Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Patricia Hemingway's Forum Activity | 2314 posts in 13 forums


Forum: General Discussion Tue, 10 Aug 2010
Topic: Dissolution Of The Order Of The Star

Randal Shacklett wrote: So is posting at Kinfonet. So is getting married. So is eating chocolate. So is watching tele. So is.......Yet you consider your escape sacred and someone elses, profane.

Randal - you are talking through your hat!

Marijuana is a 'mind-altering' substance - one which reinforces the self and its delusions. One which convinces the indulger in it that he/she has 'changed' - that he/she is 'different' - and that everyone else has got it wrong.

Come on - you are a living example of all that! :D

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 10 Aug 2010
Topic: Dissolution Of The Order Of The Star

Randal Shacklett wrote: And so, I will use that same phenomenon, to say that, you and a lot of people, better start smoking more dope.

And you won't be the first dope-smoker to use that old chestnut, as you remain self-satisfactedly stuck in the 'dope-rut', will you!

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 10 Aug 2010
Topic: 'DISSOLUTION' 2

Paul Davidson wrote: Or, if one insists he was in error, where does it lie?

He was not 'in error'. He spoke honestly from where he was at the time. And at that time he was breaking away from his theosophical conditioning and control.

(Why have you quoted 1962 as the year? That isn't the year of the dissolution of the order of the star.)

Also - K never went back over old territory to explain his actions in retrospect. Why would he? He always spoke from the moment he was in.

Which is why context IS important in the teaching of K. And probably why he allowed and approved the biographies, although never showing any interest in what they said. And again - why would he be interested? It wasn't happening now.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 10 Aug 2010
Topic: 'DISSOLUTION' 2

So one can go back to the very early teaching in isolation, and find an 'out' for the self in there. K eventually closed down all those loop-holes in the teaching. The later teaching is austere and concise, with no comfort at all for the self to indulge itself in. But the teaching as a 'whole' is extremely relevant, as it reveals the process of negation.

One can take the bits one likes and ignore the rest, but such action will never result in understanding.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 11 Aug 2010
Topic: 'DISSOLUTION' 2

Why do you say that Dean?

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 11 Aug 2010
Topic: 'DISSOLUTION' 2

Thanks Dean - understood.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 18 Aug 2010
Topic: Impossible question!

Paul Davidson wrote: The brain, which is limitless, contents itself with that data and thereby imprisons itself.

The human brain is NOT limitless. It is limited. All it can do is measure.

"Man created god in man's image, and then asked god to explain the universe, and this sent man mad". (K)

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 29 Aug 2010
Topic: Unstoppable thought

Paul Davidson wrote: Together, thought, body and emotion come together as, what we call, 'mind.'

Oh please! See 'emotion' for what it is. The self attaching to, and owning, pure feeling.

Emotion: "Agitation of the mind". That is the etymological meaning of the word.

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 29 Aug 2010
Topic: Unstoppable thought

Paul Davidson wrote: By the way, what is this 'pure feeling?'

Try the pain of hitting the finger with a hammer - pure feeling. Then watch thought takes over and make a meal of that feeling - an experience to relate to everyone - a fiercely-held memory.

Whereas the feeling of pain ends, goes away, and is forgotten, leaving no mark (except perhaps a physical scar) - the experience of hitting oneself with a hammer continues as a memory - as the emotion of having experienced pain.

And so the self is well-fed by this, along with all the other experiences of 'emotion' for today! Such as: "Someone spoke harshly to me" - "She doesn't like me" - "I can't stand her!" - "I should be doing better than that other person" - "Why does this have to happen to me?" - the list can be endless while thought is happily at work owning feelings and labeling them to be used as emotions. No wonder human beings are so miserable!

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 29 Aug 2010
Topic: Unstoppable thought

Paul Davidson wrote: Then I thank the goddess that I am not an etymolog . . . etymolog . . . analistic pedant

Your self-satisfaction is an emotion, isn't it. :)

In fact - K was most interested in the root meaning of words. How else to state clearly what one is talking about, when words are the method of communication?

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 03 Sep 2010
Topic: Control and power struggles in Krishnamurti groups

Hi Matt - welcome to the forum.

Yes - it is a worry when even people who are interested enough in the teaching of K to be in groups that promote his work still fall into the same old deadly power traps that have haunted humanity through the ages. Makes you wonder! Perhaps the whole question of 'letting go' is a much deeper demand than is currently understood.

And don't forget - whilst alive, K found there were many problems within the foundations that he set up. Human disorder is what it is - the only ending of it can be total understanding.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 03 Sep 2010
Topic: Control and power struggles in Krishnamurti groups

RICK LEIN wrote: It seems that most of the work takes place in that aloneness you speak of.

Good point Rick. It is against all we are conditioned to believe to embrace aloneness. But really - aloneness is what we have.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 03 Sep 2010
Topic: Why are you seeking at all?

Dean R. Smith wrote: 'There is only the body' doesn't translate to thought saying "I am the body".

Yes - important to point this out.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 03 Sep 2010
Topic: Why are you seeking at all?

The self desires enlightenment for itself - which is a contradiction in terms. :)

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 05 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

max greene wrote: The cancer of the "Self," the "I," remains and continues to spread, and the prognosis is terminal.

It seems that K never gave up, during his lifetime, on humanity's ability to see what it is doing, and to change.

But here we all are, twenty-five years later, and we may well be looking at 'terminal' mankind. So what did we miss in K's teaching? That surely is the question, isn't it?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 06 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

Dean R. Smith wrote: He also said: "If you don't want to change, it's alright."

And that the teaching is not for everyone - that the ground must be prepared.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 06 Sep 2010
Topic: Why are you seeking at all?

Nothing matters wrote: I have absolutely NOTHING to de with David Loucks or with his wife.!!!

You see Dean, what your conclusions, and your prejudices, and others human disorders are you able to do???

David do not know me at all, neither do his wife. You are caught at your self trap Dean!!!

What will you say to this???

Be Humble Dean, but don't cultivate it man!!! You're a very Baaaaaaad disciple. May be you're unable to learn Dean ?????? You should re-consider that!!, I mean your abilities to learn for real!!!!!??

Dean don't lie. You are only a very heavily conditionned human as all we are. STAY WITH THAT. DEAN.

Just a little bit of hysterical reaction.

And does it sound familiar?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 06 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

Dean R. Smith wrote: Could you give a J. K. quote (with some context) of this 'ground prep', please.

K talks of 'the ground' often in "The Ending of Time" discussions with Bohm. It should be read in context, but here are a few early quotes from the third discussion in that book:

K: "Can I - or you - say the ground exists? The ground has certain demands: which are, there must be absolute silence, absolute emptiness, which means no sense of egotism in any form - right?"

K goes on: "Willingness in the sense, go through that door. Or, am I, are we, willing to go through that particular door to find that the ground exists? You ask me that. I say, agreed, I will. I will not in the sense of exercising will and all that. What are the facets or the qualities or the nature of the self? We go into that. You point it out to me and I say 'Right' - can we do it? Not to be attached, not have fear - you follow? - the whole business of it. No belief, absolute rationality - you know - observation. I think if ten people do it, any scientist will accept it. But there are no ten people?"

And later in the same chapter:

K: "The fact is I am irrational and, to find the ground, I must become extremely rational in my life. That's all. Irrationality has been brought about by thought creating this idea of me as separate from everybody else. So can I, being irrational, find the cause of irrationality and wipe it out? If I can't do that, I cannot reach the ground which is the most rational."

And later: K: "First become rational in your life, begin here, rather than there. What would you say to that? This must be done without effort, without desire, without will, without any sense of persuasion; otherwise you are back in the game."

That is all in only the third talk. The book is definitely worth reading, if you have not done so already.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 06 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

ganesan balachandran wrote: Respected madam, i will be highly thankful if you can tell me about recognizing the man who has touched the ground. Though JK says some hindu books mention of it, may i know what he further mentions about it. gb

Dear gb - I really recommend that you read "The Ending of Time" for yourself. These discussions between K and Bohm are complex, revealing and challenging, and well worth discovering.

However - I don't understand what you mean about "recognizing the man who has touched the ground". Why would you want to?

Will 'recognizing' someone else who may - or may not - have 'touched the ground' mean anything? What about touching it oneself instead of looking for someone else to follow along behind? It really is time to stand alone. In fact - time may be fast running out.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 06 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

anwar ullah wrote: Everything was perfect,everything is perfect and everything will be perfect.

What planet do you live on? :D

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 06 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

ganesan balachandran wrote: I am reading it and felt a sort of change coming to me when JK was mentioning that there is only one mind.Further he was mentioning about what i enquired. i could not get it., perhaps i will try once again. gb

I have replied to a posting of yours which you have since removed gb - sorry.

And yes - K goes deeply into there being only one mind in these discussions. Also the question: "Did mankind take a wrong turn?"

And K is exploring everything as though for the first time - extraordinary. Yes - it is his discovery, but one well worth sharing with him. So yes - try once again. :)

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 06 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

Dean R. Smith wrote: Thank you for the quotes, but where is this 'ground prep'?

Well Dean - that is why I suggested you read the book. It is a recurrent theme in the book, along with other themes. And it is complex, as K is exploring (with Bohm) as he goes. But it all makes great sense - holistically.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 07 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

Soham netti wrote: Please read whole book, this is funny that you yourself have not read book completely and advising others to read it.

I have read the whole book - and I am not interested in your very limited interpretation of it. It is better not to try to interpret K, but to go there and find out - which is what I suggested my friend Dean should do.

Please don't try to tell people what it is they SHOULD discover when looking at K's teaching - that really is too simplistic and banal for words.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 07 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

Nothing matters wrote: Hey Dean!! I left 3 comments on your profile that you erased??

Why?? What do you fear Dean ??? Why not let posters of this site tell how they feel you are??? You are Frightened of what???

I can witness that I wrote 3 comments on your profile that you erased/deleted?? Why???

You cannot be naked Dean??? Why????? Psychologically you have to be naked, but apparently, you can't!! Why?? Dean???

This manner of hysterical posting and personal attack is SO familiar! Some poster from a while ago? Can't remember who. :) Someone who just can't stay away, but keeps changing identity for 'self' protection. Ring any bells?

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 07 Sep 2010
Topic: Humanity Seperate From Nature

Thank you for pointing that out Dean. :D I missed the sign.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 09 Sep 2010
Topic: My way or the highway

RICK LEIN wrote: The site is handling it sir,it seems that it is you who are not

Of course the site is handling it. The only thing that cannot handle it is the image that is hurt by being challenged, or that chooses to be insulted by words.

One does not have to jump in front of perceived insults and say 'You got me - how dare you.'

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 16 Sep 2010
Topic: Seriously

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote: My question still remains - ' Are the comments on others' faults (including that of K) conditioned reactions or not ?'

All psychological reaction is conditioned surely?

Also, focusing and commenting on the faults of 'others' is a movement away from pure observation, and into the security of self-entertainment, one-up-man-ship, and blame, all promoting yet more self-satisfaction.

Isn't this obvious?

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 16 Sep 2010
Topic: Seriously

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote: Yes, all psychological reactions are conditioned. Now, the next question that arises is this - Is it possible for the mind to make an observation (critical observation too) that has no psychological element attached to it ?

That is not something that can be theorized about. But while there is a 'judger' separate from the 'judged', there is necessarily a psychological element.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 16 Sep 2010
Topic: Seriously

nick carter wrote: Yes, no need to state the obvious.

Yes obvious, but nevertheless indulged in - constantly.

But let's face it, the most interesting thing about the people in this forum is their faultiness. Now and then someone actually says something, but most of the time it's just flatulence.

And why even bother to notice and judge as 'faultiness'? That is just another form of separation - a 'them' and 'me' statement - the invention of still more images.

Does such judgement help the overall problem of communication, or just make the 'judge' feel self-satisfaction and superiority all over again? In other words - further feed the ego?

All this attention to other people's shortcomings is surely a convenient movement away from observing one's own, is it not?

And where is compassion in all this?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 25 Oct 2010
Topic: The Shoddy Mind

Give a man the microphone to the world and he comes up with this clap-trap! Talk about a 'shoddy mind'.

Nick C and Paul D have the run of Kinfonet at the moment - and just observe how the bar is lowered. Quite clearly - what K touched upon so eloquently throughout is lifetime has been re-interpreted into all the pontificating judgement that parades here as 'dialogue' in K's name. How very sad.

And don't worry Nick - this little black duck has no intention of returning to Kinfonet to interfere with your ravings. Carry on regardless.

Just passing by!