Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

richard head's Forum Activity | 235 posts in 1 forum


Forum: General Discussion Mon, 15 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

idiot ? wrote: A very important question is how God figures in K teaching.

Important only to a mind steeped in escape and trivial content.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 15 May 2017
Topic: Krishnamurti and the Masters

idiot ? wrote: , K never unequivocally repudiated the Masters.

Can you imagine the violence anger that might have occurred within some or many within theosophy? K subtly included theosophy within the scope of "organized religious movements" which allowed him to repudiate without directly criticizing or offending anyone everyone.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 16 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

idiot ? wrote: it is not clear whether there is any God in K's teachings that the question is interesting and not trivial

Anything that tittilates interest, is by definition trivial and not serious. But please, carry on.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 16 May 2017
Topic: Krishnamurti and the Masters

idiot ? wrote: K had no problem condemning nationalism.

Few, if any, fervently nationalistic individuals attended K's talks with any frequency, I suspect. Many Theosophists attended his talks for many years after he disbanded the order.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 16 May 2017
Topic: Krishnamurti and the Masters

idiot ? wrote: He had the opportunity to say that he no longer accepted the Masters of Theosophy and his upbringing. He did not directly say it.

It is somewhat amazing the points that some minds dwell in.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 17 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

Tom Paine wrote: I think we're interested because we want to possess it....we want a savior...a god...to end our suffering...to protect us from future suffering. That all. Nothing truly religious about that...just the simple desire to be protected...like the primative man who prays to an idol for protection.

Another way of saying, "psychologicalcomfortsecurity", no?

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 17 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

idiot ? wrote: you need not participate in the discussion, of course.

It is very very clear that Mr. Krishnamurti is pointing out that rather than speculate about whether or not there is goddeity, we might question why we constantlyconsistantly are doing so.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 17 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

Tom Paine wrote: randall.

That's a low blow sir! Comparing me to that vile devious bastard, really I just don't know......

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 17 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

Tom Paine wrote: Seeking God is that, yes,

One form (escape), of many.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 23 May 2017
Topic: Krishnamurti Miscellanea For The Curious

idiot ? wrote: We will never know if a medical condition was behind "the process."

We will never know if mental illness was behind K's "the process". Or even fraud. Who knows? But we do know "it is the frustrated, shallow, narrow mind, the conditioned mind that seeks the more." (knowledgeinformationauthority).

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 23 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

idiot ? wrote: I used the word "God" because K uses it.

K used the word sparingly and qualified it's use with disclaimer of caution. If K used the word "poo-poo", would we discuss what he meant and the deep human connections? Which are very significant by the way.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 23 May 2017
Topic: How does God figure in K teachings?

Dan McDermott wrote: K primarily uses the word God to refer to our fear

Yes, our attempt to put the unknowable into packages that fit our mechanism of consumption (of knowledgeinformationauthority).

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 11 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: we are humans together interested and facing the same 'problem'?

I will just respectfully suggest Dan, that what is very seriously important/significant in this point being discussed, is that we really find out (within ourselves) whether that is the real reason for being here (humans together....interested, etc..) discussing Krishnamurti. Or whether we are hypnotized by the idea that this is why we are here, or whether there is some other, underlying, motivation (psychological comfort/security, etc..).

Whatever the case may be, I am in no way suggesting that people should not post and discuss Krishnamurti on this site.

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 11 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: I take it as a given the 'self' or 'ego' is the product of 'fear'.

I should think that the only given, is that we cannot trust what we take as given.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: Why do you think that that is the 'only given' Richard

What I think is hardly important. What might be important is how we determine if it is fact or non fact.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: Do you not "trust" anything you have discovered about your self?

What do you mean by the word "discovered"? For most minds it means simply accumulating opinion/information as a form of authority. Maybe you mean some other type of discovery?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: You have to do that for yourself

But Dan, how can I do anything for myself, if my self, is simply a bundle/collection of other peoples psychological poop?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: Yes through 'meditation' (without the 'meditator')

Sweet deal sir. Where can we get some of that?

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: Do you have another way?

Again, what I do or don't have, is hardly important sir. I am not implying/suggesting anything at all. Just asking questions.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: But the only 'way' as far as I can see.

The human mind has been seeing this way/path (imagination) for many centuries and more. I am not criticizing you or what you say.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: ...Criticism is probably best turned toward oneself

Quite, but you did not respond directly to what was posted, if you don't mind me saying so Dan. Which of course detours the discussion into a dead end.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Dan McDermott wrote: That's OK Richard, out of the "dead" the new is reborn.

Now why didn't I think of that? :)

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Patricia Hemingway wrote: there are no other people so there is no "other people's psychological poop"

I won't argue your points. Mr. Krishnamurti seems frequently to suggest that there are and there is though.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Patricia Hemingway wrote: K never argued for a "them" and "us"

No one is arguing that he did.

Forum: General Discussion Mon, 12 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Patricia Hemingway wrote: then it follows logically

K didn't argue for following the logic either. In fact, he argued that the pursuit of logic/knowledge must come to an end.

Forum: General Discussion Tue, 13 Jun 2017
Topic: Online Forums?

Patricia Hemingway wrote: He never argued that logic and knowledge must come to an end

Again, I won't argue with your logic.

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 14 Jun 2017
Topic: The beauty of it.

idiot ? wrote: And that investigation can be of anything!

But isn't there just one "anything/everything"? (sense of a central self created by thinking about stuff) Don't we already divide ("there is no division") when we say "anything"? When I say we can investigate fear/anger or envy or any other perceived character flaw, I am dividing these entities from who/what I am (the observer is the observed),am I not? Or are we saying the same thing?

Forum: General Discussion Wed, 14 Jun 2017
Topic: The beauty of it.

Rich Nolet wrote: But for me it is futile.

Yes, to continue to blindly go round and round in circles over and over, this seems quite futile indeed. However, it constantly allows us to come aware of what we are actually doing. Because it doesn't happen (come aware) is not the fault/responsibility of "outer conditions/environment", is it?

Forum: General Discussion Fri, 16 Jun 2017
Topic: General Discussion

What does it mean to discuss something generally? Is/are there topics specific/focused enough to warrant a serious look? Do we perpetually choose general/vague subjects because that is how things appear to the imagination? If my mind is vague and unfocused and circular in nature, isn't that what will be expressed in my postings?

Though many subjects may seem to be clear and obvious, isn't that a sign that what is going on is simply knowledge compare and contrast? Which by the way, is a superficial/non-serious pursuit in a forum such as this, no?

Forum: General Discussion Sun, 18 Jun 2017
Topic: The beauty of it.

idiot ? wrote: without passage of time.

K is not talking about chronological/of the watch time. He says find the timeless without thought as the future based on the past, time.