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

Who are the 'we continuing in the same path'? (to Juan and all)


Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 90 in total
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #61
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

85:

Dan McDermott wrote:
As I'm seeing, thinking about this idea of "authority", for me there is only one and that is 'thought', 'my' thought. Whether I adopt or reject the words, ideas of another, it is 'my' thought that is in the center always.

Yes, I see what you’re saying, Dan. But why DO I accept (“my own”) thought as authority; and why DO I want to impose “my” authority? In talking these matters over, where is the need for authority? It is seen that authority is divisive, conflictual.

Can there BE communication without the same intensity and attention in the “looking together”? Where there is authority regarding THESE matters - whether it is “me” accepting or rejecting authority, or whether it is me trying to impose "my" authority on others - is there looking at all?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #62
Thumb_open-uri20171115-31086-13da1wu-0 Dan McDermott United States 766 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
You don't feel that authorities of all kinds have mislead man over the centuries?

Sure and still are but if you look at it as 'thought' (the stream of human thought?) rather than individuals or 'personalities' influencing one another, it removes the judgement factor, "that one is good and that one is bad." And see it as the 'authority' of thought (the 'I' process).

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #63
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

re #90:

To SEE what is - is not to judge it good or bad, is it? It is not being judgmental to be aware of authoritarian thought, my own and someone else’s, and to be aware of compliance to authority, and the fear or desire underlying it. Is it?

If I make it an ideal that “I should not be judgmental”, I may be so intent on complying with the ideal that I I avoid seeing, I turn a blind eye to what is actually going on inwardly and outwardly.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Tue, 17 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #64
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

re #91:

Huguette . wrote:
But why DO I accept (“my own”) thought as authority; and why DO I want to impose “my” authority?

Dan McDermott wrote:
Hi, the way that you phrase that assumes that there is a 'me' apart from thought that can accept or reject. Isn't that where the 'deception' comes in that there is a 'thinker' apart from this process that is somehow different than it?

Let me rephrase it. Why DOES the mind think that thought has authority; and why DOES the mind want to impose its own conclusions as the authority? Or does it not?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Tue, 17 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #65
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Can there BE communication without the same intensity and attention in the “looking together”? Where there is authority regarding THESE matters - whether it is “me” accepting or rejecting authority, or whether it is me trying to impose "my" authority on others - is there looking at all?

Looking afresh...free of the authority of the past.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #66
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Why DOES the mind think that thought has authority; and why DOES the mind want to impose its own conclusions as the authority? Or does it not?

Thought is nothing BUT authority, though we need the authority of knowledge to cook our dinner....but we're questioning authority in relationship....the higher vs the lower....and in the psychological realm of 'I am bad...I should be better', 'You are bad or inferior', 'Jews or Blacks are inferior', right vs wrong, etc.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 17 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #67
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
So the Holocaust was a gift to the Jews so they can learn...suffering purifies? That old craziness? Well how could the Jews learn from the Holocaust? They were exterminated! The witches of Salem, Mass.(and elsewhere, I should add) who were burned at the stake?

Tom, I myself have not used the phrase “everything is a gift”, and I would not presume to tell others how they should meet life. One can only feel sadness and compassion about much that has happened in human history, and continues to happen. But if I am in a time of great suffering, is that not the time to learn about suffering?

We might investigate what is meant by “learn about”. I am meaning at the moment “to understand” with the suggestion of “transcending”.

I myself have learnt significantly about pain in the dentists chair. I am not talking about ideas, theories, but actually, in a way that changed my whole approach to pain. (That does not mean I have assumed there is nothing else to learn). In car accidents there has been observation of the workings of the brain which have been fundamental. Would you not say, Tom, that in times of great crisis the imperative to learn about oneself is correspondingly great? Which is not to say one should be dependent on crises to learn.

“Well how could the Jews learn from the Holocaust? They were exterminated! ”

As you know, although they were slaughtered in great numbers, Jews were not exterminated as a race. The second world war – and all wars – might have been a good time to learn about nationalism. It might have been a good time for Germans to stop being Germans, for Jews to stop being Jews, for all people to drop their nationalism and become human beings together. Would that not be a sane thing to do? But we did not learn, we won't drop anything, we still do not learn, we react, we continue in our craziness, and now, for example, the Jews bring great suffering to the Palestinians.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #68
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
It is actually only through a reaction from the mind that the mind is born, at any moment. No reaction, no mind.

This seems odd, Mina. If the mind is not there in the first place, how can it react? How can it come into being? No mind, no reaction.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #69
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
As I'm seeing, thinking about this idea of "authority", for me there is only one and that is 'thought', 'my' thought. Whether I adopt or reject the words, ideas of another, it is 'my' thought that is in the center always. (The 'my' is in quotes because there is only thought, the thinker, the 'my' is thought's projection.) I (it) have been told that it must be quiet for the 'truth' to be seen but it cannot quiet itself, it doesn't really believe that it can't know the truth, that it can't go beyond itself etc. so it continues on...it has been called "cunning" and "deceptive" and that it can only become 'still' when it becomes aware of itself. That there is no other entity or factor other than itself that can bring that stillness about. Thought is divisive, it divides the world into 'me' and all the rest. It defends itself against what it sees as 'wrong', and champions what it sees as 'right'. It is the 'barrier' to truth, wisdom, compassion. Only awareness can bring it to a stop. It is sorrow and fear itself. It is the authority.

A good, clear, statement, Dan. Indeed it is thought, which is knowledge, that is the ultimate and active authority. As I just wrote elsewhere, we are in the prison of our own knowledge, although that knowledge may be very subtle. The title of one of K's early books, "Freedom from the Known", seems to be the essence of the teachings.

Just one question arises for me. You write:

"That there is no other entity or factor other than itself that can bring that stillness about"

Can thought, which one might describe as noise, bring stillness about?

This response now comes: thought's perception of its own nature brings that stillness about. Of the illusion of thinker/thought. This presupposes that thought can perceive, "see". Is it thought that sees, or is it something else, outside of thought? I know we have looked at this question before. Perhaps it doesn't matter, perhaps it's academic?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #70
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
You don't feel that authorities of all kinds have mislead man over the centuries?

They could not have mislead man if the capacity to be mislead was not in the human brain.

As with the whole of psyche, one can see that this "trait" originated in the physical world where it made sense - if a man is a skilled hunter, I will naturally accept his authority in the hunt. If a man knows how to shape stone proficiently, I will learn from him. But this natural process became internalised, and man started to accept authority psychologically, spiritually. Does it make any sense in that realm?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #71
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

#96:

Dan McDermott wrote:
When K. suggests, don't judge, condemn. compare etc. what you are (just see it, be it), he isn't suggesting making an "ideal" of avoiding those reactions and then trying to follow the 'ideal' that the 'self' has now created in its own craving for a 'method'.

K said, “see the importance of being aware”. He said, “see how thought (as time, will, effort, conceit, belief, desire, etc.) compares, judges, condemns, while thinking it is self acting morally, thinking it is self having righteous authority, thinking it is self who KNOWS about right and wrong, and so on”. He didn’t say “DO NOT compare, judge, condemn”, did he?

"Do not compare" IS an ideal. "Be kind, do not be violent" are ideals. One can make an ideal out of “don’t condemn”, but one can’t make an ideal out being aware, can one? One can pretend not to compare but one can't pretend to be aware.

Understanding the significance of awareness, the nature of awareness (i.e. that it is not thought), then one (thought) does not interfere with awareness. That is not making an ideal out of awareness, is it?

Don’t we understand awareness to that extent? It IS a fact that awareness is crucial to understanding, isn’t it? NOT thought.

There are those - Hitler, Jim Jones, Charles Manson, Trump, and so many others - who have the desire and ambition to acquire authority. There are those who have the desire to be led, to follow. It is all driven by thought. To be aware of what one actually is - whether it is to be the authority, to be a follower, etc. - is not condemnation. Not only that, without being aware of all that I am in each moment that “I am”, freedom has no meaning at all.

And if we talk all these things over together because we are both passionately interested in them, because “freedom” is not merely an academic or intellectual pastime to us - because “we have the same intensity” about it as we talk it over, and you see that I not only repeat, repeat, repeat the same things and do not listen to you, I also make the meaning of my words hard for you to understand ... then ARE we talking things over?

Is it a judgment or condemnation to say that we are NOT?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #72
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Mina Martini wrote:

It is actually only through a reaction from the mind that the mind is born, at any moment. No reaction, no mind.

Clive: This seems odd, Mina. If the mind is not there in the first place, how can it react? How can it come into being? No mind, no reaction.

If the mind is not there, why do we dream at night? There's something called the unconscious. Even while we're at work or play, the unconscious is there ready at any moment to react.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 17 Oct 2017 #73
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

You don't feel that authorities of all kinds have mislead man over the centuries?
They could not have mislead man if the capacity to be mislead was not in the human brain.

"The guru exploits the followers, and the followers exploit the guru." (K)

As with the whole of psyche, one can see that this "trait" originated in the physical world where it made sense - if a man is a skilled hunter, I will naturally accept his authority in the hunt

And with the parent/child relationship. The parent is the authority who helps the child learn how to survive physically in the world.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 18 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #74
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
But if I am in a time of great suffering, is that not the time to learn about suffering?

I can't say. In times of truly great suffering we often retreat further into our self protective mechanisms....we put up thicker walls. We had a neighbor when I was a child who lost her whole family in the Holocaust...mother and father, siblings, possibly aunts and uncles. She was the only family member to survive Hitler's madness. My mother told me that this woman cried every single day of her life over this. Such horrific behaviors as the Nazis(and all too many others) engaged in are not a gift when they cause a person to retreat into depression or madness.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 18 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #75
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

re #101:

Huguette . wrote:
"Do not compare" IS an ideal. "Be kind, do not be violent" are ideals. One can make an ideal out of “don’t condemn”, but one can’t make an ideal out being aware, can one? One can pretend not to compare but one can't pretend to be aware.

I'm correcting myself. One CAN make an ideal out of being aware: "Be aware ... I should be aware". I just wanted to say it. I'll leave it at that for now.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #76
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 83 posts in this forum Offline

Justification, condemnation or identification during observation brings to an abrupt end, the process of self-knowing into self-knowledge.

Without such an end, there is always the factor of humility and innocence in knowing that what I was before is what I am now, all the while enduring and containing with all energy a possible split off. And as this is happening, this is when the highest possible human ideal is im/perfectly grounded in the actual reality.

contraria sunt complementa

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #77
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote at #105:
In times of truly great suffering we often retreat further into our self protective mechanisms....we put up thicker walls.

Must I necessarily conclude that it is my inevitable fate to suffer? Or is there a spontaneous (not forced) interest to learn, find out about suffering? In the moment where suffering invades psyche and body, can’t the mind - being passionately interested - pause in its habitual thinking? Can't it fully feel and observe “what is” going on, all the movements of suffering? I see it like Clive: THAT moment is the only moment in which I can observe and learn about suffering. Otherwise, I can only look at the memory of it. Memory cannot reveal all the subtle facets of the process of suffering, can it?

Isn’t because our upbringing has trained each one of us that - being separate from my thoughts and feelings - I must “manage” them just as I manage my household, my finance, my job, etc.? And to “manage” the thoughts and feelings of suffering, I turn to the self-protective mechanisms -- repress, resist, explain, analyze, gives oneself over to belief or activity, and so on. We do see the fact that our self-protective mechanisms do NOT end suffering, don’t we? The suffering remains, consciously or subconsciously ….. because the memories remain, consciously or subconsciously. Is it so?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #78
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Isn’t because our upbringing has trained each one of us that - being separate from my thoughts and feelings - I must “manage” them just as I manage my household, my finance, my job, etc.? And to “manage” the thoughts and feelings of suffering, I turn to the self-protective mechanisms -- repress, resist, explain, analyze, gives oneself over to belief or activity, and so on

I'm not sure about that, Huguette. In the case of fear, the mind compulsively replays the prospect of frightening...dreaded... event/s occurring because it wants to avoid them...to prevent them from occurring. If I suffer at work, I want to find a better job....or if my boss intimidates me, I want to 'figure out' a way to deal with this feeling. Should I tell him off? Should I try to be rational with him...just quit? We think we must act in some way when we suffer. We're certainly not used to doing NOTHING about it. In the worst case scenario we try to NOT feel the pain...the conflict... by drinking or drugs. We don't see that the conflict is in consciousness. Its origin is there.

Huguette . wrote:
We do see the fact that our self-protective mechanisms do NOT end suffering, don’t we?

Not if we feel the suffering has an external cause. I get angry at the government...the boss at work...the spouse...never facing myself. I'm not justifying...nor condemning...just telling how it often is in the human mind. we feel that if we can take some kind of external action, the the suffering will end, right? Like changing jobs...changing girlfriends...protesting against the government.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 18 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #79
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 415 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette wrote:
We do see the fact that our self-protective mechanisms do NOT end suffering, don’t we?

Tom Paine wrote:
Not if we feel the suffering has an external cause

I said "we" but I meant "me", Tom. I do feel that I see this fact. I'm not sure it IS a fact but I do see it that way AND I realize that I might be mistaken. So I'm not talking hypothetically about if "we" feel otherwise or about how others might feel about it.

How do YOU see it, Tom. Do you see the "fact" that our self-protective mechanisms do NOT end suffering?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Wed, 18 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #80
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Do you see it the "fact" that our self-protective mechanisms do NOT end suffering?

I honestly don't know this to be a fact. I will need to look into this point further, because it seems like it could be crucial. As long as we DON'T see this we'll continue with the usual course of events..the inner/outer battle.

Just looking further into this:
Are our self-protective mechanisms separate from the suffering? Or are they in fact the suffering itself?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 18 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #81
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Looking at the 'face of the dragon'.

That wants to eat you. It sometimes feels that way, anyway.

Dan McDermott wrote:
What 'keeps' one there in that moment?... Is it the 'wisdom' that knows if you run, it will always come back in one form or another? Or is it the desire to actually explore this 'dreaded' thing?

I think it's the latter. Though mostly we only face ourselves when all the escape routes are blocked.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 18 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #82
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Here is K on the issue of authority. What I find particularly significant is:

" And no one can give us self-knowledge, - no teacher, no book, no philosophy, no
discipline. The self is in constant movement; as it lives, it must be understood."

Yes, if the self was a static thing then perhaps another could teach us about it - like expaining how a car works, then understanding could be just a matter of accumulating knowledge. But I am constantly changing, and only I am in a position to observe that change.

And also the entity who is trying to uunderstand is a living part of what he is trying to understand. He is not outside the process, as some external authority would necessarily be outside of the process.

Krishnamurti: If one is inquiring to find out the truth of anything, all authority must be set aside, surely. There is neither the Buddha nor the Christ when one wishes to find what is true. Which means, really, the mind must be capable of being completely alone, and not dependent. The Buddha may be wrong, Christ may be wrong, and one may be wrong oneself. One must come to the state, surely, of not accepting any authority of any kind. That is the first thing, - to dismantle the structure of authority. In dismantling the immense structure of tradition, that very process brings about an understanding. But merely to accept something because it has been said in a sacred book has very little meaning.

Surely, to find that which is beyond time, all the process of time must cease, must it not? The very process of search must come to an end. Because if I am seeking, then I depend, - not only on another, but also on my own experience; for if I have learned something, I try to use that to guide myself. To find what is true, there must be no search of any kind, - and that is the real stillness of the mind.

It is very difficult for a person who has been brought up in a particular culture, in a particular belief, with certain symbols of tremendous authority, to set aside all that and to think simply for himself and find out. He cannot think simply if he does not know himself, if there is no self-knowledge. And no one can give us self-knowledge, - no teacher, no book, no philosophy, no discipline. The self is in constant movement; as it lives, it must be understood. And only through self-knowledge, through understanding the process of my own thinking, obsessed in the mirror of every reaction, do I find out that so long as there is any movement of the 'me', of the mind, towards anything, - towards God, towards truth, towards peace, - then such a mind is not a quiet mind, it is still wanting to achieve, to grasp, to come to some state. If there is any form of authority, any compulsion, any imitation, the mind cannot understand. And to know that the mind imitates, to know that it is crippled by tradition, to be aware that it is pursuing its own experiences, its own projections, - that demands a great deal of insight, a great deal of awareness, of self-knowledge.

Only then, with the whole content of the mind, the whole consciousness, unravelled and understood, is there a possibility of a state which may be called stillness, - in which there is no experiencer, no recognition.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #83
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
If the mind is not there, why do we dream at night? There's something called the unconscious. Even while we're at work or play, the unconscious is there ready at any moment to react.

I have been becoming more and more aware of the unconscious. It is always there, just below the surface, sometimes deeper, sometimes shallow. And it is this that determines our action, not the conscious mind. I often see even as I am saying "do X", I am actually doing Y, as that is what the unconscious is prompting, insisting on.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #84
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
It is afraid of 'death', the death, the ending of itself.

Yes, this is certainly true, this can be observed. This is why thought is constantly "filling in the space", avoiding any possibility of emptiness with its endless activities.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #85
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Such horrific behaviors as the Nazis(and all too many others) engaged in are not a gift when they cause a person to retreat into depression or madness.

Tom, I have not, and am not, using that phrase "a gift". All I am saying is that it is imperative that we learn about selves, and so perhaps transcend all this human suffering and insanity

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 18 Oct 2017 #86
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 3851 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Isn’t because our upbringing has trained each one of us that - being separate from my thoughts and feelings - I must “manage” them just as I manage my household, my finance, my job, etc.? And to “manage” the thoughts and feelings of suffering, I turn to the self-protective mechanisms -- repress, resist, explain, analyze, gives oneself over to belief or activity, and so on. We do see the fact that our self-protective mechanisms do NOT end suffering, don’t we? The suffering remains, consciously or subconsciously ….. because the memories remain, consciously or subconsciously. Is it so?

Yes Huguette, this is exactly the role that thought has created as the thinker - the manager of itself, of thought, feeling, problems, trying to be secure. As a manager it is forever engaged in trying to organise, to control, to take on, to let go ....... all the rest of it. But what the manager cannot possibly do is to transcend the processes it is trying to manage, no?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 19 Oct 2017 #87
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
But what the manager cannot possibly do is to transcend the processes it is trying to manage, no?

One fragment of consciousness is attempting to manage another fragment. But the manager is the managed. As you have said previously, the thinker is trying to separate from the thought, trying to 'manage' his thoughts/feelings. But the thinker is creating further conflict by this separation because he's in conflict with himself. For an example, when I try to get rid of or overcome my anger or greed which is part of me. I need to look more closely at this before commenting further. This has turned into a very interesting thread!

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 19 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 19 Oct 2017 #88
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
I often see even as I am saying "do X", I am actually doing Y, as that is what the unconscious is prompting, insisting on.

Can you give a real world example, Clive? I see it as inner conflict and division...one fragment... the conscious thought (be 'good')... opposing the unconscious fragment/thought/feeling (what I consider 'bad', be it anger or selfishness, or...). When the topic of 'being what you are' comes up, I think the issue of the unconscious vs. the conscious fragmentation must be taken into account. The conscious mind is resisting the unconscious feelings, urges, fears, etc.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 19 Oct 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 19 Oct 2017 #89
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Like the men who expose themselves in public?

We can all be grateful for a little repression, eh? ;)

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 19 Oct 2017 #90
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2045 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
So the sexual pervert say would probably not be interested in trying "to be what he is, whatever he is and be aware of it".

This brings in the question of desire. I may desire my neighbors wife, so again, maybe some repression is in order. Or can I stay with my desire without acting upon it, and perhaps learn the roots of it....probably some inner conflict which I wish to run away from by fantasizing about my neighbor's beautiful wife?

Dan McDermott wrote:
Maybe the 'house' has to be in a certain order...?

I think so, yes.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 19 Oct 2017.

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