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

All one inquiry


Displaying posts 421 - 450 of 470 in total
Wed, 03 Apr 2019 #421
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Can thought cease to regard itself as "a true copy of reality as it is"?

What would be the 'trigger' (insight) for bringing that realization about after all these thousands of years?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 03 Apr 2019 #422
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Bending over my laptop keyboard and typing aggravates the issue unfortunately.

Can you keep a straight back when typing?

This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Thu, 04 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Apr 2019 #423
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Can thought cease to regard itself as "a true copy of reality as it is"?

When I project a 'disagreeable' event in the future, the reaction is to not want that event to take place. Then there is 'suffering' what I call 'dread', or 'worry' or 'fear'... But if the projection is of an agreeable event, there is not a 'suffering' but a 'warm' feeling of anticipation. I avoid the first as much as possible and welcome the second...so the question is, what is this process of 'projection'? Is that a part of thought's 'false' copy of reality that it cannot cease to 'project' Time (a linear 'time' of past/present/future) of things/events that have taken place (memory), are taking place (so called present) or might take place (future) psychologically)?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Thu, 04 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 04 Apr 2019 #424
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
so the question is, what is this process of 'projection'? Is that a part of thought's 'false' copy of reality that it cannot cease to 'project'

What has it got to do with reality? Is it not merely a projection of thought, with no connection to reality at all? It is simply an act of imagination, is it not?

Obviously that projection is based on our 'knowledge', our conditioning, on the past. But why do we project at all?, you are asking. Good question.There is certainly something compulsive about the process, something neurotic.

It seems to be something to do with trying to make the self safe, invulnerable. For all time. Overwhelmingly, this seems to be the preoccupation of the brain. Throughout the day we are thinking of ourselves, occupied with ourselves (the things we have identified with). And mostly this process brings neither happiness or security, it brings fear and worry, insecurity.

This is the very nature of the self, is it not? This is part of the package it comes in, along with the pleasure.

Can it end? One has to examine possible motives behind that question.

This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Thu, 04 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #425
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
What has it got to do with reality? Is it not merely a projection of thought, with no connection to reality at all? It is simply an act of imagination, is it not?

It is that, a form of image making but isn't this 'projection (operation) of thought' what we take as our 'reality'?..And isn't it a false one?

Clive Elwell wrote:
Obviously that projection is based on our 'knowledge', our conditioning, on the past.

What is not obvious to me is that it is the 'reality' that I take each day as real.

Clive Elwell wrote:
It seems to be something to do with trying to make the self safe, invulnerable. For all time. Overwhelmingly, this seems to be the preoccupation of the brain. Throughout the day we are thinking of ourselves, occupied with ourselves (the things we have identified with). And mostly this process brings neither happiness or security, it brings fear and worry, insecurity.

And also 'pleasure'. Sometimes great pleasure. It occurred to me today that the whole business of psychology and psychiatry is to 'shore up' the defenses of the 'self'. To keep the 'self' on an 'even keel'...We are exploring here the 'ending' of the self, not keeping it 'happy'.

Clive Elwell wrote:
Can it end? One has to examine possible motives behind that question.

Well it must end if there is to be 'freedom' (true reality) and K has been pretty explicit that psychological thought must end. If it doesn't end, then we stay imprisoned in its false reality until death. No?

K: Must you not be conscious, deeply aware of the process of ignorance, want, which is creating further want and so ever engendering fear and illusion? When you really begin to be aware of this process, that very awareness is meditation, not the artificial meditation for a few minutes of the day in which you withdraw from life to contemplate life. We think that by withdrawing from life, even for a minute, we shall understand life. To understand life we must be in the flow of life, in the movement of life. We must be cognizant of the process of ignorance, want and fear, for we are that very process itself.

Ommen Camp 6th public talk 1936
(bold is mine)

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 05 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #426
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
The “numbness involved” is the self!

Can you expand a little on this, Tom.

Perhaps I was to general, too vague in saying thinking about things brings about numbness. But it seems to have truth in it. I think we do not feel strongly, completely, because thought is always there with its explanations and justifications.

Is 'numbness' insensitivity, or is there a difference? Clearly we "get used to things", and we "put up with things" We get used to the world being as it is, although actually it is an utterly insane place. So violent, brutal, so full of individual suffering, so lacking in love and compassion, on the verge of collapse. Sometimes I see this, rather less times I feel it strongly - but am I basically suffering from this numbness disease?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #427
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2457 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

Bending over my laptop keyboard and typing aggravates the issue unfortunately.

Can you keep a straight back when typing?

Testing this now on my laptop. It's probably an issue to do with my desk chair which doesn't make typing comfortable for my back. So I think I'm mostly going to be using my iPad. It's a shame that the site isn't more iOS friendly. I suppose it's a lot of extra work to make it work with all operating systems. The site works fine with windows and probably macs. I think Android was a little better than iOS with the site, if I recall correctly, but there were issues. iOS seems to be the worst as far as the quoting function being very erratic. Mostly it doesn't work at all. Even doing copy and paste more than one time in any one message is impossible. That's something I often want to be able to accomplish....it's a substitute for double quoting but it's freaking impossible on my iPad. I've found a fairly comfortable typing position for the moment ....going to see how it goes today. On my laptop because I have to finish up my income taxes soon.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #428
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2457 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

The “numbness involved” is the self!

Can you expand a little on this, Tom.

It's all the actions of 'me' that contribute to the numbness, I think I was trying to point out. Yes, of course, 'thinking about things', is one aspect of 'me'.

Clive Elwell wrote:
We get used to the world being as it is, although actually it is an utterly insane place. So violent, brutal, so full of individual suffering, so lacking in love and compassion, on the verge of collapse. Sometimes I see this, rather less times I feel it strongly - but am I basically suffering from this numbness disease?

Yes, to the part in bold. I feel that a lot lately. But my pursuit of pleasure is another aspect of 'me' contributing here to the numbness. I get involved in my hobby or my favorite movie and I escape. Escapes are so easy to find in modern society...unless we are poor and suffering. But today in the West, even the poor have their addiction to TV and all the insane escapist programming....the sports, the endless mostly dumb comedies, the exciting adventure movies, and so on. BTW, I just used the double quoting feature here in this message using my Windows laptop, but cannot do it at all on my iPad. I cannot even do a double copy and paste in one message. That's perhaps the most frustrating part of trying to reply to posts here on an iPad or iPhone. I tend to do double quotes almost every time I reply to a message of any length.

Is 'numbness' insensitivity, or is there a difference? Clearly we "get used to things", and we "put up with things"

I'm recalling now how very strongly I reacted to being forced to sit still in the school classroom as a young child and listen all day long to the teacher trying to teach. It was a very uncomfortable situation for most of us kids I think, but we were forced to do it. Most of us had no choice in the matter. I'm sure K schools were very different. But we here in the US in the standard public schools suffered a LOT. I'm not exaggerating. Most kids hated this enforced imprisonment. So perhaps we learn to become numb....to not feel the pain so acutely.....to day dream about all the fun we're going to have on the week end...on Christmas vacation...to fantasize about sports or think about some exciting movie we saw.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Fri, 05 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #429
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I'm recalling now how very strongly I reacted to being forced to sit still in the school classroom as a young child and listen all day long to the teacher trying to teach. It was a very uncomfortable situation for most of us kids I think, but we were forced to do it. Most of us had no choice in the matter.

I think that there is something to be looked at in the way that I am able to psychologically recall past events, pleasant or unpleasant, react to them and then move on...It's uniquely human I guess to bring up the past or imagine the future and have it totally dominate the 'actual' present. The remembered past as well as the imagined future are illusions, (electrical phenomena?)..they don't actually exist but while being re-experienced they have the illusion of 'reality', that we are re-living them. And 'sandwiched' between the two there is this 'present' which is also an 'illusion'? Is that what Bohm is getting at, that we never actually experience anything but this false reality of past, present and future...when in (true?) 'reality' there is psychologically only, always, the immediate, timeless Now?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 05 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #430
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
It's a shame that the site isn't more iOS friendly.

I am fairly certain that it would be of no use to ask Dev to update the site at the moment. He and I have discussed this in the past.

This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Fri, 05 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #431
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Is that what Bohm is getting at, that we never actually experience anything but this false reality of past, present and future

Irrespective of what Bohm was saying, it seems to me this is true. Can we say "thought can only think about itself"?

Our memories are what? Memories of our experiences, no? But what is "an experience"? It is not an experience of reality, is it? It is a record of how we (the brain) reacted to some circumstance, some challenge, is it not? I suggest that the record is made after the brain has somehow processed the challenge, the stimulus. it is part of knowledge, not reality. And we processed the experience based on our previous knowledge. I think science bears this out.

So are we not caught up in a self-enclosed prison of our own knowledge?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #432
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

So what does it mean, not to be numb?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 05 Apr 2019 #433
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote #425 :
It is that, a form of image making but isn't this 'projection (operation) of thought' what we take as our 'reality'?..And isn't it a false one?

As I experience it, the projection of thought is the thought I am having NOW, and yes, it carries a sort of absolute reality. It is saying something, and that something reigns supreme, there is nothing to challenge its reality - nothing until the next thought reacts to it. This next thought may appear to challenge its predecessor, but now this next thought is in the same situation as the former. It now carries a sort of absolute reality, it reigns supreme - until challenged by the next thought.

So we exist in a series of apparently 'absolute realities'- which really are not. They are just thought, conditioned thought.

Perhaps this can only be seen when it is clear that the thinker is the thought?

Dan McDermott wrote:
It occurred to me today that the whole business of psychology and psychiatry is to 'shore up' the defenses of the 'self'. To keep the 'self' on an 'even keel'...We are exploring here the 'ending' of the self, not keeping it 'happy'.

Yes, to create a "better self", "stronger self". The assumption seems to be that a stronger self suffers less. I would say this is futile. I don't know, perhaps it is necessary in the case of extreme mental illnesses. But hard to say who is, and who is not, suffering from that.

Dan McDermott wrote:
If it doesn't end, then we stay imprisoned in its false reality until death. No?

That is not a pleasant prospect. And maybe it continues AFTER death? K does suggest this at times. Unless we "step out of it" while living.

K wrote:
To understand life we must be in the flow of life, in the movement of life. We must be cognizant of the process of ignorance, want and fear, for we are that very process itself.

Does this imply that there must be no illusion that there is a me separate from the flow?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Apr 2019 #434
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Does this imply that there must be no illusion that there is a me separate from the flow?

That to me seems the most difficult thing.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Apr 2019 #435
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
So are we not caught up in a self-enclosed prison of our own knowledge?

Yes.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Apr 2019 #436
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
So what does it mean, not to be numb?

Probably, no 'words' to describe it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Apr 2019 #437
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2457 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Clive Elwell wrote:

So are we not caught up in a self-enclosed prison of our own knowledge?

Yes.

If we really saw that as a fact, would we move at all 'psychologically'...in the realm of becoming? If we saw that any movement is just re-decorating the prison? Just questioning...

K wrote:

To understand life we must be in the flow of life, in the movement of life. We must be cognizant of the process of ignorance, want and fear, for we are that very process itself.

Clive: Does this imply that there must be no illusion that there is a me separate from the flow?

This touches on the point about the 'prison' above.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Apr 2019 #438
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
So are we not caught up in a self-enclosed prison of our own knowledge?

Dan: Yes.

Tom: If we really saw that as a fact, would we move at all 'psychologically'...in the realm of becoming? If we saw that any movement is just re-decorating the prison? Just questioning...

Dan: You would think that upon seeing what thought is doing that it would stop, wouldn't you? And if it didn't 'stop' that would be a sort of proof that it hadn't really seen what it was doing. All or nothing? A one-shot deal...Maybe... I don't know. But given the numbness of the thought/self to a 'system' that it itself has devised and that it has maintained for thousands of years, it might take quite a bit of 'de-numbing' before it realizes that it's in the wrong place and has made a terrific mess of things. So as I see it now, 'intellectual'clarity about what is 'wrong' is essential, the minimum. We can only see in ourselves 'how' it operates, the pain and grief (as well as pleasure) that it brings about. 'Insight' may or may not come about but if and 'when' thought actually realizes that its continuing movement is the only 'problem', then it 'may' cease. All unknowns. 'Time' is the problem and Thought IS time. It can never enter the 'Timeless' is the way I understand it. It must, as K. has said, "have a stop".

K.: "And walking on that road, there was complete emptiness of the brain, and the mind was free of all experience, the knowing of yesterday, though a thousand yesterdays have been. Time, the thing of thought, had stopped; literally there was no movement before and after; there was no going or arriving or standing still. Space as distance was not; there were the hills and bushes but not as high and low. There was no relationship with anything but there was an awareness of the bridge and the passer-by. The totality of the mind, in which is the brain with its thoughts and feelings, was empty; and because it was empty, there was energy, a deepening and widening energy without measure. All comparison, measurement belong to thought and so to time. The otherness was the mind without time; it was the breath of innocence and immensity. Words are not reality; they are only means of communication but they are not the innocence and the immeasurable. The emptiness was alone."

Krishnamurti's Notebook | 20th October to 20th November 1961

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 06 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Apr 2019 #439
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Words are not reality; they are only means of communication

So why is it so difficult to realise this? Realise in the sense "make real, actual". Why is it so difficult for the words to realise their own nature?

Seems the whole world is caught in illusion of words being truth.

But a better question is: Can words realise their own illusion.

Some words of K come to mind. These are not verbatim, just the sense of them. Something like, if I see thought, it just carries on the problem, but if thought sees itself, it comes to an end.

Can anyone supply the exact quote?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 06 Apr 2019 #440
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Just drawing attention to today's QOTD

He said he had read a great deal, and you could see from the books in the library that he had all the latest authors. He spoke about spiritual mysticism and the craze for drugs that was seeping over the land. He was a rich, successful man, and behind him was emptiness and the shallowness that can never be filled by books, by pictures, or by the knowledge of the trade.

The sadness of life is this - the emptiness that we try to fill with every conceivable trick of the mind. But that emptiness remains. Its sadness is the vain effort to possess. From this attempt comes domination and the assertion of the me, with its empty words and rich memories of things that are gone and never will come back. It is this emptiness and loneliness that isolating thought breeds and keeps nourished by the knowledge it has created.

It is this sadness of vain effort that is destroying man.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 07 Apr 2019 #441
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

David Bohm had written:

I regard the essence of the notion of process as given by the statement: Not only is everything changing, but all is flux. That is to say, 'what is' is the process of becoming itself, while all objects, events, conditions, structures, etc, are forms that can be abstracted from this process.

To return to this matter of the Universe – which presumably includes us – being, according to David Bohm, being in “constant flux”, I said that I had not understood, or misunderstood, the phrase “'what is' is the process of becoming itself “. I said I was in the habit of thinking about ‘becoming’ only in terms of ‘becoming something’. Since then I came across several references in K words, speaking in South America in 1935, which I would like to share.

When you begin to discover the true significance of the values that you have built about yourself, when the mind and heart free themselves from fear which has created doctrines, beliefs, ideals, which are continually impeding you, then there is fulfilment, the flow of reality.

.

When there is the flow of action which is intelligence, then life is a continual becoming without the conflict of choice.

.

Perfection is the action, the continual flow of reality, not as an absolute objective to which you are progressing through innumerable experiences, memories, lessons, suffering. To understand this flow of life, mind must be entirely free from finalities, from certainties, which are but the outcome of the desire for self protection.

.

These memories act as a self-defensive warning, as a guide against life to help you avoid suffering. So most of our memories are self protective reactions against intelligence, against life. When a mind is free from all these self-protective reactions, memories, then there is the full movement of life, of reality.

.

If you will think over this, if your mind is aware of its own creations, then you will discern how you have established for yourself guides, values, which are but memories, as a protection against the incessant movement of life. A man that is enslaved to self-protective memories cannot understand life, nor be in love with life. His action towards life is the action of self-defence. His mind is so enclosed that the swift movements of life cannot enter it. He searches out eternity, immortality, away from life, the eternal, the immortal, and so he lives in a continual series of illusions. To such a man, whose consciousness is bound by memories, there can never be the eternal becoming of life.

.

You are used to the idea that the ego, the "I", is something that endures and lasts forever. The ego is nothing but a series of memories. What are you? A form, a name, with certain prejudices. qualities, hopes and fears. (Laughter) And through it all, through these limitations, there is a something which is not yours and mine, which is eternal. That is ever becoming, that is true. You cannot measure it by words or know it through explanations. That is to be realized through the liberating process of action. The mere inquiry into God, life, truth or whatever name you may give to it, indicates the desire to escape from the present, from the conflict of ignorance. Ignorance exists when the mind is but the storehouse of accumulative, self-protective memories, which is the "I" consciousness. This limited consciousness hinders the perception, the realization of that eternal becoming, the movement of life.

.

The highlighting is all mine. Sorry if all these quotes are seen as 'overkill', but I don't think so.If anyone wants the exact references I would be happy to supply them.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 08 Apr 2019 #442
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:

Clive: Does this imply that there must be no illusion that there is a me separate from the flow?

Dan: That to me seems the most difficult thing.

And yet a crucial thing. And is it only difficult when one has turned it into an ideal to be achieved?

Probably we have all experienced that state when there is only the flow, only flux. Which is to say, is it not?, that there is no separation between the thinker and the thought, the observer and the observed? If only for fleeting moments. A state of no conflict. It came to me yesterday, in the middle of a searching dialogue.

Dan, you asked some days ago what is the "trigger" that releases this flow. But it seems to me more illuminating to ask what is the factor, or factors, that deny this effortless state of flux? Why does the mind deal in 'things', in fixed concepts, static images?

It comes to me that the culprit is experience. Or putting it more broadly, time.

As K has put it:

Experience is the soil in which thought grows.

Experience leaves a mark on the mind, which is memory. These marks - I think they can be called wounds - become fixed points, and prevent the natural flow of the mind. The mind has accumulated, acquired, and that is a static state.

So the basic problem seems to be, can the mind be free of its accumulated experience? Which means, does it not, can the mind be free of psychological knowledge? Of course experience is necessary in a certain field.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 08 Apr 2019 #443
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
So the basic problem seems to be, can the mind be free of its accumulated experience? Which means, does it not, can the mind be free of psychological knowledge? Of course experience is necessary in a certain field.

Yes experience, knowledge is necessary in certain fields...but doesn't the idea or concept that we have "accumulated experience" and that that is a "problem"; doesn't that idea create a desire or 'ideal', to 'solve' that problem, to get rid of all that accumulation, and not accumulate any more... in order to be "free"? Doesn't that bring 'time' into play: I'm not free now but I 'will' be, if the mind can "be free of psychological knowledge"....tricky! But how do I 'know' that I'm not free? Do I have a concept of freedom as something other than what I am? Am I trying to 'become' something other than I am?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Mon, 08 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 08 Apr 2019 #444
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2457 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Yes experience, knowledge is necessary in certain fields...but doesn't the idea or concept that we have "accumulated experience" and that that is a "problem"; doesn't that idea create a desire or 'ideal', to 'solve' that problem, to get rid of all that accumulation, and not accumulate any more... in order to be "free"?

But can't we actually perceive the limitation of psychological knowledge and experience and the danger of that acting? Don't we see the danger of 'shoulds' and should nots? It's not a matter of trying to be free of anything but of understanding what actually is...the psychological knowledge and its effect as it operates in our life....as it's happening....observing how images divide psychologically and in the 'outer' world in relationships. I've accumulated a lot of knowledge about Blacks or Muslims...good or bad. Obviously that effects my relationships. That's an obvious example of accumulated experience,but there are countless more subtle ones going on all the time in relationships. We try to emulate countless accumulated experiences too, don't we...in order to gain fulfillment or acceptance from the society...our peers? There's an insane desire for status that I've observed among teens and young people here where I live. They identify with certain hip hop or pop stars or star athletes and try to dress and act like them....even paying hundreds of dollars for a brand name of sneakers to be looked up to. Can you imagine, people look up to someone who has all the right clothing styles....the brand names...Nike or what have you? Young people are constantly trying to achieve status. When I was young this was called being 'cool'. Of course you and Clive may be referring to some much more subtle behavior....but is it fundamentally different?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 08 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 08 Apr 2019 #445
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Young people are constantly trying to achieve status. When I was young this was called being 'cool'. Of course you and Clive may be referring to some much more subtle behavior....but is it fundamentally different?

I'd say no difference, only of degree of subtlety ...What is this need to 'impress'? The other apes may do it when 'courting' or when vying for the 'top spot' but we seem to have become obsessed with it and carried it to ridiculous extremes. Huxley's book 'Ape and Essence' just came to mind...Along with this need to impress, to 'stand out' there's also this need to 'experience'. What is that about? And there's no end to supply that, every imaginable thing is available out there to satisfy the desire to 'experience'. And yet no matter what form of pleasure, entertainment, knowledge, excitement, we come up with, it never seems to 'satisfy'...the killing goes on, the greed, the lack of compassion, etc. I'm not saying that it 'should' be different, it is what it is.

Tom Paine wrote:
But can't we actually perceive the limitation of psychological knowledge and experience and the danger of that acting?

It seems as if we can but if I make a judgement about it, the 'judger' is the one making it. If I compare the 'saint' to the 'sinner' and side with the saint that comparison is being made with the 'values' of the 'self'. Damned if you 'do' and damned if you 'don't'?

From today's QOTD:

K (...) To say, 'I do not know what is true, but this is false,' is surely the only true denial because that denial is not out of calculated knowledge, not out of reaction. After all, if you know what your denial is leading to, then it is merely an exchange, a thing of the marketplace, and therefore it is not true denial at all.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Mon, 08 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 09 Apr 2019 #446
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Yes experience, knowledge is necessary in certain fields...but doesn't the idea or concept that we have "accumulated experience" and that that is a "problem"; doesn't that idea create a desire or 'ideal', to 'solve' that problem, to get rid of all that accumulation, and not accumulate any more... in order to be "free"? Doesn't that bring 'time' into play:

Yes, I would say that ALL psychological accumulation, experience, is a problem. It is the very basis of problems. And that very statement could be become a problem, if accumulated, if turned into a conclusion or an ideal. Any statement, any description, any idea, any insight, can become a problem, a source of contradiction. They add to the weight of the past. Because as we have touched upon, life is actually a continuous flow, and static conclusions deny this flow.

How the mind tends to work is by turning “knowing” into “knowledge”.

Thought is a tool. It works well as a tool, to be taken up as needed, and let go of as soon as it has fulfilled its purpose. In saying that I am not implying that there is a wielder of the tool of thought, separate from thought. Can intelligence be the wielder? And does intelligence leave a trace in the mind? Does it form a concept? Because concepts of freedom, concepts of intelligence, concepts of me, of love, etc, are not the real thing. They are not reality. This must be seen, and the seeing allowed to act.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 09 Apr 2019 #447
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
I'm not saying that it 'should' be different, it is what it is.

I would both say that it should be different, but it is what it is.

Dan McDermott wrote:
K (...) To say, 'I do not know what is true, but this is false,' is surely the only true denial because that denial is not out of calculated knowledge, not out of reaction. After all, if you know what your denial is leading to, then it is merely an exchange, a thing of the marketplace, and therefore it is not true denial at all.

Yes, wonderful quote.

The only "guide" is the negation of the false.

But "guide" is not the right word,, because it is not a matter of following. There is no one to follow. Seeing the false is its own action, uncontaminated by the past.

So much of the world, and the psychological inner world, IS false.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 09 Apr 2019 #448
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4900 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But can't we actually perceive the limitation of psychological knowledge and experience and the danger of that acting?

Can the limitation of thought only be truly seen in the space between thought? If it seen BY thought, the limitation of the see-er is not being seen, no?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 10 Apr 2019 #449
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2457 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

But can't we actually perceive the limitation of psychological knowledge and experience and the danger of that acting?

Can the limitation of thought only be truly seen in the space between thought?

It's true that it cannot be seen by thought, but I'm not sure how this 'space' comes into the picture. When I'm observing myself, thought and emotion and psychological knowledge is present....thought and emotion and knowledge is myself, right? Not space. Yet, as you said, it can't be thought or knowledge which sees it's limitation, so seeing/insight must come from outside that realm. Will look further into this later, time permitting. Hopefully others will join in.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 10 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 10 Apr 2019 #450
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1160 posts in this forum Offline

I'm not following this...it has been said that it is psychological 'thought/time' that must "have a stop" and there is nothing outside of thought that can bring this 'stoppage' about...only thought itself, realizing the division, suffering, conflict, violence that it has and is causing could bring about this 'stop', can cease, can die to itself. Is this the way you all understand that? K has said there is no other factor here other than thought itself, that can do it. And thought has not done it because it has created this situation and it wants to continue it, maintain it, 'improve' it, 'work' on it, etc., but not end it, not end itself...it has brought about unspeakable horrors but it always has a way to justify its actions, its divisiveness...it has not gotten past the belief that it is an 'individual' which it seems to me, lies at the root of our 'human problem'.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 421 - 450 of 470 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.)