K:Seeing all this, as you must, one demands naturally: Can human beings change? Can you and I change? Can you and I bring about in ourselves a mutation so profound that, as human beings, our relationship is not based on temporary, convenient, self-centered activity? Because what is most important is relationship. Unless there is a radical revolution in that relationship between two human beings, talking about God or about the scriptures, or going back to the Vedas, the Bible, and the rest of it, is sheer nonsense. It has no meaning whatsoever unless we establish right relationship between human beings.

I don't know

K:That is why it is very important for a country like this not to impose upon itself the superficial culture of the West nor, because it is confused, to return to the old, to the Puranas, to the Vedas. It is only a confused mind that wants to return to something dead, and the important thing is to understand why there is confusion. There is confusion, obviously, when the mind does not understand, when it does not respond totally, integrally to something new, to any given fact.

I don't know

dhirendra singh wrote:
. It has no meaning whatsoever unless we establish right relationship between human beings.

Hi dhirendra....well today as yesterday , right relationship is organised through imposed violence...the more guns and nuts ,the more right you are..

we are ALL stuck in this corner for millennia ...and my "free of charge" for the moment :-) flash of the day says that it may have something with this absolute desire for continuity, probably never perceived as it is not in the conscious of the analytical self but is in fact very much alive..when life does not offer continuity at all.....an absolute opposition between again what is and what should be....who said that? :-)...THE mother sin ??...the self perception is : I fear death, I say maybe this comes from the desire for continuity . Self does not know that..then trying to deal with death it is trying to solve a wrong problem . No desire for continuity = no fear of death...our brain is really remarkably well "built"...indeed!

We have that sort of talk with Sean my last one , he is 7 years old and death is a subject of his for the past 3 month ish..it seems to grasp something at his own pace..as he is grasping to "adjust" itself to the naughty ones at school, when not many teacher those days have a personal clue what to do with that type of behaviour...like for death questions...like for so many questions indeed...as it seems that to an absolute fact like that one ,the intelligence can only say that this is absolute fact , absolute what is....

again gods are back here , the bells are ringing out loud...

This morning I sense that there is goodness in the mountains around here...:-)))))

Dan.

This post was last updated by Daniel Dan (account deleted) Sun, 18 Mar 2012.

dhirendra singh wrote:
If you can find out for yourself what is true, you can burn all the Vedas, the Upanishads, the Gita, and the Bible; they are not worth looking at.

yes, find out yourself:)
gb

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

Till the last talks , he was saying like this, but he asked a question about sacred in india. what is sacred here which is not influenced by commerce?
D, i too don't know:)
gb

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

Daniel Dan wrote:
I sense that there is goodness in the mountains around here...:-)))))

mountain is an allegory for brain( not an analytical one, but in a corner) in veda.
gb

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

This post was last updated by ganesan balachandran Mon, 19 Mar 2012.

au b () wrote:
Veda which is explicitely a revealed tradition, involving organized religions, theories, concepts and dogmas, and all the rest of the interpretative following process that the mind is so accustomed to, right ?

No:)

au b () wrote:
When you see all this and when you come upon
that benediction called love, then you will know the truth of what
is being said.

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

dhirendra singh wrote:
It has no meaning whatsoever unless we establish right relationship between human beings.

Not to be sarcastic.
gb

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

dhirendra singh wrote:
There is confusion, obviously, when the mind does not understand, when it does not respond totally, integrally to something new, to any given fact.

i am suggesting only a new fact.
gb

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

ganesan balachandran wrote:

Daniel Dan wrote:
I sense that there is goodness in the mountains around here...:-)))))

mountain is an allegory for brain( not an analytical one, but in a corner) in veda.
gb

:-)

Dan.

ganesan balachandran wrote:
the Gita,

a poetical form of K's teachings. here people blindly recite it is really horrible.and much more horrible is altogether rejecting it. There also intelligence says to act on freedom without any conditioning.one should see truth as truth, false as false, truth in the false.Once i read it and burnt it that is all.it is K, I am not able to burn:)
Gita says shoot him also.K says burn gita from your mind. there Krishna, here krishnamoorthy.And both say this through intelligence.
gb

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

This post was last updated by ganesan balachandran Mon, 19 Mar 2012.

Daniel Dan wrote:
:-)

Let our strength and our thought go forward to Vishnu the
all-pervading, the wide-moving Bull whose dwelling-place
is on the mountain, he who being One has measured all
this long and far-extending seat of our self-accomplishing
by only three of his strides.

earth, body and mind,

spinal cord perhaps!.
gb

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

ganesan balachandran wrote:
spinal cord perhaps!.
gb

perhaps ?

Dan.

Daniel Dan wrote:
perhaps ?

the three strides of vishnu. spinal cord connects our body earth and brain, it may mean that. or body , brain and mind.
mountain ranges.
gb

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

This post was last updated by ganesan balachandran Mon, 19 Mar 2012.

dhirendra singh wrote:
K - Unless there is a radical revolution in that relationship between two human beings, talking about God or about the scriptures, or going back to the Vedas, the Bible, and the rest of it, is sheer nonsense. It has no meaning whatsoever unless we establish right relationship between human beings.

That is a very pertinant statement by K, Dhirendra. Do you realise (make real) its meaning? That is to say, has its meaning been realised in your life? Are your relationships of that kind? Are they of that kind here on Kinfonet? Do you establish relationships here based upon love?

And if not, all your words and K's may be thrown out of the window.

ganesan balachandran wrote:
Not to be sarcastic.

Indeed, Ganesan, not to be unkind.

K is not a hammer to hit someone on the head with. People talk of burning the Vedas and then quote K as back-up, thus creating a new 'Vedas' for themselves. I do not know what Vedas means but I know what burning books means.

Burning is not an act of the ego, it happens automatically as the ego, which is its own book, burns. All the talk of burning books is nothing but hot air while the ego remains. That is the only book to burn, the ego. But we treasure that book and we want to know what happens next.

dhirendra singh wrote:
It is only a confused mind that wants to return to something dead

I would point out that K is also dead. In fact he is as dead as the Vedas. Why always return to K?

ganesan balachandran wrote:
mountain is an allegory for brain

Dear Ganesan, in the Judaic/Christian tradition, 'mountain'stands for grace or 'seeing.'When someone 'goes to the mountains'there is the state of direct perception of what is that K talks of. The mountain is an inner state.

In the Ancient Greek tradition 'the mountain'is the place of the gods, but the original meaning was lost as it was taken literally as the external mountain and the external god.

K rejected the usfulness of such metaphor or such a notion, as it leads to much confusion but he never rejected the thing itself and attempted to express it straightforwardly as a state wherein the mind is completely still yet full of movement, alert, watching, meditating and ready to see. Total attention. That is the mountain. From that 'high'vantage point, insight can flow naturally.

ganesan balachandran wrote:
or body , brain and mind.

It is all body, Ganesan, but there are three movements, which we have separated. Attention is usually in one or the other or the third, but has never been able to stride over the three.

Attention is captured in either the moving/instinctive functions, the emoto/feeling functions or the intellectual/mentation functions.

I wonder if this is what may be meant in the text you refer to?

When attention is captured in one or another function, it is not free to operate naturally, extensively and the functions tend to separate. Then you have fragmented attention, limited and frustrated in all its action.

To stride over all three 'mountains'means to free attention and create the possibility of integrating the functions. Where the functions are described as the mountains, attention muct rise above their highest peaks. The whole cannot be seen from the inside. There must be a certain stepping out.

Nietzsche also refers to this often. His point is that first one must know one's mountain and al the characters that reside on it. Then one can overcome oneself, or, as he also put it, stand on one's own shoulders.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
That is a very pertinant statement by K, Dhirendra. Do you realise (make real) its meaning? T

Peng, I realize that scripture/god/guru are not helpful, so full stop to seeking for any help in scripture/god/guru.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
Are your relationships of that kind?

No, but to have such relationship, I don't look into veda.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
And if not, all your words and K's may be thrown out of the window.

Yes, as soon as possible, sir.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
I would point out that K is also dead. In fact he is as dead as the Vedas. Why always return to K?

Exactly he is dead, I am not interested to return to K, quote were produced in the response of gb's post where he claimed that K accept Veda as something sacred and whatever whatever, so please Peng, give your kind attention to all concerned posts, if you are interested to make a proper comment.

K is dead, even he was dead when he was physically present, he always said he can't help, no one can help, there is a difference in veda and him, veda are not audio-video recordings.

I don't know

This post was last updated by dhirendra singh Mon, 19 Mar 2012.

ganesan balachandran wrote:
he was saying like this, but he asked a question about sacred in india. what is sacred here which is not influenced by commerce?
D, i too don't know:)

but you insist that it's veda.

I don't know

Daniel Dan wrote:
This morning I sense that there is goodness in the mountains around here...:-)))))

Very beautiful pictures,Dan, lovely:)

I don't know

This post was last updated by dhirendra singh Mon, 19 Mar 2012.

...Yes, I agree, with you about mountains; I have just come back from a weekend in The Lake District - beautiful!:)...

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
Burning is not an act of the ego, it happens automatically as the ego, which is its own book, burns. All the talk of burning books is nothing but hot air while the ego remains. That is the only book to burn, the ego. But we treasure that book and we want to know what happens next.

Well stated Peng. No doubt that the ego/self is the most treasured book of memory, and holds endless (individual) fascination for each individual ego/self searching for the entertainment of what will happen next.

And yes - all is disorder unless that book ENDS.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
I would point out that K is also dead.

Yes he is dead. The truth he pointed towards however is very much alive. The disorder he highlighted is carrying on regardless, constantly growing in its destruction of all that is pure and natural on the planet.

au b () wrote:
There are indeed two distinct positions: tradition, which is repeating and conforming, or true understanding, which comes about from real alone inquiry, and seeing by oneself things as they actually are

Here is the crux of the difficulty in this discussion. There are said to be two positions. But, what is a position? It means that if one is for this, one is against that, does it not? Let me say clearly that direct seeing is not a position; it is not something to be for or against. Either it is a fact or it is not. But when it is put as a position then hostilities are started.

And in case Dhirendra missed it, in the quote he gave K said that for the mind that can see directly the books are of no use. He could also have written that for the mind that can see directly, the teaching given by K is of no use, so can also burn. But in every quote people have given here K has put in the clause that the book, the teaching the explanation (in any form) is useless FOR THE ONE WHO'S EYES ARE OPEN.

And here we are, giving a great deal of respect to the words of K and to the teaching. Why? on what basis? If the word has no value, if the word cannot help, why did K promote the word? Why did he sanction the printing of millions of books?

Au talks of not making K an authority but this misses the point. The point is that words ARE of value. And if you say burn the Vedas you are also saying burn K and burn everything. And here you are on this site doing what? Trotting out millions more words, the very things you say have no value. Which only proves that one does not have to make an authority of K to be wrapped in inner-contradiction.

I find all this talk about burning to be uter hypocrisy, coming out of the mouths of those who do not and cannot see directly and who have come nowhere near to what K was describing. It is self-indulgent, ego-rattling drivel. If you want to burn something, start with your own keyboard.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
Yes he is dead. The truth he pointed towards however is very much alive. The disorder he highlighted is carrying on regardless, constantly growing in its destruction of all that is pure and natural on the planet.

Thank you Patricia. The words continue to have meaning as long as there are minds open to receive. I do not mind to read K, the Vedas, the bible or any other book, IF I find a value in it. The teaching given by K is of the highest value, whether or not he is alive or dead, whether or not it is recorded word of mouth, written or DVD. It is not the mode of transmission that creates value but the mind that is open to receive.

K is now. The teaching is in the contemporary framework. It is for us. In a thousand years something else will be required. Things will be able to be said in the future which are impossible for us to conceive of today. The human mind is limited beyond its beliefs and moves with time. ANY teaching has to be in that same time. Truth is non-temporal but its delivery is always now.

Still, we can see from the Vedas and other texts that truth has always been before us. There have always been those prepared to give their lives to its transmission. The live word constantly dies and has to be renewed. But, I feel, for us it is far more important to live the truth of the teachings than to compare the teachings.

The ego wants to decide what to burn and what to preserve, which is the start of all organised religion. Let us at least be done with that horror.

Peng Shu Tse wrote:
K is now. The teaching is in the contemporary framework. It is for us. In a thousand years something else will be required.

Certainly the teaching of K is relevant now. Which is all there is - now.

I would suggest that if it is not heeded, 'a thousand years from now' is anyone's guess. 'A thousand years from now' could well be a total myth.

How long can humanity continue along its present increasingly destructive path without nature hitting back - and strongly? Are we already ignoring the signs?

And if humanity eventually wakes up and tunes in to what is happening on the planet, will the human brain be sharp enough to take on the myriad of problems we humans have created? Will mankind even be able to mutually agree upon any solution?

These are questions for NOW - not the future.

dhirendra singh wrote:
but you insist that it's veda.

i don't find anything else but if at all anything is sacred as he mentions.
gb

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

This post was last updated by ganesan balachandran Tue, 20 Mar 2012.

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
These are questions for NOW

in the question itself the answer-action in non action and non action in action.
gb

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

ganesan balachandran wrote:
in the question itself the answer-action in non action and non action in action.

What does that mean gb?

selfless action.
gb

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