Organised dialogue does not give much scope for self-inquiry. Being aware of - your thoughts, actions, reactions, speech, interactions, relationships - in everyday living, brings about changes.

It is absolutely spontaneous and unprompted. I love such dialogues but how rare are such precious moments. we are such slaves to intellect losing the heart!

Dialogue comes about spontaneously all the time. I havn't made up my mind how important oraganised dialogues really are, but I think they are one way of spreading and "digesting" insight. Like this site.
However, if the dialogue is arranged, it must be highly organised. It demands a lot from the participants. The format, the facilitating and the rest of the formal framework must be given a lot of thought. If the subject is not quite clear to everybody, the confusion will distract people and the whole experience will be disapointing.

a true dialogue is to inquire with one self or with others in humility of not knowing and to understand ( to stand-under)the light of teachings spontaneously without self interest.

The very word dialogue implies a two-way communication, therefore in enquiry, unless openess to spontaniety is there any form of organized dialogue would be futile and serve no purpose.
The listener, the speaker and the choice of words to synchronize in context and meaning is indeed an achievement per se; can that be organized, that is the question?

no reason why it cannot come in both ways. alternately, it may not come in either way.

A group of people, two, three or more can come together to sit quietly and anyone if so moved, may openly reflect what is arising within their own space. That open invitation on the part of one can allow others to look at what is arising within and together all can examine further the problems, observations, awareness of the joined group.

I think, sincere inquiry can arise both in organized dialogues and also spontaneously when people meet without any purpose.

I'm a bit sceptical about the word spontaneity. It's a receipe for inaction, laziness. Yes, both are important. Yes we need both--we have to organise with a heart.

I think it has to be spontaneous in the sense that it must take place at a deep experiential and heartfelt level. As the latter is what must be reached if the old foundations are ever to be truly destroyed and a genuinely radical rebuilding process begins to take place in a person. Though I feel this could take place in an organized manner (or even in an organization) if there was right leadership.

Dialogue can be organized, being a light to oneself cannot.

Certainly, all of K's dialogues [so called] were organized to some extent. Similarly, any dialogues in a Forum context are organized to a certain extent as well, although in a different manner. While this is true, I see that the elements of spontaneity and freedom are required for the inquiry to be sincere and genuine in spite of a certain level of organizing to bring people and subject matter together for relationship in dialogue.

Spontaneously. The dialogue even if organized should culminate in spontaneity.

'Dialogue', in the sense of 'Selfless Collective Exploration', shall happen as the totally dedicated participants learn to explore together without any thought of personal credit of any sort; and, as they learn to explore collectively with 'One DelusionFree Mind'. They will decide together about experimenting with any planning/organization. Before getting to smooth exploraion, one should be prepared for rough-ride. Howsoever dedicated one might be, 'delusionary self' would continue asserting its existence, until drowned in 'DelusionFree Culture' inside the ExplorationCollective.

Nothing is lost.The organised dialogue may open the heart of the unexpected visitor,looking for something else,

I would say that dialogue can be organized but its success probably depends on the individuals involved being prepared to listen to others and to be open and capable of freeing themselves from their own cherished beliefs or attitudes, at least for a while. But ultimately if dialogue is not spontaneous it will not produce much nourishing fruit.

both

Every day is a dialogue with life in relationship with others. What's wrong with organising one or two days where that sense of dialogue is brought to the fore? After all, much of what happens spontaneously and unprompted is of a very trivial or ephemeral nature. What's wrong with being deliberately serious?

In the sense of sincere inquiry it should come spontaneously unpropted.

Organized dialogue risks 'becoming' a ritual.

Spontaneity is natural inquiry, and natural inquiry is spontaneous.

spontaneously and unprompted.......

It has to come spontaneously and unpromted.

We can seat down and have a dialogue about a specific topic. Time is not a factor for inquiry.

It can be facilitated as well as made impossible by attitude and intentions.

K's talks were obviously "organised " to a certain extent yet the content was always spontaneous.