Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
A Quiet Space | moderated by Clive Elwell

Desire


Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 167 in total
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #61
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I don’t see how the self is helping us survive.

I Don't want to die.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #62
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1651 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
I Don't want to die.

Can that self-centered psychological desire to 'live' or to "not die", can that desire (fear) as in Huguette's post, be allowed to "wither"?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 14 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #63
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

I Don't want to die

Yet I smoke and drink too much which kills me

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 14 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #64
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I Don't want to die

Yet I smoke and drink too much which kills me

Which only underlines the fact that : thought, fear and desire do not lead away from confusion and suffering.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #65
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Can that desire to 'live' be allowed to "wither"?

Why should it wither? Why should I allow it to wither? Its only goal is to remain, prosper and multiply.

I shall not slowly realise that I am not me. Nor can I decide that I am not me.

No. The self will not wither. But maybe it can be consumed for a while by Something greater.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #66
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote #29:

Clive Elwell wrote:

So constant seeing is constant changing, isn't it?

I have no experience of Constance - its Always ebb and flow

Yes, this is how I experience things also - always ebb and flow, always coming and going into and out of existence.

So I now wonder what I was trying to express with the "constant seeing is constant changing"? Is there a contradiction between "constant" and "changing"? Change IS always there, isn't it? Although logically there appears to be a contradiction, in fact change is the very nature of our existence.

I think what I was trying to express was that seeing MUST bring about change. So whenever there is seeing, then there must be change.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #67
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote #30 :
As for the question about "what sees?" - Either its me, the thinker and its thoughts (LOL) or there is Something else other than me.

Perhaps it is only a matter of language, how its structure forces us into saying things that are not so, but still the phrase "Something else" suggests some sort of entity that sees.

It may sound romantic, but could not "seeing" be a process whereby the universe is revealing itself TO itself?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #68
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Huguette . wrote #31 :
So what “maintains” a PARTICULAR desire over time, hold onto it, be obsessed with it? Isn’t it effort and belief? Isn't effort based on the belief that effort can solve all problems?

This is similar to the question that I was trying to ask.Similar, but perhaps not quite the same. I was asking about the image, the image that comes into being after contact and sensation, the image that gives birth to desire. And, as I am seeing now, the image that creates time.

What gives this image continuity? Why is it that there is tomorrow the same image, same desire? Why does it not "easily and gracefully" end? After all, so many images DO thus end.

I have read your mail carefully, Huguette, but I cannot see that it is effort and belief that maintains this image. I will read the subsequent mails, which I have not yet done, and continue to watch this movement. Not that I can decide to watch, but being sensitive to the question, watching may occur.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #69
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
So whenever there is seeing, then there must be change.

absolutely - and once seen the effects will continue.

What I was reacting to was the idea of "constantly seeing" : as if once the scales had Fallen from our eyes, we would wander around for the rest of our days as the forever awakened one. It would seem that I am forever reborn with my tendancy to interpret from my point of view. And that silence must be forever courted.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #70
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
language forces us into saying things that are not so

The relative cannot embrace the absolute

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #71
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
what “maintains” a PARTICULAR desire over time,

Habit? Repetition and memory?

Everyday I am reborn as the person I was yesterday.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #72
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
What is not allowing this Clarity to shine through?

Why do we not "See"?

I suggest our knowledge (maybe one can skip the word "our" there). Psychological knowledge, which has a tremendous grip on the mind. Which, I suggest, is because the brain finds some sort of security in knowledge - illusory as that may be.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #73
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
Everyday I am reborn as the person I was yesterday.

And yet each day is a new day, and there is a sense of that.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 14 Dec 2019 #74
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

Clive: What gives this image continuity? Why is it that there is tomorrow the same image, same desire? Why does it not "easily and gracefully" end? After all, so many images DO thus end.

Fear and pleasure...thought...no? Maybe I’m not understanding your question Clive. The game of golf might give me great pleasure. I remember that...think about it...feel it...and want more tomorrow. Desire doesn’t end because basically I’m not happy and I want to escape my unhappiness with the object/s of my desire. K talked about contact and sensation and then thought wanting that repeated as the birth of the me....if I’m recalling correctly.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sat, 14 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 15 Dec 2019 #75
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
(maybe one can skip the word "our" there)

Please Don't : its the most important word - It points to the main stumbling block.
The word Knowledge however may be replaced with a whole load of potentially more accurate words, like illusion, beliefs, false memories, data etc...

But it is the fact that it is mine which gives it value.

Look, see, let go

This post was last updated by Douglas MacRae-Smith Sun, 15 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 15 Dec 2019 #76
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
But it is the fact that it is mine which gives it value.

Why? Can you explain this point? Here’s Clive’s second sentence: “Psychological knowledge, which has a tremendous grip on the mind.” Need he say ‘MY’ mind to make it accurate? It affects all of us. But maybe you’re referring to one’s identification with his opinions, beliefs, knowledge, etc. Thinking some thoughts are good and some bad....right vs wrong. That’s the ‘center’ K sometimes referred to...the self. The holding on to all that content...and the judgments of it....the judge is the judged.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Sun, 15 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Sun, 15 Dec 2019 #77
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Maybe I’m not understanding your question Clive.

Perhaps I have made a wrong assumption here. I see it is not true that images associated with desire persist in time (better say they CREATE time in fact), while other images do not. The images associated with sorrow, for example, also persist. They may last a lifetime. But some images do fade away as soon as they are born. Why this distinction? Why do some some images persist, and others do not? I think that is the essence of my question.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 15 Dec 2019 #78
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
But it is the fact that it is mine which gives it value.

Why? Can you explain this point?

What are we afraid of losing? My mind or mind?

What must be defended? What I know or Knowledge?

It is because I identify with Something that I want to protect it.

If we say that the obstacle to Clarity/Pyschological Freedom is the Brain or Knowledge itself, then the conversation would have to take the route of progress over time (through surgery, gene therapy, or accumulation of better data maybe)

However if we can see that the obstacle to Love and Understanding is conlict, is fear, is separation (is myself in other words), then we will have seen all there is to see.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 15 Dec 2019 #79
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Maybe I’m not understanding your question Clive

I'm probably not understanding it either - but here's my reaction : We are petty little creatures with only one real preoccupation, ourselves. I am what binds the past to the present and projects into the future. And the images that remain are what makes up me : my traumas, my victories, my habits, my beliefs, my tribe. The rest is of no importance and may be discarded.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #80
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1651 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
We are petty little creatures with only one real preoccupation, ourselves. I am what binds the past to the present and projects into the future. And the images that remain are what makes up me : my traumas, my victories, my habits, my beliefs, my tribe. The rest is of no importance and may be discarded.

Yes, the 'self', 'ego', it turns out, is truly 'evil'. You inherited it, I inherited it, we inherited it...Let's stop feeding it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #81
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

Let's stop feeding it.

But we ARE it....What else?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 16 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #82
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

“observe and investigate ‘what is’, not how to go beyond ‘what is’, not how to transform ‘what is’. If you do, then duality comes into being, therefore conflict.” January 22, 1978, Bombay, public talk 1

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #83
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 148 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
observe and investigate

To do so is to accept and forgive. Judgement in terms of good/evil, is to remain within the confines of fear/desire and thought.

So, what else?

Words and thoughts will not bring Freedom of understanding (not even K's words). All that his words can do is to accompany us, until one day we find ourselves standing at the door between Annihilation or Confusion; between Existence or Freedom.

Words and beliefs cannot give us sight; cannot be used as a path to Truth or a battering ram. The only thing words can do is to give us the courage to embrace the Doubt with passion.

The only Reason to step through the door is if Freedom and Clarity becomes more important than my own existence.

Look, see, let go

This post was last updated by Douglas MacRae-Smith Mon, 16 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #84
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

Words and beliefs cannot give us sight; cannot be used as a path to Truth or a battering ram. The only thing words can do is to give us the courage to embrace the Doubt with passion.

Doubt begins at home.... but doubt yes. Doubt all authority, including one’s own....and doubt oneself who is nothing but conclusions based upon the past.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 16 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #85
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

Clive Elwell wrote:
Why do some some images persist, and others do not? I think that is the essence of my question

I’m still not quite getting your question Clive (I understand the words of course, but not what you’re really getting at) , but I just read the QOTD and it may shed light on what we were discussing about desire.

Public Talk, February 29, 1948 | Mumbai, India

... And now you will say 'I have learned a very good trick. I know how to deal with unpleasant feelings, how to make them come to an end quickly: I won't term them'. But will you do the same with regard to pleasant feelings? I am afraid you won't. Because, you want pleasant feelings to continue, you want to give substance to pleasant sensations, you want to maintain them. Therefore, you will keep on giving them names. But that does not lead anywhere; because, the moment you give a name, a term, to a feeling which is pleasant, you are inevitably creating the opposite, and therefore you will always have the conflict of the opposites. Whereas, if you don't name, term, label, a sensation, whether pleasant or unpleasant, they both wither away; and therefore the thinker, who is the creator of the opposites, comes to an end. Then only shall we know what love is, because love is not a sensation. You can name it, but when you name it, you are naming the sensation of love, which is not love. When you love somebody, what happens? When you think about a person, what happens? You are really dealing with the sensation of that person; you are concerned with that sensation, and the more you give emphasis to sensation the less there is of love.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 16 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #86
Thumb_dm Dan McDermott United States 1651 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Let's stop feeding it.

What is it that strengthens and maintains the control of the ego, this "protective mechanism", I think Douglas called it? A survival mechanism? Is that all we are Tom, a 'mechanism', or are we in essence "nothing, not-a-thing" as K. suggested? It's clear to me that any attempt to 'fix' the psychological situation calls forth the duality of a 'fixer', and, that which has been judged to need 'fixing'. That is the duality that feeds and strengthens the 'self-image' isn't it? The ignorance of the fact that the thinker, me, and my thought are one and the same thing. That duality is the source of conflict and unless that illusion is seen through in the moment, the self, ego, is continuously strengthened and maintained. Does the self/mechanism maintain its control because of our acceptance or belief that something can be done and our attempts to do, no matter how subtle? Is it the fact that really nothing can be done? Only a "choiceless awareness of 'what is'? Isn't 'not-doing', not 'fixing', not 'searching', etc, isn't that a mind that is no longer in conflict?

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Mon, 16 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #87
Thumb_stringio Huguette . Canada 800 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
I am what binds the past to the present and projects into the future.

As I understand it, there is chronological time and psychological time. Both are based on memory, knowledge, experience, reasoning (sane or insane), and so on. What distinguishes the 2, as I see it, is where psychological feelings - fear, anger, greed, desire, shame, conceit, compulsion, and so on - are attached to time/memory. So, for example, I remember a wrong that you did against me, and I bear a grudge; or I remember that you praised me for my performance - that is psychological time.

In contrast, when I remember that I have an appointment tomorrow at 2, for example, that is chronological time which is neither problematic nor pleasurable.

Where memory/time is psychological, “I” is already part and parcel of it, as I see it. So - as I see it - the process is not that “I am what binds the past to the present and projects into the future”. “I AM” the past, present and future; “I AM” part and parcel of that memory. This is the conditioning that has inculcated the mind (not mine, theirs or yours).

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
And the images that remain are what makes up me : my traumas, my victories, my habits, my beliefs, my tribe.

Exactly - only without "that remain". Those images make up the me. But such images are not the whole of memory. There are also the memories of chronological time, which are indisputably necessary. So we are not demonizing images, memories, knowledge, time. We are merely observing the process which puts the self together. We are learning about the significance of time. Where we had taken the "reality", the factual nature of self for granted, we are now aware of the process and of the illusory nature of self as it arises. Where those feelings ("my" feelings) now arise (and they do arise), we can understand what is going on. Self, action and relationship are not what they seemed to be; they are not what we had assumed them to be.

It is, as K said I think, a shock! Isn't it?

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #88
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3103 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
Is that all we are Tom, a 'mechanism', or are we in essence "nothing, not-a-thing" as K. suggested?

That is all the self is, yes. What we are in essence? I’m not really interested in speculating about that, but rather in understanding the fact ...understanding how we live...understanding what actually is now. What’s the point of speculating about my essence when I’m consumed by desire all day, or when I’m angry or worried?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 16 Dec 2019.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #89
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Douglas MacRae-Smith wrote:
And the images that remain are what makes up me : my traumas, my victories, my habits, my beliefs, my tribe. The rest is of no importance and may be discarded.

But this is not the whole story, is it? otherwise we would not be here on the forum, enquiring.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 #90
Thumb_kinfonet_avatar Clive Elwell New Zealand 5551 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:

Dan: Is that all we are Tom, a 'mechanism', or are we in essence "nothing, not-a-thing" as K. suggested?

That is all the self is, yes. What we are in essence? I’m not really interested in speculating about that, but rather in understanding the fact ...understanding how we live...understanding what actually is now. What’s the point of speculating about my essence when I’m consumed by desire all day, or when I’m angry or worried?

You use the word "speculate", Tom. But is it necessarily a matter of speculation/ Is it not possible to simply LOOK to see what we are in essence? Look in order to understand, instead of using the intellect?

if we answer "NO" to that question, would that not be because we have never discovered how to look? in the past, I mean. So we have to admit the possibility that we can look, we can discover how to look and see the facts of our life, no?

To actually look suggests to me: without thought trying to look, without the interpretation of thought.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 167 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.)