I think the sacred/profane dichotomy is an artificial create of a conditioned mind. In a perfect world, there is only the sacred.

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

In a perfect world if we wanted something, would we have to pay for it ? :-)

True experimenting consists in understanding through our own alert watchfulness,

In a perfect world you wouldn't want anything.

Yes I agree with you, not wanting anything is very liberators
I have experiment with it. Wanting is to be attached isn?t it?

True experimenting consists in understanding through our own alert watchfulness,

why wanting should be an act of attachment? can not one want out of compassion?

Yes I can see what you are saying. I could want peace for all, I could want
freedom for all people and this wanting would not be attachment it would be out of compassion?
Wanting something is still a goal, a destination, and idealization, aiming
to reach isn?t it When K is talking about want, he is not really distinguishing good and bad want, he pointing out that in wanting we narrow our vision, wanting this or that is still focusing, also we have inclination to attach our self to our goal, our hope, to our objective, they can become our raison to live.

To me wanting out of compassion does not makes sense
because compassion is understanding of, in the now. It is like wanting something out of love, is it love? One want it but the fact is that if we want something it is still and indication that we have and image of what it supposed to be, this is also call conditioning. Now K is saying that love is the unknown, is infinite, it wouldn?t be love if it would limited by conditioning, if we experiment with this idea, I find that we don?t focus as much, we enlarge our vision, it is more inclusive.

True experimenting consists in understanding through our own alert watchfulness,

jean-m girard wrote:

Yes I can see what you are saying. I could want peace for all, I could want
freedom for all people and this wanting would not be attachment it would be out of compassion?
Wanting something is still a goal, a destination, and idealization, aiming
to reach isn?t it When K is talking about want, he is not really distinguishing good and bad want, he pointing out that in wanting we narrow our vision, wanting this or that is still focusing, also we have inclination to attach our self to our goal, our hope, to our objective, they can become our raison to live.

To me wanting out of compassion does not makes sense
because compassion is understanding of, in the now. It is like wanting something out of love, is it love? One want it but the fact is that if we want something it is still and indication that we have and image of what it supposed to be, this is also call conditioning. Now K is saying that love is the unknown, is infinite, it wouldn?t be love if it would limited by conditioning, if we experiment with this idea, I find that we don?t focus as much, we enlarge our vision, it is more inclusive.

Dear Jean,

Yes, I would say that desire/wanting is another synonym of the self/observer/thinker. Based on choice between fragments of knowledge, it is in itself always contradictory and limited. (creating all pairs of opposites like sacred/profane for example). So, there is only a relative difference between wanting peace or a new pair of trousers for example, between various objects of desire. What is of importance instead, is to understand this whole movement of desire.

Ironically enough, it is not even possible to 'want peace in the world' as an action of thought, because desire itself is the root of all contradiction/violence in the world that we are. The only way to create true peace in the world is to be it ourselves. And this is seen to happen when there is constant ending of desire/thought within. In other words it is the ending of the distance between the observer and the observed, or the distance between the peace in myself and the peace of the world. There is then nothing left to "want", since there is no thought/image of how anything "should be'.One may still "want to do this or that, like i wanted to clean the bath today, but wanting is not a good word to describe action which happens without any psychological time/attachment and which is not motivated by self-interest/desire. -Interesting, while cleaning the bath i felt clearly how cleaning is taking place for the sake of cleanliness itself, no distance there either..and that everything one does in this way serves a greater order from which one is a part...

K's techings are 100 per cent practical, since they are about the ending of conceptual reality,about the ending of idenrtification with image. There is nothing theoretical in it, it is about pure action. Saying this because if i remember correctly, you said somewhere that "you like the practical approach to K's teaching' or something alike...(put me right if i unintentionally have distorted your words)But what else is the teaching about but absolute practicability?

Mina

jean-m girard wrote:

In a perfect world if we wanted something, would we have to pay for it ? :-)

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

nick carter wrote:

In a perfect world you wouldn't want anything.

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

jean-m girard wrote:

Yes I agree with you, not wanting anything is very liberators
I have experiment with it. Wanting is to be attached isn?t it?

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

T N Padmanabhan wrote:

why wanting should be an act of attachment? can not one want out of compassion?

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

jean-m girard wrote:

Yes I can see what you are saying. I could want peace for all, I could want
freedom for all people and this wanting would not be attachment it would be out of compassion?
Wanting something is still a goal, a destination, and idealization, aiming
to reach isn?t it When K is talking about want, he is not really distinguishing good and bad want, he pointing out that in wanting we narrow our vision, wanting this or that is still focusing, also we have inclination to attach our self to our goal, our hope, to our objective, they can become our raison to live.

To me wanting out of compassion does not makes sense
because compassion is understanding of, in the now. It is like wanting something out of love, is it love? One want it but the fact is that if we want something it is still and indication that we have and image of what it supposed to be, this is also call conditioning. Now K is saying that love is the unknown, is infinite, it wouldn?t be love if it would limited by conditioning, if we experiment with this idea, I find that we don?t focus as much, we enlarge our vision, it is more inclusive.

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

Minna Martini wrote:

jean-m girard wrote:

Yes I can see what you are saying. I could want peace for all, I could want
freedom for all people and this wanting would not be attachment it would be out of compassion?
Wanting something is still a goal, a destination, and idealization, aiming
to reach isn?t it When K is talking about want, he is not really distinguishing good and bad want, he pointing out that in wanting we narrow our vision, wanting this or that is still focusing, also we have inclination to attach our self to our goal, our hope, to our objective, they can become our raison to live.

To me wanting out of compassion does not makes sense
because compassion is understanding of, in the now. It is like wanting something out of love, is it love? One want it but the fact is that if we want something it is still and indication that we have and image of what it supposed to be, this is also call conditioning. Now K is saying that love is the unknown, is infinite, it wouldn?t be love if it would limited by conditioning, if we experiment with this idea, I find that we don?t focus as much, we enlarge our vision, it is more inclusive.

Dear Jean,

Yes, I would say that desire/wanting is another synonym of the self/observer/thinker. Based on choice between fragments of knowledge, it is in itself always contradictory and limited. (creating all pairs of opposites like sacred/profane for example). So, there is only a relative difference between wanting peace or a new pair of trousers for example, between various objects of desire. What is of importance instead, is to understand this whole movement of desire.

Ironically enough, it is not even possible to 'want peace in the world' as an action of thought, because desire itself is the root of all contradiction/violence in the world that we are. The only way to create true peace in the world is to be it ourselves. And this is seen to happen when there is constant ending of desire/thought within. In other words it is the ending of the distance between the observer and the observed, or the distance between the peace in myself and the peace of the world. There is then nothing left to "want", since there is no thought/image of how anything "should be'.One may still "want to do this or that, like i wanted to clean the bath today, but wanting is not a good word to describe action which happens without any psychological time/attachment and which is not motivated by self-interest/desire. -Interesting, while cleaning the bath i felt clearly how cleaning is taking place for the sake of cleanliness itself, no distance there either..and that everything one does in this way serves a greater order from which one is a part...

K's techings are 100 per cent practical, since they are about the ending of conceptual reality,about the ending of idenrtification with image. There is nothing theoretical in it, it is about pure action. Saying this because if i remember correctly, you said somewhere that "you like the practical approach to K's teaching' or something alike...(put me right if i unintentionally have distorted your words)But what else is the teaching about but absolute practicability?

Mina

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

Minna Martini wrote:
K's techings are 100 per cent practical, since they are about the ending of conceptual reality,about the ending of idenrtification with image. There is nothing theoretical in it, it is about pure action. Saying this because if i remember correctly, you said somewhere that "you like the practical approach to K's teaching' or something alike...(put me right if i unintentionally have distorted your words)But what else is the teaching about but absolute practicability?

Yes, I said that, I am happy that you come back with it.
I see myself has a practical gars but with ???. This maybe one of the raison I was seduce by JK, even if I did not understood it. But thank for mention it.

(What else but absolute practicability)?. yes absolutely.

True experimenting consists in understanding through our own alert watchfulness,

Venu Gopal wrote:
I hope this clarifies my ?proverb?.

Yes it does Venu.

True experimenting consists in understanding through our own alert watchfulness,

To all,
Funny many said that K was not practical because they found what he said impossible to do, or put into action. After sixty years of speaking what he says maybe simple and practical, and yet why is it that so many of us find it impossible to live the teachings?

Life is relationship

Eve Goodmon wrote:

To all,
Funny many said that K was not practical because they found what he said impossible to do, or put into action. After sixty years of speaking what he says maybe simple and practical, and yet why is it that so many of us find it impossible to live the teachings?

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

Hi all...kind of new here...the word "Sacred" caught my eye...for a while now I've pondered that word...finally came up with something I felt was truly sacred. After that decison I decided to go and ask people to define the word for me out of curiosity. It was truly amazing to see so many people struggle trying to define it...I think it was a good exercise...not to see people struggle but to see them pause and look at something they took for granted...to question is a good thing...No?

Even the smallest person can change the course of the future

do you know the scene in the play Our Town when Emily gets a chance to come back from death for just a typical morning at home? she finds it unbearably beautiful

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

kenny rich wrote:

Hi all...kind of new here...the word "Sacred" caught my eye...for a while now I've pondered that word...finally came up with something I felt was truly sacred. After that decison I decided to go and ask people to define the word for me out of curiosity. It was truly amazing to see so many people struggle trying to define it...I think it was a good exercise...not to see people struggle but to see them pause and look at something they took for granted...to question is a good thing...No?

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

kenny rich wrote:
I decided to go and ask people to define the word for me out of curiosity

sacred is being holy

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

Venu Gopal wrote:
people who claim to work for others but are actually fattening themselves

i planted a garden in the spring, i am already harvesting, as i walk around the streets of the city i see plants growing everywhere without vegetables, i see trees growing everywhere without fruit, i see flowers growing everywhere we cant eat, seeds can provide a lot of nourishment, they can cut a $300 a month food budget in half and less if you eat for fuel instead of pleasure... people are carefully taught not to plant for themselves much less others so that economic scarcity can control the demand curve. this is what conditioning is

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

Venu Gopal wrote:
Can you encapsulate what K's core teaching is?

JK taught that if you teach a child about planting from a book at a desk, s/he learns botany, if you give a child a bit of earth, s/he grows a garden.

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

Therese Okamoto wrote:

kenny rich wrote:
I decided to go and ask people to define the word for me out of curiosity

sacred is being holy

Be warned: If you want something, you have to pay for it.

Venu Gopal wrote:
And being holy is being wholesome.

I would say wholehearted.

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

from profane to sacred, perchance the difference between rape and lovemaking is the same difference with sex as sport at the top of the bell curve, i think we should deviate to abnormally good... does it bother anyone else that there are people who dont think goodness is good?

... people who think that goodness is stupid

Health care is everyone's job, not just in treating illness but in promoting healthy living. We must take personal responsibility, engaging our minds and hands in meaningful work - all essential components of healthy, secure lifestyles and communities.

This post was last updated by Trees Palin (account deleted) Fri, 11 Sep 2009.