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

Do you give 100% of your energy to change?


Displaying posts 151 - 155 of 155 in total
Sun, 02 Dec 2018 #151
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 4639 posts in this forum Offline

Peter Kesting wrote:
Without this "light" that we are everything (matter moveing) would be going on mechanically, (matter only), as it were, in deep sleep...in the dark...robots.

That is very intriguing, Peter. A universe without any awareness that it exists? A Universe without any 'self-awareness'? Such a thing does not seem possible.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 03 Dec 2018 #152
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 999 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Are you not using the word observer to mean awareness, being conscious, or just plain the sense of being alive? Whereas I was referring to the observer as the action of the past, of memory. How thought interprets what the senses take in, or how thought plays this trick of dividing itself, of 'looking at itself', while pretending that there is an entity who is looking, a permanent entity. This is how I was using the word, anyway.

I had a similar thought about this. When K. speaks of the observer being the observed, I take it in the same way as the 'thinker' is the 'thought', or the 'experiencer' is the experience...that the seeming separation between them is illusory. The thinking that there IS something apart that 'sees', that is 'aware' that is not 'person' is not something that the observer/thinker/self/I can ever 'know'. It is a belief, isn't it? It can be comforting to 'think' that I am in essence not this "beastly little self" but actually the "world" as K. says or "Being" or "Awareness". It is comforting. But is it any different than a belief in 'spirit', or God, or higher dimensions, etc. Isn't all that idea of an 'Other' a comforting belief that there is something other than this mess? Isn't any thinking like that just an 'escape' from 'what is'? Isn't our feeling that we are somehow special just a 'trick' we've played on ourselves to keep 'madness' at bay?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 03 Dec 2018 #153
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 597 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:

Are you not using the word observer to mean awareness, being conscious, or just plain the sense of being alive? Whereas I was referring to the observer as the action of the past, of memory. How thought interprets what the senses take in, or how thought plays this trick of dividing itself, of 'looking at itself', while pretending that there is an entity who is looking, a permanent entity. This is how I was using the word, anyway.

Dan wrote:I had a similar thought about this. When K. speaks of the observer being the observed, I take it in the same way as the 'thinker' is the 'thought', or the 'experiencer' is the experience...that the seeming separation between them is illusory. The thinking that there IS something apart that 'sees', that is 'aware' that is not 'person' is not something that the observer/thinker/self/I can ever 'know'. It is a belief, isn't it? It can be comforting to 'think' that I am in essence not this "beastly little self" but actually the "world" as K. says or "Being" or "Awareness". It is comforting. But is it any different than a belief in 'spirit', or God, or higher dimensions, etc. Isn't all that idea of an 'Other' a comforting belief that there is something other than this mess? Isn't any thinking like that just an 'escape' from 'what is'? Isn't our feeling that we are somehow special just a 'trick' we've played on ourselves to keep 'madness' at bay?

Peter writing: Hello,
What I am pointing to is not an idea, not a belief, not thought. It is something seen. Is existence a belief? Is time a belief? Is now (nowness) a belief? Those are words of course, but "the word is not the thing". In talks with Bohm,...is K's use of the word truth pointing to a belief or to something seen? Perhaps you must say "I don't know. Reality and truth, they could have used other words. As I see it K is pointing to something (not a thing) to the "other". To something that is beyond matter.
When K speaks of the observer being the observed, (as seen here), he is speaking of what most take to be self which is thought and memory and matter only, being observed.... and by what ?... By memory?

This post was last updated by Peter Kesting Mon, 03 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 03 Dec 2018 #154
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 597 posts in this forum Offline

Dan, As I see it until one can step out of the self the observer will always be a divided off piece of the same self. The looking is by a part, which is looking at a not really separate part. K repeatedly says one must look at the whole...otherwise it's just more of the same...division, conflict, the whole of that continues.

As seen here.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 03 Dec 2018 #155
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 2325 posts in this forum Offline

Peter: Dan, As I see it until one can step out of the self the observer will always be a divided off piece of the same self.

This is true. One can only see/understand the self when one is outside of the self. The self is darkness....the wrong turn that K talked of...and only light can see/understand that....darkness cannot see or understand anything. It’s really astonishing to step out of it/self, and see the whole thing for what it is....see it’s action in action from outside of it. But one can never say, “I am light....or I am truth”. There is no self ...no I...where there is light...truth...intelligence...love.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 03 Dec 2018.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 151 - 155 of 155 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.)