KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 14:52:20

awareness wrote:
karma? do you mean action with consequence? you sound distored.

Distored? What is that?

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 14:53:27

pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
what is with this "together"? why do you want to think "together"?why do you think it is so important this "together"? what is exactly "together"? how can aloneness and togetherness be in harmony? does aloneness exclude togetherness or it is the same?
Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?

Of couse not, they are linked, we are alone and together, very simple no complication

awareness · 2012-04-13 14:53:53

the mind moves into two contrary directions

awareness · 2012-04-13 14:57:07

Ekanta wrote:
pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
what is with this "together"? why do you want to think "together"?why do you think it is so important this "together"? what is exactly "together"? how can aloneness and togetherness be in harmony? does aloneness exclude togetherness or it is the same?
Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
Of couse not, they are linked, we are alone and together, very simple no complication

very confused. what is we, what is they? please, be exactly. be exactly with thought, stream of consciousness, knowledge.

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 14:58:20

awareness wrote:
pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
what is with this "together"? why do you want to think "together"?why do you think it is so important this "together"? what is exactly "together"? how can aloneness and togetherness be in harmony? does aloneness exclude togetherness or it is the same?
Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)

Hum...observing, at the right moment in wich you read some think and you react...is like all belongs also to you...you identify, make you be against, to criticise, because is in side of you, is a normal mental dynamism...we attack , is a reaction to some think that is complet a live in side of us...

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 15:00:38

awareness wrote:
Ekanta wrote:
pearl wrote:

Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
Of couse not, they are linked, we are alone and together, very simple no complication
very confused. what is we, what is they? please, be exactly. be exactly with thought, stream of consciousness, knowledge.

Yes, we , they, he, she us...always linked like a one body, observing, you bring the world called CONFUSED, is your word, not from nobody else, come from you...observing...

awareness · 2012-04-13 15:02:46

Ekanta wrote:
awareness wrote:
pearl wrote:

Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)
Hum...observing, at the right moment in wich you read some think and you react...is like all belongs also to you...you identify, make you be against, to criticise, because is in side of you, is a normal mental dynamism...we attack , is a reaction to some think that is complet a live in side of us...

observing is in which there is the ending of the observer, which is the observed. please put your words on the right place if you like to understand, what k has told us. the you, the me is the observer, which is the observed.

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 15:13:13

awareness wrote:
pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
what is with this "together"? why do you want to think "together"?why do you think it is so important this "together"? what is exactly "together"? how can aloneness and togetherness be in harmony? does aloneness exclude togetherness or it is the same?
Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)

That is strange, I post here and disapear, is not the first time

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 15:15:36

awareness wrote:
Ekanta wrote:
awareness wrote:

thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)
Hum...observing, at the right moment in wich you read some think and you react...is like all belongs also to you...you identify, make you be against, to criticise, because is in side of you, is a normal mental dynamism...we attack , is a reaction to some think that is complet a live in side of us...
observing is in which there is the ending of the observer, which is the observed. please put your words on the right place if you like to understand, what k has told us. the you, the me is the observer, which is the observed.

Observing...agression, not see the good side, Every think is observing...put the right words? What is right and what is wrong?

awareness · 2012-04-13 15:17:26

Ekanta wrote:
awareness wrote:
pearl wrote:

Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)
That is strange, I post here and disapear, is not the first time

i know you had been for a long while here and you sound as you had not found your light, your energy field. its only a thought from me.

pearl · 2012-04-13 15:50:25

awareness wrote:
pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
what is with this "together"? why do you want to think "together"?why do you think it is so important this "together"? what is exactly "together"? how can aloneness and togetherness be in harmony? does aloneness exclude togetherness or it is the same?
Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)

Hi Awareness, howdy! :-)

I simply wondered about the meaning of what one means when using the word togetherness when reading your post, as it brought up something to be looked into, and nothing to do with anyone else's perceptions of it. In other words looking at it impersonally as you might understand. So let me explain what I meant. Let's take any other word for example, like goodness, peace, order, justice, love. So what makes the mind demand, or seek it. Is it not a mind that is disorderly that demands, asks for order, just as a mind that is fragmented that asks, demands for peace. In other words being not peaceful, peace is demanded. Being unloving, love is demanded. Being injust, justice is demanded. Not that it is wrong to, but just as a matter of fact, for if one were really peaceful would then one demand peace? If you were full of love would you then demand love? You can only demand what you are not. Just as being lonely the mind seeks out togetherness, being disorderly it seeks out order. If you were totally at peace, then you would be peace in action, harmony, love, beauty in action, and so there is no need for you to ask, seek, beg, demand anything whatsoever from anyone, anywhere! Does that make sense? I find it fascinating to explore, all this.

pearl · 2012-04-13 15:56:34

Ekanta wrote:
pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
what is with this "together"? why do you want to think "together"?why do you think it is so important this "together"? what is exactly "together"? how can aloneness and togetherness be in harmony? does aloneness exclude togetherness or it is the same?
Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
Of couse not, they are linked, we are alone and together, very simple no complication

Yes, a mind that is alone and so with all, has no need to ask of, or seek out togetherness as it is complete within itself. In general, seeking of togetherness, or love only indicates to the lack of the thing being sought, demanded. Not saying this is you, but just looking at it from an impersonal point. Hope all is well out there, Ekanta. Have a great evening/night.

awareness · 2012-04-13 16:19:13

pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
pearl wrote:

Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)
Hi Awareness, howdy! :-)

I simply wondered about the meaning of what one means when using the word togetherness when reading your post, as it brought up something to be looked into, and nothing to do with anyone else's perceptions of it. In other words looking at it impersonally as you might understand. So let me explain what I meant. Let's take any other word for example, like goodness, peace, order, justice, love. So what makes the mind demand, or seek it. Is it not a mind that is disorderly that demands, asks for order, just as a mind that is fragmented that asks, demands for peace. In other words being not peaceful, peace is demanded. Being unloving, love is demanded. Being injust, justice is demanded. Not that it is wrong to, but just as a matter of fact, for if one were really peaceful would then one demand peace? If you were full of love would you then demand love? You can only demand what you are not. Just as being lonely the mind seeks out togetherness, being disorderly it seeks out order. If you were totally at peace, then you would be peace in action, harmony, love, beauty in action, and so there is no need for you to ask, seek, beg, demand anything whatsoever from anyone, anywhere! Does that make sense? I find it fascinating to explore, all this.

yes, thats right, pearl. it makes crazy if i hear all that "together" or "we". i dont know what i am, so how can i be together with until i am not connected with an umbilical cord. consciousness is this together per se with all its facettes, but its limited.

kirsten · 2012-04-13 16:21:29

pearl wrote:
kirsten wrote:
true, we don't know what's good or bad.
see the difference it will make when we all talk from that understanding ?
Hi kirsten, just came to be shared that, that whic is good, which is true cannot be "known" by the psyche, but the false, yes, certainly. Infact, what is called intelligence is the very ability to distinguish the true from the false. In other words by knowing that which is false, truth, or goodness comes into being, and infact the only thing that can be known, understood is the false and all that is known as in knowledge is also the false as truth, goodness cannot be known. And in that sense what you say is true in the above response is actually not true. Not that you are wrong, but it is simply not true for the reasons just shared.

hi pearl
nice juggling..

kirsten · 2012-04-13 16:28:28

you just shared your view, awareness, and so do others,
sharing views together in stead of taking opposition, that's what my post was about.

pearl · 2012-04-13 16:46:38

kirsten wrote:
pearl wrote:
kirsten wrote:
true, we don't know what's good or bad.
see the difference it will make when we all talk from that understanding ?
Hi kirsten, just came to be shared that, that whic is good, which is true cannot be "known" by the psyche, but the false, yes, certainly. Infact, what is called intelligence is the very ability to distinguish the true from the false. In other words by knowing that which is false, truth, or goodness comes into being, and infact the only thing that can be known, understood is the false and all that is known as in knowledge is also the false as truth, goodness cannot be known. And in that sense what you say is true in the above response is actually not true. Not that you are wrong, but it is simply not true for the reasons just shared.
hi pearl
nice juggling..

But I won't say it's nice of you to piss everywhere...;-)

Last edited by pearl (2012-04-13 16:47:00)

pearl · 2012-04-13 16:50:31

awareness wrote:
pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:

thats one point, but i think the people here read k and the knew about the danger of society. it sounds mor like a conditioned projection from childhood, school, university, work. it sounds like to be a member in an academic group, frightened to show the egoistic tendency of conscioussness, to cover it. you know, like lets talk abaut what you feel, perhaps we can find out what you feel.:-)
Hi Awareness, howdy! :-)

I simply wondered about the meaning of what one means when using the word togetherness when reading your post, as it brought up something to be looked into, and nothing to do with anyone else's perceptions of it. In other words looking at it impersonally as you might understand. So let me explain what I meant. Let's take any other word for example, like goodness, peace, order, justice, love. So what makes the mind demand, or seek it. Is it not a mind that is disorderly that demands, asks for order, just as a mind that is fragmented that asks, demands for peace. In other words being not peaceful, peace is demanded. Being unloving, love is demanded. Being injust, justice is demanded. Not that it is wrong to, but just as a matter of fact, for if one were really peaceful would then one demand peace? If you were full of love would you then demand love? You can only demand what you are not. Just as being lonely the mind seeks out togetherness, being disorderly it seeks out order. If you were totally at peace, then you would be peace in action, harmony, love, beauty in action, and so there is no need for you to ask, seek, beg, demand anything whatsoever from anyone, anywhere! Does that make sense? I find it fascinating to explore, all this.
yes, thats right, pearl. it makes crazy if i hear all that "together" or "we". i dont know what i am, so how can i be together with until i am not connected with an umbilical cord. consciousness is this together per se with all its facettes, but its limited.

Indeed. This so called togethernessand asking for it is nothing but a facade of a mind in isolation, disorder, conflict.

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 17:05:48

pearl wrote:
Ekanta wrote:
pearl wrote:

Indeed, great points. Could it be that the togetherness that is being sought, demanded merely another projection, another idea of the mind in isolation?
Of couse not, they are linked, we are alone and together, very simple no complication
Yes, a mind that is alone and so with all, has no need to ask of, or seek out togetherness as it is complete within itself. In general, seeking of togetherness, or love only indicates to the lack of the thing being sought, demanded. Not saying this is you, but just looking at it from an impersonal point. Hope all is well out there, Ekanta. Have a great evening/night.

Sure and be vulnerable is one of the greats beauty in the world...the intelectual field, helps to develop the mind, but the real think is to love...to be inteligent, observing and be vulnerable and open , that is so nice...I still love make friends, and seqe together, as K alwya saymin his discourse, lets see together, see beyond
Ual...I just working in a song now with my producer, is being all inspired also by gurdjeff
Good night to every one
Thank you,
Ekanta

kirsten · 2012-04-13 17:09:05

pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
yes, thats right, pearl. it makes crazy if i hear all that "together" or "we". i dont know what i am, so how can i be together with until i am not connected with an umbilical cord. consciousness is this together per se with all its facettes, but its limited.
Indeed. This so called togethernessand asking for it is nothing but a facade of a mind in isolation, disorder, conflict.

it could be the other way round as well,
isolation is threatened by togetherness ?

pearl · 2012-04-13 17:13:06

kirsten wrote:
pearl wrote:
awareness wrote:
yes, thats right, pearl. it makes crazy if i hear all that "together" or "we". i dont know what i am, so how can i be together with until i am not connected with an umbilical cord. consciousness is this together per se with all its facettes, but its limited.
Indeed. This so called togethernessand asking for it is nothing but a facade of a mind in isolation, disorder, conflict.
it could be the other way round as well,
isolation is threatened by togetherness ?

When togetherness is but a facade to cover up the loneliness, there is nothing to be threatened except the very idea of "being together" which indicates to the lack thereof, of that very thing that is being demanded, sought. If you look a little deeply you'll understand.

kirsten · 2012-04-13 17:42:33

sure..
but can we get back to the original thing i posted please ?
no demand or search there, and nothing of a facade either.

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 17:43:47

kirsten wrote:
sure..
but can we get back to the original thing i posted please ?
no demand or search there, and nothing of a facade either.

Sure, can you star again?
Thank you

Ekanta · 2012-04-13 17:53:24

Ekanta wrote:
kirsten wrote:
sure..
but can we get back to the original thing i posted please ?
no demand or search there, and nothing of a facade either.
Sure, can you star again?
Thank you

For me is grait

natura · 2012-04-13 18:25:17

pearl wrote:
kirsten wrote:
true, we don't know what's good or bad.
see the difference it will make when we all talk from that understanding ?
Hi kirsten, just came to be shared that, that whic is good, which is true cannot be "known" by the psyche, but the false, yes, certainly. Infact, what is called intelligence is the very ability to distinguish the true from the false. In other words by knowing that which is false, truth, or goodness comes into being, and infact the only thing that can be known, understood is the false and all that is known as in knowledge is also the false as truth, goodness cannot be known. And in that sense what you say is true in the above response is actually not true. Not that you are wrong, but it is simply not true for the reasons just shared.

I think what you are discussing here in this message is the matter of difference between truth and fact, pearl.
Absolutely important for understanding matter and we are coming up with it any time when being stumbled over.
Without proper understanding of this no conversation is ever possible, but arguing and struggle only.

natura · 2012-04-14 07:36:34

Ekanta wrote:
…that I become, still want to meet the forum in personal, become frinds am experience a real relation...even here can be real, or maybe nothing is real...but who know in the future we can manage to have a forum festival in Brazil?
Love
Ekanta

Dear Love Ekanta,

That’s a greatest idea I’ve ever heard on this forum.

Festival in Brazil, just wonderful!

I think you are also very close to realize this idea. The only thing you need now is to finance a proper arrangement (5 star hotels and restaurants would be very welcome) of that gathering for… let’s see… well, Total number of registered users: 17457… Yes, that’ it.

Looking forward to experience very soon that greatest event in the whole history of Krishnamurti forum.

KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

Announcement

#51 2012-04-13 14:52:20

Re: the experiment

awareness wrote:

#52 2012-04-13 14:53:27

Re: the experiment

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

#53 2012-04-13 14:53:53

Re: the experiment

#54 2012-04-13 14:57:07

Re: the experiment

Ekanta wrote:

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

#55 2012-04-13 14:58:20

Re: the experiment

awareness wrote:

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

#56 2012-04-13 15:00:38

Re: the experiment

awareness wrote:

Ekanta wrote:

pearl wrote:

#57 2012-04-13 15:02:46

Re: the experiment

Ekanta wrote:

awareness wrote:

pearl wrote:

#58 2012-04-13 15:13:13

Re: the experiment

awareness wrote:

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

#59 2012-04-13 15:15:36

Re: the experiment

awareness wrote:

Ekanta wrote:

awareness wrote:

#60 2012-04-13 15:17:26

Re: the experiment

Ekanta wrote:

awareness wrote:

pearl wrote:

#61 2012-04-13 15:50:25

Re: the experiment

awareness wrote:

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

#62 2012-04-13 15:56:34

Re: the experiment

Ekanta wrote:

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

#63 2012-04-13 16:19:13

Re: the experiment

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

pearl wrote:

#64 2012-04-13 16:21:29

Re: the experiment

pearl wrote:

kirsten wrote:

#65 2012-04-13 16:28:28

Re: the experiment

#66 2012-04-13 16:46:38

Re: the experiment

kirsten wrote:

pearl wrote:

kirsten wrote:

#67 2012-04-13 16:50:31

Re: the experiment

awareness wrote:

pearl wrote:

awareness wrote:

#68 2012-04-13 17:05:48

Re: the experiment

pearl wrote: