Isn’t this question the wrong place to start? I may think about this but only see the mind for its limited function, and alternatively propose ideals. I may have an intelligent response, but this will be read as at odds with nature of the original question. There is in discussion an implied authority of the nature of the discussion, which we may call logic, and variance from this is frowned upon. Its like talking about what I think, only to be asked to consider humanity. This is treated as an anomaly, not something relevant.
Yeah. It is wrong to ask. But I ask everyone, personally, what urges you to come this forum?
To have intellectual discussions of K’s teachings day after day? or to observe/enquire actually why all this conflict/sufferings/fight is going on in human life and end it instantly?
Not wrong to ask, its the wrong question. To the questioning human being, the goal, the forum, is nothing but particular circumstances, and not the matter for the question asking.
Sorry sir.
I’m asking, personally,
whether we are come to this forum - to verbally discuss what K,a,b,c,etc… teaches - to gain knowledge/intellectual or we come to inquire thought, which is limited, and put an end to thought instantly.
Because i joined this forum, to show something all - that one can put an end to thoughts. And be freedom from the known. I may be right/wrong. I doesn’t say that. But i am serious. I am just asking we have all this discussions - to gather knowledge, or to change our life entirely different from limitations.
Ah, but I am responding. This idea of the personal is because we want self satisfaction.
No sir. I just doesn’t know how to express my feeling.
We humans are fighting because of our images/thoughts/sufferings/pain/etc… can you observe that sir? - Can you observe thoughts is the root of everything, and so we are limited.
The asking is the beginning, not the result.
K: Yes, and as I have been talking for sixty years, I would like others to reach this - no, not reach it. You understand what I am saying? All our problems are solved. Because it is pure energy from the very beginning of time. Now how am I - not ‘I’, you understand - how is one not to teach, not to help, or push - but how is one to say, `This way leads to a complete sense of peace, of love’? I am sorry to use all these words. But suppose you have come to that point and your brain itself is throbbing with it - how would you help another? You understand? Help - not words. How would you help another to come to that? You understand what I am trying to say?
I can feel that - I reached that state of choiceless awareness. I doesn’t know whether it is right/wrong. So I came here to discuss about this.
If , this forum is not for that, and to discuss just verbally about K’s teaching, but go on with fighting with wives/childrens/neighbours/etc…, then it is no use of K’s teachings in his whole life.
Choiceless awareness is not a state to be recognized or achieved by the I. It is not a state of uncertainty or confusion where one doesn’t know whether it is right or wrong and looks to others for clarification and confirmation.
What makes you think that you were in a state of choiceless awareness?
No thought. No one/Nothing to distract what is there. In this state - ‘if’ i see a TV ad. - showing beautiful girls - there is no thought at all. Only experiencing the beauty. Living the ‘now’. And continue watching TV. No thought arises to say “That structure looks good. Let’s search in porn of that type”. Nothing is there. Only ‘pure love’.
When it was seen that this world was round and it was in orbit around the sun, could that ever be ‘unseen’ even though our eyes saw the sun ‘moving’ across the sky? If the brain is caught in time as it seems to be, if it is understood that there is no such ‘time’, can that ever be unseen and the brain return to the illusion that has been seen through? It couldn’t, could it?
Questioning whether there is such a thing as partial ‘insight’.
Yes. It couldn’t. But mere understanding verbally, that there is no time - is not a seeing.
If you actually see it, nothing distracts feeling it. Because what it feels is unlimited,permanent. No senses or ‘I’ arises(as it is limited) to bring back again to illusion.
Yes that is obvious.
Though K has referred to the “snake” in the corner that has to be watched.
1 Like
The “senses” only operate in the Now. When it is seen/felt that there is only Now, thought which is the ‘I’ and is also ‘time’ (past present future) cannot arise, having no longer a ‘place’ in the psyche? Then ‘silence’ is possible?
But everything hinges on perceiving the Timelessness.
1 Like
That ‘silence’ is there always with tremendous energy. But from the time of birth - one is caught in ignorance and dwell in the ‘I’. But if one observes the ‘I’ carefully - then there is no ‘I’ at all.
1 Like
Yes. The continuity of the ‘I-me’ is an illusion created by thought with memory.
1 Like
Everyone has many examples when there is no reaction as pleasure/thought. A non - smoker does not have any pleasure thought when a tv ad for cigars is shown. A teetotaler does not react with pleasure thoughts when an attractive ad for beer is shown. That does not mean they are living in choiceless awareness or in the ‘now’. Pleasure is not static. Pleasure changes its objects, people, and ideas throughout life. Being totally free of pleasure is not the same as not having pleasure in a particular object or person. It is very easy to delude oneself if one does not understand the difference.
1 Like
According to K, observation is not a tool. We (the conditioned mind) can’t use it. For us, observation is ascertaining verifiable facts or confirming our bias. But what K meant by “observation” did not rely or depend on the known.
1 Like