Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Mina Martini 's Forum Activity | 162 posts in 1 forum


Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 18 Sep 2017
Topic: On being wholly responsible for ANYTHING that happens in the world

Dear all,

Clive was wondering in another thread if K's claim that everyone is fully responsible for whatever is going on in this world, (not exact words) is a little 'too extreme', but of course it is not! The mind, hitting its own limits, might think so, but in fact for any such opinion to arise, we have not gone far (extreme) enough but still move within the measurement and limits of thought.

In short, (if that is ever possible for this writer :-) ) for as long as there is no insight into the fundamental meaning of the statement that we ARE the world, separation from the world (from ourselves in other words!) will persist.

some more thoughts on how each is wholly responsible for anything and everything going on in the world, in any part of it (in any part of human consciousness):

Once the first step in psychological thought - which always implies division - is taken, at that instant the whole of the fragmentation of all humanity is activated, contributed to, nourished.

Any step taken by thought is also the creation of cause and effect, or thinker and thought as separate. That is why thought is based on division.

Likewise, when no step in that limited realm is taken, in other words when no reaction occurs psychologically, the whole of fragmentation of all humanity is stepped out of, or died to.

(For the one stepping out, the world has never existed, because the one to experience anything is not there)

When the whole of humanity, instead of a separate identity, is realised as one’s true essence, it is understood that each one of us is wholly responsible every moment for all of us.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 18 Sep 2017
Topic: Why don't we give our whole heart, mind, to the inquiry? .......

Why don't we give all our hearts and minds to the inquiry, Clive asks.

-Is there already some knowledge involved in your question? (there appears to be)

Knowing about giving one's heart or not giving one's heart, is the same thing.

To give the whole of one's being to anything, means that NOTHING is held back, which means that there is no knowledge of anything coming in the way of total perception!

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 18 Sep 2017
Topic: You will never know who I am

You will never know who I am. Whatever you would experience as 'mina', in any separation from you, is a reflection of your mind. The whole mind of humankind is a reflection, not the truth. But you can come to know yourself, beyond reflection and the false division between you and me that it creates, and there we meet as One ,neither of us existing as images of ourselves.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 18 Sep 2017
Topic: New member

I may delete that account also, in order to create a name that is more harmonious to the eye. :-)

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 18 Sep 2017
Topic: No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)

Tom says in another thread:I can see that as an adult I am part of all of the disorder....the inner is the outer. But the child isn't born with this disorder. It is programmed into the innocent child. And this innocent child becomes the disordered adult without realizing how he/she has been programmed. The programming appears to be 'me'....and 'my life'. Even for a Hitler this is so. His thoughts and feelings seem to be telling him the truth. So in a sense he is an innocent victim of his programming as surely as the young child who is programmed to be a fundamentalist Christian or a violent racist or anti-Semite or a true believing Muslim or Hindu. So the innocent child is programmed by the society to become a murderer or a tyrant like Hitler, and then K says he is responsible for the madness. But he is a product of the madness. Is the child responsible for the programming....conditioning...he receives?

Mina: Conditioning is a creation of the false belief that the thinker is separate from the thought. It is accumulation of thought around the illusion of an ego. **There is really no real entity in this structure, responsible or not. The child is not held responsible, but nothing else is not held responsible either, in this limited sense that an observer can experience the concept of responsibility, always in separation, as 'someone responsible for something'.

BUT: It is exactly in the seeing that there is no entity that is responsible for conditioning, because it is what we ARE, that also means, that each one is completely responsible for all of it every moment, without the separation between the one responsible and what he is responsible for. These two sentences are both pointing to the same.

So, the seeing of this total responsibility for all and everything that is happening in the world happens when there is no division between one and the world or the thinker and the thought, in one. And THAT is the carrying fully of the responsibility in this world, in which it ends. Separation ends.

It is the ending of separation that is the real issue, and not if the child is to be held responsible etc. We have to go to the core, to the eye of the storm as Clive put it once, and not be content with swirling around the essence, speculating about it.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 18 Sep 2017
Topic: No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)

My post was negating the dualistic meaning of the word 'responsibility' and at the same time introducing its holistic meaning. Yes, it has no meaning for/in duality once it starts having a holistic meaning. I was pointing out that no other than a total response, is enough, when it comes to responsibility for the state the world is in. That total response does not come from partial thought/mind and its ideas, including the idea of responsibility for example. Without a perception free from the boundaries of the mind, the conditioned world appears to continue.

Forum: A Quiet Space Tue, 19 Sep 2017
Topic: You will never know who I am

Clive Elwell wrote: That seems right that I can never know you, Mina. Or anyone else of course. All that "I" can know is what has been engraved in in the cells of this brain. So I can know things that you have done, things that you have said, or written. One says "you" for convenience, but it can be a misleading convenience. There is only the actions, the words, emanating from that body/brain known as Mina.

Mina: Yes, all knowledge engraved in the brain cells. Now, a very interesting point is this: for as long as there is the psychological delusion at work, the image of you separate from the image of me, you may for example have an IDEA of 'what mina has done', or an IDEA of what she has meant by saying this or that, which is already an interpretation within the psychological reality, and that also is engraved in the brain cells. What I am pointing to is that for as long as we have not understood the whole mechanism of the psychological, memory contains the psychological also, mixed up with the factual in one big confusion :-), unless the nature of the one to discern between the two, is fully exposed and understood.

Actually I doubt if there is anything purely factual or objective in memory in a state of duality! If there is duality, the illusion of the one to have that memory in other words, even a factual piece of information, apparently completely objective and impersonal, is still claimed to me somebody's knowledge!

Yes, there are only the actions and words coming through this body, happening always only now, and all else is time/thought/interpretation/psychological memory.

Clive:>It is like seeing a tree, taking away the trunk, the roots, the branches, the twigs, the leaves, and saying that the tree still exists.

Mina: Not sure where you are referring to, but I love the description anyway, the holistic approach of it! :-) :-) -Take away all image of the other, and the other is still there, you are also, but in an altogether different place, looking at each other, communing with each other, without the pretension of time and distance!

Clive:>As for knowing myself, there has been a feeling most of the day, sometimes faint, sometimes strong, that putting aside the symbols (clearly a symbol of a thing is not the thing) there is nothing left to know. That is, "I" am nothing.

Mina: Wonderful! Blessed is the one who is no one!!

Clive:>Are you saying, Mina, that 'meet' in this nothingness? That is not seen seen - perhaps there is still a symbol of that nothingness - and so there is not nothingnes.

Mina: Only love. Love is when NOTHING is expected. And only NOTHING, meaning no image, expects nothing. No time in it. Here we meet. Yes, there may still be a symbol, lurking somewhere, attempting to have a say in this relationship, but who cares. Only an image would care and it can be seen through. All is already complete.

Forum: A Quiet Space Tue, 19 Sep 2017
Topic: On being wholly responsible for ANYTHING that happens in the world

Mina:Clive was wondering in another thread if K's claim that everyone is fully responsible for whatever is going on in this world, (not exact words) is a little 'too extreme',

Clive:No, I did not say that. I said:

"Many people find this "a bit extreme", hard to understand - including me."

So I was saying that it is sometimes hard to understand that one is fully responsible for what is going on in the world. Especially when K would say "YOU are responsible for the war in Vietnam".

So my statement was really an invitation to enquire.

Minna: Sorry for unintentionally slightly altering your words!

This does not however change the fact that the 'a bit extreme' is an experience of the mind, and not holistic understanding of what K is pointing out.

And I say so because your utterance reveals that there is some separation experienced, here between your world and the world of war in Vietnam.

Manna Martini wrote: Once the first step in psychological thought - which always implies division - is taken, at that instant the whole of the fragmentation of all humanity is activated, contributed to, nourished.

CLive:Yes, this is how I tend to see it. We ARE the whole of humanity (part of it?), and so any action we take is not 'me' acting, it is the whole of human consciousness acting.

Mina: Yes, beautiful, this is true. Now, we are the whole of humanity. Each part when not separated from the whole by ideas of separation, is also the whole. So, your question mark after the 'part' is indicating, or is it, that there is some difference between part and whole for you? It is only the idea of separation, the thinker, that is deluded to experience itself as a SEPARATE part. In truth, the part IS the whole. Each IS the whole of mankind. Each IS completely responsible for the 'war in Vietman' and the 'neigbours divorce' etc etc.

But, in realising this fully, and the realisation takes place OUTSIDE of this divided consciousness, one is no longer tipping one's toe into the muddy waters where all the wars, psychological and physical, keep going on. BUt not even the tip of the toe must go in, that is already a compromise and truth knows of none!. Either you are in illusion or there is no illusion for you.

When 'you' are 'out of it', (there exists no real 'you' as there exists no place of where you are out), the war in Vietnam or the neigbours disharmonious marriage :-), or your own disharmony, all one package, has ended in you.

The whole world of division has ended in you!!! In 'only one' person!!

('only one' belongs to the realm of experience of thought/division)

But this is tremendous!!!! See the utter potential there is in one person when he realises himself as the whole!!

Clive:For good or bad, for clarity or confusion. But basically we continue that consciousness, unless we "step out of it".

Mina: Yes, we may be fairly sensitive, lead peaceful lives, etc, but still be compromised or unaware within..and in that unawareness we are still part of the 'war in Vietnam'-structure of thought/divided consciousness. ok; if you want to measure and compare :) you can say that you are a little less responsible, but we are not here to compare or to defend ANY EGOS!!!

Clive:>No time for more at the moment.

Mina: Thank you for your time already! Have enjoyed all our exchanges today, private and public, thoroughly!

Love always Mina

Forum: A Quiet Space Tue, 19 Sep 2017
Topic: No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)

Tom Paine wrote: So why introduce the idea of responsibility in the first place? Just say a total response. Not sure how this total response would enter the picture to dispel all the fragments when the mind is identified with any one of the fragments.

mina: Total response. :-) Total responsibility. :-) It is the 'total', the quality of wholeness that is the essence.

In the total response there is no mind, no identification with anything, no fragments.

Mina earlier:>My post was negating the dualistic meaning of the word 'responsibility' and at the same time introducing its holistic meaning

Tom:A holistic meaning of a word that introduces duality?

Mina: Was talking about discovering what is true in the process of negation of the false. Words used may differ from thread to thread, according to what is the 'subject', but the essence remains untouched by any description.

Tom:I only see duality being introduced with that word. It reminds me of the parent telling the child to be responsible....do what they're told. Which is probably a necessity if the child is to survive in the world physically.

Mina: If I may point out that you see duality being introduced by that word exactly because it acts as a trigger for the experience of duality in you. It is not, however, the word itself to blame, it is that which happens in you when hearing that word, which creates/is the experience of duality. It is all a matter of the quality of response.

Forum: A Quiet Space Wed, 20 Sep 2017
Topic: Creation and destruction as one

There exists no 'creative mind'. Creation is the constant destruction of the mind itself.

Forum: A Quiet Space Wed, 20 Sep 2017
Topic: No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)

We can obviously understand intellectually what those words mean, but going further is a whole other story.

Mina: For this writer this is not a matter of the intellect. You talk about 'going further'. So, you feel you understand only intellectually?

Tom: What would introduce this total response(no fragmentation) in the course of one's daily living when there's fragmentation acting....when there's identification with one or more of the fragments? Is there some action 'I'...one of the fragments...can take to have a total response to life? Or do I first have to understand what this 'I' is?

Mina: Well the above is really intellectual, that is the problem. Thought/intellect, which is time, will always come up with subtle excuses which prevent the total response from having the space in which it can take place. It keeps on maintaining itself unless it ceases to do so.

The "Do I first have to understand what this 'I' is" reminded me so much of some words in the Bible. Tried to find them in English but could not. Jesus was asking someone to follow him. This person said he would come 'but first he has to go home to tie his oxen' (something alike)....' -This is exactly pointing out the how thought will try to continue itself, even when superficially looked at (which means that the focus is in the content as separate from the nature of thought itself), it would appear to be doing something else.

No Tom, there is NOTHING 'you have to do first'...There is NOTHING you have to do! It is the doings of thought that are in the way of total response, nothing else!

Forum: A Quiet Space Wed, 20 Sep 2017
Topic: On being wholly responsible for ANYTHING that happens in the world

Clive Elwell wrote: So are you saying Mina, that you feel "one" with all the killing, the slaughter, the torture, the depravity and so on, that is going on in the world?

No, I do not feel one with all the killing. I feel out of it. (not as an image of myself of course)

The world of separation is the world of killing etc.

When one sees no separation from the world of separation, it cannot be maintained in one.

This is all about the TRANSFORMATION of that which appears divided (with all its manifestations like the ones you described) into Oneness.

(the divided does not become one, that is an impossibility, but it dissolves in the One)

Seeing that you ARE the world means that you are no longer the world.

This is ONE TRANSFORMATION. There are no 'two things' in it, no-thing in it.

It is Creation happening now.

......

Your question is one side of the coin talking. When there are both sides simultaneously, the coin (world) is gone.

Forum: A Quiet Space Wed, 20 Sep 2017
Topic: You will never know who I am

Mina:Actually I doubt if there is anything purely factual or objective in memory in a state of duality!

Clive: How often discussions come round to this sort of thing! I know you drove to the airport, and that is a fact, is it not? Of course it is an abstraction from “a larger picture”, but I would still call it a fact.

Mina: Do they? I have not then been around. :-) Further down will reply to the above question.

Mina: If there is duality, the illusion of the one to have that memory in other words, even a factual piece of information, apparently completely objective and impersonal, is still claimed to me somebody's knowledge!

Mina: Yes, well put Mina. :-)

Clive: Are you saying that there cannot be a memory without the arising of a psychological entity who HAS the memory? That is not such thing as 'pure memory'?

Mina: No. I am saying that for as long as there exists an experience of oneself, image of oneself, (which is IN memory, images are memory!), it is bound to give its 'colour' (gosh i do not find a word!), its 'smell', its 'touch', its 'feel', TO THE WHOLE OF MEMORY. Then memory is NOT pure!!! It functions in a state of distortion because the 'me' is everywhere there. You can still insist that some things of the memory are purely factual, but even they are distorted by the smell of the ego, if memory is not totally purified from delusion of someone having it.

Clive:>It is like seeing a tree, taking away the trunk, the roots, the branches, the twigs, the leaves, and saying that the tree still exists.

Mina: Not sure where you are referring to,

Clive: I think I meant this is the idea of the “I”, which always appears separate from its properties, its attributes.

Mina: Oh yes, beautiful...

(cut)

Mina: Only love. Love is when NOTHING is expected. And only NOTHING, meaning no image, expects nothing. No time in it. Here we meet.

Clive: But what is there to meet?

Mina: No-thing is there to meet. That will do for an answer to that question. :-)

Love

Forum: A Quiet Space Wed, 20 Sep 2017
Topic: New member

Tom Paine wrote: Mina M. to keep it simple? Just a suggestion :)

m: Thank you Tom love! :-) You are sweet with your suggestions :-)

"Manna" is a word from the Bible, food from heaven...this beautiful word appeared during a gathering that I held here in my home, amidst very powerful communion with another, and I got the idea from there. But alone it would stand well, 'Manna'...but it must not be followed by any surnames...it wants to stand alone, like 'me' :-) Love.

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 21 Sep 2017
Topic: what is wrong with desire?

Desire is pure life force when it is not in the service of an ego.

Conflict as division exists only in 'psychological desire', as energy which maintains and creates the ego.

It is the pure desire that is the energy that sees through the 'psychological desire' and comes out untouched by it. One is greater than the other. This is all that needs to happen.

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 21 Sep 2017
Topic: Creation and destruction as one

Clive Elwell wrote: In that creation, is anything being created, would you say?

Mina: Well, is not the manifested world, including our bodies and manifesting thoughts, already an answer to your question? :-)

Something CAN be created, and that which is created is really one with the Creator and Creation, but the Creator/Creation can also not manifest, since it is the Unmanifested itself.

And life loves to create...you can sense it in yourself when you are completely one with all that is described above...the creator-creation-creature, moving through one, as the totality of life..

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 21 Sep 2017
Topic: Some K quotes

Yes, a creative mind is a mind that never exists, (in time/thought/memory) but always creates/destroys as one movement

Anyone 'having' such a mind has no mind in the conventional (a mind put together by thought) sense. He/She is carrying only a constant explosion of energy within, instead of accumulating anything. This is the Supreme acting in the world, through a human being.

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 21 Sep 2017
Topic: Creation and destruction as one

Hello Wim, nice to see you..

Mina: Well, is not the manifested world, including our bodies and manifesting thoughts, already an answer to your question? :-) Something CAN be created, and that which is created is really one with the Creator and Creation, but the Creator/Creation can also not manifest, since it is the Unmanifested itself.

Wim:But does this description explain the difference between the created society, which is full of greed, cruelty etc ... etc and the creation of the natural virgin things around us ??

Mina:

To fully understand the nature of creation, by being it, (indeed there is no other 'way'!), is the ending of the observer/observed, and the divided society it is creating.

So, in this sense, the full understanding of "the difference between what thought is creating and what the source is creating " is already living in pure Creation.

That understanding is not of course thought, but its very destruction which IS Creation.

So yes, only pure Creation is, the mind (society) is not.

Explaining the difference between two things of which only one is real, is not the way to go.

Instead, all the energy is in being the Creation, and nothing else exists.

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 21 Sep 2017
Topic: No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)

Mina:No Tom, there is NOTHING 'you have to do first

Tom:Well, K said it...not that that makes it true :) But he did emphatically speak about the need to observe...not in order to reach some goal, but without self knowledge the circus continues.

Mina: The choiceless observation that is described above IS the doing nothing. (it means that the MIND as thinker/thought does nothing) (and when it does nothing, it simply does not exist)

Tom: It's 'business as usual'. I wake up in the AM for instance and I think "I must get ready for work", but I'm tired...and I hate my job. I wish I could just quit, but I need a paycheck or my family won't eat nor have shelter. There's conflict there and maybe conflict with my wife....with my child who is doing poorly in school. All that conflict...and much more...will not resolve itself, right?

Mina: It will resolve itself if your mind stops creating and stirring this same old stuff, its own content!!

Tom:That's why K spoke about 'putting one's house in order'. From the moment I wake up in the AM there's conflict....and again throughout the day at work, or school, with the spouse or neighbor. How will I begin to address the actuality of this conflict filled existence?

Mina: You insist on all that you say, so that becomes your reality.

From the moment I wake up there is the beauty of life. There are things to do and be addressed but everything is done in lightness of heart and mind. There is gratefulness, there is causeless joy. There was even skipping and dancing this morning, hugging my daughter, laughing with her...embracing the little dog..joking...There was/is immense gratitude, wholeness, holiness...I do not hate anything I do, because it is possible to see through any reaction...a big cup of coffee fell on the floor and coffee was spillt on the bed and on the floor and the cup broke...but no reaction occurred to that whatsoever, other than the body cleaning it up...there is no conflict with other people I am in contact with, why should there be...when we are all sisters and brothers...

I felt I wanted to write those things just to balance the negativity that you describe, because I say it is not life at all! There can be a totally different kind of life, life in wholeness and holiness!! If you really refuse, not superficially, but profoundly and actually, to live like you describe above, then that will happen! But if you remain at the level of describing conflict, this is not enough!!

Here's K.:

From 'The Awakening of Intelligence':

K: No. Why is there this cult of effort? Why have I to make effort to reach God, enlightenment, truth, whatever? Why?

JN: There are many possible answers, but I can answer for myself here.

K: It may be just there, only I don't know how to look.

JN: But then there must be an obstacle.

K: Wait.

JN: No?

K: How to look! It may be just round the corner, under the flower, it may be anywhere. So first I have to learn to look, not make an effort to look. I must find out what it means to look. No?

Mina: The looking without time, effort, thought, IS the total response again. It does not need time. It is not of time. Yes, and that total response can be to ANY thought, to ANY part of this conditioned world in other words, so that is why K describes that it 'may be anywhere'.

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 21 Sep 2017
Topic: what is wrong with desire?

Tom and Clive,

" in the very nature of desire itself, there is contradiction. " (quote from K, a part of Tom's longer quote in his reply)

Mina: Yes, that is true. By the above sentence it is meant that in the very nature of the observer separate from the observed, there is contradiction. So, the whole of human consciousness, as a collection of memory, images, knowledge, IS created by contradiction.

The above is all about psychological desire.

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 22 Sep 2017
Topic: what is wrong with desire?

Mina:It is the pure desire that is the energy that sees through the 'psychological desire' and comes out untouched by it. One is greater than the other.

Clive:Mina, this "pure desire", does it have an object, would you say? Is it desire FOR something?

Mina: I love your questions (at times) :-).

Yes, pure desire can APPEAR to have an object, but as a force in itself, it is a force, energy without subject and object. And it is energy without subject and object because it is not energy that comes from thought=division between subject an object.

An example of how it can APPEAR to have an object, but really does not:

Seeing this image of a 4-year-old suddenly noticing a tempting slide in the playground and at that instant the little legs run in great passion towards 'the object of desire', and yet there is really only the joy of living, the desire to be alive as one with the aliveness itself, not at a distance from it. :-)

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 22 Sep 2017
Topic: what is wrong with desire?

K:the nature of desire, in which there is a contradiction, and that this contradiction breeds conflict. We are in ourselves in contradiction, wanting this and not wanting that, wanting to be more beautiful or more intelligent, wanting more power. In ourselves we are in a state of contradiction, and that state of contradiction is brought about by desire - desire for pleasure and the avoidance of pain." Saanan, 1967.

Clive:This sure does seem in contradiction to the quote I originally presented,

K:>"After all, what is wrong with desire? The problem comes in when it creates conflict"

Mina: There is no contradiction at all. The first quote is a description of desire within the observer/observed-loop, which is always in conflict with itself by its very nature and its desires are consequently also in conflict.

The second quote mentions desire without these conflicting elements.

Only when there is an effort (which comes from thought that IS contradiction) to combine the two, is there conflict. The conflict is in the movement of thought, and not in what K is saying.

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 22 Sep 2017
Topic: No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)

Tom and Dan,

I think you and Mina are both right, just viewing your situations from different perspectives. How does Tom get to Mina's?

Tom:Really? But our situations are entirely different. I doubt Mina would be happy working on an assembly line or at the local 7-11 for near minimum wage.....and having not enough money to raise her child in a safe environment...nor living in a crime infested neighborhood.

Mina: No, no, no, a holistic 'no'! To what, you might wonder! To NOTHING, because this is about holistic negation of the reality created by the division, by thought, which seems to be stirred and maintained through your replies.

I am not talking about anything Tom that you think I am. And you keep replying to what you think I am saying. That is the movement of the observer and the observed within you. Direct contact is obscured, although it is not seen of course.

This is not about 'situations', this is not about comparing, this is about the inner state of any one of us which also creates the outer, including the assembly lines or their absence, (including all the life situations you have described, all creations of a divided mind, or their absence) according to what your inner states creates 'in' the world.

I feel the basic and fundamental difficulty in sharing real understanding (by those words I mean understanding in which there is no thought/idea/world) is that energy is all the time being waste of describing the world as if it existed independent and separate from the inner state of any one of us. It appears as the describtion of others, instead of going deeper into ourselves where the whole world is created. No 'others' are needed. But this is not simply seen.

When one's whole life is dedicated to giving oneself away to the hands of life itself, to Intelligence, the whole of life, as one with you yourself, is supporting and helping you to do the work you need to do in the world. Krishnamurti's body was also therefore taken care of, so that the dedication to the Work which is the most significant and urgent in the world blinded by image, could keep taking place. It is absolutely sacred, all of it.

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 22 Sep 2017
Topic: No one is responsible=everyone is completely responsible (to Tom/all)

Tom:Would you prefer I put on rose colored glasses? And tell you lies about the life I see all around? And that I lived for all too many years? If there's a hidden video camera filming the homeless beggars in front of the convenience store here in town, the gangbangers making a drug deal in the alley way...does the camera lie? Thirty-two gang members were arrested the other day in my town in a drug bust...drugs AND guns. This isn't a big city I'm talking about. It's a town of 31,000 people.

Mina: I would prefer no colour glasses at all. All or any colour distorts. Thought is all the distorting colors. Thought distorts because it separates. It focuses on the outer world as separate from the inner world, and that is the distortion. It will forever deal with the reality of the beggars, the gangbangers, the guns, (or whatever might be considered the opposite, the rich, the "priviledged" etc), from this distance, never realising that the outer is its own projection and creation.

The lie is in this way of looking, the lie is fundamentally in this distortion and only.

(of course there is no one denying that what you say is happening, I am going deeper, to stay at the mere level of distorted manifestations is not enough, it does not change this reality that you are describing. The one who truly cares will return back to himself, there is no other place where this insanity can end.)

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 25 Sep 2017
Topic: Creation and destruction as one

Wim,

Wim:>Are we investigating this together or does one have to take your statement for truth ?

Mina: If you took what you experience as 'someone's statement' for truth, that would not be truth, but just some limited idea. Such thing is definitely not wished for at this end!

Feeling completely open here Wim, for anything, no conclusion driven. This very 'state' of openness, of not knowing, is empty of any experience of contradiction (experience IS contradiction/thought!) and therefore there is an absolute, choiceless, uncompromising feeling to it...which may be interpreted by others, understandably, unless we fully live this together beyond ANY thought/division/interpretation whatsoever, as coming from 'someone who thinks she knows alreadly' etc....

So, open, space, although no idea 'what to investigate' , there does not seem to be any content..

But go ahead, here with you...

Wim:Indeed there are no ways to go nor with any explination or description, but not real ??

Mina: Yes, no way..meaning no steps in the division thinker and thought..which is the way of time, of division, of sorrow and contradiction.

Wim:>Yes, the truth plays a role here as well as the lies, they are not made up but those are real we may not imagine life more beautiful than it is and should be careful not to be too philosophical about reality.

Mina: It is exactly the imagination, as thought and conceptual contradictory reality, which have created the wars and the veteran you describe. Life is absolutely beautiful, absololutely free, beyond the boundaries of mind/image/concept/in it. This beauty cannot be imagined. No philosphy can touch it, no mind can touch it. This is not about denying the reality created by thought on earth, this is about going through it. It is only pure percpetion, or the total response that has been mentioned here lately, that cuts through the whole world of thought in a timeless moment, and comes out untouched by it, realising that nothing has been cut, nothing real was there to go through (to experience, in other words) in the first place.

Wim:>Now I can support this argument with a quote from K. but would that adds something to the facts ??

Mina: We must move through the facts that thought has created on earth, as described above. Those facts are there (like the fact of the wars) for as long as we do not, ourselves, discover our own true nature as Peace.

Wim:>Pain is real, but is it necessary ??

Mina: It may be necessary and meaningful, at least as much as it is let to serve the waking up of a human being to their true nature from the nightmare of suffering.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 25 Sep 2017
Topic: Creation and destruction as one

Tom Paine wrote: I doubt you would tell the slave that 'Life is absolutely beautiful', Mina. The young women working in a sweat shop in Bangladesh 10 or 12 hours per day. The Jewish people who lost family members in the Holocaust, not to mention those living in the death camps. This is the modern day equivalent of the crucifixion! The young teenage girls selling their bodies in the brothels in Bangkok. "Father why have you forsaken me?"

Mina: When one fully realises one's true essence as the whole of life, as freedom, as energy without the bounds of thought, as the beauty that is talked of, this very realisation is the most precious gift to all humanity,

The Beauty that is talked of is the energy in which 'the young women working in a sweat shop is Bangladesh 10 to 12 hours per day, the Jewish people who lost families in the Holocaust, the young teenage girls selling their bodies in the brotherls in Bangkok' are being helped in the most fundamental and crucial way.

You do not see the full significance of this, because the separation insists in you, you look from that division...perhaps thinking I am just living 'my own beauty here', not concerned about others, since I am well etc....

It is not this shallow, for heaven's sake, for the sake of all humanity and other life forms on earth!!!!

This is about realising that one needs to completely and absolute be the new foundation on earth, that of oneness, true brotherhood, compassion. It is impossible in such energy, any brothels, to mention an example, to exist!!! There is no other place than ourselves where freedom FOR ALL can be discovered. It is not a personal business, ever! It is about the ending of the personal and the discovery of the universal!

...

When viewed from separation, it is hard to understand how one person living throroughly and fundamentally free, and joyous, would have an effect on others? This happens because the others are seen as separate, and the others are seen as separate because within you yourself the observer-observed -division has not completely been exposed to light where it dissolves.

If we are truly concerned about the state of the world, then we truly change, in ourselves! This real change, this real dissolution of sorrow of all mankind, of all consciouness in its divided state, into Oneness, is the ultimate, the most sublime and sacred action that can ever take place.

All else are compromises, half-measures, coming from the same mind which has created these phenomena you describe, and they do not uproot 'the reality of the brother and the young teenagers working there' fundamentally and completely.

We are here, at least this person is, to be unconditionally and complete free, because that is the only real action the world created by re-actions, (contradictory reactions from thought) is in need of.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 25 Sep 2017
Topic: House in order

This little 4-year-old boy was sitting in my arms, as I was reading a bedtime story to him.

We were sharing this absolute sense of well-being, which only true Love can bring about and be.

There we some 'bad wolves' in the story, which I leisurely changed a little. :-) But even if I had not, that would not have changed much, such was the presence of the power of love between us, in us.

He spread his little hands, opening them to point to all directions in the room, and said, with such true pleasure in his voice: 'Look, the house is in order, everything is beautiful.'

This little boy, from the innocence of his heart, had uttered a fundamental truth, in words also.

Since there is still the ability in him to sense the wholeness, the energy of love, to receive it and to bask in it, this love could not be expressed (and in essence it cannot, its source is beyond any expression!), but the concrete part of it, the room, the order, was what his words were describing.

He was actually himself this order of love, inwardly, and pointing to the outward order. But note, the inside and the outside were not. Only love was.

THIS is the 'house in order'.

It is the Heart that is fully alive.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 25 Sep 2017
Topic: On the ending of stories...

The story does not exist but only for the image of the one whose life-story it is supposed to be.

This insight came after I was, by a friend, asked to 'tell him my story'. I could tell, what 'mina' appeared to be going trough and what she did etc, fairly interesting really :-), but the essence is to realise that our life story exists only at the level of thought, which is not the whole story of what we are, as it moves at the level of what we think we are! :-)

Life happens, but not to anyone. When this is realised, there is really no story to tell because there is no experience of the past. :-)

The present moment carries no story, no content, it just 'is'. :-)

Just wanted to share this insight.

Forum: A Quiet Space Mon, 25 Sep 2017
Topic: what is wrong with desire?

Clive Elwell wrote: Would you say, Dan, that I AM that very wish to move away from myself?

Mina: I am not Dan, but fundamentally we are all one, so it does not matter if I say something here :-)

The movement from thought, which always contains the observer separate from the observed, is what 'moving away from one's true essence', is.

Without this movement taking place, there is no image of you to move or not move away from, at all. Only the essence remains.

Forum: A Quiet Space Tue, 26 Sep 2017
Topic: Creation and destruction as one

Juan E wrote: There's no 'presence' without having looked deeply at own suffering (which is the world's suffering) ... Otherwise, 'presence' is merely an illusion.

m:Yes. In one's own suffering (in no separation from the world's suffering) does suffering of the world continue, or is brought to an end through understanding the whole of it. For as long as there is the subtlest experience of division (of the self), in other words intellectual understanding trying to replace the actual, this cannot be truly lived and understood.