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

To read someone's writing or comment you become him or her.


Displaying posts 31 - 60 of 100 in total
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #31
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

idiot ? wrote:
You can argue about whether K was intellectual or not. Compared to other spiritual teachers, he most certainly was.

Instead of coming to a lot of conclusions and assumptions about what I asked Clive in my above post can we stick to the question and not go off in all directions? What I asked:

"Clive, is it enquiry, is it dialogue to think something to death? To intellectualize a subject to death with opinions and conclusions? Are we aware of the limits of thought when we do the above?"

What do you mean, idiot?, by intellectual? I'm asking for your take on what constitutes an intellectual.

What I mean by using the word intellectual is one who exercises this:

Intellectualism:
The theory that knowledge is wholly or mainly derived from pure reason; rationalism. And therefore using this knowledge to understand.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sun, 12 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #32
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

Sean Hen wrote:
Strange days as we enter our fifth week of lockdown in Spain. Maybe an opportunity to explore things in a new and different way.

Hi Sean. I've thought about you over the last few weeks since we last conversed. I was hoping all was well with you. Yes they are strange times. In the US we have a completely insane, sadistic, narcissist and pathological liar who is taking this opportunity to use the pandemic to institute a dictatorial capitalism while people die for lack of available equipment. Stay well, brother.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sun, 12 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #33
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 820 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Instead of coming to a lot of conclusions and assumptions about what I asked Clive in my above post...

Jack Pine, you are mistaken about what I'm saying, as you nearly always are, which is why I don't tend to converse with you. It would just be endless correction of your misunderstandings.

Jack Pine, here's a suggestion for you to consider: You can start a thread here in the General Forum. You can invite specific people to it: A, B, and C. You can say to others, X, Y, and Z, "I cannot stop you from posting here but I'm only going to respond to A, B, and C." Then you can have your exclusive dialogue in whatever way you want. If you don't want me to participate in your thread, I will not.

I don't think you will do this. I don't think you are really interested in trying to create discussion. I think you are interested in criticizing how others do it. You are interested in attack and domination, which is nothing more than conflict and the imposition of ego.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Sun, 12 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #34
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

idiot ? wrote:
I don't think you are really interested in trying to create discussion.

And yet I asked you for your understanding of what intellectualism is so that we could, indeed, embark upon a discussion. What I also asked is that you not cluttler the conversation with extraneous comments by George Carlin and others. Let's stick to the subject at hand and keep it as lean as we can.

It appears to me, idiot?, that you are the one who has ended my attempt to have a conversation with you.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #35
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 820 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
And yet I asked you for your understanding of what intellectualism is so that we could, indeed, embark upon a discussion.

Are you genuinely interested in the question of intellectualism? Or is it a ploy? In previous posts you have criticized me for being too intellectual. Are you just trying to get me to define "intellectual" so that you can turn around and say, "See! By your own definition you are intellectual!"

Anyway, let's assume the question is genuine.

To me there are both positive and negative aspects to intellectualism.

The positive is the benefit of thinking critically, carefully, and deeply about a topic. Being smart is not a bad thing. We're surrounded by contraptions that were created by and large by brainiacs. It is a tremendous gift to have intelligence, and I'm using the word here in the traditional sense, not in the K sense. As you have pointed out, the Dunning-Kruger effect is our tendency to overestimate our own ability or intelligence. But consider your grades and test scores in school. If you got good grades and scored high on aptitude tests, you have traditional intelligence. If you went to to a top college, you have traditional intelligence. If not, you may very well not be as smart as you think you are. Aptitude tests are not perfect but they are the most objective measure we have.

The negative of intellectualism is that it can be abstract and removed from the practical and the everyday. It can be so bound up in itself that it loses what it is talking about. Many things K talked about are very ordinary, like fear, greed, jealousy. Since we all more or less have these, we are all experts in them. Or so we think, anyway.

Look at the people with whom K dialogued. Many of them were intellectuals. David Bohm, for example, was a highly regarded physicist. Many others were professors or writers with considerable education.

At the same time, K pointed out how thought is problematic. He pointed to a quiet mind where thought has stilled. With regard to the silent mind, he warned about intellectualism: Having some abstract idea about it is not it. Speculating about it is not it.

So being overly wrapped up in the brain is distance from the actual. Dressing up statements with fancy words may make them feel removed from the actual. Intellectualism is basically thought. At its best, it is careful and penetrating thought. But inevitably it is thought and therefore it is representational. It is not what is.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Sun, 12 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #36
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 959 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
So being overly wrapped up in the brain is distance from the actual.

Yes, this is really what I'm referring to. If Krishnamurti's teaching are to have any meaning at all, surely they should have some kind of effect on our lives. Does reading or listening to K speak actually help us to look and observe? I mean, we've all read what Krishnamurti says about attachment. I know that it is really, really difficult not to be attached to the people who are closest to us but perhaps listening to or reading Krishnamurti opens some kind of door for us to understand our attachment. That practical application is key to me. Of course, people are free to discuss what they want to.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #37
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 959 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Hi Sean. I've thought about you over the last few weeks since we last conversed. I was hoping all was well with you.

All well at the moment here Jack and I hope things are good with you too. I envy you being able to walk in the spring weather in the mountains - I am certainly missing that at the moment.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #38
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 820 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
That practical application is key to me.

Me, too. And even more so right now with coronavirus and the economic repercussions and the tremendous fear. Many of us are spending much more time where we live, either by ourselves, or with loved ones. That prolonged proximity can exacerbate tensions so it is all the more important to pay attention, to watch yourself in relationship.

I certainly respect others who discuss K, intellectually or not. But when it ceases to be friendly, when it degrades into personal attack, that is just wastage of life, as K said.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Sun, 12 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #39
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

idiot ? wrote:
Are you genuinely interested in the question of intellectualism?

Yes. What I asked you to explain was your personal understanding of what is intellectual. A short, concise version. Not necessarily a long hypothetical definition. We have to first understand what each of us means by "intellectual" before we can discuss it together. Don't you think?

I said that it appears that many of the conversations on Open Space seemed to be too over intellectualized, to abstract and rambling.

You mentioned Bohm as being an intellectual and he was without a doubt. But his discussions with K, while intelligent, were not full of hypotheticals or conclusions without foundations. To my understanding that is the difference between what K and some others, who were in dialogue with him, discussed things and of how most of us tend to discuss things together.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #40
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 820 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
I said that it appears that many of the conversations on Open Space seemed to be too over intellectualized, to abstract and rambling.

"A Quiet Space," not "Open Space." "Too abstract," not "to abstract."

Well, how's that working out for you to judge some as too intellectualized and others as not enough? Are you exerting control over the forums? Are you getting people to post here in ways that you think are appropriate? Or are you frustrated and feel that standards for how K should be discussed are never met? Did K want a conflictual attacker to guard and protect his sacred teachings?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #41
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1731 posts in this forum Offline

" There are three classes of people: those who see, those who see when they are shown, those who do not see."

Leonardo da Vinci

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #42
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

idiot ? wrote:
Too abstract," not "to abstract."

You noticed I used the double 0 first and dropped it by accident the second time I used it? You're right. We can't talk because you would rather argue and accuse instead of answering a simple question.

Your post #35 is exactly what I am talking about. A lot of over thinking pseudo-intellectual nonsense. You know I have much better things to do than to banter words with an idiot?.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #43
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1731 posts in this forum Offline

To speak to the third class that do not see is like pumping water to a dead tree as k said.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #44
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1731 posts in this forum Offline

When you converse with someone part of you becomes him or her . It is not like a scientific laboratory that you can discuss things without becoming part of it. So one doesn't get involve unless it is an important matter. That is negative thinking. The positive and common thinking leads to contradiction and and antagonism as we see frequently in here and in other social medias.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #45
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
Clive, is it enquiry, is it dialogue to think something to death? To intellectualize a subject to death with opinions and conclusions? Are we aware of the limits of thought when we do the above?

Yes, that seems always a crucial question to me - are we aware of the limits of thought? Then opinions and conclusions are seen to have no meaning, but are destructive of enquiry.

Someone's statement may look like a conclusion - but it may be merely a passing phase of a process, no? Is the statement, the thought, held on to, is not that the test for 'conclusion'? Or is it allowed to die, so the issue can be looked at anew?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #46
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

Are we not here to question our conclusions? And it may be that others can help us to question our conclusions, or to gently point out that we are operating from a conclusion. But if this is done aggressively, rudely, one is not likely to be listened to.

Besides, is not such aggression from a person an indication that THEY are operating from conclusion? The conclusion that they are in the right, and the other is wrong, or stupid.

For me, one of the basics of K's 'teachings' is to question oneself. And that is not just an intellectual process, it implies 'seeing where one is coming from', uncovering one's hidden motives. I suggest if one is focusing on criticising others, lambasting others, then that is an indication one is NOT questioning oneself.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #47
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

Clive, you are the one who came to this forum, unbidden, as a result of a conclusion you made to make a critcal statment about what you see happening here.

You posted this which you certainly had a right to do. I don't question that right:

Clive Posted:
Is it enquiry, is it dialogue, to form images of each other? Is what is true revealed by argument, by personal attacks?

You asked a question about this forum and I asked a question about the "Quiet Space" forum which was: Clive, is it enquiry, is it dialogue to think something to death? To intellectualize a subject to death with opinions and conclusions? Are we aware of the limits of thought when we do the above?

Why is my post and questions any different than yours?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #48
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

Clive, another thing that shouldn't need to be pointed because it should be obvious to any casual observer. This part of the Kinfonet is, essentially, not operating. We have one poster who has dominated this forum with a flood of topics no one is interested in responding to. Basically, no one posts here, or at least not often.

I havn't posted here very much lately until a few days ago. It's ridiculous to just sit by while one poster ruins, disables, destroys this forum without, at least, pointing that fact out. That's what I was doing when you stopped by to add your opinion or ask your questions. I wasn't saying anything about your forum. I ask you again, why not let One Self post on your forum and see if things would be different there? If you're not willing to help then why come to this forum to criticise?

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sun, 12 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sun, 12 Apr 2020 #49
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1731 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
..one of the basics of K's 'teachings' is to question oneself. And that is not just an intellectual process, it implies 'seeing where one is coming from', uncovering one's hidden motives. I suggest if one is focusing on criticising others, lambasting others, then that is an indication one is NOT questioning oneself.

That is the core of the teachings isn't it . Self- inquiry . Why do I do the things that I do? or why do I feel the way I do ? Or what is the cause of fear?
There are many great questions that one can ask (from oneself). But we are not interested in that . We want excitement to give us a sense of importance. Self-importance seems to be more appealing even though it is an illusion.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #50
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
If you're not willing to help then why come to this forum to criticize?

There are two meanings to the word "criticize", are there not? One is to condemn. The other is to look at things as they are, and perhaps constructively comment.

What does "help" mean in the circumstance of this forum. Doesn't the attempt to help almost immediately degenerate into conflict? - A wants to help according to his perceptions/convictions, and B wants to help according to his, which may be quite different from A's, no?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #51
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
s a result of a conclusion you made to make a critcal statment about what you see happening here.

I look back to find what you might be describing in this statement. I presume you mean:

Clive: but what I see going on in a quick glance, generally, seems to me a great wastage of energy.

Either it is a wastage of energy, or it is not. The issue can be discussed, questioned. Is there anyone here who is saying that all the bickering, image forming and personal attacks is NOT a waste of energy? If so, please come forward and explain.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #52
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
. But we are not interested in that . We want excitement to give us a sense of importance. Self-importance seems to be more appealing even though it is an illusion.

I would not say that we are not interested, 100%. Some of us are. There is a movement to enquire, is there not? And yes, there is the movement that you describe. This perhaps has been mankind's dilemma for thousands of years. And it is a dilemma, or a challenge, that we face at this very moment. every moment it is there. How do we respond?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #53
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1731 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
would not say that we are not interested, 100%. Some of us are. There is a movement to enquire, is there not? And yes, there is the movement that you describe.

We (humans) always take the easy and convenient way. Self-awareness is difficult because one has to be totally honest with onself. We are not used to that. We are accustomed to escape from ourselves through economical success and all sorts of identifications . Once the significance of our escapes are understood then maybe self -awareness or self-inquiery becomes a norm.

This post was last updated by One Self Mon, 13 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #54
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
I ask you again, why not let One Self post on your forum and see if things would be different there?

I question if this is your concern, Jack. 'One self' has expressed no interest in joining "A Quiet Space", and I am certainly not saying that he should. Is it not a matter between him and me? In fact I feel uneasy talking about another person like this. I certainly have a repulsion about experimenting with others.

If 'one self' approaches me as moderator to join "A quiet Space" then I will look at the issue, until then no need for me to think about it.

This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Mon, 13 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #55
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

Clive, this is what I mean. Your posts 50 and 51 are just a lot of phony intellectualizing. Look how you complicate a fairly straight forward note I posted with all your hot air. You can't even respond to a simple question.

Clive Elwell wrote:
Either it is a wastage of energy, or it is not. The issue can be discussed, questioned. Is there anyone here who is saying that all the bickering, image forming and personal attacks is NOT a waste of energy? If so, please come forward and explain.

Well Clive, maybe it's none of your business which it is. It is simply your judgement, your opinion which isn't worth any more than anybody else's. Maybe you need to get over yourself, Clive. I have a hunch about you. You didn't get very far with your education did you? And now you are trying to compensate for that with all this pseudo-intellectualism you seem to like to engage in.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Mon, 13 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #56
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

So, Clive, you're not going to allow One Self to post on your forum? You still haven't answered that very simple request and question.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #57
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
We (humans) always take the easy and convenient way. Self-awareness is difficult because one has to be totally honest with onself. We are not used to that. We are accustomed to escape from ourselves through economical success and all sorts of identifications . Once the significance of our escapes are understood then maybe self -awareness or self-inquiry becomes a norm.

I feel what you say is so. Even when we appear to take a difficult way, it may be the easy way in disguise!

Yes, self-enquiry must be "difficult", certainly not the norm, otherwise I feel that human consciousness would have significantly changed by now. But K warns about using the word "difficult" in a psychological context - if we regard something as difficult, or impossible, then it will be so.

In the end it boils down to us, does it not? You and I. Are we prepared to take the voyage of discovery, the "voyage on an uncharted sea" as K beautifully put it. Never mind what has gone before. Never mind what others do or don't do.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #58
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 117 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
So, Clive, you're not going to allow One Self to post on your forum? You still haven't answered that very simple request and question.

Please see above, Jack, #56

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #59
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5845 posts in this forum Online

Clive Elwell wrote:
Is it not a matter between him and me? In fact I feel uneasy talking about another person like this. I certainly have a repulsion about experimenting with others.

Oh that's cute Clive. But it was not between One Self and me when you came to this forum and butted in with your comment? Your opinions? Was it any of your business whether I and another were wasting energy or not? How in the hell was that any of your business. Don't be such a bloody hypocrite.

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Mon, 13 Apr 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 #60
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1731 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
So, Clive, you're not going to allow One Self to post on your forum? You still haven't answered that very simple request and question.

Jack thinks that I am desperate like he is..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 31 - 60 of 100 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.)