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

Back to the essence...


Displaying posts 31 - 48 of 48 in total
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #31
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1002 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
For as long as we keep thinking about ourselves, (or about anything else) that long thought is creating a cover that prevents the direct seeing/being of what we already, timelessly, are.

The confusion that I'm seeing here is trying to bring two things together that are not compatible: The 'self' and 'Innocence'. The self can never 'become' Innocence, as it can never become Intelligence, or Love or Compassion etc. It is the ending of psychological thought that is Intelligence. The 'self is the brain's false security blanket and as long as it is present, as K. has said, the "Other" (Innocence,Love, Compassion, Intelligence) cannot be. What I see is that the only way that thought can cease its 'craving' is for it to understand that what it wants and what it is searching for (as well as re-membering) is only a projection of the past, and can only be a projection of the past. The 'self'/thought/time is the 'known' and it can never 'know' or touch the 'unknown'.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #32
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

To say I'm lonely is then simply stating a fact.

No Tom, you're simply stating how you feel right now, not a fact ...

By definition a fact is "a piece of information presented as having objective reality", but it happens that "feeling alone" is a subjective reality (based on the images, projections, and so on, of the subject), therefore it can not be considered as a fact ...

Violence is not a fact? Anger? There are objective physiological changes in hormones, brain waves, pulse, heart rste, blood pressure when I'm angry. I may strike out in anger at my 'enemy', which is violence...a fact. My beliefs and ideals may not be objective facts, but there is the fact that I hold beliefs and ideals. As I see it.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 30 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #33
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 639 posts in this forum Offline

Juan,

Can we keep it very simple, not jump all over the place? We’re not talking about “facts” in the context of a court case, a police investigation, a journalistic or scientific investigation, and so on.

We’re talking about understanding life - the facts of life - as we live it, aren't we? If not, what are we really talking about?
In order to understand life - the misery, the beauty, the love, the suffering, the pain, the fear, the pretense, the deceit - I must understand myself as I am in the moment, don’t I? The mind must understand itself, its functioning, its movements, its relationships. Which means observing “what is” inwardly and outwardly, and the relationship between the inner and the outer, no? These are the facts we’re talking about, aren’t they? What am I observing if not the inner (and outer) facts as they unfold?

I can say to you that, in my opinion, you have no reason to feel sad or happy but I can’t claim that what you’re feeling is not a fact. If someone is feeling pain or love, isn’t that a fact for him (or her)? There is no objective measure of what someone else is feeling, but I can certainly say that what I feel is a fact. Not for you, for me. No?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #34
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
We’re talking about understanding life - the facts of life - as we live it, aren't we? If not, what are we really talking about?

As we live it, yes. Am 'I' not afraid or worried at times? Doesn't anger arise when my desires are thwarted? We are feeling something, no?...when we get angry. That feeling itself is surely a fact. That's all I've been trying to say in reply to Juan. If I crave a cigarette, that attachment and the physical feeling are indeed facts. Didn't the Nazis have their warped belief that the Germans would be the master race? Wasn't the violence they perpetrated a fact? Their beliefs were a fact too...a perversion of the truth, yes, but the insane beliefs were indeed a fact. The fact of believing...no?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 30 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #35
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

but there is the fact that I hold beliefs and ideals.

The fact you're talking about is merely based on an intellectual/logical understanding of the actual fact, therefore it is not actually seen, but imagined that it is seen

Are there not thousands ...or millions...of people praying to their imagined God in Heaven? Am I imagining that millions go to church every Sunday because of belief?

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #36
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4651 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Is innocence a 'psychological' state?

Hmmm, perhaps not Tom. Perhaps it is the absence of psychological states.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #37
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4651 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
but the insane beliefs were indeed a fact. The fact of believing...no?

It is a fact that people hold beliefs, but the content of those beliefs are not facts (although the people who hold them think they are)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #38
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
The facts of life", as you call it, are not those imagined facts in which most of us base our understanding of life, and of ourselves and others ... When we actually see those imagined facts, there are no facts there,

(scratching my head here) There is no alcoholism or depression?? If you say "no....those are not facts", then it seems we're speaking a different language. Or we have a different understanding of what the word fact means, perhaps.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Jan 2018 #39
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
It is a fact that people hold beliefs, but the content of those beliefs are not facts (although the people who hold them think they are)

Yes, that's what I was trying to say.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 #40
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 639 posts in this forum Offline

#53:

Huguette . wrote:
We’re talking about understanding life

Juan E wrote:
It would be interesting to know what makes you think that i'm not doing the same!

Juan,

There are quite a few definitions of “fact”. I think you’re using a very narrow one which is not helpful or appropriate in terms of understanding the human being.

To maintain that feelings are not fact is an insurmountable obstacle to talking these things over among us, as far as I can see. Is my toothache not fact because it can’t be seen by you? I just don’t understand why you’re insisting on this. What does it clarify?

Are you suggesting that one should pretend that one is not feeling what one is feeling? Projections of the mind is part of what we are talking about, isn’t it? Projections of the mind are not ended by pretending they are not there or by replacing them with “new” projections, but by fully facing them. No?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 #41
Thumb_open-uri20180717-8420-135f99u-0 Mina Martini Finland 248 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Yes, it struck me yesterday that society (which is us of course) is always concerned with the EFFECTS of thought, and hardly ever on thought itself, the cause of all the effects. Solutions are looked for within the field of thought, and so the chaos continues.

Mina: Yes, it is one collective observer which is under the impression of the observed ('problems) being separate from it, and trying to change the observed/effect all the while not realising that it itself is both the cause and the effect, both the observer and the observed!

So, it is the totality of the mind, as the observer and the observed, that needs to be fully seen/understood, for the cause and effect to end.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Wed, 31 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 #42
Thumb_open-uri20180717-8420-135f99u-0 Mina Martini Finland 248 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Mina:For as long as we keep thinking about ourselves, (or about anything else) that long thought is creating a cover that prevents the direct seeing/being of what we already, timelessly, are.

Tom:Are you saying that we are not angry or confused...ambitious or greedy? That would be denying the obvious fact of our anger or fear, when in actuality we may be full of emotional conflict of some sort...and attachment, addiction, craving.

Mina: No, I am not saying that we cannot be angry or confused, ambitious or greedy or in any other state. But I am saying that facing such a state fully, embracing it, not being separate from it, understanding it fundamentally, can only happen in innocence, in not knowing, in total awareness. That understanding is energy without contradiction, and it is inward contradiction, division (observer/observed) that experiences states like the one you described, and not the innocence, not the understanding.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 #43
Thumb_open-uri20180717-8420-135f99u-0 Mina Martini Finland 248 posts in this forum Offline

Dear Dan,

Mina:>For as long as we keep thinking about ourselves, (or about anything else) that long thought is creating a cover that prevents the direct seeing/being of what we already, timelessly, are.

Dan:>The confusion that I'm seeing here is trying to bring two things together that are not compatible: The 'self' and 'Innocence'.

Mina: No, it is only thought/self that could try to bring two (or more) things together, as fragmentation is its very nature. So that is not what one is saying. Innocence, oneness, awareness, understanding (all words used as synonyms) has no content, no fragments in its essence to unite even. It is always only One.

Dan: The self can never 'become' Innocence, as it can never become Intelligence, or Love or Compassion etc. It is the ending of psychological thought that is Intelligence.

Mina: Yes. Seeing the self for what it is, IS innocence. Seeing the false with the eyes of what is true, is the transformation, the dissolution of the false.So, in essence there exist no two things at all, only one!

Dan: The 'self is the brain's false security blanket and as long as it is present, as K. has said, the "Other" (Innocence,Love, Compassion, Intelligence) cannot be.

Mina: Yes, because the absolute cannot co-exist with the limited, the relative.(mind) That is why the mind must be totally empty of content, the house immaculately clean, for an Honoured guest to arrive, or not. The mind is empty of all, any expectation and desire, of all its content. That is true intelligence, true innocence.

Dan: What I see is that the only way that thought can cease its 'craving' is for it to understand that what it wants and what it is searching for (as well as re-membering) is only a projection of the past, and can only be a projection of the past. The 'self'/thought/time is the 'known' and it can never 'know' or touch the 'unknown'.

Mina: Yes, to fully SEE this, without any activity of thought/known, is the transformation of the human consciousness.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Wed, 31 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 #44
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 639 posts in this forum Offline

repeat of #61, leaving out the toothache sentence.

Huguette . wrote:
We’re talking about understanding life

Juan E wrote:
It would be interesting to know what makes you think that i'm not doing the same!

Huguette . wrote:
Juan,
There are quite a few definitions of “fact”. I think you’re using a very narrow one which is not helpful or appropriate in terms of understanding the human being.

To maintain that feelings are not fact is an insurmountable obstacle to talking these things over among us, as far as I can see. I just don’t understand why you’re insisting on this. What does it clarify?

Are you suggesting that one should pretend that one is not feeling what one is feeling? Projections of the mind is part of what we are talking about, isn’t it? Projections of the mind are not ended by pretending they are not there or by replacing them with “new” projections, but by fully facing them. No?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Wed, 31 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 31 Jan 2018 #45
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 639 posts in this forum Offline

#65:

Juan E wrote:
If your toothache is a fact, you must accept also that God exist, because althought you can not see it it is a fact that it exist for a christian believer, what according to your reasoning, is enough to turn it into a fact ... In the same way, you must accept all and each one of the particular facts as facts ... Do you agree?

Are you saying that my toothache, or your toothache, is nothing but a belief?

This post was last updated by Huguette . Wed, 31 Jan 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 01 Feb 2018 #46
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
Huguette . wrote:

Are you saying that my toothache, or your toothache, is nothing but a belief?

Juan: Are all the toothaches suffered by each and every one of us in the same way? ... On what basis will we base ourselves then to say that toothache is a fact and not a simple subjective experience?

All trees and clouds are not the same either, but we can use the word 'tree' or 'cloud' to communicate the fact of a tree or cloud, right? Of course a toothache is also a fact. And who's to say that if you and I look at the identical cloud at the same time we are subjectively seeing the same cloud? Yet we call a cloud a 'cloud'. If there's an apple tree in my back yard, it's a fact there's an apple tree in my yard even though you and I are not subjectively seeing the same tree.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 01 Feb 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 01 Feb 2018 #47
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
. But I am saying that facing such a state fully, embracing it, not being separate from it, understanding it fundamentally, can only happen in innocence, in not knowing, in total awareness.

It may be so, Mina. Knowledge does seem to be the barrier(psychological knowledge, that is). But the human mind is full of knowledge...beliefs, ideals, etc. Can innocence somehow take hold in such a mind...can awareness?

Today's QOTD might shed some light on this issue:

"To be aware without choice, to be conscious of the many activities of the mind, its richness, its subtleties, its deceptions, its illusions, is to be intelligent."

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 01 Feb 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Feb 2018 #48
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2335 posts in this forum Offline

Juan E wrote:
No, we have simply given a name to a certain observed phenomenon and then we all accept that name as if it was the actual thing, what from then on will prevent us from seeing the actual phenomenon again, having separated ourselves from the actual phenomenon through the name

I understand, but that has nothing to do with the fact of the cloud...or the apple or the tree. If you were lost in the jungle and suddenly you came face to face with a tiger, I can assure you you'd be aware of the fact of the tiger. And perhaps you'd be aware of the fact of fear as well. If you were lost in the woods and hungry and came across a tree with tasty red fruit you'd be aware of the fact of the apple...and this even if you were unaware of the name of the fruit. Even without the name there is the fact of the apple. Not sure I want to go on with this. Perhaps someone else will share their view of what Juan and I have been discussing.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 31 - 48 of 48 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.)