Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
A Quiet Space | moderated by Clive Elwell

How do you tell your fellow human beings?


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 65 in total
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #1
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

I am starting a new thread with something Tom said to me, because it opens up a new angle to look into the same one life that we all are:

Tom:Do you think a word like 'surrender' helps us to understand how we're actually living, mina...the fear, anxiety, greed, loneliness, conflict that is our daily living? If I'm living with fear or anger....violence or some sort or psychological suffering...what meaning has 'surrender'? Does it have any meaning at all? How do you explain this surrender to a man like my father who lived with depression his whole adult life...or to the one struggling with alcoholism or eating disorder, or to the heavy smoker?

Mina: Many observations on this...describing them in a random order.

You ask about how that what I seem to be talking about, and especially the way I do, I suppose, would help a fellow human being who is suffering?

First of all, can you see how you are making the separation between the suffering fellow human being and you yourself, when asking that question? I see the 'alcoholic', (anyone expressing suffering in any form), as inseparable from you and me, so for me the essence is, when Tom and Mina relate, (or anyone elese with anyone else) whether these two people can truly meet, in a revolutionary way, without ANY division/image between them, because THAT is seen as the only fundamental 'help' for all by bringing in the world new energy that is not neurotic, not divided. It will have its own action, own ways, in the world, something again that the mind/image cannot realise or need to be concerned about.

Do you feel any of this? Do you see the significance of putting all our energy here and now, in being tuned together, for the sake of all?

Another aspect is that when you talk about the suffering alcoholic, you talk about images at that moment. Where is this person, these people, in our talk, apart from images? (not saying suffering people do not exist, of course, but talking about others when it is me and you talking, is an introduction of image of others, theory. Do you see how thought is always scattered, never really completely focused, completely present, never still, as if always avoiding the direct seeing of the fact that we ARE the world? (that is understandable of course since thought cannot see anything directly, it itself comes in the way)

Actually, there is no how at all. When people meet, something happens between them. We may think we are separate, but really, without doing anything at all, we can sense various degrees of connectedness or the lack of it. (unless we are so totally lost in thought, that we do not seem to sense anything beyond it!!)What I am pointing to here, is that I am not again separate from this other, to then 'talk to him about surrender' etc, but that FUNDAMENTAL 'talk' (in essence it is beyond all talk, so whether the word surrender is used for example or not, is not the point at all) between people happens on its own, when both are ready, or then not, depending on people's degree of sensitivity and receptibility to that which is beyond fragmentation of thought, I would say.

So, what I am saying, yes, in a way also theoretically above, since there is no actual meeting with another taking place at the moment, that it is the relationship itself that will or will not act fundamentally.

The more awake you are, the more presence in you...that is what 'you offer', spread, when you meet that fellow suffering human being, no matter what. He or she may, or may not, sense it, but that is in essence what happens when you really care. And you have no 'ready speech' to tell anyone, there is no past, but the relationship itself, will bring about words, or not.

On Christmas Eve there was very powerful presence. During the same day life guided me close to three different people, all in the state of suffering. With one I was sitting in the car, she came in and burst into tears once she saw me. Without any thought of surrender or of anything else, which is action beyond thought, I took her hand and just held it on my heart at the same time when she was describing her disturbance. That was all.

With another, later the same day, I was sitting in silence, just in presence, letting all this accumulated pain come out in that space, of the other. At some point I felt a complete lack of words, felt I wanted to say something I had no words for, and even feeling some hopelessness momentarily, in my yearning and love for him, and how I knew I could not take the burden away from him, just keep on staying present. Then a wonder happened and he started seeing to the root of why he was in agony at that moment. Again, I did not 'do anything'. This sharing just happened.

What I have lived recently very intensily, in practice, is that when we, you and me, stay faithful to what is true, no matter what, letting life keep on pruning away all that comes to the way of seeing clearly, wonders start happening with the people around us.

Thank you Tom for bringing this out from me..:-) and for your patience if you read it all..:-)

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Fri, 06 Jan 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #2
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Tom,

Adding this:

Part of my work is with children, more or less disturbed, whom I host in my home a couple days a week. Now, I do not talk about 'surrender' to them, or about 'the observer being the observed', :-), there is mainly only holding and presence. Little children are still responsive, although it depends on the degree of sensitivity that there already is, or is not in us, since birth..

A 3-year-old boy came the other day...he has been with me for two years almost now...and is very disturbed at times..well, he was running from the children's room into the kitchen (where I was working) and back, many times, jumping and skipping on his way..:-) He was saying at the same time: "It is nice to be at Mina's...it is nice to be at MIna's..." :-)

This is just an example of the child picking up the energy of freedom that is often there...an example of how this Work is being realised in the world...without a single word, surrender or other, being uttered!! :-)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #3
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 468 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
How do you tell your fellow human beings?

Dear Mina,

In fact there's nothing to tell..... only to be !!!!

any attempt to prove or concinve or accept is giving away of the ME somehow
- sometimes very tiny - is being present.

It's not a digital world we're living in, it's not: or this.... or that....
it's and this .... and that...

Everything can become something it is not and that's why awareness is a necessary component of live.

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
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #4
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
Part of my work is with children, more or less disturbed, whom I host in my home a couple days a week. Now, I do not talk about 'surrender' to them, or about 'the observer being the observed', :-), there is mainly only holding and presence....
This is just an example of the child picking up the energy of freedom that is often there...an example of how this Work is being realised in the world...without a single word, surrender or other, being uttered!! :-)

I understand. Thanks for sharing. I have often been in relationships with very disturbed individuals. Speaking from 'rote'....from some past script that we've learned from reading K or the bible...only widens any division between us. One can only be with the sufferer as they are....looking...listening to their conflict. Sometimes something opens up....something totally unexpected...sometimes not. So how do we relate here on the forum? We have only words here. Is there any meaningful way to talk about conflict, fear, violence, and all the rest of the misery that is a fact of life for most of us? When you spoke of surrender the other day you lost me...and perhaps some others feel the same. Surrender to what? I have some issue or other troubling me....fear about the future...about my loved one's future..,,some unresolved anger or anxiety. Not sure what you were trying to say about surrender and how it relates to my problem...whatever the problem may be. It's OK if you want to move on to something else. I just wanted to follow up on what we were discussing the other day.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 26 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #5
Thumb_open-uri20161029-25138-m3lyyv-0 VANI D India 8 posts in this forum Offline

If I can just butt in.....I think surrender implies submitting or yielding oneself to our fears, anxiety, envy or any such emotion and not resisting the pain would take us beyond. May be we are unable to convey the teachings of K to some as they might think that what 'mumbo-jumbo' is that but yes if as you said there won't be any division and the sufferer is felt just a part of us then as K said 'compassion works'.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #6
Thumb_2474 Dan McDermott United States 531 posts in this forum Online

I think Vani, i might be saying the same as you... To NOT 'surrender' is to keep in place the duality or separation between the fear, anxiety etc. and 'me'. Seeing through the falseness of that duality, of that separation is the 'surrender'. 'Giving up' the illusion of 'me' apart,different than the fear, anxiety, pleasure is the 'surrender'?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Mon, 26 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Dec 2016 #7
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
To NOT 'surrender' is to keep in place the duality or separation between the fear, anxiety etc. and 'me

To NOT surrender is to react....to condemn or judge or try to eliminate the fear or anger....which is the norm for man. He knows no other way of living. If we tell ourselves to NOT react, or to surrender, that's another duality. All this is in thought of course, divided from the fact....from what is.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 27 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #8
Thumb_open-uri20161029-25138-m3lyyv-0 VANI D India 8 posts in this forum Offline

If there is no division of good and bad or pain or pleasure, without being judgemental if we accept and let the emotion flow ,then that watchfulness does its work. We tend to resist or shove off which is unpleasant but like to keep or continue with which is pleasurable , and bliss is beyond good as well as evil.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #9
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
In fact there's nothing to tell..... only to be !!!!

Mina: Wim, exactly..and the being IS the doing.

But when life is lived from identification with thought...then there is the doer and the doing, always in separation and contradiction, and no Being at all...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #10
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Dear Tom,

I understand. Thanks for sharing. I have often been in relationships with very disturbed individuals. Speaking from 'rote'....from some past script that we've learned from reading K or the bible...only widens any division between us. One can only be with the sufferer as they are....looking...listening to their conflict. Sometimes something opens up....something totally unexpected...sometimes not.

Mina:Yes, this is so. When there is love, compassion, there is no past, no thought, no theory, no philosophy, because love does not spring from the content of consciousness which is put together by thought. Love is not thought.

Tom: So how do we relate here on the forum? We have only words here. Is there any meaningful way to talk about conflict, fear, violence, and all the rest of the misery that is a fact of life for most of us? When you spoke of surrender the other day you lost me...and perhaps some others feel the same.

Mina: Yes, it is understood that there can be increased difficulty when meeting like this, not in person, BUT it is not quite true that 'we have only words here'. If we have only words when we relate to the people we actually meet in or daily lives, (which really means that we live lost in thought, words) then we also have only words when we write on this forum.
If not, if there is another dimension acting in our lives other than words/thought, then that is the same case when writing here!!!! If it was really only words that is possible to share here, then talking and writing here, or for example reading Krishnamurti's books, would have no meaning at all. And this is definitely not the case!

The question is, the same here and when physically with another, can we meet beyond the words? (this is not a theoretical question)

Now, I have exactly tried to shake us into PRESENCE together (which is not a creation of words) by pointing out that the others are YOU and ME. We are lost in theory if we talk about 'the suffering of the world', and not about our own suffering (if there is any). This shaking of each other into presence, could also be called surrender. (again, it is not the word 'surrender' that matters, or any other word, but the seeing beyond the words. just re-writing the word here since it still seems to be in your mind as something 'not fully understood')

So, my question to you is, is there suffering in your life, do you live in conflict, fear, vionlence, and all the rest of it, this is the question to be shared. Forget about K, your boss, your father, the alcoholic, the one suffering from eating disorders, AS if they were something OTHER THAN YOU.

A feeling now that all that is being written, the energy of it in fact, is like passion to be tuned into one with another, whoever the other is, and that also means being tuned into NOW, free from ideas of past/present/future.

I will have to end here, for now.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Tue, 27 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #11
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
The question is, the same here and when physically with another, can we meet beyond the words? (this is not a theoretical question)

Now, I have exactly tried to shake us into PRESENCE together (which is not a creation of words) by pointing out that the others are YOU and ME.
We are lost in theory if we talk about 'the suffering of the world', and not about our own suffering (if there is any). This shaking of each other into presence, could also be called surrender. (again, it is not the word 'surrender' that matters, or any other word, but the seeing beyond the words. just re-writing the word here since it still seems to be in your mind as something 'not fully understood')

Of course any image I have of the alcoholic divides me from him. It's so common to have a subtle image of being superior in some way. 'I' have managed to succeed in life, and he is a failure. Absolutely, I've seen how we all do that kind of thing....myself included. Even looking at the obese person, we may feel that they're inferior in some way. Or looking at the successful or happy person we ourselves may feel inferior to them if I'm NOT happy. For years, speaking personally, I felt inferior to K, and would have been very shy if I met him in person. I had an image of him as being superior in some way. Back to what I was trying to share the other day. I tried to share with you how your word 'surrender' would affect the average person, and this is how I was reading the meaning as well. But you if feel it's a word that has some 'spiritual' or special meaning that's beyond how I see it, that's fine with me. You have my permission to use it as you wish :) I'm still not comfortable with that word. As if surrender to God...truth...'what is'...anger...fear...is an option for man (including myself of course)....an option being something one can choose to do. Your using it as a tool to shake us into presence seems like another separation....you trying to accomplish some goal ...trying to shake someone up....shake them into awareness.....as if 'they' are a they.... separate from you.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 27 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #12
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

VANI D wrote:
If I can just butt in.....I think surrender implies submitting or yielding oneself to our fears, anxiety, envy or any such emotion and not resisting the pain would take us beyond. May be we are unable to convey the teachings of K to some as they might think that what 'mumbo-jumbo' is that but yes if as you said there won't be any division and the sufferer is felt just a part of us then as K said 'compassion works'.

Recommend

Dear Vani, yes the surrender I talk of could be described as complete yielding oneself to whatever appears to be happening. This always means going beyond appearance, beyond the 'event', beyond thought. The surrender is going THROUGH thought, through the fear, through the envy itself, and the through takes to beyond, as one movement. That is the process of negation. It feels like a thread passed through the needle, turning back to undo itself, through same place it was born.

Yes, you described well how compassion works.

Some more thoughts...to Tom especially...

So, it is fundamental to understand that the word is not the thing, so many words could be used to describe the same one Reality beyond them.The problem I see arising with the word here, (or with any word), is that it is attempted to be understood in some odd separation. This is bound to happen for as long as it is thought/fragmentation in us that tries to understand anything at all. It cannot. It can only turn everything into more fragmented ideas, accumulating them onto itself.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #13
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Your using it as a tool to shake us into presence seems like another separation....you trying to accomplish some goal ...trying to shake someone up....shake them into awareness.....as if 'they' are a they.... separate from you.

Mina: Sorry, feeling a little sad reading those lines...because what you say is not felt here to be so here..as if there was some resistance to sharing between us...

The problem in communication seems to be that instead of letting the negation, or the surrender, or the 'shaking into awareness' happen, in us, (ceasing to interpret each other with the mind in other words) words are being interpreted all the time, and now the phrase I happened to use about 'shaking each other into presence', tries to become another separating factor (not successfully if we are alert)

Perhaps some silence is in place now

Love
m

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #14
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
I think Vani, i might be saying the same as you... To NOT 'surrender' is to keep in place the duality or separation between the fear, anxiety etc. and 'me'. Seeing through the falseness of that duality, of that separation is the 'surrender'. 'Giving up' the illusion of 'me' apart,different than the fear, anxiety, pleasure is the 'surrender'?

Mina: Yes...in my reply no.12 I described the same.

And surrender of this kind always goes beyond the fear, anxiety, etc, because surrender is not a movement of thought, but a movement where it ends. And it is thought, duality, that creates the emotions described.

So, thought goes through itself back to the place where it is not, and which is its own essence.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #15
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
The problem I see arising with the word here, (or with any word), is that it is attempted to be understood in some odd separation.

Why is it 'odd'? Is it odd that I don't understand how you were using the word? That I questioned your meaning...useage? It's fine if you want to move on. It feels like we've beaten the subject to death. Unless someone else has something to add.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #16
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

No, I just feel that all separation, psychologically, is 'odd'. Perhaps he word 'odd' was used because one feels that all separation psychologally is something other than our natural state, something pretensious that thought is creating and trying to maintain..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #17
Thumb_open-uri20161029-25138-m3lyyv-0 VANI D India 8 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
The surrender is going THROUGH thought, through the fear, through the envy itself, and the through takes to beyond, as one movement. That is the process of negation. It feels like a thread passed through the needle, turning back to undo itself, through same place it was born.

Thanks Mina,
You have shown the whole process of it in a very subtle manner. Its hard to watch all the nuances of ones thought process but as we are watching we seek a conclusion, I think one needs to go even beyond it otherwise where is the newness or the arrival of the unknown.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #18
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

VANI D wrote:
Its hard to watch all the nuances of ones thought process but as we are watching we seek a conclusion, I think one needs to go even beyond it otherwise where is the newness or the arrival of the unknown.

Yes, to the first part. Go beyond what, Vani? If we try to go beyond anything, then we're not watching.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #19
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3040 posts in this forum Offline

VANI D wrote:
If I can just butt in.....I think surrender implies submitting or yielding oneself to our fears, anxiety, envy or any such emotion and not resisting the pain would take us beyond.

I was just reading through the whole thread. I can certainly understand the word surrender as Vani describes it above, and as Dan has described in terms of negation. But negation comes from seeing, does it not, it is not a 'positive act', positive in the sense of an act of will, a sense of 'moving forward'. So I am surprised when Mina talks of it as if it was a tool to be used, as in:

"This shaking of each other into presence, could also be called surrender"

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #20
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3040 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
We are lost in theory if we talk about 'the suffering of the world', and not about our own suffering

Seems to me we could say the exact opposite - that we are lost if we talk about "our own" suffering and not about the suffering of the world.

Either way seems to draw a distinction between the two. But given we are the world (and nowhere is this more obvious that in see the commonality of suffering), then there is only suffering. This is certainly not to be lost in theory - in fact I am seeing over the last few days, with my mother dying, how personal sorrow dissolves into the common human sorrow.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #21
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
So I am surprised when Mina talks of it as if it was a tool to be used, as in:

"This shaking of each other into presence, could also be called surrender"

I had a similar feeling...being a little confused by Minaji's statement. K spoke of taking a journey together without one leading and another following. a journey together...or even taken alone...into uncharted territory.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 28 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Dec 2016 #22
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
then there is only suffering.

That was also something I wanted to bring up with mina, but ran short of time. She asked about my mention of my father's depression. Depression in him was/is no different than depression in me or anyone else. Violence in the Nazis, that I often mentioned in the past, is no different than violence in me. We're looking at the human being and his actions....his thinking....his confusion and conflict....his cravings and desires.... his suffering.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #23
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Dear Clive,

You also have misunderstood what I have said, you have not read the thread carefully :-)

This is what I was saying on surrender:

Dear Vani, yes the surrender I talk of could be described as complete yielding oneself to whatever appears to be happening. This always means going beyond appearance, beyond the 'event', beyond thought. The surrender is going THROUGH thought, through the fear, through the envy itself, and the through takes to beyond, as one movement. That is the process of negation. It feels like a thread passed through the needle, turning back to undo itself, through same place it was born.

and:

And surrender of this kind always goes beyond the fear, anxiety, etc, because surrender is not a movement of thought, but a movement where it ends. And it is thought, duality, that creates the emotions described.

So, thought goes through itself back to the place where it is not, and which is its own essence.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #24
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
So I am surprised when Mina talks of it as if it was a tool to be used, as in:

"This shaking of each other into presence, could also be called surrender"

Mina: surrender=discovery of timeless presence

Life is trying to shake us into it, through so called challenges, through everything happening in our lives, it is trying to awaken us. For as long as there is anything in us (the 'I'-thought that comes together, is linked with, all thought of all human consciousness really) that holds us separate from ourselves/life, we need more shaking. Just like a sleeping body is shaken awake...:-)

I may be in need of more shaking also, cannot say, and do not need to be concerned...so wonderful to find one's greatest delight in surrender..in standing alone, not resisting being pruned, if necessary, wherever necessary, in life's hands..

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #25
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Mina:>We are lost in theory if we talk about 'the suffering of the world', and not about our own suffering

Clive:Seems to me we could say the exact opposite - that we are lost if we talk about "our own" suffering and not about the suffering of the world.

Either way seems to draw a distinction between the two.

Mina: Right, good point. My original statement really meant that the theory is born when the distinction between the two, appears. Yes, either way, makes no difference.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #26
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I had a similar feeling...being a little confused by Minaji's statement. K spoke of taking a journey together without one leading and another following. a journey together...or even taken alone...into uncharted territory.

Mina: No division between you and me, or between anyone, was meant by 'us being shaken into presence'. It is like waking up from a dream, to truly discover we are together, that we are one in essence. At times we need a good shake, all of us, I feel, like a sleeping body may need some shaking to be awakened..There is absolutely no 'leading-following--business that is implied with any of this! -The leaders and the followers are thought-fragments relating to themselves, always from and in a false separation.

P.S It may also be that one of the two is awake fully, and shakes the other by what he says and is..by his very being in essence..but NOT in any separation from the other...This is what all realised persons on Earth have been doing, or all doing...But they have discovered themselves as the whole of life, so it is that wholeness acting through them, and not their egos..

Love

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Wed, 28 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #27
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 533 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
That was also something I wanted to bring up with mina, but ran short of time. She asked about my mention of my father's depression. Depression in him was/is no different than depression in me or anyone else. Violence in the Nazis, that I often mentioned in the past, is no different than violence in me. We're looking at the human being and his actions....his thinking....his confusion and conflict....his cravings and desires.... his suffering.

Mina: Dear Tom, it is absolutely as you say above...

I asked you to 'forget about your father' not because I would have thought that his depression is somehow separate, not at all, but because I felt that the complete focus of YOU BEING THE WORLD, him included, was being shifted exactly into division between you and your father. It is difficult to explain, because this living of no division is not thought at all. You can only fully BE the world when the division between you and it, ends, in you. This means that the world of suffering, of division, with all its various expressions that spring from the same root cause, end in you. It is the ending of the cause and the effect in you. It is like letting the cause of your dad's suffering, end in you, out of love for him.

You might say, 'but this does not, or did not, take his depression away'.

Yes, it is possible. But still you have died, giving up yourself for him, unconditionally, and only that really matters. You are not looking for 'results'. You move in another timeless dimension that is the only ultimate healing for your father, for me and you and all.

(apologies if you felt bad about my saying 'forget about your father' at all, it was said in a feeling how there is no compromise with truth, and our biological family is no exception to it.living all this myself first-hand so I know what I am talking about. )

Love

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Wed, 28 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #28
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 1496 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
It is like letting the cause of your dad's suffering, end in you, out of love for him.

My dad passed away many years ago....just used him as an example ...could be anyone who is severely depressed. It's still not clear what you mean by 'letting it end in you'. If I'm depressed(I'm not, but I have certainly known it in the past), what do I do to let it end? I usually fight it intellectually....or analyze it...or try to find some escape from it....turn on the TV or some music. One thing I noticed in the past about depression is that the usual escapes no longer work. You turn on a movie on tv, but your depression stays. You can't let yourself escape into the story playing out on the screen....or into music...or sports. Everything is dark. So, mina, how exactly does one 'let it end'? What exactly are you pointing to? These kind of statements just don't seem to register in my brain. One quick aside here. Many years back, due to my dad's situation, I was feeling very deep sorrow myself. It became so deep that I felt myself being sucked down into a bottomless pit of despair and suffering...like a whirlpool pulling me down. Suddenly I stopped fighting this 'negative' force and it felt like I instantly floated up and out of it. It ended completely when I stopped fighting it. Now, I'm not clear how this applies to the ordinary kinds of conflicts we face in daily living....our worries and anxieties...our fears and cravings....anger, violence, etc. How does one 'let it end', as you seem to suggest as a possible action? It does seem odd, the way you said it. As if I can do something to let it end....just surrender it all....the whole of 'me', without even understanding what the suffering is all about....without understanding the mechanism of it...HOW it came about....how it's perpetuated. Perhaps you mean 'let it be' like the famous Beatles song? Let the depression...the emotion(whatever it is)....tell its story?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 28 Dec 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #29
Thumb_img_1496 Per . Sweden 85 posts in this forum Offline

It is seen that we must reach beyond the word level to truly meet. Here on this forum or in real life does not matter. We can argue forever if we are stuck on level of words and explanations. We need to move into the realm of understanding to connect. That is to probe into the silent understanding that the word emanates from and meet there.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Dec 2016 #30
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3040 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
Life is trying to shake us into it, through so called challenges, through everything happening in our lives, it is trying to awaken us. For as long as there is anything in us (the 'I'-thought that comes together, is linked with, all thought of all human consciousness really) that holds us separate from ourselves/life, we need more shaking. Just like a sleeping body is shaken awake...:-)

I took you to mean that you, Mina, were embarking on a crusade of shaking us up. I questioned you on this basis.

So it is life you were referring to as the shaker. In fact from my perspective I don't see that Mina should not be seen as part of life. But it seems different if this is an intention behind it, the intention being ego, a deliberate shaker.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 65 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.)