I still need help with unqualified self. (Thinking straight I understand, thanks.) What do you mean by corrupted self vs. complete self?
I am here to talk with people who care about things I care about. I value the sense of shared interest and purpose. Why are you here, your posts are often critical of other members and ideas, even insulting at times. What drives you to remain active here?
1 Like
Good question. If Iām being driven āto remain activeā, I ought to know why, and perhaps I do. I know Iām here to do what Iām doing, but Iām not sure I know why. I used to know, but nowā¦
Thank you, @rickScott, for asking again. I will try to illustrate by means of an analogy. Suppose we have water in a vase, just water (H2O), and water by itself is complete, it does not need anything else added to it to be water; letās say that this water represents the self, unqualified self, which needs nothing else added to it to be a self, because it is complete by itself like water is. Now, suppose we combine sulfur oxide with this water in a chemical reaction; this sulfur oxide represents a conditioning. As a result of this reaction water ceases to be water, we no longer have water, we have H2SO4, which is an acid. So, the sulfur oxide (the conditioning) added to the water (the self) has corrupted the water, turning the water into acid (a neurotic self, āneuroticā being the qualification that the self has acquired). Does this make any sense to you?
Why I keep returning to Krishnamurti (assuming I ever left) is a bit of a mystery to me, though I have my theories. I like spending time with and around people who care about what really matters: truth, reality, awakening. Pleasure is part of it too.
Forgive my ignorance @Manuel, but is there any chemical element(s) that combined with that acid can make it turn back into water?
Thanks, and thanks also for the example you used
Hi Manuel
I think this āunqualifiedā self and ācorruptedā self distinction continues a confusion that is omnipresent. As I understand what Krishnamurtiā is suggesting is that it is the image that has formed of a āmeā in the brain , an individual entity ā¦that that is the cause of our problems: our wars, our division, our misery and fears.
Okay I think I understand the words, now (finally!) Iāll respond.
It seems to me that if I understand myself correctly, if I am truly clear to myself, then how I think must be straight.
The author Walker Percy wrote about ācoinciding with yourselfā and the straightness (your definition) this state brings. Similar?
This is my understanding, which moves me to question whether an unqualified self is to be blamed for what happens in the world.
You wonder whether the unqualified self, complete and whole and unadulterated, is responsible for the unnecessary suffering we bring into the world. ?
Not me, it was the other guy!..ā¦ā¦ā¦
Thank you for asking, @fraggle. Yes, there are chemical substances that can be put to react with the acid to recuperate the water, the process is called dissociation.
There is another guy?
Sure the ācorruptedā ones!
Letās say that all humans (except for one) are corrupt, and the one has no choice but to speak to any one who will listen. But because the listeners canāt stop streaming their contents, they canāt really listen, andā¦
Our psychological content is our poison and our prison. I am who I think I am because, thanks to the poison of belief, I can be anyone I can imagine, regardless of what the unimaginable truth may be.
Por favor! Gracias a ti por tus respuestas!
Now forgive me but I just realised that I forgot to ask you something else in my previous question: Once this so-called ādissociationā has taken place, and the water becomes water again, is there any trace of the sulphur oxide left in it?
Hello, hello Evian here, hello, hello!ā¦.
Sorry? 
ā¦
Donāt apologize, just drink it! Itās āuncorruptedā and fresh as a spring day!
There is no apologize there, it is a correct expression in Spanish (āĀæPerdĆ³n?ā) to indicate that the person does not understand at all why the other person says what he or she says. Itās like asking for clarification. So I thought that was its correct English translation (isnāt it?).
On the other hand, now I know what āEvianā is because I looked it up on the internet (although it seems to exist in Spain too, I personally had never heard of it). Although I still donāt understand your post regarding the question I asked @Manuel. Were you trying to make a joke or sound funny?
Yes it is my ācorruptā self!
I want to understand, so may I ask what is the meaning of trying to keep sounding funny? ā¦ Is it because you donāt like the discussion, because it bores you, because you want to ease the situation,ā¦ why Dan?