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

reflections at the end of the year.


Displaying posts 91 - 120 of 177 in total
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #91
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1718 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
If I AM the problem - and this is not just a theory, it can be seen with the arsing of every thought - then there is nothing that I can do. Therefore I must be silent.

And "I must" is just more of the problem?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #92
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
And "I must" is just more of the problem?

it could be. Conventionally it does. But I am using the word in the sense that everything points to the necessity of silence. At the same time it is seen that "I" can make no move towards silence, as I am noise. Perhaps this is one of "impossible questions" beloved of K.

Do you not think, Dan, that the perception of the absolute necessity of silence (that is, seeing that all other movements are contradictory and futile) in itself may bring about that silence?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #93
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
the perception of the absolute necessity of silence (that is, seeing that all other movements are contradictory and futile)

Does our language betray our intentions? Or is language itself biased? The sentence above presupposes a goal, and exposes value judgements.

Another way of addressing the silence/thought situation might be : The fragmentation of rationality can never encounter the wholeness of potential, emptiness and mystery.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #94
Thumb_open-uri20200202-16653-rg2qz5-0 Mina Martini Finland 418 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
it could be. Conventionally it does. But I am using the word in the sense that everything points to the necessity of silence. At the same time it is seen that "I" can make no move towards silence, as I am noise. Perhaps this is one of "impossible questions" beloved of K.

Do you not think, Dan, that the perception of the absolute necessity of silence (that is, seeing that all other movements are contradictory and futile) in itself may bring about that silence?

Mina: Clive and Dan, I hope you do not mind my stepping in.

The impossible question is still an experience of thought when it has been pushed, (by its own voluntary inquiry into its own nature or perhaps by some other major crisis in one's life) into a place where it feels trapped in not being able to make any movement.

So I cannot take a move, neither left nor light...somehow feeling that everything I, as thought, would do, is more of the same limitation..

Can I look even deeper, and be totally open to the total dissolution of ANY experience/past, so that the 'absolute necessity of silence' (thought is relative and cannot really feel this absolute choiceless necessity!) IS found in the energy of silence itself!

Otherwise there is still division, thought and speculation, no matter how subtle.

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #95
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

At the same time it is seen that "I" can make no move towards silence, as I am noise

Yes. This seeing...understanding...is what K. calls seeing that the ‘observer is the observed’, right? Then no movement is possible....it is seen that more movement...more thinking ...is the noise. Our normal consciousness is one of me trying to do something about what I observe...to act upon it. But what I’m observing is me.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #96
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
So I cannot take a move, neither left nor light...somehow feeling that everything I, as thought, would do, is more of the same limitation..

No, I think Clive was actually seeing the fact(understanding the truth of it) that he is the noise....that observer is observed, not “somehow feeling”, as you call it. Seeing/understanding...is what brings change. This is what K called the necessary ‘self knowledge’. Clive of course can answer for himself.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #97
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
This is what K called the necessary ‘self knowledge’.

Here’s K. on self-knowledge.... To Be Human | Fifth Talk in Madras:

“What is true cannot be repeated, and if repeated, quoted, it ceases to be the truth; it becomes a lie. A lie can be propounded, propagated, but not truth; when a truth becomes an instrument of propaganda, then it ceases to be true.

Self-knowledge is not a conclusion, an end; it has no beginning and no end. You must begin where you are, reading every word, every phrase, every paragraph of the book of self-knowledge. To understand its contents there must be no condemnation, no justification, for all identification and denial put an end to the stream of self-knowledge. To be awake to the movement of the self, there must be a certain freedom, a spontaneity, for a thought that is disciplined, controlled, molded, can never pursue the swift current of the self. A disciplined mind is shaped in a mold, and so cannot follow the subtle promptings of the different layers of consciousness. But there are rare moments when the disciplined mind, the drugged mind, is spontaneous, and in these moments there is a comprehension of conditioned responses, when thought can go beyond its own limitations.

Wisdom is not in a book, it has no secret source. You will find the real very near; it is in yourself. But to discover it there must be the activity of constant alertness. When thought is passively aware, watching and following, then the map of self-knowledge unfolds itself. Self-knowledge is not by the study of the self in isolation, for there is no isolation. To live is to be related, and isolation is merely escape. If thought is alertly passive, watching its own movements and flutters, then when sleep comes the conscious mind is capable of receiving the hints and intimations of the hidden consciousness. He who desires to discover the real, the eternal, must put aside every book, every system, every guru, for that which is can be uncovered only through self-knowledge.“

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #98
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1718 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
Can I look even deeper, and be totally open to the total dissolution of ANY experience/past, so that the 'absolute necessity of silence' (thought is relative and cannot really feel this absolute choiceless necessity!) IS found in the energy of silence itself!

Otherwise there is still division, thought and speculation, no matter how subtle.

Aren't we always in the embrace of Silence (or whatever name we give to the Nameless)? How could it be that any 'thing' is 'outside' of 'it'? We hear about this 'state','bliss', emptiness, etc and 'think that it is somewhere else, something other than 'what is'. How could that be? It is always 'here' because there is no other 'place' but 'here', and now? There is no "path" to it and no 'time' in which to get there. Thought with 'time' creates the phantoms that we chase...

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #99
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
It is always 'here' because there is no other 'place' but 'here', and now?

How do you know it’s alway here? Maybe it takes vacation when we’re busy killing each other.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #100
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1718 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Maybe it takes vacation when we’re busy killing each other.

Let's go a bit deeper. It can be threatening for thought to question its belief of what is 'right' and what is 'wrong'. You and I may not want to do that. But right and wrong is always changing depending on the era, society, the civilization one is living in, isn't it?...But really, is there such a thing as universal right and wrong or is it always subjective? Is it 'wrong' for black holes to 'swallow' planets and stars...Isn't it a product of thought? For psychological security? Isn't it something one has 'adopted', something one can be sure of,i.e., "At least I know what's right and what is wrong" (even if I don't follow it) Right and wrong depend on the 'aim', the belief, the 'goal', the morality. 'Awareness' on the other hand, is neither right or wrong,-it just is. And that somehow we could be ever outside of 'what is', the 'Now', the 'Presence' doesn't make any sense to me. But yes, are we searching, struggling, suffering, killing, saying this is wrong and this is right, this should be and this shouldn't etc....? Absolutely, but when we blame our 'problems' on the 'absence' of the 'Nameless', we shift the blame from what we are to what we think we should be...What we are are killers, lovers, saints, devils, and many other things, that's 'what is'. If we say it 'should' somehow, some way, be different then 'do it'. And if we can't 'do it', and be what we think we 'should' be, at least we shouldn't blame 'God', or jump to the conclusion that the 'Silence' is on "vacation".

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #101
Thumb_open-uri20200202-16653-rg2qz5-0 Mina Martini Finland 418 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Aren't we always in the embrace of Silence (or whatever name we give to the Nameless)? How could it be that any 'thing' is 'outside' of 'it'? We hear about this 'state','bliss', emptiness, etc and 'think that it is somewhere else, something other than 'what is'. How could that be? It is always 'here' because there is no other 'place' but 'here', and now? There is no "path" to it and no 'time' in which to get there. Thought with 'time' creates the phantoms that we chase...

Mina: Yes, absolutely so, although thought can think/experience otherwise. (which does not make it true of course, or it does, but for thought only)

Therefore it is seeing/understanding the whole of thought/mind that remains the essential issue.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #102
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 832 posts in this forum Offline

Manfred Kritzler wrote at #80:
Many years I did not understand why Krishnamurti told us things like „the house is on fire” because ...... That sounded like when we would behave in a different way the world will be better. On the other hand he told us to be choiceless aware of what is.

For me this was a direct contradiction.

Hi Manfred,

As I see it, there is no contradiction in those 2 statements. The contradiction is rather in, on one hand, thinking that I AM aware of the dire circumstances the world is in and, on the other hand, acting “as usual” - i.e. in pursuing the usual pleasures, ambitions, grudges, desires, conclusions, and so on. Can one BE aware of the house burning and still carry on these “usual” pursuits?

If I am choicelessly aware of the whole (i.e. not just of my personal circumstances), then I inevitably understand that “the house is on fire”, it seems to me. I don’t need anyone to tell me it is so. No?

So IS the house on fire? Am I directly aware of it?

If I am, do I conclude that I don’t know what to do about it - and does that conclusion come from my ideas about what action should be, what it should look like to do something about stopping the wars, injustice, corruption, brutality, global warming, pollution, the destruction of the oceans and lands, and so on?

And if I am NOT aware, if I do NOT deeply and irrevocably see and understand that the house is on fire, then I CANNOT act appropriately, can I? If I’m not aware and don’t understand it for myself, how CAN I act appropriately or “differently”? If I’m not aware, merely being told it is so does not make me become aware. If I accept it on authority, then I just look for a method, idea or ideal of action to conform to what I think might be appropriate. No?

The action of awareness and understanding has a different quality or energy from the action taken as a result of being TOLD that the house is on fire. Doesn’t awareness naturally bring about a quality of seriousness which imbues action? Don't awareness and seriousness have their own choiceless action? The action of awareness might not take the form I expect or desire. But action there is. Just as there is action when my child is terminally ill. Understanding that my child is terminally puts an end to frivolity, superficiality and triviality, for example. Doesn't it?

Awareness is choiceless by nature, isn’t it? It is the intellect in its isolation which weighs, compares, analyzes, etc., and then chooses its action - what to do. Awareness - and the understanding which comes from awareness - doesn’t “do” that. It is not that first there is awareness, then a review of my options, then choosing action. Awareness doesn’t act from knowledge/the past.

As I see it, it is not necessary to chase understanding or to formulate a plan of action. Understanding and action come to me (not "me" the ego - but me, the human being, the mind) not through effort but in awareness, as I see it.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #103
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

Choiceless awareness does not mean no action - just no choice and no effort.

Imagine you are playing baseball. Playing outfield (sorry I know Nothing of baseball, I am thinking of the guy getting bored doing Nothing standing there just in case someone whacks a ball his way), daydreaming. Suddenly someone shouts : "Hey you!" You look up. The ball has been whacked for miles and is coming your way. You step forward, reach out, and the ball falls perfectly in your hand.

If you had been paying attention, you might have known the score, you might be aware of the Psychological pressure, your ego would be thinking of win or lose. You might self consciously do your best. Fingers might break, balls might fall.

(Maybe I'm thinking cricket; baseball players wear enormous gloves)

Look, see, let go

This post was last updated by Douglas MacRae-Smith Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #104
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 832 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
Choiceless awareness does not mean no action

I'm not saying that it does.

This post was last updated by Huguette . Sat, 25 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #105
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote #93:
Does our language betray our intentions? Or is language itself biased? The sentence above presupposes a goal, and exposes value judgements.

Where is this goal that you say I have presupposed?

This is what I wrote:

Clive Elwell wrote:
it could be. Conventionally it does. But I am using the word in the sense that everything points to the necessity of silence. At the same time it is seen that "I" can make no move towards silence, as I am noise. Perhaps this is one of "impossible questions" beloved of K.

Do you not think, Dan, that the perception of the absolute necessity of silence (that is, seeing that all other movements are contradictory and futile) in itself may bring about that silence?

I don't see any goal implied. Any goal would be part of the "all other movements are contradictory". i was talking about the negation of all goals.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #106
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
Can I look even deeper, and be totally open to the total dissolution of ANY experience/past, so that the 'absolute necessity of silence' (thought is relative and cannot really feel this absolute choiceless necessity!) IS found in the energy of silence itself!

Yes Mina. Thought's perceptions of its own limitations (and I would say these are absolute limitations, even though thought is relative as you say) does .....point to? ...... lead to? ..... initiate? ..... this dissolution of the past, of knowledge. I am not sure I would use the word "total" as you do, but certainly things start to shatter.

I am also not sure that I would use the phrase "can I look even deeper" since it is this "I" that is being shattered. But some 'process' starts, is initiated. Something irreversible, it seems.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #107
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote #95:
Yes. This seeing...understanding...is what K. calls seeing that the ‘observer is the observed’, right? Then no movement is possible....it is seen that more movement...more thinking ...is the noise

Yes, this is another way of putting it. There is an assumption in the (illusion of the) thinker that he knows, that he sees the truth, that he is in some superior position. But that position is always only a fragmented one, a limited one, and will always be contradicted by another position (unless one is totally insane and has given oneself over entirely to some belief, some idea). The thinker is always trying to move, trying a=to act as an independent entity, but actually no movement is possible in the light of awareness.

Seeing that the thinker does not have a special position, seeing that this thinker is merely part of thought, brings about this shattering that i talk about above.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 25 Jan 2020 #108
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5683 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
There is no "path" to it and no 'time' in which to get there. Thought with 'time' creates the phantoms that we chase..

Indeed, Dan

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #109
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

Dan: but when we blame our 'problems' on the 'absence' of the 'Nameless', we shift the blame from what we are to what we think we should be...

You totally misunderstood my post I think, Dan. I only said, ‘Maybe he was on vacation.’

What we are are killers, lovers, saints, devils, and many other things, that's 'what is'.

Yes....what is. What is is clearly not the ‘bliss or Silence’ you originally spoke of.

If we say it 'should' somehow, some way, be different then 'do it'.

No...only seeing the unthinkable horrors we create...not thinking about, but choiceless awareness of the horror of war, for instance. Perhaps you have never come face to face with such things....perceived them directly.

And if we can't 'do it', and be what we think we 'should' be, at least we shouldn't blame 'God', or jump to the conclusion that the 'Silence' is on "vacation".

Well, K once said that only an insane God would create the horrors we see in our world. Or something similar, that only an insane God would create the world as it is(the world of human suffering). That God must be insane to allow these horrors (slavery, war, etc).

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #110
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1718 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Well, K once said that only an insane God would create the horrors we see in our world. Or something similar, that only an insane God would create the world as it is(the world of human suffering). That God must be insane to allow these horrors (slavery, war, etc).

"Maybe"...but (he also said)"you are the world"! The one committing the horrors and the one shaking his finger at them. Both. "You are the world".

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #111
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
"Maybe"...but (he also said)"you are the world"! The one committing the horrors and the one shaking his finger at them. Both. "You are the world".

I know. But he never said that Silence, bliss, was always there....that we were always in the embrace of the Nameless. How do you know that any of that’s a fact? (Post #98)

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #112
Thumb_open-uri20200202-16653-rg2qz5-0 Mina Martini Finland 418 posts in this forum Offline

Dear Clive,

Mina>Can I look even deeper, and be totally open to the total dissolution of ANY experience/past, so that the 'absolute necessity of silence' (thought is relative and cannot really feel this absolute choiceless necessity!) IS found in the energy of silence itself!

Clive>Yes Mina. Thought's perceptions of its own limitations (and I would say these are absolute limitations, even though thought is relative as you say) does .....point to? ...... lead to? ..... initiate? ..... this dissolution of the past, of knowledge. I am not sure I would use the word "total" as you do, but certainly things start to shatter.

Mina: Yes. The word 'total' means that there is even a moment of timelessness in us, space without thought, (totally without!) from where a ray of light can shine in..as the blanket of clouds reveal a spot of clear sky, a ray of light comes in and starts then spreading to all directions...Yes, something irreversible then happens and the light starts doing its work in consciousness. -There is an element of a process in all this, for the light to be shed on even the subtlest forms of conditioned thought in oneself.

So, from the point of view of this process I understand that the word total does not sound accurate, and at the same time, the light and the awareness themselves are never anything else but totally purely one, undivided.

I wonder if this resonates there at all...

Clive:>I am also not sure that I would use the phrase "can I look even deeper" since it is this "I" that is being shattered. But some 'process' starts, is initiated. Something irreversible, it seems.

Mina: Oh, here I see you use the word 'process' too, yes, exactly so. Together we have gone through some of the processes so beautifully, coming out of them and having only love for one another...:-)

Of course I did not mean the ego doing anything even when the wording was 'can i look even deeper'.

From the post I initially replied to it was not clear whether your description of 'the absolute must of silence' and at the same time 'thought not able to take any step' (because its limitation is seen) were said in any an experience of contradiction OR were those words said in silence itself where no word or experience enters.

Thought can come closer and closer to the door of silence, through earnest self-inquiry, but it must be be left outside, like one would leave shoes neatly in front of a door before entering...and when there is awareness, the shoes are taken off so beautifully, with grace, humility and gratitude..because one is no longer identified with the shoes but realises one's own true nature as awareness itself..

This post was last updated by Mina Martini Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #113
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote:
Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
Choiceless awareness does not mean no action

I'm not saying that it does.

Sorry Huguette - I wasn't meaning to disagree, just adding to.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #114
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

Mina Martini wrote:
Thought can come closer and closer to the door of silence, through earnest self-inquiry, but it must be be left outside, like one would leave shoes neatly in front of a door before entering...and when there is awareness, the shoes are taken off so beautifully, with grace, humility and gratitude..because one is no longer identified with the shoes but realises one's own true nature as awareness itself..

After reading your recent posts lately Mina, I feel like you are giving a lecture/talk...speaking from authority and knowledge...like a talk by a so called ‘spiritual teacher’. OK I think I said something about that previously, so I’ll leave it at that. But what you’re saying often totally contradicts what K said...and most important, my understanding of K....NOT thoughts or feelings. I want to share an excerpt from a discussion K had that might be relevant here...Dec. 1985, Rishi Valley teacher’s discussion:

K: Suppose you don't know, how will you then start? I don't know. How will you, not knowing, begin?

RH: It must begin that way because then it is...

K: You understood what I said?

RH: Yes.

K: Not knowing, you begin.

RH: Yes.

K: Not experiment. You begin. I wonder if you understand what I am saying. Is it that we all know and therefore we do nothing?

RH: And bully each other.

K: I am not being clever. This is not being astute or cunning. Somehow I feel we are all striving after something that we inwardly feel is important. You understand? And therefore we never start with saying, 'I really don't know. Let us move together'.

KJ: Isn't it in not knowing you do move together, because in knowing...

K: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. So, start with yourself. Do you... You start with knowing - I am not being personal - and you botch up the whole thing. I come along or he comes along and says, 'Sir, I really don't know how to build this house. I don't know anything. Let's talk together.' You are not instructing me. I am not instructing you. Let's see what it really means not knowing. What is the content of not knowing? Is there any content to not knowing? Is that a different quality of the brain. You understand? Because we say, 'Yes, I know about this. I know about that, and god of course'. You know, we know every damn thing. So, you and I start with not knowing. That is an immense thing. I don't know if you follow.

KJ: Yes.

K: It is not you are experimenting on me or I am experimenting on you, but I don't know. I am not weak. You understand? I am not weak. On the contrary I am full of this extraordinary energy which is free from knowing. So, we talk it over, not knowing, what is the content of not knowing. And we have to eat food two hours later. You follow, sir. I don't know if you follow. Won't some of you say something? Is it time? It is time, I know. Aren't you tired of your long journey?

RH: Not yet.

K: This is the last...

RH: Teacher's talk, yes.

RD: It seems the mind is knowing. Knowing is the very nature of things.

K: Is the brain. It is the nature of the brain. Knowing.

RD: So, when you say, 'I don't know, let us find out'. You will find out in talking over, but it will still be knowing.

K: When you say, 'I don't know', if you really say it to yourself, what takes place? Don't conjecture up things. What actually takes place when you say, 'I really don't know.' I really don't know what's the other side of the mountain. Right? I have never taken the trouble to climb. I won't imagine. I won't - et cetera. So, I want to find out what it means to look over the mountain. Either climb the mountain if I can, or I can't. But there is something still on the outside, beyond the mountain.

RD: How do you know? Why do ask that question?

K: What question am I asking?

RD: When you ask this question...

K: What question?

RD: That there is something else.

K: 'Maybe', I said. You didn't listen. There may be something beyond the mountain. Right? To find that out, either I have to climb the mountain to find out or say, 'Sorry, I don't know what is beyond it.' Right? You understand?

RD: I am not sure I understand.

K: What is the difficulty, old boy? The mountain suddenly - drop. Maybe. So to find out I have to climb the mountain. But I can't climb the mountain. Right? I am too old or too young or too inexperienced. I can't. And I won't imagine what is on the other side of the mountain. So, I say, 'I don't know what is on the other side of the mountain.' Right? It may a sheer precipice or it may be the most beautiful of valleys. Right? I don't know. I won't pretend. I won't imagine. I won't get emotional about it. I don't know. If you go up there and see, don't tell me. Your description won't satisfy me.

Shall we stop? It is time.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #115
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1718 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But what you’re saying often totally contradicts what K said...and most important, my understanding of K....NOT thoughts or feelings.

But what you just posted by K. is all about "not-knowing" so your 'understanding' of K may be all off the mark. You don't know, I don't know, but maybe Mina does...and like k. maybe she has touched that "vast emptiness". You don't know, I don't know. Why criticize what you don't know? I say, let what she and K and others say, go to some place deeper than that in yourself. Real "listening", yes?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #116
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 93 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But what you’re saying often totally contradicts what K said...and most important, my understanding of K.

Then discuss those things.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #117
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

I'd like to add that even if someone has been graced by the light, they should be able to communicate.

Also conflictual dialogue is still difficult for anyone - so the best is to enter into dialogue honestly and calmly. Ask questions - if your interlocuter only has one way of communicating (mystical poetry for example, or au contraire, hard lined incomprehensible rationality) this probably indicates what it appears to indicate - which is of course forgivable, as we are not perfect.

Look, see, let go

This post was last updated by Douglas MacRae-Smith Sun, 26 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #118
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

You don't know, I don't know, but maybe Mina does..

I hope we are not implying that someone here ‘knows’. It’s that knowing that makes dialogue difficult at best.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #119
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3259 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Then discuss those things.

I’ve tried but it’s always some variation of I know and you don’t .... or you are talking from division and I’m speaking from wholeness

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 26 Jan 2020 #120
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 212 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I hope we are not implying that someone here ‘knows’. It’s that knowing that makes dialogue difficult at best.

What are you trying to say? Surely Insight , however rare is possible. Even the smallest insight wants to be shared. We are herd animals.

Maybe you are talking about the problem of pride?

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 91 - 120 of 177 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.)