Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Discussion Forums

Eve G.'s Forum Activity | 1922 posts in 11 forums


Forum: My Favorite Krishnamurti One-Liners Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: "The aim of education is the flowering of goodness"
Kingston Gilbert wrote:

' The major problems of the world are the result of the differences between how nature works and the way man thinks.' Gregory Bateson - British anthropologist and social scientist, author of Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Apply this to education and we are confronted with the same distance between nature and thought; I often wonder why?

Fair enough and good question?.lets look at how nature operates and how we do, shell we?

Can we observe our motives while also questioning if nature operates based on the same basis? Greed, ideology etc?

Forum: Question authority Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: a new me

Are we? Holding the beggers bowel as K called it? We are programmed to belive that others know more and have the answers, this is part of our conditioning....in the world of experience it is even true. You know English and I don't so you can teach me etc....including other things that experience teaches. You know how to farm and I don't and so you teach me. The question is why we apply the same in our daily living or our daily life....?

Forum: Question authority Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: observation

So what happens when one is aware of ones delusion?

Forum: Insights Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: Painful Relationships

I remember K once saying don't trust and dont mistrust be alert. I don't think i need to escape the past but when one is alert one can see and feel what is happening...we often don't want to see or hear what the other is saying because we have a filter called will, motive and wanting or desire. We hear what we want to hear. Like Patricia said, what is it that is hurt? Awarenes of the hurt and its motives often alerts one to the movement of the self. I don't think that relationship are ment to make us happy, they are ment to be a mirror in which we can observe the self in action. The label of pain and pleasure is again the function of the the self which is to measure and lable.....without it what would be our interactions?

Forum: My Favorite Krishnamurti One-Liners Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: "The aim of education is the flowering of goodness"

So the action of intelligence, which must be with no motive, the flowering of goodness? which means it is the movement of nature, so can we say then that nature is intelligence in action?

Forum: Serious Debate Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: confused!
farha naaz wrote:

"Thought has created this sense of lonliness, this emptiness, because it is limited , fragmentary, divided and when it realizes this, lonliness is not, therefore there is freedom from attachement." Have not been able to understand it beyond the verbal level, any explanations?

Is there a sense of lonlyness when one is not thinking? Or maybe we should look at waht is craving and attachment in its relationship to lonliness. K maybe saying that it is only in the action of the self or ego that we experience this feeling of emptyness, without the actions of the self this sense is not there. Maybe when one observes the feelings that come up with the toughts that accompany them, one is able to end it simply by a state of being rather than thinking....?

Forum: Question authority Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: a new me

I think we are seeking freedom from pain not looking for authority. We look to someone else because we suffer. Because we try to be free of suffering by using drugs, sex, money people and experience. When it all fails, we look for something or someone else to free us from the self where the sit of suffering is.

Forum: Question authority Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: observation

Because you posed the question? Because this is a question and answer forum? Because you say you have delusions? We all have delusions, if we are a ware that they have no basis in actuality, I mean you really are aware that it is all image, do you hold on to it? not you as Randy but one any one?

Forum: Serious Debate Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: You are the World

Randal Shacklett wrote: You really think I could be a master uh? Hey Eve, you hear that? Uh-huh, that's what I'm talking about! Master Randy, I like it!

Hey Randy....feel better? If one is a master why would they spend so much energy trying to convince others they are?

Forum: Serious Debate Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: K is me

Hi Ron, K is you and me without the me and you. There is no me and you anyway there is only humanity one whole. This is what he is saying and yes there is no question that K was human. Perhaps a transformed human but human. If you read his biographies you can see that clearly. They all are humans all the sages of all ages, but this still does not change anything. In order to transform you walk this road with no following another.

Forum: the end of discussion Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: How to finish, once and for all...

Good for you. I also think it is a waste of time but some times it is better than tv ;)

Forum: the end of discussion Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: What is the purpose of discussion?

We all know the history of K and the history of other sages who spoke for many years in an attempt to encourage if not convey the necessity of a changed humanity. Have they all failed? Is humanity better off today than it was when K started to talk? Does discussion work, and if it does, what are the changes that one can be aware of ? Why do we continue the discussion, when we know the silence and the answer is always within our own grasp?

This are the questions of anyone who has read and watched and discussed K for many years and has not seen that ?flash? out of time instant transformation that K is speaking of?..Why have we not changed? Can humanity change? What does it take?

Forum: The Sacred Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: The purpose of being

Dear Mina, I see what you mean. The question itself is resistance to what is. But don't you think that sometimes we question as a natural sense of curiosity or exploration without a goal? Or do you think that it is alwyas suffering that brings about this question?

Forum: The Sacred Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: Consciousness

Ramesh G wrote: Yes, Looking is the great hope. isn't hope time?

Forum: The Sacred Tue, 30 Jun 2009
Topic: The sacred and profane

To all, Funny many said that K was not practical because they found what he said impossible to do, or put into action. After sixty years of speaking what he says maybe simple and practical, and yet why is it that so many of us find it impossible to live the teachings?

Forum: Insights Wed, 01 Jul 2009
Topic: Painful Relationships
Keshni Sahni wrote:

Eve Goodmon wrote: without it what would be our interactions

Welcome back Eve. Hope your expedition filled you with new experiences.

Full of insects bites anyway....:)

Forum: Question authority Wed, 01 Jul 2009
Topic: a new me

Yes of course the self can not communicate it but when intelligence is communicating verbally by using words it can point to another actuality . K communicated verbaly and he pointed out some truths that we need to examine. Doest this mean that his words freed us? No they just pointed to the possiblility of another existance that does not include suffering that is all...we have to do the rest.

Forum: Question authority Wed, 01 Jul 2009
Topic: observation

Satisfaction as an end is one thing and investigation is another. K gave planty of answers and questions. He set this format in order to create a dialouge where people can explore these issues verbaly till there is no more answers, the point being is in order to get to that point where there is no need for answers....one has to qestion everything including what K says....

Forum: Question authority Wed, 01 Jul 2009
Topic: conflict

Randy, I suggest you reread what you have written....it is hard to understand.

Forum: the end of discussion Wed, 01 Jul 2009
Topic: What is the purpose of discussion?

Richard Kover wrote: What tells you such a flash has not happened?

We still suffer the world is a mess, the transformaton which happens outside time, clearly creates a new human being that is not trapped by the self. Partial clarity and particial mess is not a transformation is it? As for expectations, is a reality check an expectation? One can be aware of fear after flashes of understanding and awareness of living in time, is that an expectation?

Forum: the end of discussion Wed, 01 Jul 2009
Topic: What is the purpose of discussion?

Kingston Gilbert wrote: There has been a perceptive change especially in the younger generations who have it in them to a great extent - if left alone - to act not only responsibly but are a lot more aware of the constant change in the Info-Age and have naturally put aside unnecessary psychological baggages in their every day lives.

Can you demonstrate this change? The sixty's also had this type of 'change'. But is it really change? Can techological change bring about a transformation of humanity?

Forum: the end of discussion Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: How to finish, once and for all...

Yes good idea ....when was the last time you had a life transforming insight and what was it's connection with discussion?

Forum: Question authority Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: a new me

We do or at least some of us do.....

Forum: Question authority Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: a new me

We do or at least some of us do.....

Forum: Question authority Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: conflict
Randal Shacklett wrote:

Ok, The title of the post is included in the question. Does that help you?

. Yes it does thanks. What you are saying is in conflict ;) he he. You either observe or you are in conflict. Conflict is a conditioned response to life based on reactive response as you have stated. I don't know if we are addicted to it or it is a form of entertainment or it is simply seen as unavoidable and the only way we function. We never really stop to question if there is another way we are sure this is it....You can only observe conflict after the fact but if you are really paying attention to it when it starts, or while it is happening it just ends....both can not exist at the same time. But please go into what you mean by the word conflict....self conflict and or conflict with others? Or maybe they are both the same?

Forum: Question authority Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: conflict

Randy, I question if it is based on pleasure....conflict is often very painful. It is more like automatic pilot...we react in a split second without really paying attention to that reaction. I suppose the root has to be the self and the past. If we are able to slow donwn our reactive response, perhaps we are able to see the conditioned response of the image?

Forum: Question authority Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: observation

So why are you doing it? Why are you participating in this forum this is all it is, isn't it? An exchange of opinions and information right? So what is the point of communicating on this topic? If discussion can not lead to something more what is the point in any of it? Unless there is better show on tv?

Forum: Question authority Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: reaction

Randal Shacklett wrote: If that is your belief, then you have not understood the nature of competitive conflict. It only takes one ego to compete. That is what the ego does.

UMMM interesting....the problem is not ANOTHER ego but just ego that we identify with as mine and yours....good job Randy.

Forum: the end of discussion Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: What is the purpose of discussion?
Richard Kover wrote:

Is the purpose of discussion to notice commitment to past and future in our words and drop it? Is it to notice a fixed idea in our thought pattern and drop it? Is it to notice the influence of the ego in reaction to our own words and the words of others? Is it to notice desire for an outcome based on any particular discussion or based on any particular topic or with any particular person? Can we not know the answers to these questions together, but notice these things (and others no doubt) together?

Thems' are a lot of questions...and I am not sure I 'got it'. We are clever, the self is clever and tricky. If change in humanity was not critical or absolutely necessary as K often said, I would play with lots more words. The purpose of discussion is to bring about an understanding if not transformation. The reason we are here is that we have all read K's teaching and it resonate as truth as you wish to define it. But there has to be something in the teachings that awakens us. These flashes of understanding or AHHA moments where there is an understanding of something deeply. We all have experienced it on one level or another or we would not be here.

Had we all have ?experienced? this transformation, I wonder if we would be here. What is it that one wants? To share in the exploration of what is truth and the peeling process that accompanies it. The peeling of what is not true and allowing the ?flowering of goodness? to show itself. Since it is unlikely that the topics we discuss here are of any interest to most people, or are deemed to ?heavy? to many, we are here pointing out to each other where the blind spots maybe.

Does this lead to transformation? I sincerely doubt it. Does one feel passionate about it? Probably so or there would be little reason for exploring these topics. As many of us have been around the bend, and back again, it would be entirely hypocritical if we did not tell the truth.

One has explored life pains and pleasures and little is left but the understanding that all these roads lead to confusion and pain. So while K?s teachings are a mystery beyond the mind and language, there is a perfume that lingers after each discovery that points to the unknowable, to that mystery one may call the sacred. We all see the absolute necessity of a new humanity, we want the change that ?wanting? or will could not possibly obtain.

So where does all this leave us? Direction-less exploring to see what stands beyond the mind and time?

Forum: the end of discussion Thu, 02 Jul 2009
Topic: What is the purpose of discussion?
Richard Kover wrote:

Eve Goodmon wrote: there has to be something in the teachings that awakens us

Is it something in the teachings, as if they were an outside agent, or is it "a light" in the teachings which occurs simultaneously with a 'light' in the listener's mind?

P.S. Can the many questions above be summarized as just one: Does discussion allow for the noticing of the influence of "me", and its ending?

It appears as if the book is on the outside but is it? It awakens something that is timeless within the being more like a puzzle that comes together 'it feels' right. But the danger is that one has this kind of response to some things that turn very dangerous.

Discussion does allow for the mirror in which one sees the condition self. Yes. But is that the only way one sees it? Can one see the same in relationship to our own thinking and nature etc?