Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Eric Elejalde's Forum Activity | 4 posts in 1 forum

4 posts  |  Page 1 of 1
Forum: General Discussion Fri, 29 Apr 2011
Topic: Have we fundamentally changed?

hiroshi ichikawa wrote: If I am not mistaken, Krishnamurti said before he passed away " nobody has changed after having talked for 60 years"

Then, I asked myself if I have fundamentally changed like K wanted people to do??? Sadly, my answer is no,,,, if any, only partially.

Hiroshi, hola, ¿Cómo estás?, saludos desde Cali, Colombia... thanks for a respectfull, frankly treated and well conducted topic. Sorry if I make some mistakes, English is not my native lenguaje...

What it first comes to me reading your message is: "What is fundamental in this process, learning or to have a desire to change as a goal? For me one of the fundamental differences between K. and "other teachings" is how he saws the function of time in the process, because when we talk about change, that means a process in time, but learning is a continuos never ending process, from instant to instant. This is not just for quoting K. work. I know that all we have many things we want to "change" but the process of learning avoid us from the desire to "force" a change, in my case for example I desire to change the way I eat, so I diet and suffer... but the fact is that I have won more from comprehending the way this hapenss in me, that has give me clarity and peace, even if I haven't reduced to much my "beatifull" figure. The paradox is that for learning we have to be so open and void, without a trace of any prejudice against us or others, that by itself learning is the first and last step. But if we are looking all the time if we have change or not, and wath have we change, we convert ourselves in something like and accountman of time. I think Krishnaji just was in his last days, anyway he was a human being, and is difficult for us to know wath was happening enside of him... I can see in their last meetings (with David Bohm and others) that "maybe" because of the age, something become different "maybe" in his brain of the K. I read of the 40's, 50's, etc. Obviously I can be completely wrong, even I hope I am completely wrong. I say this with respect but trying to be sincere...

This like everything that involves K teathing is an endless discussion, because his work has been so rich...

I hope as anybody that we as humankind really make a change, but at the same time wath only we can do is to learn and: "reality will be changed by itself". I understand that for K. change was not a result of the will, but a consecuence of the learning process that lead us to let reality be wath it really is without any forced distortion or modification...

Buena vida,


Forum: General Discussion Wed, 04 May 2011
Topic: la liberación interior

carlos david wrote: porque el problema humano no es un problema ideologico lo ideologico es parte del problema,ya que ello crea aislamiento ,sectarismos,manejos inadecuados de la realidad,sin duda el problema humano nace en este sentirnos separados unos de otros lo cual es producto de nuestra forma de pensar y esta forma de pensarnos esta en cada uno de nosotros en forma de programacion cultural ,por tanto somos ese desorden

Hola Carlos: Que hermosa síntesis lograste en esa sola frase "... el problema humano no es un problema ideologico lo ideologico es parte del problema...". Por eso ideológico proviene de idea, ideal, etc... Toda idea nombra un fragmento, y entonces el fragmento deviene más importante que el todo... además la idea que tan solo describe una imagen se hace algo estático, muerto, mientras el todo es nuevo de instante en instante, es creativo y permanece desconocido e indefinible para la mente. Así que eso que llamamos lo ideológico no es otra cosa que este mundo del hombre fragmentado y virtual... podemos ser sensibles al propio dolor que de hecho no es diferente al dolor de los demás solamente cuando abandonamos lo fragmentado, pero creo que es inútil preocuparse por el supuesto futuro de un mundo sin fragmentaciones, ya que ese mundo ya existe, es este mismo, sólo que nuestra mente que vive en lo virtual del pensamiento lo ve fragmentado, lo único, me parece, que nosotros podemos hacer es vivirlo sin fragmentaciones (en nuestra humilde y por el momento limitada capacidad de hacerlo) y si lo logramos, recordarles a los demás que lo que vemos como fragmentos son realmente flujos de energía de distinta densidad que se funden unos en otros, es decir que las "cosas" no están separadas como las palabras y las ideas nos lo quieren hacer ver, sino en permanente relación y que todavía no ha "nacido" nada separado del entorno. En el universo todo es producto del resto y nada es independiente de su entorno...

Saludos desde Colombia, Eric

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 12 May 2011
Topic: Honesty

Paul Davidson wrote: It must be a first principle to see the need for honesty in self-enquiry.

When we talk about been honest, who is in us the one that is going to evaluate what is honest? To be in a state of perception nothing has to do with someone in us "trying" to be honest with himself. Sometimes our feelings of being honest comes from feelings of been guilt learned in our childhood... anyway our brain, as an animal heritage can't be honest, because it is just trying to survive. As you can see around you it will do anything to survive, and that include to be honest or to lye, both of them. Intelligence (perception) is over both of them, is not honest or dishonest, intelligence is just coherent. Not because is "trying" to be coherent, the result (the action) of intelligence is coherent without a choice, or because is looking for that result. To comprehend ourselves we have to see everything we are in both our honest moments and our dishonest moments. We have to accept that we are both and continue perceiving ourselfs without a choice or evaluation. If you try to be honest, you begin to repress a part of you, to put a policeman in front of your deepest unconscious feelings... A moment after our mind thinks it was honest, finds its real motives, better just to relax and perceive without election. (Been honest it is not easy... ;)


Forum: General Discussion Wed, 18 May 2011
Topic: Thoughts

Yogi Anurada wrote: Thought is an English word. There are a lots of reference to it here. Can any one say what it is (define)?

First: Please forgive my mistakes in English; my original language is Spanish... I understand that the reference of K. to thought is not just for the "abstract" process, but for the physical one… If I’m not wrong, there is a quote of K. where he says that “though” begins with the live organism, that is with the existence of “neural” (or sensitive) system in an organism. This neural system means an organism that looks how to survive in time, an organism that uses fear as a media to look for its permanency in time. Trough all the evolutionary chain the instinct to survive uses fear as a media to indicate a lack of security. Fear in humans is thought, thought is fear, thought can appear in front of “actual”, real dangers, or in front of “virtual” ones. This point is very subtle and difficult to define, but is clear that for us, as “modern” humans, virtual fears are preeminent over real ones. Some of us accept easier some physical dangers, that the “danger” of being called “stupid” or “lair”, or not “very masculine or feminine”. This puts a lot of thought (fear) in our mind. I understand that for K. the “inner talk” is mostly a flux of different densities of fear or security search. So he says that when the mind rest without conflict, intelligence can act, and fear disappear. Maybe us can’t define “abstract” thought, because we will try to do it with thoughts, but for him (K.) all thoughts were the same, just fear, for him there where not more or less important thoughts. I don’t know how it goes in English, but I remember a quote of him that says: “Una mente preocupada es una mente esclavizada, no importa si está preocupada por lo más alto o lo más bajo”, something like this: “A worried mind is an enslaved mind, it does not matter if it is worried about the highest or the lowest thing”...

!Qué tengas una maravillosa vida¡, Eric

4 posts  |  Page 1 of 1