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

Who am i? ...


Displaying all 29 posts
Page 1 of 1
Sat, 08 Apr 2017 #1
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Can we look at that question without absolutely none of the answers others have given to it, or we are too much conditioned by any of those answers (no matter who gave them) to do so?

Could we go on from here or this is too much difficult (almost impossible)?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

This post was last updated by Juan E Sat, 08 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 08 Apr 2017 #2
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 200 posts in this forum Offline

To answer this question i would not answer the same thing to a policeman or to someone like you Juan Who knows various knowledges about 'spiritual' level. On what field is your question? Conventional?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 08 Apr 2017 #3
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

I'm just talking about inquire, Richard ... Are we aware of our conditioning when we do it, or we think that it's absolutely genuine?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 08 Apr 2017 #4
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 200 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Are we aware of our conditioning when we do it,

I don't think so... otherwise, there could not be conditioning

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 08 Apr 2017 #5
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

richard viillar wrote:

Juan E wrote:

Are we aware of our conditioning when we do [inquire],

I don't think so... otherwise, there could not be conditioning

Which simply means that nobody can be aware of anything

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 08 Apr 2017 #6
Thumb_img_20150716_212047-1-1 richard viillar France 200 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Which simply means that nobody can be aware of anything

Yes in the sense that a "nobody" means a "someone"...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 09 Apr 2017 #7
Thumb_2474 Dan McDermott United States 548 posts in this forum Offline

Who am i? ...

I am the world.

When there is only fear without any hope of escape, in its darkest moments, in the utter solitude of fear, there comes from within itself, as it were, the light which shall dispel it."

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 09 Apr 2017 #8
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Dan McDermott wrote:
Who am i? ...

I am the world.

This was said by someone else

Now, could we look at ourselves without such conditioning and go on from there?

I'm afraid that this can be really difficult, to look anew at any thing including myself without the influence of someone else's description!

BTW, Good morning everybody! ;-)

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

This post was last updated by Juan E Sun, 09 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 09 Apr 2017 #9
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Dan McDermott wrote:
Who am i? ... I am the world.

Why there's still a "me" if according to you this is a fact to oneself?

Everybody's talking about "you are the world" in its multiple ways (yes, Krishnamurtians too), but nobody sees that those words are said from a center which is still conserving its own individuality in front that world they all say we are ... Just to put an example among many other examples: is there something as an inter-religious dialogue each one identifying oneself with his own particular belief?

So what, Dan?!

Why do we repeat the words of another if those words are not in fact a fact to ourselves?!

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 09 Apr 2017 #10
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Breaking News: Death toll rises to 21 in bombing of church in Tanta City, 90km north of Cairo

Can i look at those who have been killed as human beings, to those who put the bomb as human beings, to us who observe all that as human beings, without absolutely NO label, without absolutely NO division?

What is the meaning of saying "I am the world" if i'm not able to do so then?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

This post was last updated by Juan E Sun, 09 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 09 Apr 2017 #11
Thumb_rodin_de_denker Olive B Netherlands 104 posts in this forum Offline

Who am I?

Hi Juan,

There is one question and two ways of seeing this question:

1

From the view point of the separate self.

If you know yourself as a separate self, your answer will be: “I am the separate self”.

2

From the view point of consciousness.

If you know yourself as consciousness, your answer will be: “I am consciousness”.

This is it, no more no less, either way you have got your answer.

So, find out for yourself who you are.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 09 Apr 2017 #12
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Olive B wrote:
So, find out for yourself who you are.

And you can look for another to give him/her advice on what to do, wise man (or woman)!

BTW, i beg you please to read carefully next time ...
... then perhaps you'll see that this is not what i was asking in my initial post.

In fact you are confirming what i'm trying to look at, which is that we are not aware of our conditioning when we dare to give advice to others in the name of who knows what "inquiring".

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

This post was last updated by Juan E Sun, 09 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 10 Apr 2017 #13
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

Who am I? Isn't there an assumption in this question that I AM something?

An assumption that there IS a me?

This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Mon, 10 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 10 Apr 2017 #14
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Clive Elwell wrote:
Who am I?
Isn't there an assumption in this question that I AM something?
An assumption that there IS a me?

As i have told to Olive, this is not what i was asking Clive ... But anyway i will comment on your questions to show how conditioned we are in our comments when someone put questions like this one i've put in the Topic Title (although, as i have already said, this is not what i was asking in my OP)

You see, when one fully listens to a question like this, one sees that such a question does not imply anything, that what it simply does is to start an inquiry that no one knows where it will lead ... But we are so conditioned by what we've read or listened from others that we quickly jump to the assumption that a question like this necessarily implies some assumption in the one who put it, which means that we are not listening to the question itself but to our own conditioning interpreting the question being put ... Which simply means that our inquire will not be based in the question itself but on our own conditioned way of looking at the question ...

And that's precisely the reason why i started this thread, to see if we are aware of our conditioning in any inquiry in which we can be involved ... And it's obvious, by some comments i've got in this very thread, that we are not ... That it is our conditioning which is observing almost all the time any question that is put ...

Is there an assumption that one is violent in someone who puts him/herself the question "Am i violent"? ... Or this question simply implies "let me forget whatever others have said about it and see if that is so by myself?" ...

I think it's time for us to assume that such "pure" inquiries are very rare in us
Isn't it, brothers and sisters?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

This post was last updated by Juan E Mon, 10 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 10 Apr 2017 #15
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
As i have told to Olive, this is not what i was asking Clive ... But anyway i will comment on your questions to show how conditioned we are in our comments when someone put questions like this one i've put in the Topic Title (although, as i have already said, this is not what i was asking in my OP)

Clive: What is an OP?

One knows, one sees, the conditioned nature of the response of thought – not just to specific questions, but to ALL questions, and to all the challenges life brings.

You see, when one fully listens to a question like this, one sees that such a question does not imply anything, that what it simply does is to start an inquiry that no one knows where it will lead

Clive: When one hears the word – what example shall we use? - say a reference to “Juan's wife” there is an immediate assumption that there IS such a creature. When the word “me” is used, heard, it does carry an assumption that there is such a thing, that the me exists, and so we carry on discussing it on the same basis. This is conditioned behavour, is it not?

... But we are so conditioned by what we've read or listened from others that we quickly jump to the assumption that a question like this necessarily implies some assumption in the one who put it, which means that we are not listening to the question itself but to our own conditioning interpreting the question being put ... Which simply means that our inquire will not be based in the question itself but on our own conditioned way of looking at the question …

Clive: Not wanting to defend anything, but asking: if one starts to question if there is a me, or question its nature, its substance, is that then a conditioned response? I think the answer is “It could be, it may not be”.

And that's precisely the reason why i started this thread, to see if we are aware of our conditioning in any inquiry in which we can be involved …

Clive: Does that imply that you are not interested in going into the question itself?

And it's obvious, by some comments i've got in this very thread, that we are not ... That it is our conditioning which is observing almost all the time any question that is put ...
Is there an assumption that one is violent in someone who puts him/herself the question "Am i violent"? ...

Clive: I would say not, because one is questioning the very existence of violence. But there is an assumption that there is an “I”.

Or this question simply implies "let me forget whatever others have said about it and see if that is so by myself?" ...
I think it's time for us to assume that such "pure" inquiries are very rare in us
Isn't it, brothers and sisters?

Clive: No brother, it is never time to draw any assumption. It is always time to see what is.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 11 Apr 2017 #16
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Clive Elwell wrote:
Clive: I would say not, because one is questioning the very existence of violence. But there is an assumption that there is an “I”.

Well, yourself gives the answer to yourself ... nice isn't it?!

Clive Elwell wrote:
Clive: No brother, it is never time to draw any assumption. It is always time to see what is.

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 11 Apr 2017 #17
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Do we see how conditioned we are, up to the point that we don't pay attention even not to our own responses?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 11 Apr 2017 #18
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Clive Elwell wrote:
When the word “me” is used, heard, it does carry an assumption that there is such a thing, that the me exists,

Not necessarily, and i challenge you to defend your thesis showing us that this is so ALL the time.

BTW, i've never been married! ;-)

Clive Elwell wrote:
Clive: Does that imply that you are not interested in going into the question itself?

Right! ... I've never been interested in the question itself, but IN WHICH WAY we approach to the question itself.

Clive Elwell wrote:
Not wanting to defend anything, but asking: if one starts to question if there is a me

Could you tell me please in which way one questions if there's a me if according to you there's already the assumption that there's a me in the one who's questioning its existence?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 #19
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 551 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Can we look at that question without absolutely none of the answers others have given to it, or we are too much conditioned by any of those answers (no matter who gave them) to do so?

Mina: Yes. Looking at that (or any other) question without ANY past/thought/mind/conditioning/reaction/anyone conditioned by anything, is the only whole response.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 #20
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 551 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Can we look at that question without absolutely none of the answers others have given to it, or we are too much conditioned by any of those answers (no matter who gave them) to do so?

Could we go on from here or this is too much difficult (almost impossible)?

M: From a 'place' where there is no conditioned response/thought/time/mind/consciousness, only Silence can 'go on'...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 #21
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

Juan wrote:
Not necessarily, and i challenge you to defend your thesis showing us that this is so ALL the time.

It seems obvious, self evident to me, so I challenge you to defend your statement “not necessarily”

Juan wrote:
Right! ... I've never been interested in the question itself, but IN WHICH WAY we approach to the question itself.

Yes, that does make sense. Professor P Krishna once said of K's teachings: “there is no content, it is all approach”

Juan E wrote: Could you tell me please in which way one questions if there's a me if according to you there's already the assumption that there's a me in the one who's questioning its existence?

Juan, seems to me you have truncated my reply so as to make it appear it has a meaning it doesn't. What I originally asked was:
Clive: Not wanting to defend anything, but asking: if one starts to question if there is a me, or question its nature, its substance, is that then a conditioned response? I think the answer is “It could be, it may not be”.

This seems to be getting to complicated, can we take a step back. You originally asked “Who am I”, and I suggested a more basic question is “Is there really a me?” How do we approach any question, anyway. Either by using the knowledge we happen to have picked up, conclusions we have drawn, other people's words, or we look. Is there such a thing as “just looking”, in a way that does not involve knowledge/conditioning? This is, I think, what Huguette is basically asking on the “It's very simple” thread.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 #22
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 551 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Who am I? Isn't there an assumption in this question that I AM something?

An assumption that there IS a me?

Juan and Clive

Mina: There may or may not be an assumption, but that is not the point. Just like a person saying "I am the world" may or may not be speaking from conditioning, but that is not the point.

The only point is in the absolute ending of all speculation/thought. The point is in the ending, and not in 'what ends'.

Similarly, the point is not in the content of any thought or question, but in the ending of it in a complete response. That response is not from the mind at all.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Wed, 12 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 #23
Thumb_avatar Juan E Spain 187 posts in this forum Online

Mina Martini wrote:
That response is not from the mind at all.

If i may ask: from where has arised your response #22, Mina? ... A response that dares to point out a duality in two friends inquiring into something, that may or may not exist ... Would you give the same response to K while listening to any inquiry he had in his life? ... Do you see the conditioning?

"When i talk to audiences, they know what i'm talking about ... another thing is that they do something about it" - K. Brockwood Park (Making ideas of the Teaching)

This post was last updated by Juan E Wed, 12 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 #24
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
Similarly, the point is not in the content of any thought or question, but in the ending of it in a complete response. That response is not from the mind at all.

Firstly, I want to ask, Mina, "What is this mind?". What meaning do you put on the word? Because somehow I no longer know what it is. (See my last two posts on the "It's very simple" thread, if you are interested). If you had said "The response is not from thought, not from knowledge, I would understand you. But you say "Not from mind".

You say the point is the ending of any thought or any question. What is meant by "ending"? Every thought ends anyway, that is its nature. If "I" want to end thought, that is no ending, that is the continuation of thought. Similarly any action directed towards the ending (and as with all direction, it could only be the image of direction), Any thought about ending is not ending. If there is an ender, then there is no ending.

So where does this ending arise from? It cannot be the result of desire, it cannot be the outcome of will. And why SHOULD there be an ending? If there is any motive whatsoever, again that is denial of ending.

Sorry to shower you with questions, which you might say are all from the intellect anyway, and the only point about them is that they end. So it might appear that we (or me at least) am back at the beginning again. And indeed if all this is purely intellectual, then it IS back at the beginning again. But if there has been any perception - ie any real inquiry - then something has shifted, and it is not the same beginning.

It seems to me we have now entered the territory of your other thread, 'Negation of the false'.

This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Thu, 13 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 12 Apr 2017 #25
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

This comes now:

The necessity of ending arises from the perception of contradiction in thought.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 13 Apr 2017 #26
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Yes, that does make sense. Professor P Krishna once said of K's teachings: “there is no content, it is all approach”

So you are interested in the approach to any inquiry, is that it Juan? I think we need to be very careful with the word "approach" - how we approach it :-). Feel it does not imply the conventional approach, which is from a certain discipline, a certain point of view. An approach is usually based on the past, but the more one inquires into oneself, the more one sees that we ARE the past, and that is the problem.

So preception points to an approach which is - can one say the negation of ALL approaches? This seems to turn the word on its head.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 13 Apr 2017 #27
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

More on "approach"

The perception that thought rises unbidden to the mind, and I AM thought, which means there is no me to control it, no me to decide on anything psychological, I really cannot put any meaning on "approach". Who or what decides what the approach will be?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 13 Apr 2017 #28
Thumb_ws_hp-wave_2560x1600 Mina Martini Finland 551 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
If i may ask: from where has arised your response #22, Mina? ... A response that dares to point out a duality in two friends inquiring into something, that may or may not exist ... Would you give the same response to K while listening to any inquiry he had in his life? ... Do you see the conditioning?

Mina: Apologies, if my post was experienced as some interference in the dialogue you and Clive were having. There was of course no such intention. -There is great sensitivity to any element of division between any of us, and that sensitivity does not seem to allow more words for now. Let us see if more words will come, one never knows. Love.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 14 Apr 2017 #29
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3138 posts in this forum Offline

So Juan, you said that you were interested in how we approach problems, approach understanding. This is interesting and I feel worth while, and I have entered into the discussion with you. So waiting for a response from you to carry on this inquiry.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying all 29 posts
Page 1 of 1
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.)