Yes Dev,I too would like to take over the content of the site.I only want people here that agree with me,and the right to expel those who do not.I prefer an atmosphere of conformity according to my personal wishes.I do not want what is,but something else,some comfort,some security.I do not want to have the open forum as it is,but as I would like it to be.If everybody was just a little more like me everything would be fine,by me.I know it must appear to be selfish,but I have plenty of self justification for feelin the way I do.Truth is I am deeply identified with my thinking,and god forbid someone should ask pointed questions of me.I know you will probably tell me it's my conditioning,but can't you see I AM DIFFERENT?And no I know what's next,I have control issues right,well is it a control issue when I unreasonably expect others to conform to my expectation? Well I got to end this plea for my quest for power and dominance I am getting writers crap.opps I mean cramp. Thank you.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

"So the question is: you hurt me, you flattered me, you scandalised me, and can the mind wipe away at the very moment you are insulting, never recording? You understand what I am saying? Never recording your insult. Have you ever tried this?"strong text****

Jk

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Soham netti wrote:
can the mind wipe away at the very moment you are insulting, never recording? You understand what I am saying? Never recording your insult.

Thank you for that.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

Soham netti wrote:
Never recording your insult.

Aside from the unconditioned state, the brain registers. You can point out insult without the words having had any effect. The effect is in the immediate response of thought in relation to the self image. Thusly, the profound wisdom and immaculate intelligence of Krishnamurti's pointing: "Keep on wiping thought away as it arises."

"See thought arising; watch it. Without that, all else is illusion and becoming."

**The brain is the instrument of registration. Right? Like a computer it registers. It registers because in that registration it finds security, safety, it is a form of protecting itself. Right? You are following this? Right sirs? And when one is called an idiot, or some other insult takes place, the immediate reaction is to register it, verbally, the word has its significance, wanting to hurt and it is registered. Like flattery is also registered. Right? Now can this registering process come to an end? Bearing in mind that the mind, the brain must register, otherwise you wouldn't know where your house is, you wouldn't be able to drive your car, or use any language. But not to register any psychological reactions. You understand? You are following all this?

Then one will ask: how? How will I prevent registration of an insult, or a flattery? Flattery is more pleasant and therefore I like to register, but the insult or the hurt I want to get rid of. But both factors, insult, flattery, are registered. Now is it possible not to register psychologically? Right? Can we go on with this?

What is it that gets hurt? You say, ''I am hurt'', what is that entity that gets hurt? Is it an actuality? You understand what I mean? Something concrete, something tactile, something that you can talk about you know? Or is it something that you have created for yourself about yourself? Are you following all this?**

J. Krishnamurti

First Question & Answer Meeting at Brockwood Park

Don't need K or any, do yourself

RICK LEIN wrote:
Yes Dev,I too would like to take over the content of the site.I only want people here that agree with me,and the right to expel those who do not.I prefer an atmosphere of conformity according to my personal wishes.I do not want what is,but something else,some comfort,some security.I do not want to have the open forum as it is,but as I would like it to be.If everybody was just a little more like me everything would be fine,by me.I know it must appear to be selfish,but I have plenty of self justification for feelin the way I do.Truth is I am deeply identified with my thinking,and god forbid someone should ask pointed questions of me.I know you will probably tell me it's my conditioning,but can't you see I AM DIFFERENT?And no I know what's next,I have control issues right,well is it a control issue when I unreasonably expect others to conform to my expectation? Well I got to end this plea for my quest for power and dominance I am getting writers crap.opps I mean cramp. Thank you.

Quite a rant, Rick, but it's all over the place and it isn't clear what you're getting at. Be specific. Did someone say something that triggered this? If so, quote what they said and tell us how you feel about it.

It can be done, the seeing of thought for what it is and the dissolution of the self, the psychological "I." But few of us have done this. So long as there is self and thought there will be hurt - - and hurting.

max

max greene wrote:
It can be done, the seeing of thought for what it is and the dissolution of the self, the psychological "I." But few of us have done this. So long as there is self and thought there will be hurt - - and hurting.

The only way, Max, you can honestly say, "It can be done" is to have done it. This means you'll be added to the list of forum particpants, present and past, who believe themselves to be selfless. Congratulations! Your Certificate of Selflessness, suitable for framing, will be mailed out today. Also, a modest sterling siver trophy with your name engraved on it is available for $19.95.

nick carter wrote:
Did someone say something that triggered this?

Read Regulation of the Forum as posted by Paul,the rest is self explanatory!

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

When Paul said, "Can there not be some guidelines about making personal and abusive attacks on one another?", he must have been referring to what went on between Dean and David a couple of days ago. It got pretty intense but it was just a flare-up and I didn't mind it at all. Nothing wrong with naked honesty, in my opinion, but some people can't handle it.

nick carter wrote:
Did someone say something that triggered this?

Hi Nick,the confusion in part stems from the fact that Rick could not respond to Paul's post directly.So he started another thread to do so.Paul had locked the thread.It takes issue with the need for power,and control over content,and expression,and dominance.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

nick carter wrote:
Nothing wrong with naked honesty, in my opinion, but some people can't handle it.

Agreed,if one wants phoniness,and a false sense of security there are plenty of places to find it.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

Soham netti wrote:
The brain is the instrument of registration. Right? Like a computer it registers...
... Or is it something that you have created for yourself about yourself? Are you following all this?**

A bit long winded, but he covered the bases and got to the point. :)

"See thought arising; watch it. Without that, all else is illusion and becoming."

RICK LEIN wrote:
Agreed,if one wants phoniness,and a false sense of security there are plenty of places to find it.

It's the bloody hypocrisy of these f*^#ing holier that thou's, that make Bill go "Aack!" :)

"See thought arising; watch it. Without that, all else is illusion and becoming."

This post was last updated by Dean R. Smith Wed, 08 Sep 2010.

Rick,

It appears your initial posting was in response to a locked topic advocating better oversight of the forums.

I agree that outside oversight isn't the answer - - but then, neither is lack of outside oversight. As intelligent people we should be able to see what is right behavior, and that seeing should be our "oversight." But if intelligence is lacking, then the need for rules and parameters (oversight) arise to prevent chaos.

max

Dean R. Smith wrote:
It's the bloody hypocrisy of these f*^#ing holier that thou's, that make Bill go "Aack!" :)

Oh come on Dean can't you sugar coat that,just a little? It's like Mary Poppins used to say"Just a spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down,in the most delightful way".

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

max greene wrote:
It appears your initial posting was in response to a locked topic advocating better oversight of the forums.

There is nothing life threatening here is there Max,I'm not saying yes or no to your response.Just saying it is as it is.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

max greene wrote:
But if intelligence is lacking, then the need for rules and parameters (oversight) arise to prevent chaos.

Well that's in place,some may not agree with it,and that was my point.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

RICK LEIN wrote:
Oh come on Dean can't you sugar coat that,just a little? It's like Mary Poppins used to say"Just a spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down,in the most delightful way".

That was the mild version for delicate ears. :)

"See thought arising; watch it. Without that, all else is illusion and becoming."

nick carter wrote:
Nothing wrong with naked honesty, in my opinion, but some people can't handle it.

Yes, but what is the difference between naked honesty and naked violence? Why should anyone want to handle the stuff pumped out in the way it was?

This automatic response of the 'sticks and stones' variety is a stock macho response and doesn't come from either sensitivity or compassion.

And why should a site dedicated to the teaching of J. Krishnamurti 'handle it?'

It is quite beyond being a personal matter, Nick.

As for the young person who comes to the site to try to understand something of the teaching, they will be instantly repelled, which may be why the constant flow of vitriol is self-perpetuating.

How many new people have come and engaged on these forums?

If I had not already read K I would look once at this forum and run a mile.

What are you waiting for?

Dev, it seems quite simple. If you want some amount of peace and respectability on this forum you really must remove David Loucks and Dean R Smith. David for things he has already posted and Dean for his ongoing childish rants that show no sign of stopping anytime soon. Please take this post seriously.

David Loucks wrote:
Dev, it seems quite simple. If you want some amount of peace and respectability on this forum you really must remove David Loucks and Dean R Smith. David for things he has already posted and Dean for his ongoing childish rants that show no sign of stopping anytime soon. Please take this post seriously.

Unlike you, Dean doesn't troll the forum looking for opportunities to slight you.

"See thought arising; watch it. Without that, all else is illusion and becoming."

Paul Davidson wrote:
nick carter wrote:
Nothing wrong with naked honesty, in my opinion, but some people can't handle it.Yes, but what is the difference between naked honesty and naked violence? This automatic response of the 'sticks and stones' variety is a stock macho response and doesn't come from either sensitivity or compassion.

Paul, it really depends on how one feels about the words one reads. Personally, I'm more offended by piety and hypocrisy than blunt insult...but that's just me. Anyway, there's nothing Dev could've done about the outburst that he hasn't already done, so what's the problem? Someone blew his top and it's over. It happens. No one got hurt and now everyone knows who's the hothead and who's the smart-ass provocateur.

Paul Davidson wrote:
If I had not already read K I would look once at this forum and run a mile.

Yeah, me too, but I've already made the same complaint to troy (at KFA) and to Dev, but they disagree. They feel it's better to encourage (or at least enable) the idiocy of these forums than not to, so go figure.

This post was last updated by nick carter Thu, 09 Sep 2010.

Paul Davidson wrote:
Yes, but what is the difference between naked honesty and naked violence? Why should anyone want to handle the stuff pumped out in the way it was?

Seems someone may have completely missed the point of this thread,which was,my way or the highway,could the point have been missed due to the fact that the thread is open to anyone,even if they have huge control issues.No one forces you to read it or respond sir.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

Paul Davidson wrote:
As for the young person who comes to the site to try to understand something of the teaching, they will be instantly repelled,

Fortune telling posing as fact? Perhaps young people have more insight than you imagine,is that possible? Once again sir the teaching only points,as Krishnamurti pointed out time and again we are to observe the working of our own mind.Young persons may have deeper insight,having been conditioned less.It seems as if one might be speaking again from a personal perspective.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

Paul Davidson wrote:
It is quite beyond being a personal matter, Nick.

You know if a certain someone would PLEASE STOP THE WHINING,someone else MIGHT be able to see some truth in the above captioned statement!

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

Paul Davidson wrote:
And why should a site dedicated to the teaching of J. Krishnamurti 'handle it?'

The site is handling it sir,it seems that it is you who are not.Now her is someting to ponder"You are not really watching at all.You think that by watching you will gain a reward,you will be more loving,you will suffer less,be less irritable,get something beyound;so your watching is a process of buying".To watch is to observe without choice,to see your self as you actually are without any movement of the desire to change.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

RICK LEIN wrote:
The site is handling it sir,it seems that it is you who are not

Of course the site is handling it. The only thing that cannot handle it is the image that is hurt by being challenged, or that chooses to be insulted by words.

One does not have to jump in front of perceived insults and say 'You got me - how dare you.'

Patricia Hemingway wrote:
The only thing that cannot handle it is the image that is hurt by being challenged, or that chooses to be insulted by words.

Thank you Patricia,it is like K said,choice is conflict.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

nick carter wrote:
When Paul said, "Can there not be some guidelines about making personal and abusive attacks on one another?", he must have been referring to what went on between Dean and David a couple of days ago.

Hi Nick,that may be.The author may have been pleading his own case as victim of perceived abuse,the operative word here being victim as well?That being a possibility the question one might ask is,What did Krishnamurti mean by the term "Choiceless Awareness"?

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE