Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Experimenter's Corner | moderated by John Raica

What are actually the K-Teachings ?


Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 650 in total
Fri, 11 Sep 2015 #1
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 580 posts in this forum Offline

With some support and feedback from our fine readers, we'll try the 'impossible' task of putting together a more coherent version of these Teachings for which K- in his own words- was the 'speaker'. It is a rather delicate task especially since most -if not all- the K talks, dialogues and writings are all contained in one day's work, and...tomorrow is a new day, with a new insight. And since tomorrow's perception may take place in another area or depth, the 'K-Works' seem to be lacking a certain coherence, although they may be 'holistically' consistent if Truth is a living, timeless dimension of Reality

In fact these K-Teachings are deeply insightful perceptions of the open and hidden complexity of human consciousness, throwing light ( from many different angles) on the very actual possibility of a qualitative (psychologically time-free) mutation. Unfortunately, this is generally seen as a major challenge...for the future generations of truth seekers. Now, such open minded new generations may be just around the corner ( leisurely surfing the web while sipping a 'latte' at the nearest Starbucks ?) or many many generations away, after the human race finally succeeds to make peace with itself.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Sat, 12 Sep 2015 #2
Thumb_2474 Dan McDermott United States 133 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
is to provide to this very brain an overall sense of stability and protection- independently of the material circumstances.

What I got from this John, was that the brain is 'automatically' updating the self much in the same way that it controls and oversees the functions of the body. Constantly adding and subtracting to minimise punishment and maximise reward...that's healthy in a way, individually, but a disaster globally. For there to be real change, the brain needs to see that this 'momentum' that it has inherited and fosters is not the 'best' way and that a 'better' way can only come into being when it sees that it no longer has to keep butressing the 'wall' it has built around itself for it's psychological security, safety and 'well-being'. As you say, that could only happen through its realising the situation through a type of 'meditation without a meditator'.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 12 Sep 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 #3
Thumb_2474 Dan McDermott United States 133 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
wherever we look we see the same ego-centred mentality.

Well John, our evolved brains have set us apart from all the life here. We are 'alone' in that sense. We 'know' too much. There is no going back obviously...we're here and we've made a mess of it, (and most want to continue that 'mess') But there is a sense that something else is possible. In the understanding of 'conditioning', of the duality between the thinker and the thought, the observer and the observed, the limitation of thought, etc., we can see the insanity and danger of nationalism, belief, that which causes the 'divisions' between us where none actually exist but which 'feel' so real. And the 'continuity' of the self can only take place in the moment, the 'self' of the past is dead and the 'self' of the future doesn't exist...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 #4
Thumb_avatar david sharma Ireland 7 posts in this forum Offline

continuity' of the self can only take place in the moment, the 'self' of the past is dead and the 'self' of the future doesn't exist...Dan yes sir self of the moment is an illusion that self can not see ,it is afraid of ending of death of it self, ending of the time as self so it lives in that illusion ,it is the ignorance of man ,the sorrow ,the stream man is in,

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 #5
Thumb_2474 Dan McDermott United States 133 posts in this forum Offline

So it follows, does it not, that the place that this psychological creation (continuation) of 'me' takes place is in the present moment, this "unfolding" as Max has called it. This moment is the 'place' that the 'becoming' or the 'what is' can reveal itself to itself. This is the life/death instant where the 'self' appears and disappears. This is where the "passive awareness' of this 'process is present or it is not. And it is usually not. So how does this 'awareness' which is so 'unnatural' come into this process, unforced, uninvited, this awareness without motive?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 #6
Thumb_avatar david sharma Ireland 7 posts in this forum Offline

Dan sir this unfolding of awareness in not in time ,in now or in the moment , time is becoming ,ending is not , life and death moving timelessly

This post was last updated by david sharma Sun, 13 Sep 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 #7
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 14 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
So how does this 'awareness' which is so 'unnatural' come into this process, unforced, uninvited, this awareness without motive?

The timeless present unfolds, and this unfolding is the evolution of the physical -- the universe. The universe is caught in sequence and accumulation, but this is not true of the present. Out of the present comes all. The present is before existence; existence is created out of the present.

Life and awareness are neither sequential nor accumulative -- they either are or they are not. Life and awareness are one with the timeless present, so obviously they are before existence.

It might be said that the present is the Real and that existence is Reality.

Awareness is "unnatural" in that it is not of our reality. But awareness, just as is life, is quite real. Awareness is newness and creation. The real -- awareness -- will appear when thought has not brought the past, as image, forward into the present. Thinking occupies the brain and pushes awareness aside. The past distorts and corrupts the flowering and unfolding of the present.

Evolution is not built from, or on, the past. Evolution is built on what is, unfolding, flowering. This is the "natural" way. The "unnatural" is brought in when the psychological (thinking) influences the physical to bring the past back into existence. This can't be done, of course, and the attempt leads to a distortion and corruption of the present.

max

This post was last updated by max greene Sun, 13 Sep 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 #8
Thumb_avatar david sharma Ireland 7 posts in this forum Offline

Life and awareness are neither sequential nor accumulative -- they either are or they are not. Life and awareness are one with the timeless present, so obviously they are before existence.Max sir this is insight thank you

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 #9
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 14 posts in this forum Offline

David,

This awareness (insight) is with us all, so long as we are alive. It is thinking and thought that smothers it. Our natural being is with awareness, and it is not "my" awareness or "your" awareness.

max

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Fri, 18 Sep 2015 #10
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 580 posts in this forum Offline

Meditation as a non-dualistic learning

Questioner: I would like to go into the deeper sense, of meditation. I have practised many forms of it, including a little Zen. There are various schools which teach (a mechanical) awareness so, can we go into it more deeply?

Krishnamurti: We must also set aside the whole meaning of ( accepting a spiritual ?) authority, because in meditation any form of authority, prevents a freshness, a newness. So authority, conformity and imitation must be set aside completely. Then only can one go into this very deep and extraordinarily important thing called meditation. Meditation is the essence of ( awakening one''s total) energy.

Questioner: When you say that meditation is the essence of energy, what do you mean ?

Krishnamurti: Every movement of thought, every action demands ( a certain amount of intelligent ?) energy, but this energy can be dissipated through conflict, through various forms of unnecessary (self centred ?) thoughts, pursuits and sentimental activities. ( Our inner) energy is wasted in conflict which arises in duality - in the division between the observer and the observed, the thinker and the thought. When this wastage is no longer taking place there is a quality of ( intelligent ) energy which can be called ''awareness' - an attentive observation, a seeing of things exactly as they are, both inwardly and outwardly, without the interference of (our self-centred ?) thought, which is the ( conditioned response of our ?) past.

Questioner: This I find very difficult to understand. Recognition is necessary, isn't it, when you look at a tree or the woman next door?

Krishnamurti: When you observe a tree is ( a verbal recognition?) necessary? If you begin to recognise ( and label it as ?) an oak or a mango tree then the (memory of the ?) past interferes with direct observation. In the same way, when you look at your wife, if you look with (through the ?) memories of annoyances or pleasures you are not really looking at her but at the ( vitual ) ''image'' which you have in your mind about her. That prevents a direct perception (and a direct contact?); such direct perception does not need recognition. When you condemn something, that prejudice distorts observation.

Questioner: Yes, I see that all these ( self-enclosing ?) interferences of thought are actually waste of energy, but there is the next point which is the (sense of ?) division, of separateness - the 'psychological ''distance'' that exists between the observer and the thing observed which creates duality; you say that this also is a waste of energy and brings about conflict. I find what you say logical but I find it extraordinarily difficult to remove that 'distance''. How is this to be done?

Krishnamurti: The ''observer'' is always casting its shadow ( of personal expectations ?) on the thing it observes. So one must first understand the structure and the nature of the ''observer'' and in that understanding perhaps the ''observer'' comes to an end. Let's examine what this ''observer'' is: it is the ( active memory of the ?) past, conscious and unconscious, its racial inheritance, its accumulated experience which is called knowledge, its reactions. The observer is really a conditioned ( psychic ?) entity. He asserts that ''I am'' and in protecting himself, he resists, dominates, seeking comfort and security. To be aware of this ''observer'' of his self-centred activity, his assertions, his prejudices, one must become aware of all these un-conscious movements which build the self-separating feeling that he is different. It must be observed without like and dislike in daily life, in its relationships. When this observation is clear, isn't there then a freedom from the ( psychological identification with the ?) ''observer''?

Questioner: So this ''observer''( entity ) is really the ego; you are saying that it must dissolve through an observation in which there is no sense of like or dislike, no opinion or judgement, but only the observing of this "I" in action? And you say this is part of meditation?

Krishnamurti: Of course. This is meditation.

Questioner: Surely this demands an extraordinary self-discipline?

Krishnamurti: The word ''discipline'' ( latin discere ) means to learn and when there is learning, not accumulating, when there is actual learning, which needs attention, that learning brings about its own responsibility, its own activity, its own dimensions: so there is no discipline as something imposed upon it. Where there is ( such free) learning there is no imitation, no conformity, no authority. If this is what you mean by the word discipline, then surely there is this (inner) freedom to learn?

Questioner: From what I have understood you are saying that learning is a constant movement without ( any psychological) accumulation. Is that so? Can learning be without accumulation?

Krishnamurti: Learning is ( can be ?) its own ( rewarding ?) action. But what generally happens is that having learnt – we try act upon what we have learnt. So there is ( a time?) division between the past and action, and hence there is a conflict between what should be and what is, or between what has been and what is. We are saying that there can be action in the very movement of learning: that is, learning is doing; it is not a question of having learnt and then acting. This ( psychological ?) acting from accumulation, is the very nature of the "me", the "I", the ego or whatever name one likes to give it. The "I" is the (active ?) essence of the past and the ( memory of the ?) past impinges on the present and so on into the future. In this there is constant division. Where there is ( an integrated ?) learning there is a constant movement; there is no ( need for psycho- ?) accumulation which can become the "I".

Questioner: But in the technological field ?

Krishnamurti: Of course sir; such practical knowledge is absolutely necessary. But we are talking about the ( inward ) ''psychological'' field in which the "I" operates. The "I" can use technological knowledge in order to achieve a social position or status. So the "I" ( the ego-identified consciousness ?) is not concerned merely with knowledge in scientific fields; it is using it to achieve something else. It is like a musician who uses the piano to become famous. What he is concerned with is fame and not the beauty of the music in itself or for itself. We are not saying that we must get rid of technological knowledge; on the contrary, the more technological knowledge there is the better living conditions will be. But the moment the "I" uses it, things begin to go wrong.

Questioner: I think I begin to understand what you are saying. You are giving quite a different meaning and dimension to the word ''learning'', and say that meditation is a free movement of learning .

Krishnamurti: Also we said that the essence of energy is ( to be found in ?) meditation. To put it differently - as long as there is a ''meditator'' ( a controlling ego ?) there is no (authentic) meditation; he will attempt to achieve a state described by others, or some flash of experience.

Questioner: If I may rephrase what you are saying,( this inward) learning must be constant, a flow without any break, a constant movement, and the moment there is a break ( a time delay ?) between learning, action and meditation, that break is a form of inner conflict. In that break there is the ( separation between the ?) observer and the observed and hence the whole wastage of ( one's intelligent ?) energy; is that what you are saying?

Krishnamurti: Yes, that is what we mean. Meditation is not a ( static) state ( of being) ; it is a ''movement'', as action is a movement. And when we separate ( the inward ?) action from learning, then the ''observer'' comes between the learning and the action and uses action and learning for ( personal) motives. When this is very clearly understood as one harmonious movement of acting, learning and meditation, there is no wastage of ( inner) energy and this is the beauty of meditation. There is only one movement. Learning is far more important than meditation or action. To learn there must be complete freedom, not only consciously but deeply, inwardly - a total freedom. And in freedom there is this ( integrated ?) movement of learning, acting, meditating as a harmonious whole. The word whole not only means health but ''holy''. So ( ''non-dualistic'' ?) learning is holy, acting is holy, meditation is holy. This is really a sacred thing and its ( timeless ?) beauty is ( to be found?) in itself and not beyond it.

This post was last updated by John Raica Fri, 18 Sep 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 02 Oct 2015 #11
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

Hello.......John...

Are k words a teaching ? perhaps. A sharing for sure...

60 years of attempted unfolding to others of the functioning of thought, which I call analytical process..
Many times k stressed that awareness of the self is vital...this is where I am myself...
the time through sorrow has brought many "things" the surprisingly revealing about much of the program called thought itself is one of them....

It shows why desire there is, how it works for example and more...
We may go a bit into that at some stage...

must go now

Cheers.

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 03 Oct 2015 #12
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Indeed, Dan, a teaching based on sharing an extra-ordinary inner experience. So, even if he was constantly denying that he taught a certain approach to one's inner reality, for the good listener there is a learning. Another view of his teachings is that they are an unlearning- in the sense of learning to drop off a redundant psycho accumulations. unfortunately these very accumulations constitute the data base of the ego- which explains the total lack of interest in this deeper investigation of the human psyche. So it is learning in a far more universal sense: learning about life and death and eventually about integrating them and transcending their materialistic limitation

hello John....Is there a learning as such? i think the learning about one's self,thought,brain etc...is personal at this level, then someone like k by telling his path and deep experiences,which had to be as widely as possible said no doubt about that, somehow may be delivering something to someone which can trigger something , many things...here it is , for me from scratch entering into the unknown, or at least be aware that this is what the concern is now..

une parenthèse: it is amazing how we put things upside down, where the global is what matters vitally the most then it includes the vitally needed personal "we" (some ) say the personal is first , I mention the production and sharing of all vital needs by and for all..which is war as k mentioned that, and where the personal is what comes vitally first, then we sort of go along with some global views under the guidance of someone ,anyone , a method,a religion, anything but never me and.....me....

the total lack of interest ,yes indeed John...

Death ,as an absolute fact of the future, for me has a vital role to play mentally in the psyche....thinking expands itself in the future, today is sad tomorrow will be heaven of course, when doing so the analyser meets death, I have seen that alas for us due to our superficiality ,this is happening at a level which has become non conscious for us, yet it is happening and when the analyser meets death , it meets it only when and where it is trying to search for an absolute continuity of any of his rejected or adored desires ...

this is creating ,still unconsciously a mental pain, which of course is a signal of wrongness. never perceived anymore.....etc. etc etc

result is pain, attempt to escape from it, yet I have no clue about what it is....a life of escaping has started the day I really meet death as a fact which disturb me too much, but what I do not know is why it is so disturbing,I think that it is about death itself as a root, not at all, it is because death as a fact of the future is negating continuity, so is negating the leadership of thought in such fields.......

that was two insights which happened....

so yes it is about integrating but the will to do so brings nothing one more time of course..

what is left ? same old story

cheers...

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. Sat, 03 Oct 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 03 Oct 2015 #13
Thumb_2474 Dan McDermott United States 133 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
my view is that there is nothing that can be done at this level- the problem is truly insoluble for the traditional self-centred human mind.

I think that this is right, "truly insoluble" in the way that we see the 'problem'. We have unconciously separated 'Life' and 'Death' as if one could be without the other. As if they were opposites. And trying to reconcile them is impossible since the idea of their separation is false. Reason can see that one cannot be without the other but emotion is frightened by the idea of not-being. (which has been separated from 'being').

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Sat, 03 Oct 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 03 Oct 2015 #14
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 14 posts in this forum Offline

If there is only the present (a "past" and a "future" have never existed, and won't exist) and there is life in the present, how can death also be in the present?

I see death as just the comparison of one present to the memory of a former present.

max

This post was last updated by max greene Sat, 03 Oct 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 04 Oct 2015 #15
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Indeed, Dan, this may be the root cause of one's mataphysical sorrow but what you- and K - are calling escaping is what the brain is instinctively doing when faced with issues it cannot fully grasp or understand ( which are beyond its control) . So a fuite en avant time generating process is set going, creating its own continuity; it is self-sustained simply because it has become part of me- I am aware of my mortality. But then, this is describing the whole psychological history of mankind. This being the case, my view is that there is nothing that can be done at this level- the problem is truly insoluble for the traditional self-centred human mind.

Hi John....

Well that is precisely the idea and the fact that it is insoluble, but we do not know that generally speaking;then the analytical mind is so trying somehow randomly , hopelessly ,fearfully etc to solve what is insoluble..in fact here is that, not superficially but beyond that level, the analysing keeps doing its work in secret of this so called "I" , and as I have seen twice in deep real insights, one basement of thought is continuity, in an indirect manner because one of its real concern is not to deal with any end but with good work, steady work ,something which works, which last like a shelter..

Death as a fact of the body for the future is denying thought to play that game of continuity as a PSYCHOLOGICAL self centred game which thought love as it is its main work....

So death as such when those insights happened was perceived as not being a root problem, there is more to it which is continuity is now the problem...and this bring us logically to thought and its set up , its program being the problem , thought as a leader-dictator of the brain is THE problem because it is far too limited to apprehend all what life contains , and now I would even say as I know it for me now that it was not at all meant to function on its own...

We need our other capacities back...I have lived more than deeply some of them so I know about that...as long as thinking is trying to act here, nothing will happen...thought here is already back on the tack to be a problem...

for me of course what we wrongly call sorrow which only is a signal(and a catalyst) unknown as such , is my only help when and if left alone..when I learn that I cannot be willing to leave it alone as this does not work but creates more problem....nor face it and all those analytical nonsense, there is one option left and nothing else left but sorrow itself...then sorrow will take care of itself...

k says so , me too by experience..

knowing the self is vital did he say too....this is more than right according to me..this is happening when the catalyst is left alone,somehow when me as the powerful entity not knowing that it is a program for survival only, when me is defeated.....so far it is the only way I see as a vital step, a vital door...then if this happens, something new enters into being as and when and how it wishes...

it seems to me that at some stage you are naturally and spontaneously because of a deep deep understanding of all that, naturally able to refuse to control life, precisely because you have travelled in the pain created but such nonsense.

We consider pain as an incident when it is a vital repellent thought process..when it goes beyond its limits of competency, this means that the Creator ,the Ground knows that and had no other ways...or is insane so are we !!!

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 04 Oct 2015 #16
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Now if the very premises of this collectively inherited tendency for self-centredness are questioned and eventually negated - in the sense of transcended through a direct perception- there is a very definite possibility of not feeling anymore that instinctive craving for la fuite en avant away from what is an absolute fact of life , namely that death is indivisible from life. So that is a self- transcending level of understanding .

What you call instinctive craving for la fuite en avant is as I see it a consequence of how thought works so of its program, which by having many times lived sorrow so having been defeated, has started to reveal itself when and as it wishes. What is important or even vital here is that such non accumulative knowledge is greatly helping to instantly see the trap of thought when happening. For the analytical process too like for the body to be alive contains death in the package, we leave the death of the body and only keep what it mentally means for the analyser, which is always analysing for the future and at first as a child expanding itself to a few hours ahead,then bit by bit at some stage expanding itself to reach the infinite...mental pain says; for god sake this is wrong beware...!!!

who listen to that ? no one...

Pain and beyond that when understood so left totally alone is a signal, a catalyst, a sort of dialogue with X, a helper,and so on,which bit by bit is suggesting ways up to see that I cannot be the leader of a life...."I" is not capable of that....something else must lead our lives....what is left for "I" so ?? many things to do in vital fields, in keeping the body in good shape, in meeting other in peace simply because I is at peace now , working together and sharing everything etc, the only relative security we will ever get....no business, no money, no competition, no value to people, no hierarchical society etc etc all those things are absolutely and definitively beyond the "I" imagination of course..

John: The only difficulty for people like us
is that there has to be created a certain free inner space for letting
this primordial fear of not-being to be exposed and integrated with the
other levels of our consciousness, to unfold itself and tell its story. Mr K
is suggesting that it will flower then wither - but the truth of the matter
may be that those essential energies previously trapped in this time
process (la fuite en avant) are released and get integrated in the
total energy of our being. So this is an understanding of a transformational
nature and it is a process very much related to a meditator-less..

Yes , thought leadership-less in other words ???

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 05 Oct 2015 #17
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Well, Dan, this statement that K often uttered did also put me on a loop- it sounds so hopeless for both him and for a better future of mankind. However, to his merit, he was also adding that it was a wrong question. And I can see why, because it is being asked from the perspective of time (dans une logique temporelle). Which is sending us back to the timeless logic of ...meditation. So it may be possible to act in a more direct way on this day-dreaming human consciousness. In fact, the K teachings are taking us only up to this point, but if we've learned our lesson well we might take it from there....

Hopeless it sounds yes because it is right now,is it not ?? ...thought which field of competencies is always in the future has not succeeded to imagine a forever and secured future and never said: may be this does not exist at all???....sort of mixed both psychological and material sort of security, rather steadiness where everything would be certain.....constant, a sort of frozen continuity, which is unbearable at the same time because of the need for more..

Here I stop , for me it goes nowhere, the analysing of that is a dead end, I have learn that for myself.

So yes totally agreed with what you say about une logique temporelle,sign of the dictatorship of the analytical process over the entire brain,never able to be in the present other than mechanically, so is never entirely so superficially only in this present..

meditation is not that then...well agreed so..

Acting in a more direct way, well that is a question I ask myself since I write here,voluntarily not searching for some answers..

You know one of my way to go into that which is to find ways to leave sorrow or pain or frustration or or or etc free to be as a catalyst that would make it a process in fact ...is it the only one? as a mandatory step it could be ..but as I cannot be willing it to be free to act as a catalyst, the subtlety here has to be renewed each time, as what worked once will not work next time...it is entering in a no reproductive method land ..

even solved, such symptom of error still is there in a mild way even sometimes in a nearly imperceptible way..but is there as a warning....it could well be be part of thought itself...that is my view...we could consider it as a program with a precise function so...

As a child it is fine and yet some are already totally loony ,violent, and so on,as an adult meaning here that the brain is entirely formed, this is not good enough..in itself I find that quite simple...

thought deals with practical matter and plan the future so ,having too a mission allowing the body to move into its environment...me, the environment..vital not to fall from the cliff etc

a division found too in so called psychological fields too...me and others, the universe..ending in me fighting others and the universe,that simply would be a misuse of the analytical program in the wrong fields...

etc ..must go now, sorry as this is a bit all over the place...no time for more careful writing

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 06 Oct 2015 #18
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
I was thinking of this too, Dan, for quite a lot of time. The 'rationale' of it would be the following : if it is true that all humans share the same global consciousness, then within this shared consciousness field, there must be a 2 way interaction: one way is quite obvious; the pressure of the collective thought on each of us- a banal example: if the national soccer or rugby team has a game tonight; chances are that many will feel spontaneously enticed to turn on the TV, etc. But few have noticed the possibility that the same transfer mechanism could work in the opposite direction: the whole nazi hysteria was triggered by a only few mad men in the first place- a very bad example to follow ...K and Bohm were implying the same effect when in The Ending of Time dialogues they were speaking of 'a dozen of us who would not be divided'. So psycho-technically speaking the thing is not impossible..

Hello John....

Global mechanism as thought would I say,same OS with minor non vital differences this does not contradict what you say,we just have different ways to put things in words.Well this have been proven to me ,us probably, many times like same thought at the same time despite the distance...it is about a connection so, interconnection.

What you say here sounds logical to me, and can be factual.

Let me say about myself, I often wonder if this sort of work as it is somehow work , within the core of sorrow, pain and all of that ,which had been constant with me since quite young like since 10 years old ish , having at the same time some energy to counterbalance this up to a point, where the balance was definitively broken , if all that was uncovered by drowsing and being defeated and all that leading to some totally unexpected deep insights and more , if all that does not feed some field where such experience can be there somehow to be seen too by someone, this would mean that k's momentum are still there ,for eventual use...and more..

I do not know, but in my logic based too on weird events ,that is a real possibility....

But I do not know is the fact..

Having said that, as what only prevails in mankind is thought and nothing else,thought is feeding thought....helping to increase the worse up to the level where the balance will be broken....

we may have to reach this momentum globally like one have to ..??? so we clearly would be living ,at last !! such crisis right now....thought has become totally meaningless and a danger despite its machines... for itself leading to suicide intention out of the usual escape of pain...

this is something that k has mentioned about escaping being a suicide...I agree by having seen that clearly too

cheers

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 06 Oct 2015 #19
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

max greene wrote:
If there is only the present (a "past" and a "future" have never existed, and won't exist) and there is life in the present, how can death also be in the present?

I see death as just the comparison of one present to the memory of a former present.

Hi max....

What i see here is this ...

death is virtually in the present due to thought activity forecasting the potential future , its filed of action....by doing so, this is for me happening quite unconsciously for the superficial thought, when forecasting thought meets death in this future, and this as I have seen it very deeply, is contradicting one of thought base which is continuity ..

death as a fact of the future is denying thought to play games with continuity...

thought get "angry" with that..not superficially knowing it does

usually it is not perceived...this was perceived in one of my passive drowning into deep heavy mental pain, that was so revealed twice insightfully, if i may use k terminology...

when fear of death is there so, this is not a root problem, behind there is the matter of the craving for continuity of thought...

is there more behind? well each one have to go or not into that question is not it ?
For myself behind for sure there is the process itself which craves for continuity...now we are dealing with the program behind thought itself etc etc .....

then will this program reveal itself, in what I live , yes it does by itself..

cheers

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 06 Oct 2015 #20
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:

John Raica wrote:

my view is that there is nothing that can be done at this level- the problem is truly insoluble for the traditional self-centred human mind.

I think that this is right, "truly insoluble" in the way that we see the 'problem'. We have unconsciously separated 'Life' and 'Death' as if one could be without the other. As if they were opposites. And trying to reconcile them is impossible since the idea of their separation is false. Reason can see that one cannot be without the other but emotion is frightened by the idea of not-being. (which has been separated from 'being').

Hi Dan, where have you been ? :-))

If it is insoluble and seen as such as a truth then it is solved for me in the sense that it is out of the way as something to be solved.

so what is next comes into being as a question..

;-)

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 06 Oct 2015 #21
Thumb_original_avatar max greene United States 14 posts in this forum Offline

paul daniel wrote (post 49):
...now we are dealing with the program behind thought itself . . .

As I see it, the brain creates the psychological -- thought, thinker, self -- through its mechanical process of thinking. All of this created psychological is a phantasmagoria. It has no reality other than as thought, but it is given life through the belief that it is real, the belief that the "self" is actually the individual himself. It is this belief -- which is acceptance without understanding -- that is behind all of our problems. All the world believes that the psychological is more important than the physical. That's why we are willing to kill and die for it.

max

This post was last updated by max greene Tue, 06 Oct 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 07 Oct 2015 #22
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 580 posts in this forum Offline

Paris meditations ( selected from the K Notebook, 1961)

To deny ( the psychological need for?) power, in every form, is the beginning of virtue; this virtue is ( bringing its own inner?) clarity; it wipes away conflict and sorrow. This corrupting energy (of self-centred thought?) with its endless cunning activities, always brings its inevitable mischief and misery; there is no end to it; however much it is reformed and fenced in, by law or by moral convention, it will find its way out, darkly and unbidden. For it is there, hidden in the secret corners of one's thoughts and desires. It is these ( subconscious recesses?) that must be examined and understood if there is to be no inner conflicts, confusion and sorrow.

To see the 'what is', is the ending of that which is. With the complete ending of this (hidden craving for?) power, with its confusion, conflict and sorrow, each one faces what he 'is' , a bundle of ( active) memories and a deepening loneliness. The desire for power and success is just an escape from this loneliness and the ashes which are memories. To go beyond ( to transcend this psychological condition?) , one has to see them, face them and voluntarily and easily put aside power and success and then in being passively aware, the ashes ( of ) loneliness have a wholly different significance ( are seen in a different light?). To live with the ashes of loneliness there must be great energy and when you have gone through this loneliness, as you would go through a physical door, then you will realize that 'you' and the 'loneliness' are one, you are not the ( isolated?) observer watching that feeling which is beyond the word (non-verbal) . You 'are' that loneliness; there is no way to avoid it and nothing can cover it or fill it. Then only are you living with it; it is part of you, it is the whole of you. The brain can no longer devise ways and means of escape; it is the creator of this loneliness, through its incessant activities of self-isolation, of defence and aggression. When it is aware of this, 'negatively'- without any choice, then it is willing to 'die' ( to its own past and?) to be utterly still.

Out of this loneliness, out of these ashes, a new movement is born. It is the movement of the 'all-one' - a state where all (outer) influences, every form of search and achievement have naturally and completely stopped. It is the 'death of the known'. Then only is there (the new beginning of?) the never-ending journey of the unknowable. Then is there ( the inner) 'power' whose purity is creation.

There was a beautifully kept lawn, not too large and it was incredibly green; it was well watered, carefully looked after, rolled and splendidly alive, sparkling in its beauty. It must have been many ( several?) hundred years old; not even a chair was on it, isolated and guarded by a high and narrow railing. At the end of the lawn, was a single rose bush, with a single red rose in full bloom. It was a miracle, the soft lawn and the single rose; they were there apart from the whole ( Parisian?) world of noise, chaos and ( psychological?) misery; though man had put them there, they were the most beautiful things, far beyond the museums, towers and the graceful line of bridges. They were splendid in their splendid aloofness. They were what they were, grass and flower and nothing else. There was great beauty and quietness about them and the dignity of purity and one could almost smell the perfume of the solitary rose.

On waking so early, with the full moon coming into the room, the quality of the brain was different. It was aware of itself as a part of a whole movement of the Mind. The brain functions in ( compartmented?) fragmentation; it is never the whole; it tries to capture the whole, to understand it but it cannot. By its very nature, ( its self-centred ) thinking is always incomplete, as is ( its self-centred?) feeling; thought, the ( mechanical) response of memory, can function only in the 'known' or interpret (translate?) everything from what it has known. The brain is the product of ( man's evolution and ) specialization; it cannot go beyond itself. It divides and specializes - the 'scientist', the 'artist', the 'priest', the 'lawyer', the 'technician', the 'farmer''. In ( its self-centred?) functioning, it projects its own status, the privileges, the prestige. Function and status go together for the brain is a self-protective organism. From the demand for ( a socially recognised?) status begins the opposing and contradictory elements in society. The specialist cannot see the whole.

Meditation is the flowering of ( self-?) understanding. This understanding is not within the borders of time, time never brings ( a transcending self-?) understanding. ( This self-) understanding is not a gradual process to be gathered little by little, with care and patience. Understanding is now or never; it is ( coming in ?) a destructive ( cleansing?) flash - and it is this ( inner) 'shattering' that one is afraid of, since such 'understanding' may alter the course of one's life; it may be pleasant or not but ( self-) understanding is a danger to all ( conventional) relationship. But without (this self-transcending?) understanding, sorrow will continue. Sorrow ends only through self-knowing, the awareness of every thought and feeling, every movement of the 'conscious' and of that (part of one's consciousness?) which is hidden.

Meditation is the understanding of ( one's self-centred?) consciousness, the hidden and the open, and of the ( creative?) movement that lies beyond all thought and feeling. The specialist ( the specialised brain ?) cannot perceive the whole; capacity, gift, is obviously detrimental, for it strengthens self-centredness; it is fragmentary and so breeds conflict. Capacity has significance only in the total perception of ( one's) life which is in the field of the Mind and not of the brain. ( Mental) capacity breeds pride (and/or) envy, its fulfilment becomes all important and so it brings about confusion, enmity and sorrow; it has its meaning only in the total awareness of ( one's inner ?) life.

Life is not merely at one fragmentary level, bread, sex, prosperity, ambition; life is not fragmentary; when it's made to be, it becomes a ( potential?) matter of despair and endless misery. The human brain functions (safely?) in specialization, in self-isolating activities and within the limited field of time. It is incapable of seeing the whole of life; the brain is a part, however educated it be; it is not the whole. The Mind alone sees the whole and within the field of the mind is the brain; the brain cannot contain the Mind, do what it will. To see wholly, the brain has to be in a state of 'negation' : it must not interfere, with its evaluations and justifications, with its condemnations and defences. It has to be still, not made still by compulsion. When it is in a state of 'negation' ( non-action?) , it is choicelessly still. Only then is there a total 'seeing' . In this total 'seeing' which is the quality of the Mind, there is no 'observer', no 'experiencer'; there's only seeing. The Mind then is completely awake. In this fully wakened state, there is no ( division between the?) 'observer' and the 'observed'; there is only light, ( inner) clarity. The contradiction and conflict between the thinker and thought ceases.

This post was last updated by John Raica Wed, 07 Oct 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 07 Oct 2015 #23
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
When it is aware of this, 'negatively'- without any choice, then it is willing to 'die' ( to its own past and?) to be utterly still.

hello John..that is exactly what takes place with suffering....when it is lived...so not escaped, yet there is no escape at all taking place for real...it is all a phantasmagoria as Max would evoke in his last post.

as well as this

John Raica wrote:
To live with the ashes of loneliness there must be great energy and when you have gone through this loneliness, as you would go through a physical door, then you will realize that 'you' and the 'loneliness' are one, you are not the observer watching that feeling which is beyond the word . You 'are' that loneliness; there is no way to avoid it and nothing can cover it or fill it. Then only are you living with it; it is part of you, it is the whole of you. The brain can no longer devise ways and means of escape;

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 08 Oct 2015 #24
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 580 posts in this forum Offline

Roman Meditations (From the K notebook 1961)

Meditation, in the still hours of early morning, with no cars rattling by, was the unfolding of beauty. It was not thought ( the thinking brain) exploring with its limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling, it was not the movement of 'time', for the brain was still. It was total negation of everything known, not as a reaction but a denial that had no cause; it was a movement in complete ( inner) freedom, a movement that had no direction and dimension; in that movement there was a boundless energy whose very essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at the touch of thought.

To look with (the aid of?) thought and to look without thought are two different things. To look at those trees by the roadside and the buildings across the dry fields with ( the back up of ?) thought, keeps the brain tied to its own moorings of time, experience, memory; the machinery of thought is working endlessly, without rest, without freshness; (and eventually ?) the brain is made dull, insensitive, without the power of recuperation (self-regeneration?) . It is everlastingly responding to life's challenges and its response is inadequate and not fresh. To look with thought keeps the brain in the groove of habit and recognition; it sluggish; it lives (safely?) within the narrow limitations of its own making. It is never free. This freedom takes place when thought (the memory based activity of the?) brain is not looking; to look without thought does not mean a blank observation ; there is only (pure) observation, without the mechanical process of ( verbal) recognition and comparison, justification and condemnation; this ( direct) 'seeing' does not fatigue the brain for all mechanical processes of ( living and thinking in terms of?) time have stopped. Through complete rest the brain is made fresh, to respond without reaction, to live without deterioration, to die without the torture of problems. To look without thought is to see without the interference of time ( of one's past ?) , knowledge and conflict. To see without the mechanism of thought is a total seeing, without particularization and division, which does not mean that there is not dissimilarity. Seeing without thought does not put the brain to sleep; on the contrary, it is fully awake, attentive, without friction and pain. This attention without the borders of time ( without the psychological component of the past?) of time is the flowering of meditation.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 08 Oct 2015 #25
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
I can see your point, Dan. But there are 2 possible ways to look at this suffering- with or without the back-up of the past knowledge of it- as the new text above rightfully points it out. One is just giving it 'reality' by verbally recognising and implicitly accepting it as an actual fact, while the second is in a direct contact with the fact, so there is a certain freedom in dealing with its causes.

Hello John, yes this is something I have mentioned from time to time, let me be more define..

one day out of the blue whatever the reasons are you leave suffering alone then something totally unexpected takes place...suffering is immediately gone, there is some very very good energy around, some revealing of the source of one or more problems and a much better vital energy around for you as well as side effects some days if not weeks or month after like some unexpected revelations about one self or of the thought functioning etc etc

Next time suffering is there, of course you know all what took place before...the first situation will never be again..it is gone.

you know as you clearly see what happens that it must be left untouched , but what happened the previous time cannot be reproduced, you know that or you learn it by trying and not succeeding..

Of course there is something left from previous experience, if there was not ,for me it means that I should again wait years before such momentum eventually takes place again , or never, as for many people such momentum never take place...

I know what has to be done, but each time I have to discover how to do it, the how being not good in k's world of course...however there is a gradual learning through personal experience, so much deeper than what thought does of course, and many totally unexpected events take place ...

each learning gives birth to a new situation,some of the past learning can be used,like suffering must be left alone and some cannot be used..like how I did it last time....well I am going to do that again...but it does not work ,it cannot work....if consciously I am not aware that I am trying to reproduce the same trick, unconsciously this is what I am surely doing so perverting the situation where nothing will take place, as the unconscious is involved in this..it must be involved , this is why suffering is for out of more used for it..it is involving the unconscious too

at this level, a method does not work, but to throw away everything is not right for me either...

as i never discovered nor followed what k said about that, I wrote this before then I am going, out of the usual curiosity to read what he said in your last quote..

thanks..

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 09 Oct 2015 #26
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 580 posts in this forum Offline

More Roman & Florentine Meditations ( from the K Notebook 1961)

In the middle of the night meditation was pure delight, without a flutter of (the self_centred) thought, with its endless subtleties; it was a movement that had no end and the brain was still, watching from emptiness. It was an emptiness that had known no knowing; it was emptiness that had known no space; it was empty of time. It was empty, past all seeing, knowing and being. In this emptiness there was a fury; the fury of a storm, the fury of exploding universe, the fury of creation which could never have any expression. It was the fury of all life, death and love. But yet it a vast, boundless emptiness which nothing could ever fill, transform or cover up. Meditation was the ecstasy of this emptiness.

The subtle interrelationship of the Mind, the brain and the body is the complicated play of life. When there is harmony between the brain and the physical organism the Mind can consent to abide with them; it is not a plaything of either. The whole can contain the particular but the little, the part, can never formulate the whole. It is incredibly subtle (tricky?) for the two to live together in complete harmony, without one or the other dominating. The intellect can and does destroy the body and the physical body can bring about the deterioration of the intellect. The neglect of the body with its self-indulging and demanding appetites can make the body heavy and insensitive and so make for a dull thought. But ( on the other hand?) thought becoming more refined, more cunning can and does neglect the demands of the body which then ( in a feedback loop?) sets about to pervert thought. ( Bottom line:) The body and the brain have to be sensitive and in harmony to be with the incredible subtleness of the Mind which is ever explosive and destructive. The Mind is not a plaything of the brain, whose function is mechanical. When the absolute necessity of a complete harmony of the brain and body is seen, then the brain will watch over the ( needs of the?) body, not dominating it and this very watching sharpens the brain and makes the body sensitive. With the seeing of the ( truth of the inner ?) fact there is no bargaining; it can be denied, avoided but it still remains a fact. The understanding of the fact is essential and not the evaluation of the fact. When the 'fact' is seen, then the brain is ( becoming?) watchful of the habits,f the degenerating factors of the body. Then thought does not ( have to?) impose a discipline on the body or control it; for discipline, control makes for insensitivity and any form of insensitivity is deterioration, a withering away.

It was deep in the night when meditation was filling the spaces of the brain and beyond. Meditation is not a (silent?) war between 'what is' and 'what should be'; there was no contradiction between the 'thinker' and the 'thought' for neither existed. There was only a 'seeing' without the observer; this seeing came out of emptiness and that emptiness had no cause.

How strange love is and how neatly it has been divided, the profane and the sacred; the priests talk of it and so do the politicians and ( while) the housewife everlastingly complain about ( the lack of ) it. ( Trying to give?) continuity to love is ( transforming it into?) pleasure and with it comes always pain. This continuity is the ( result of the brain's need for?) stability and security in relationship, and in ( such) relationship there must be no change for in habit there is security and also sorrow. To this unending machinery of pleasure and pain we cling and this thing is called 'love' and to escape from its weariness, the ultimate refuge and hope is God. But all this isn't love. Love has no ( temporal ?) continuity; its (memory?) cannot be carried over to tomorrow; it has no future. What has continuity is the memories (of it) and (these) memories are ashes of everything dead and buried. Love has no tomorrow; it cannot be caught in time and made respectable. It is there when ( the mentality of?) 'time' is not. It lives and dies each minute. It is a 'terrible' thing, for love is (also implying ?) a destruction (of 'yesterday'?) , without ( expecting a?) tomorrow. Love 'is' (undivided from this psychological ?) destruction ( of past memories?)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 09 Oct 2015 #27
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Well, Dan, that's why we are all here, to learn. For me the 'K experience is definitely of a transcendental nature, even if at this point in time it has no appeal for practically anybody..........

hello John...

Yes , no doubt for me...the time we live seems special yet it is not, because modern man had lived since the end of WW2 ( yet for me it is still on ,not the subject here) as if all his future could be secured for good ( how can it be where there is competition is ? this is nonsense) ,full of potential future events to cherish, absolute happiness and contentment would be joining too , never-ending entertainment etc etc ,and secretly au usual had been avoiding death, the real one to come as well as death as a psychological subject having a remarkable effect on our mental capacities ,forcing the brain working in the known to stop its activities where it shall never go...

so we are living the fall of a way of no life...thought only based..

as a help we have what we wrongly call suffering which is for me the only "trick" able to act here as a catalyst, in order to start another process able to stay with the unknown, like a sort of ignition ; for me it is the process to be used here in order to freeze somehow , more less , the never-ending activity of thought ..

then anyone sees for him-herself...
K talks from beyond thought...indeed !

So now let me read as I did not get a chance to do so yet ...

;-)

Dan ...........

This post was last updated by Daniel Paul. Fri, 09 Oct 2015.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 09 Oct 2015 #28
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

to look without thought does not mean a blank observation ; there is only observation, without the mechanical process of recognition and comparison, justification and condemnation; this 'seeing' does not fatigue the brain for all mechanical processes of time have stopped. Through complete rest the brain is made fresh, to respond without reaction, to live without deterioration, to die without the torture of problems. To look without thought is to see without the interference of time , knowledge and conflict. To see without the mechanism of thought is a total seeing, without particularization and division, which does not mean that there is not dissimilarity. Seeing without thought does not put the brain to sleep; on the contrary, it is fully awake, attentive, without friction and pain. This attention without the borders of time is the flowering of meditation.

Hello John,as you know...I had lived that, that was long ago,deeply twice....I mention in order to say if someone else but you read :I do not go into that intellectually ,analytically, logically but by looking at what is left of it,as there is something left, not about the content ,about the container ...

What I sense is clearly that another process of some sort turns itself on all of a sudden, thought sees it coming up then stay far away from it as a very remote spectator, but it is there...something it seems not to be there, because parts of a full day were clearly not memorised , hours are missing........

total seeing yes , k has this remarkable way to describe what cannot be described ..

no division , no particularization , yes absolutely no hierarchy would I add to that

fully awake ,yes indeed....

no reaction ,again true , no fatigue either..no problems, no fear etc etc..

This is not even surprising, nor is there any regret when it is gone...this is out of many more reasons why I know about another process not being thought..because thought is always sad ,disappointed,depressed when something big ,huge and so on ends...when this involuntary contact with this weird energy is nothing big ,huge when it is happening etc, it is just entirely of a different nature where division is not , problems are not,fear is not,and I would ad that in such moment the question of the meaning is not asked, because this is asked by a brain who is suffering,as another escape from it, than what we known by living, or rather surviving with thought only..

this is not my actuality for 40 years...I am just in the process of curing my own brain mind from years of wrongness so of wounds ....:-)

this need the revealing of what is still unconscious and so on....

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 10 Oct 2015 #29
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
Well after midnight, when the wind was noisy among the
trees, meditation became a fierce explosion, destroying all the
'things' of the brain;( since ?) every thought shapes every response and limits ( a totally perceptive ?) action. Action born of idea is non-action; such non-action breeds conflict and sorrow. It was in the still moment of meditation that there was strength. ( This inner ) strength is not (the strength of) the many threads of will; will is resistance and the action of will breeds confusion and sorrow within and without. ( This Inner) strength is not the opposite of weakness since all opposites contain their own contradiction.

Well this weird energy was there........the other process at work..so the presence...k sometimes call it the mind is not it ? not being of the brain ...

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 11 Oct 2015 #30
Thumb_picture0122 Daniel Paul. Ireland 229 posts in this forum Offline

John Raica wrote:
The 'seriousness' of ( self-centred?) thought is fragmentary and immature but there must be a Seriousness which is not the product of desire. This Seriousness has the quality of a light that has no shadow; this seriousness is infinitely pliable and therefore joyous. It was there and every tree and (the perception of?) every blade of grass and flower became intensely alive and splendid; their colour intense and the sky immeasurable. The earth, moist and leaf-strewn, was life.

Desire would be one of "my" new uninvited topic...since I have deeply seen out of the blue that without desires ,thought would not be functioning ....desire is a complex incentive, to make our thinking process which by many aspects is just a calculator, calculating....the process needs goals to function...so desire provide them....

I say that it is complex because the word desire again says too little...there are a lot of others sub incentives behind like self reward,self pride,self satisfaction and so on....what we call fear is part of it too, frustration not to reach too etc ad libitum, then all this is creating discontentment ,sorrow and suffering...

not bad at all..

when one sees that one may say that the Origin is not that great so are we...

then I leave that here for now....yet I could go more into...later on..not a day to write a lot..

I Will come back to it , by finding more accurate sayings by k about desire too, not too simple ones as I am not interested in that any more, but deeper ones..and see his experience on that...

thanks

Dan ...........

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 1 - 30 of 650 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.)