Make friends across the globe, post your photos and videos, write a blog or start a discussion, just go to jkrishnamurti.ning.com
hermann wrote:
As the squirrel employs gravity to construct its fabulous life style, so I want to live with the known - with my conditioning - with the thing that is me. As it is, I'm imprisoned in the self. So what is it that has to happen to change my life?
Not much, just a steady reading of the me in operation.
Offline
The contradiction is that when the self is operating there is no observation, and when there is observation the self isn't operating. But maybe there is no contradiction: see the danger, and Seeing takes over.
Offline
hermann wrote:
The contradiction is that when the self is operating there is no observation, and when there is observation the self isn't operating. But maybe there is no contradiction: see the danger, and Seeing takes over.
But I'm not seeing the danger. Not as an actuality. It's no better than theory. But can I not enter into that logic and see how my lack of seeing is shaping my life? And isn't that true of most of the contributions here? They only show the paralysis of the posters - often in the form of strutting their purported wisdom.
Is there anything I can do to go from rational acceptance to actual seeing? What is the stumbling block here? How am I to see that rational acceptance is the stumbling block? I confuse rational acceptance with seeing and am paralyzed by that confusion. I fail to see the harm done here.
Offline
What exactly is the harm done?
Offline
A confused mind - willfully confused. None of us are ending that confusion.
Offline
We're stuck in the known. Seeing occurs in the field of the unknown.
Offline
Stuck in the naming process.
Offline
The naming process is ego-enhancing.
Offline
Joy is outside the ego, and the ego can do nothing about it. They are forever incompatible.
Offline
ego is just the sum of your experiences. Big deal, so what? Are you going to talk about it until the end of your days?
Offline
Why act so superior? Aren't you caught in it, blind to your own machinations?
Offline
Is this how you welcome feedback in your life, hermann?
I am not caught, there is no acting, just your reading of some words and your feeling associated with it. You have being talking about the ego on this forum for years, and then you complain about being called on it. The ego is really a small thing of not very much importance, much less than you are assigning it. Yet I asked you a question, and you did not answer it (except with another question, which is kind of a dodge).
Offline
Yes, I did ask you a question. But apparently you're not interested. So be it.
Offline
night wrote:
ego is just the sum of your experiences. Big deal, so what? Are you going to talk about it until the end of your days?
The ego IS a big deal: people suffer and die because of it, and to say it is only natural is just an excuse for not looking at it.
Offline
bruce sean wrote:
night wrote:
ego is just the sum of your experiences. Big deal, so what? Are you going to talk about it until the end of your days?
The ego IS a big deal: people suffer and die because of it, and to say it is only natural is just an excuse for not looking at it.
When there is this freedom from suffering, what is the relationship between two human beings? What do you value?
Offline
Are you asking me theoretically-what will happen after suffering is no more? Or practically, it's already gone?
Offline
bruce sean wrote:
Are you asking me theoretically-what will happen after suffering is no more? Or practically, it's already gone?
Im asking you practically.
Offline
bruce sean wrote:
night wrote:
ego is just the sum of your experiences. Big deal, so what? Are you going to talk about it until the end of your days?
The ego IS a big deal: people suffer and die because of it, and to say it is only natural is just an excuse for not looking at it.
I don't remember engaging you here. Actually in your case i would suggest you study what 'being a prick' is.
Offline
hermann wrote:
Yes, I did ask you a question. But apparently you're not interested. So be it.
It is an accepted form of discourse to answer a question first before asking one back. And I asked you first. Life is too short to waste it on deaf ears.
Offline
I think I've been as clear as I could. If that isn't enough, so be it.
Offline
night wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
night wrote:
ego is just the sum of your experiences. Big deal, so what? Are you going to talk about it until the end of your days?
The ego IS a big deal: people suffer and die because of it, and to say it is only natural is just an excuse for not looking at it.
I don't remember engaging you here. Actually in your case i would suggest you study what 'being a prick' is.
If the ego looked in the mirror it would see that it IS a big deal; not looking, it considers to be a small affair. So looking changes the perspective.
Offline
LMP wrote:
bruce sean wrote:
Are you asking me theoretically-what will happen after suffering is no more? Or practically, it's already gone?
Im asking you practically.
Practically, from my own experience, a relationship may take place when one doesn't exist: THIS IS THE ONLY CASE-SCENARIO WHEN A RELATIONSHIP IS POSSIBLE.
That means no values whatsoever, but whatever happens to be happening at the moment-no values, no ideals.
Conflict may exist around you, but when you don't exist you are not helping spreading it around: on the contrary, it (you not existing) nips it in the bud.
Offline