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

How does one go to the very source of thought?


Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 237 in total
Wed, 17 Jul 2019 #61
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
The truth is not a position, it simply IS. The very taking of positions about anything obfuscates the truth, don’t you think? No truth can be understood or spoken without self-awareness, wouldn’t you say?

The truth is the truth and independent of any position someone takes about it. For example, the earth goes around the sun. That is a fact. But a thousand years ago, most people thought that the sun goes around the earth.

Careful observation and science can help us get at the truth. In this case, we can understand psychological priming, how we can be conditioned at an unconscious level and how that can affect our perception. We can do the experiment I have suggested: play the sound excerpt for unbiased people unfamiliar with K on good audio equipment without telling them what you think is being said and let them tell you what was said. Or perhaps a skilled audio engineer could clean up the sound of the excerpt in such a way so that the voice could be more clearly heard.

It is a fact that K said something. I am convinced that he said "valid." Others are just as convinced he said "wrong." Science can help us get at the truth but I don't think people care that much or consider the issue very important. So it is likely to remain unresolved.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 17 Jul 2019 #62
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

Has anyone else noticed how the news is full of the idiotic stuff Trump is saying? It's not by accident but by design he is doing this. It's not only a diversion from other things that he doesn't want people to read or talk about. It is also about him being a narcissist. He wants to be the center of attention...all the time.

Now has anyone noticed how on this forum how many of the threads become centered around idiot?/One Self? When this poster, idiot?/One Self then he/she posts something completely off the wall involving "carbon monoxide" or the telegraph. These kinds of posts are begging for responses. Personally, I refrained from responding to either purposely idiotic posts.

This thread started out as a video about something K said. Now it's all about idiot?/One Self and his/her irrational refusal to look at facts. Please, can we move on and talk about something related to K and not something related to idiot?/One Self, or Jack, or Dan, etc? Please?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 17 Jul 2019 #63
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 539 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
But a thousand years ago, most people thought that the sun goes around the earth.

Exactly. And people did then and still do now kill or attack those who disagree. Whether one believes the Earth goes around the sun or vice-versa, or whether one believes K said this or that - does not justify physical or verbal violence, does it? Nor does belief make the world a better place. But we attach value, virtue and significance to belief, we are attached to our beliefs and to the sense of security they provide. And so we feel justified in attacking non-believers. Science can only “help us get at the truth” if we drop all belief and conclusions. There is no dearth of beliefs and conclusions, even those which have been disproved by science. Good audio equipment cannot help us. Those who transcribed the tapes of K’s talks at the time had access to the horse’s mouth, didn’t they?

So where does this leave us? What are we really interested in? Whether K said “valid” or “wrong”? Is this the truth we hunger for? The truth that we hunger for cannot be proffered to us by science, can it? It cannot be understood by looking outwardly but only by looking inwardly. No?

http://uberfritz.blogspot.com/2018/12/nietzsche...:

“No matter how strongly a thing may be believed, strength of belief is no criterion of truth.”

I'm not very familiar with Nietzche, but this makes sense, doesn’t it? I have often heard people say, “I really really believe….”, as though adding an extra “really” strenghtens the truth. But it only shows the strength of the belief, not the truth.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Wed, 17 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 17 Jul 2019 #64
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1453 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
But it only shows the strength of the belief, not the truth.

That is the 'problem' with 'truth'. K. has said it is 'what is'. But for most I think, it is that 'truth' is what one believes it to be. We have imbued, invested the world with 'meaning', there was none here before us... What is of 'value' and 'significant' is what we say, think, believe is of value and significance. It is completely subjective. That has led to great division and bloodshed among us. 'Truth', the word, implies something fixed, but we know, if the word is to have any sense at all, it can't be that. 'Truth' has to be 'alive', vibrant, moving, timeless etc. K's "What is", seems to point at that.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 17 Jul 2019 #65
Thumb_fuzzy6 Ken D United States 47 posts in this forum Offline

"Sow the seed of freedom, which is to awaken intelligence; for with that intelligence you can tackle all the problems of life." Krishnamurti

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 17 Jul 2019 #66
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

All of these confusions would have cleared up if each one studied the teachings seriously and not verbally. In fact there is no verbal understanding. That is why practically everyone is lost in here. There is no truth in symbols. Truth is outside of this and other chatrooms which are based on words. Here we can chat for amusement as ken generally does(which I don't condemn).

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 18 Jul 2019 #67
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 886 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Careful observation and science can help us get at the truth. In this case, we can understand psychological priming, how we can be conditioned at an unconscious level and how that can affect our perception. We can do the experiment I have suggested: play the sound excerpt for unbiased people unfamiliar with K on good audio equipment without telling them what you think is being said and let them tell you what was said. Or perhaps a skilled audio engineer could clean up the sound of the excerpt in such a way so that the voice could be more clearly heard.

Yes, careful observation and science can sometimes help us to get at the truth. However, I'm confused about the part above which talks about psychological priming. Given that we are not absolutely sure what the adjective before "question" was, there may have been no psychological priming present. Quite simply, we could have heard the word "wrong" correctly. Have I misunderstood what you mean by "psychological priming" here? Or do you mean that hearing the word "valid" might have been the result of psychological priming? In a previous message idiot?, you wrongly assumed that I had been watching the video with captions and jumped to an erroneous conclusion.

As for science, the experiment you carried out was interesting but the sample group was far too small to prove anything. I asked my wife to listen to the audio. English is not her first language but she is a very proficient speaker with a good ear. Alas, she couldn't make out the word. Neither "wrong" nor "valid" were possibilities she came up with. We both agreed the adjective sounded as if it had only one syllable.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 19 Jul 2019 #68
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
In a previous message idiot?, you wrongly assumed that I had been watching the video with captions and jumped to an erroneous conclusion.

Yes, I am sorry, Sean Hen. I responded quickly and I was thinking of Jack Pine who had the captions on when he first heard the statement. In your case, you first heard it without captions on.

That's interesting that you and your wife both hear only one syllable. My friend and I definitely hear two. The second syllable of "valid" is, of course, much quieter since it is unaccented but I definitely hear it. The second syllable follows very quickly right after the first. Hearing it makes all the difference.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Fri, 19 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 19 Jul 2019 #69
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

Well the news is still full of Trump raging about this or that, racism, idiocy and idiot?/One Self is still talking about what K said which has been well established with or without the CC. K said "wrong" the CC said wrong. Get over it. Get a life.

And as a matter of fact I didn't have the CC on when I first watched the video. You have to actively turn that on. I didn't need it until the controversy arose. If you can't hear that's one thing. But when you don't understand what K has said about thinking all along; that's something else. Can we, for cristssake, move on. Who cares what idiot?/One Self believes or doesn't believe?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 19 Jul 2019 #70
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Who cares what idiot?/One Self believes or doesn't believe?

You believe idiot and me are the same person! How unintelligent one can be!
(The mechanical mind can't go beyond itself even though it begs for it.)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 20 Jul 2019 #71
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

The odds that two people posting on the same forum have exactly the same kind of thinking are just too long to believe. Both identities think superficially and literally. You believe everything you think. Both identities have absolutely no ability to think abstractly.

You know who you are. But do you know how dishonest it is to use two or more identities? Especially when those identities "Recommend" each other.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 20 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 20 Jul 2019 #72
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Whatever the devil says the opposite of that is true. That is an old saying.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 20 Jul 2019 #73
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 886 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Well the news is still full of Trump raging about this or that, racism, idiocy and idiot?/One Self is still talking about what K said which has been well established with or without the CC. K said "wrong" the CC said wrong. Get over it. Get a life.

Hi Jack and all. I have to say that I am the one who was responsible for bringing up this controversy again and idiot? replied to me. Anyway, I think it's a good idea to move on.

We've commented before on K's ability to rediscover things as if for the first time when he gives his talks or writes. This gives what he says an air of freshness and newness. In the video, he asks what happens if you are asked a question for which you have no answer. You're not looking, not waiting to be told. You say "I don't know". You're absolutely clear that you don't know. He asks what has happened to the quality of thinking. What happens to the movement of thought?

Are our brains ever in a state of not knowing? Or are our brains always full of knowledge?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 21 Jul 2019 #74
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Are our brains ever in a state of not knowing? Or are our brains always full of knowledge?

Sean, it's an interesting question. But how do you discuss being, "in a state of not knowing"? I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss it. It's just that when I read the question and thought about it for awhile I wondered how to discuss this question.

As we have all read and heard many times, thought is limited, based on experience and knowledge. The answer to the original question was immediately obvious to at least some of us. It was as K eventually was quoted in the video; "The basis of thought is memory; experience and knowledge." The question to ask was not what the source of thought was but rather what happens when thought ends, when we see that we don't know? When the brain is quiet?

Once again where do you begin? We can't say, "Well I remember one time when I didn't know something and my brain was quiet...etc...etc. That's all meaningless. So what is left? You ask, "Are our brains ever in a state of not knowing?" I don't know. If you don't know either then what is happening? what is thought doing? Is it trying to find an answer? Is it [thought] trying to figure it out logically? Is the brain quiet?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 23 Jul 2019 #75
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 886 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Sean, it's an interesting question. But how do you discuss being, "in a state of not knowing"? I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss it. It's just that when I read the question and thought about it for awhile I wondered how to discuss this question.

Hi Jack. I must say that I have no idea how to discuss being "in a state of not knowing". It almost seems like a trap as we could be accused of searching for an answer if we discuss this. However, if we don't discuss it how can we explore and understand more? Is a state of choice less observation a state of not knowing?

I would say that the quality of newness and freshness which K gets into his talks seems to be connected to a state of not knowing. Is that the case? Do we ever have that sense of freshness and newness in our discussions here? This is a genuine question.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 24 Jul 2019 #76
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

I should say that other than afew of us ( ken ,jack,one-self sean ,Patricia ) we have some dam good writers in here.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 24 Jul 2019 #77
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Do we ever have that sense of freshness and newness in our discussions here? This is a genuine question.

Maybe and maybe not. That's a judgement I'm not going to make. But then we have the completely inane, irrelevant, unintelligent and hateful comments like the one above this post. A child making noise to get the attention of the adults in the room.

Sean, have you noticed, in yourself, how thought is almost always in the escape mode? Seeking pleasure, entertainment, escape from what is. Thought is limited because knowledge is limited. It uses the self it has invented as a means of seeking pleasure, seeking identification with something more permanent than itself. Because thought realizes it's impermanence, it's insecurity on some level and it is constantly seeking to escape or fill that void it feels. When thought ends, if it ends in the brain, what "entity" is there to register the end of thought? Not the self. K spoke of a vast emptiness, of energy that is when thought ends. To try to seek that in any way is just the desire of thought. According to K, thought can never touch that vastness. So I guess this leaves us back where we started.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 24 Jul 2019 #78
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 886 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Sean, have you noticed, in yourself, how thought is almost always in the escape mode? Seeking pleasure, entertainment, escape from what is.

Hi Jack, what you say seems to be very true. More than anything I notice my thought wandering all over the place in many directions most of the time. Yes, seeking pleasure and entertainment are never far away most of the time.

I've watched and listened to the video which I posted at the start of this thread very closely and feel that the part below (bolding is mine to reflect parts K stressed) is very important. K seems to be pointing out something that is key to the teachings. But do we really get this?

6:16 "Now if one is asked a question .... for which you have no answer ... no answer .... which means you are not looking ... you are not waiting to be told .... you're not searching, asking. You say "I don't know." When you say I don't know, actually I don't know, what has happened to the quality of thinking? Are you following this? Please sir, do it, follow. Do it with me. When you actually say, I don't know. And you mean it, not say, "Well I'll find out. I am waiting for an answer, I'm doing it." But when you are absolutely clear that you don't know, what happens to the movement of thought? Go on sir, tell me what happens. Oh, for God's sake - go on sir. The activity of thought comes to an end for the moment."

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 25 Jul 2019 #79
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

QUESTIONER: When I observe my thoughts there is great tension -
KRISHNAMURTI: When one observes one's thoughts, the questioner says, there is greater strain, greater conflict. Why does this take place? When you observe your thought why should there be strain? There is strain, tension, conflict, because you look at your thought with the eyes of condemnation?, comparison, judgement, you don't look at it. When I look at that microphone, I can look at it and not make it a strain. But if I say, `I don't like it', immediately it becomes a strain. We compare and judge because we are conditioned to look at everything in our life with condemnation, comparison, or justification; never to look at things as they are without any of this. Then you will find, Sirs, life becomes very simple: you can look.
J.K., Talks in Europe, 1967, 5th Public Talk

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 #80
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

So Krishnamurti tells the questioner that he or she looks at life wrongly. That is why he/or she is stressed out when looking at thought.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #81
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

What is the source of thought? How does one go to the very source of thought so there is the possibility of silencing the thinking process itself? It is a valid question!

Which is why K himself asks, What is the source of thought?" For example...

The Future of Humanity:

JK: Of course. That's why I feel that if once we grasp the nature and structure of thought, how thought operates, what is the source of thought - and therefore it is always limited - if we really see that, then...

DB: Now the source of thought is what? Is it memory?

JK: Memory. The remembrance of things past, which is knowledge, and knowledge is the outcome of experience, and experience is always limited.

DB: Thought also includes, of course, the attempt to go forward, to use logic, to take into account discoveries and insights.

JK: As we were saying some time ago, thought is time.

Or...

https://jkrishnamurti.org/content/ending-thought:

Krishnamurti: The brain is the source of thought. The brain is matter and thought is matter. Can the brain - with all its reactions and its immediate responses to every challenge and demand - can that brain be very still? It is not a question of ending thought, but of whether the brain can be completely still. Can it act with full capacity when necessary and otherwise be still? This stillness is not physical death. See what happens when the brain is completely still. See what happens.

Or...

The Ending of Time:

http://jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/the-ending-of-...

K: On thought. So why have we lost the other? We have cultivated very carefully, by thought, the concept of meeting hate by hate, violence by violence, and so on. Why haven't we moved along with the other line? With love, that is causeless? You follow my question?

DB: Yes.

K: Is this a futile question?

DB: One doesn't see any way of proceeding.

K: I am not trying to proceed.

DB: We have to understand what made people respond to hate with hate...

K: ...To X, the other seems so natural. So if that is so natural to him, why isn't it natural to everyone else? It must be natural to others!

...

K: But we have explained all that. I want to find out why, if it is natural to X, it isn't natural to others. I think this is a valid question.

...

K: But to go back to that question: I think it is valid. X is without cause, Y is caught in cause. Why? You understand? Is it the privilege of the few? The elite? No, no. Let's look at it another way. The mind of humanity has been responding to hate with hate, violence by violence, and knowledge by knowledge. But X is part of humanity, and he does not respond to hate by hate, like Y and Z! They are part of X's consciousness, part of all that.

DB: Why is there this difference?

K: That is what I am asking. One is natural, the other is unnatural. Why? Why the difference? Who is asking this question? The people, Y and Z, who respond to hate by hate, are they asking the question? Or is X asking the question?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #82
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ?/One Self wrote:
DB: Now the source of thought is what? Is it memory?

JK: Memory. The remembrance of things past, which is knowledge, and knowledge is the outcome of experience, and experience is always limited.

So what? This has all been said before. Thought is based on memory which is knowledge and experience. Nothing new here. You have not made an argument that the question is valid in the original context of the question in the video which clearly states K saying this is a wrong question.

Why do you continue to beat this to death? Why? You are like Trump. You can't admit when you are wrong. Further, like the psychopath Trump, you invent your own reality without the ability to see the actual facts.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #83
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 689 posts in this forum Offline

Krishnamurti, The Impossible Question, Part 2, Chapter 4:

Sirs, look, we never put the impossible question - we are always putting the question of what is possible. If you put an impossible question, your mind then has to find the answer in terms of the impossible - not of what is possible. All the great scientific discoveries are based on this, the impossible. It was impossible to go to the moon. But if you say, 'It is possible' then you drop it. Because it was impossible, three hundred thousand people co-operated and worked at it, night and day - they put their mind to it and went to the moon. But we never put the impossible question! The impossible question is this: can the mind empty itself of the known? - itself, not you empty the mind. That is an impossible question. If you put it with tremendous earnestness, with seriousness, with passion, you'll find out. But if you say, `Oh, it is possible', then you are stuck.

The impossible question. The valid question. The wrong question.

Call it what you will. Can thought end and love flower?

It's really the only question.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jul 2019 #84
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
idiot ?/One Self wrote:

What a jerk!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jul 2019 #85
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Krishnamurti: The brain is the source of thought. The brain is matter and thought is matter. Can the brain - with all its reactions and its immediate responses to every challenge and demand - can that brain be very still?

There is the key. The Brain is the source of thought. It is so simple that the complicated and messed up Brain denies that.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jul 2019 #86
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

One Self/idiot? wrote:
There is the key. The Brain is the source of thought. It is so simple that the complicated and messed up Brain denies that.

And you and your alter ego are both idiots. Of course it's the brain. What do you think holds the cells that store memory; knowledge and experience? Do you ever get embarrassed by these really stupid responses of yours? Probably not right? To be embarrassed you'd have to actually know how stupid they were.

You haven't even watched the video have you? In the end K answers the question by saying the source of thought is memory; experience and knowledge.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Tue, 30 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jul 2019 #87
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
And you and your alter ego are both idiots.

The most influential word of the devil is "you". Defuse that word and the devil is wiped out.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jul 2019 #88
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5755 posts in this forum Offline

One Self/idiot? wrote:
Defuse that word and the devil is wiped out.

Your above post makes no sense, of course. But the disturbing part is do you really believe in the "devil"? Do you believe in the Easter Bunny too? Does your mommy know that you are posting on Kinfonet?

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Tue, 30 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jul 2019 #89
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1456 posts in this forum Offline

Just notice how many you and your the little devil jack uses in the above. Take that word away from him and he has nothing to post in here. I don't know how his wife tolerates him and why she doesn't post in here!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jul 2019 #90
Thumb_fuzzy6 Ken D United States 47 posts in this forum Offline

"Do you believe in the Easter Bunny too?"

"Sow the seed of freedom, which is to awaken intelligence; for with that intelligence you can tackle all the problems of life." Krishnamurti

This post was last updated by Ken D Tue, 30 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 237 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.)