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

No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 33 in total
Mon, 18 Sep 2017 #1
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

Tom says in another thread:I can see that as an adult I am part of all of the disorder....the inner is the outer. But the child isn't born with this disorder. It is programmed into the innocent child. And this innocent child becomes the disordered adult without realizing how he/she has been programmed. The programming appears to be 'me'....and 'my life'. Even for a Hitler this is so. His thoughts and feelings seem to be telling him the truth. So in a sense he is an innocent victim of his programming as surely as the young child who is programmed to be a fundamentalist Christian or a violent racist or anti-Semite or a true believing Muslim or Hindu. So the innocent child is programmed by the society to become a murderer or a tyrant like Hitler, and then K says he is responsible for the madness. But he is a product of the madness. Is the child responsible for the programming....conditioning...he receives?

Mina: Conditioning is a creation of the false belief that the thinker is separate from the thought. It is accumulation of thought around the illusion of an ego. **There is really no real entity in this structure, responsible or not. The child is not held responsible, but nothing else is not held responsible either, in this limited sense that an observer can experience the concept of responsibility, always in separation, as 'someone responsible for something'.

BUT: It is exactly in the seeing that there is no entity that is responsible for conditioning, because it is what we ARE, that also means, that each one is completely responsible for all of it every moment, without the separation between the one responsible and what he is responsible for. These two sentences are both pointing to the same.

So, the seeing of this total responsibility for all and everything that is happening in the world happens when there is no division between one and the world or the thinker and the thought, in one. And THAT is the carrying fully of the responsibility in this world, in which it ends. Separation ends.

It is the ending of separation that is the real issue, and not if the child is to be held responsible etc. We have to go to the core, to the eye of the storm as Clive put it once, and not be content with swirling around the essence, speculating about it.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Mon, 18 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 18 Sep 2017 #2
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
: Conditioning is a creation of the false belief that the thinker is separate from the thought. It is accumulation of thought around the illusion of an ego. **There is really no real entity in this structure, responsible or not. The child is not held responsible, but nothing else is not held responsible either, in this limited sense that an observer can experience the concept of responsibility, always in separation, as 'someone responsible for something'.

That was a good one, Mina....the first two sentences above. Never heard conditioning explained that way before. Thanks. It's the concept of responsibility that I don't get. If what you maintain in bold is true, then the word responsible holds no meaning. The word always leads one to feel either guilty/ashamed...or proud, in the sense that "I did it", with the emphasis on the big 'I'. Or, conversely, "I didn't do it"(what I feel I should be doing, that is...the dreaded 'ideal' that K warned about)

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 18 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 18 Sep 2017 #3
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

My post was negating the dualistic meaning of the word 'responsibility' and at the same time introducing its holistic meaning. Yes, it has no meaning for/in duality once it starts having a holistic meaning. I was pointing out that no other than a total response, is enough, when it comes to responsibility for the state the world is in. That total response does not come from partial thought/mind and its ideas, including the idea of responsibility for example. Without a perception free from the boundaries of the mind, the conditioned world appears to continue.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 18 Sep 2017 #4
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
That total response does not come from partial thought/mind and its ideas, including the idea of responsibility for example.

So why introduce the idea of responsibility in the first place? Just say a total response. Not sure how this total response would enter the picture to dispel all the fragments when the mind is identified with any one of the fragments.

My post was negating the dualistic meaning of the word 'responsibility' and at the same time introducing its holistic meaning

A holistic meaning of a word that introduces duality? I only see duality being introduced with that word. It reminds me of the parent telling the child to be responsible....do what they're told. Which is probably a necessity if the child is to survive in the world physically.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 18 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 19 Sep 2017 #5
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
So why introduce the idea of responsibility in the first place? Just say a total response. Not sure how this total response would enter the picture to dispel all the fragments when the mind is identified with any one of the fragments.

mina: Total response. :-) Total responsibility. :-) It is the 'total', the quality of wholeness that is the essence.

In the total response there is no mind, no identification with anything, no fragments.

Mina earlier:>My post was negating the dualistic meaning of the word 'responsibility' and at the same time introducing its holistic meaning

Tom:A holistic meaning of a word that introduces duality?

Mina: Was talking about discovering what is true in the process of negation of the false. Words used may differ from thread to thread, according to what is the 'subject', but the essence remains untouched by any description.

Tom:I only see duality being introduced with that word. It reminds me of the parent telling the child to be responsible....do what they're told. Which is probably a necessity if the child is to survive in the world physically.

Mina: If I may point out that you see duality being introduced by that word exactly because it acts as a trigger for the experience of duality in you. It is not, however, the word itself to blame, it is that which happens in you when hearing that word, which creates/is the experience of duality. It is all a matter of the quality of response.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Tue, 19 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 19 Sep 2017 #6
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
If I may point out that you see duality being introduced by that word exactly because it acts as a trigger for the experience of duality in you.

Why is it an experience of duality to share one's understanding of what the word means? It means 'you(any you) should' or 'you shouldn't'... that's all I mean. I'll have to come back to the rest later when I have time to read it more carefully...got to get some practical chores done in the apartment.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 19 Sep 2017 #7
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
Total response. :-) Total responsibility. :-) It is the 'total', the quality of wholeness that is the essence.

In the total response there is no mind, no identification with anything, no fragments.

We can obviously understand intellectually what those words mean, but going further is a whole other story. What would introduce this total response(no fragmentation) in the course of one's daily living when there's fragmentation acting....when there's identification with one or more of the fragments? Is there some action 'I'...one of the fragments...can take to have a total response to life? Or do I first have to understand what this 'I' is?

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Wed, 20 Sep 2017 #8
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

We can obviously understand intellectually what those words mean, but going further is a whole other story.

Mina: For this writer this is not a matter of the intellect. You talk about 'going further'. So, you feel you understand only intellectually?

Tom: What would introduce this total response(no fragmentation) in the course of one's daily living when there's fragmentation acting....when there's identification with one or more of the fragments? Is there some action 'I'...one of the fragments...can take to have a total response to life? Or do I first have to understand what this 'I' is?

Mina: Well the above is really intellectual, that is the problem. Thought/intellect, which is time, will always come up with subtle excuses which prevent the total response from having the space in which it can take place. It keeps on maintaining itself unless it ceases to do so.

The "Do I first have to understand what this 'I' is" reminded me so much of some words in the Bible. Tried to find them in English but could not. Jesus was asking someone to follow him. This person said he would come 'but first he has to go home to tie his oxen' (something alike)....' -This is exactly pointing out the how thought will try to continue itself, even when superficially looked at (which means that the focus is in the content as separate from the nature of thought itself), it would appear to be doing something else.

No Tom, there is NOTHING 'you have to do first'...There is NOTHING you have to do! It is the doings of thought that are in the way of total response, nothing else!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 Sep 2017 #9
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
Mina: Well the above is really intellectual, that is the problem. Thought/intellect, which is time, will always come up with subtle excuses which prevent the total response from having the space in which it can take place. It keeps on maintaining itself unless it ceases to do so.

Yes and it continues to rain until the rain ceases ;) Without understanding....'self-knowledge'....it will keep maintaining itself...it DOES maintain itself. I'm simply stating how the human mind functions. It's not a matter of coming up with an excuse. I'm simply stating what is a fact.

Manna Martini wrote:
No Tom, there is NOTHING 'you have to do first'...There is NOTHING you have to do! It is the doings of thought that are in the way of total response, nothing else!

if I'm identified with a fragment or many fragments the identification will cease by itself? Is that what you're implying? It will simply cease without insight....without self knowledge? Without understanding? I don't think you are actually saying that. But it's not clear what your are saying with this 'nothing you have to do first'.

It is the doings of thought that are in the way of total response, nothing else!

The 'doings of thought' have their own momentum. Without understanding, they continue on their merry way, no? Do humans change effortlessly (a topic we've discussed quite a lot previously)? Humans simply don't mutate spontaneously....or there would be no war...no Jews vs. Muslims in the Middle East, no alcoholism, smoking, drugs, homelessness, etc. I would be able to walk after dark on the streets of my town without fear of being assaulted or mugged. I wouldn't need to lock my doors and windows at night....nor my van when I park it at the mall.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 20 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 20 Sep 2017 #10
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
No Tom, there is NOTHING 'you have to do first

Well, K said it...not that that makes it true :) But he did emphatically speak about the need to observe...not in order to reach some goal, but without self knowledge the circus continues. It's 'business as usual'. I wake up in the AM for instance and I think "I must get ready for work", but I'm tired...and I hate my job. I wish I could just quit, but I need a paycheck or my family won't eat nor have shelter. There's conflict there and maybe conflict with my wife....with my child who is doing poorly in school. All that conflict...and much more...will not resolve itself, right? That's why K spoke about 'putting one's house in order'. From the moment I wake up in the AM there's conflict....and again throughout the day at work, or school, with the spouse or neighbor. How will I begin to address the actuality of this conflict filled existence?

Here's K.:

From 'The Awakening of Intelligence':

K: No. Why is there this cult of effort? Why have I to make effort to reach God, enlightenment, truth, whatever? Why?

JN: There are many possible answers, but I can answer for myself here.

K: It may be just there, only I don't know how to look.

JN: But then there must be an obstacle.

K: Wait.

JN: No?

K: How to look! It may be just round the corner, under the flower, it may be anywhere. So first I have to learn to look, not make an effort to look. I must find out what it means to look. No?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 20 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Sep 2017 #11
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

Mina:No Tom, there is NOTHING 'you have to do first

Tom:Well, K said it...not that that makes it true :) But he did emphatically speak about the need to observe...not in order to reach some goal, but without self knowledge the circus continues.

Mina: The choiceless observation that is described above IS the doing nothing. (it means that the MIND as thinker/thought does nothing) (and when it does nothing, it simply does not exist)

Tom: It's 'business as usual'. I wake up in the AM for instance and I think "I must get ready for work", but I'm tired...and I hate my job. I wish I could just quit, but I need a paycheck or my family won't eat nor have shelter. There's conflict there and maybe conflict with my wife....with my child who is doing poorly in school. All that conflict...and much more...will not resolve itself, right?

Mina: It will resolve itself if your mind stops creating and stirring this same old stuff, its own content!!

Tom:That's why K spoke about 'putting one's house in order'. From the moment I wake up in the AM there's conflict....and again throughout the day at work, or school, with the spouse or neighbor. How will I begin to address the actuality of this conflict filled existence?

Mina: You insist on all that you say, so that becomes your reality.

From the moment I wake up there is the beauty of life. There are things to do and be addressed but everything is done in lightness of heart and mind. There is gratefulness, there is causeless joy. There was even skipping and dancing this morning, hugging my daughter, laughing with her...embracing the little dog..joking...There was/is immense gratitude, wholeness, holiness...I do not hate anything I do, because it is possible to see through any reaction...a big cup of coffee fell on the floor and coffee was spillt on the bed and on the floor and the cup broke...but no reaction occurred to that whatsoever, other than the body cleaning it up...there is no conflict with other people I am in contact with, why should there be...when we are all sisters and brothers...

I felt I wanted to write those things just to balance the negativity that you describe, because I say it is not life at all! There can be a totally different kind of life, life in wholeness and holiness!! If you really refuse, not superficially, but profoundly and actually, to live like you describe above, then that will happen! But if you remain at the level of describing conflict, this is not enough!!

Here's K.:

From 'The Awakening of Intelligence':

K: No. Why is there this cult of effort? Why have I to make effort to reach God, enlightenment, truth, whatever? Why?

JN: There are many possible answers, but I can answer for myself here.

K: It may be just there, only I don't know how to look.

JN: But then there must be an obstacle.

K: Wait.

JN: No?

K: How to look! It may be just round the corner, under the flower, it may be anywhere. So first I have to learn to look, not make an effort to look. I must find out what it means to look. No?

Mina: The looking without time, effort, thought, IS the total response again. It does not need time. It is not of time. Yes, and that total response can be to ANY thought, to ANY part of this conditioned world in other words, so that is why K describes that it 'may be anywhere'.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Thu, 21 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Sep 2017 #12
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
If you really refuse, not superficially, but profoundly and actually, to live like you describe above, then that will happen! But if you remain at the level of describing conflict, this is not enough!!

"Refuse" in what manner? Refuse my fear? There may be tremendous fear in me. Refuse my anxiety? My smoking or drinking (as an example)? Simply refuse to go to work today, because I'm tired and hate my job? Really....just say 'No, I won't go to that stinking factory'? Refuse to live in conflict, how? By an act of will? I'm frightened my family will be homeless if I refuse to go to my dreadful office or factory job! K once said he would never work at a dreadful office job...paraphrasing. He was always well provided for and never needed to work, as we all know. Most of us are not in that situation. You may be fortunate in that you love your job, Mina, or are provided for, but the overwhelming majority of us don't enjoy working on an assembly line in a noisy factory or stocking shelves at the local seven eleven store. I was doing office work back when I first met you online way back in time, and much of it WAS dreadful. How could I have simply refused to do it?? My family will be evicted if I don't pay the rent....and without a job I can't pay my rent. Are you saying I can simply refuse to work at a job I don't like? Or that is too stressful for my body...bad for my physical well being? Most of my jobs were like that, and my family and friends...most of them... find themselves in the same situation. I'm in a much better work situation now, though I'm in fairly poor health, so can't say my life is joyful. Plus I still do have to work. I don't have the leisure time and rest my body craves. Since you shared some of the 'personal', I felt like doing the same :)

Manna Martini wrote:
Mina: You insist on all that you say, so that becomes your reality.

Would you prefer I put on rose colored glasses? And tell you lies about the life I see all around? And that I lived for all too many years? If there's a hidden video camera filming the homeless beggars in front of the convenience store here in town, the gangbangers making a drug deal in the alley way...does the camera lie? Thirty-two gang members were arrested the other day in my town in a drug bust...drugs AND guns. This isn't a big city I'm talking about. It's a town of 31,000 people.

there is no conflict with other people I am in contact with, why should there be...when we are all sisters and brothers...

Of course some of those sisters and brothers might rob and assault you in order to steal your money...or your car. We used to have a lot of car theft around here...car jacking too, which was even worse. A poor taxi driver here was shot in the head...just to rob him of a small amount of cash.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 21 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 21 Sep 2017 #13
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

I think you and Mina are both right, just viewing your situations from different perspectives. How does Tom get to Mina's?

Really? But our situations are entirely different. I doubt Mina would be happy working on an assembly line or at the local 7-11 for near minimum wage.....and having not enough money to raise her child in a safe environment...nor living in a crime infested neighborhood.

Dan McDermott wrote:
but seeing through what seems the hard realities of living?

Not that I want to 'get to' Mina's situation, which would mean I had an image of Mina's situation, which I don't other than that she says she's happy. But I'm not clear about what you mean by the above Dan. Can you clarify your meaning? How does one 'see through' his or her fear of not being able to make the rent for example? Or his fear that his child will be assaulted on the school bus? Where I live there are armed security guards in the high school. They carry guns! It might be hard to fathom this....I was shocked myself when I saw a couple of them ordering coffee in the local Dunkin Donuts.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 21 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 #14
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

Tom and Dan,

I think you and Mina are both right, just viewing your situations from different perspectives. How does Tom get to Mina's?

Tom:Really? But our situations are entirely different. I doubt Mina would be happy working on an assembly line or at the local 7-11 for near minimum wage.....and having not enough money to raise her child in a safe environment...nor living in a crime infested neighborhood.

Mina: No, no, no, a holistic 'no'! To what, you might wonder! To NOTHING, because this is about holistic negation of the reality created by the division, by thought, which seems to be stirred and maintained through your replies.

I am not talking about anything Tom that you think I am. And you keep replying to what you think I am saying. That is the movement of the observer and the observed within you. Direct contact is obscured, although it is not seen of course.

This is not about 'situations', this is not about comparing, this is about the inner state of any one of us which also creates the outer, including the assembly lines or their absence, (including all the life situations you have described, all creations of a divided mind, or their absence) according to what your inner states creates 'in' the world.

I feel the basic and fundamental difficulty in sharing real understanding (by those words I mean understanding in which there is no thought/idea/world) is that energy is all the time being waste of describing the world as if it existed independent and separate from the inner state of any one of us. It appears as the describtion of others, instead of going deeper into ourselves where the whole world is created. No 'others' are needed. But this is not simply seen.

When one's whole life is dedicated to giving oneself away to the hands of life itself, to Intelligence, the whole of life, as one with you yourself, is supporting and helping you to do the work you need to do in the world. Krishnamurti's body was also therefore taken care of, so that the dedication to the Work which is the most significant and urgent in the world blinded by image, could keep taking place. It is absolutely sacred, all of it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 #15
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

Tom:Would you prefer I put on rose colored glasses? And tell you lies about the life I see all around? And that I lived for all too many years? If there's a hidden video camera filming the homeless beggars in front of the convenience store here in town, the gangbangers making a drug deal in the alley way...does the camera lie? Thirty-two gang members were arrested the other day in my town in a drug bust...drugs AND guns. This isn't a big city I'm talking about. It's a town of 31,000 people.

Mina: I would prefer no colour glasses at all. All or any colour distorts. Thought is all the distorting colors. Thought distorts because it separates. It focuses on the outer world as separate from the inner world, and that is the distortion. It will forever deal with the reality of the beggars, the gangbangers, the guns, (or whatever might be considered the opposite, the rich, the "priviledged" etc), from this distance, never realising that the outer is its own projection and creation.

The lie is in this way of looking, the lie is fundamentally in this distortion and only.

(of course there is no one denying that what you say is happening, I am going deeper, to stay at the mere level of distorted manifestations is not enough, it does not change this reality that you are describing. The one who truly cares will return back to himself, there is no other place where this insanity can end.)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 #16
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Manna Martini wrote:
I am not talking about anything Tom that you think I am. And you keep replying to what you think I am saying.

But I don't think ANYTHING about what you're saying....not that I'm aware of. I'm simply asking questions that come up when reading it. You seemed to be saying that one can simply refuse the conflict...refuse the fear...'refuse to live that way', I think were your words. You did say just that somewhere above, right? I was saying that it's impossible. One IS all that. There is no one separate to refuse to live in fear or with greed or anger...refuse to be what he is. K didn't have a family to support. He didn't feel the necessity to hold a job to keep a roof over their heads and food in their stomac8. That's the only manner in which I'm comparing people. I'm not looking at any other level than how they deal with the simple necessities of daily survival on a physical level. K didn't have to deal with it at all. Mary Zimbalist asked him what he would have done if he wasn't provided for. He said , "I don't know....just beg around, probably" (paraphrasing). That's actually illegal to do here in the US...or parts of it, I think. K himself said that physical security is absolutely necessary. When that simple necessity becomes threatened life becomes a struggle. Yes or no? :) Are you implying that that struggle and fear of homelessness, for example(that I suffered with when younger), is not necessary...is created by 'me' in some manner? That the Jews' fear of the Gestapo in Nazi Germany was created by the Jew? That the slave is responsible for his slavery? I'm sorry if I'm missing your point about responsibility, Mina. I'm not trying to be dense. Perhaps I am hopelessly so. I would probably pose the same questions of K.

It will forever deal with the reality of the beggars, the gangbangers, the guns, (or whatever might be considered the opposite, the rich, the "priviledged" etc), from this distance, never realising that the outer is its own projection and creation.
The lie is in this way of looking, the lie is fundamentally in this distortion and only.

All that outer horror...mess... is created by 'my' way of looking? I doubt it. I doubt I created the thugs and gang members who threaten the safety and security of ordinary citizens by my way of looking. In what sense am I responsible for violent drug dealers and violent crime? Can you say how? Or the idiots who blast loud vulgar rap music out of open car windows where children are living. Even K spoke about the ugliness and filth of life in the big city. He was appalled by the poverty. He was incredibly shy....almost painfully so....in public. Why the shyness if there was no image of others? A friend of mine was abused as a child. She still suffers with great fear of people sometimes. Is she creating the fear? Responsible for the fear? It's part of her, yes, and distorts her way of looking, yes, of course, but she herself didn't create it, nor is she maintaining it. It simply happens. "Just because I'm paranoid, it doesn't mean that people aren't out to get me." Joseph Heller.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 23 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 #17
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Would you prefer I put on rose colored glasses? And tell you lies about the life I see all around? And that I lived for all too many years? If there's a hidden video camera filming the homeless beggars in front of the convenience store here in town, the gangbangers making a drug deal in the alley way...does the camera lie? Thirty-two gang members were arrested the other day in my town in a drug bust...drugs AND guns. This isn't a big city I'm talking about. It's a town of 31,000 people.

Tom, you often describe the violence around you, the mean-ness and meaningless-ness of life, the poverty, the unhappiness and conflict of people. And it is right that you do so, we need to see the facts, the whole picture of society, of the world, as it is. And you are right, to see things as they are, we need to take off all rose-tinted glasses, whatever form those glasses might take.

And of course we need to understand our relationship to that world - and in saying that, I am not implying that we are fundamentally separate from the world.

Here are some words that I just came across from K that seem to me highly relevant to this enquiry:

"The fact can never bring sorrow"

I can and will present the wider quote, but will leave K's words sitting there for the moment.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 #18
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Clive Elwell wrote:
And of course we need to understand our relationship to that world - and in saying that, I am not implying that we are fundamentally separate from the world.

Right...we are not. If I am a rich man..or a right wing politician... my actions may contribute to creating the poverty we see in some of the neighborhoods near me. And that poverty may lead some young folks to try to sell drugs and/or join a gang because they see no future in working at the local seven-eleven. I was too intelligent to throw my life out selling drugs.....and inevitably winding up dead or in prison...yet the prospects of a life struggling to make the rent working at a menial job (plus the total druggery...slavery...of such work) led to inner conflict in myself....depression and terrible anxiety.... rather than outer. Even if you or I are not rich or powerful, we still effect the whole...the world. We may be self-centered in another fashion, which leads to conflict and division in relationships. The poor man who resorts to selling drugs may be a victim of poverty and the rich man's greed and selfishness, but the drugs he sells have a terrible negative effect on others, obviously. So we may be both victims as well as victimizers.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 23 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 23 Sep 2017 #19
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Clive Elwell wrote:
Tom, you often describe the violence around you, the mean-ness and meaningless-ness of life, the poverty, the unhappiness and conflict of people.

Yes, as I said recently to Mina....I'm just recording what I see like a video camera records. I'm sure even K would be appalled by the social disorder in much of the U.S. today. The crime and violence has multiplied exponentially since I was young and children could roam around my town after dark totally alone and free of adult supervision. I went everywhere in town alone after dark on my bike as a kid. No decent parent would allow that for a single minute today! Armed security guards in the high school? Armed against who? The violent students that's who! It's total madness here.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 23 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Sep 2017 #20
Thumb_img_1496 Per . Sweden 96 posts in this forum Offline

Our ability to respond fully to any problem is clearly hampered by our identification with a fragmented and non existent mind made me. This me is responsible for the havoc in the world, but it is not able to respond fully to the situation. A full response must imply the resolution of the original sin. Of Me.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Sep 2017 #21
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Per . wrote:
A full response must imply the resolution of the original sin. Of Me.

It may be true what you say, Per. I don't know. When I wake up in the AM, 'me' is there. We don't know life without identification with our job, our family, our religion, our desires, our opinions, beliefs, and so on. You say this must be resolved. By who? We ARE all that. K said that conflict can be ended NOW, but as we were discussing on another forum, he says there is no 'how'. No effort, no will, which is further conflict...'just DO IT'....like that stupid Nike sneaker commercial says. Mina takes it further by saying, "You don't have to do anything!" OK, pass me my cigarettes and turn on the TV (as an example). Or conversely, I resist those desires and struggle to achieve something 'higher'....or to understand them/myself. Is there really "nothing" to do when desires and fears arise? My friend who was abused as a child....when fear arises as it does, is there anything she can do to avoid it? That's a rhetorical question. We obviously can't avoid a fact....what is.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 24 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Sep 2017 #22
Thumb_img_1496 Per . Sweden 96 posts in this forum Offline

Tom!

K spoke about putting ones house in order. It is seen here that this is all Me can do. All Me needs to do. Not order according to appetite or taste, but according to harmony. Everything in its own place and its own space.

The things we touch on here are sacred; they cannot be talked about carelessly in messy rooms. We first need to put our houses in order so that we can meet on the same level with the same energy. When this is at hand a sacred space is created in which a true meeting can occur. Deep understanding beyond the word. Deep healing.

As the Me thus puts the house in order it will eventually find its own place and its own space. It will not spill over into the domain of the sacred, where it does not belong. The full response is sacred action and the Me has no part in it.

This post was last updated by Per . Sun, 24 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 24 Sep 2017 #23
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Per: "As the Me thus puts the house in order it will eventually find its own place and its own space."

Tom: 'Eventually'? So this will take a lot if time right? In the meantime you have nothing to say to me? First I have to find a way out of 'my' job which is torture...and a place to live free of all the noise and violence and crime? And eventually after doing that I will be free of fear and conflict? Probably not, right? I can understand the necessity of having order in daily living, but were all those rich comfortable associates of K free of fear....of conflict? They I'm sure had very comfortable and orderly lives, yet K said "no one got it". So you have nothing to say to the average man, Per? You only speak to the man who has purified himself of the 'messy' mind and messy existence they live with? K was able to talk to everyone who came to the talks....thankfully. I was a total MESS when I first came across K. yet his words reached me.

Per . wrote:
Not order according to appetite or taste, but according to harmony. Everything in its own place and its own space.

And a disordered mind can do this? A mind that is afraid, in conflict, can put the house in order? Without having the need for basic physical security met....a safe, quiet, home, good food, meaningful and fulfilling work? Do all this in the midst of a disordered society?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 24 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 25 Sep 2017 #24
Thumb_img_1496 Per . Sweden 96 posts in this forum Offline

It came to be seen that the mind made Me is utterly unable to respond fully to any human problem. Separated, fragmented, deluded, fear ridden and anxious - it IS the very problem itself. Any response from this Me towards the problem therefore must add to it. And yes, from the point of the Me this is a most frustrating insight.

The full response is as Mina pointed out elsewhere, the total resolution of the problem in oneself. The dissolution of the Me as Me IS the coming back to presence. From here it is seen that Me may have it's functional place - as long as it is not identified with and as long as it stays within it's boundaries. As when your car fails you in the middle of nowhere. Then it is perhaps good to think to perhaps be able to fix it.

This post was last updated by Per . Mon, 25 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 25 Sep 2017 #25
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Online

Per . wrote:
t came to be seen that the mind made Me is utterly unable to respond fully to any human problem. Separated, fragmented, deluded, fear ridden and anxious - it IS the very problem itself. Any response from this Me towards the problem therefore must add to it. And yes, from the point of the Me this is a most frustrating insight.

It wouldn't be frustrating if it was an actual insight. The 'me' would be silent. But the 'me' doesn't accept this, and will continue to approach the problem/s in all the usual...all the known ways. Fears will continue to arise on their own, of course(due to the subconscious content of the mind)....anger arises...cravings arise. That is our state. The overwhelming majority of mankind experiences this suffering. What is your response to seeing your neighbors and friends...maybe family... in conflict? Is there some wisdom you can share with them? Other than what you shared above? You're telling the one who suffers that HE is the problem. Now he's going to try to do something about this HE..himself...judging himself bad, or wrong or sinful...creating more difficulties for himself in the process. This is a Krisnamurti forum, so we tend to discuss how K approaches the subject of man's inner and outer disorder... his fear, his violence. How he observes himself....the conflict...the fear..,the violence. The "full" or total response you speak of is not a fact for most of mankind. What might bring this response into the picture, when fragmentation is present? What but a total understanding of the fragmentation? Not a denial of it, but going into it....thoroughly...not looking for the ideal or goal of a total response. When fear or craving or anger arises as it inevitably will for the usual man, that is the fact...what is. Speculating about anything else is an avoidance of the fact.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 25 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 25 Sep 2017 #26
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

re 24:

Respectfully and hesitantly, Per, I don’t think that the comparison between the mind and the car is accurate or helpful.

The car which has broken down CAN be fixed through knowledge, skill, reasoning, analysis, comparison, and so on. That is an appropriate use of thought, isn't it? It is in “its functional place”, as you say. Thought is not out of order there, is it?

But “I” am not the car, the car is not “me” - a person and a car are actually separate in terms of functionality, intended use, material composition, origin, etc. - like apples and oranges. Of course, everything - good and bad - is part of the totality ..... but I still want or need to put the car in order so that I can use it to go from A to B. Observation and awareness cannot put the car in order. The human mind has put the car together and the mind can fix it. But the skills and knowledge used for putting the car in order are useless for bringing order to the psychological house, aren't they?

I want to put "my" mind in order because I understand that the human mind’s disorder is responsible not only for my personal sorrow, but also for the whole world's sorrow. And as part of that understanding, I realize that “I” cannot put the mind in order. Obviously, it would be “me” who would determine whether or not the mind “stays within its boundaries”, as you put it, isn’t it? So right from the start of my intention to put the house in order, I would be starting with a "wrong" step, wouldn't I? Isn't this understanding solid, immovable? It's not a guess or an idea, is it? Not that it cannot be constantly questioned and renewed with doubt. It must be doubted and seen afresh or it must surely become an idea or belief, I think.

I do see that the use of “me-we-you” has its functional place in communicating with each other, but the “me” which is the self-centre, the psyche, the image, the beliefs, ideals, and so on, has no legitimate place, as I see it. Of course that psychological “me” will get frustrated by this insight but the same silent awareness which opened the window to the insight can also observe the frustration. And then the frustration is not a problem to be overcome.

The brain has not been put together by itself. One can say that intelligence, the source, the uncreated, creation, has put the brain and everything else that is not man-made together. Can that source or intelligence “fix” it, perhaps through awareness? I don't know. Whether or not “it” can, what is clear is that the human mind cannot, isn’t it?

I hope I have understood what you said.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 25 Sep 2017 #27
Thumb_img_1496 Per . Sweden 96 posts in this forum Offline

Thank you Huguette!

Likewise respectfully and hesitantly, as we thread together on sacred grounds.

The car story was meant to exemplify ”appropriate use of thinking”. No identification with the car. It was seen that the thinking mind has its functional place, and that it is not necessarily problematic in and of itself. And it is agreed that the skills and knowing used to mend a broken car is not helpful in bringing the house in order.

It is not the mind per see that is problematic. It is the identification with the thinker that seems to be at the root of it.

Some people have what we call a keen ear for music. Is this a skill of the mind? I would say it is a skill of the perceiving mind. Likewise some people have a keen ear, so to speak, for harmony in a room. This too is a skill of the perceiving mind.

Order brought about by thinking IS disorder. This is a fact. But is it possible to use the skills of the perceiving mind to put ones house in order? This would require a very keen listening, would it not? For this to happen thinker and thought has to be in its proper place. So this is what was seen; when perceiving mind is used to put the house in order thinking mind will eventually also find its proper place. In keen listening to what is the identification with the thinking mind is eventually lost. You cannot be in the thinking mind and the perceiving mind simultaneously. You are either present or not.

This post was last updated by Per . Mon, 25 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 26 Sep 2017 #28
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

re 27:

Per,

I think that skill can be developed over time but that talent is innate ability. Talent may be polished by technique and practice but it cannot be acquired over time by technique, effort and practice if it is absent to begin with. No?

In the same way, perception or awareness is not a skill that can be developed over time through practice, technique and effort, is it? Nor is it a talent for the gifted few. Perception or awareness is there for all living things, unsolicited, effortless and free. Isn't that perceived and understood? The snail's awareness may not be like human awareness or like the tree's awareness, but isn't awareness observed in all forms of life by the sensitivity of our own human awareness? Or is this a delusion?

Doesn’t perception require sensitivity and freedom? By freedom, I mean a mind that is not occupied or preoccupied with its own desires, a mind that is not overcome by fear, anger or jealousy, and so on. Aren’t preoccupation, desire, fear, anger, etc., the things that stand in the way of sensitive awareness? So sensitivity or awareness is not a skill that can be practiced or acquired and it is untouched by time.

Can perception or awareness - being independent of time and unrelated to thought - be "used" by the mind-brain-thought to put the house in order?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 26 Sep 2017 #29
Thumb_img_1496 Per . Sweden 96 posts in this forum Offline

Dear Huguette!

How effortlessly and beautiful misconceptions in this mind evaporate into thin air in the meeting with the light that you are! Yes. Everything you put into words is seen and shared in silence.

There is no doer. Life happens. And as it happens it brings its own order.Life happens through us; we are this greater order. The house is in order already.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 26 Sep 2017 #30
Thumb_img-0590 Mina Martini Finland 162 posts in this forum Offline

How beautiful, Per and Huguette!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 33 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.)