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

All one inquiry


Displaying posts 481 - 510 of 882 in total
Wed, 24 Apr 2019 #481
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1358 posts in this forum Offline

What I found to be an interesting 'seeing' this morning: I was up early before sunrise and looking at the river and the colors of the newly leafed trees on the far bank...just quietly taking it all in, the calls of the birds, a squirrel making his way through the tops of the trees to get to the feeder, the eagle going somewhere, a loon back in what was an obviously favorite place in the water...then I began to 'think' about something and while the scene was still visible the image accompanying the thought took precedence. It was as if I had been looking at the quiet scene of the river, trees, etc. through a clear glass but an image had been now 'projected' onto it and partially obscured the clear glass that I had been looking through.

And if this is the way it 'works', then what is projected on the 'screen' has to be from the 'past' or imagination...the 'projector' can't produce anything new?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Wed, 24 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 24 Apr 2019 #482
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
And if this is the way it 'works', then what is projected on the 'screen' has to be from the 'past' or imagination...the 'projector' can't produce anything new?

Right, and of course what's projected is totally limited by this past experience. But life is not limited...K might even say the essence of life....truth...is unlimited. But our consciousness is bound by the past/memory. The experience of the Jew or the Catholic is totally limited, right? He's stuck there and never sees anything new....never sees anything that's beyond it. Even K can have this limiting effect if we don't look free of it...look anew. Just waking up with some coffee, will come back to this later time permitting.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 24 Apr 2019 #483
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Jose Roberto Moreira wrote:
I suspect that suffering is always present in our brains, either consciously or unconsciously.

Right...I think that's the case, except in rare moments of joy or bliss. But what about pleasure? We DO enjoy being absorbed in an exciting movie or sporting event. Is suffering present then...on an unconscious level...lying beneath the pleasure?

Jose Roberto Moreira wrote:
So, we are constantly moving away from suffering towards feeling good, or pleasure. Maybe this is the very source of the movement of thought.

Or maybe we're moving away from fear....feeling insecure...towards pleasure....thereby escaping the discomfort of fear. Going to look further into this....most of our living seems to be focused on gaining fulfillment....in a good meal...a good movie...a new hair style....jewelry...wardrobe...music (my particular escape for many years). I do like a good old b&w movie as well. But so did K. He went to the cinema with Mary Z. quite often, or watched Kojak or a Clint Eastwood movie....read mystery novels. Yet, he didn't seem to have any attachment to any of that. My take on this, anyway. I don't know for certain whether he was attached in any way to fulfillment. FWIR, I would say no, however.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Apr 2019 #484
Thumb_open-uri20151228-18124-1kyi3s7-0 Jose Roberto Moreira Brazil 62 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Jose Roberto Moreira wrote:

I suspect that suffering is always present in our brains, either consciously or unconsciously.

Right...I think that's the case, except in rare moments of joy or bliss. But what about pleasure? We DO enjoy being absorbed in an exciting movie or sporting event. Is suffering present then...on an unconscious level...lying beneath the pleasure?

Excelent question, Tom!

It seems to me that what K meant with the word pleasure is not obvious. If I do something I enjoy, watching a movie, reading a book, etc, without a motive, just because I like it, then, I have the impression there is no suffering because then I am fully there, living the present moment. Maybe not with full attention and awareness, without a center, but only concentrated. I would not call that the pleasure K was refering to. I maybe wrong of course. To be concentrated is to be in the present moment?

I think pleasure is always associated with pursuing something, becoming something. A good question to ask ourselves is what is the relationship among pleasure, desire, suffering and fear. Does no fear mean no suffering? Or no desire no suffering?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Apr 2019 #485
Thumb_open-uri20151228-18124-1kyi3s7-0 Jose Roberto Moreira Brazil 62 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
If I may suggest, Jose, it's not "your brain". It's the human brain. Feeling today that distinction is very, very important.

I am afraid that, to me, it is "my brain". The existence of the human brain seems plausible but it is not the reality for me. What does it take to really see that?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Apr 2019 #486
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

As I said, I have been away for a few days, in a somewhat rugged part of New Zealand, a peninsula divided by a forest-covered mountain range. I have taken one question with me, reflecting on it on walks along beaches, along mangrove swamps, under giant 1000 year-old trees, and discussing with several serious-minded people. And perhaps a certain quietness has accompanied me back home, which at the moment seems stronger that the old habit patterns waiting for me.

The question being, from #474: “Who is the "you" that K is referring to that observes fear?.”

And this is from the quote given in #474

“You see that means one has to understand very deeply the structure and nature of thought. Until you do that you won't solve the problem of fear and pleasure ......... So can thought observe its own movement and can thought observe itself at all? You are following? If it observes itself it creates an entity who becomes the observer, therefore there is a division in that and therefore conflict. So can you observe fear without any movement of thought? Not control thought, not suppress thought, but to observe it without any movement of thought”

And Dan asked who or what is this “you” that observes thought, if it is not the observer? Is that right, Dan?

During my reflections, I put aside all pretence that “I know” the answer to the issue. I doubt very much that the answer CAN be known, in fact. And there was relief in that putting aside, a sense of freedom in the fact of not knowing

It seems to me that the usual process is an observer looking at thought. But actually I would not call this looking, or observation, at all. That observer has a definite content of its own, it is a “point of view”. It is a conclusion that thought has drawn in the past. It IS thought. It is condemnation, criticism, disapproval, approval, the attempt at control. It is interpretation, analysis. Recognition. I am sure that we are all familiar with this process, it can be seen at any moment in the mind. It is the naming process, and as we know, K frequently asked is we can observe something (like a tree) without naming it.

Hmm, all the thoughts/observations that came to me on the trip now drop away. It is curious has this happens. But here is a quote from “Krishnamurti to Himself”, a book I took with me:

“So one sees there is no becoming of the self, there is only the ending of selfishness, of anxiety, of pain and sorrow which are the content of the psyche, of the `me'. There is only the ending of that, and that ending does not require time. It isn't that it will all end the day after tomorrow. It will only end when there is the perception of its movement. To perceive not only objectively, without any prejudice, bias, but to perceive without all the accumulations of the past; to witness all this without the watcher - the watcher is of time and however much he may want to bring about a mutation in himself, he will always be the watcher; remembrances, however pleasurable, have no reality, they are things of the past gone, finished dead: only in observing without the observer, who is the past, does one see the nature of time and the ending of time”.

As for that “you” that according to K observes without thought, in the original quote, I’m afraid that K did use the same word in different senses throughout his history of talking and discussing. Obvious examples were “consciousness”, “mind”, “reality”, “individual”. “You" is a very vague term anyway. A term of convenience. My feeling here is – I could well be wrong – that he meant “one”. Meaning any individual.

I am sorry, I have an appointment, no time for more at the moment.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #487
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1358 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
K...only in observing without the observer, who is the past, does one see the nature of time and the ending of time”.

'You' is the pure "state of observation"? (No trace of the past)

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 27 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #488
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
K: "So can you observe fear without any movement of thought? Not control thought, not suppress thought, but to observe it without any movement of thought?”

And Dan asked who or what is this “you” that observes thought, if it is not the observer? Is that right, Dan?

The 'you' in K's question refers to the one listening to the talk or reading the excerpt....any man. He's asking this 'any man' if he/she can observe himself. We know of course that this is tricky, as our normal observation includes reacting, judging, condemning, justifying, etc.

My feeling here is – I could well be wrong – that he meant “one”. Meaning any individual.

Yes

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 27 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #489
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Jose Roberto Moreira wrote:
I think pleasure is always associated with pursuing something, becoming something. A good question to ask ourselves is what is the relationship among pleasure, desire, suffering and fear.

So, you're saying that the pursuit of pleasure is the issue, not pleasure itself. I go skiing for instance, and get great joy. That's not a problem, but only when I get attached to the pleasure/joy, and want it repeated? I'm attached to my favorite football or baseball team. I get great pleasure when they're winning...and feel depressed if they lose. So where does pleasure become a problem? And how is it related to suffering. When I suffer, I become more and more attached to my pleasures, right? The talk among men in my town often seems to center around their favorite football or baseball team. It gives a ready escape from their frustrations, anxieties, fears, conflicts, problems at work or with the family. So there's the relationship between pursuit of pleasure and pain/suffering.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 27 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #490
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1358 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
It gives a ready escape from their frustrations, anxieties, fears, conflicts, problems at work or with the family. So there's the relationship between pursuit of pleasure and pain/suffering.

If my reaction to 'my' problem is to escape to some pleasure, then isn't that a continuation of the problem? If the psychological pain, frustration, anger, loneliness, boredom, sorrow...is not met without reaction, if it isn't just simply 'met'...isn't the pleasure that I am escaping to, just the other side of the 'pain' that I am running from?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #491
Thumb_open-uri20151228-18124-1kyi3s7-0 Jose Roberto Moreira Brazil 62 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
So, you're saying that the pursuit of pleasure is the issue, not pleasure itself. I go skiing for instance, and get great joy. That's not a problem, but only when I get attached to the pleasure/joy, and want it repeated? I'm attached to my favorite football or baseball team. I get great pleasure when they're winning...and feel depressed if they lose. So where does pleasure become a problem? And how is it related to suffering. When I suffer, I become more and more attached to my pleasures, right? The talk among men in my town often seems to center around their favorite football or baseball team. It gives a ready escape from their frustrations, anxieties, fears, conflicts, problems at work or with the family. So there's the relationship between pursuit of pleasure and pain/suffering.

Tom, when I was a teenager, I used to get great pleasure when my soccer team won. But, somehow, I could identify a strange feeling associated with that pleasure. Now, I think I managed to identify it. That strange feeling is suffering. I think that people suffer without even knowing that are suffering.

It is similar to when we get good news. The article below gives a good explanation for that.

The conclusion is that both good news and bad news cause suffering! Of course this might be bad news for most people. :-)

http://www.pravdareport.com/science/142299-dopa...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #492
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Jose Roberto Moreira wrote:
ttp://www.pravdareport.com/science/142299-dopa...

Thanks for posting this article, Jose, I found it very interesting. It raised not a few questions in me, questions that seem to have significance. And interesting to see it in the light of my recent comment "the brain is basically interested in feeling good, or better".

I am wondering if these neuro-transmitter chemicals like dopamine are present in the brains of other animals, or are they functions of the "higher brain"? In other words, are they part of our "animal inheritance"? I imagine that this is the case. And if so, do we have any reason to think that we can in anyway transcend them? If these chemicals automatically respond, react, to certain stimuli, if they bath the brain and bring about certain movements like anger, the lust for power, competition, domination .... what reason do we have to think there is a way out, given the system is built into the brain itself? We don't think there is a way to transcend the liver, for example!

But as I put these questions, I see the glimmer of an answer.

The systems are necessary for survival of the physical organism of animals, no? They could not survive without these chemicals stimulating the body to act in certain ways. And the same is true for human beings, although we tend to have less real need of it, as we do not meet much in the way of physical danger in a modern life-style.

But in humans these neuro-chemicals are not usually responding to real physical challenges. They are often responding to IMAGINED challenges. What MIGHT HAPPEN. They are usually responding to PSYCHOLOGICAL challenges, not challenges to the body (and I think it is recognised that this actually poisons the body).

If this is the case, it can be seen that the neuro-chemicals do not have to dominate our lives, and dictate the course of society, as the article well describes. There is a way to transcend this destructive system, and that is simply to see the unreal AS the unreal. And not to mistake it as real.

Is this not the role of choiceless awareness? Does not this tie in with what Dan and I have been discussing, observation of thought without the observer? It comes now - I might be wrong - that the observer will always be under the influence of these neuro-transmitter chemicals.

This post was last updated by Clive Elwell Sat, 27 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #493
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I go skiing for instance, and get great joy. That's not a problem, but only when I get attached to the pleasure/joy,

I would not equate pleasure with joy, Tom.

I was pondering recently if fear is not always in the future. I mean it is always about what might happen, what is imagined might happen. That future might be 10 years down the track, or one second ahead. But when what we imagine comes to pass, if it does, then there is no longer any fear. We just meet the situation.

I feel this is true - not that it cannot be challenged.

Now as fear and pleasure seem to be two sides of the same coin, I wonder if pleasure is not always in the future. That is, pleasure lies in the anticipation of what is hoped will happen? What we generally call pleasure is actually the PURSUIT of pleasure.

And joy is what happens, can happen, in the present moment?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #494
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Jose Roberto Moreira wrote:
Tom, when I was a teenager, I used to get great pleasure when my soccer team won. But, somehow, I could identify a strange feeling associated with that pleasure. Now, I think I managed to identify it. That strange feeling is suffering. I think that people suffer without even knowing that are suffering.

I think I knew this as well. I couldn’t understand all the hoopla/anticipation/pleasure about team identity and winning. I mean, if we’re really happy or intensely interested in life, would we care about a dumb football team? I was lucky in that I knew real joy....camping in the woods....cooking over the camp fire....swimming in the ocean waves....in a mountain stream. All that gave me incredible joy as a kid. Even an exciting adventure movie like Robin Hood. I have nothing against enjoying participation in sports, but this identification with one’s favorite team and winning and losing is absurd. It’s an escape from the problems in my own life. One thing I noticed is that this is something that has to be learned. A young child doesn’t identify as a Yankee or Giants or Patriots fan. They don’t identify as an American or German either.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 27 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #495
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1358 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
I am wondeering if these neuro-transmitter chemicals like dopamine are present in the brains of other animals, or are they functions of the "higher brain"? In other words, are they part of our "animal inheritance"? I imagine that this is the case. And if so, do we have any reason to think that we can in anyway transcend them? If these chemicals automatically respond, react, to certain stimuli, if they bath the brain and bring about certain movements like anger, the lust for power, competition, domination .... what reason do we have to think there is a way out, given the system is built into the brain itself?

Are we looking for a "way out"? A way out to 'where'? Has there been an image formed of where and what we should be? An ideal? 'Craving' that 'place' up ahead is the trap of time isn't it? I'm not 'there' yet but I want to get 'there'...(because that's where the 'good stuff' is...?)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #496
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Are we looking for a "way out"? A way out to 'where'? Has there been an image formed of where and what we should be? An ideal? 'Craving' that 'place' up ahead is the trap of time isn't it? I'm not 'there' yet but I want to get 'there'...(because that's where the 'good stuff' is...?)

Yes, I would say I am looking for “a way out”. Certainly a way out of the great chaos in the world, the violence, the vast inequality, the suffering, the stupidity that is threatening to destroy human civilisation and perhaps most life on earth. Yes, I would say I am concerned for all that, and one inquires if there is “a way out”.

When it comes to examining one’s own role in all the mess, it becomes more complicated. The line between looking for “a way out” and personally escaping becomes a little blurred. And I am not saying one is searching for a way out in terms of a method, a technique, following some idea.

So, on reflection, that word "way" is not correct.

So no, there is no single image of where we should be. But a multitude of images come to the mind, and pass from the mind, of “should be’s”. That is part of the problem.

I would say the problem is seen in the negative. Of course there is a need for change, fundamental change. But the imaging of solutions, of should be’s, and pursuing them, trying to make them real, is not the answer. Rather, certain things must end. Like the illusion that there is two of me in here.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Apr 2019 #497
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
'You' is the pure "state of observation"? (No trace of the past)

Yes, it sounds so simple. But it obviously is NOT simple, otherwise, I suspect, the human race would not be in the mess that it is. Would you say, Dan, if we could observe all the falseness of thought in this 'pure state', then it would instantly drop away?

The fact is I don't observe in this way, or at least very rarely. I don't even observe the natural world, all the things around me, in this pure way - the observer with his opinions, his likes and dislikes always comes in.

Can we KNOW if we are observing in this way, this pure way, in fact? I have not seen this so far. Here is a quote from K:

If I am aware that I am aware, in that there is division between the observer and the observed

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 #498
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1358 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Dan, if we could observe all the falseness of thought in this 'pure state', then it would instantly drop away?

Yes.

Clive Elwell wrote:
The fact is I don't observe in this way, or at least very rarely. I don't even observe the natural world, all the things around me, in this pure way - the observer with his opinions, his likes and dislikes always comes in.

That is what must be seen, not just the (mistaken) desire to go beyond what you mention above... But the (mistaken) desire of 'you', craving to not be this way...do you see it this way?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sun, 28 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 #499
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
That is what must be seen, not some desire or image beyond this? ( an image of 'you' not being this way?)

Yes, that is what is (not implying by that it is always static) and that is what must be seen.

But it must be seen WITHOUT an observer, no?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 #500
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1358 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Dan McDermott wrote:

Are we looking for a "way out"? A way out to 'where'? Has there been an image formed of where and what we should be? An ideal? 'Craving' that 'place' up ahead is the trap of time isn't it? I'm not 'there' yet but I want to get 'there'...(because that's where the 'good stuff' is...?)

Clive: Yes, I would say I am looking for “a way out”. Certainly a way out of the great chaos in the world, the violence, the vast inequality, the suffering, the stupidity that is threatening to destroy human civilisation and perhaps most life on earth. Yes, I would say I am concerned for all that, and one inquires if there is “a way out”.

Dan There may be , but it has to come through us and it may be too late?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 #501
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
I was pondering recently if fear is not always in the future. I mean it is always about what might happen, what is imagined might happen.

Yes...agreed.
And pleasure? (Using my iPad so I can’t double quote.) Anticipation is in time, of course, as well as remembrance....both related to pleasure. So does pleasure always involve time and thought? Is thought always present when we feel pleasure? Questioning this now. Joy, is not pleasure I think you implied. So joy must be beyond time....beyond thought. It is in the present moment only. I was casually listening to some music the other day, and suddenly there was immeasurable joy....just in listening...listening free of thought or analysis. It was really immense. Never felt quite like that before when listening to music even though I’ve often been very moved by good music. But what I experienced the other day was quite unique in my experience....just unfathomable(is that a word?) joy.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 #502
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Dan There may be , but it has to come through us

Yes. This "having to come through us", the seeing of this, brings about a sense of responsibility for our actions, out thinking, doesn't it? A focus for our lives.

I feel a similar sense of responsibility when I see deeply that "I am the world". Any action from me is an action of the world. Action for good or bad, if I can use those terms.

Dan McDermott wrote:
and it may be too late?

When you say "it may too late", Dan, what do you mean exactly? Are you referring to being too late to stop all the environmental destruction, for example? Or are you saying that the human mind has become too degraded to allow any fundamental change to occur? I certainly sometimes ponder this. This transformation of the mind that K spoke of may no longer be possible. I am not saying that it IS so, I don't know. But I admit the possibility.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Apr 2019 #503
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
So does pleasure always involve time and thought?

It seems to me to be that way, yes. And the personal example that you refer to in the matter of listening to music seems a perfect example of 'joy'.

It is interesting that change, a shift in perception, when it comes,is always unexpected, as you describe. There is nothing that we can deliberately do to bring it about. Does that mean it is causeless?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 #504
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1358 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
When you say "it may too late", Dan, what do you mean exactly?

I don't know exactly what I meant...human 'goings on' seem pretty bleak to me at times. Maybe it's living so close to nature and the harmony and orderliness here and then hearing what is going on 'out there'..we can't know what is going to happen, that's for sure. It may be that the 'weapons' get used or some other man-made calamity. But K. and others have through their insights, sowed a lot of 'seeds'. That may turn things around in a future. We will not be here to see the results of all that. But questions about who and what and 'why' we are, will inevitably arise...No one knows enough to be pessimistic. Right?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Mon, 29 Apr 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 #505
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
It is interesting that change, a shift in perception, when it comes,is always unexpected, as you describe. There is nothing that we can deliberately do to bring it about. Does that mean it is causeless?

It's outside of time...outside of consciousness...so does that mean it's causeless? Probably so. Cause and effect implies time. If X causes Y, then X comes before Y in time, no? Just exploring...
Was sharing something from Mrs. Z's book with a friend last night and it touches on what you say above. I'll try to find it in a bit...

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 #506
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

March 13, 1975 from Mrs. Z's diary:

The thirteenth of March. ‘Krishnaji didn’t sleep too well. So, he spent the day in bed. I went to town on errands. We had supper, as usual, on trays in his room, while a noisy western with Burt Lancaster shot it out as The Law Man.’ That’s the name of the film. ‘Krishnaji’s face changed. His eyes were heavy-lidded. He was far off. I felt the change, motioned to turn off the TV, but he shook his head. He asked, “Do you feel it?” There was a something electric close at hand. He didn’t want to speak of it.’

The fourteenth of March. ‘Krishnaji has slept well. “Something had continued.” At lunch he had asked me if I was keeping a record of these things. “You should keep a complete diary.” I asked what relation there was between what happened last night and the noisy television. He said that the movie rests and relaxes the mind, then the other comes. He used to go to the movies for rest. Later, he washed both cars. In the evening, he said, “It is still going on. I wonder why. Maybe because of the talks. I don’t know, and I don’t ask.”’

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 #507
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
No one knows enough to be pessimistic. Right?

Although I would not describe myself as usually being in a pessimistic state of mind - ie depressed - one's observations, and all the observations and predictions of science point to a very dire future indeed. I do not see how these things can just be put aside, as they are factual. Most graphs for future decades are of the hockey-stick variety. Changes which are disasterous for life, are exponentially increasing.

And most importantly, perhaps, human beings, nations, show very little sign of working together to solve what are common problems.

As Bohm and K agreed in the 80’s, the future is dire.

Scientifically, we certainly do know enough to be pessimistic. If on hand we accept and use, as technology, the theories/predictions of science, why should we deny its findings of the coming climate catastrophe, the destruction of the environment that is happening, and all the rest of it? What possible reason is there for optimism, even its mildest form? So yes, things look bleak indeed.

An over-arching question, though, is there any sort of fundamental change happening in human consciousness? I really don’t know the answer to that. I see many people CLAIM that is happening, but people make many claims. What I do know, what I do observe, is more and more depression, confusion, an apparently on-going deterioration of the human mind. I do not think these are just words.

In 1983 K said “what would a person do ….. knowing the future is grim, very depressing, dangerous, and so uncertain”. How much worse is it now?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 #508
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
while a noisy western with Burt Lancaster shot it out as The Law Man.’

After reading, probably from you, Tom, that K had a liking for Clint Eastwood movies, I watched a couple out of curiosity. I certain did not find the rampant violence relaxing! Quite disturbing in fact.

Another example of the inability of the brain to distinguish between actuality and imagination, perhaps?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Apr 2019 #509
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5159 posts in this forum Offline

Jose Roberto Moreira wrote:
Tom, when I was a teenager, I used to get great pleasure when my soccer team won. But, somehow, I could identify a strange feeling associated with that pleasure. Now, I think I managed to identify it. That strange feeling is suffering. I think that people suffer without even knowing that are suffering.

Could you say more about this, Jose? Especially what I have marked in bold?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 30 Apr 2019 #510
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2691 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
K had a liking for Clint Eastwood movies, I watched a couple out of curiosity. I certain did not find the rampant violence relaxing! Quite disturbing in fact.

He seemed to have an attraction to what we call action/adventure movies. I think he liked the tv series Kojak...a detective....not overly violent if I recall correctly. My mother used to watch it. I think he told Mrs Z, about the blood in some action movies, that it didn’t bother him because “It’s only ketchup.” Funny he didn’t mind the violence in films, but used to hide his eyes during any passionate romantic scenes. I think it was a James Bond movie that got too hot and steamy for him.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 481 - 510 of 882 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.)