Wed, 13 Jun 2018 | #1 |
---|---|
![]() |
After writing that I saw little point in trying to investigate into the matter of “The Ground of all things”, as described by K, I started to ask myself what WAS the basic issue of the human mind, the thing one really needs to be concerned with. The most immediate. And I came up with the answer “Conflict”. One could call it struggle, and also is it not in essence the same as “suffering”? But before starting on that, I felt, after reading the above messages, the issue of the inner and the outer needs to be addressed. It is my experience, that if I ever discuss, in “Krishnamurti circles” the problems facing the world at large – environmental, political, social – I am soon pulled up, and it is pointed out that the real issue is the human mind, or is ME. Well, of course that is true, but still it seems to me that it is necessary, important, to look at the world “out there” - knowing that it is not just “out there”. The inner and the outer are one – just how they are one is something that could be looked at – and need to be looked at as a joint phenomena. And not to be considered as faux pas to look outwards. Not just that, is it not distorting to limits one’s inquiry to that inner world? I don’t want to keep repeating phrases like “the inner is the outer”, “I am the world”, of course that is understood. Well, it may not be fully understood, that also can be examined. Is it really just an inner world? I don’t want to assume anything. Let me put it this way, because I might look outwards, through some news item, or what I see in the street, in others, does not automatically imply that I am not also looking inwards. I hope this can be understood, while examining the issue of “Does our daily life have to be one of constant struggle?” Also, I have debated over using a thread subject K’s words: “We are all caught in the idea of progress”. This seems to me the essence of struggle, of conflict. |
Back to Top |
Wed, 13 Jun 2018 | #2 |
---|---|
|
Clive, When you, I or any of us say things like: “What is this human mind that is capable of such infinite deception? [...] This is one thing we can do. Not be a hypocrite, not be dishonest with ourselves? We can face ourselves as we are, in the sense if we tell a lie, we can admit that we have told a lie” ... are we not separating ourselves from the hypocrites, even though we say “we” are doing it and “the human mind” is doing it? I’m not saying that I don’t see the hypocrisy in them. I don’t say that it doesn’t revolt and sadden me. It does. The greedy, the hard-hearted, the vengeful, are protecting themselves, aren’t they? So their behaviour is based on fear/self, isn’t it? That inner movement of division - fear/self - IS the movement of the stream, the world consciousness. It is the power of the stream carrying the mind along in its powerful current. There is no reasoning with fear. Fear/self denies its own existence, it lies, deceives, pretends. Either the brain in my skull is a party to the chaos or it is not. Either there is one human brain or there is not. Maybe after all the crisis is NOT in consciousness. Maybe none of these things are so. Maybe the old ways of moralizing, condemning, denouncing, fighting, violence - are the only "action" the human being can take to change things. It is one thing to see the horrors, the brutality, the hard-heartedness, the greed, the hypocrisy. One can - must - see “what is” - the horror, the beauty, the hate, the love. But is it necessary to condemn and judge? Or does seeing “what is” produce its own action? Is the crisis “out there”, or is it within? Am “I” qualitatively different from the bullies and dictators or not? Is the disorder within “my” brain and “their” brain essentially the same disorder or not? Is the enormous weight, power, momentum, force, movement of thousands of years of self - the stream - operating on the brain or not? If all this is NOT a fact, if seeing "what is" is not its own action, then I don't know what to do about what’s “out there”. Then I guess daily life DOES HAVE TO BE a struggle. Again, this is what K had to say .... but maybe after all he was mistaken:
And:
|
Back to Top |
Wed, 13 Jun 2018 | #3 |
---|---|
![]() |
This is the crux of it, isn’t it? We likely think we are. Trump and the Congress persons all lie. But in essence, is my consciousness different from theirs? We DO, most of us, feel that we are somehow more moral...more righteous...than the ones in power that we condemn. Of course we can take practical actions to attempt to make positive changes in society...to protect the environment, for example...to have fair pay and safe conditions for workers. That is far different than the name calling and divisiveness that has become so much a part of our public life in recent years. Well, even way back in the late 60’s and early seventies so called liberal protesters of the war in Vietnam were shouting “Pigs,” at the police and the right wing politicians. They had become just as violent as the ones they were protesting about....some were even making bombs, tragically. Most of us are not going to resort to bomb throwing, fortunately, but when there’s conflict in my daily life between me and my wife or neighbor, for example, I might very well see my point of view as the righteous one and condemn them for being wrong or inferior to myself....’qualitatively different’, to use your phrase, Huguette. The division in mankind is right there in my daily living. This doesn't mean that one shouldn't speak out about a politician's lies or greed or some other kind of gross deception. Just stating the fact that someone is lying ...or even that someone is insane (like a Hitler)...is not necessarily feeling that one is superior...better...more moral...righteous. One simply sees the fact that a Hitler or a Trump is lying....manipulating public opinion...intentionally deceiving. Let it Be This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 14 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 | #4 |
---|---|
![]() |
Even my optician lies to me. Yesterday I received a letter and on the back of the envelope were the words: “A special gift just for you” Inside was some “special offer” that must be applicable to everyone who had an eye test there recently. No, not “just for me”. And, I see that “politics” arises in me in human relationship. I may not lie, but the initial movement is there; from fear to avoid the fact of what I am at that moment. By deceit, by dodging, machinations, stratagems, artifices, But if there is awareness of these movements as they arise, they are negated; they may never actually express themselves |
Back to Top |
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 | #5 |
---|---|
![]() |
That is so beautiful. I guess I mean the instant, pure truth of it is beautiful. I don’t know why but it brings tears.
This is so strange. My intense response came immediately upon reading the first quote above; I did not read further. And later I go on to this second quote, and see that this is exactly what happened. The beauty of the truth of K’s words did “knock out my mind”.
I was composing a post on struggle, conflict, earlier this morning, and I was trying to express exactly this. Analysis might explain conflict, but it will in no way bring conflict to an end. |
Back to Top |
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 | #6 |
---|---|
![]() |
The last few days I was working on making a table for my gazebo built earlier this year.
"Holding on costs energy, letting go only a moment and falling to the ground is a natural phenomenon and that goes for all the knowledge you pick up when necessary and otherwise it will leave you alone .. Inside and outside is one unit!" Maybe you also have something about this insight, or is this a thought flash? But what does it matter, it was just an event! Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else. This post was last updated by Wim Opdam Thu, 14 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 | #7 |
---|---|
![]() |
I had to laugh at that one :) probably I shouldn’t laugh as this kind of advertisement is obviously deceit as you say, but it’s so a part of our culture that we normally don’t even notice it. Like the air we breathe! But thought itself is deceit, isn’t it, when it operates in the psychological realm? I’m deceiving myself all the time with my image of myself and my images of ‘you’ because the image is never the actuality. Let it Be This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 14 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Thu, 14 Jun 2018 | #8 |
---|---|
![]() |
And this is a terrible thing, isn't it, to get used to something? Get used to something beautiful so that we no longer notice it, get used to a relationship so that we take it for granted, get used to conflict, so that it wears us down with our being aware of it?
Yes, I take your point, Tom. So we live with - let us call it falseness, as deceit suggested some deliberate action - and we get used to that. |
Back to Top |
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 | #9 |
---|---|
![]() |
I was really puzzled as a child when I found out that TV commercials lied. It was quite a shock that they were doing that. Before that, I lived in blissful ignorance about this sort of thing. I can't even watch TV anymore. Haven't owned a TV for over 20 years...maybe 25. Not just because of the commercials, but the programs themselves, other than nature programs and documentaries, are for the most part unbearable for me to watch. I told a friend of my wife's that I never watch TV and she was really shocked. Let it Be This post was last updated by Tom Paine Fri, 15 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 | #10 |
---|---|
![]() |
To return to the issue of conflict, struggle. Because it seems to me to be at the very root of our being. I was suggesting, or asking, if one can look simultaneously at conflict in the outer world and in ourselves, and see it is the same movement. To see that they produce each other. It is beyond question that we have built a society firmly rooted in division and so conflict. Listen to the news at any time, it is account of conflict – often out and out warfare – between all the identifications mankind has made, as Greek, Jew, American, Muslim, Shia Muslim, Sunni Muslim, Extremests and Moderates, Conservatives and Socialists, Communists, ….. I could spend all day listing them. And then there are the divisions thought creates in each brain. This is what I have to deal with – but the very idea of “me” dealing with “it” is perhaps the very essence of conflict. Surely we HAVE to be free of conflict? It is an absolute necessity. K says that conflict dissipates the energy that we need for transformation. Conflict is confusion, contradiction. It is the very denial of a clear, still, mind. As we cannot pursue non-conflict, (pursuing anything psychologically implies more conflict), we have to understand conflict, don’t we? Which means what? I hesitate to use the word “accept”, but say not to resist it – resistance being yet another form of conflict. There has to be the determination – again, that is a word people might object to, but I will use it for now – the determination or intention to live with it, to just observe it. Conflict is there anyway, whether we like it or not, whether we accept it or not. I am talking about ACTION, and action now. Not ideas. Not something to be done in the future. And significantly, I find that once that intention is there – once the necessity of staying with conflict is seen – then change has already started. Will leave it there for now (I don’t mean leave staying with conflict there, that must go on all the time. I just mean reporting on it). Sorry if it is all very obvious - it is - but we have to DO it.
|
Back to Top |
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 | #11 |
---|---|
![]() |
Do we accept this as truth ? In reply #6 there is a description of a moment, an event not of conflict , but of passing by let it go. Not so long ago I WOULD have called myself stupid or clumsy giving my father credit for seeing me as such in manual activities.
That's very true, even this reply can be a source of debate. My mind still makes quantum leaps,
Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else. This post was last updated by Wim Opdam Fri, 15 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Fri, 15 Jun 2018 | #12 |
---|---|
![]() |
I am not quite sure that I understand you fully, Wim, but if you are saying that the movement of letting go, of surrender, of dying to the known, does not bring about conflict, then I would say that is so. But K's words are: "Everything we do brings conflict." Letting go is not something that we do, is it? Is it not a movement in a quite different direction altogether? It is not an action of will, it has no direction. Is it not the holding to a direction that contains the seeds of conflict? It might be interesting to into the question of every thing that we do bringing conflict.
But it doesn't have to be that way, does it? I can look at what you say, listen to you, without the interpretation of the past - the past being my conditioning. Then there is no argument. I might doubt something you say, and we can discuss it, but there does not have to be argument, does there? This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Sat, 16 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Sat, 16 Jun 2018 | #13 |
---|---|
![]() |
I also don't watch TV, although I watch documentaries on the internet. Often I cannot watch nature programs anymore, amazing as they often are, because of the knowledge that it all being destroyed. |
Back to Top |
Sat, 16 Jun 2018 | #14 |
---|---|
![]() |
That's just one part of the whole event and in that part you're right.
Another possibility could be that I would do it to overcome the perception of my family members that I was unable to do such a thing ! that would be a struggle ' I wanting to proof their image of me as wrong ' Also my image of them having such an image of me is part of that struggle'. But this was not the case, so no struggle !! so the seed is there without any energy to become alive. realizing afterwards that there is a kind of being proud of my work and thinking of my dad words and also those of my brothers in law and my own brothers (9 of them !) when i tried something like that in the past. Seeing that, is that a struggle.? It's very delicate to distinguish a border between the fysical and the psychological me/we and without knowledge of the K. Teaching that he is speaking of the psychological we do without mention it. So to take a part out of the whole can be the source of misinterpretation. It is a pitty that our language does not make this difference clear by using the same word with different meanings. Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else. |
Back to Top |
Sun, 17 Jun 2018 | #15 |
---|---|
![]() |
When one actually embarks on an inquiry – in this case into conflict – something unusual happens, I find. There is a certain energy – an energy I am tempted to call passion. There is a certain dropping away of the usual obstacles to inquiry.I think it is fair to say that, having determined to face what is, fear drops away. It is this dropping away of fear that releases the energy, perhaps. I think I can see why this is so. When one merely contemplates facing what is, it remains at the level of idea. It is something that one will do in the future. And whenever one imagines what will happen in the future, there is fear. Fear of failing, of not achieving. But when one actually embarks on the voyage, the future is irrelevant. The inquiry is NOW. You are facing the ACTUALITY of what is, now. Because it is not some prospect in the future, there is no fear involved, There is only the ……… intense interest to face what is, now. And this brings about the energy to inquire, to see what is. |
Back to Top |
Mon, 18 Jun 2018 | #16 |
---|---|
![]() |
You had written this in post # 2, Huguette, and I am turning to it now. I see that I used the word “we” three times. The very origin of the post was the seeing of the movement of hypocricy inside myself. So it is not obvious to me that I am separating myself from “them”, imagining some group “out there” who are hypocrites – sorry, I don’t want to creat images; better to refer to people who manifest hypocrital behavour. How else can I put it, Huguette? It is in essence “the human mind”, is it not? The stream. It would not be correct to describe states of being as peculiar to me, would it? That is as misleading as attributing things to “them”. Or are you referring to a more subtle level, where the mind is continually separating itself from its atributes? You also wrote:
Is it necessary to condemn/judge? It is certainly what the mind (me, if you prefer) strongly tends to DO, it is not clear that this movement is a necessity. In fact in order to seen things as they are, it is necessary NOT to judge and condemn, is it not? Both ourselves and others. And does this seeing produce its own action, you ask? A tentative “yes”. As you say, if it does not, there does not seem to be any other source of right action. I suppose belief has its own distorted form of “action”, perhaps better described as inaction, paralysis. But it is fragmented, and so not right action. |
Back to Top |
Mon, 18 Jun 2018 | #17 |
---|---|
|
I understand the difficulty very well, Clive, because I face the same difficulty. I’m just saying that when I get angry at others, blame others for the state of the world, blame the horrors all around on the hypocrisy, fear or cruelty I see in others, I’m avoiding the primary causes, which are within “me”, and my action of blaming, criticizing, denouncing - is incomplete action. It festers, it solves nothing. In doing so, in that too, I am the world. I once again take the liberty of quoting K, right or wrong:
The quote is taken from POONA 2ND PUBLIC TALK 10TH SEPTEMBER 1958 http://jiddu-krishnamurti.net/en/1958/1958-09-1... This post was last updated by Huguette . Mon, 18 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 | #18 |
---|---|
![]() |
You use the word "blame" here, Huguette. When I read through - usually plough through - the "comments columns" that sometimes follow news articles, about 90% of the comments consist of blaming others - political parties, particular politicians, big business, the capitalist system, other people on the thread, etc etc - and of course this does avoid the primary cause of all human problems. And blaming others has become, perhaps always has been, the principle activity of those politicians. And of the husband, the wife, the parent, the child, all of us in essence. You might say it is what I m doing now, in fact. But from "My point of view", I am seeing the facts, seeing what is. One thing is sure - it gets nowhere, it resolves nothing. Worse than that, it diverts attention from where attention needs to be. There is no question that "I am the world". But, as I just wrote to Tom, there is no awareness of that fact at the moment the "I" emerges from the world, from the The Stream. At least that is how it appears to me. Awareness may come a moment later, but this is then not complete action, it is the incomplete action that you mention. Have you any comment on this? I will read the quote you have posted. |
Back to Top |
Tue, 19 Jun 2018 | #19 |
---|---|
|
Clive, I’m certainly not suggesting that one should pretend not to see what one sees and not to feel what one feels. I’m not advocating hypocrisy! :o) Of course, I can’t help but see what I see and feel what I feel. Seeing brutality, kindness, injustice, etc., and feeling pain, joy, sorrow, beauty, love, pleasure, hate, etc. - happens immediately, effortlessly. But sorrow, as I see it, is not the action of conditioning, it is not reaction, not conditioned. K says sorrow is rooted in self. That’s something I don’t understand. It doesn’t seem that way to me. I see suffering, self-pity, as self-centredness, but not sorrow ... or switch the words around. The point is I see 2 essentially different movements, coming from 2 different places. When I see children ripped from their parents’ arms at the border, the bombings, human trafficking, prisoners stuffed like sardines into cells, people toiling in harsh conditions for an unsustainable wage, brutality and injustice of all sorts, including indifference, there is immediate sorrow ... and THEN anger, it seems to me. Maybe someone can help me out with this. The futility, danger, toxicity and divisiveness of anger, I understand. But how can one see the pain inflicted by greed and selfishness upon the vulnerable and NOT feel hurt by it? I see no self-centred motive of self-protection in this. Perhaps this question can only be answered by the mind which discovers “that which is everlasting”, which this particular mind ("me") certainly has not. Does the mind which discovers “that which is everlasting” NOT feel pain when it sees cruelty? What is clear is that as long as the mind is confused, fragmented, conflicted, whatever action it chooses to take is bound to contribute to the problem. What is clear is that there is no answer to be found in the known. To repeat (sorry for that):
This post was last updated by Huguette . Tue, 19 Jun 2018.
Sign in to recommend
This post has been recommended by
1 reader
|
Back to Top |
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 | #20 |
---|---|
![]() |
Of that I am sure, Huguette. Of course, I can’t help but see what I see and feel what I feel. Seeing brutality, kindness, injustice, etc., and feeling pain, joy, sorrow, beauty, love, pleasure, hate, etc. - happens immediately, effortlessly. But sorrow, as I see it, is not the action of conditioning, it is not reaction, not conditioned. K says sorrow is rooted in self. That’s something I don’t understand. It doesn’t seem that way to me. I see suffering, self-pity, as self-centredness, but not sorrow ... or switch the words around. The point is I see 2 essentially different movements, coming from 2 different places. C: It is my understanding, my memory, that K does distinguish between “two sorts of sorrow” He does talk of sorrow as self pity, and clearly this is a reaction of the self. K asks if you are suffering because someone close to you has died, are you feeling for that person, or are you feeling for your own loss? But K also talks of a greater sorrow, a sorrow because of the state of the human race, its great inhumanity, as you go on to describe, and its great suffering. This perception, I think, is beyond self concern; or nothing to do with self. If I come across a quote on this, I will share it, but I have an appointment soon. When I see children ripped from their parents’ arms at the border, the bombings, human trafficking, prisoners stuffed like sardines into cells, people toiling in harsh conditions for an unsustainable wage, brutality and injustice of all sorts, including indifference, there is immediate sorrow ... and THEN anger, it seems to me. Maybe someone can help me out with this C: You feel what you feel, Huguette. Do we have to justify our feelings? Do they have to be approved of or disapproved of? One would have to be insensitive indeed to see these horrors and not feel deeply moved by them. The futility, danger, toxicity and divisiveness of anger, I understand. But how can one see the pain inflicted by greed and selfishness upon the vulnerable and NOT feel hurt by it? I see no self-centred motive of self-protection in this. C: you appear to be equating anger and hurt, here, which I do not understand. In fact I do not understand this use of the word “hurt”. Is not hurt always associated with an image of oneself, which gets deflated? But perhaps you are saying anger is a reaction to hurt, which I do understand. Perhaps this question can only be answered by the mind which discovers “that which is everlasting”, which this particular mind ("me") certainly has not. Does the mind which discovers “that which is everlasting” NOT feel pain when it sees cruelty? What is clear is that as long as the mind is confused, fragmented, conflicted, whatever action it chooses to take is bound to contribute to the problem. What is clear is that there is no answer to be found in the known. Yes, Huguette, that becomes clearer and clearer. There is no answer to be found in the known. The known is a vast escape |
Back to Top |
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 | #21 |
---|---|
![]() |
Strangely I was talking this over with a friend last night. Part of a deeper inquiry that had come to me concerning regret over things I had done in my life. The friend said that “you could not help it. You were not to blame. You were following your conditioning”. Perhaps that was so, I was lost in my own desires, my own pursuits, I did not see the harm I might be doing to others. But it came to me that now in my life there is a certain awareness of inner movements. In fact now “I cannot help” but see my motives, I cannot help but be aware of the greater picture. If I proceed with a destructive action in spite of this awareness, THEN I am at fault, then I am to blame. |
Back to Top |
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 | #22 |
---|---|
![]() |
Clive: But K also talks of a greater sorrow, a sorrow because of the state of the human race, its great inhumanity, as you go on to describe, and its great suffering. This perception, I think, is beyond self concern; or nothing to do with self. If I come across a quote on this, I will share it, but I have an appointment soon. Yes, I first felt this as a young child when I felt deep sorrow in my mother. I was a typical carefree child, but feeling this sorrow in her, it became my own sorrow. A few years later when first viewing a newsreel on TV about the Holocaust I felt such overwhelming sorrow that I felt I was trapped in a living nightmare. Viewing the immeasurable horror and suffering of the victims, it became my own immeasurable sorrow. Let it Be |
Back to Top |
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 | #23 |
---|---|
![]() |
Blamed by who? The one who says, “you should act with awareness”? That’s surely not awareness to blame. Let it Be This post was last updated by Tom Paine Thu, 21 Jun 2018. |
Back to Top |
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 | #24 |
---|---|
![]() |
Ok, that was a poor choice of words. Let us stick with "I am at fault". Or I am responsible. |
Back to Top |
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 | #25 |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Back to Top |
Thu, 21 Jun 2018 | #26 |
---|---|
![]() |
"A living nightmare" is an apt description of the world we have created. |
Back to Top |
Fri, 22 Jun 2018 | #27 |
---|---|
![]() |
To end sorrow is to face the fact of one's loneliness, one's attachment, one's petty little demand for fame, one,s hunger to be loved; it is to be free of self-concern arid the puerility of self-pity. And when one has gone beyond all that and has perhaps ended one's personal sorrow, there is still the immense collective sorrow, the sorrow of the world. One may end one's own sorrow by facing in oneself the fact and the cause of sorrow - and that must take place for a mind that would be completely free. But when one has finished with all that, there is still the sorrow of extraordinary ignorance that exists in the world - not the lack of information, of book knowledge, but man's ignorance of himself. The lack of understanding of oneself is the essence of ignorance, which brings about this immensity of sorrow that exists throughout the world. And what actually is sorrow? Saanen 1962 talk 7 |
Back to Top |
Fri, 22 Jun 2018 | #28 |
---|---|
![]() |
Most of us are conditioned to have a certain sense of kindness, of fairness and when we see the things you say happening to others, we suffer for them. We feel their pain to a degree. It is 'compassion' but maybe you would agree that it is limited in each us depending on our history, background, experience, etc. The SS officer who explained why the children had to be killed because "they have jewish blood in them and when they grow up they could be a threat" obviously lacked any compassion regarding them though he may give up his life for his own children or those of other nazis. The 'self' to one degree or another with its beliefs, ideals, morals etc. is separative, divisive. Its attachments are selective. It is the impediment to true Compassion which is not separative. The self is the source of sorrow because it is always limited,'disturbed', always trying to maintain a balance between its pleasures and its pains and its fears. K.-"The ending of sorrow is the bliss of Compassion". |
Back to Top |
Fri, 22 Jun 2018 | #29 |
---|---|
|
I don't think that the pain we feel when we see a child - our child or another child - in pain, or the pain of the man struggling 16 hours a day in dangerous, uncomfortable conditions to feed his family the bare necessity, and so on and on .... I don't think that this inner movement of compassion is learned behaviour, a conditioned reaction. Compassion to me is spontaneous suffering with another, feeling another's pain. Like love, compassion is not related to thought, is not a movement of thought. The Nazi guard, the slave master - I think that their heard-heartedness IS learned behaviour, conditioning. If the ending of sorrow is the bliss of compassion, then it sounds as if compassion is something that is sought in order to end "my" sorrow, which sounds like the essence of selfishness or self-centredness. I won't try to convince you of any of this if you see it differently. In any case, this issue of compassion - feeling the pain of other human beings and animals - is one I must leave aside since I don't understand it, I can't make sense of it. I can't do anything about it, just as I cannot do anything about conditioning. The issue of this suffering still does NOT take away from or invalidate the absolute logic (to me) and truth of what K says about the processes of the mind. |
Back to Top |
Fri, 22 Jun 2018 | #30 |
---|---|
![]() |
Right...feeling another's pain is surely not learned. It's part of what makes us human. Perhaps even animals do this to some extent...at least some of the other mammalian species. My horror when watching a newsreel of the Nazi Holocaust as a young child was not learned. I never experienced such a thing before, nor heard of it! The horror was overwhelming...and outside of the thinking mechanism. Prior to that I had a happy childhood. Let it Be |
Back to Top |
Not a member yet? Create an Account