Does anyone thought about fearing failures in life? What makes the mind, ready to face failures?
Freedom from self image (which is thought). Which does not necessarily mean non-existence of self image.
Freedom comes from seeing what the self image is (what its function is, how it works)
Fear, the emotion and associated thought is one thing. The instinctive reaction of self protection is another.
We can say that there is an important distinction between the two - one being immediate reaction to physical stimuli, and the other being mentation in relation to memory.
The first being primeval conditioning, and the second more recent (and complex?) - Both are still within the realm of : identification with/protection of the center for survival purposes.
Why are we bringing up the distinction between these two forms of self protection? Just for clarity? Or are we being asked to compare the two for some other reason?
Roddonus, hi. 
If we take both what fear is and what causes fear off the table, whatâs left to explore?
The bus driver told me it was a dodgy neighborhood and I should watch my back.
The body must and can be protected. What else is there to protect?
1 Like
So watch your back. Does fear need to come into it?
We were talking about this at the beginning of the thread, does self protection need to be driven by fear? MacDougDoug thought yes. I thought no, the drive to protect oneself can also be driven by logic, like you describe it here.
Not thought per se, but psychological thought.
Thought is not the problem. The intellect is standing in for intelligence because, Krishnamurti says, intelligence is asleep, and awakens when the difference between psychological and practical thought is clearly discerned.
I am not sure it is logic. It is the urge of life to continue.
Theyâre both involved. The urge to live is the engine, logic is the driver.
and self-deception is the drivetrain.
I think I need new rotors.
Logic involves thought. When thought gets involved, what happens? Life then becomes something in the future, doesnât it? Thatâs where fear comes in because then one is protecting an image of the future. This image of the future must be based on all our images of the past. It is these images that want to live. But I am talking about the urge of life to continue, which is a very different thing. By its very nature an image is something already dead, even though it has its origin in a life event or experience. And behind every image is a memory of pleasure or pain. It is this dead memory that wants to continue in order to bring about more pleasure and avoid any prospect of pain. So the urge to live and the urge of life are two very different things: the first has its roots in a dead system of memory, which is the self, and the other has nothing whatsoever to do with the past. The first must always bring fear in its wake; the other is a totally different energy.
If I may ask the stupid questions (because : âit just isâ seems lacking)
Why must the body be protected ?
Two answers come to mind:
1)Because it houses the self - it is my home (nice paradox or irony here)
2)Because Biology necessarily works against entropy - ie. life counters chaos implicitly, it just is.
3)Insert better answer here
???!!? If you can find a quote where I give this impression, we might be able to address this misunderstanding.
Misunderstanding most certainly due to the dichotomy between what the word symbolises for communication purposes (fright, worry, panic) and what fear/self is, how it functions.
I am calling the whole movement of self : fear. Obviously needs to be addressed further for clarity (or the word fear dropped, but Iâll have another go first)
Also again, Logic is what we use to show whether our reasons are logical or not - thats it. If I want to eat ice cream I can give logical reasons for or against (for, of course when I really want to eat ice cream) - In rational debate, we can also hopefully identify if there are logical mistakes in the argument.
3)Energy conservation - matter must be conserved (against heat death of the universe or for the Matrix) 
4)Because biology is more real (and useful) than psychology - but to whom?
Fear is what we call the emotions that accompany the flight (or fight) response in the face of some existential threat (imagined or actual);
@anon78228991 points out that the flight response can initiate automatically, without the need for any thought or emotion. That fear is the word we use to point at the emotional responses due to scary imaginary scenarios (future previsions based on past experience) being played out in the brain.
While not denying any of this - I would still like to argue (if it is still not accepted) that the need and pleasure of security, comfort and progress, is basically the same movement of self as our aversion to danger. (And that the self is nothing more than this movement)
Your opening lines:
I see the world through the lens of self protection - which implies constant fear.
I am the necessary basis for fear. Fear is my reason for existing. The movement of fear is me.
The me = identification with a center for survival purposes (which is fear).
Humans are born with two fears: loud noises and falling. The rest emerge from personal experience and conditioning.
To what extent is thought involved in our fears? 100%? Or does fear arise and persist at times without thought?
What does it take to have that freedom from self-image?