Dear Paul, I am sorry, I am not playing your game. If you are not conscious of what you have written here, it does not make sense to continue. You just seem to express words here. I am out and wish you good luck in continuing with the others.
I want to explore a question with you or with anyone. Any question will do. If it is a wrong question I am sure we can put it right. That’s my position.
Nope. Even if I have, it is just a ‘name’ in this forum and not ‘grouping into an identity’. Isn’t it?
So what’s your question?
There must be a reason why we choose to remain anonymous on these forums. Is it fear? Is it fear that determines our initial position?
Yes. There is a reason. Not every situation is favorable to us, because of the behavior of the one’s ‘self’ known by another ‘self’, and the another ‘self’ cannot be free from the knowledge of that one’s ‘self’.
A fresh start is necessary, not to hide their ‘self’ on ‘fear’ (or) run away from it, but to not let (or) give an opportunity to another person to bring back the ‘memory/past’.
I don’t know what the reason of other anonymous. But, finding out the ‘reason’ of other person’s behavior, i feel it as a useless thing.
We can only find what my own ‘self’ is, and investigating what is the ‘self’ of “false” - is like running away from facing the ‘self’ of “Paul”. We are only concerned about others and fail to look what I am, what other person points about me and why he points them. In case of your dialogue with Erik, I feel Erik had faced the questions - Paul pointed. But, Paul is always running away from the questions pointed by Erik and look at what it is.
Had you felt once to ask others “Why you are saying I am playing?” “Why you are calling me a monkey?” “What I had done?” “What is wrong with me?”.
Could you see that, we are just battling between us, “Whether who is going to win in this. You (or) me?”. And always driven “to make the other person fall in my trap/way” and not letting the question flow?
That’s fear then, isn’t it? You are telling me you want to feel safe.
Yes. It is fear.
‘Fear’ that the other person bring back the ‘image/past/knowledge/experience’ about me and the consequence of ‘dialogue’ and ‘relationship’ might break.
Yes. You are right. I was ‘securing’ myself, to have a dialogue with people, and not let the other person to cut a dialogue with me, like how it happened before. But who am I to stop an act of others and it’s consequence?. I have to snap out of this ‘safety’. Thanks a lot. Now you shall check the ‘name’ suited by my parents.
Now. Please also look at the questions I had posed. Face everything and be not selective
Then are you sure it’s a dialogue you are seeking when you come here? Or are you still seeking to defend a position?
I feel - I am only seeking a ‘dialogue’. But, if you feel that “Viswa is defending a position”, bring it out, so I can see ‘what it is, what I am doing’.
Before, I couldn’t do it with the old account and so I created an anonymous one - to meet people without they being caught in the image of ‘Viswa’. Now, I am not feared of it. Free to face whatever happens.
But still now,
No reply for it. What makes you to ignore these questions?
They are not really questions. Why not start again with something completely fresh?
Ayham said thoughts are floating.
In my terms, I call it a chain of thoughts.
I feel like we should understand how thought occurs first?
Inside the brain, many images from past and recent activity will happen continuously as it is the nature of brain function.
If the mind reacts to one of them, the thought occurs. For example, if the thought is trying to satisfy your EGO or Image. A similar kind of image will be produced by the brain and again mind will react in almost the same flavor. Finally it results in a chain of thought, which Ayham referred to as “Thoughts are floating”.
There are a lot of other things regarding the “Thought processes”, which I do not know for the moment. If I figure it out I will share.
If this is true, what use have you of a discussion group like this? No one here has “absolute clarity of [their] conditioned content and that which lies beyond this”. We (for the most part] are just struggling to understand what Krishnamurti meant by what he said. If you’re beyond that, you should be speaking from the authority of your clarity to those who don’t need to pull you down into their struggle.