SATURDAY DIALOGUES September 30 & Sun October 1, 2023 – Insight & Darkness

Dialogue Question: To be discovered

Greetings Everyone,

Thanks to everyone who attended last Saturday for Jackie’s facilitation. Everyone I’ve talked to found it interesting and we look forward to the possibility of her returning again.

September has 5 Saturdays, so we’re going to insert an extra dialogue this coming weekend.

And at the suggestion of Douglas Macrae Smith we’re going to be experimenting with dialogue a little bit this week. I’ve included his proposal for the experiment as well as the topic he’s suggesting for your review.

Douglas will run Dialogue I, and Crina has agreed to run Dialogue II. I will be present to assist.

Time changes are happening this time of year, and unfortunately the time changes on different dates in different parts of the world. This weekend, New Zealanders and Australians will start 1 hour later. The rest of us will start at the regular time.

Here are the dates of the time changes

 New Zealand          9/24/23          +1 hour
 Australia            10/1/23          +1 hour
 Europe               10/29/23         -1 hour
 US                   11/5/23          -1 hour
 India, Malaysia, Hawaii – no change

The universal times of the dialogues remain the same

 Dialogue I at 3 PM UTC
 Dialogue II at 11 PM UTC

See you Saturday,


Douglas’s suggestion:

I would like to propose another experimental game (in dialogue) : Focusing exclusively on one person’s question at a time - preferably a “real” question, as in something that the person is actually confused about.

And the rules would be (once we have encountered an interesting question) to begin by determining whether we have really heard the question being asked. This would be done by repeating in our own words what we have understood the question to be (repeating the question in our own words).

Once we are happy that we have all agreed what the question is (by this repetition, which is a process that is often recommended in Bohm dialogue) - we can move on to the second and final part of the game.

The second part of the inquiry would be to find out what the source of the question is.
By which I mean what presuppositions and conflictual ideas the question might be based on.
I suppose we could do so by revealing (via speculation and questioning) what the question implies.

That’s it - the goal is to find out whether it is possible to resolve a question without the habit of merely reacting with our habitual answers and conclusions.

Here’s a quote from a conversation between K and D Bohm in Ojai 1980 :

The Division Between Insight & Darkness

K: The person living with insight and the one not living from insight are a construct (of the mind). The person living in darkness can move away to the other (side) at any time.

DB : Yes, nothing holds us there, except that we constantly keep turning the wrong way.
I am constantly creating division.

K : By wanting to live in a space with no division, I am constantly creating division.

I constantly create and maintain the wall between insight and selfishness. And thus I live in this state of wanting not to live in this state.

What am I to do if I see that this is what I do?

Zoom Info & Link:

Schedule: 1st, 3rd & 5th Saturdays of the month
(or Sundays following the 1st, 3rd & 5th Saturdays for E Asia, OZ, and NZ)

Dialogue I at 3 PM UTC
Dialogue II at 11 PM UTC

See the attached Schedule for the time in your time zone or check the time at under Dialogue groups.

Duration: 2 hours

Zoom link to join:


Just to be clear, K never actually said these precise words, thats just me repeating what I think they were saying. (just like the game we are going to try during Saturday dialogue)

1 Like

What is the space with no division for me?

What is the relation between division and non-division?
What is the relation between self and absence of self?
What is relation of darkness and light, hate and love, habit and freedom?

Is there any relation at all?

Thought wants to describe non-division, space. It cannot.

Non-self will always be a mystery to self.
Innocence or humility will always be a mystery for those who are proud.

The space or non-division can only be talked in terms of negation. What it is not.

It is not division.
It is not self.
It is not thought.
It is not thinker.

Light can only be talked about that it is not darkness.
Darkness can never know light. Light is absence of darkness.

Thinker believing it is aware is the biggest illusion.
Thinker is unawareness.
Unawareness does not know awareness.

Mind knowing it is unaware, does not move.
It listens in silence.
That silence is awareness and it has nothing to do with thought.
Thought will never know silence.
Negation of thought is silence.
Silence then looks directly.

What is the space without division.
The answer is in the question as question is formulated in terms of negation.
That space is not division, not thought, not thinker, not self.

So how can self discover non-self?
How can thought discover silence?
How can unaware self perceive?
It cannot.
But self knowing it is unaware, cannot perceive, does not move.
Thought as thinker does not move.
Then in the non-movement of thought there is silent passive awareness that looks, listens.
That silence, awareness has nothing to do with memory. It is not conditioning, not thought, not self.

So if thought sees it is the one that it creating division, is unaware, it does not move. Then there is silence that is not thought. Awareness that is not unawareness. Light that is not darkness. Non-division that is not division.
The divisive process of thinker, thinker separate from thought, observer separate from observed image, psyche as judgement of me, has come to an end. Division has then ended.