When knowledge about the Unknown is impossible, one is at the mercy of ideas. I ideate, speculate, say 'seems' because I don't know. Then you may say ``then keep quite". I have no answer to that.

dhirendra singh wrote:
Is not it an idea?, it seems!

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

We are here to break the mirror called 'K' and be our own light. This disciple thing is a passe.

dhirendra singh wrote:
Then why are we here?

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

We are here to break the mirror called 'K' and be our own light. This disciple thing is a passe.

dhirendra singh wrote:
Then why are we here?

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

I think you are more interested in confrontation. Words do lie, but intentions don't.

dhirendra singh wrote:
But you told without asking, probably this is way of language, usually we are not aware about habitual lies in routine language.

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

Ramesh G wrote:
but intentions don't.

He didnt notice the question .besides your reply comes first and quote come the next.
gb

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

ganesan balachandran wrote:
He didnt notice the question .besides your reply comes first and quote come the next.

thanks gb for pointing out.

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

Ramesh G wrote:
We are here to break the mirror called 'K' and be our own light.

Why? Because we cannot listen? Is the human brain now too senile to listen?

"Be our own light" is one hell of an ego statement! And the ego will only get it wrong, because it has to feed upon its conditioning, memory, comparison, judgement, self-justification, and all other sacred cows to exist.

A man passed by quite some years ago who questioned EVERYTHING. With that very deep questioning, all that stands in the way of truth manifesting dissipated, including the very ego itself.

That is all. No 'mirrors' to 'break'. Simple listening to the fact of human disorder will suffice.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Why? Because we cannot listen? Is the human brain now too senile to listen?

In almost all cases, what you say is true. No doubt about that.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
"Be our own light" is one hell of an ego statement! And the ego will only get it wrong, because it has to feed upon its conditioning, memory, comparison, judgement, self-justification, and all other sacred cows to exist.

Why has ego become such a big problem? By fighting our ego we will become 'virtuous', but the truth of humility -- which shines when we acknowledge our ego gracefully -- won't operate then.

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

Ramesh G wrote:
We are here to break the mirror called 'K' and be our own light. This disciple thing is a passe.
dhirendra singh wrote:

Then why are we here?

Humm.... I suspect that question may have a different answer for each of us.

Personally, I am not ready to break the mirror yet. Hope I am not addicted to it, but it surely feels like I am not yet weaned off.

I know if K could hear me he'd possibly roll his eyes in disgust at what I am saying here, but, still ... :-(

T

Ramesh G wrote:
Why has ego become such a big problem?

As K so graciously said: The teaching is not for everyone.

Why has the ego become such a big problem? Because it is at the root of all human disorder. But to find that out, one has to give up all that one values - all the sacred cows. The main one of which is the ego itself.

Ramesh G wrote:
By fighting our ego we will become 'virtuous',

It is not a question of 'fighting' anything. Or of becoming anything.

Ramesh G wrote: Before energy takes the form of thought/word, it is in its pure unknown form, it seems.

dhirendra singh wrote:Is not it an idea?, it seems!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:>Before the energy takes the form of thought/word, it is in non-verbal "'I'ness/'me'ness" form/state.

Before energy takes the form of thought, what has it been? Put bluntly, where do we get the energy to think? To put it another way, what did you eat for breakfast this morning? What did you turn that food into?

We have three foods (plus sunlight), three intakes: Solid/liquid, air/oxygen and information/data. Thought entails the transformation of these three foods into mental movement in the form of thought/emotion. Thought is the continuation of the movement of the energy contained in our food, by other means.

Photons spin off an object and are carried into the eye, still bearing an impression of the object. The motion of that photon becomes the motion of the information carried to the brain, which in turn becomes the motion of the brain itself, transcribed as a visual image

We are that.

Certainly thought is no more than that.

Are we anything more?

This post was last updated by Peng Shu Tse (account deleted) Wed, 22 Feb 2012.

Ramesh G wrote:
acknowledge our ego gracefully

Not gracefully, Ramesh, but choicelessly. That is to say, we may not be able to have this 'grace.' It is not something to acquire. But we do have the ability to see this ego, if and when we are not trying, at the same time, either to deny or accept it (gracefully or not).

But having seen it?

To see it, it is necessary to approach it with no judgement. But, having seen it? Having seen the snake, do not tell me to make no judgement. Having seen evil my whole being makes a judgement.

The judgements of thought/emotion are always biased. But if you have really seen something, holistically, the seeing IS the valuing of it.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
It is not a question of 'fighting' anything. Or of becoming anything.

quite. understanding should be enough

. . . should it occur!

B Teulada wrote:
if K could hear me he'd possibly roll his eyes in disgust

everything passes, even embarrassment

B Teulada wrote:
Personally, I am not ready to break the mirror yet. Hope I am not addicted to it, but it surely feels like I am not yet weaned off.

That's moving from honesty to honesty. Breaking becomes unnecessary then.

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

Ramesh G wrote:
Breaking becomes unnecessary then.

In any case, 'breaking' with respect to the mirror, is a well worn metaphor.

Relationship is the mirror, relationship with all and everything. You cannot break that, but you have to 'learn' to look into it. Breaking, is about the particular mirror. It is about dependence.

K is saying, in effect, do not personalise this mirror, it is one of many. Truth is not contained in any one reflective device, although it may appear so. Do not thank me, empower me, hold me responsible or worship me. I am nothing. It is you who are doing it. When you say K is this or that, you are bestowing, creating an inequality. You are damaging yourself, as you have always done. Break with that.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
When you say K is this or that, you are bestowing, creating an inequality. You are damaging yourself, as you have always done. Break with that.

Agreed

Freedom from the known is Attention in the Unknown: Krishnamurti J

I think Patricia would agree too.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
Are we anything more?

What all are we inwardly...not chemically, electrically, mechanically, atomically etc. but psychologically?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
Having seen the snake, do not tell me to make no judgement. Having seen evil my whole being makes a judgement.

The whole being makes no judgement but there is spontaneous total action.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Ramesh G wrote:
We are here to break the mirror called 'K' and be our own light.

Words/teachings of K or of anyone or of myself are the mirror in which there is a possibility of actually seeing oneself in action. They are the pointers and tend to describe verbally what is real. This seeing of oneself in action is the beginning of a journey towards being one's own light. Seeing is related to light, isn't it?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

This post was last updated by Dr.sudhir sharma Wed, 22 Feb 2012.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
What all are we inwardly...not chemically, electrically, mechanically, atomically etc. but psychologically?

I am saying that our psychology is that - chemical, electric, mechanical, atomic etc. Not different.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
The whole being makes no judgement but there is spontaneous total action.

Only then are judgement and action one. No gap.

When you are jumping across a chasm, you judge and act.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
Seeing is related to light, isn't it?

Obviously. One cannot see in the dark.

But is there a gap between the light and the seeing?

Is there a beginning and an end to the journey?

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
spontaneous total action.

yes, spontaneous. The whole acts 'of itself' without a reference. It sees, judges and acts as one movement. There is no external referent. Time is not allowed.

dhirendra singh wrote:
What is sense to say that unknown exist?

A sense of mental security.

dhirendra singh wrote:
What is sense to say that god exist?

Same as above.

dhirendra singh wrote:
What is sense to talk about effects of god/ unknown?

What happens when we start with any concept? of unknown or whatever?

Answer to both questions would be to speculate.

nothing

dhirendra singh wrote:
It was definitely known.

It was after all personal experience.An experience is past record.If one take it as absolute trueth, it is an illusion.Experience only makes one mechenical.

nothing

Ramesh G wrote:
When knowledge about the Unknown is impossible, one is at the mercy of ideas. I ideate, speculate, say 'seems' because I don't know. Then you may say ``then keep quite". I have no answer to that.

" I don't know it", is a fact.One could stay with that fact.That is the toughest part of our living.Hence we form opinions, which takes us away from the fact,giving rise to ideation,and speculation.An alert and energitic mind with probing built into it can ward of the ill effects of the ideation and speculation.In fact it is second time we are back to the fact in this thread.Let us keep alert. That's it, without anticipation of any result.

nothing

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
Peng Shu Tse wrote:

Are we anything more?
What all are we inwardly...not chemically, electrically, mechanically, atomically etc. but psychologically?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Not psychologically... Deeper

Peter Kesting wrote:
Not psychologically... Deeper

I think 'deeper' too Peter. The psychological level is still the chemical/electrical movement of the brain.

But surely that deeper level may only be seen when the psychological level is silent.

The problem is that the brain cannot record any such seeing. But it can imagine. And it is image which then becomes the double block.

But do not suppress the action of the brain which is seeking and which is imagining. Just follow its action in these endeavours and learn about its folly. The brain is channelling this passion to touch the 'unknown.' But it is the wrong instrument. I doubt there is a right instrument. My feeling is that when the mind is silent, one is this unknown. It seems logically so.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
The problem is that the brain cannot record any such seeing. But it can imagine. And it is image which then becomes the double block.

This is worth examining. Let's not just assume things here.

The brain doesn't record an understanding. When we suddenly understand the proof of a problem in mathematics, there is an insight. That insight itself is not in the memory... Is not a process of memory... but there is a memory of having had that insight. One has had an insight into the limitation of memory processes. One has seen that there is something beyond memory. There is a memory that there has been such a seeing.

There is a seeing that one is actually of this presentness only; a seeing that memory, in itself, has nothing in it that is actually the self... this presentness... what one actually is. There is seeing that that is always there. There is a memory of that truth. What is the problem with that? There are memories of having seen many truths, mathematical truths and truths about human behavior, human programing: When one operates out of programing only one is operating out of fear. One has seen that truth. Operate out of presentness. One has seen all of this, and there is a memory of having seen these things and of seeing that operating out of the limited is ugly, a horror. There is nothing wrong with having these memories, The disorder is only in operating in a limited mechanical way when there is another possibility.

This post was last updated by Peter Kesting Thu, 23 Feb 2012.