Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Experimenter's Corner | moderated by John Raica

Are we actually machines?


Displaying posts 421 - 450 of 551 in total
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #421
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
That'a a lot of I am's, Paul. How about 'being as nothing' - or 'not-knowing', which seems to have been K's fundamental attitude to life

sorry to jump into your conversation. But yes, that is the essence. If you are anything, ie you ego identifies with anything, then you build a resistance against life. When I say that "I am a Krishnamurtite", then that automatically means, that I am in opposition to that "which is not Krishnamurtite". All identifications are sand castles, the tide of life constantly crashes against those and erodes them and the erosion is conflict. Truth is the utter lack of resistance against life. If you belong to an organization, follow a pattern, a method, then all of that is exclusive and a form of resistance, but truth is all-inclusive. And you can merge with the truth only when you yourself become all-inclusive, ie remove the source of any resistance, of any conflict within you. And that can happen only when you become as nothing. But not consciously, your ego cannot identify with nothingness and then crash with not-nothingness, for that would again be conflict. That you are nothing means that you have no resistance against life whatsoever. You are all-inclusive, you never supress, never controll anything, identify with anything. The will, the supressor, the censor, the controller, the chooser is the mechanical. If there is no will, no censor, no exclusor who identifies with that and is in opposition to that, there is liberation, truth, joy. I am living it now. I do not know if it will last, or how long it will last, but I am certain it is the truth. And Paul or anyone else cannot erode it, because I am not in opposition to Paul. He is the tide of life just like anything else is. If Paul or anything else in life crashes with something inside me, then that something inside me is the sand casle, a resistance, the non-real. And if Krishnamurti foundations or Krishnamurti forums become exclusive, ie. allowing an elite few, excluding others, they lost the Krishnamurti massage (haha! I like the Freudian slip of words)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #422
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
his sounds to me like a big stretch of a rather simple 'statistical' observation made by Heiseberg: that the actual location & momentum of the 'electron' cannot be precisely defined except within a certain 'probability field'

but this (not so simple) observation by Heisenberg is needed to save the whole physics
https://chem.libretexts.org/Core/Physical_and_T...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #423
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Agreed, Jan but -at least for myself- this is a "Job for...Meditation", and since its wanderings beyond the shores of the known are 'unpredictible' ( to say the least !) it seems that our
knowledgeable 'thinking brain' has a natural tendency to 'cheat' itself (and therefore others ) by just assuming that this or that Teaching is 'telling the truth and only the truth'. So the 'ego' choses to walk on the 'right' side of Truth - which is quite similar with betting on the 'winning horse' ( and expecting to win the Big Prize)

I think that every serious truth-seeker should realize, as a first step on his journey, that he is, in fact, not searching for truth, but is looking for escape, for consolation, for shelter away from the conflict and pain of life. The ego has nothing whatsoever to do with truth, it cannot choose to walk in the shadow of truth, it cannot take shelter in it, it cannot posses it, own it, come to it. Only when the ego gives up, lets go, stops asserting itself as will, as desire, as censor, controloer etc., can the truth shine. The ego is the noise. But truth comes in silence. The ego is the known, in silence comes the unknown. Unknown is life. Meditation is not a process of seclusion and exclusion of the outer world, but of inclusion of everything. If you welcome everything that life brings, offers, you can meditate anywhere and anytime.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #424
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 9 posts in this forum Offline

Jan Kasol wrote:
Hi Dave, the interpretations are always a trade-off between determinism and locality. If you interpret it deterministically (by means of hidden variable theories), you must admit nonlocality (faster-than-light influence), if you admit locality, you must give up realism and determinism. It is pointless to discuss these things theoretically, without going into concrete experiments and mathematics. The wave function describing the quantum system is a vector in a complex mathematical space (Hilbert space). The evolution of this vector (its rotation in the space) is governed by the Schrödinger equation and is deterministic. But an act of measurement "collapses" the wave function and a concrete result is realized. All experiments show that the result was not predetermined, it is pure, absolute chance, indeterminism.

Hi Jan,

I wouldn't use the words "trade-off" in this case. All sorts of combinations of local/non-local and deterministic/non-deterministic interpretations exist. Also, I don't think any understanding of Hilbert-space is necessary to get the gist here, nor the exact details of the wave-equation. Clearly if you want to compute exact probabilities of events/state-changes, or extend these results with any precision, e.g. to take in account special relativity, then yes you do need the maths. The evolution of the wave-function is deterministic as you say, but the mechanism by which specific possibilities are realized, is still very much being debated.

But lets say the universe is part-deterministic/part-non-deterministic system, you are either trapped by rules, or at the mercy of a dice. Is the determinism/indeterminism debate really of any import?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #425
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 9 posts in this forum Offline

John Perkins. wrote:
My view, dave, since you ask, and which is based on experience, is that understanding can be 'acquired' without any time element involved. In other words the 'acquisition' can be instantaneous. One implication of this is that there is no brain movement, ie. it is not 'brick upon brick'. It is not there, then it is there. This is entirely in keeping with the K teachings and for me it is a fact of life, and it never went away.

Ok, interesting. Are you talking of time by the psyche? or time by the clock? or both?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #426
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
That's a lot of I am's, Paul. How about 'being as nothing' - or 'not-knowing'

Is that a personal lifestyle choice, John, or a fact? But hey, I do feel yopu have missed my purpose in the list of "I ams." In fact it was in answer to Jan's rather impertinent question: ""let it go and find some other occupation in life" which suggested my occupation in life was Knet. I was only saying that it is not. "I am" in that case was not a list of petty identifications, it was a liost of things that occupy my life, my interests and activities. 'Being as nothing' is not an occupation or an activity and played no part in that list. But okay, how about 'being as nothing?' How does it work for you, John? It is very easy to say to someone 'be as nothing' but what does it mean in practice?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #427
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

The thing is, the thread is about the mechanical aspects of life and what it means. We can easily divert to 'being as nothing,' the nature of instantaneous total perception, theoretical physics or any other thing, as people fancy. And that is what we usually do. Instead of finding our way into any question we go back to repeating pat phrases that satisfy and sustain our belief systems. There is more comfort in that than turning in a new direction and discovering something freshly.

While this discussion has proceeded, even with all the twists and diversions, I have come across new things every day. For instance, yesterday I brought up the issue of the mind's function of seeking patterns, a function which may be one of the important aspects in what we are seeing as mechanical functioning. Why? Because the perception of pattern arises at the cross-section of sensation and memory. Therefore there is a stimulus (sensation) and response (memory) aspect at the centre of this absolutely necessary function.

That may seem an 'intellectual argument' to you but for me it is not. Though I use my intellect to guide the expression of what I am seeing, the seeing comes first. I have to see the thing in order to find an expression for it. Verbal expression is primarily an intellectual function while the seeing of the pattern function derives from the pattern function itself. I see the pattern of the pattern function. But it only becomes visible when I am looking at it. These discussions, for me, help me look deeper into things and discover what is going on. That is why I am here. Do I think K is responsible for my seeing? No, but reading K opened up a new avenue for me and continues to help me on my way (my way, not his).

I have been challenged by some posters to "accept" K's teaching in its entirety. I am sorry, that is impossible for me. I do not have a mind prone to this thing you are calling "acceptance." To me (and to K) acceptance is abhorrent. So, I go on probing and questioning.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #428
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

Jan Kasol wrote:
Only when the ego gives up, lets go, stops asserting itself as will, as desire, as censor, controloer etc., can the truth shine.

I take the above statement as an example:

What is the state of the mind that writes such? I don't know, of course, but two possibilities strike me. Either it is a mind where the ego has "given up" and in which, as a result, "truth is shining" or it is a mind that has accepted a certain idea about the ego giving up as a condition for truth to shine, and is using its imagination to extrapolate a number of conclusions from that idea.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #429
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

Words are powerful, powerful in the sense that the mind uses words in a way that invests them with power, the power to command that mind that initially invents them.

A word can have power as a descriptor and used as such, the mind tends to turn upon each word. That is to say, the word is invested at the same time with the power to describe the world and in that very description, it influences the mind that is using it.

Apart from the powers the word has as a descriptor of the world: In being invested with the power to turn the mind, how does this actually work? The word attracts the attention in this direction or that, according to the nature of the mind that is within the field of its attraction and according to the meanings that mind ascribes to the word.

Words also act, internally, as power-brokers. That is to say, they have the power to open inquiry and to close it, to begin and to stop. In general, when a word is used in a categorical sense, it closes the inquiry. When we say, "this is that" we have reached a conclusion and move on from there, never looking back. In this discussion it has been said that "we have looked into it and found that thought is mechanical (that this is that). Then we moved onto other things.

But the same word may open an inquiry rather than close it. It can be asked, for example: "What do we mean by saying thought is mechanical?" or "When we say thought is mechanical, what is the actual thing, process or event we are describing?" or "What is the quality we are giving that title to?"

By simply saying "thought is mechanical because 'a,' 'b,' or 'c'" we close of any further inquiry and we move on.

I have observed that it is this sort of categorical thinking, of declaring "this is that" or reaching a conclusion and moving on that most resembles the mechanical side of thinking. Why? Because in that case thought has become a functional tool rather than a mode of inquiry. In that case it is as John describes, placing one brick after another to complete the wall.

When I started this thread I sought a free-flowing inquiry and I tended to resist various stops, bars, early conclusions and categorical statements, where I found them. But this has been taken as being abrasive, derogatory or disparaging. On top of that I am told I have been "exposed" etc. To me, this is exactly as I described it, kindergarten behavior. Yes, that is also a categorical statement but one that describes a moment, not a permanent state of something. Genuine inquiry may start at any moment, I have no doubt. But for it to happen, the other is required to quieten down.

It would be funny were it not so serious, that such a lot is written about the so-called free state but each has his/her own take on it. For instance, Jan says it is required to give up the ego. John says it is not. Yet both imply that they are speaking from experience or from reality, or from some level of truth that supersedes thought and conditioning. They both write well, but let's face it, their instant insights into what is, contradict each other.

Words are powerful. We should use them wisely.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #430
Thumb_017 John Perkins. United Kingdom 78 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
Ok, interesting. Are you talking of time by the psyche? or time by the clock? or both?

I'm talking of time by the clock. Chronological time. I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by 'time by the psyche'. Care to explain a bit?

Que Sera, Sera.

This post was last updated by John Perkins. Tue, 18 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #431
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
Ok, interesting. Are you talking of time by the psyche? or time by the clock? or both?

Ah, the clock is definitely a machine. But is the psyche?

By the way, I wonder how any mind would know that its understanding has been acquired "instantaneously."

Certainly, if a particular understanding and/or insight has been incubating unconsciously for some time, a sudden triggering of the insight into consciousness may appear to that consciousness as "instantaneous," but would it be or would that just be a conscio-centric bias?

The psyche may have two senses of time, the conscious and the unconscious.

Apart from that possibility is the division is the concept of time between Cronus and Horus, time by significant events and time by the clock. Chronology is a list of significant events in the order of their arising but not related in any regular temporal order such as the days of the week, the months of the year etc. What is involved is selection, not counting. Horology is the regular movement or march of time itself that can, for example, be measured by a clock. What K calls psychological time does involve a high degree of selection (and imagination of future events) and is therefore more like chronology than horology, though it is a mixture of the actual and the imaginary or fantastic.

Interestingly, the word 'actual' in Latin tongues implies 'now.' Neither the past nor the future are 'actual' because only now is actual. English has ripped the word from its temporal context and left it hardly distinguishable from the word 'real.' In Latin tongues it is almost as if 'actuality' implies the horizontal line of everything that is happening now whereas 'reality' can be vertical, implying the course of an event through time.

It is revealing to discover when your mind is operating in the horizontal mode and when it is in the vertical mode.

This post was last updated by Paul David son Tue, 18 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #432
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

Paul David son wrote:
or it is a mind that has accepted a certain idea about the ego giving up as a condition for truth to shine, and is using its imagination to extrapolate a number of conclusions from that idea.

if that were so then the mind would be corruptible, because then the truth would be just another sand castle that could (and would) be eroded by life. You would need to exert a lot of mental energy to defend the illusion (that you are living in truth) from life and ultimately from yourself. Fear would constantly be lurking in the background, that that crutch, that security would be taken from you (as it ultimately would). The mind would need to exert a lot of mental energy to supress all that threatens the illusion. There would be a lot of resistance against life in such a mind. But if you welcome everything that comes both, from outside and inside, there is no resistance. The ego is resistance (just one of several ways how to look at the ego). And when you have no resistance, nothing can disturb you, you are at peace. Your mind in incorruptible.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #433
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
I wouldn't use the words "trade-off" in this case. All sorts of combinations of local/non-local and deterministic/non-deterministic interpretations exist

Hi dave, no they don't :-) Several years ago, I studied QM intensively, because it is such a delightful intellectual candy. It is mostly realism vs locality, and locally realistic theories were definitely ruled out by experiment. You either need to give up locality (no FTL influence) or reality (no reality exists prior to measurement). I forgot a lot over the years, I would need to brush it up.
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/quantu...
"In the decades since, numerous experiments have exploited Bell’s insight to demonstrate that quantum entanglement is every bit as spooky as Einstein feared: There are no hidden bits of reality that act “locally” to predetermine quantum measurement results."

But is has no relation whatsoever to Krishnamurti. We could speculate if the quantum indeterminacy has any relationship to free will and derive theories, but ultimately, all these theories are very limited.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #434
Thumb_2474 Dan McDermott United States 159 posts in this forum Offline

This was K. in 1938 saying that what he was 'bringing' was something new:

"We have sedulously cultivated through generations of tradition, of morality based on will, of compulsion, the mechanical attitude of life, calling it by sweet-sounding words; in essence it is purely mechanical, intellectual. The process of discipline, of violence, of subjugation, of resistance, of imitation - all this is the outcome of the development of the mere intellect, which has its root in fear. The mechanical is overwhelmingly dominant in our lives. On this is based our civilization and morality - and at rare moments, when the will is dormant, forgotten, there is the joy of the spontaneous, the unknown.

I say that in this state of spontaneity alone can you perceive that which is truth. In this state alone can there be wise action, not the action of calculated morality or of will."

So to me if that makes sense and it does, then the challenge is, remain in the thrall of the intellect and never come upon the "spontaneous" (except in those "rare" moments)...and then what comes after that is decided by desire, interest, health, one's own personal conditions etc. The 'search' starts off quite coarsely and how it becomes refined is also decided by many factors. But ultimately, through insights it can be seen that the 'search' is just a continuation of the intellect's control with a goal of more 'security'. So it's a journey of discovery and I think its very necessary and I wish others well for all our sake.

When there is only fear without any hope of escape, in its darkest moments, in the utter solitude of fear, there comes from within itself, as it were, the light which shall dispel it."

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #435
Thumb_017 John Perkins. United Kingdom 78 posts in this forum Offline

Paul

I've pointed this out before, probably more than once in fact, but I'll try again. Your most recent avalanche of posts drive powerfully into a complexity which it is instantly obvious to any sensitive observer can only keep going the same way. Ie. no matter what point or points happen to be picked up on, the investigation/discussion can only get more labyrinthine and there is no way anything is going to get resolved. This is the modus op you evidently adore but not only does it evidence itself useless for anything other than creating friction and frustration but it is totally contrary to K's own exploratory methodology. K could go into the deepest of stuff but it never got complicated. The reason, I think, is twofold: firstly he was invariably talking about something real, something that meant something to the people around him rather than having been plucked out of the ether; and secondly he (equally invariably) knew what he was talking about.

You see, you always drag people into the place you yourself evidently love to be; a battleground of turmoil out of which you're always able to pick snippets that make it sound as if you're on to something when you're not. It's the art of the politician. I fear you missed your vocation.

Que Sera, Sera.

This post was last updated by John Perkins. Tue, 18 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #436
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

Jan Kasol wrote:
if that were so then the mind would be corruptible . . . And when you have no resistance, nothing can disturb you, you are at peace. Your mind in incorruptible.

This is an assertion. It may be true or may not be. On what basis is the assertion made? Is it also an extrapolation or is it an experiential fact emanating from an incorruptible mind?

Please don't answer with another "if."

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #437
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 9 posts in this forum Offline

Jan Kasol wrote:
Hi dave, no they don't :-) Several years ago, I studied QM intensively, because it is such a delightful intellectual candy. It is mostly realism vs locality, and locally realistic theories were definitely ruled out by experiment. You either need to give up locality (no FTL influence) or reality (no reality exists prior to measurement). I forgot a lot over the years, I would need to brush it up.

Well according to this, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_o..., you have Many-Worlds which is deterministic/local, Copenhagen which is non-deterministic/non-local, Bohmian which is deterministic/non-local, and Consistent Histories which is non-deterministic/local.

I also studied these things some time ago, including the Aspect experiments, but have forgotten most of it. We could take this up again on another thread sometime perhaps?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #438
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
the mechanical attitude of life

Yes, indeed. This is one reason why I like K. Here he talks of 'mechanical' in terms of the quality of an attitude to life. A mind that would prefer life to be as predictable as a machine, mechanical, determined according to a moral purpose or the point on a compass.

Certainly I find it so. There is a tendency for the human mind to get stuck in its pattern-seeking mode at a certain level of conclusions. Then it wants to stop seeking any more patterns. It rests on its laurels. The mind would prefer to find security in "this being that" then finding wonder in all the imponderables.

If mental laziness drags us down we might do well to wonder why we are so lacking the energy to get ourselves up and be more than a tool for our own survival.

I feel a danger in getting bogged down with ideas such as that "thought is mechanical" and building up an ideology from there. But certainly we can witness the mechanical attitude to life, the will that life should as be simple and certain as a machine. To place such demands on life may simplify things for a while or within a limited space but in the end it acts to create a new complication elsewhere and add to an already conflictive environment.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #439
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

dave h wrote:
Copenhagen which is non-deterministic

Come on Dave, I've been to Copenhagen and its as deterministic as any other place. I took the ferry from Malmo in 1973, with John Salter (I wonder whatever became of him). We'd driven down from Goteborg. I recall ordering a "tulip pulser" from a stand. It was a sort of hot dog. The guy was determined to plaster it with every type of pasts he had at the stand, yellow, red, onion etc. I tried to stop him but it was no good. In the end he chased us off, wiped the hotdog clean and threw it back in the hot water. I never went back.

This post was last updated by Paul David son Tue, 18 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #440
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

Paul David son wrote:
This is an assertion. It may be true or may not be. On what basis is the assertion made? Is it also an extrapolation or is it an experiential fact emanating from an incorruptible mind? Please don't answer with another "if."

It is coming from a mind that is a peace, at harmony with itself and with the world. The mind has no resistance. Every form of resistance is a sand castle, that is corruptible. Nothing can stain the mind. It perceives clearly and knows the right value things, because its perception is not perverted by thoughts of loss and gain, greed and envy. There are still thoughts, there are still reactions of like and dislike, of past and future, but their roots are not deep. The mind can experience discontinously, as intervals between thoughts (even if it is only once or a couple of times a day) the state without will (ego, observer, resistance, choice). That state of silence is ultimately beyond thought and feeling, yet a culmination of both, and indescribable, and when the mind reemerges of that state, it is regenerated. Everytime the censor dies, the mind is reborn, made innocent, unburdened. That state without thought is bliss, and out of that state joy, peace and love are born.

Who but yourself can tell if your mind is corruptible or not? If it can be disturbed, it is corruptible. And if someone else tells you that his mind is incorruptible, he could be telling the truth or he could be lying. There are a lot of spiritual poachers who try to esnare the unwary into their nets.
https://forum.culteducation.com/index.php

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #441
Thumb_avatar Peter Kesting United States 41 posts in this forum Offline

There's lots i would like to say about a number of subjects that have come up here, but i would like to first get back to the thought experiment.

Jan suggests that a duplicate Peter would be just as conscious as the original. If so, one wonders who would that new one be. I can remember asking how is it i am this one and you are that one. That new Peter would surely come to wonder about this strange state of being "this one". Why me and where did i come from, and how did i come to have this particular beingness.

So that is one of the possibilities were a second Peter assembled the two of them moveing in perfectly synchroniszation each in his own in identical insulated space.

We can consider a second possiblity. If a perfect material second were assembled even though the movement in that second exactly paralleled that of the origional at every level of resolution that second "person" might have "no one" in it at all. There might be just the movement of matter and energy there.

Among those who think about artificial intelligence there are those who wonder why there is consciousness at all, because they see what computation is as pure mechanism. They consider the material world, and as they are seeing things a computer should be able to replicate any human action without this unnessary consciousness added on.

So in the second case it seems that it might be that if an identical copy in an identical space were set in motion there might not be "anybody" in there at all. I see this as there being just blackness in what is seemingly a second Peter with every particle in that one and every partical in that space moving sinchronously with its dual in the first.

But if this "light" could be there in the one and absent from the other then we can consider removing it from that first one also. So that these two chambers and thier contents would then be completely identical, blackness only in each, and we will allow that everything in each could continue without interruption in parallel synchronously.

We'll put this "light" that we are removing away in a safe place where there is nothing happening.

Mean while in both chambers everything that is going on is being recorded without disruption. Sensory cells are responding, nerves are carrying impulses, memory is being stored in the matter of the brain. In each chamber there is the identical reading of a page, the thought involved activity in the brain, the identical taking of a drink of water, the taking a bite of a sandwich, moving of the body, changing position.

If after a few minutes this "light" is put back into the original it will immediately have access to memory as if it had never been away. And there would be no awareness of its having been away, thought and memory being matter. Its history there intact in each brain including the events during its absence .

Now if we remove this "light" once more we could replace it not into the one in the chamber from which it was removed but into the Peter in the other chamber. It would again have no awareness it had ever been anywhere else. It would have access to a lifetime of memorys in a brain that had only been recently assembled, a brain which didn't even exist just little while earlier. It would have in that one complete access to a remembered life that had, in spite of seeming just as real as its actual life, a life that had for that brain never actually happened.

This experiment could be extended to another person, to the reader, Two chambers you in one and and a duplicate in a second. This that we are calling "light" in you could be exchanged from on chamber to the other. But it could als be exchanged with the "light" that is here in Peter and neither of us would be aware of the exchange. The one that was seeing thru these eyes would then be seeing thru those eyes. I would become you and you would become me and we would not have any awareness of haveing ever been been the other.

It seems to this writer that this "light" is what is actually the self. The matterial being including its history is only what we mistakenly think we are. All that is matter only is conditioned, is conditioning.

As seen here this is the seeing of it all with one look that K is talking about. This "look" allows the ending of identification and that allows the observing of what had been mistakenly seen to be the observer when the "observer is the observed".

Out of computer time. Next thing is to see that there are not two things that are "light" but it is one. There is nothing in the one that will allow it to be distinguished from the other.

This post was last updated by Peter Kesting Tue, 18 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Apr 2017 #442
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 536 posts in this forum Offline

Paul David son wrote:
. But okay, how about 'being as nothing?' How does it work for you, John? It is very easy to say to someone 'be as nothing' but what does it mean in practice?

Thanks for asking, Paul. In fact it works in the sense that my life is now an open-ended opportunity for learning - a learning by total 'immersion' rather than one in which you are learning more details about what you knew before. The difference is qualitative and this kind of learning in which you are leaving (literally !) the shores of the 'known' is its own reward- probably in the same sense in which a creative musician feels fully rewarded by the very quality of the music he's playing rather than by the standing ovations or public recognition occurring after his performance (or by ...their absence)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #443
Thumb_a1056283319_2 Tom Paine United States 49 posts in this forum Offline

From today's QOTD...K. on the 'mechanical':

"There is always a war between the spontaneous and the mechanical. Please do not adapt this to suit your own religious, philosophic terms. To me, what I am saying is vitally new and cannot be twisted to suit your particular prejudices of the higher and the lower self, the transient and the permanent, the self and the not-self, and so on. Most of us have, unfortunately, almost destroyed this spontaneity, this creative joy of the unknown from which alone there can be wise action. We have sedulously cultivated through generations of tradition, of morality based on will, of compulsion, the mechanical attitude of life, calling it by sweet-sounding words; in essence it is purely mechanical, intellectual. The process of discipline, of violence, of subjugation, of resistance, of imitation - all this is the outcome of the development of the mere intellect, which has its root in fear. The mechanical is overwhelmingly dominant in our lives. On this is based our civilization and morality - and at rare moments, when the will is dormant, forgotten, there is the joy of the spontaneous, the unknown.

I say that in this state of spontaneity alone can you perceive that which is truth. In this state alone can there be wise action, not the action of calculated morality or of will."

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 19 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #444
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
"We have sedulously cultivated through generations of tradition, of morality based on will, of compulsion, the mechanical attitude of life, calling it by sweet-sounding words; in essence it is purely mechanical, intellectual. The process of discipline, of violence, of subjugation, of resistance, of imitation - all this is the outcome of the development of the mere intellect, which has its root in fear. The mechanical is overwhelmingly dominant in our lives. On this is based our civilization and morality"

Thanks, Tom, the whole passage you quoted is well worth going into and is right on topic. I had noticed the header today but hadn't followed it up. Again, thanks.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #445
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Thanks for asking, Paul. In fact it works in the sense that my life is now an open-ended opportunity for learning

Yes, John. I do understand that. It seems to be the way to go. Life is also an open-ended opportunity for acting. Learning and acting go hand in hand. I am learning a lot from these exchanges.

May I relate something that happened today? Ana took our youngest grand daughter, yasmin, to her new school today. She's been there for two weeks and was pressing Ana to take her as she wanted to show her her new friend, Pietra. She was so happy that Ana went with her and held her hand tightly. Approaching the class, Yasmin rushed up and grabbed two classmates by the hand. They were overjoyed to see her too. The teacher ushered Ana into the class but upon entry little Yasmin was horrified. "No, Ana, you must go. You can't come in here."

So keen is the human brain to adapt to order and rule that the relationship of 'school' could not co-exist with the relationship of 'family' in a little girl, brought up in freedom, and just turned four. The world of 'school' was her own realm, her own relational game, one which it was sacrilege to intrude upon, even when invited.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #446
Thumb_screen_shot_2017-04-11_at_14 Paul David son Brazil 202 posts in this forum Offline

Jan Kasol wrote:
t is coming from a mind that is a peace, at harmony with itself and with the world.

Thank you, Jan. I am happy for you. Maybe you were born with it. Maybe it came to you out of the blue without an effort or maybe you applied yourself to finding it. Maybe the whole thing is a misunderstanding or a self-deception. How could I know. But please, this is you. This is your experience and may not apply to anyone else. I cannot be you. I cannot become you. I cannot have what you have. I have what I have. You cannot have that. No one is an example of what the other can or may become. We say we are this or we are that and hold the this or that up as a possibility for the other.

I accept you as you are, Jan, and whatever you are, it cannot be held as an example for what I may be. I am indifferent to that state you describe. I do not touch it, except if I indulge my imagination, but then I only touch the image I have made of it. I really do not care if you are this or that. It is neither my problem nor my solution. But thank you for explaining.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #447
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 9 posts in this forum Offline

John Perkins. wrote:
I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by 'time by the psyche'. Care to explain a bit?

The activity of memory, but in relation to a self that was X/Y/Z and should become A/B/C. My feeling is that this kind of thought is no more, or no less, mechanical than technical thought.

Something occurred to me, which is that you can almost see where the conflict is in the language we use. I was this. I am this. I want to be that. It's not the same 'I' in each case is it?

This post was last updated by dave h Wed, 19 Apr 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #448
Thumb_baboon-9186 dave h United Kingdom 9 posts in this forum Offline

Jan Kasol wrote:
We could speculate if the quantum indeterminacy has any relationship to free will and derive theories, but ultimately, all these theories are very limited.

Yes, you're right.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #449
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

Paul David son wrote:
I do not touch it, except if I indulge my imagination, but then I only touch the image I have made of it.

maybe it will show to be an act of imagination with me also. I had these states since I was a teenager. There are 3 ways, how these states come about (in me). 1) drugs like LSD, psilocybin, ibogaine - these can definitely give you a very real glimpse into that state, but it won't last. I experimented with those as a student 2) fasting, for example a 10 day water fast. This will produce that state in me also, usually after the 5th day or so, it can last up to one month after finishing the fast 3) I had those states without any outside help. This usually comes after intense inner struggle to reach that state. I try everything possible, meditate, try to study Krishnamurti, observe myself etc. Nothing works in the end, and I become almost depressed, apathic. But then, after the struggle, it suddenly dawns on me, that the problem is my will - my will to achieve that state, my will to have this or that, the will constantly wills to have its way. And once I understand that, the will will stay silent, or disperse. And then something new is borne. I had periods in my life (when I was maybe 16, then a couple of times later) when I entered that state of spontaneous joy, but then the worries, problems of life, stress through examinations, relationships etc. took over and I lost that state.

Let me quote Meister Eckhart: "give up your own will, so that you can be transformed into the will of God.". The will, the maker of effort, the chooser, the observer, the ego - all names for one and the same thing. You cannot reach that state without struggle, and when you come at the end of that struggle (out of despair that nothing works), that in that despair it might dawn of you, that the will to reach, to will to possess is the barrier that prevents you from that. So you give up, let go, but not as an act of will

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 19 Apr 2017 #450
Thumb_hot-sale-font-b-cool-b-font-cat-animal-poster-custom-font-b-wallpaper-b-font Jan Kasol Czech Republic 101 posts in this forum Offline

Hi John, thanks for you comments. The original Eckhart (from whom Ulrich Tolle borrowed his name and renamed himself to Eckhart Tolle) had the same insight as K

"The most powerful prayer, one wellnigh omnipotent, and the worthiest work of all is the outcome of a quiet mind. The quieter it is the more powerful, the worthier, the deeper, the more telling and more perfect the prayer is. To the quiet mind all things are possible. What is a quiet mind? A quiet mind is one which nothing weighs on, nothing worries, which, free from ties and from all self-seeking, is wholly merged into the will of God and dead to its own."

When I had those insights in the past, they could last several months, but then I got slowly caught in the troubles of life - examinations, earning a living, family, existential worries, friends, loves - and slowly, gradually, the mind became entangled and lost this state of spontaneous happiness and joy and sense of freedom and clarity. And now I feel I am having that state again. Once you have this insight (that the will is the root of sorrow), the mind will somehow be on guard. K likened it to a poisonous snake, with witch you live in one room, you must be constantly on guard. And so a mind that had insight into the fact that will is the root of sorrow, is on guard and gives up the will constantly. I believe that the state is real, that it is not an illusion. You write: "The new 'will' is not as visible as the first, it is taking a more 'rational' form". If that is so then that state is an illusion and will perish, you havent really given up. Giving up your will is not as easy as snapping your fingers. You have to give up without wanting anything in return, otherwise that would be just exchange. Anytime you try giving up, but find nothing but frustration, the reason is, that subconsciously, you expect something in return, there is continuity of your "I". If you really can give up, to the depth of your mind, I assure you that it is the same state that K was talking about. There is joy, there is silent mind, there is creation, there is clarity of mind, there is no fear. The mind is free from top to the bottom

Is is only a matter of language. "Giving up your will", "dying to the known", "abandoning the ego", "having no resistance to world", "dying to time" - same expression for the same thing. Giving up is psychological death.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 421 - 450 of 551 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.)