Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Patricia Hemingway's Forum Activity | 2306 posts in 13 forums


Forum: Serious Debate Thu, 27 Aug 2009
Topic: What could be the cause of the present recession ?

Yes - the demand for constant economic growth does reflect the human constant desire for more - becoming. The whole economy is expected to constantly 'become'. It is 'this' - it will be 'that'! When it is quite obvious that the earth just cannot go on sustaining such growth.

It is really a matter of the unsustainable human brain - continually demanding more - and wanting sustainability at the same time. The economic 'corridor of sorrows' - "I am unsustainable - I will be sustainable".

Interesting insight into the inner and the outer of the human being. No difference at all really, is there?

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Sat, 29 Aug 2009
Topic: Krishnamurti and Bohm on the Physical Brain.....

Robert Michael wrote: Dear Klaus,

Are you by any chance the man who shared the following remark with me (on the KFA online discussion forum) that was supposed to have been made by Krishnamurti during a discussion between yourself, K, and David Bohm?

"Very, very soon someone is coming who is much greater than I am and he will lead you to love and understanding." (J. Krishnamurti)

Thank you, Bob M.

Dear Robert,

I never spoke with Krishnamurti. It was a yoke. Sorry that you took it seriously. Of course Krishnamurti never said something like that.

Sorry, Klaus

Bob - there is no need whatsoever for another "someone" to pick up K's mantle. K has said it all - the truth is there for all to see for themselves - or to not see, as the case may be. Only a very large ego would presume to take over from K, and in such a case, quite clearly K's teaching has just not been understood at all.

But it is interesting that Klaus has now changed his identity to Nick M. If he did make that statement to you as you claim, I suspect that he was referring to someone else as the "someone" - and not you - hence the misunderstanding, and renouncement.

So the 'yoke' is on ?????? Followers and those who would presume to 'lead' them perhaps?

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Sat, 29 Aug 2009
Topic: Krishnamurti and Bohm on the Physical Brain.....

Robert Michael wrote: if there is real physical and chemical damage to the brain as Bohm observes and Krishnamurti seems to agree with; is it possible that the damage may be permanent or irreversable? In which case the brain would not under any circumstances be able to become whole or right-functioning and atttain to that rare state of mind and being that Krishnamurti had obviously attained to?

Perhaps the irreversible damage is the continuing need of humans to either be 'leaders' or 'followers' - completely unable to simply stand alone and find out! :)

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Sun, 30 Aug 2009
Topic: Krishnamurti and Bohm on the Physical Brain.....

Robert Michael wrote: However, he never found the right approach to opening men's hearts to radical change. Nor was he ever able to draw up for others a clear map to the mountaintop. Though he certainly tried to. Also it seems most people pick and choose from the things he said merely to suit their own petty self-interests.

And it wouldn't have really surprised me if K did make that statement that Klaus wrongly claimed he did. Since throughout his entire life he complained that no one (within the foundations or among the public) understood him or what went through him, lived the teachings, or attained to the liberation that he had found.

It is not up to K or anyone else to "open men's hearts". That implies power and authority over another, does it not?

As K said - truth is the only authority. Deny that all one likes - eventually one will come face-to-face with truth, even if it is left to the deathbed!

And how can there be a 'clear map to the mountaintop' when truth has no path?

K did not 'complain' that no one understood 'him'. He simply stated the fact that the truth he pointed towards had not been seen by others - (those who were still clamouring around him on his deathbed begging him to name a 'successor' for them to follow.)

It is not about a leader and followers Bob - it is about seeing the truth of human existence, and the responsibility for it, for oneself. Nothing more.

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Sun, 30 Aug 2009
Topic: Krishnamurti and Bohm on the Physical Brain.....

Robert Michael wrote: Seems somewhat hypocritical to me for a man to teach self-reliance to others when he himself lived his entire life dependant upon other people. Along with the fact that he was never completely open and honest about his life.

One only judges in this manner to feel superior. Have you walked a mile in K's moccasins?

Robert Michael wrote: I think K once said that followers are the greatest curse. Which I agree with. I wonder if the same thing can be said of supporters?

Understanding is perhaps support - I do not apologize for understanding - nor do I see it as a curse.

If you 'agree' that 'followers are the greatest curse' - why are you advocating Klaus' quote, and applying it to yourself?

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Tue, 01 Sep 2009
Topic: Krishnamurti and Bohm on the Physical Brain.....

Robert Michael wrote: Bob: If you truly understand as you claim to do, I feel your sharing here would be on an entirely different level than what it generally is, Patricia. You would be directly and enthusiastically promoting the teachings and pointing out various truths about yourself, life, and others which probably wouldn't be all that well-received or popular. Not only here, but in all your daily affairs. You would be a Light and undoubtedly feel its glorious radiance within your being. My feeling is that K's need for supporters, and especially those many around him who were clearly incapable of transformation, was his undoing.

That - (as with all your opinions about K) - is your opinion about Patricia. It is an expectation, born of ignorance and the desire that others should act and emote as you act and emote. Which is nothing more than desiring followers - as in: "BE LIKE ME. K wasn't like me - so he must be WRONG".

Sorry Bob - not going there - it is a tangent. What's more - it is the tangent that a only very big ego goes up. End of communication.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Sun, 06 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Hi Krishnan - Thank you for raising this subject.

Quite apart from the matters already raised in this thread about worldwide disease and pollution resulting from mankind's unnecessary desire to eat animal flesh and products, there is also the sensitivity factor.

K spoke constantly of the deep sensitivity required for the human brain to understand its own disorder and to bring about change.

He also said that, while vegetarianism and veganism will not on its own change the human brain, there CAN BE NO CHANGE while one is consuming animal flesh.

Why talk about 'love' when at the same time one is blindly and irresponsibly contributing to the suffering of fellow sentient beings on our planet because of the desire to eat animal flesh? Where is the 'love' in that?

Forum: Awareness in our world today Sun, 06 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Quite clearly there is a strong link between meat consumption and aggression. In all creatures of the earth, including humans.

And the increasing decline in health - both physical and mental health - is directly linked to the increased amounts of animal flesh consumed, as you say Krishnan. The body has become so insensitive it does not even feel the damage being done to it until it succumbs to cancer, diabetes, obesity or heart disease.

Obviously, for the human body to be deeply sensitive and healthy, a diet of fresh organic vegetables, grains and legumes, fruits and clean water - (a diet free of meat, animal products, alcohol, drugs, artificial foods and stimulants) - is absolutely essential.

Pure sea-salt is all right in small quantities. Salt is only a problem when eaten along with a meat diet, as it combines to clog up the body even further - as does cane sugar. But there are natural sugars in fruit.

The secret is to eat only pure, incorporated (as in 'whole'), organically grown fresh-from-the-garden fruit and vegetables, along with grains and legumes. And to drink fresh water and pure (not bottled) fruit juices.

If you look back to tribal societies, meat was generally eaten when the men of the tribe were about to go off to fight. Now we give it to children and send them off to school and wonder at the playground aggression being displayed.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Sun, 06 Sep 2009
Topic: Young boy kills to please his fiancee``

Just to link back to the other thread about vegetarianism - would you suppose the boy and his girl-friend are meat-eaters?

Does meat-eating feed fantasy, desire, and images - along with aggression?

Forum: Awareness in our world today Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Greg Van Tongeren wrote: Isn't vegetarianism like every other "ism," a divisive philosophy as to what should be? Another belief-system as to what is moral and what is not?

Can a fact - an action - be an 'ism'?

Forum: Awareness in our world today Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Robert Michael wrote: My experience is that when some one who possesses a sensitive organism and is thereby is blessed with the gift of life and love, he must ongoingly and ever more perfectly and completely turn his life and his will over to the Greater Will (or continually die to the self in K's terms), or there could very likely be repercussions. And often more than just losing the joy of living.

A 'sensitive organism' that consumes animal flesh? And all this talk of 'love'. Where is the 'love' for the suffering and tortured sentient beings, farmed to fulfill your desires?

Forum: Insights Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Topic: Can one's mind be totally empty of ideas?

I have a Mac also.

Just highlight the words you wish to quote, as you do to copy and paste, and then click on 'Quote' (in blue on the gray bar just below the posting you are quoting) and it will come up in the "your Reply" box.

Make sure you double-press 'return' on your keyboard to start a new line for your reply, which keeps the quote in its own box.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Greg Van Tongeren wrote: If the reason we don't eat something is because we were taught it is very wrong, we may well get sick when we eat it, but that is a conditioned reaction.

It is very easy to find out for oneself whether or not disease, aggression and flesh-eating go together. One only needs to take the action of cutting out all animal flesh from the diet - and observe what takes place.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Krishnan - It is interesting to look into the relationship between a vegetarian diet and the old caste system in India. I had a vague awareness of the importance of diet in that system, but have just been reading up on what a large part it played. In fact in many of the ancient cultures diet was an extremely important factor. In that respect, perhaps as far as diet is concerned anyway, humanity is less aware now than then.

If you think about it - mankind seems to 'consume' everything now. And what is your feeling about organ transplants? 'Cannibalism' by any other name surely?

Forum: Insights Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Topic: What To Do With a Guru

Why? Sounded interesting.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Mon, 07 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Greg Van Tongeren wrote: But at the same time after a lifetime of eating and enjoying meat, you very much want to consume it and that is an undeniable fact. So there is a conflict between what is and what you think should be and generally the habituated reoccurring urge wins out.

Where did you draw that conclusion Greg? Or perhaps you speak of your own experience?

Unlike Krishnan, I am not a lifelong vegetarian. Over twenty-five years ago I had an insight into the danger of flesh-eating. Since then I have not touched meat, nor have I had any desire at all to do so. So one can only say - it must have been a genuine insight! :)

Greg Van Tongeren wrote: Aren't you minimizing the nature of deeply engrained habits?

Exactly right! For humans, flesh-eating is a habit. The human body - with its long intestinal tract - is not designed for meat-eating. Humans are not flesh-eaters by nature, but rather by habit. Hence many human diseases.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Tue, 08 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Greg Van Tongeren wrote: Indicators of that might be a judgmental attitude or self-rightious feelings of indignation.

I suggest the "self-righteous feelings of indignation" come from the flesh-eaters. :)

Forum: Awareness in our world today Tue, 08 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Robert Michael wrote: Again, why then did K, the righteous vegetarian, suffer and die from cancer, Patricia?

The body dies eventually. K was no more immune from death than anyone else. At least he did not contribute to animal suffering during his lifetime.

I am not in a position to judge the manner of K's death. You may believe you are - but be careful - meat-eating can lead to delusions of grandeur! :D

Forum: Awareness in our world today Tue, 08 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Robert Michael wrote: Where did he go wrong, I wonder?

Why suggest death is 'wrong'? It is just an ending - no matter in what form it comes about.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Thu, 10 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

Robert Michael wrote: but soon I'm afraid there's going to be a lot of killing going on, Krishnan (the necessary grand-cleansing of the planet). So be prepared, be ready. I might even suggest that you repent ! Or perhaps start pointing the finger at oneself.

K said that mankind created god in man's image, then asked god to explain the universe and this sent man mad. What a vengeful 'now-I-am-going-to be-proved-right-when-you-are-all-dead-because-you-didn't-listen-to-me' god is created in Bob M's image here. :D

Really Bob - one cannot even begin to approach the teaching of K until all vestige of such petty-minded judeo-christian conditioning is seen, understood and ended. No wonder you dismiss the later teaching, where K had finally closed all loop-holes for those who would still seek self-gratifying solace in what he said.

Forum: Awareness in our world today Thu, 10 Sep 2009
Topic: Is vegetarianism a must for saving the world and ourselves?

The division between meat-eaters and vegetarians is not 'inward division'. It is a physical fact. We are what we eat - no?

K had many people around him, but all indications are that, at least when they were in his vicinity, they behaved as vegetarians. I wonder - would he have interacted closely with them if he was aware they were flesh-eaters?

Personally - it is not my business what other people choose to consume. But my own observation is that it makes a tremendous difference to flexibility of thought and sensitivity of feeling. And (technical) flexibility is essential to understanding the whole movement of thought.

So I have not made a doctrine about division. There IS one human brain on the planet - a disordered brain. At the root of much of that disorder is meat-eating - a residue of universal cannibalism - the wrong turn. As far as I am concerned - the first step to ending the disorder is to end flesh consumption. You can agree with me or not. It makes no difference. The truth does not depend upon opinion - neither yours NOR mine - it is there regardless.

Forum: Serious Debate Tue, 15 Sep 2009
Topic: Can justice be enforced from outside?

max greene wrote: Aren't there some men in influential positions that can gently suggest to all that there might be another way? Where are they?

I seriously doubt that anyone in an 'influential position' has any interest at all in truly deep change.

People in those positions have been nurtured by the system (society), approved of by the system - they are dependent upon the system, conditioned by it, and important within it. Is someone in that case then going to bite the very hand that feeds him/her, by rattling the system - by insisting there 'might be another way'? Too much to lose, and society covers all its bases very well. One must be highly educated within the system to have any credence at all there, and the mere fact of that education/conditioning negates all real doubt about what one is such a success within! A vicious circle!

Don't forget, K was always outside the approval of the system - he never did fit in as a 'good student'. That was his blessing when all is said and done!

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Tue, 15 Sep 2009
Topic: Classic Conditioning

max greene wrote: I'm beginning to think that the emotions are the "I" itself. Since we say the "I" is a thought, this would make emotions thought.

The word 'emotion' etymologically means: "Agitation of the brain".

Emotions are thoughts which latch onto pure feeling, and 'own' it as the self - build time around it - reinforce the self with emotion - create a center built upon, and surrounded by, emotions.

Emotions are memories. Feelings leave no memory because thought has not yet attached itself to the feeling - but it probably will - given TIME and desire. When it does so - you will have an emotion - a memory! In time. An agitation of the brain.

We have been conditioned to value emotions. It is just another way of valuing the psychological - which is thought (as the self) out of place.

Valuing emotions holds all conditioning in place for the benefit of a conditioned society.

Forum: Serious Debate Wed, 16 Sep 2009
Topic: Can justice be enforced from outside?

max greene wrote: Pretty discouraging, Patricia. There's only one thing we can do: worry.

Dear Max - worry is useless! It will only harm and dull the sharpness of the brain.

The only thing one can do is see the fact of what is going on and allow that fact to act.

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Wed, 16 Sep 2009
Topic: Classic Conditioning

max greene wrote: You say , "Emotions are thoughts. . . " What about this: Emotions are right brain "thoughts," equivalent to the left brain thoughts. But they are both thoughts. So as thoughts they are both rather neutral--they are just there, a product of observation--until the thought of the "I" is super-imposed on them and becomes entangled with them.

Max - why further complicate thought with left and right-brain ownership? Quite simply - there is thought in place in the technical (as a bird would build a nest or a human create a shelter) and completely out of place in the psychological - where a self desires to be 'better-off' than another.

All thought can do is measure. In the technical world - in building a shelter - measurement is in its place - useful. In the psychological world of imagery, thought measures its 'self' against another 'self' - comparison - competition - war.

The body requires shelter and sustenance - and there are technical means to provide that. Only a 'self' wishes to be 'better' than someone else - and that is desire - not need.

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Thu, 17 Sep 2009
Topic: Classic Conditioning

max greene wrote: But as I said, are we willing to give up, with the "I," Beethoven, Van Gogh, et.al? Even K remarked more than once that we lack "passion." I would interpret this "passion" as deep feeling--and isn't this emotion? What is the place of emotion in all of this? I think Phil has the idea that emotion might be conditioning. I haven't read his last post so here I go.

Max - one can be passionate about great music and all great art - be deeply inspired by it - without bringing emotion into it at all. Music and art can deeply touch feelings, but emotion comes about only when one desires to take it out of the moment and invent an experience around it - build a self with it - create an image with it - carry an emotional memory about it.

For me, the line between feeling/passion and emotion is very clear. But I suppose it all comes down to definition. Emotion is not a friend - it is an indulgence. Passion exists only in any given moment - emotion lingers and creates/reinforces time and self.

Phil - Yes - we are conditioned to embrace emotion as a friend. Human beings are far more controllable if we are emotional. A human being who exists only in the moment is impossible for the system to control. Look at K.

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Thu, 17 Sep 2009
Topic: Classic Conditioning

max greene wrote: It is a deep feeling, and I am not aware of the "I" at all at the moment. I define that as strong emotion. You call it passion.

Yes - when the "I" is absent there is only the passion. Emotion has to 'owned', indulged in - therefore requires a 'self' to exist at all.

And don't forget the etymological definition of the word 'emotion': Agitation of the brain (or mind). Emotion is disturbance to any possibility of stillness.

But again - it is all a question of definition. And K - bless his heart - did re-define many of the terms he used over his long life, which is fair enough. And it challenges us to go and find out for ourselves anyway - which is what he always claimed had to be the fact of it: don't follow - discover! But discover without the self standing in the way of the truth.

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Mon, 21 Sep 2009
Topic: Classic Conditioning

Therese Okamoto wrote: emotion is the expression of a feeling, do you recommend keeping them all to yourself?

Why attach thought as ownership to feelings? Without thought there is only the pure feeling - and the brain is not agitated. No memories. No comparisons. Simply feeling.

'The expression of a feeling'? Why does a feeling need to be 'expressed'? - and by whom? Emotion is only the psychological owning of a feeling, to further feed the 'self' upon.

But I suppose one has to see the fact of all this for oneself, and that only comes about by understanding the movement of thought - as K so often said.

Forum: K, psychology and the physical brain Mon, 21 Sep 2009
Topic: Classic Conditioning

Galaxy Eh wrote: Frankly conditioning is not that important. It really does not matter whether one is conditioned or not. Question is are you sensitive to everything. Do you have the native intelligence capacity to completely respond to daily challenges.

That is an interesting point. Everyone is conditioned, so it could be that dwelling on one's own particular conditioning is pretty much akin to 'analysis' - and it closes out the bigger picture by putting the emphasis on the self and its importance. Is that your meaning?

Isn't it also important to understand the manner in which conditioning generally controls and keeps people in their place within society?

Forum: Insights Thu, 01 Oct 2009
Topic: Honestly

Paul Dimmock wrote: But I did say if we are looking together. And that's the problem, because we don't do it. We are not together. Now why not? Why don't we start there and then move, which will be freedom? It will be freedom because we are both starting from a place where there is order in our relationship. Not an order imposed from outside, or suggested by either you or me, but order in our relationship.

Isn't this invention of a dogma Paul? Aren't you endeavoring to invent a path to 'freedom' with a little game of 'follow the leader' and fake 'togetherness'? Some may be fooled - but not all.

Why create havoc in the wake of K's teaching with such theories, which all seem to be based on the idea of a 'leader'? The only place they lead is to further and multiplied confusion. Are you aware that these little games and puzzles only entertain a dull and confused brain? There seem to be a few people who really get off on them, and perhaps you believe you are 'helping'?

However, what you spout here has nothing at all to do with the truth that K pointed towards. Rather, it is 'self'-promoting - through entertainment, and inventing a false belief that 'we are really getting somewhere because we are all together!' Truth is not defined or controlled by popular opinion, is it?