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

All one inquiry


Displaying posts 811 - 840 of 882 in total
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 #811
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
And If this approach is so obviously nonsense, why has it taken such a hold over how people live their lives?

Clive, I would say (and as we seem 'obliged' to say, " I may be wrong") that we have been exposed to a 'secret'. A secret about what we are, and what we are not. The secret has not been hidden but for some reason it has only been picked up and 'taken to heart' by a few. That may be 'lawful', obviously I don't know. But if it is not brought to fruition, it may be better that it was never come upon at all.

This may be all wrong of course

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Fri, 26 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 #812
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 837 posts in this forum Offline

Dear people,

Reading the dialogue back, I cannot avoid the impression that a word has been used that possible leads to a wrong interpretation.

Although the words "cancer" and "death" are very closely related in our collective memory, in my situation this appears not to be the case.

what I wanted to express was that it was not minimized compared to it could have been worse or they could heal so much today. The Dutch word for that was translated as such without alternatives.

For the sake of clarity and to prevent misinterpretation, which could lead a life of its own, this had to be corrected.

Truth will unfold itself to those who enquire their own actions.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 #813
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
The secret has not been hidden but for some reason it has only been picked up and 'taken to heart' by a few. That may be 'lawful', obviously I don't know. But if it is not brought to fruition, it may be better that it was never come upon at all.

Why? Referring to your last sentence, Dan.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 #814
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Tom

I was speaking to Clive's reaction to the mystery of why so few people get involved in this 'questioning'... we agree that this is not about 'self-improvement' don't we? No matter how subtle a form that takes, that is still just more ego-enhancing, strengthening. etc. That's how we embark on all this because we don't know anything else except to seek more security and avoid any pain. And up to that point we are with everyone else as they go about pursuing whatever it is they pursue...but that changes when the 'pursuer' himself comes into question as well as the idea of 'pursuit' itself'. That's a 'parting of the ways'. And that can put us in a place where we are all alone and where no-one can tell us what to do. No authority of any kind. Many never get to that place, and continue clinging to someone else's words and experiences, hoping some change will come. But no matter how hard you try to graft them on to yourself, they have no force unless the truth of them is 'seen' by yourself. Even the desire to know the 'truth' comes into question as just more greed, more fear.

As I see it, we are before coming upon this 'teaching' or something similar, similar to everyone else and in a way similar to every other living thing here. We all are performing some unknown 'cosmic' function, of energy exchange perhaps, something to do with the earth, we don't know what that is. People, plants and animals all carrying out some function at their own level. They have no 'possibility' to 'do' other than they do. It seems that we, Man with his 'new' brain does have another possibility and this teaching has resonated with that potential thing in us. Awakened it? Everything is moving with the flow, all living things...and in that movement there is an observable harmony...except in Man who is not in 'harmony' with himself or with nature... that he is enslaved in misery and fear and at war on all sides. Is it because he is oblivious for the most part to the possibility he has and has unwittingly turned his 'back' on it? This possibility of 'freedom from the known' which may be the only way to an authentic 'flowering' and freedom?

This may be all wrong of course

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 #815
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
forum
Offline
Tom

I was speaking to Clive's reaction to the mystery of why so few people get involved in this 'questioning'...

I think Clive was questioning why this illusion of struggling to become or overcome has taken such hold of man in the first place. It’s taken such hold that it’s not even questioned at all.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Fri, 26 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 26 Jul 2019 #816
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5194 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I think Clive was questioning why this illusion of struggling to become or overcome has taken such hold of man in the first place. It’s taken such hold that it’s not even questioned at all.

Fundamentally, when people assume that they can act to solve their problems, to rise above their unhappiness, to go beyond suffering, they are assuming that there is some aspect of the mind that is unconditioned, are they not?

They are assuming – we are assuming - that there is some sort of entity that is apart from the problems/suffering, and can act on the problem to solve it, or at least alleviate the suffering. Such is our conditioning, and thus we act, or try to act. We try to become different from what we are. At first glance this seems quite reasonable and natural. But it based on the assumption of the existence of an independent, intelligent entity (me) which is separate from the me which is suffering. An entity that CAN act. But is there such an entity?

I think most people are incapable of answering this question, of even asking it, because fear immediately comes in. Fear with its images, of being stuck forever in this terrible, painful situation, with no way out.

But actually what happens when we don’t try to “solve” a problem, to overcome suffering? When we make no movement away from suffering?

Can we know the answer to this question?

I quote from the Ommen camp talk 1937

So what is one to do, discerning that whatever action, whatever effort one makes only strengthens ignorance? The very desire to break through the circle of ignorance is still part of ignorance. Then what is one to do?

Now, is this an all-important, vital question to you? If it is, then you will see that there is no direct, positive answer. For positive answers can only bring about further effort, which but strengthens the process of ignorance. So there is only a negative approach, which is to be integrally aware of the process of fear or ignorance. This awareness is not an effort to overcome, to destroy or to find a substitute, but is a stillness of neither acceptance nor denial, an integral quietness of no choice. This awareness breaks the circle of ignorance from within, as it were, without strengthening it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #817
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Fundamentally, when people assume that they can act to solve their problems, to rise above their unhappiness, to go beyond suffering, they are assuming that there is some aspect of the mind that is unconditioned, are they not?

Clive

I guess I don't understand why you bring in 'people' who have had no contact with this or similar teachings. People who have had no contact with these 'teachings' are going to do what they have always done. They are not 'assuming' anything about 'conditioning', for them that's just some silly thing you read and are caught up in...Are you trying to 'spread the word' to people? People who haven't read or heard Krishnamurti?

This may be all wrong of course

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #818
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I think Clive was questioning why this illusion of struggling to become or overcome has taken such hold of man in the first place. It’s taken such hold that it’s not even questioned at all.

Tom

Yes that is what I was speaking to in #814 but obviously I didn't do a great job.

This may be all wrong of course

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #819
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Clive Elwell wrote:

Fundamentally, when people assume that they can act to solve their problems, to rise above their unhappiness, to go beyond suffering, they are assuming that there is some aspect of the mind that is unconditioned, are they not?

Dan:
Clive

I guess I don't understand why you bring in 'people' who have had no contact with this or similar teachings. People who have had no contact with these 'teachings' are going to do what they have always done. T

Perhaps it would make more sense to read Clive's above sentence and substitute 'we' and 'our' for 'they' and 'their' and 'people'.

Let it Be

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #820
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
they are assuming that there is some aspect of the mind that is unconditioned, are they not?

Clive

They are not 'assuming' anything about 'conditioning', for them that's just some silly thing you read and are caught up in.

I think Clive is correct...there's an unconscious assumption that 'I' am a separate and rational observer or analyzer of 'my' problem....that the problem is not me...it's separate from the observer or analyzer....from 'me'.

Let it Be

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #821
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I think Clive is correct...there's an unconscious assumption that 'I' am a separate and rational observer or analyzer of 'my' problem....that the problem is not me...it's separate from the observer or analyzer....from 'me'.

Right, 'I' have problems. Not 'I' am my problems. So the whole 'situation' as I see it, revolves around whether this 'center' or 'me' can dissolve effortlessly. K. has said that what we are is "nothing" (not-a-thing) that this 'me' was created by thought to provide continuity and a sense of security. But K.'s saying it does not make it 'true'. How do we find out in ourself if this radical suggestion that 'I' don't actually exist is true? Speaking psychologically, 'I' actually suffer, things actually hurt 'me'...it doesn't 'feel' like an 'illusion'...Can the 'center'/'self'/'me'/thought/time actually end? And if not, why not? Do we actually have this possibility of freedom that I mentioned in # 814?

This may be all wrong of course

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #822
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Do we actually have this possibility of freedom that I mentioned in # 814?

Who's asking the question? Isn't it the 'me' seeking to escape from himself...his life of problems? Just questioning...

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #823
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Who's asking the question? Isn't it the 'me' seeking to escape from himself...his life of problems? Just questioning...

I would say no, the 'me' has no interest in that 'possibility' (freedom from the known) at all, the 'me' is only "seeking" or interested in continuing with as little pain and as much pleasure as possible.,,and for as long as possible. This is a different question, it is asking whether there can be an altogether different 'approach' to life. Non-accumulative. Where time as past, present, future does not exist and color the 'psyche'. Because as long as that time 'illusion' exists, there is a 'wall' created by the 'me' between myself and the 'living moment'. That wall consists of the past values the self holds dear and which must be defended or on the other hand, which it doesn't hold dear and must be avoided. A wall of knowledge? It is a barrier of judgements, opinions, conclusions, etc. But when there is a psychological disturbance or 'upheaval' in 'me' those 'things' that have been given this positive or negative significance are revealed. Whether there is 'escape' from the disturbance or a 'staying with' is a matter of intelligence, I'd say. Intelligence says running away only pushes the conflict into an imaginary future and can never 'end' (understand) what is behind the conflict. Is it the 'desire' to 'hold on' that is the enslaving factor? And if so, how does that desire come to an end?

This may be all wrong of course

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #824
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
I would say no, the 'me' has no interest in that 'possibility' (freedom from the known) at all, the 'me' is only "seeking" or interested in continuing with as little pain and as much pleasure as possible.,,and for as long as possible.

So who is it that is interested? I think the ‘me’ is incredibly sneaky and any possibility that ‘me’ is interested in may still be a subtle escape from our daily life of conflict.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #825
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
So who is it that is interested? I think the ‘me’ is incredibly sneaky and any possibility that ‘me’ is interested in may still be a subtle escape from our daily life of conflict.

Is questioning, investigating, exploring,etc. always an "escape"? Is there a "who" behind those activities that is always deviously, trying to escape?... You have to answer that for yourself, right? You can suspect it another but you can't know because the language, the words are not the thing that is trying to be described. Only we can know if our motive is to 'impress' or whether it is to communicate something that has been seen. And simply to share that albeit always incomplete, even faulty description with another.

Considering this a bit more, it may not be a 'who' at all that is behind this but rather a "state" of questioning, investigating, etc.?

This may be all wrong of course

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #826
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5194 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
Reading the dialogue back, I cannot avoid the impression that a word has been used that possible leads to a wrong interpretation.

Hi Wim,

I think it was me that jumped to a conclusion about the nature of your illness, and that lead to a misunderstanding. I apologise for that.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #827
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5194 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote @817:
Are you trying to 'spread the word' to people? People who haven't read or heard Krishnamurti?

I do do a certain amount of work, in different ways, in making Krishnamurti's words available to people, but I don't think that has any relevance to what I have been writing/describing on this thread.

Dan McDermott wrote:
I guess I don't understand why you bring in 'people' who have had no contact with this or similar teachings. People who have had no contact with these 'teachings' are going to do what they have always done. They are not 'assuming' anything about 'conditioning', for them that's just some silly thing you read and are caught up in.

I come into contact with people - some family, some friends, acquaintances, new contacts, in a natural sort of way, and I find I can no longer merely "chat", have superficial communication. I am not on any sort of crusade, but when people ask me questions I find I go into the questions seriously, from my true perceptions rather than give superficial, perhaps expected, answers. And this often leads to interesting inquiries - at least on my part. I am not trying to influence them, to change them, but when people appear to ..... how to put it? ..... have a false approach to life, or a completely different perception from myself, I do, often, go into things with them.

I find there is a great deal of learning in doing this. Although I may have used the term "people", as I said I know that "I am the world", and if there is a movement, a pattern in 'their' consciousness, then I can be sure it is in mine. Isn't this part of "using relationship as a mirror in which to see oneself"?

In particular, in this case, I saw how people (several that I met in succession) were using effort and control as a basis of their lives, in a persistent way. I don't feel that I am committed to making any consistent effort (as far as I can see), nevertheless I saw the essence of this movement was very much active in my mind. That is, thought breaks itself up into the controller and the controlled. Of course I am not in any way defending this movement, and it does not seem to have any continuity - but still that elemental movement, that conditioning, is there.

This is so important to see and understand, because it is the root of all contradiction and conflict in the mind.

So, a chance conversation just a week ago now has given rise to a deepening "dialogue with myself" - and shared somewhat on the forum.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #828
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5194 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote @814:
This possibility of 'freedom from the known' which may be the only way to an authentic 'flowering' and freedom?

What you say seems to be so to me also. And this freedom from the known seems to be the only thing that matters in human affairs. Whether anyone has "achieved it" is questionable, but this has no importance to our own inquiry.

But it does seem that we are rapidly running out of time to bring about a fundamental change in human consciousness.

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 27 Jul 2019 #829
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5194 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote @821:
Do we actually have this possibility of freedom that I mentioned in # 814?

We cannot know, can we? And it is useless to assume that we have or we have not.

While I am not claiming to know what freedom is, I feel it is not something that we can work towards. We cannot take a single step towards it, because the origin of all steps lie in conditioning, not freedom, and so can only continue that conditioning.

All "positive movements", which are in essence effort, are always towards what the mind has projected, and so not real.

As I quoted in #816

So what is one to do, discerning that whatever action, whatever effort one makes only strengthens ignorance? The very desire to break through the circle of ignorance is still part of ignorance. Then what is one to do?

Now, is this an all-important, vital question to you? If it is, then you will see that there is no direct, positive answer. For positive answers can only bring about further effort, which but strengthens the process of ignorance. So there is only a negative approach, which is to be integrally aware of the process of fear or ignorance. This awareness is not an effort to overcome, to destroy or to find a substitute, but is a stillness of neither acceptance nor denial, an integral quietness of no choice. This awareness breaks the circle of ignorance from within, as it were, without strengthening it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #830
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5194 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:

Dan; I guess I don't understand why you bring in 'people' who have had no contact with this or similar teachings. People who have had no contact with these 'teachings' are going to do what they have always done. T

Tom Perhaps it would make more sense to read Clive's above sentence and substitute 'we' and 'our' for 'they' and 'their' and 'people'.

Yes. Although the starting point of an observation may be the words, the actions, of others,either individually or globally, we have in the end to see those actions are within ourselves, that we are the world. Seems to me as long as thought is operating, this must be true, as the very origin of thought is the collective human consciousness.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #831
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
All "positive movements", which are in essence effort, are always towards what the mind has projected, and so not real.

"The house is burning" says K.

Maybe that's not just a "projection" of the mind but a fact. Does the putting out of that fire require an 'effort' or a non-effort?

This may be all wrong of course

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #832
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
But it does seem that we are rapidly running out of time to bring about a fundamental change in human consciousness.

Well yes but the only change that has to come about is in our own...isn't it? If it doesn't happen here , why should it happen anywhere else? And "time" is completely beside the point here, is it not? There is only 'Now'. As I posted to Tom, the approach to all this has to be radically different....humanity may only have another million years or so but what we do now may make all the difference. (In terms of freedom.)

This may be all wrong of course

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

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #833
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5194 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
"The house is burning" says K.

Maybe that's not just a "projection" of the mind but a fact.

That is indeed a fact.

Does the putting out of that fire require an 'effort' or a non-effort?

This brings out the two meanings of the word "effort", doesn't it? When one is involved in a car accident, or one suddenly is looming, does it require effort to take evasive action? I would say not, because our whole being suddenly is working together. So although action may be taken, I would not call this "an effort". There is no desire involved, and normally effort is the action of desire.

The fire that K refers to is the one in the human mind, is it not? That is really where the crisis is, all other global crises stem from that one cause, no? So I would answer your question by giving the same K quote as above. No effort.

So what is one to do, discerning that whatever action, whatever effort one makes only strengthens ignorance? The very desire to break through the circle of ignorance is still part of ignorance. Then what is one to do?

Now, is this an all-important, vital question to you? If it is, then you will see that there is no direct, positive answer. For positive answers can only bring about further effort, which but strengthens the process of ignorance. So there is only a negative approach, which is to be integrally aware of the process of fear or ignorance. This awareness is not an effort to overcome, to destroy or to find a substitute, but is a stillness of neither acceptance nor denial, an integral quietness of no choice. This awareness breaks the circle of ignorance from within, as it were, without strengthening it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #834
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
You can suspect it another

No image of another Dan....we’re talking about the human mind

Considering this a bit more, it may not be a 'who' at all that is behind this but rather a "state" of questioning, investigating, etc.?

But you can only investigate ‘what is’, not what is not . You can’t investigate a ‘possibility’, as I see it.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 28 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #835
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 837 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell qouting K. wrote:
So there is only a negative approach, which is to be integrally aware of the process of fear or ignorance.

NEGATIVE approach and negative thinking are for us the only keys to the revolution in the mind
But what exactly does Krishnaji mean by it ?

From the seventh public talk in Madras on 12 November 1958.

' I was saying negative thing is the highest form of thinking. We never think negatively; we only think positively: That is we think from conclusion to conclusion, from pattern to a pattern , from a system to a system - that I must be this; I must acquire some virtuev, follow this or that path, do certain disciplines. '

May be this item, this approach, this focus is in need of a new topic,
what do you think ?

Truth will unfold itself to those who enquire their own actions.

This post was last updated by Wim Opdam Sun, 28 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 28 Jul 2019 #836
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1386 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But you can only investigate ‘what is’, not what is not . You can’t investigate a ‘possibility’, as I see it.

K.:The impossible question is this: can the mind empty itself of the known? - itself, not you empty the mind. That is an impossible question. If you put it with tremendous earnestness, with seriousness, with passion, you'll find out.

K. The Impossible Question

This may be all wrong of course

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jul 2019 #837
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
If you put it with tremendous earnestness, with seriousness, with passion, you'll find out.

K. The Impossible Question

Well, I'm glad K agrees that it's impossible. Personally speaking I do question the value of asking impossible questions. He did once say that 'no one got it', so apparently asking the question was not meaningful for most, if not all, of his listeners....no one 'found out'. But if you feel it's important, then by all means, ask away. Mind you he's talking about asking, not investigating. You can't investigate the unknown, can you?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 29 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jul 2019 #838
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 733 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Personally speaking I do question the value of asking impossible questions .... You can't investigate the unknown, can you?

I understand a “possible” question to mean a question for which, as far as the questioner is concerned, an answer DOES exist. He or she doesn’t know the answer but he knows that SOMEONE knows the answer. It can be a request for information: “How much does this cost; how do I get to the bus station; on what day is the garbage picked up”, and so on.

For other questions, there is an answer or explanation based on personal conclusion, tradition, belief or experience: “Why did you do that; what’s wrong with you (or me, or them); why are human beings greedy, cruel, cunning, dishonest”, and so on.

So the answers to possible questions are totally within the field of time-thought-knowledge. They do not address what lies beyond the field of knowledge.

An “impossible” question cannot be answered by the known. So when K puts the impossible question “can the mind empty itself of the known?”, he is pointing to a state of mind which can be pointed to ONLY by asking an impossible question. It cannot be pointed to verbally. To find out what is the action which empties the mind of the known, to discover what that state of the mind IS, the mind obviously cannot search through the known, through its memory banks. The answer is unknown, it is not of the known. “The answer” IS the stillness of the mind. The mind is still because it is not searching. There is nowhere to look, no movement it can make to find the answer. That stillness is not the movement of thought. That’s what I understand K to mean when he says: “If you put it with tremendous earnestness, with seriousness, with passion, you'll find out.”

Isn’t that the value of such a question? In the stillness of not-knowing and not searching, the mind is beyond concerning itself with “investigating the unknown”, isn’t it?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jul 2019 #839
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2712 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Isn’t that the value of such a question? In the stillness of not-knowing and not searching, the mind is beyond concerning itself with “investigating the unknown”, isn’t it?

I don't see how a moment of stillness will help me to understand my many conflicts and problems....the noise. The noise is there...present...I can't avoid it when there is suffering/conflict...some deep disturbance. It's what is. That's what I must understand...and perhaps question....investigate...and observe. Why do I have opinions and conclusions and beliefs about my problem/s? What is my thinking? What is the value of the known when facing suffering? Etc. That's how I see 'investigation', but it's very possible I may be missing K's point. In my own experience with 'the teaching', I've often come upon the necessity of thought being still, yet, these moments of stillness didn't lead to self understanding...only to brief moments of peace and freedom. How do we learn about ourselves...the noise? I recall K discussing this very issue and asking this very question; and one of the members of the discussion replied....'in silence'. K. replied, 'Do you learn a foreign language in silence?'. 'No, you play with it....learn the structure of it....the vocabulary...'. Of course I may be missing the deeper meaning of what K is asking. I don't know.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 29 Jul 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 29 Jul 2019 #840
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 733 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
The noise is there...present...I can't avoid it when there is suffering/conflict...some deep disturbance. It's what is. That's what I must understand...and perhaps question....investigate. Why do I have opinions and conclusions and beliefs about my problem/s? What is my thinking?

Aren't these words the noise itself - thought - separating itself into “the noise” and the “I” who can and must understand?

Tom Paine wrote:
What is the value of the known when facing suffering?

None. Doesn't the very question point to the known itself - thought - coming to the understanding that it is powerless in resolving suffering, and to “the necessity of thought being still”? Thought's efforts are not just useless. They waste and scatter energy. They wear the brain out, damage the brain. Isn't this seen?

Tom Paine wrote:
I've often come upon the necessity of thought being still, yet, these moments of stillness didn't lead to self understanding...only to brief moments of peace and freedom.

Again, is it stillness when thought is waiting in the wings, hoping, desiring, supervising, guiding, expecting the outcome of peace and freedom? Aren't these the tricks thought plays on itself? It understands the need for stillness but it "takes part" in experimenting with stillness thereby preventing stillness.

Then realizing that hoping and expecting are obstacles to stillness, it decides that it will NOT hope and expect and it stifles its hopes, desires and expectations. That again is not stillness, is it?

To come upon the necessity of thought being still is not the same thing as thought’s effort to “be still”. And thought CAN see and understand that its expectation and its efforts to be still are part of the noise.

Below is a quote posted by Clive in Mina’s thread, “The gift that lies in the heart of all suffering”. I don’t see suffering as a gift, but the quote seems relevant here. It points to the fact that you can be aware integrally OF confusion and suffering. Confusion and suffering do not arise out of any EFFORT to be confused and to suffer. Confusion and suffering arise spontaneously. Thought is still when there is no EFFORT or WILL to be, to become, to do, to achieve, and so on.

Ommen Camp 1938 talk 2:

When you are aware integrally, with your whole being, of this confusion and suffering, without any hope of escape, then there will arise spontaneously that which is real. But you must love, be enthused by that very confusion and suffering. You must love with your own heart, not with another's.

If you begin to experiment with yourself, you will see a curious transformation taking place. In the moment of highest confusion there is clarity; in the moment of greatest fear there is love. You must come to it spontaneously, without the exertion of will.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 811 - 840 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.)