Are we, as a human beings, are free from our Fears, sufferings, anxiety, pain, pleasure, etc… not verbally but actually?
If not, Shall we discuss about ‘how to get rid of it’?
If I understand the teaching, freedom from the known comes through seeing/understanding the whole movement of self.
Self, which is fear, suffering, knowledge etc.
The whole movement, which means not just believing particular concepts or looking at particular details (whether our knowledge of those details is similar to reality or not)
Ok. I’m just asking, whether we ask us - "how this fear, sufferings arises?. This just makes me miserable. How one can get out of this ‘self’? ". Not verbally, but actually.
By seeing that the self is the misery.
Yes, we can ‘see’ this ‘self’ is misery. But don’t stop there.
Inquire, ‘how this suffering arises?’
The self should inquire into itself? How? Wouldn’t this just be more movement of the self?
And who will determine if the inquiry is going well?
No. The self cant. That’s why we gather here. We can get into the ‘fact’ about ‘how suffering arises?’ through discussions. That’s the importance of ‘Inquiring Together’.
Two selves are better than one?
One Billion is better than two. But we don’t have that much.
Now, lets discuss about the word ‘security’ - which is the root of all our fears, sufferings, etc…
When we born as a child, we don’t have ‘ego’ at all. We grab a thing, play with it, move on. But we feel ‘secured’ from everything because of our parent’s love,affection,caring. Am I Right?
Right in what way? Even if we are only discussing what science claims about the Psychology and neurology of infants, I am sure that your description presents a lot of errors.
I remember hearing (maybe a decade ago, so, apart from errors in my non-specialist understanding of already simplified descriptions, we must take into account the half life of facts - ie. Facts becoming errors as new data is taken into consideration) that when we are born as a child, there is no distinction between “me” and “not me” - so does this mean everything is me, or that there is no sense of self?
So, I don’t know.
Absolutely. There is no differentiation between ‘subject’ and ‘object’. There is no "I’ but they are not aware of results/effects of something - as they don’t have knowledge (Physics,chemistry,biology,etc) about it. They see objects, they play with it. They cry if you pull out those object from them. They have fear of sudden sensual experience and to protect the physical body - they show them by crying out. It’s nature and occurs for all (Grownups,animals,birds). If we kindly ask them to give those, they will give. They are not attached to it. They move on to the next. They experience the objects they see.
Then, his parents suits him a ‘name’ to call him. Let’s say his name is ‘Adam’. When he is hungry, you may have watched him saying “Adam is hungry” and not “I am Hungry”. Because on those days, he doesn’t cultivate any ‘I’ in his mind. But the Parents, make him to call ‘I’, which is the root of cultivation. Correct?
Then, ‘Adam’ grew up, got an admission to primary school. There he seeks the same ‘security’ which the Parents gave him. But he couldn’t find it, except from one or two friends. Adam makes them as ‘close friends’ as he find security from them.
Then he is promoted to high school - which is the most important part of the life. Adam asks others - how he can be ‘secured’ for whole life. And his Parents,teachers,society says "you can be secured - when you have an ‘aim’ in your life, work ‘hard’ to achieve it, earn money, marry a woman who you ‘love’ (here ‘love’ in the current era is more about ‘ego’, ‘s**’ - we can discuss about it later), have one or two children, give them ‘education’ to achieve more than what you did, live a comfortable/luxuries life by spending money to satisfy your psychological needs.
This is the main problem in the society. Making ‘everyone’ to run for their ‘life’. They don’t and don’t set others to find what ‘life’ really means. To find out that actually, we need ‘Right Education’. That’s why K founded many schools.
Right?
Waoh! I don’t know. Obviously most descriptions of reality are at the very least incomplete.
So, is there any standards in life for comparison, to get a certificate that it is ‘complete’. In my view, there is not at all. Even if it’s complete, it’s of not much use practically. What do you say?
Once again you may be correct - I don’t know.
Although what does this do to the idea that we must “see the whole movement of self” in order to be free of it?
Anyway - what are you trying to point at regarding your description of human developmental psychology above ? - nb. I am willing to agree that our psychology and world view is subject to a whole load of processes.