Hi Raj

I think, there is no meaning of k's words.

If you look at K's talks, he often asked, "Have you listened fully? or you have stored the words for future to understand better, if so then it is useless"(Not ditto quote)

So, only listening fully matters, not his words.

K's teachings are different from others because his teachings say there are no teachings, no methods,no teachers, no guru, no religions, no techniques.., you have to find out yourself. If you have understood this than you have understood his message, and then you can donate your K books to someone else, you don't need his books any more.

Mohad Dib wrote: and not :(

Hi Daniel

Sad thing is we are looking for guidance in k books.Well, new bible for twenty first century.I have some where read that there are highest idols of Budha who was against the idol worship.So we are such a contradictory persons.

Paul Davidson wrote: Oh, I like the idea of leaving them in strategic places on public transportation systems, with little notes inside (not monetary!)

Let the book find its own way home.

:)

Hi Paul, good idea.

I have seen two major improvement in you, first is your sense of humour and second is your writing skills.Now you are a great writer, an expert teacher.You have command on language and subject both.

Or we may write inside a note:

Don't read this book, otherwise you may lose your faith.;)

Most K readers will agree that psychological time can't bring truth nearer.

But I ask a question which may look like a foolish one.Do chronological time is required to reach to truth?Do observation/being aware is a method which need chronological time? What K said about it?

Personally I think that any 'time' psychological or chronological is not required to meet to truth.

What do you say?And what did K say?

Paul Davidson wrote: But the very phrase, "to meet truth" indicates time, however much time it may be. When you meet something there is implied a movement towards it and then a meeting, which is all time.

Even if you say that the meeting of truth is instant it does not negate chronological time. One instant truth was not there, the next it was. It is therefore a movement in instants.

Paul

The phrase "to meet truth" is not exact description of real thing.It indicates that there are two things, 'A' someone who meet to truth and 'B' something which is truth; this is language of time.I think K's whole teaching is based on this one thing; which means if these two (A and B) are separate than they need time (chronological time) to meet, and if it would be so then it would be a physical process under physical rules, it means you can bound this process to happen continuously by applying proper rules in required manner.

But I think K was saying that "A" and "B" are not separate things and this very idea of separation is cause of whole misery.This idea that it needs any kind of time, is reason of 'missing the meeting with truth'(again this is language of time, in fact there is no meeting, there is only truth without any gap).

Because truth is not separate, not away, not far, there is no role of any kind of time, technique and method, to be in it.

I think if we bring time in this matter by any mean, we only postpone the realization of truth.

Max and Kapila

Thank you for your posts.I think it will be good if you write more about the need or no need of chronological time to see the truth or to be radically transformed.

Dhanan Rao wrote: There has to be an ending of this process of self before anything new may arise.

Hi Paul, Thank you for your response.

You seem right when you say that without ending of this process, there can't be new.But again there is old question, how can we end this process?If it need any other process which require time(sequence/ steps/chain) to end old one, then this is not ending of the process, it's only modification.

I think without dropping of idea of doing/ending/becoming, end of this process is not possible.But 'dropping of idea' too may be a thought.I think that's why K used the word 'flash of insight'.Flash may be a last breaking of time where time disappear.He used word 'flash', but it is not exactly in same ordinary meaning of word 'flash'.Generally flash mean something appear for a moment and then disappear.But flash of insight(I am using this word in the sense K used in 'Ending of time') appears at once but it ends the idea of time, so we can't say about this flash that this is momentary or for forever.

So what I want to say?Ending of self don't require any kind of time.By any practice I can't become more eligible to realize the truth.Improvement of understanding through experience of years is illusion.Our gathered understanding of years will not help to end the self.(Now I am giving statements without proving them by logic, so better I stop this:))

Dhanan Rao wrote: But so long as that conditioning exists there is nothing wrong in assuming in the existence of chrono time

Thank you for response, D Rao.

But, Do time(Days/years/months)is required to end the conditioning?

Mohad Dib wrote: dhirendra singh wrote: Improvement of understanding through experience of years is illusion Mohad Dib :dhirendra ,this point seems wrong to me.( I quoted it already but come back to it ) I see a learning , gradual learning , if there is no pattern then it is my way only, which is fine. again if there is a pattern ...! ! ! ! ???

Hello Daniel

Thank you for your response.

I see your point, but I think these two are different things.Till the old mind is working, we can't start learning.And I think ending of old mind is not a time based process, It only can be ended now.

Well, be well:)

Paul Davidson wrote: Is understanding something that is gathered, Dhirendra? Certainly one can gather knowledge, but understanding?

Hi Paul

This is what I am trying to convey.Because understanding can't be gathered, this means it can't be recorded.I think then it's free from time.

Why am I emphasising on the question of chronological time?Whenever I think that it will take some time to be fully aware, then this thinking is psychological time.This is hindrance.Thinking in manner of hours, days, months is thinking of future.It's a gap.

Paul Davidson wrote: And I feel that we have not quite understood what that difference is and so we say that essentially they are both time, which actually they are not.

I think most people understand that both are different.But whenever there is matter of seeing truth, chronological time is essentially psychological.This is the thing which most people don't understand, I think.

What is physical time?It's relative transaction of energy under fix laws, which cause continuous change and movement in things.We measures time through relative movements.So time is a measurement of movement of matter and energy.Do realisation of truth is process of matter?Remember, any process of matter is under rules and can be handled mechanically.

I think truth/intelligence/insight is not a material process, which means it don't need time, yes chronological time too.Because chronological time is nothing else except material process, it can't exist separate from process.

Dhanan Rao wrote: The deeper/more powerful the conditioning the more chrono time it seems to take to be free of the condition.

Thank you Rao

Though I don't feel so.I think that we all are conditioned from centuries, probably from millennium( I am not talking about rebirth, I mean it's conditioning of common human psyche and brain which is result of evolution process of years).

So we all are conditioned from almost same period, same process and same quantity.

Hello Max, Paul, Kapila, Rao, GB and Daniel

Thank you for your contribution.

Discussion is still on.

It's nice to see such a thoughtful and interesting contribution by everyone.

Paul Davidson wrote: If I drop a cup there is a sequence. I let go. The cup drops. The cup hits the floor. The sequence is repeatable and lawful. It never happens any other way. This is the chronology of the event, the sequence. What is fundamental about lawful sequence is that it can only happen in a time which is uni-directional, always moving in one direction. This movement is actual, even if we do not understand is cause and meaning.

Let us see that what is 'time' in above event?

Is above sequence of dropping of cup itself not time?I think it is wrong to say that sequence is happening in time, there is a sequence to which we measure by an invented measurement.So actual time is not a separate thing from sequence. But what is sequence? It is change/movement in things because of force.It's force which causes change to matter in a direction.I can change direction of event by using opposite force.

If there is anything which is not effected by force, then there is no time for that thing.Because time is effect of force.Time is not a thing which exist separately from the sequence of movement produced by force.Sequence is time.

If enlightenment is force effected movement, a process, a change in material, then it definitely a thing of time.

But if it is not so, then it has no relation with sequence of movements, change, which is time.

Physical time is as real as physical process(both are one and same).It is neither required nor related to intelligence/insight/truth/enlightenment.

Paul Davidson wrote: Time is more than that. Sequence by itself is not time

Paul, let us find out, what is time?

Hello Daniel

I think your friend is right.:)

Mohad Dib wrote: hi dhirendra.. do you need time for that ? LOL ..

:)

Paul Davidson wrote:(K quote) Surely, a life that has significance, the riches of true happiness, is not of time. Like love, such a life is timeless; and to understand that which is timeless, we must not approach it through time but rather understand time. We must not utilize time as a means of attaining, realizing, apprehending the timeless. But that is what we are doing most of our lives - spending time in trying to grasp that which is timeless.****

Paul Davidson wrote: (K quote) Obviously, chronological time is confused with the psychological, with the psyche of one's being; and with that chronological mentality we try to become, we try to achieve. So, this whole process of becoming is of time, and one must surely inquire if there really is such a thing as becoming - becoming in the sense of finding reality, God, happiness. Can you use time as a means to the timeless? That is, through a wrong means can the right end be achieved?

It was a directly related quote to topic, Thank you for this , Paul.As K said, We must not utilise time as a mean of realizing time less.

Earth revolve around sun, it's a reality, but this has nothing to do with the realisation of truth.Improvement, progress, methods, paths etc are attributes of time.

I think time is a quality of matter and energy(Both are same).The thing which is not matter, is not related to time.

Max, Dhanan and Paul have put a great effort to deal with the question, thank you for that.

Mohad Dib wrote: hello dhirendra....yes, this is seriously funny , but really sad too. OK I keep ravi shankar music for when in the mood..but if he went missing , I won't miss...

Hi Daniel

It's nice to listen music. Musician Ravi shankar is other guy, not a spiritual guru, shri shri ravi shankar.

That seriously funny post has been deleted because I felt to do so.:)

Here is a guy who have steps of transportation, old Indians had already spoken about 8.4 million steps of transportation of consciousness;)( though this guy call it transformation, omg).

I think by chance this guy is at wrong place, hopefully soon he will find his right place, till that, is it not better to ignore his posts which are irrelevant to K's message?

An Interesting incident described by K:

"K proceeded to describe the second instance of total liberation in his own words: ‘After seeing off a friend at a railway station, I was returning home. A stranger asked: “Shall I walk with you?” “You may,” was my reply. Next he lit a cigarette and was enjoying it. “Smoking is a stupid habit,” he suddenly said. “Perhaps it is,” was my reply. The man then threw away his cigarette and trampled it. At that moment he became free not only of smoking but of all conditioning. The mind was fundamentally transformed.’"

It is an example of immediate transformation, in a flash.

moad dheeb wrote: are you feeling better ?

Hello Daniel

Yes, I am better.:) Thank you, take care.

ganesan balachandran wrote: Did K mention it like that?

Yes, GB.

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote: Well Dhirendra, this is rather a puzzling thing for me.In fact I heard about some such statement as this too.Do you have the quote? I do not know what K exactly meant.Because at the time of his death he said nobody in the world could come to the change he talked about

Hi Kapila

Above was K quote.,Book's name is :"J Krishnamurti as I knew him" By Susunaga Weeraperuma.Susunaga seem honest, and I don't think that he had altered K's statement.

You are right about his last statement.Probably two or four transformed peoples were not countable in proportion of thousands of peoples who heard him for sixty years.

ganesan balachandran wrote: Perhaps he meant 'at that moment only',which occurs very often

No my dear, sweetheart Ganeshan, K was not talking about momentary change, he was specially talking about two peoples who were fully transformed.This was not about the moments which occurs very often.

Here is second quote from same book, "J. Krishnamurti as I knew him, by Susunaga, about another guy:

"Thereupon K looked at me in a grave manner and corrected one of my statements: “Sir, it is not true that none has radically changed.”

K then described two instances of psychological mutation: ‘I had gone into retreat in North India amidst the lovely mountains. Every day a sannyasin walked past the house where I was staying. We became good friends. I think he lived somewhere high up in the mountains. During the mornings he walked down the footpath to the valley and returned to his cave later.

One day I questioned the sannyasin as to the reason why he was returning to the cave. He answered: “To remain silent.” He was asked: “Is there silence if your mind is chattering?” The question shocked his mind. He saw something very clearly. All chattering stopped and he was completely changed.’ With a bewitching smile, K added: “And instead of going to the cave he walked into the valley below where the people live.”

Thank you Daniel, for link of book.

Self centred way of living is only problem of human being.Efforts are feed for self.So, in term of effort, there is no solution of this problem.

Hi Kapila

Thank you for information, I don't know the truth of incident.Though I have heard that M.L. too have written about this kind of incident, but I have not personally read it.But other thing is, it is difficult to believe anything about K, which is not recorded or approved by K.Writer may imagine a lot, or may misunderstand a lot.:)