Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
General Discussion | moderated by Dev Singh

Fear and Knowledge The Real Enemies of Man


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 36 in total
Wed, 09 Mar 2016 #1
Thumb_005 Nicholas Okumu Canada 70 posts in this forum Offline

If one follows what JK said over the years, you come to realize that fear and knowledge seem to be the real problems preventing us to live a true religious life.

Fear drives man to do all sorts of things. Once fear comes to mind, one immediately tries to counter it either by running away and associating or clinging to something we feel gives us security. This may be money, a gun, some kind of belief in the super powerful, etc.

Second, we may react to fear by cultivating what we call courage.

All the above reactions to fear relate to knowledge. Something that we already have in our memories; our minds, our the so called consciousness.

So, to lead a true religious life one needs to tackle fear and its mother, knowledge.

...the problems of duality...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 09 Mar 2016 #2
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 5845 posts in this forum Offline

That creation of the brain, the self, is the source of fear. Fear is the basic emotion of the self.

max

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 09 Mar 2016 #3
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Nicholas Okumu wrote:
Second, we may react to fear by cultivating what we call courage.

Yes this is very true ... and society praises courage as a very high moral value ... especially when society needs you for making war to so-called enemies of the nation ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 09 Mar 2016 #4
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

Nicholas Okumu wrote:
If one follows what JK said over the years, you come to realize that fear and knowledge seem to be the real problems preventing us to live a true religious life.

What do you mean by: fear, knowledge and true religious life? And why it is a problem, only because it prevents to live what you call a true religious life?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #5
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 262 posts in this forum Offline

Voco . wrote:
What do you mean by: fear, knowledge and true religious life? And why it is a problem, only because it prevents to live what you call a true religious life?

I think, if I may put in, a 'religious life' is one of inquiry based on finding something, if there is anything, beyond the content of consciousness. I would further say fear blocks because that's its nature- it runs away from facts. And one has to face facts to see truth. Knowledge? Do you really not know? Knowledge is the past held in the brain. As long as one is living in the past, knowledge, one cannot see anything new. It is translated into the past, knowledge, experience. But you know all this, no?

mike

This post was last updated by m christani Thu, 10 Mar 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #6
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Nicholas Okumu wrote:
So, to lead a true religious life one needs to tackle fear and its mother, knowledge.

Fear yes but I don't see knowledge as an enemy.

Why do you think so ?

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #7
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

m christani wrote:
I think, if I may put in, a 'religious life' is one of inquiry based on finding something, if there is anything, beyond the content of consciousness. I would further say fear blocks because that's its nature- it runs away from facts. And one has to face facts to see truth. Knowledge? Do you really not know? Knowledge is the past held in the brain. As long as one is living in the past, knowledge, one cannot see anything new. It is translated into the past, knowledge, experience. But you know all this, no?

You are now repeating K and you are saying that you do not live in the past? This forum is full of hypocrisy. Then, there is different kinds of fear, fear is not necessarily an expectation of some threat from the future. And If I inquiry, this does not have anything to do with the so called religious life.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #8
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
Fear yes but I don't see knowledge as an enemy.

Why do you think so ?

Nothing is an enemy. To perceive something as an enemy within yourself is do not see yourself.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #9
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Voco . wrote:
Nothing is an enemy. To perceive something as an enemy within yourself is do not see yourself.

Correct Voco ... fighting 'what is' would be futile ... everything has its place ... anyway "what you resist persists" (Jung)

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #10
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

Voco . wrote:
This forum is full of hypocrisy.

Isn't this forum the reflection of the rest of the world ? Why would it be different ?

However no need to make a problem of that ... it just is 'what is' ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

This post was last updated by Jean Gatti Thu, 10 Mar 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #11
Thumb_stringio Pavil Davidov Poland 4402 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

"The religious life" is an ideal you have either invented or adopted. It is something you have put in your bank of knowledge. What does it do and how does it act?

You start with some sort of fear that things are not right and you find comfort in the new idea that there is something called "religious life" that, if and when achieved, will make things right - right thought, right action etc.

But this "religious life" is something you cannot live. You dedicate yourself to learning about it by reading K or some other source of knowledge. You cultivate knowledge of a state you have never touched and you believe in the existence of that state despite having no experience of it.

Your outer face is that of a wise person who can answer all questions in terms of K or "the religious mind" or some other idea while your inner face is that of a confused, fearful and domesticated individual who has turned himself into little more than a credo, adding to itself and defending itself.

"Wherever you go, there you are." Insight from Mullah Nasruddin

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #12
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 262 posts in this forum Offline

re: #14

What an excellent view of your concept of religious inquiry!

mike

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #13
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 262 posts in this forum Offline

In my view, I think religious inquiry is the daily learning of 'what is', inner or outer or whatever, it's all inner anyway; questioning-whether one questions as K did, putting some of those same questions to oneself, or, asking your own questions, deeply- not looking for ideas to satisfy, but to perceive the truth of the matter.

Giving space to the mind to let things germinate and not always come up with the superabundance of superficial answers abounding on this forum, eg. And if you experience, or change in some ways, fundamentally, through daily insights, it may be seen as sort of 'signpost' on the way, not to be given undue importance. My experience anyway.

mike

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #14
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
"what you resist persists" (Jung)

Resistance is an escape through defense. Suppose that I want to deal with fear, why? Because of the same fear. That is, deep down I'm afraid of that feeling of fear.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #15
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

m christani wrote:
In my view, I think religious inquiry is the daily learning of 'what is'

Why call it religious?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #16
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 262 posts in this forum Offline

Voco . wrote:
Suppose that I want to deal with fear, why? Because of the same fear. That is, deep down I'm afraid of that feeling of fear.

Is it that one is afraid of the feeling of fear? Does that bring one down a hall of mirrors? Personally, I watch it. The specific, more obvious fears, down to the feeling itself- and remain with it. Don't move away. Try to apprehend- perceive it, the feeling, the uncomfortable feeling.

mike

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #17
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

Pavil Davidov wrote:
"The religious life" is an ideal you have either invented or adopted. It is something you have put in your bank of knowledge. What does it do and how does it act?

You start with some sort of fear that things are not right and you find comfort in the new idea that there is something called "religious life" that, if and when achieved, will make things right - right thought, right action etc.

But this "religious life" is something you cannot live. You dedicate yourself to learning about it by reading K or some other source of knowledge. You cultivate knowledge of a state you have never touched and you believe in the existence of that state despite having no experience of it.

Your outer face is that of a wise person who can answer all questions in terms of K or "the religious mind" or some other idea while your inner face is that of a confused, fearful and domesticated individual who has turned himself into little more than a credo, adding to itself and defending itself.

This perspective is not senseless I would say. Given a fact, that most people who seeks for any understanding of themselves from another are in confusion by that time.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #18
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

m christani wrote:
Is it that one is afraid of the feeling of fear?

If I think that it is something which is not me, which is my enemy, which is something I must get rid of, then there is fear of the feeling of fear. Then one seeks for an escape in a life which is without fear, which is pure joy, happiness, bliss, nirvana or call it how you want, a life without any problems. Or, one is soaked in entertainment, drugs.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #19
Thumb_stringio Pavil Davidov Poland 4402 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

m christani wrote:
In my view, I think religious inquiry is the daily learning of 'what is', inner or outer or whatever, it's all inner anyway; questioning-whether one questions as K did, putting some of those same questions to oneself, or, asking your own questions, deeply- not looking for ideas to satisfy, but to perceive the truth of the matter.

Most people do this, Mike. They do it to the extent that they can, given the minds they have. It is relative. We (you, I and others) do it until we come to a block, then we either divert, lose interest of self-calm in some way. The fact that you name that which is ordinary as something special, "religious," is only a change in nomenclature.

"Questioning whether one questions as K did," is a cute way of setting K up as an authority or model, suggesting to oneself that one has the wherewithal to judge in what way he was actually questioning himself internally and then comparing oneself with that fabricated conclusion.

Observe, for example, when you are creating 'specials.'

"Wherever you go, there you are." Insight from Mullah Nasruddin

This post was last updated by Pavil Davidov (account deleted) Thu, 10 Mar 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #20
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 262 posts in this forum Offline

Voco . wrote:
If I think that it is something which is not me, which is my enemy, which is something I must get rid of, then there is fear of the feeling of fear. Then one seeks for an escape in a life which is without fear, which is pure joy, happiness, bliss, nirvana or call it how you want, a life without any problems. Or, one is soaked in entertainment, drugs.

Then you have an image of your enemy, and are afraid of that.

But that reply to the post in question (#16) has to be the most irrelevant, vacuous reply I have read yet. Congrats!

mike

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #21
Thumb_stringio Pavil Davidov Poland 4402 posts in this forum ACCOUNT DELETED

m christani wrote:
But that reply to the post in question (#16) has to be the most irrelevant, vacuous reply I have read yet. Congrats!

Oh, you should follow Voco more closely. He can turn the simplest idea into a pretzel.

"Wherever you go, there you are." Insight from Mullah Nasruddin

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 10 Mar 2016 #22
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

m christani wrote:
Then you have an image of your enemy, and are afraid of that.

Suppose that once or at certain times you have felt fear. You remember that state and you are afraid of the return of that state. And you escape from the conditions which may trigger that fear again.

m christani wrote:
But that reply to the post in question (#16) has to be the most irrelevant, vacuous reply I have read yet. Congrats!

Why? Why such put-down? Are you hurt?

This post was last updated by Voco . Thu, 10 Mar 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #23
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 262 posts in this forum Offline

Pavil Davidov wrote:
Most people do this, Mike. They do it to the extent that they can, given the minds they have. It is relative. We (you, I and others) do it until we come to a block, then we either divert, lose interest of self-calm in some way. The fact that you name that which is ordinary as something special, "religious," is only a change in nomenclature.

"Questioning whether one questions as K did," is a cute way of setting K up as an authority or model, suggesting to oneself that one has the wherewithal to judge in what way he was actually questioning himself internally and then comparing oneself with that fabricated conclusion.

First, Paul, I don't believe most people really understand what perceiving thought without the perceiver (the self) is. I think typically most 'meditators' are aware of the self observing. The meditator is watching. This is not the perception of 'what is' that brings about insight, which changes 'what is', not into something altered, but perceives, and the perception immediately goes beyond 'what is'. (it is difficult to put this in words).

Your second point- what I meant was asking the same questions as K did. "Is envy caused by comparison?", "Is the self-image what's hurt?", "Does desire arise when one creates an image out of sensation?", "Is fear non-acceptance of 'what is'?" and so on. We like to think we weren't or aren't influenced by K, but "if we are", why not learn from the horse's mouth? Which doesn't preclude posing one's own questions. I do think it's questioning that investigates, breaks down this wall of the self.

mike

This post was last updated by m christani Fri, 11 Mar 2016.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #24
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

m christani wrote:
I do think it's questioning that investigates, breaks down this wall of the self.

No what breaks down the wall is the clear seeing that duality (ie. self) is a myth ... because seeing the illusion destroys the illusion ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #25
Thumb_farside0411 m christani United States 262 posts in this forum Offline

Voco . wrote:
Why? Why such put-down?

The thing is, Voco, when one puts effort into a post, and another replies to it without apparently having read it or considering it for more than a second or two, it sucks the energy out of the discussion. There is more here than respect between posters (which I may have violated, out of frustration), but respect to the post. Read it or don't read it, but why reply without even considering it?

mike

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #26
Thumb_3252 Voco . Luxembourg 878 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
No what breaks down the wall is the clear seeing that duality (ie. self) is a myth ... because seeing the illusion destroys the illusion ...

Surely it is easy to break down your own concepts.

m christani wrote:
The thing is, Voco, when one puts effort into a post, and another replies to it without apparently having read it or considering it for more than a second or two, it sucks the energy out of the discussion. There is more here than respect between posters (which I may have violated, out of frustration), but respect to the post. Read it or don't read it, but why reply without even considering it?

First of all, why this show off "I put effort in my post". Imagine a musician or a painter or a writer who declares publicly or to himself "I really did a great work!", but by setting this value you are expecting others to value it the same, that's why you are getting disappointed when someone sees it different, not as you like it would be seen. Second thing, you are expecting a respect, but to expect a respect from another means that you are expecting another to comply with your value system. Third thing, how do you determine that I'm not considering what you write? Provide some arguments, tell me where I am wrong, but you have just switched to a direct attack.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #27
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

m christani wrote:
Voco, when one puts effort into a post, and another replies to it without apparently having read it or considering it for more than a second or two, it sucks the energy out of the discussion.

Mike, this 'effort' means an 'expectation' ... when you expect something from others you inevitably call for frustration ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #28
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 5845 posts in this forum Offline

Jean Gatti wrote:
. . . what breaks down the wall is the clear seeing that duality (ie. self) is a myth ... because seeing the illusion destroys the illusion ...

Seeing is the action, yes.

There is only one duality -- the reality of the physical and the unreality (other than as idea) of the psychological.

max

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #29
Thumb_photo_jg4 Jean Gatti Belgium 8638 posts in this forum Offline

max greene wrote:
There is only one duality -- the reality of the physical and the unreality (other than as idea) of the psychological.

For some (eg. Buddhists) even the physical is illusory ... the only reality being emptiness ...

Why resist 'what is' ?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 11 Mar 2016 #30
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 5845 posts in this forum Offline

Jean,

I don't see how the physical can be called illusory. The physical universe exists, and to exist it must be now, the present. The physical has evolved through sequence, measurable by time, but sequence and evolution is the timeless present -- reality -- unfolding.

max

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 36 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)