intelligence there is in our actions is not due to my or your personal qualities. Looking at the created universe and its contents on all levels and in all its forms, I see intelligence and order throughout. I may be wrong...

The problem is that intelligence which is neither personal or impersonal is not operating in the world . We keep slipping into unintelligent wars. Conflict denies intelligence does it not? We humans have brought this world and we are destroying it by our ignorance. It is ignorance that is needed to be understood. Until then there is no intelligence. Until then intelligence is merely another word as it has been ..
Human ignorance and indifference is the result of our wrong education .The educational systems are creating murderers in the world. Robots with no feeling for other human beings.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 91 - 120 of 148 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.)