Chances are many of us have been reading K for a long time, many would say they take a break from the teachings and some fight over them here in this forum. As if there is anything to fight about....

All there is to do is be aware of what it is we are saying, doing and thinking....and if we are would we fight about it?

We all know that the source of conflict is the self which is a non existing fictional creation of a collective human ego, yet we go on talking about it and fighting over it.

How important is it to be diligent to take care of what we say or do? What does it mean to be responsible for ones thinking, feeling and words, to take pains in being aware of our words?

This post was last updated by Amber Cinquini Fri, 13 Jan 2012.

I think we outgrow the man, K. himself. At least this is what I had to do. I realised I idolised him, for a number of reasons, one of which the fact that my mother knew him personally and idolised him too.
So, I understood that that is exactly what he asked us NOT to do and have understood that and, hopefully, gone beyond that.

As for the teachings (I actually do not like this word), let's say as for his 'work', I like Patricia, think there is nothing beyond it. He is the last stop. He has gone to the root of everything and to the edge of thinking and back.
In this sense I also agree with Ganesan who, if I understood him correctly, thinks K is 'where speech ends'.
Nothing left to be said or thought after K, so ... silence... then, maybe, eternity.

T

B Teulada wrote:
As for the teachings (I actually do not like this word), let's say as for his 'work', I like Patricia, think there is nothing beyond it. He is the last stop. He has gone to the root of everything and to the edge of thinking and back.

This is your belief, your faith, your religion. Had you "gone to the root of everything and to the edge of thinking and back", you might have something to say other than to testify, like a true believer, that K "is the last stop".

lidlo lady wrote:
This is your belief, your faith, your religion. Had you "gone to the root of everything and to the edge of thinking and back", you might have something to say other than to testify, like a true believer, that K "is the last stop".

B Teulada wrote:
As for the teachings (I actually do not like this word), let's say as for his 'work', I like Patricia, think there is nothing beyond it. He is the last stop. He has gone to the root of everything and to the edge of thinking and back.
In this sense I also agree with Ganesan who, if I understood him correctly, thinks K is 'where speech ends'.
Nothing left to be said or thought after K, so ... silence... then, maybe, eternity.

It is important to be aware of when belief takes over for one owns understanding of existence. One may agree or disagree about belief or opinions and chances are if one has 'sorted'it or integrated it all out, or has a sustained awareness of what is the state of being, one is not likely to be able to communicate this without difficulties. The style of the teaching may change based on the period, but the limitations are still there.

There is a great deal beyond Krishnamurti, but it is not in the sphere of knowing or words. Many had difficulties understanding the words or the work of Krishnamurti and chances are there will be others who will continue to say the same things in an attempt to clarify. Since the state of being and the transformation of humanity is not a state one can communicate in words, it is unlikely that we can go further by using words.

Seeing truth as true, false as false, and truth in the false is the beginning of wisdom. Sorry lidlo to quote K again, there is something I feel worth for you investigating, false in the truth. if possible go ahead.
gb

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

Surely one outgrows the teaching of K only once it is fully understood.

Other than that it is moving away, because the self just does not want to know. Why? Because the teaching understood means an ending of self.

ganesan balachandran wrote:
Seeing truth as true, false as false, and truth in the false is the beginning of wisdom. Sorry lidlo to quote K again, there is something I feel worth for you investigating, false in the truth. if possible go ahead.
gb

This is some thing that every one of us must realise ,even if it ment that we repeat what Jk had say.

I am that Iam.

This post was last updated by kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao Fri, 13 Jan 2012.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Other than that it is moving away, because the self just does not want to know. Why? Because the teaching understood means an ending of self.

Yes the teaching understood is the ending of the self....but I am not sure that the cognitive self can not 'go a long' with that ending.

K spoke to that cognitive self....and often he said and I am paraphrasing, that when thinking is aware of its own limitation. The self itself is aware of its own limits, can that happen?

Did you ever go round and round with compulsive thinking and then comes an awareness of this, and then nothing?

Amber Cinquini wrote:
The self itself is aware of its own limits, can that happen?

Of course. Takes deep understanding though.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Of course. Takes deep understanding though.

Can one be aware of its own self in action, and therefore when another is in action? Or is this impossible to be aware of?

Can one observe one owns and 'another' state of being and see the self in action?

Amber Cinquini wrote:
Can one be aware of its own self in action, and therefore when another is in action? Or is this impossible to be aware of?

Can one observe one owns and 'another' state of being and see the self in action?

Why the concern about 'another'?

The only observation of any value is to watch the movement of self. Not in someone else - what use is that? It then becomes judgement, not observation.

This post was last updated by Patricia Hemingway Fri, 13 Jan 2012.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Why the concern about 'another'?

The only observation of any value is to watch the movement of self. Not in someone else - what use is that? It then becomes judgement.

:) yes it is. So when the self is not is there any communications? In words? Is there no value in observing the image maker, in one self or another in action? Is there any difference if it is 'mine' or 'yours'?

Amber Cinquini wrote:
So when the self is not is there any communications? In words?

Why wouldn't there be? The communication is technical not personal, that's all.

Is there no value in observing the image maker, in one self or another in action? Is there any difference if it is 'mine' or 'yours'?

Of course there is a difference. Observing in oneself is observation - Observing anything in another is judgement/opinion, and it could be a completely wrong one.

Does that matter? Probably not. Doesn't affect the person being judged, does it? Opinion does not change fact.

Amber Cinquini wrote:
round and round with compulsive thinking and then comes an awareness of this, and then nothing?

exactly.

lidlo lady wrote:
This is your belief, your faith, your religion. Had you "gone to the root of everything and to the edge of thinking and back", you might have something to say other than to testify, like a true believer, that K "is the last stop".

Dear lidlo, if resistance and effort equated understanding you woulda figured out the blueprint of the universe already .... :-)

T

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Of course there is a difference. Observing in oneself is observation - Observing anything in another is judgement/opinion, and it could be a completely wrong one.

I think observing in oneself can be judgment/opinion too and conversely observing another can be pure observation too.
The difference, I think, is that without dispassionate observation and understanding of oneself first, observing another may be absolutely pointless.

T

B Teulada wrote:
I think observing in oneself can be judgment/opinion too and conversely observing another can be pure observation too.
The difference, I think, is that without dispassionate observation and understanding of oneself first, observing another may be absolutely pointless.

Perhaps the way one observes oneself or another? If I am watching me, with me in tact, using the self to watch the self, well this is pointless.

But if I am watching myself without the evaluator or commentator? Or I watch you without the observer telling me your are this or that....then? It doesn't matter what you observe right?

If you observe without the observer, there is no me or you, but only observation....?

ganesan balachandran wrote:
but what (to) (do you) observe.

Do implies what? Is observation a do?

ganesan balachandran wrote:
what is in observation.gb

If it is possible to observe with out the critic in the audience, so to speak, then what is observation?

Is it possible to observe without recording?

Amber Cinquini wrote:
Is it possible to observe without recording?

true, i could not merely keep watching your posts. sorry for the trouble. when observation shows it is futile, i delete them as it does in me.
gb

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

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
The only observation of any value is to watch the movement of self. Not in someone else - what use is that? It then becomes judgement, not observation.

The movement of self is neither yours nor mine...it's what humans do, so when it's seen for what it is it doesn't matter who's doing it. As for "judgement", there's no such thing as observation without it. You wouldn't have any conciousness of observation if judgement wasn't involved.

Amber Cinquini wrote:
It is important to be aware of when belief takes over for one owns understanding of existence. One may agree or disagree about belief or opinions and chances are if one has 'sorted'it or integrated it all out, or has a sustained awareness of what is the state of being, one is not likely to be able to communicate this without difficulties. The style of the teaching may change based on the period, but the limitations are still there.

Huh?

What sort of medication are you on?

lidlo lady wrote:
As for "judgement", there's no such thing as observation without it. You wouldn't have any conciousness of observation if judgement wasn't involved.

lidlo lady wrote:
What sort of medication are you on?

Can you observe this without judgment? What is the state of mind that makes this statements?

Amber Cinquini wrote:
Can you observe this without judgment? What is the state of mind that makes this statements?

"There is no difference. The mind turned inwards is the Self; turned outwards, it becomes the ego and all the world. Cotton made into various clothes we call by various names. Gold made into various ornaments, we call by various names. But all the clothes are cotton and all the ornaments gold. The one is real, the many are mere names and forms".

Who are you quoting?

K. Kennedy wrote:
The mind turned inwards is the Self; turned outwards, it becomes the ego and all the world.

Is this true? What is "the mind"? If there is such a thing and it can be known, those who are learning will find out in spite of quotes like this.

lidlo lady wrote:
You wouldn't have any conciousness of observation if judgement wasn't involved.

that is what we are up to ,the centreless.
gb

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

the insight on an issue, is the observation without the self. it is also the "intelligence" which sees the actuality of something.

in reading posts, the looking at the meaning behind the words, and seeing what is actually going on, is the seeing w/o the self. then it immediately comes back and records the insight. there's nothing wrong with this. it's the conflict created by the aim to achieve something, that is the wanting to "end" the self.

Philip Bradley wrote:
it's the conflict created by the aim to achieve something, that is the wanting to "end" the self.

this restless Soma(delight of existence)- you try to grab him but he breaks away and overpowers everything. He is a sage and a seer inspired by poetry.
gb

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

lidlo lady wrote:
The movement of self is neither yours nor mine...it's what humans do, so when it's seen for what it is it doesn't matter who's doing it. As for "judgement", there's no such thing as observation without it. You wouldn't have any conciousness of observation if judgement wasn't involved.

Wah!