KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

bruce sean · 2011-11-30 23:58:04

Peer wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
Peer wrote:

With all due respect, Mr Bruce, unless you are the moderator of this forum, you are in no position to patronize me and tell me how should I inquire, ...
I'm not telling you 'how to inquire':rather, there's no inquiry at all, from the very beginning when all you want is a reference text. It is a fact: you're not here to inquire, at least not yet.

Whenever you're ready, I'll be the first to join you.
I can see MR.Bruce that you are so K brain washed, and so judgmental and patronizing that you can not even conceive that someone could ask a question without you having to say something to antagonize it. I`ll put it in K`s language and you may understand it that way:What is is what I ask or do, what it is is not, is what you think I should do or ask regarding my question by some vague set of standards.

There's nothing to do, really, apart from the understanding. So if you've understood something, it is already done.

The answer you want can come only from your questioning, from beating your brains out, so to speak, rather than from a quote. It's not that easy.

bruce sean · 2011-12-01 00:00:44

wilbro99 wrote:
bruce sez: "By the way, freedom is not yours or mine."

γνῶθι σεαυτόν sez: "No, it is not, just anyone of us could be in there"

wonky-tonky: Now, there is a double in that we could get in a conversation about; the first in being necessary if the second in is to be practiced.

Even without practice, freedom has no sense of ownership.

bruce sean · 2011-12-01 00:02:13

natura wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
By the way, freedom is not yours or mine.
No, it is not, just anyone of us could be in there

How?! Why most people are NOT 'in there'?

BobD · 2011-12-01 00:08:18

bruce sean wrote:
natura wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
By the way, freedom is not yours or mine.
No, it is not, just anyone of us could be in there
How?! Why most people are NOT 'in there'?

All you need to be concerned with is....Why aren't you?

bruce sean · 2011-12-01 00:11:26

Eden wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
It is a fact: you're not here to inquire, at least not yet.
If someone is not inquiring, then they aren't even alive. Would you agree with that bruce?

So is your interest really in ending human suffering, or is it more 'essentially' to quicken the dead?

After all, you have said that most people don't even know they are suffering, which to me implies that someone is nearly brain dead.

Though I still do find it strange that you want to free people from suffering, when they don't even know they are suffering. Shouldn't your main interest be in freeing those who know they are suffering? lol.

No wait...I get it.....you want people to be able to feel their suffering first, so they can then want to be freed of the suffering. Got it.

Both things are necessary: to end suffering for those who are aware of it, and to make aware of suffering those who are are so far away from reality-specially now with so much entertainment-that they're convinced suffering doesn't exist. Of course, upon pointing out some obvious facts , such as the death of a 'loved' one suffering is finally admitted to, but then it is concluded to be 'normal', part of life, which is just a rationalization.

But suffering is not personal, and so no division is necessary.

bruce sean · 2011-12-01 00:13:40

BobD wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
natura wrote:

No, it is not, just anyone of us could be in there
How?! Why most people are NOT 'in there'?
All you need to be concerned with is....Why aren't you?

I feel it's wrong to say 'I'm free'. But freedom is a fact for a stupid person called bruce. Otherwise he wouldn't open his mouth.

BobD · 2011-12-01 00:33:16

bruce sean wrote:
BobD wrote:
bruce sean wrote:

How?! Why most people are NOT 'in there'?
All you need to be concerned with is....Why aren't you?
I feel it's wrong to say 'I'm free'. But freedom is a fact for a stupid person called bruce. Otherwise he wouldn't open his mouth.

Why would you feel it is wrong?

natura · 2011-12-01 00:44:44

bruce sean wrote:
The answer you want can come only from your questioning, from beating your brains out, so to speak, rather than from a quote.

Well, not exactly from quotes, no.

But from beating your brains out!?

At any rate, this is a flagrant contradiction and ignoring of Krishnamurti. I may say, of my personal knowledge and experience, too.

As last thing condemned Krishnamurti ‘beating the brains’.

The real answer to any question as well as solution of any problem comes up in a quiet mind.

Any kind of beating and torture, any violence (might be inner or outward, compelled or voluntary) provokes appropriate reaction sharpening conflict and destruction.

I really don’t see any point to come to a forum to try to spread own teaching – exact opposition to the original and impose on it the do-it-himself statements with such insistence.

Are you really so brain-beaten, bruce?

natura · 2011-12-01 00:59:48

bruce sean wrote:
natura wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
By the way, freedom is not yours or mine.
No, it is not, just anyone of us could be in there
How?! Why most people are NOT 'in there'?

Partly, because people like you, instead exploring and understanding Krishnamurti teaching, are trying to spread around brain-beaten theories distracting and confusing the others.

awareness · 2011-12-01 01:10:44

natura wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
The answer you want can come only from your questioning, from beating your brains out, so to speak, rather than from a quote.
Well, not exactly from quotes, no.

But from beating your brains out!?

At any rate, this is a flagrant contradiction and ignoring of Krishnamurti. I may say, of my personal knowledge and experience, too.

As last thing condemned Krishnamurti ‘beating the brains’.

The real answer to any question as well as solution of any problem comes up in a quiet mind.

Any kind of beating and torture, any violence (might be inner or outward, compelled or voluntary) provokes appropriate reaction sharpening conflict and destruction.

I really don’t see any point to come to a forum to try to spread own teaching – exact opposition to the original and impose on it the do-it-himself statements with such insistence.

Are you really so brain-beaten, bruce?

no, natura. what is your problem with bruce? that a quiet mind is neccessary for comprehend the other is obvious a fact. but this is a forum, and a forum is to activate people to change now. that means, after met bruce in a direct dialogue , then afterwords to change to understand what he is saying. why do you dont let him, if he is really diligent in the subject of thought and brain. or you like more posts over the law of attraction? likylike?

natura · 2011-12-01 02:27:38

awareness wrote:
natura wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
The answer you want can come only from your questioning, from beating your brains out, so to speak, rather than from a quote.
Well, not exactly from quotes, no.

But from beating your brains out!?

At any rate, this is a flagrant contradiction and ignoring of Krishnamurti. I may say, of my personal knowledge and experience, too.

As last thing condemned Krishnamurti ‘beating the brains’.

The real answer to any question as well as solution of any problem comes up in a quiet mind.

Any kind of beating and torture, any violence (might be inner or outward, compelled or voluntary) provokes appropriate reaction sharpening conflict and destruction.

I really don’t see any point to come to a forum to try to spread own teaching – exact opposition to the original and impose on it the do-it-himself statements with such insistence.

Are you really so brain-beaten, bruce?
no, natura. what is your problem with bruce? that a quiet mind is neccessary for comprehend the other is obvious a fact. but this is a forum, and a forum is to activate people to change now. that means, after met bruce in a direct dialogue , then afterwords to change to understand what he is saying. why do you dont let him, if he is really diligent in the subject of thought and brain. or you like more posts over the law of attraction? likylike?

I have the problem with bruce that, as I said’, he is misusing the forum spreading brain-bitten theories instead of exploring and understanding Krishnamurti teaching, that’s all.

It’s not a matter of like- dislike, attraction-rejection. I know him since he is here and understand what he is saying, appreciate his diligence in the matter, but if you see the necessity of quiet mind for understanding, you would speak about meditation; what has that to do with brain-beating?

I understand that the forum is verbal communication and there couldn’t be a ‘silent forum’.
But what is the line of the forum, that’s the question. Exploring Krishnamurti and ourselves or patronizing the others trying to implant in their brain own theories through insistent, monotone repeating and endless muttering?

He says the point is in permanent speaking.
I’m saying the speaking prevents actual action, understanding and appropriately transforming, changing now.
He wants people and himself to speak about it.
I want everyone (including myself) to do it.

awareness · 2011-12-01 03:04:42

but what is the problem to speak without center? i cannot see a theory, in which he insist, i cannot see an authority, this forum without bruce would not be such, as it is now

awareness · 2011-12-01 03:26:19

and by the way, he spoked about meditation in one thread, you can read it

natura · 2011-12-01 03:50:38

awareness wrote:
but what is the problem to speak without center? i cannot see a theory, in which he insist, i cannot see an authority, this forum without bruce would not be such, as it is now

There is a big problem to speak ‘without centre’, a huge problem for the speaker and audience because it’s not the point to speak (with centre or without); the point is to understand that centre practically, individually, to see it on your own.
Immense silence is necessary for that, not repeating of whatever and however.

Anyway, nobody is trying to separate you from your favourite. Nobody is trying to kick out bruce. It’s just a forum to talk as you say.

awareness · 2011-12-01 03:56:41

natura wrote:
awareness wrote:
but what is the problem to speak without center? i cannot see a theory, in which he insist, i cannot see an authority, this forum without bruce would not be such, as it is now
There is a big problem to speak ‘without centre’, a huge problem for the speaker and audience because it’s not the point to speak (with centre or without); the point is to understand that centre practically, individually, to see it on your own.
Immense silence is necessary for that, not repeating of whatever and however.

Anyway, nobody is trying to separate you from your favourite. Nobody is trying to kick out bruce. It’s just a forum to talk as you say.

empty handed is empty handed, nothing to separate. have a good day, natura.

natura · 2011-12-01 03:56:51

awareness wrote:
and by the way, he spoked about meditation in one thread, you can read it

Meditation of Krishnamurti is a very special kind of meditation.

It has nothing to do with brain-beating.

Either you meditate or you beat your brain. They are mutually excluding each other, whatever bruce has spoken about it.

joe · 2011-12-01 08:28:00

Natura...I think Bruce meant something different than came across with his 'brain beating' words. My take is that he meant one must continually see what is happening in the brain (brain beating), but better let him explain before we jump to conclusions one way or another, yes?

natura · 2011-12-01 09:35:52

joe wrote:
Natura...I think Bruce meant something different than came across with his 'brain beating' words. My take is that he meant one must continually see what is happening in the brain (brain beating), but better let him explain before we jump to conclusions one way or another, yes?

Joe, if you have several incarnations leisure time to listen to his explanations, it’s your private life, you can do it.

To me, ‘beating’ will be remaining as beating and imply tension forever.
That’s exactly what Krishnamurti warned about and non-choice, effortless observing is exactly the essence of his kind of meditation.

Brain-beating is bruce’s point, joe, don’t you see it? I remember him having terrible pain and saying that was normal.

I say to everybody, it’s nonsense and dangerous business.

Don’t mutilate yourself! Know yourserf!

Last edited by natura (2011-12-01 15:49:13)

natura · 2011-12-01 09:56:55

joe wrote:
My take is that he meant one must continually see what is happening in the brain

No, joe, it’s not what he means, if he knows what he means at all.

What happening in the brain belongs to ‘what is’ and we could explore it and see it.
That’s what I was taking about the other day.
He told me exactly the contrary – we have to explore beyond the thought. And he sets himself in position of speaking from ‘no-centre’.

Don’t you see the nonsense?

pearl · 2011-12-01 16:26:53

natura wrote:
joe wrote:
My take is that he meant one must continually see what is happening in the brain
No, joe, it’s not what he means, if he knows what he means at all.

What happening in the brain belongs to ‘what is’ and we could explore it and see it.
That’s what I was taking about the other day.
He told me exactly the contrary – we have to explore beyond the thought. And he sets himself in position of speaking from ‘no-centre’.

Don’t you see the nonsense?

Well said natura. I see what you see in regards to the nonsense you pointed out.

pearl · 2011-12-01 16:32:55

awareness wrote:
but what is the problem to speak without center? i cannot see a theory, in which he insist, i cannot see an authority, this forum without bruce would not be such, as it is now

Don't fool yourselves that you are speaking from "no center". If bruce or another has no center then why are you busy defending him, talking for him? As for the forum it would do very well without patronizing, sidekicks and psuedo gurus who claim all sorts of rubbish things that K exactly warned about and pointed to.

natura · 2011-12-01 17:59:52

pearl wrote:
Don't fool yourselves that you are speaking from "no center". If bruce or another has no center then why are you busy defending him, talking for him? As for the forum it would do very well without patronizing, sidekicks and psuedo gurus who claim all sorts of rubbish things that K exactly warned about and pointed to.

Thanks, pearl

couldn't be said more correctly,

especially that part I like most: ‘Don't fool yourself that you are speaking from "no center".’

joe · 2011-12-01 18:18:19

natura wrote:
joe wrote:
My take is that he meant one must continually see what is happening in the brain
No, joe, it’s not what he means, if he knows what he means at all.

What happening in the brain belongs to ‘what is’ and we could explore it and see it.
That’s what I was taking about the other day.
He told me exactly the contrary – we have to explore beyond the thought. And he sets himself in position of speaking from ‘no-centre’.

Don’t you see the nonsense?

yes but I also see what is not nonsense. How can I turn only to one when they are both in front of me? I do recall bruce and his brain pain but had not connected those dots. Still not sure connecting them is accurate either.

natura · 2011-12-01 18:37:42

joe wrote:
How can I turn only to one when they are both in front of me?

Dear joe,
This question definitely belongs to meditation-matter.

That matter is the only thing what matters in Krishnamurti teaching as well as in whole human life.

I think this forum in general is still not ripe enough to pick up that matter. It’s still much too noisy.

joe wrote:
I do recall bruce and his brain pain but had not connected those dots. Still not sure connecting them is accurate either.

But he, himself, has never made a secret from this connection, joe

bruce sean · 2011-12-01 18:45:40

BobD wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
BobD wrote:

All you need to be concerned with is....Why aren't you?
I feel it's wrong to say 'I'm free'. But freedom is a fact for a stupid person called bruce. Otherwise he wouldn't open his mouth.
Why would you feel it is wrong?

Because freedom doesn't haver an owner. Freedom is freedom, not 'I'm free'.

KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

Announcement

#26 2011-11-30 23:58:04

Re: Life`s routine

Peer wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

Peer wrote:

#27 2011-12-01 00:00:44

Re: Life`s routine

wilbro99 wrote:

#28 2011-12-01 00:02:13

Re: Life`s routine

natura wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

#29 2011-12-01 00:08:18

Re: Life`s routine

bruce sean wrote:

natura wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

#30 2011-12-01 00:11:26

Re: Life`s routine

Eden wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

#31 2011-12-01 00:13:40

Re: Life`s routine

BobD wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

natura wrote:

#32 2011-12-01 00:33:16

Re: Life`s routine

bruce sean wrote:

BobD wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

#33 2011-12-01 00:44:44

Re: Life`s routine

bruce sean wrote:

#34 2011-12-01 00:59:48

Re: Life`s routine

bruce sean wrote:

natura wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

#35 2011-12-01 01:10:44

Re: Life`s routine

natura wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

#36 2011-12-01 02:27:38

Re: Life`s routine

awareness wrote:

natura wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

#37 2011-12-01 03:04:42

Re: Life`s routine

#38 2011-12-01 03:26:19

Re: Life`s routine

#39 2011-12-01 03:50:38

Re: Life`s routine

awareness wrote:

#40 2011-12-01 03:56:41

Re: Life`s routine

natura wrote:

awareness wrote:

#41 2011-12-01 03:56:51

Re: Life`s routine

awareness wrote:

#42 2011-12-01 08:28:00

Re: Life`s routine

#43 2011-12-01 09:35:52

Re: Life`s routine

joe wrote:

#44 2011-12-01 09:56:55

Re: Life`s routine

joe wrote:

#45 2011-12-01 16:26:53

Re: Life`s routine

natura wrote:

joe wrote:

#46 2011-12-01 16:32:55

Re: Life`s routine

awareness wrote:

#47 2011-12-01 17:59:52