Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Jack Pine's Forum Activity | 5690 posts in 2 forums


Forum: General Discussion Sat, 01 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Jack Pine: When what was suppose to be the "greatest country in the world", the United States, is taken over by a corporate oligarchy, as it has been, then this surely is an example of a crumbling world. What is happening here is also happening around the world. Please read the article and consider how this might effect you no matter where you live on the earth. Because it will sooner or later.

Posted on Sep 29, 2011

AP / Louis Lanzano Protesters march past Federal Hall on Wall Street on Monday. The Occupy Wall Street protest is in its second week in New York City as demonstrators speak out against corporate greed and social inequality.

By Chris Hedges

There are no excuses left. Either you join the revolt taking place on Wall Street and in the financial districts of other cities across the country or you stand on the wrong side of history. Either you obstruct, in the only form left to us, which is civil disobedience, the plundering by the criminal class on Wall Street and accelerated destruction of the ecosystem that sustains the human species, or become the passive enabler of a monstrous evil. Either you taste, feel and smell the intoxication of freedom and revolt or sink into the miasma of despair and apathy. Either you are a rebel or a slave.

To be declared innocent in a country where the rule of law means nothing, where we have undergone a corporate coup, where the poor and working men and women are reduced to joblessness and hunger, where war, financial speculation and internal surveillance are the only real business of the state, where even habeas corpus no longer exists, where you, as a citizen, are nothing more than a commodity to corporate systems of power, one to be used and discarded, is to be complicit in this radical evil. To stand on the sidelines and say “I am innocent” is to bear the mark of Cain; it is to do nothing to reach out and help the weak, the oppressed and the suffering, to save the planet. To be innocent in times like these is to be a criminal. Ask Tim DeChristopher.

Choose. But choose fast. The state and corporate forces are determined to crush this. They are not going to wait for you. They are terrified this will spread. They have their long phalanxes of police on motorcycles, their rows of white paddy wagons, their foot soldiers hunting for you on the streets with pepper spray and orange plastic nets. They have their metal barricades set up on every single street leading into the New York financial district, where the mandarins in Brooks Brothers suits use your money, money they stole from you, to gamble and speculate and gorge themselves while one in four children outside those barricades depend on food stamps to eat. Speculation in the 17th century was a crime. Speculators were hanged. Today they run the state and the financial markets. They disseminate the lies that pollute our airwaves. They know, even better than you, how pervasive the corruption and theft have become, how gamed the system is against you, how corporations have cemented into place a thin oligarchic class and an obsequious cadre of politicians, judges and journalists who live in their little gated Versailles while 6 million Americans are thrown out of their homes, a number soon to rise to 10 million, where a million people a year go bankrupt because they cannot pay their medical bills and 45,000 die from lack of proper care, where real joblessness is spiraling to over 20 percent, where the citizens, including students, spend lives toiling in debt peonage, working dead-end jobs, when they have jobs, a world devoid of hope, a world of masters and serfs.

The only word these corporations know is more. They are disemboweling every last social service program funded by the taxpayers, from education to Social Security, because they want that money themselves. Let the sick die. Let the poor go hungry. Let families be tossed in the street. Let the unemployed rot. Let children in the inner city or rural wastelands learn nothing and live in misery and fear. Let the students finish school with no jobs and no prospects of jobs. Let the prison system, the largest in the industrial world, expand to swallow up all potential dissenters. Let torture continue. Let teachers, police, firefighters, postal employees and social workers join the ranks of the unemployed. Let the roads, bridges, dams, levees, power grids, rail lines, subways, bus services, schools and libraries crumble or close. Let the rising temperatures of the planet, the freak weather patterns, the hurricanes, the droughts, the flooding, the tornadoes, the melting polar ice caps, the poisoned water systems, the polluted air increase until the species dies.

Who the hell cares? If the stocks of ExxonMobil or the coal industry or Goldman Sachs are high, life is good. Profit. Profit. Profit. That is what they chant behind those metal barricades. They have their fangs deep into your necks. If you do not shake them off very, very soon they will kill you. And they will kill the ecosystem, dooming your children and your children’s children. They are too stupid and too blind to see that they will perish with the rest of us. So either you rise up and supplant them, either you dismantle the corporate state, for a world of sanity, a world where we no longer kneel before the absurd idea that the demands of financial markets should govern human behavior, or we are frog-marched toward self-annihilation.

Advertisement

Those on the streets around Wall Street are the physical embodiment of hope. They know that hope has a cost, that it is not easy or comfortable, that it requires self-sacrifice and discomfort and finally faith. They sleep on concrete every night. Their clothes are soiled. They have eaten more bagels and peanut butter than they ever thought possible. They have tasted fear, been beaten, gone to jail, been blinded by pepper spray, cried, hugged each other, laughed, sung, talked too long in general assemblies, seen their chants drift upward to the office towers above them, wondered if it is worth it, if anyone cares, if they will win. But as long as they remain steadfast they point the way out of the corporate labyrinth. This is what it means to be alive. They are the best among us.

Forum: General Discussion Sat, 01 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Paul Davidson wrote: Jack, if you ever venture outside of the US you may be in for an even greater shock. Not everyone on this planet actually shares that strange belief that the US was 'supposed to be the greatest country in the world.' And quite a few people think the opposite.

That's why I put it in quotes. I don't believe it either. You really are obtuse. You're like a child in your critizisms. Why don't you try to understand what I posted instead and yet another infantile response on a minor point?

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 02 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Paul Davidson wrote: But I asked you specific questions about the other article you posted on arctic ice-melt. I asked your opinion about the cause and about the effect. You have not answered

And I won't answer it. Find out for yourself. You obviously lack a great deal of understanding of the modern world and it's problems. Which is obviously the result of a lack of a sufficient education. Perhaps you couldn't afford one. But I am not your teacher or your mentor. If you can't figure out how melting ice sheets influence climate than find out for yourself. I'll give you one hint: Check the word albedo and how it's being changed can effect the earth's temperature and climate patterns in general.

If you have asked any other questions that I haven't answered it's because I haven't read them. I never read past the first sentence or two of your long, hot air filled diatribes.

You can't seem to understand the point is not me but rather what I am posting to give examples of the world in a state of decay and disruption. I shouldn't have to spend any energy proving the world is crumbling. It's obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence and objectivity. If you don't see the problem then it can't be addressed.

Believe me, if you remain an obstructionist to change and leave these problems for your kids and grandkids to solve they will line up to piss on your grave. And rightly so.

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 02 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Paul Davidson wrote: I don't care if society crumbles. That is not the point.

You don't care if society crumbles? It is very much to point to those living in misery which is most of the world. You don't care who starves to death as long as you eat, right? You don't care who has to live in filth and poverty and endless suffering, as long as it isn't you. As long as everything is good for you screw the next generation, right? You don't care who lives in abject poverty as long as it is not you right? Yes, that is the point. What a nice guy you are. I think your attitude is very much the point and it reveals a lot about you.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 04 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Published on Tuesday, October 4, 2011 by Associated Press South Pacific Islands Face Water Crisis After Six Months of Low Rainfall Rising sea levels and a shortage of rain leave Tuvalu and Tokelau relying on bottled water Crops are wilting, schools have shut their toilets and government officials are bathing in lagoons because of a severe shortage of fresh water in a swath of the south Pacific.

Tuvalu in the south Pacific – one of the island groups suffering a shortage of fresh water after a particularly strong La Niña system. (Photograph: Matthieu Paley/Corbis) The island groups of Tuvalu and Tokelau have declared emergencies, relying on bottled water and seeking more desalination machines. Parts of Samoa are starting to ration water.

Supplies are precariously low after a severe lack of rain in a region where underground reserves have been fouled by salt water from rising seas that scientists have linked to climate change.

The logistics of supplying everyone with enough water to survive and the potential health problems that might arise is worrying officials as is how the islands will cope in the long term.

"We are praying that things will change," the Samoan-based official Jovilisi Suveinakama said.

Six months of low rainfall have dried out the islands. Climate scientists say it is part of a cyclical Pacific weather pattern known as La Niña – and they predict the coming months will bring no relief.

Rising sea levels are exacerbating the problem, as salt water seeps into underground supplies of fresh water that are drawn to the surface through wells.

On the three main atolls that make up Tokelau, the 1,400 residents ran out of fresh water last week and are relying on a seven-day supply of bottled water that was sent on Saturday from Samoa, Suveinakama said.

He added that some schools no longer had drinking water available, and pupils often needed to return home if they wanted to use a toilet.

"In terms of domestic chores, like washing clothes, everything's been put on hold," Suveinakama said. "We are cautious of the situation given the possible health issues."

He said that Tokelau, a territory of New Zealand, had tapped emergency funds to buy desalination machines, which turn salt water into fresh water. He hopes those will be shipped to the islands soon.

In Tuvalu, a country made up of low-lying atolls that is home to less than 11,000 people, the Red Cross team leader Dean Manderson described the situation as "quite dire".

He said on Tuesday that on the island of Nukulaelae there were only 16 gallons (73 litres) of fresh water left for the 350 residents, and the Red Cross was sending over two small desalination machines.

He said much of the well water on Tuvalu was unusable because it had become contaminated with salt water.

The New Zealand government this week flew a defence force C-130 plane to Tuvalu stocked with Red Cross supplies of bottled water and desalination machines. Officials including the high commissioner, Gareth Smith, also flew over to assess the situation.

Smith said the coconut trees on Tuvalu were looking sickly and the edible breadfruit, which grow in trees, were much smaller than usual. He said other local fruits and vegetables, including a type of giant taro, were not growing well or were in short supply.

He said people in the capital of Funafuti were permitted a ration of two buckets of water a day and government ministers had been bathing in the lagoon to preserve water.

Funafuti residents have been relying on a large desalination machine for much of their daily water supply, said Manderson. The Red Cross has been helping to improve the function of the machine and fixing others that have broken down, he added.

The New Zealand climate scientist James Renwick said the rainfall problems could be traced back 12 months, when the region began experiencing one of the strongest La Niña systems on record.

La Niña is triggered when larger-than-normal differences in water temperature across the Pacific Ocean cause the east-blowing trade winds to increase in strength, Renwick said. That, in turn, pushes rainfall to the west, leaving places such as Tuvalu and Tokelau dry.

Last year's La Niña system dwindled by June but this year it has begun picking up again just before the November rainy season, Renwick said, meaning that there is no relief in sight for island groups such as Tuvalu, Tokelau and Samoa.

"Low rainfall continues to be on the cards, at least through the end of the year," Renwick said.

Officials say they are concentrating on the short-term supply problems and have not yet had time to think about longer-term solutions for the islands. But they say the combination of rising water levels and low rainfall makes life on the islands look increasingly precarious.

© 2011 Associated Press.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 04 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

The above is just another example of the physical crumbling of the world due to Man's use of fossil fuels which have drastically affected the climate. There is also wide spread social, political, and economic crumbling throughout the world which is obvious to anyone who can read a newspaper or watch and listen to a television or computer. And repeating words that are thousands of years old or even thought up yesterday isn't going to help a bit. Mankind has to become aware of the relationship it has with the world and change. That change does not come through government reforms, or war or wishing or hoping. Change begins within each of us. But before we can change we must see what is happening and not just stand around and deny the facts.

And by the way, Mr Davidson, James HanSON, British industrialist, was the one who supported Margaret Thatcher NOT James HanSEN the American scientist who's research lead to the understanding of how fossil fuels and other pollutants are changing our climate. If you are going to do research to refute someone try to understand what you are reading.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 04 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Paul Davidson wrote: Oh, you mean this James Hansen, from the world renowned US environmental group NASA who is also a multi-millionaire nuclear advocate:

Why do you insist on making an ass of yourself? NASA is not an environmental group. It's the US Space Agency. Even if what you say about Hansen was true, and I don't think it is, what does that have to do with his scientific findings which have not been proven wrong? In fact everyday he is proven right. Try to stay focused Mr. Davidson. You mind seems to wander with the least provocation.

The world, unfortunately, is crumbling whether you approve or not. So get over it and move on.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 05 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Ms Davidson, even if James Hansen were the only researcher of Global Climate Change, and he's certainly not, your conclusions about him are irrelevent. What you have said about James Hansen doesn't disprove his findings about climate change in the least. But he's not the only researcher as even you must realize. To an over-whelming majority of climatologists climate change is no longer a theory it is a provable fact. If you choose not to accept fact in favor of your own personal predjudices that's your problem. I have neither the time nor inclination to waste on a fool.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 05 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

Mr Davidson, here's a more pertinent question for you. Why do you spend so much time on this forum? You obviously are addicted to being here. You post several times more than any other poster here and yet you offer very little in the way of relevent material.

You seem desperate for the validation of others on this site in the form of their agreement with your confused and never ending "ideas". Have you considered talking to a professional about this complusion of yours?

By dominating this site you not only don't add to any understanding of what K pointed out but you seem determined that no one else will have a voice here without having you yapping at their heels like a deranged puppy.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 05 Oct 2011
Topic: Is the world crumbling?

The thing that started this ludicrous thread is that I mentioned in passing on another thread that because the world is crumbling it is even more important that each one of us look to ourselves to understand, not end but to understand, our own greed, envy, anger, fear, aggression and so on because we are the world. And until we can understand these conflicts in ourselves this strife will not end in either ourselves or the world. I further pointed out, and I am paraphrasing all of this, that the self is an invention of thought which is the past and is and of itself a block to what is, the now, the eternal present.

I could understand that if I posted the above statements on just any site on the internet, with no connection to K or what he pointed out, that I would probably by soundly criticised. But I was surprised and shocked to be set upon and criticised by someone on this thread for writing the above.

What I have written above is part of what K talked about over and over again for more than sixty years. If this forum isn't about what K pointed our what the hell is it about? Continual, endless juvenile nit picking? I certainly hope not. I am done with this ridiculous thread and am ready to move on with discussions about what K pointed out. Let's stay on subject and if anyone feels that they can't at least have enough consideration for the rest of us to go post somewhere else.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 17 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

What is love? I don't know. But most of us think of love as some sort of romantic or psychological attachment. We "love" our wife or husband or girl friend, boy friend, new car, ipod, etc. That love is based on an image we have formed of the other. The image is based on experience, desire and knowledge of the other person or "thing" we want to possess and that which gives us pleasure. So this thing we call love is based on thought which is the past. The past is limited. Is love, in the sense K talks about it, based on the past and therefore limited? K has often pointed out that love is what is there when the center, the I, me, you is not. It is unlimited and doesn't belong to anyone person.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 18 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: You cannot find love through negation.

You can't find love at all. When you look for something you already have an idea in mind of what that something is you want to find. Otherwise how would you recognize it if you find it? In effect, you are chasing your own thoughts and beliefs. If you would simply observe you would see that most of what K pointed out was what something is not, negation. There is no way to describe what is beyond thought. You are left only with removing your preconcieved notions or conditioning which are continually keeping your mind from being open to something new. Negation.

Why do you seem to be threatened by what K pointed out? You spend so much time rejecting K's points. Is it because these things K pointed out threaten your security? Negation means removing or moving past your preconceived notions so the mind is empty. Without this emptiness you cannot observe what is. If your mind is full of your own opinions based on your own experience and knowledge, which is limited, or the Christian Bible, or the Koran, the Torah, the Gita, the Vedas and so on then you are a dead human being. Don't take my word for it, try it. Let go of everything you have ever believed in.

Question everything you think. Go to the root of each of your beliefs as they come up in your mind. You don't have to be a Krishnamurti to do that. If you did have to be K to observe your thoughts then everything K pointed out would be utterly useless.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 19 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Krishnamurti: You're making difficulties for yourself, blocking yourself, when you say you must become superhuman. It's nothing of the kind. You keep on looking at things with eyes that want to interfere, that want to do something about what they see. Stop doing anything about it, for whatever you do belongs to the traditional approach. That's all. Be simple. This is the miracle of perception - to perceive with a heart and mind that are completely cleansed of the past. Negation is the most positive action. Taken from URGENCY OF CHANGE.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 19 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: "Negation is the most positive action," must be taken in context. I think that if you refer back to the text from which this passage was taken you will get the meaning of that phrase.

Have you read the text from which the statement was taken? I don't think you understand. "Negation is the most positive action" stands alone. It is not conditioned on any thing. I don't have to refer back to the text, I've read the book.

And no, K wasn't answering anything to his critics. That's a defensive act. A person is defensive only when they feel they need to prove they are right. K often said to his audience you can listen or not, stay or leave. I never had the impression he was concerned with his critics if he was even aware of them. Which I doubt. While all of us are incumbered with proving we are right K didn't appear to have that affliction.

Why do you make it so complicated? K is simply saying see what is false. The very act of seeing what is false removes it. This is done without any expectation of arriving at something called the positive. The act of seeing what is false, negative, is complete in itself. It is not seperate from the positive.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 19 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: How does negation work in your own life, Rick? What actually happens?

While Mr Lein is completely capable of answering for himself let me say that is a wrong question. In your question negation is a "thing" a "process". Is negation a process that can be practiced or is it a choiceless awareness of something that comes about when the mind is quiet?

And find out for yourself what negation is. What someone else sees or doesn't see is only of concern to them. Don't compare yourself to others. It dulls the mind.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 20 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: No statement stands alone. Nothing in this whole universe stands alone

See what you are doing Mr Davidson? You keep splintering a topic into pointless tangents. This discussion was about love. Then because someone, Mr Lein and myself, mentioned "negation" you seized on that and said no, negation doesn't lead to anything. Negation is simply seeing the falseness of something like the "Union Jack" is just a colored rag. The nation it represents is part of the seperating of humanity into national groups which enevitably leads to war. Organized religions do the same thing. Split people into seperate groups that oppose each other and that often leads to wars. Look at the Middle East. A three way religious war between the world's most bloody religions; Judism, Christianity and the Islam. Seeing the falseness of nationality and religion, are just two examples of negation. That's all. But you have tried to make it into a big complicated problem.

Now you want to splinter this topic into "no statement stands alone" Negation is not a statement. It's a state of mind. But because negation doesn't fit neatly into your tightly held belief system you reject it. Are you incapable of thinking consecutively? You are like a child in your criticisms, your name calling, and your thinking. You are cluttering this thread with meaningless digressions and trying to keep others from having an adult conversation. Kindly stop it.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 20 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Katy 9 wrote: It seems to me that dialogue is a process which can lead to negation

Ms Katy 9, is it necessary to have a dialogue to see the destructiveness of nationalities, of organized religion, of psychological conditioning and so on and to negate these things? I am sure you understand that all negate means is to see the falseness, the destructiveness of something and to end it. And all I'm trying to point out is I don't think the negation of the false need be a group activity.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 20 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

The quote below seems like a clear explanation of positive and negative. All I was saying before is that to understand what something is, love for instance, we negate what it is not. Which is negating our conditioning about whatever it is we are looking at. For K, apparently, love has nothing to do with sex, romantic attachment, desire and possession and so on. So we negate these and maybe other things in our thought that conditions the way we preceive love. And then what is left when our conditioning, our thoughts about something has ended?

The quote by K:

The way of life to which we are accustomed is what is called a positive way because you can feel it out, you can do it, day after day, repetitively, based on imitation, habit, following, obeying, being drilled by society or by yourself. All that is positive activity, in which there is conflict and misery. Please listen to all this. And when you deny that, the very process of denying, the very process of turning your back on it, is a state of negation because you do not know what comes next. Surely it is not complicated. Intellectually, it sounds complicated; but it is not. When you turn your back on something, you have finished with it. 1966 Madras

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 20 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Katy 9 wrote: Good question Jack. It seems to me that dialogue can bring these things to light (even as a by-product) for people who do not see them 'at a glance' and/or affords the opportunity to go into things more deeply. I also see that some things just go without saying.

Thanks for explaining. I see your point and I agree with you. I think it is the whole point of K's 60 year plus dialogue with anyone who would listen.

Forum: General Discussion Thu, 20 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: Have you been able to negate sex? Have you been able to negate desire, attachment and so on? Have you turned your back on romantic attachment? Have you told your wife?

Or is it a theory and a belief?

Have I ever said I did? No. Why do you constantly miss the point? Do you do it on purpose or are you really that thick? Do you understand that negating something is not an end? It is something that is on going as different conditioning comes into play. And who said I was married?

Mr Davidson, may I suggest that you not be concerned with what other people have done or not done or are doing and just focus on what is happening with you? As far as I know you have not been appointed arbiter of this site and, therefore, I am not answerable to you. You are not my mentor in matters of my understanding K. Or anything else that I am aware of.

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 21 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

B R wrote: Have you ever had an experience where the moment seems to stretch out for an extremely long time and all things within stay in extreme focus? It is usually, but not nescessarily, related to moments of extreme danger...

Oh yes indeed. You can also get the same experience if you injest a few mgs of lysergic acid diethylene. I tried that once many, many years ago on a small island that was just off of Key West, Florida on the Gulf side. Aldous Huxley experimented with it too and had similar experiences with it. Lot of fun but the problem is that it is temporary.

Make that Lysergic acid diethylamide. Thanks Mr. Davidson for the correction. I should know better than to rely on my memory at my age for things so far back.

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 23 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

B R wrote: I am not convinced love is an emotion(another conversation perhaps)

Of course you're right. Love is not an emotion. At least the love K refers to. We have already negated the popular concept of love as emotion in this thread. At least some of us have but not Mr. Davidson who rejects the state of negation which K pointed out as being the highest form of the positive. Confusing and contradictory? Not really. When you see your conditioning, which is one's preconceived notion of reality, really become aware of it and don't reject or accept it but see it for the limited thing that it is, then that is the mind in a state of negation. It's really not complicated.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 24 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: It is not complicated, but have you done it? Are you that?

We have been through this before. Do I ever question your extravagant and self aggrandizing claims such as you have recently made on this thread with regard to near drowning or falling from ten feet? No. Why? Because it doesn't concern me. My understanding of absolutely nothing is predicated on what you are or what you say you are or what you see or don't see about living.

Who could listen to or read what K has to point out and not see or question the limitation of conditioning? One would almost have to be in a coma to not become aware of conditioning.

Must I again point out that you are not the arbiter of this site with regard to anything? This especially applies to deciding who is being sincere or accurate in their statements and who is not. You have no standing that allows you to question what others are aware of. Question yourself and let others question themselves. It is for each of us to discover for ourselves without the need to justify ourselves to another. What's not clear to you about that?

I am not on this site to promote myself or to share my personal awareness or experiences. Nor am I here to try to impress others with anything. I consider doing so to be in bad taste. Also, to do so strenghens the center. Do you understand what it means to observe one's self in relationship to others? Just to observe without the need to make voluminous and constant comments on everything that pops into your thoughts?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 24 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

me speak wrote: sarcastic, rude, teaching or criticising mode, it is impossible to observe activities of 'self' at all.

No, you're wrong. I wasn't sarcastic, rude or teaching. Also I did not use the words "without judgement". You added that to make a point that can't be made.

And by the way, you're "me speak" is getting to be quite a bore. What are you hiding? That's a rhetorical question. I don't care one way or the other. That's all, you may go now.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 25 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: Nick was very rude when he criticised people's spelling and grammar. He seemed to berate, criticise and chastise them over their language. It was a devise he used to pursue his project. I have never done that.

Actually, you have. You did it to me in posts 263, 264, 265. But why nit pick, right?

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 25 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

me speak wrote: one possibility is the that the 'quote' system is adding these two words by itself or you are getting senile and forgetting things done by you quickly.

And what about your rudeness above? That's OK though, right? Look at the times at which I posted my original post to Mr. Davidson and you posted your post criticizing me and saying I used the phrase "without judgement", that actually isn't there. My last revision of that post was one hour before your post. If you can't be accurate in your posts and if you can't post without being hypocritical then please be quiet.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 26 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: But to say what you said in the post previous to that is something quite more profound. You said that when one really becomes aware of one's conditioning, then the mind is in a state of negation.

Personally, I don't think what I wrote was profound at all. If you have read K, and I think you have, and if you feel he didn't adequately explain what you are trying to find out then why would you expect me to be able to explain anything to you?

Maybe you are thinking about it too much. Maybe you have made the word, "negation" into a thing, an ideal, something to apprehend and to possess. Why don't you go back and read K with regard to conditioning and negation without expecting any thing. Just read it without agreeing or disagreeing. No results, no goals, no nada. Just watch. Forget the damn word negation.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 26 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

RICK LEIN wrote: Well..if nothing else it becomes clear that image making around interpretation of words is an issue which clouds direct perception!and as Krishnamurti points out..as long image making is present..there is not relationship!

Yes, nicely put Mr Lein.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 26 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: But to see things so profoundly that the mind is in a 'state of negation' implies that the mind has been negated, which is what K points to as the necessary condition for freedom. Certainly it is easy to understand a verbal presentation of that, but to live it is something other.

You're thinking about negation too much and making it too complicated. You have already divided negation up into the superficial and the profound. I don't believe you would have really been interested in anything I might have said, beyond trying to prove me wrong, if I would have fallen into the trap of trying to explain negation to you. You think you already know the answers and you compare what others say with what you think you already know.

You relentlessly introduce new words and new meanings into a discussion before you have understood what the discussion was originally about. For example, you siezed upon the word notions. That's just another word for thought which is the expression of conditioning. That sort of approach pretty affectively blocks any meaningful conversation. Maybe that's why so many conversations with you become circular and rather pointless. I don't mean this as a personal insult but just as a fact as I see it.

You do understand that all thought is conditioned don't you? If you do understand that then why do you keep trying to think your way out of conditioning?

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 26 Oct 2011
Topic: Love...What is it?

Paul Davidson wrote: Yes I do, Jack, and also the images we hold of each other are conditioning. For example you state that you don't believe I would have really been interested in anything you had to say and so it would have been a trap for you to say anything. That is based upon the image you hold of me.

If I were you I would be more concerned about the image I (you) have of negation. It's just a word, Mr Davidson.