Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Vik P's Forum Activity | 9 posts in 2 forums


9 posts  |  Page 1 of 1
Forum: Experimenter's Corner Tue, 06 Feb 2018
Topic: Evolution

I am wondering and just wondering..maybe going into abstraction in the eyes of others, idk: but i am wondering...will it be acceptable to say that depending on the placement of the observer as in whether placed as a human/individual or placed outside of that as in a point of awareness, the topic of evolution might be perceived and understood differently by each? If the observer sees itself as a point of awareness then i am wondering... if all time will be in the now? And thus all evolution, it's culmination as well as its destruction will be in the now? So creation, evolution and destruction all happening in the now? Coming into existence, evolving and disintegrating all in a moment. For example the passage of the 6000 years of recorded history or of the unfolding of the universe since the current big bang is in the now. The story of the evolving mankind is occurring in the now. In other words whether it's creationism or evolutionism, they are still in the now.

But if what i said is correct, for me and not necessarily for another, then the understanding of time has undergone a radical change, hasn't it? For an observer that is placed in a point of awareness the movement of time i.e. Linear time has stopped whereas for the individual placed in their individualism time is still moving and linear. For the former each moment is a new slice of creation, evolution and destruction. But this understanding goes against the current mainstream scientific paradigms for obvious reasons.

Again, i am not sure what i said can be proved in a lab but as i said i was wondering.

Forum: Experimenter's Corner Wed, 07 Feb 2018
Topic: Evolution

My apologies for not being able to make it clearer, please feel free to delete the comment.

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 08 Feb 2018
Topic: What is experience?

Hello Clive, thanks for the welcome.

Before i start a dialogue on the topic of this thread i would like to make a disclaimer since i am a newcomer and we don't know each other: i approach a dialogue rather simply which happens to also be in sync with what K suggested throughout his life and that is, i go slowly, step by step, humbly, and DO NOT give or receive any handouts. By handouts I mean providing or receiving any ready answers. My effort is to have an interactive dialogue in which the participants are meeting each other in clean motives, equal effort and not where one is doing all the work and another has their legs stretched out as a passive listener wanting to be spoon fed. Also i won't respond to declarative statements unless it includes a question. Does this seem fair and acceptable to you? if so we can proceed and if at any time my approach creates a problem let me know and i will stop contributing.

If we are in agreement then i will start by saying: In regards to your original post (without reading all the responses of others) and since you postulate that "experience" requires a "recognition"...... would it be acceptable to distinguish between experience and experiencing? For an experiencing without an experience? That way the experiencing is ever new?

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 08 Feb 2018
Topic: What is experience?

Thank You Juan!

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 08 Feb 2018
Topic: What is experience?

Wim Opdam wrote: This is a very good distinction to make, does this prevent a remembering of this action ? Recently someone stated that if one remember such an event it did not took place as such !

Hello Wim, your question is a good one but has jumped way ahead if i may say so, if it was me then i will be investigating on what all is involved in "experiencing without an experience". The same goes for Juan E.

Forum: A Quiet Space Thu, 08 Feb 2018
Topic: What is experience?

What is the first requirement of investigation and inquiry into these matters? How does one initiate and continue in an inquiry?

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 09 Feb 2018
Topic: What is experience?

Clive Elwell wrote: Without doing any searching through past posts, I have a memory that I already mentioned this distinction, Vikram.

Yes i see it now Clive, you have made that distinction. I had however followed up with higher octaves when i made that distinction by pointing out couple of other things in a question format and they are "For an experiencing without an experience? That way the experiencing is ever new?". The second question posed by me was addressing your question on the "disturbing conclusion" issue in your original post. Nevertheless, this then brings us us to the point of inquiry where i will ask you to walk me though how you made that determination/distinction? (Is there any other inquiry or insight you have pursued or came upon, apart from what you mention in that paragraph to arrive at the determination?)

After you clarify the aforementioned question and in the interest of pursuing the inquiry i will ask you then to walk me through (if you have done it yourself i.e.) to what are the implications of that determination/distinction in daily living of a human? How does that insight translate into daily living? What does it look like, feel like?

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 09 Feb 2018
Topic: What is experience?

Juan E wrote: Hi Vikram,

You said to Wim (and by extension to me too) that he had jumped way ahead from the initial question put by you with his own question, which may be ... But i was wondering myself if asking someone about the ending result without first inquiring about the possibility or not of what is proposed in the initial question (which was "would it be acceptable to distinguish between experience and experiencing? For an experiencing without an experience?") could be considered also as "jump way ahead" from the initial question ... more when you yourself said in the same post to Wim that "if it was me then i will be investigating on what all is involved in 'experiencing without an experience'"

What do you think?

Hello Juan,

Excellent question! No it wouldn't be jumping ahead in this case i.e. between Clive and I as both of us have already arrived at the same determination. If you will look a little closer you will see that i wasn't asking about the "end result" but still am exploring the original question. Your determination that i was asking about the end result could be an error of perception which will be cleared up as Clive and i proceed. But to give you a hint:

I am not looking for the end result FROM Clive as i already have done my own investigation and found out somethings and it remains to be seen if he has. To find out if both of us have seen and discussing the same things. That's why i had put "(if you have done it yourself i.e.)" next to the question . Since he and I have already seen the same determination, now we will inquire into the "translation" of that determination which is the proof of the pudding. Why is the proof of the pudding important? It has been my observation that "determinations" on their own are kind of looking for "answers" and once found the questioner or the inquirer stops inquiring and forgets that without a translation into daily living any answer or determination is just a theory. So further inquiry and clarity is needed for that determination to translate into conduct. Otherwise we are still living in these appalling discrepancies between thought, word and conduct as we see people live in. Talking about the most sublime of the things and yet living a life of violence and neurosis. Believing something, talking something but doing something totally contrary etc. Their alleged insights not showing in actual daily living. Something you see everywhere including this forum. And this is the reason why further inquiry is needed which you will see presently. Does this satisfy your question?

Forum: A Quiet Space Fri, 09 Feb 2018
Topic: What is experience?

To Juan, Furthermore, both you and Win have agreed to my initial determination of the distinction between experiencing and experience. Both of you have made declarative statements. But agreeing is not your own insight (being a light to oneself) and without one's own insight we haven't even began to look at translation into conduct. Thus i pointed it out that let's take it slow and go step by step and see if both of you will see what i have seen and not simply agree since simply agreeing is impotent. Therefore i asked both of you a question " What is the first requirement of investigation and inquiry into these matters? How does one initiate and continue in an inquiry?" but so far haven't had a reply or seen interest to go deeper into the original determination and make it your own.... to a point where it translates into conduct. The importance of which was touched base in prior response.

I have done the same thing with Clive and one of the two questions i had asked Clive was "how did he arrive at the determination"? His answer will reveal the line of his inquiry (which is what all there of us should have pursued and still can) but have't. Is this becoming clearer?

9 posts  |  Page 1 of 1