In this forum we will discuss issues relating to education and the teacings of Krishnamurti.

Life is relationship

Eve Goodmon wrote:

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Hi Yeming, as you can see we now have locked from where people can talkd only with people that agree with them. :)

Sorry let me correct this. As you can see we now have locked forum where people can discuss only with people who agree with them ;)

Here on this forum, you are welcome to digress to any topic that you think is related to K and his teachings.

You may be polite if you want, as long as you are willing to be tolerant and flexible of the human condition and cultural differences about what is polite or not polite.

Living in Asia, I found out that many practices that are seen polite or impolite in America and not seen in the same light here.

But then again Americans often think they are the world ;)

Hi Eve, Prasanna,

I have copied out all your replies and relevant posts for working on offline and will respond asap. (Eve, I cannot locate the post you sent to Terrence with all that good stuff on education. You must have removed it.)

I am now in Kuala Lumpur on my way north. Internet service pretty bad here. I could log in yesterday but could not navigate through Kinfonet let alone read anything.

One point to ponder before I log off. If Prasanna's opinion is correct, there is a tremendous implication on K's approach. Your observation in this regard is food for thought also.

Why do you say there is a difference in the desire for immediate gratification of wants and needs, in children and adults?
There is no such thing as "psychological development". Both children and adults, throw temper tantrums when they don't get what they want or don't like what they see or hear. Where is "development" in that? What we generally refer to as development, is simply behavior modification through reward and punishment. Just like your dog.

Eve Goodmon wrote:

Randal Shacklett wrote:

Eve Goodmon wrote:

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Hi Yeming, as you can see we now have locked from where people can talkd only with people that agree with them. :)

Sorry let me correct this. As you can see we now have locked forum where people can discuss only with people who agree with them ;)

Here on this forum, you are welcome to digress to any topic that you think is related to K and his teachings.

You may be polite if you want, as long as you are willing to be tolerant and flexible of the human condition and cultural differences about what is polite or not polite.

Living in Asia, I found out that many practices that are seen polite or impolite in America and not seen in the same light here.

But then again Americans often think they are the world ;)

Of course so did the Italians(Romans). ;o)

True Randal but they at least had better food :)

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Eve Goodmon
Tue, 07 Jul 2009, 3:14am

It is my understanding from reading Krishnamurti and from my discussions with him as a young child, that he created schools because children are less conditioned than adults and therefore are easier to reach.>

With due respects to You and K, may I submit two points here for kind consideration. a) Just as all other great teachers, K too felt that mere teachings can de-condition human minds. b) Besides, in his later years, K questioned the near-failure of his strategy to meet his objective of liberating mankind.

In my own experience ....... is that children are easily conditioned and also can be easily taught to be aware of this conditioning.>

The factors of 'easily conditioned' and 'easily taught...' seem to be not in the same parameter. According to my findings, the conditioning of the mind doesn't take place through education, but by unnatural external behavioral intervention of elders during the growing years of the brain. Then the conditioned mind merely consolidates its own conditioning with the help of education or knowledge, to bring a semblance of balance.

The lifeless recordings of Knowledge is invariably mistaken as the culprit. For instance, if I get angry and violent and I happen to be a Hindu and keep quoting my scriptures, then Hinduism is held or blamed as the prompter for all my actions. Instead, if I speak calmly, coolly and convincingly, then my religion is highly acclaimed. Hence, it is crucial to understand the two components in the vital process of human behavior viz., a) the energy part or the consciousness and b) the memory or stored knowledge. For instance, while you are playing a DVD, just observe that the performance is also affected when there is a voltage fluctuation in power supply.

Protect the energy or consciousness without disturbance in early child hood only till it has grown fully or just above 51% of its full growth, and see the difference. Such children can't be conditioned by any amount of bad or violent education, and their natural judgment of pure consciousness can't cause harm to the world and instead begins to question and correct the insane world.

Education can neither condition nor de-condtion the human minds. Education merely consolidates the conditioning of the mind. If conditioning through education was possible, we wouldn't have been discussing this here, for the world would have been completely annihilated by the very second generation of human beings themselves, after the advent of so called civilization. Alternatively, if de-conditioning was possible through education, nearly half a century of experiments of K and all other schools put together, would have brought at least some rays of hope to mankind, even if the world wouldn't have turned itself into a paradise!!

I agree with Krishnamurti that teaching children to be aware of conditioning is simple and it gets more difficult with age.>

The problem seems to be equally same in both, but not similar. In children the drive is enormously high, but they can't rest and focus in any given intellectual direction. Whereas in elders, they can understand the direction intellectually, but the drive to begin to actually understand is abysmally low and reduced due to age.

Often here in Asia, where children are taught to obey and not question authority they seem to be passive learners and much more conditioned than in the West and especially reluctant to make mistakes. This fear of making mistakes blocks their innate curiosity to explore the world around them.>

Forgive me again, Eve, if I appear to be vehement. Here again, according to me, the 'vulnerability to get conditioned' is very high due to the high amount of errors during upbringing when compared to what takes place in the west. Fear alone leads to obedience and pretension and education can't teach 'fear'. Elders alone can inculcate fear by fragmenting the consciousness that too only during its growing years. Haven't you seen the courageous people even dying without fear? Don't you also see the people, who are 'reluctant to commit mistakes' only have brought the present state of affairs in the oriental countries?

Still Eve, I respectfully submit that education according to me is basically the communication and that is also essential. This is going on everywhere informally and now even here between us. So far the declared purpose of education hasn't succeeded in its objectives only because the quality of contents particularly in the subject of human interactions or Psychology, haven't been of a high standard.

The day the contents grow up to be of optimum quality, the change will not just begin, but will take off at super sonic speed. I have the greatest admiration for your drive, and now I am only offering you a new direction, requesting you to examine my Theory (TFI) and I will look forward for your valued comments. Till then don't be in a hurry. Take care and with Best wishes,
Prasanna

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

Yiming Zhang wrote:
One point to ponder before I log off. If Prasanna's opinion is correct, there is a tremendous implication on K's approach. Your observation in this regard is food for thought also.

Hi Yiming, To avoid duplication, I request you to consider my reply to Eve as if addressed to you too, though I have referred to only her statements therein. Yes, I see that my findings have a tremendous implication on K's approach to education. Be that as it may, I can't ignore that the change in me was also initiated by K's teachings to 'turn inwards'.
I think, it will give enough food for thought and also to ruminate, until you return and sit on the net next time.

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

Hi people,
Just have time to drop this post in. To Prasanna, ok, no need for reposting to each other. Every reply from each are meant for all. To Eve, you are moving fast and furious like a bullet train! I still have not digested all your stuff. You are very driven and your energy has only been encountered in the business world. Will respond soon to your stuff. Meeting at this point would be pre-mature. Thanks for offer to come to me now. Travel distance will never be an issue. If this project deserves to fly, I will come to you wherever, or fly you (and others too) in and back from anywhere on the planet.

Please never forget that each of us is an asset and has much to contribute to a common goal. That goal is not the education of children per se. The true goal is riding the flame of affection that binds us all in our venture, and it is that flame, embodied by us, that will teach the kids. So, in putting forth our views, we must resist the urge to bicker and snuff that flame out. Eve, Prasanna, both of you have valuable skills in your own respective field. On the open market, you guys are worth a lot of money and both of you are willing to contribute without even considering getting paid! This is what successful people are like, winners that can make things happen. (Provided you don?t let infighting kill that flame.)
My questions below.

Prasanna wrote: 18 to 20 years of age is necessary for humans to develop psychologically and to develop their individual personalities. Till then, they are either adolescents or children. They can't have an intellectual, societal or world view till then. Their vision is limited to their physical daily needs and persons around them and hence, they can't grasp the problem of adults. Even if they hear the problems of adults, they can't make head or tail of it.
Children's problems are centered around their daily needs, and hence they seek solutions only to them.

You are saying that children have a different psychological make-up that is not as developed as those of adults, and their world is less complicated and defined by simple needs. You also observed that ideological conditioning (religion, nationalism) is not as deeply rooted in your minds. This are the reasons, as Eve pointed out, why K felt that they are easier to reach. This approach, however, is at variance with your judgment that change is possible only in adults.
I can clearly see Eve?s (and Krishnamurti?s) argument that we should reach those kids before they are completely ?rotten?. However, for some strange reason I cannot dismiss the position you have taken with regard to targeting adults and not children in a de-conditioning program. Is it because adults are the ones with the ?fully developed disease? that calls for the cure and kids don?t show the full-blown symptoms that lend themselves to treatment?

To my mind, your Point 3 alone is sufficient ground to go for the adults and not children. But this is another aspect entirely. After all, if the adults are unclean, can?t see the dirt, how can they clean up the kids?

Can you see the dirt (i.e. conditioning)?

Prasanna wrote:
However, mankind's efforts to achieve that freedom may remain fruitless, as long as some of the discrepancies in the teachings remain.

What are those discrepancies? Can you cite one?

Hi All,
.

Here, the point of contention seem to be if childhood is the right time for teachings or not?

Are we doubting the capacity of the child or the concern is that the teaching will harm the child in some way... like the conditioning does!

I am segregating different points here so that we can identify and address where we are seeing differently.... step by step:

• Children are the most impressionable and very quick learners.




• what they are exposed to is the world of adults - how would we like to see this world natural vs unnatural or *clarity vs distortion




• even before they are in a school for formal education, they are strongly conditioned by what they learn by observation and role modeling




• conditioning seems to rob the person of clarity of the perception that makes the sane actions more and more difficult.




• more time conditioning is repeated,... neural pathways are facilitated more.... more hold it has on limiting/fixing the perception from acting without involving memory. (case with the advancing age)




• education need not be mere contents of the curriculum. In fact, more important is the inner place from where the educator comes across.




• why education has not been successful in liberating from conditioning - why 50-60 years of K teaching could not liberate the humanity ------ could be important areas for exploration before brainstorming the new recipe..

I Am Not This!

Well, Eve I am saying the same thing.

I was prompted to write after reading Prasanna's opinion about feasibility of sharing teachings with Children and .. role of education in disseminating the understanding.

Prasanna wrote:

Education can neither condition nor de-condtion the human minds. Education merely consolidates the conditioning of the mind. If conditioning through education was possible, we wouldn't have been discussing this here, for the world would have been completely annihilated by the very second generation of human beings themselves, after the advent of so called civilization. Alternatively, if de-conditioning was possible through education, nearly half a century of experiments of K and all other schools put together, would have brought at least some rays of hope to mankind, even if the world wouldn't have turned itself into a paradise!!

and...

Still Eve, I respectfully submit that education according to me is basically the communication and that is also essential. This is going on everywhere informally and now even here between us. So far the declared purpose of education hasn't succeeded in its objectives only because the quality of contents particularly in the subject of human interactions or Psychology, haven't been of a high standard

I wanted to separate the debatable points from those where we are seeing together.

No, I am not saying that you need to be a Budhha before you can teach. Genuineness and real interest are enough for a fruitful learning relationship I hope I am not creating any misunderstanding on this point.

And, are we not still looking for more effective ways of sharing/learning both with children and adults?

I Am Not This!

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Human consciousness is conditioned from time in memorial. 25 million years of human existence with its fears, experiences and knowledge are all conditioning.>

An error on the part of elders causing the process of 'conditioning' may be going on from time immemorial or inestimable. However, with due respects and humility, I may state, that each human consciousness is an independent entity and is free of all conditioning at its birth in a new brain. It can remain free for the rest of its life, if it is protected from getting fragmented or damaged, that too only during its growing period.

Conditioning is much more than education. What is ?natural? and unnatural behavior? Is there such a thing?>

Yes, Eve. Behavior is either natural or motivated due to fragmentation.

Education and the teachings can not bring about transformation but it does cause an AWAKENING of intelligence.>

Generally both terms mean the same thing. Can you define them, if you feel they are different?

Are you sure you have read K? I question that POLITELY but I do question if you have read or understood the teachings.>

I may not have read or understood as much as you may have done. Is my knowledge or seriousness not enough to discuss with you ?

Again you are using the word HOPE. What is hope? It is a wishful thinking for a future and is there such a thing as future? >

Let us be free from K, rather his words, just for a while. I merely answered your question. as " if de-conditioning was possible through education, ....(it)..... .would have brought at least some rays of hope to mankind, even if the world wouldn't have turned itself into a paradise!!"

It wasn't my hope. Aren't 'hopes' the birth rights of those, who invariably wait or even pray for the kingdom to come, without bothering to do what actually should be done? Future is the continuation of the present. So let us change the present.

Yes, I wish I can and with the help of people like you and Yiming, I should continue the venture, from where K left, to liberate mankind absolutely and unconditionally. That is the true tribute we can offer to the man who showed us the door to freedom. Of course, not necessarily with his words or strategy. You see it hasn't worked so far.

Eve, I would earnestly appeal to see my Theory of Fragmentation of Intelligence, which helps you to understand my stand vis-a-vis K. That is my honest attempt to give a scientific revelation of the human mind, by merging Psychology, Philosophy, Spirituality and Religion in a gist, for the benefit of the serious and the discerning. If we don't get down to the brass tasks now, we will also lose our precious time, just like all our predecessors.

Last but not least, please try to use this symbol right arrow ( >) at the beginning and ending of all that you quote of others. Then the whole thing doesn't become one paragraph.

Bye for the time being, Eve.
Take care and with best wishes,
Prasanna

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

wait, wait... Eve. Let there be no mix up.

The italics in my post are excerpts from Prasana's write up. I wanted to bring it on the surface so that we can discuss it objectively.

Are we talking about an awareness that is its own action... conditioning is seen for what it is.. and all actions to make corrections are clearly seen as movement of becoming that continues the same game?

Or, are we talking about intellectual/emotional de-conditioning?

What is behind the idea that adults make better candidates than children?

My feeling is that if all the children on the planet have the opportunity to enjoy the grace of choiceless observation and be able to see the destructive role of me-center, we will have the paradise on the earth. And for this reason alone I think that finding more effective ways/resources to reach more and more children will be the leveraging action.

Child focus.. I am not saying at the cost of others. Adults will be instrumental to reach out to children... so, there is no question of making it child or adult.

Teaching is for every one. And children make the special group because their conditioning is not as firm and rigid... and they are the natural learners...

I Am Not This!

Yiming Zhang wrote:
Eve, Prasanna, both of you have valuable skills in your own respective field.

Hi Yiming, now it is left for you how you would harness these skills. ;-)

You are saying that children have a different psychological make-up that is not as developed as those of adults, and their world is less complicated and defined by simple needs. You also observed that ideological conditioning (religion, nationalism) is not as deeply rooted in your minds. This are the reasons, as Eve pointed out, why K felt that they are easier to reach.>

Yiming, Let me not add to the pre existing confusion, before commencement of this discussion.

All that I say now is already stated in my Theory of Fragmentation of Intelligence. I said that the unfragmented state exists in children at the time of birth. An avoidable error committed unknowingly and involuntarily by elders during the growing years of the brain, is responsible for the permanence of fragmentation of intelligence in humans.

According to me, educating school going children about conditioning or K's teachings, can be only academically useful, which can be undoubtedly helpful later and not more than that. However, you don't have to agree with me.

This approach, however, is at variance with your judgment that change is possible only in adults.>

If you can understand the anatomy of conditioning, then you may understand my stand also. In order to escape from its own disturbance, the disturbed consciousness repeatedly replays some specified knowledge, resulting in its own conditioning. For example, first I am sorrowful and then to escape from my sorrow, I begin to practice Hinduism and thereafter I am invariably conditioned as a Hindu.
The point here is that School going children aren't yet conditioned by any ideology. However, the vulnerability to conditioning has already set in. So there is no point, possibility or even the need to de-condition them, or even trying to prevent getting conditioned. Only academic teaching is possible, though not with any high expectation.

I can clearly see Eve?s (and Krishnamurti?s) argument that we should reach those kids before they are completely ?rotten?.>

Vulnerability to conditioning is already set in in the early growing years of the brain. We are all partly 'rotten', if I can borrow your word. Completely 'rotten' people are neither harmful to the world, nor they can discuss like this.

However, for some strange reason I cannot dismiss the position you have taken with regard to targeting adults and not children in a de-conditioning program.>

Yimin, this isn't like the mass immunization program that is held regularly. I have only stated that de-conditioning is possible only in adults, by their own seriousness. And it is possible by each person by meditating without the help of any one.

Is it because adults are the ones with the ?fully developed disease? that calls for the cure and kids don?t show the full-blown symptoms that lend themselves to treatment?>

The answer is in the above paragraphs. Don't mistake it as a disease. It is not caused by any virus or bacteria. It is a simple error in perception. It is just like the calibration error, which is found in measuring instruments.

To my mind, your Point 3 alone is sufficient ground to go for the adults and not children. But this is another aspect entirely. >

Take care, Yiming in using these metaphors, that are likely to be mistaken by lay men. Whole world is already engaged in Meditation for adults. They are undergoing improvements and it is possible, that some one may come up with guaranteed and specific transformation.

After all, if the adults are unclean, can?t see the dirt, how can they clean up the kids?>

You see, Prevention and Correction are two different things altogether. When adults are conditioned, it doesn't disable them to prevent fragmentation in small children. It is after all the mere avoidance of an on going error, which went unnoticed till now.
Meditation for children is easy and effective. It will help them to see their own minds. Now, don't ask me which is the best. Even the most mediocre type also will be of some benefit to children.

Can you see the dirt (i.e. conditioning)?>

For me, it is merely like a calibration error. Why don't you see my TFI ?

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

Randal Shacklett wrote:
There is no such thing as "psychological development".

This is an interesting perspective, Randal. Could you share your observations that led you to this conclusion?

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Yiming I suggest for you to read K's teaching on education which fundamentally contradicts what Prasanna says.

I am familiar with K?s take on education (bookwise only) but I must say that your direct contact with him on this matter carries more weight than just any judgment that both Prasanna and I derive from just reading up on him. However, I am not sure Prasanna?s position and yours are mutually exclusive in light of what Manoj said below.

Manoj SachDeva wrote:
? education need not be mere contents of the curriculum. In fact, more important is the inner place from where the educator comes across.

Eve, your strong commitment has earned you an impressive in-depth knowhow in working with children. I can see that from your posts. Prasanna's perspective and approach come from a different direction. I am still going through his ?Theory of Fragmentation? and will be able to comment ? once I am through the review - on why we can?t see eye to eye yet.

Eve Goodmon wrote:
I am sorry but unless we are all on the same page, are using the same definitions of words and study the teachings, it would be impossible to discuss them. It becomes an intellectual exchange of opinions which frankly is endless.

Shades of Terrence Webster Doyle! You are not giving up on us already, are you? You are supposed to be the teacher and this is your classroom, remember? I am not asking you to give us another 30 years of your life. How about four weeks? You can re-assess the situation then before you throw in the towel.

Eve Goodmon wrote:
I have sent you some information via the email portion of Kinfonet about a program I am interested in.

If you are talking about Kokop Village in Papua, I have checked out the website as you have requested. Living conditions there are pretty basic. It won?t be Club Med: Where happiness means the world.

Tell me Eve, what kind of a K school would you like to create? You did say something earlier about not submitting to pressures to conform and tearing down stuff. Can we advance this topic at two levels in parallel? One level where we all are doing now discussing K education as we would like it to be; and another level, where we talk about the brick and mortar part i.e. location, education program, teaching methods, etc., and most important of all, its intent. We need to take care that we don?t come out with an animal that is identical to the Oak Grove School!

Hi Eve,

I would like to share my two cents...

The root of all the conflict is the movement of becoming... becoming better/more.. etc.... and this is the psychological evolution.. the central illusion.

The building block of the psyche is thought and that is a fragment. Insecure from its fragmentary nature thought is caught in seeking to become whole. Impossible mission. So, the conflict continues for ever.. in time.

In the ending of this dys-functional movement... becoming ends... conflict ends..

And that is the reason that any teaching that is based on de-conditioning or re-conditioning will continue the crooked thing.

It is only in seeing what is doing you in that what is dysfunctional can transform.

Contents and techniques are ok but they are secondary. Primary - the teacher. Not Buddha. But genuine human being who feels responsible for the child, for the world. Because s/he basically sees the urgency of the transformation.. not obsessed with my system... the intent will help him to find ways to share the inexpressible..

I am not sure if I am making any sense...

I Am Not This!

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Eve Goodmon, Wed, 08 Jul 2009, 4:06am

Yiming and Prasanna,

K can explain this better than me. Watch the nature of the mind with psychologists and other scientists. I think they all invalidated what P is saying.>

P is saying now, but how it was invalidated even before he found it or wrote it, is still an enigma ! :--)

One is very cautious about finding new sages and theories, I am interested in finding out on my own without leaning on anyone including K. >

You are right, Eve. Even I was saying so, until others pointed out not only my repetitions of K's words, but also the defensive postures behind it.

What about K, did he develop a method or theory a religious doctrine that he defended?>

Generally methods are myriad and could be at variance at each other. But the principles in any natural process can't be more. This goes on till the principles of operation of the human mind is unraveled, after which all methods and theories that couldn't bring a fundamental change, will quietly exit.

What are the similarities and differences? And can the teachings become authority and unexamined ?truth? which one is attached to?>

It seems the most relevant question that has arisen in you so far, which you may introspect by turning inwards.

Thanks and welcome again Eve, when you find time and inclination,

P

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

This post was last updated by Prasanna P Wed, 08 Jul 2009.

Hi all,

Manoj?s dialogue style is informative without being provocative. This avoids agitating emotions that Prasanna says are indicative of fragmented people in the AD state (ego-driven and fragmented).

Eve makes no apology about going ahead teaching children regardless of her own state (i.e. she doesn?t have to be a Buddha), as K advocated; Manoj agrees and said that the important thing is an authentic passion to learn together (i.e. parent and child, teacher and student). Prasanna, however, may have a problem with this because his Theory says that only unfragmented people in the AC ego-free state can share their accurate perceptions with others.

But Prasanna also said that accurate knowledge, meaning accurate perceptions of others (Krishnamurti teachings?) can trigger reversal from the AD state to the AC state if there is a longing to do so. My question to Prasanna is this. Is it not feasible to have a school where sincere, committed AD teachers, like Eve and Manoj, share their longing for reversal to the AC state with their students, expose them to K teachings (i.e. accurate perceptions) and use K-inspired teaching methods to facilitate the learning of practical knowledge (math, science, biology, etc.) in order to live in a non-selfish, AD-free way in society?

Existing K schools, such as Oak Grove and others, are not doing it right, we feel. Manoj suggests that we learn from their vain attempts.

Manoj SachDeva wrote:
why education has not been successful in liberating from conditioning - why 50-60 years of K teaching could not liberate the humanity ------ could be important areas for exploration before brainstorming the new recipe..

Prasanna made the same observation that K?s commitment to set mankind free hasn?t worked so far. Although he has his own views, Eve said the reason why K-type education process has not been successful is because we don?t want any of it.

Eve, how can you say that we don't want any of it? People who congregate at K forums, people who run his schools and foundations, as well as all here in your classroom want it. Do you really believe that it is a simple matter of wanting it as in "ask, and it shall be given; seek and ye shall find"?

The approach to education that we adopt is shaped by our perception. In this regard, I would like to look through Prasanna's eyes. This is what he sees:

Prasanna wrote:
I may state, that each human consciousness is an independent entity and is free of all conditioning at its birth in a new brain. It can remain free for the rest of its life, if it is protected from getting fragmented or damaged, that too only during its growing period.

Manoj seems to echo the same sentiment when she said:

Manoj SachDeva wrote:
My feeling is that if all the children on the planet have the opportunity to enjoy the grace of choiceless observation and be able to see the destructive role of me-center, we will have the paradise on the earth. And for this reason alone I think that finding more effective ways/resources to reach more and more children will be the leveraging action.

I have a problem with this brand-new, pristine baby concept. Are we all created like little ginger-bread boys served out fresh from the oven; getting spoiled, initially by fragmented moms and dads; gradually twisted out of shape by a fragmented education system; and finally destroyed completely by a selfish, ego-driven world? Fresh born babies do have faces that show no guile, and innocence is definite more evident in kids than in older crooks. The two of you could be lulled into believing that a sleeping crocodile is more gentle than a snapping, thrashing, limb-tearing 500 pound reptile in full attack mode.

Sorry guys for being circumspect. My last encounter with a 10 year-old in India left me with the impression that I was the half-baked cookie taken out of the oven for a ride by that disarming sloe-eyed urchin with gleaming white teeth.

Yiming ! It was touching and balanced. Your observations could be the turning point for all discussions. Eve's revelations of my true colors brought a smile in my heart as well as the brain, ;-) , and I started the new topic 'Why JK's Findings Need To Be Advanced?'. When when I returned to invite Eve to my forum, I saw another quite reconciling one of hers and your post also.

Now I request all the members in this forum to come, bring others also and participate in my forum. Needless to state, thanks to all your interactions, I am actually improving both in the state of mind and ability to express clearly, for which I am highly grateful to you all. Come let us begin our journey. Best wishes, P

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

Tell me Eve, what kind of a K school would you like to create? You did say something earlier about not submitting to pressures to conform and tearing down stuff. Can we advance this topic at two levels in parallel? One level where we all are doing now discussing K education as we would like it to be; and another level, where we talk about the brick and mortar part i.e. location, education program, teaching methods, etc., and most important of all, its intent. We need to take care that we don?t come out with an animal that is identical to the Oak Grove School!

Eve Goodmon wrote:
.Well I am afraid once you organize things this is the real danger. Kokop is no club med and I am not interested in club med. Its isolation and hard conditions will preclude it from becoming another prep school, no danger of Kokop becoming one :).

I hope Samson realizes that there is no free lunch. I wonder if he knows what he is bargaining for and getting into when he lets radical, foreign educators use Kokop children as guinea pigs in ground-breaking, experiments. One thing is certain: very likely, you will have the comparative free hand, you seek, to implement your teaching programs without interference from any oversight.

In a fishing village, the purpose of education is to train the next generation of fishermen. In a farming community, the aim of education is to pass on the ability to raise crops from the land. In both cases, as well as, I daresay, in all other societies, the goal of education is an economic one. Schools are meant for training human beings to fit into and earn a living as part of society. What place has a K school in this scheme of things?

I suspect that you are already too far down the road in this business of schooling children to ever want to go back to the drawing board, where I am, to re-examine what you are doing and why you are doing it. You are already hauling up your anchors and setting out your sails. You are a woman in a hurry to get somewhere, over the rainbow.

Hi All

Yiming Zhang wrote:
daresay, in all other societies, the goal of education is an economic one. Schools are meant for training human beings to fit into and earn a living as part of society. What place has a K school in this scheme of things?

I say that is the moot point....

Schools will continue to churn out society worthy guys and gals. And, the society is the real monster. Its designs and strategies are made to protect it, perpetuate and keep it in a growth mode. So it will go on and on, becoming more and more intense in its divisions and conflicts.

When you are sensitive, watchful.. you naturally see the foolishness of this continuity.. and you ask... is there some sane alternatinve?

K school can be that diference.

the student is "society worthy" but can stand alone...

He is not a lamb.

An intelligent being, is not struggling for physical/biological security..

...and, he is not chasing any psychological security of ideals and beliefs.

He sees this movement of becoming is dysfunction..

And his living the teaching is the live matrix for his family, friends and community!

I Am Not This!

Hi All

In an earlier post, I said that in all other societies, the goal of education is an economic one. Schools are meant for training human beings to fit into and earn a living as part of society.What place has a K school in this scheme of things?

Manoj SachDeva wrote:
I say that is the moot point....

Do you really think so, Manoj? I wish it was that straightforward.

Schools will continue to churn out society worthy guys and gals. And, the society is the real monster. Its designs and strategies are made to protect it, perpetuate and keep it in a growth mode. So it will go on and on, becoming more and more intense in its divisions and conflicts.

I see what you see: society is the monster. And we want to revolt. But each
day, in earning a living as part of that society, we contribute to its functioning in our respective economic slots as professionals, business people, beggars, kings, etc., as we draw our sustenance from it in the form of wages, bribes, alms, and other kinds of profit. Can the heart or kidneys or lungs revolt from the body it detests? Can the part rebel against the whole? You obviously believe we can, part by part, organ by organ, and cell by cell ? one at a time. What if the body senses disorder within and calls for help from the physician who administers a nasty drug to kill off the troublesome dissidents, who, on the one hand, feed off the body, and on the other, plot the body?s demise like unruly cancerous cells?

From the above metaphorical scenario, I draw two conclusions. One, if the movement becomes significant, such a negative reaction to society by us would, like a public riot, only bring the whole house crashing down on top of each other. Two, this reaction to what we are - for we are the society that we condemn ? is self-righteous and an instance of hypocrisy. If we really believe that we are not the monster, then leave it, walk away from it, and create a fundamentally new society based on the Krishnamurti teaching.

Apparently, and, as a matter of fact, there have been such attempts by people who share the same sentiment as Krishnamurti folks, feel society is a monster, and went off to create communes not unlike but more radical than the Krishnamurti Foundations and their schools. Are they any better than the monster that we detest?

When you are sensitive, watchful.. you naturally see the foolishness of this continuity.. and you ask... is there some sane alternatinve?

You tell me, Manoj. I am prepared to devote the rest of my life and invest my last dollar on finding this alternative together with you. But why do you want to do this? Do you have children that you want to raise in a wholesome way; unhappy with your job; feel trapped in your world? As for me, I have no family and, must admit, live rather well off this monstrous society which doesn?t confine me in anyway. Like, Eve, I live wherever I want. Sometimes, when I really want to get away from the monster, I live for a while on my sailboat adrift about 20 miles offshore in international waters, beyond the jurisdiction of any monster except for pirates and God.

K school can be that diference.
the student is "society worthy" but can stand alone...
He is not a lamb.
An intelligent being, is not struggling for physical/biological security..
...and, he is not chasing any psychological security of ideals and beliefs.
He sees this movement of becoming is dysfunction..
And his living the teaching is the live matrix for his family, friends and community!

Is that what a K school is for? Bring about the flowering of special human beings? Wasn?t Krishnamurti an example of such a human being? Never mind the fact that, after a lifetime of trying, he could not liberate humanity, as you pointed out, or brought about a sane alternative that you are wishing for. The point I want to highlight is that Krishnamurti lived well off this monstrous society just like I am doing. Where do you think the money that funded his lifestyle, schools and foundations come from? Even if you discount the donations from the rich people (whose earnings may not be from right living) who contributed the lion share to his assets, the money from the sales of his books and recordings to keep the Krishnamurti brand going these days come from people like you and me who earn money through the monster society.

All too often, we have children, especially teenagers, who resent their dependance on parents whose values cramp their style. Rather than be compliant and obedient to the parents, who have to feed, clothe and house them, these kids vent their rage and become torns in their parents' sides.

Are we behaving like those brats in our agitation for social change?

The bottom line is this, my dear Manoj. While you and I see the same thing ? that society is a monster ? your response, which is to pick up a stick to beat it, is different from mine. My response, as I watch you flailing that stick, is one of befuddlement.

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Dear Yiming, In the last several posts you are running a commentary on all of us. I wonder what qualifies you to do so?

What you have called a commentary on all of you is actually a recap of all your viewpoints. This is a technique (taught to me in my first job, when I had a life) used for the conduct of effective meetings. It helps to maintain focus on every viewpoint, conflicting or otherwise, so that none of us are ignored in the process of building a cohesive and coherent game-plan for a workable K school.

There was a teepee, at the Oak Grove School, that was used for conflict resolution. Kids would troop in there with the teacher whenever there was an issue to be dealt with. I used this method to deal with Tommy when he started pulling up the herbs, instead of the weeds, in the organic garden and wouldn?t stop. The teacher called time out and the tiny tots (kindergarten), the teacher and I (visitor) moved to the teepee. Tommy, like Prasanna, had a mind of his own even when the rest of the kids agreed that weeding was the thing to do. The conflict was resolved when soft-spoken Pauline suggested that Tommy be assigned to pull out (harvest) the thyme and the rosemary for lunch while the rest of the class do the weeding. That must have been the first effective meeting at a K school that corporate America paid for.

Your inference that I am playing guinea pig with the children of Kokop village is not only offensive but way out of line.

Perhaps, that was a poor choice of words on my part. ?Guinea pigs? does carry a morbid connotation that I did not imply. K teachings do have a fundamentally new core value, your understanding of which, you have admitted, is not yet crystal clear. In a sense, I saw the K teaching as a promising ?new drug? that we are all excited about using in clinical trials. At the Oak Grove School, the students have parents who have read K and want a K-type education for their kids. Is Samson familiar with the teachings of K?

So before you pass judgment on me, whom you don?t know, and tell me how provocative I am, you better read you own writings.

I did go over my own writings after being alarmed by your outbursts and did some research. Apparently, every American girl, I was told, knows about Dorothy and the yellow brick road. I suppose, every American boy knows that too. But I didn?t grow up in America, and if Manoj and Prasanna were raised in India, they, like me, would have no inkling that sending you ?over the rainbow? was a hilariously insulting thing to do. I used the phrase only because it made good prose, a phrase that came from an obscure song, its lyrics I did not know, that somehow, drifting from the radio now and then through the years, found itself lodged inside my head only to creep into an electronic post that is driving an American girl ballistic. Cultural gap? I do apologize and beg your pardon.

The Nazis were very polite and progressive people who killed millions. K was far from being a polite man.

I never called for politeness, especially political correctness which is a form of intolerance, in our discussions. Each of us has a particular style that others, in dialogue, need to accommodate. It is the substance of what each says that matters. If it hurts, it is the guy with the pain that has a problem. I did point out, in another topic, the form of your style, that Terrence found offensive, to explain how it got to him in order to smoothen his feathers and keep the conversation from going belly up. Your style, which others may find unsettling, is fine by me. It is not a self-conscious style but one that speaks of a woman who is always comfortable with whom she is, even in the morning, when she dares to look at you with no make up.

I have gone to the trouble to respond to you and outline some ideas that you respond with insults. You may have nothing to do with your life, but some of us do actually work for a living and also have a life. I suggest you may want to have one.

Having a life is rather poisonous to me. Thank God, I don?t have to work for a living. Krishnamurti started me on a journey of self-inquiry, an ongoing expedition that led me to unschackle myself from personal ties and unhooked myself economically from society in order to remove its stranglehold on me. I am now like Siddharta Guatama on the lam, after leaving the security of palace and family. I live, anonymously, in the world but not of it, actually. You are right, I don?t have a life. No job to go to, no one to call home. At Rosh Hashanah, people are told that it is not a question of what life you live, but how you live it. Since I don?t have a life, I don?t need to figure out how to live it. And that, to me, is liberating.

Yiming,

I am saying that conventional schools will continue to churn out "society worthy" people who are not aware of the dysfuctional mind mode that will continue to create pain for them and for others.

When I am saying that society is the monster, I don't have the least doubt that society is nothing real but a concept. And, I, You and others make it what it is.
So the real monser is the I - that is never facing the truth of the moment. I is always off to various escapes and ideal/ belief chasing.

So, the monster is that activity of the coditioning in me and you and that superimposes its past patterns on the fact of the moment. No wonder , results are going to be painful and conflicting.

By the way, I am at loss of understanding at your sharing your freedom to be where you want to be. Do you really think that living right is somohow dependent on such variables and wanting? How does it matter that you are on a sailboat, private aircraft or to some exotic location.

About K school I said that It is about holistic flowering and the students-teachers both are learning sharing togeter to survive in the same society but at the same time dare to stand alone. It is about the balanced living where knowledge and understanding both are in dynamic balance.

I Am Not This!

Eve Goodmon wrote:
Funny you don't see this is all just and escape from life.

Why do you see my lifestyle as an escape? Escape from what? I am pursuing this observation of yours because it is important to examine criticism. Do you think that Krishnamurti was escaping when he gave up his place in the Theosophical Society? I would imagine that the Theosophists would think so. In my case, my father said that I was irresponsible on top of being ungrateful to him. My mother was distraught. I was their only son. If I abdicated and didn?t take my place in the family, the whole business would go to my uncle?s family when my father retired. And you feel that I had done wrong by him for refusing to be a part of his plan? K didn?t want to be caged and neither do I.

Now you are the Buddha he he The schackels are in you as long as you are conditioned....but you know that don't you, or you would not be here....and how do you live your life? Fooling your self?

Why do you say that I am fooling myself? Back then, I was fooling myself being somebody. I am not trying to trade being that somebody to being the Buddha. I just don?t want to be anybody. And why do you say I am conditioned? Do I come across to you as a typical crackpot treading the eight-fold middle path? (By the way, I like my filet medium rare paired with a full-bodied, dry red wine, preferably Italian.)

For your information, I don?t agree with Krishnamurti that one should start teaching K stuff to anyone, especially children, before one has his head screwed on right and can figure out for certain which side is up. So, tell me, why you say I am conditioned?

Manoj SachDeva wrote:
I am saying that conventional schools will continue to churn out "society worthy" people who are not aware of the dysfuctional mind mode that will continue to create pain for them and for others.

Conventional schools are not in the business of healing the inner self. They don?t share the agendum of K schools that want to bring about the flowering of goodness. The reason why the conventional school fall short is that its focus is narrow and its goal is only to churn out what you call ?society worthy? people. Religious schools, like K schools, go beyond just churning out ?society worthy? people.

When I am saying that society is the monster, I don't have the least doubt that society is nothing real but a concept. And, I, You and others make it what it is.
So the real monser is the I - that is never facing the truth of the moment. I is always off to various escapes and ideal/ belief chasing.

In what way is society a monster? Is it because we are materialistic, selfish, belligerent and uncaring? Isn?t that human nature? Isn?t it peculiar that there is no formal scientific research into this problem even though accredited professionals like Professor Bohm and others took K seriously? Instead of K schools, don?t you think it is more appropriate for this matter to be studied and researched by the best minds the way diseases are researched in biotech industry and academia? I think there is a better chance of making a breakthrough when professionals, like yourself, are given research grants by the government and industry to study this problem. What do you think?

By the way, I am at loss of understanding at your sharing your freedom to be where you want to be. Do you really think that living right is somohow dependent on such variables and wanting? How does it matter that you are on a sailboat, private aircraft or to some exotic location.

No, I am not touting my way of life as an example of right living. Details of my activities have no significance in this discussion. They are incidental and just came out in passing in the course of our conversations.

About K school I said that It is about holistic flowering and the students-teachers both are learning sharing togeter to survive in the same society but at the same time dare to stand alone. It is about the balanced living where knowledge and understanding both are in dynamic balance.

Isn?t this taking place in the K schools? If not, why not? This topic was started because there is this feeling of Eve, Prasanna and others that the people now running the K schools are not doing it right. You have not voiced any opinions on the positions that Prasanna and Eve had taken on this matter. Do you agree with either of them?

Yiming, why should I form an opinion about you, Eve or Prasanna?

I am not interested in opinions. When you have the facts there is no need to make opinions.

Facts are that we human beings as a race are violent and brutal. Our actions are unintelligent resulting in ecological disasters, terrorism, nuclear threat and innumerable auto-immune diseases.

Now, as you suggest, some biochemical / genetic theory can prove that such and such hormones/enzymes or sequence of genes are responsible for this human nature. Well, knowing the cause does not remove the problem. Scientific explanation becomes the excuse for not changing. Isn't so?

But, you seem to be asking what is wrong if human nature is such.

If that is the case, we need to address this first. If there is no sense of urgency, where is the need for transformation?

And, then what is your relationship with K or his teaching that you say inspired you to transform and leave behind your business empire for the freedom of international waters and sailboat?

You say that mentioning of your lifestyle was just incidental and has no significance in the discussion. But facts don't agree with this.

Not once, but many times, you made the similar statement with additional qualification of being like K and Eve.

And, that is a purposeful activity. You desire some definite outcome from this. Probably you want to impress others? Want to leave a K/Buddha like image? You may like to ask yourself why you need to see yourself like K or Eve or Bhdhha. Often there are hidden agendas of self. But relationship helps as a mirror. If one is serious about transformation, there is no alternative to choiceless observation. Of the working of the self, the images that one makes about the self, the other, world and the god.

Awareness that has no agenda of changing what is.

And, the paradox is that real change comes only when all attempts to defend or change ceases.

But, if you are really content about the "human nature", and happy manipulating yourself and others, you may like to ignore this. Or, if the "self monster" compulsively wants to keep playing games.. by all means, go ahead and please your self.

I Am Not This!

Manoj SachDeva wrote:
Yiming, why should I form an opinion about you, Eve or Prasanna?
I am not interested in opinions. When you have the facts there is no need to make opinions.
Facts are that we human beings as a race are violent and brutal. Our actions are unintelligent resulting in ecological disasters, terrorism, nuclear threat and innumerable auto-immune diseases.

I am not asking you to form an opinion of anybody. Do you know why Eve started this topic? It is for the purpose of discussing education as intended by Krishnamurti. Both Eve and Prasanna opined that the teachers at the Krsihnamurti schools are not doing it correctly. Prasanna has his reasons for believing that the Krishnamurti schools are not effective. Eve also has her own reasons why she thinks the Krishnamurti schools are failing. So, I am asking you what you think? This is a discussion to find out the facts and the truth of the matter. Do you understand what I am trying to say to you?

Now, as you suggest, some biochemical / genetic theory can prove that such and such hormones/enzymes or sequence of genes are responsible for
this human nature. Well, knowing the cause does not remove the problem. Scientific explanation becomes the excuse for not changing. Isn't so?
But, you seem to be asking what is wrong if human nature is such.
If that is the case, we need to address this first. If there is no sense of urgency, where is the need for transformation?

No, no no. I am not suggesting that the problem in human nature can be
solved through biological research. What I point out is this. Don?t you think that our problem of a monster society deserve the attention of the leaders of government and industry? When Krishnamurti was alive, he was able to get university professors, successful industrialists and even Indira Gandhi interested in what he was teaching. Instead of wasting money on space research and going to the moon, wouldn?t it be better if all that money is channeled towards studying the teaching of Krishnamurti. Imagine, India spearheading global research into the monster society to find out what is wrong with human nature. Isn?t that far better than just laymen discussing this on the internet in their spare time?

And, then what is your relationship with K or his teaching that you say inspired you to transform and leave behind your business empire for the freedom of international waters and sailboat?

You don?t think that I am doing the right thing? I didn?t want to get up everyday to go to work dealing with business problems. I wanted to give up my job and give my full attention to the problem of human nature. K inspired me to change my life from a wage-earner to a truth seeker. Even in India, there is this tradition of people who give up a wordly life to become an ascetic and do puja all the time. But I am not an ascetic or a monk. I don?t need to live in any temple because I have my own money.

You say that mentioning of your lifestyle was just incidental and has no significance in the discussion. But facts don't agree with this.

Why do you say this? What are the facts? I need your help to open my eyes to my own hypocrisy.

Not once, but many times, you made the similar statement with additional qualification of being like K and Eve.
And, that is a purposeful activity. You desire some definite outcome from this. Probably you want to impress others? Want to leave a K/Buddha like image? You may like to ask yourself why you need to see yourself like K or Eve or Bhdhha. Often there are hidden agendas of self. But relationship helps as a mirror. If one is serious about transformation, there is no alternative to choiceless observation. Of the working of the self, the images that one makes about the self, the other, world and the god.

No, I don?t want to impress anyone. Why do you say I am leaving a Buddha image? Yes, relationship does help as a mirror. You are my mirror and you please tell me why I look like Buddha or K imagery?

Do I really look like Buddha? I eat meat and drink wine. I like girls and fine clothing. And after logging off, I am heading to a party. Are you sure I come across like the Buddha? Wow. This is mind-blowing. Manoj, you are really something.

Eve Goodmon wrote:ys
So we start with what is. We observe what is happening now. The state of the self, the state of our relationship with each other, nature and the planet. Actually it is not true that our educational institutions do not look at these issues, they do at least the good ones do look at environmental and health issues. The problem is the premise from this is looked at. It is not seen as the exploration of the possibility that we are all one or that humanity can exist without self. Everything starts with the self so obviously one has to start there.

Would you be interested in participating in such a program?>

Yes, the problem is the premise from which we look at it. If we look at it as a mechanical problem that can be fixed from outside... like genetic engineering, cloning.. we are on a very slippery road. Life is undivided and creative. For any change that is imposed upon it from outside... IT (the organism) reacts from inside. So, the problem is further complicate.

The premise that sees what is creating the problem and let that dysfunction stop makes room for the organism to heal itself.

That is the reason, as you say, that obviously one has to start with the self. Society is only an amplified version of the self.

Eve, I am interested in the holistic reach of what you have said. Let us find out together in dialogue the meta-structure of the initiative and that how we can be a part of that.

I Am Not This!

I am not asking you to form an opinion of anybody. Do you know why Eve started this topic? It is for the purpose of discussing education as intended by Krishnamurti. Both Eve and Prasanna opined that the teachers at the Krsihnamurti schools are not doing it correctly. Prasanna has his reasons for believing that the Krishnamurti schools are not effective. Eve also has her own reasons why she thinks the Krishnamurti schools are failing. So, I am asking you what you think? This is a discussion to find out the facts and the truth of the matter. Do you understand what I am trying to say to you>

Yes, I understand what you are saying...

I said before that theories - how so ever impressive - are inappropriate substitution of direct perception. So, Prasanna's version of "theory based" resolution of the existential problem is unacceptable to me. It is not that I have studied his theory... rather it is the basic seeing that applying a static solution (theory) to a dynamic problem (life) is the way of creating more problems, more conflicts... For Technological problems you can with benefit use the blue prints. But not with the problems of self.. !!

No, no no. I am not suggesting that the problem in human nature can be solved through biological research. What I point out is this. Don?t you think that our problem of a monster society deserve the attention of the leaders of government and industry? When Krishnamurti was alive, he was able to get university professors, successful industrialists and even Indira Gandhi interested in what he was teaching. Instead of wasting money on space research and going to the moon, wouldn?t it be better if all that money is channeled towards studying the teaching of Krishnamurti. Imagine, India spearheading global research into the monster society to find out what is wrong with human nature. Isn?t that far better than just laymen discussing this on the internet in their spare time?>

Yes, I agree with you that it is desirable if more resources are available for the right activities.

I am smiling at your attempt to provoke (which seem to be a subconscious activity with you) my Indianness... that is dangerous Yiming. Nationality is probably one of the biggest social monster..

Anyway, more resources... whether from governments, corporates or other resourceful enlightened people will be helpful.

I want to clarify something about K-teaching. For me this word is of symbolic value of the vision that is about seeing the primacy of perception and action from that perception rather than the racially accepted "rational/logical" thought based approach to life.

We can as well call is Y-teaching instead of K word. Word is not the thing. And we must remember to work for the thing what the expression K school and teaching point to and not be obsessed with the words or personality. Books are dead. Even those that belong to K.

You don?t think that I am doing the right thing? I didn?t want to get up everyday to go to work dealing with business problems. I wanted to give up my job and give my full attention to the problem of human nature. K inspired me to change my life from a wage-earner to a truth seeker. Even in India, there is this tradition of people who give up a wordly life to become an ascetic and do puja all the time. But I am not an ascetic or a monk. I don?t need to live in any temple because I have my own money.>

Why do you say this? What are the facts? I need your help to open my eyes to my own hypocrisy.>

No, I don?t want to impress anyone. Why do you say I am leaving a Buddha image? Yes, relationship does help as a mirror. You are my mirror and you please tell me why I look like Buddha or K imagery?>

Do I really look like Buddha? I eat meat and drink wine. I like girls and fine clothing. And after logging off, I am heading to a party. Are you sure I come across like the Buddha? Wow. This is mind-blowing. Manoj, you are really something.>

Dear Yiming, I might be wrong in inferring what I said. I heard you saying that like K, I am living well off this social monster.. that like K, I left my business empire... that like Siddharth Buddha I am on lam...

But, this is immaterial. It was then and there. Should I form an image of Yiming that he is an hypocrite and manipulating and provocative on purpose... ?

Yiming, while responding to you as these adjectives came out through my fingers on keyboard... there is an active, real but tentative understanding that image prevents real relationship and may I say that this understanding is the end of the barrier.

It is for Yiming to see his conditioning.

For me it is good enough when you say that I am not trying to impress or create a particular image with other friends on the forum, kinfonet, that you are not provoking on purpose.. I will listen to your words without prejudice... but, let me tell you one secret, Yiming... this listening with no prejudice is intelligent...and can discern.. the truth has its own ringing!

I Am Not This!