Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

natarajan shivan's Forum Activity | 166 posts in 3 forums

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 17 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

Tom Paine wrote: Are you trying to say that there's no contradiction between saying God is real and saying God is imagination? Sorry if I misconstrued what you're saying Nat., but it's not clear what you're trying to say.

Imagination has no place whatsoever in the context of God/K's put it differently there is no contradiction between seeing and doing, perception and action.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 18 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

Tom Paine wrote: Are you trying to say that God has a place in the teachings

Yes, so long as it's not reduced to a known.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 18 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

Tom Paine wrote: I'm not sure that it's helpful to bring in the notion of 'God' at all

The question of help is a deviation from the original question posed, nevertheless I am in agreement with what you have written.

K would have objected to the notion of 'God' so long as it hinders one's understanding that one has to start working with oneself, but beyond that, imo, he wouldn't interfere. But K followers sometime's tend to be dogmatic and philosophize to elevate whatever he has said to be a truth which is valid at all times and therefore consider it as sacred and inviolable, the result is that, in-effect one is led back to the original theological ideas one has entertained as will be evident in their attachment to the words, the incomplete understanding eventually withering away.

Forum: General Discussion Sat, 20 May 2017
Topic: Krishnamurti Miscellanea For The Curious

Re: Posts #1 to #5

Reducing K's works to a literary body and positing ourselves as a critic, we maybe right in pointing out that there indeed is a contradiction and as a matter of fact he did read other books.But this criticism involves overemphasizing the conceptual elements and then waging war on words. Note that same applies to K when he did attempt to reduce Vedanta and Upanishads (unknowingly wearing the garb of a literary critic) by overemphasizing it conceptually and reducing it to an axiom of 'ending of knowledge', but importantly he didn't pursue the criticism any further. All in all everything has cancelled out and the discussion could be considered closed, imo.

Forum: General Discussion Sat, 20 May 2017
Topic: Is thought the enemy?

As I see, the enemy IN thought is it's incapacity to be inclusive of paradoxes (to the extent of considering it's own ending). And when it manages to do that finally to a certain extent, to attempt resolving the paradox employing choice, rather than through an experiential reality wherein it manifests essentially as an awareness of thought OR thinking. 'Think on these things' is one of the titles of his book.

Forum: Experimenter's Corner Fri, 06 Oct 2017
Topic: Holistic Education

As I see, Paul's larger point was on why such insight's reflected by ideas are not prompting an action, but instead circling around it by mutually cancelling out all opposing value systems and courting a position of 'nothingness'. A natural progression to action which the situation calls for is what is expected to follow.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 10 Oct 2017
Topic: Conversation on afterlife and the stream of consciousness.

Randall, as I see, it's K's adamancy in grounding everything mystical to physical reality and hence the reference 'physical heat' as a response to 'psychic momentum' in the interview; so that, there isn't any escape from here especially into the psychological realms, and the only thing left being the seeing/action principle. He hasn't deviated an inch away from his position if one may put it that way. But I see your point, when one quotes a part of text to justify personal experiences.., I think we should let it pass.

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 13 Oct 2017
Topic: Being what you are

As I see, there is no contradiction between compassion and ruthlessness other than as a creation of thought. What is compassion if not continual self negation and what is ruthlessness if not the abrupt transformation of self negating process towards taking outward action when we are being confronted with a perceptional challenge demanding it. We think it is ruthless, because, we act as if we accurately know what needs be done in the present(which will always remain unknown). We can't do away with this contradiction by thought but only resolve it in action; by always carrying deep within us the very thing we think is the opposite, therefore it's being ruthlessly compassionate or compassionately ruthless. The very positing of compassion and ruthlessness as opposites has the potential to cripple the sensitive mind, and to cease seeing them as opposites will free us from both, and that is when compassion is engendering it's own action.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 16 Oct 2017
Topic: Being what one is

Huguette . wrote: Pretending to be what one should be - IS what one is.

Believing that "I" should be other than what I am or that "you" should be other than what you are - IS the authority of one's thinking.

Believing that there is another me, a true me, a better me, which is not what I am now - IS the authority of one's thinking.


Huguette . wrote: Therefore these beliefs - all one's beliefs - are also what one is, as is avoiding to face these simple facts ... as is avoiding to face the fear which lies beneath.


As I see, Richard's question was more like, the above (i.e. the insight that observer is the observed) being an ongoing description of our inner state, how is it that it ends up with a conclusion and a vague sense of self righteousness. To put it differently, insight being integral to action, how is it possible that we can split off from it?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 16 Oct 2017
Topic: Being what one is

richard head wrote: K pointed out that the intensity of our passion is not an "easy" endeavor. Most people prefer to sit in a comfortable chair and exchange opinions in a safe (psychologically) environment. Yet seem quite perplexed that no change of habit occurs. Most will deny stagnation and can become indignant when the obvious is pointed out.

As I see, passion is not a matter of endeavor, it is the natural response as awareness to every movement the body-mind complex makes.

Forum: A Quiet Space Wed, 18 Oct 2017
Topic: Who are the 'we continuing in the same path'? (to Juan and all)

Justification, condemnation or identification during observation brings to an abrupt end, the process of self-knowing into self-knowledge.

Without such an end, there is always the factor of humility and innocence in knowing that what I was before is what I am now, all the while enduring and containing with all energy a possible split off. And as this is happening, this is when the highest possible human ideal is im/perfectly grounded in the actual reality.

Forum: A Quiet Space Sun, 22 Oct 2017
Topic: Freeing the Unconscious Mind

Clive Elwell quoting 'K' wrote: What is important is a radical change in the unconscious. Any conscious action of the will cannot touch the unconscious.

The conscious action of will is the part of the same movement as unconscious, only that it is directed outwards. For this reason, it can't do anything with the unconscious but can only limit it by an attempt to control it, i.e. will. As the perception without judgement is ongoing, we don't split it as conscious and unconscious but let it flow as a single continuum. It is then that the personally imposed limitation to the unconscious disappears and along with it the happening of a radical change (which is the ever readiness to meet life in awareness) in it's mode of operation. As I see it.

Clive Elwell wrote: Is it enough to talk about “just being aware of things”?


Forum: A Quiet Space Tue, 24 Oct 2017
Topic: Freeing the Unconscious Mind

Clive Elwell wrote: First of all, can you enlarge somewhat on your words above?

The so called conscious action of will is the separation as observer in the act of perception who tries to direct and control the outward action, and therefore limit the free flow of unconscious based on the value system it thinks is desirable. This separation as observer is bound to lose its continuity in time (for the reason that it’s a part of the free flow of unconscious) and therefore there is always this struggle in trying to become aware all the time.

Clive Elwell wrote: Again, can you explain this phrase "personally imposed limitation”. I am understanding from K's words that the personal – which I take to be a construct of the consious mind – cannot impose on the unconscious? No?

The imposed limitation is the attempt to constrain and therefore direct the unconscious (bottleneck so to speak) by a part of itself, and in that process there is no radical change in the content of the unconscious (but only in the shape it assumes with the induced separation as a conscious will/observer) other than the making of a continual effort in trying to be aware.

Forum: A Quiet Space Tue, 24 Oct 2017
Topic: Freeing the Unconscious Mind

Dan, to respond to the post you deleted recently, the key is what happens in the real time; at the moment of happening, 'the judger is the judged'; and as it is recalled the next day, 'the actor then is the rememberer now. As I see, what we call as conscience, with all it's honesty can go only that far, and when we persist in staying around such a knowing process without gathering all the energy, it will immediately transform alternately between an acknowledgement of suffering and an acknowledgement of self righteousness. The key is to instantly see what such an insight demands of us in the real time.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 26 Mar 2018
Topic: Fake world ?

Wim Opdam wrote: What is 'actual' is very hard to see in this fake world.

Yes, but as I see, the more distorted and perverted it gets, the more eloquently it asks us of integration within. In that sense, there is always an equilibrium maintained.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 06 Mar 2019
Topic: What is passion?

Wim Opdam wrote: do you understand me?

Understanding is the breaking of barrier as internal and external, any thing which qualifies as internal understanding has to necessarily resolve itself externally into dialogue and communion, and as that is happening, semantics shouldn't be a matter of separation.