Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

natarajan shivan's Forum Activity | 175 posts in 3 forums


Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: About the unconscious mind......Revisited

P Sylvan wrote: if you are interested in exploring the themes in your post together a little further

Paul, yes, let's carry on.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

Sean Hen wrote: He sees not only subtleties of colour in the plumage, but colour of legs, beak, wing projection, supercilium etc.

Sean, is giving attention to details same as exhausting memory? Any effort to get into details prevents exhausting memory or in other words sustains memory/image as I see.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

max greene wrote: Image is psychological, the result of thinking.

Image is what allows recognition as I see, it is not a 'giving life' process.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Can we stop arguing, and think together instead?

Clive Elwell wrote: This is a very important issue..

Clive, I have sent a PM to you.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

max greene wrote: Isn't the recognition, ..... the psychological reaction of thinking?

If there is an effort in recognizing, a process of measurement, then we could attribute thought to it, otherwise it is a simple recall of image in awareness.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

max greene wrote: Does awareness recall image, or does awareness recall memory?

I see both memory and image as same, both has validity only in the moment of perception and not outside it. It isn't actually a recall, it is a coming together in the event of perception.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

max greene wrote: In the moment of perception (sensing) there is no image.

In sensing, there is always something sensed from which the memory/image of it cannot be separated.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

Dan McDermott wrote: This 'exercise' was very 'interesting' in that it was very difficult not to go (fall?) into the 'duality' of thought with a thinker, a 'me' but simply stay with the thought...but when that did happen, to just pick it up again and try to see what ever thought was there, for itself.

Dan, if someone were to ask what you were doing at those moments, what would be your reply? As I see, if it is something you won't be doing in your normal course of living, there may not be any insight coming out of it. Maybe I am wrong.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

Dan McDermott wrote: K.'s challenge to that group;

It appears to me, if K's quotes can be listened to, it asks of only one thing, that whether can we go together or can you transform to see this is what I am asking of you, nothing more, nothing less. Wholeness whenever it encounters anything separate, gets a question to it as how it can be whole without the listener to which it speaks to. It can't experiment with the listener, nor can it ask to do exercises, maybe I am getting it all wrong.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

Dan McDermott wrote: That possibility N, exists for all of us!

Yes perhaps, but we are always given the moment to see the veracity of it.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 12 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

Dan McDermott wrote: It's great to be alive though, isn't it?

This somehow reminds me about a trick a group of kids did to what they thought to be a 'knowledgeable' person; they took a living ant in their palm and closed it and asked the 'know-all' guy to say whether the ant is alive or dead, so that, anything pronounced by him could be immediately falsified either by crushing the ant or letting it free. 'Know-all' guy just said 'it is in your hands'.

Forum: General Discussion Sat, 13 Feb 2016
Topic: About the unconscious mind......Revisited

P Sylvan wrote: “decoupling of it from memory”, means that thought is no longer being looked at from separation, i.e. from within the field of thought, and that therefore, there is no longer two but one?

decoupling of it from it's starting point which is the reserve as past/memory. As I see, there is no more looking at it continually but we are aware of its beginning, and by letting it happen thus , we are one with it, in unity.

P Sylvan wrote: if I am understanding you correctly that there would be an ongoing movement in and out of Awareness - is this what you are suggesting?

It is a progressive movement of awareness, what we are aware of has been understood in the totality of situation and from that proceeds response as action. In doing, awareness (seeing) is implicit in it without any effort.

We can't extract ourselves out of such situations for an objective understanding, for, we are one with the movement.

Forum: A Quiet Space Sat, 13 Feb 2016
Topic: What irritates us is an opportunity ...

Tom Paine wrote: Of course when an emotional reaction occurs it does no good to deny.

What often happens however is that, by stating that the offended is at fault, the button pushers are let loose, when they are pointed out of their doing they immediately court the logic of offended being at fault, escaping from the fact that button pushing itself is an emotional reaction.

As I see, some people can ride over their feelings which is easily misinterpreted as them having a sense of understanding over it.

Forum: General Discussion Sat, 13 Feb 2016
Topic: Thought Becoming Aware of Itself...

Voco . wrote: There is no gap between perception and thought as it seems to me.

What happens when there is a perception of emotion like anger within, do we straight away proceed with thought? There needs be no gap between seeing and doing, but does 'doing' always imply thought/thinking?

Forum: A Quiet Space Sat, 13 Feb 2016
Topic: What irritates us is an opportunity ...

Jean Gatti wrote: Not necessarily Nat, sometimes buttons are being pushed without the 'offender' even realizing he is pushing buttons and 'offending' ...

That is what I was getting at, it is almost an act out of their own lack of awareness that it takes others to point it out.

Forum: A Quiet Space Sat, 13 Feb 2016
Topic: What irritates us is an opportunity ...

Tom Paine wrote: It's often unconscious.

Quite, it appears more as an attempt towards emotional manipulation to me, knowing exactly what to say to push the button.

Forum: A Quiet Space Sat, 13 Feb 2016
Topic: The Purpose of Memory

max greene wrote: the evolutionary purpose of memory is to prevent a repetition of the past

Memory is the result of incomplete actions says K.

The effect of memory as you say is to prevent the repetition of past. As I see, past in your statement refers to storehouse of partial responses which creates conflict, and memory refers to that which happens along with awareness, therefore the memory you refer to has to correspond to what K calls as self knowing which prevents the response as self.

In any case, as I see, the memory resulting from awareness is not of the details but of the futility of partial actions and therefore of the wholeness in action. It is not something that could be recalled but nevertheless gathers itself up in the act of deepening perception. It is not awareness recalling memory, but awareness is a state wherein everything related to the event is brought into the orbit of perception.

With awareness, we can't say memory is recalled, but it is included. The recall of memory to establish perception is the act of self or in other words, it is a partial action. Getting into details of the observed for the same reason does not free us from division with the observed whereas awareness does.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: About the unconscious mind......Revisited

P Sylvan wrote: in order for thought to be aware of itself

What we are discussing, as I see, can't be approached from both sides, therefore we have to be careful with the usage of 'in order for'.

P Sylvan wrote: ‘starting point’, which includes its mechanism of continuance as the sensed observer (as memory). Is this what you mean or are you saying something other than this?

The starting point is not memory, it arises and flows in perception .

P Sylvan wrote: Further, that in the absence of the observer/observed division, there is an awareness of thought arising from “its beginning” and “by letting it happen”, or in other words, without there being any centre interfering or attempting to change that which arises, there is unity in which awareness and thought cannot be divided because the former factor of division is now absent.

Yes.

P Sylvan wrote: thought can therefore no longer be separated from Awareness itself.

Yes

P Sylvan wrote: So could we consider the following: When the observer is the observed and therefore the factor of division has ended, that Perception is the seeing in which the seen is no longer separated from the seeing, and in that state of unity, thought can be said to be aware of itself as it comes into being?

We can't say anything about such thought, but the fact of it can be evidenced by the absence of conflict despite our lack of awareness about it.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Who are We? What are We?

max greene wrote: the wider our contact and unity with the world because sensing is contact and unity. To the extent of our sensitivity, we are the world.

Max, it appears it is not in sensing that the fact of 'we are the world' is actualized, but in the action that flows out of that understanding. In sensing there is always a tension maintained and therefore unity has to wait for actualization until action is attempted.

In the living reality, to talk about unity only in sensing is half the story. As I see.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Who are We? What are We?

max greene wrote: awareness, understanding and choiceless action are all one, so that with sensing (awareness) there is actualization.

I was questioning the nature of 'understanding' in this context, and also the choice-lessness of action. Yes, in sensing/awareness there can't be choice for then it is partial and therefore self-driven. What would you say is the nature of understanding born of awareness?

max greene wrote: It seems so obvious: take away what is sensed, all of what is sensed, and is there anything at all?

There is always an element of memory projected onto what is sensed, not projected willfully but as a coming together in the event. This, as I see is the sensor/observer, but apart from that, is there not a physical reality for the sensed?

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Who are We? What are We?

max greene wrote: take away what is sensed, all of what is sensed, and is there anything at all?

As I see, taking away of the sensed is the denial of relationship of any kind. Why do we need to take any question beyond that of relationship? By the taking away of what is sensed, we are no more talking about awareness.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Who are We? What are We?

max greene wrote: For you, the operation isn't happening. And for anyone, including the physician who is operating on you, unless the operation is sensed, the operation simply does not exist.

Max, that is metaphysical subjectivism; physical reality doesn't depend on whether it is sensed or not. Unless we are speaking of a subjective unconscious state or a state of sleep, physical reality is very much there, there is no escape from sensing it.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Coming to truth

Brian Smith wrote: Maybe the truth is that I'm not going to meet an attractive and available woman tonight, and that tomorrow it was a fact that I didn't.

Brian, truth is the fact that you were related with the idea (of going to meet someone) in that instant. Truth is the truth in relationship.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Who are We? What are We?

max greene wrote: but this requires others who sense its existence. And so on.

But we are then reducing reality to a subjective affair, how much would that correspond to the living reality.

Do we have such an isolated and independent existence to define world as something that exists only when sensed?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Coming to truth

max greene wrote: The present is the truth.

It appears we can't say anything conclusive about truth, there is as you say both physical and awareness in the present and that is a fact. Perception, as it deepens is an unintended attempt to reach out for the unknowable, a search for truth, through relating with the physical in the present and in awareness.

Do we need memory to establish the fact of existence? It appears physical reality is independent of the existence of observer/memory.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Who are We? What are We?

max greene wrote: I don't see sensing as isolating.

The point which was attempted to put across is that, there is no sensing without something sensed.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Who are We? What are We?

max greene wrote: There is the universe and evolution, but until there is life and awareness, who or what is there to say that the universe exists?

As I see, there is no need to establish an order of precedence, they are all together. Our reality is that of a human being, and that is the fact to be honored.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 15 Feb 2016
Topic: Coming to truth

Brian Smith wrote: The truth is I'd want to at least want to get her tits out.

Yes, that is what I was getting at, every human being born wants it the very instant it gets into contact with the world, and it gets that without even asking, the relationship.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 16 Feb 2016
Topic: About the unconscious mind......Revisited

P Sylvan wrote: So our question remains: “can thought be aware of itself?”

What is the state in which a question remains unanswered?

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 17 Feb 2016
Topic: About the unconscious mind......Revisited

Ravi Seth wrote: Emptiness.

P Sylvan wrote: Listening

Yes, but the state of freedom being pointed out thus, using these words, is incomplete without the U-turn of it as responsibility in action, and it is IN such actions that the questions are answered. To put it bluntly, it is a sense of false freedom which sustains a question as unanswered.