Thoughts

Why are we continuing to ‘think’, to ‘question’, even though ‘seeing’ it is limited and disorder?

Why don’t we stop ‘thinking’?
Why don’t we question,
‘why we are questioning mind/self/events? What will happen if I question? From where question arises? There is no answer for questions, so why I’m still questioning?’?

“questioning is movement”. To ‘know’ something. But we see clearly that “Knowledge” is limited and loop. So, why not stop movement?, why not stop search?

Note - ‘We’ is to represent humans in a general manner but not specific. If one ‘thinks’ he is out, you may replace ‘we’ as ‘whatever word one likes’.

Mind is for thinking, we cannot control it. I can say that, after understanding some aspects of mind and brain system. There will be change in thought process, with lesser conflicts this time.

Questioning is an art. It happens only if there is a space between mind and memory.

Share your views :slight_smile:

Yes. It is an art. But, the art is also limited and we are getting carried away by it’s art. It’s illusion. Illusion is an art. Thought,illusion,art,creation are just different words but represents the same limitedness.

Nope. It happens because, the way things happen is not what I “thought” “should-be”. So, only then question arises as an effect of “conflict”. If there is no conflict, no thoughts, no questions arises.

It’s not about controlling. It’s about “don’t care” of mind. Bcz, the tool I use to “know/understand” the mind/self, is just question, which is nothing but thoughts. And it will always gonna be limited.

Only when thoughts ends, there is mutation. I quite expeirence it. Until then any transformation of thoughts is just limited and gonna be in loop.

And why one has to understand thoughts. Why not don’t care about it, whatever the form of thought is, and remain calm/still/being?

Hi, Mahesh. :slight_smile:

Turn the mirror on yourself:

The theme of this thread you have created and all your postings in it are full of thinking and questioning. Why are you doing this … what is your intention … what do you hope to gain?

Neither gain nor loss.
I have a duty to express. I expressed.

It’s upto one to turn it or go along with it or push it to trash or …

I have no other thing to express.

If you have any questions, don’t ask me. Question yourself, why I am questioning the person in this thread? Why I am turning the mirror? What I will get by turning the mirror? By turning, by questioning, limitedness continues as “inquiry” in form of “thoughts”. So, why don’t stop thoughts/desires/attachments and stay free?.

By asking me, you continue in the same limitedness of win/loss/help/guide/pointing. One will surely see himself if he is serious, like K did. No one has to make/turn the mirror, which is useless.

One can easily stop thoughts. Just put the locomotory organs off. Like, you have some questions/thoughts now by reading this post, right?. Don’t engage the fingers in typing it. Don’t allow the thoughts to go outside in expressing it to others. Then thoughts have no way out but to put off itself. Easy peasy.

Why a question will become illusion?

Why do you say this?

Sir,

Here I said about “Movement”. What is a movement?

Say, at 11.30.01 (hh.mm.ss) - my right hand is at my right lap. At 11.30.03 - my right hand is near to my right ear.
Now, whether my hand is moving/moved? How can we see a ‘movement’? Neither at the first position (11.30.01), nor at second position (11.30.03), but only at a position after 11.30.03 (say 11.30.05).

So, I can say my hand “moved” (but not mov’ing’), by comparing ‘first and second’ positions at a third position. We can say an atom rotates by not present within the first or second position of tht atom, but only at the third position of that atom (outside first and second).

We cannot say I’m moving, but only “moved”, by comparing knowledge/experience of ‘first past’ with ‘second past’ at present. But “now”, I cannot express what I’m ‘being’.

The question is same “movement” of thoughts, comparing/evaluating/understanding ‘past’ i.e. thoughts. The past already dead. There is no use in questioning (i.e. Understanding past), which ‘now’ changed into another past.

And so, whatever I say “moved” (One cannot say moving), is just “illusion” of comparing “one past experience” with “another past experience” with “knowledge/experience/thoughts”.

It’s useless. It’s like framing a “character/image” of a person with their “past behavior”. It’s foolish to “understand” the past/thoughts, which is dead and not remains anymore, but only as ‘memory/illusion’.

“Now” is “neither moving nor not-moving”. It’s a “feel” cannot be reached by understanding/evaluating/inquiring/questioning the past/thoughts/mind.

So, “STOP” movement, then what remains is “NOW/BEING”.

Why you are interested in “Knowing” Mahesh’s duty? It just creates an ‘image/knowledge’ of that person, and induces/urges you to compare with the future encounters with him and ‘evaluate’ the ‘past’ with ‘present’ at that future, and ‘finding out’ “whether he keeps the word he said or changed his duty or …”, and it’s foolish to do that.

Don’t ever try to understand any’thing’/any’person’ - every’thing’/every’person’ if you try to compare will always “change”. Bcz, Limitedness always change second by second.

But if not, you may continue to read the following reply.

My DUTY is, like K’s. Sir, first when Krishnamurti dissolved “Order of the star in the East”, He felt a “simple and holistic” one, let’s take it as an ‘apple’. In around 1930s, K expressed it in a ‘simple’ manner the whole ‘apple’. You may check here the work of Dennis Fey (Life and Individuality) - https://kinfonet.org/meetups/6 - which looks more like “Advaitin/Non-dual” way. But it is “Simple and Whole”.

When time passes, he “observed” - people couldn’t grasp the ‘whole’ apple, so let we introduce a ‘concept’ of “Inquiry/Dialogue”, slice the “Apple” little by little - step by step, and make people ‘watch/observe’ holistically.

But, this slicing made simplicity become complex. People started to “Compare” his words of one dialogue with another, one year with another, one slice with another (You know how a complex thing create a Loop). More words, more dialogues, more inquiries, more questions, more speech, makes a thing “Complex”.

But, I’m not like K. The “Watching/observation” is not a ‘thing’ to findout in inquiry (which is a movement), but a remaining essence of STOPING Movement. (here movement is nothing but questioning/inquiry/thoughts/locomotion/etc…, which I explained in previous reply to Sivaram). To “Observe”, one has to STOP.

I really/actually found/understood/catch/whatever word you like to use what Krishnamurti pointed out in his 60 years.

That’s all. This is my duty, to revolutionize K’s teaching in a ‘simple and holistic and actual’ manner, which evolved in his period as a “Complex” thing. Revolutionize is nothing but STOPPING the evolution/complex things and what remains is the **WATCHING/BEING/OBSERVING/SIMPLE/HOLISTIC’.

I now opened the thread here. I have nothing more interest to engage in other threads for a dialogue, which is a movement.

My duty is to, open, and people who are serious will study this thread (no matter what), and might stop their movement, without trying to understand what is a STOP, but just STOP.

You may have watched K’s videos, and why he sat erect and hands in a position (in laps or in chair). The locomotory organs have to be put at ‘rest’/‘stop’, to not let the ‘thoughts’ to go out and making a form, but just remain within and STOP.

Thank you for the insight into what you meant by “I have a duty to express.” I feel Krishnamurti’s teachings would be more accessible to people if they were made more simple, consistent, and structured. To use a software term, they would benefit from a more user friendly front end.

Mahesh,

I think that that reason @nobody asked you a question was because of your usage of the word ‘duty’, which Charley also found to be extraordinarily odd, considering how much damage is done by those professing duty !!

K: “What does ‘duty’ mean? Duty to what? To the aged, to what tradition says, to sacrifice yourself for your parents, for your country, for your Gods? That word ‘duty’ becomes extraordinarily significant to us. It is pregnant with a lot of meaning which is imposed upon us. What is much more important than duty to anything – to your country, to your gods, to your neighbour – what is much more important than the word, is to find out for yourself what truth is – not what you want, not what you would like not what gives you pleasure, not what gives you pain. But, to find out what truth is, the word ‘duty’ has very little meaning; because, parents or society use that as a means of moulding you, of shaping you to their particular idiosyncrasies, to their habits of thought, to their liking, to their safety. So, find out for yourself, take time, be patient, analyse, go into it; do not accept the word ‘duty’ because where there is duty, there is no love.”
Rajghat, 16thTalk to Boys and Girls , 28th Dec. 1952

K: “Duty is an ugly word”.
Madras, 1st Public Talk , 27th December 1980

K himself asked why someone would use certain words, like sacrifice, responsibility, duty, etc.as follows:

K: “I wonder, if you understand the word “sacrifice”? Why do you use that word? You know, the words ‘responsibility’, ‘duty’, ‘sacrifice’, are dreadful words. When you love somebody there is no responsibility, there is no duty, there is no sacrifice. You do things because you love.”
Krishnamurti on Education, Talk to Students, Ch. 9, ‘On Behaviour’

So, when you say:

That is entirely false. K never did anything out of duty, all his talks were done out of love.

Sir,

I think, K just shared his understanding to the people. :slight_smile:

It was not a duty for him.

You said something about foolishness.

What happens with foolishness?

Okay.

Sir, Words have many meanings based on the content/purpose/place/situation it is used for. Words in itself is just words, and seeing one word as beautiful and another word as Ugly, just shows how one is uncompassionate. Words are just words. It’s only people who thinks, one is beautiful and another is Ugly.

I differ more from K. Sir, now why you compare the word i used with K’s word and it’s ‘meaning’? If you want to understand what I meant by the word duty, you can ask me without comparing another meaning, isn’t it? What are you gonna do/get/achieve by this comparison?

First of all, changing people/things itself an Uncompassionate/non-loveable act. Charley may desire a kind/way of life - and he is totally free to live in that way. Person who loves people, just let them do what they want. "I love people, so I’m here to change them** is not right. One will face the deeds/returns of their action- no matter what. One may desire to rule the world, destroy the world, whatever they desirous of - they are free to do. They have to go through the ‘pleasures,pains,sufferings’ of those act. Only they themself - while go through sufferings - can really be ‘serious’. Until then, no change within that person by external means (in the name of Love) is possible. I’m not here for that in the name of Love how K did.

He failed in my things. He suffered in trying to change. He attached to Limitedness. Well I’m not. I’m not interested to change them.

You may have read the dialogue between K and Swami Venkatesananda. There they speak about three kinds of people “More non-‘self’”, "Partial self and partial non-self’, “more ‘self’”. Unto me, Here the people in third category(More self) is Largely populated. They are ruling the world, and important positions. He won’t change any words uttered to him, any means tried to. Even they suffer, they try to hold on to the positions. The person with “Partial self and partial non-self”, are just desirous of ‘positions’ and they have to go through sufferings, to become ‘serious’. But the person with “More non-self” - are just searching (bcz they went through much sufferings and open to everything, open to questions) and are very ‘serious’ to really be free. I’m here only for them, who are ‘serious’.

Sir, in a non-dual sense, I/one can reside as a stone as everything is just maya or Brahman. Everything happens as a ‘dream’ within me. So, just stop the dream and wake-up. I had resided that for some days. But, I actually found I’m not the kind of Sages. I’m not gonna be like stone. To reach the serious people, and actually express what I feel. Sir, the Truth is always watching us, and very compassionate, so don’t interfere with our desires, and I am not interest to interfere too.

The word ‘duty’ meant by K is, “what religious people do, in the name of duty said in religious scriptures, and deceive themselves and others”. Actually, they (both K and religious people) had misunderstood the word “Duty” said in scriptures.

The “duty” I meant is, I’m not attached to people/humanity, to change them. There is not at all an Urgency of Change. Everyone is free to live their own desires. The Earth/Mother Earth is not a life-less thing, we have to take care off and to provide the future genereations. The earth,water all moves with a “principle/command”, and it “knows” what to do,when to do, where to move, when to move. I individually can stop damaging the Earth’s life. But, if I stop people doing that (like activists do), it means I’m not compassionate towards people and their desires. I don’t want to bring them out of their desires. Only their sufferings can show them and no other scriptures/religions/people/K can do it. Sufferings is a beautiful thing, in the sense, the door to be serious and free. Sufferings is not a wrong thing to get rid off. I don’t wanna save people from death/sufferings. I’m very eagerly waiting for people to go through much sufferings, so they may become serious.

The duty is, after people become serious, they run from one religion to another, from K to etc…, but really couldn’t grasp the complexities. They are drowning in the ocean of search, even they went through sufferings and really want to be free from this loop. My duty is only to reach this people and save their drowning.

Who am I to save their drowning? - It doesn’t matter. I’m here to find those serious people and show them to STOP Movement,search,thoughts,organs,senses. I’m here to share my views with them - this is nothing but engaging with the company of them.

Mohammed,Krishna,Vyasa,Jesus,Buddha - had not shared/expressed to all people in the name of Love like K did. They did shared only to serious people/followers, and not to all, but the foolish/non-serious followers had spread those words, to every person, as they didn’t understood it. They are fools. Jesus,etc… did the duty entrusted to them.

I’m not them. But I’m nor going to shut me as everything dream and wait for the time of enlightenment/getting up. Until that time, I just reach those serious people - with actual knowledge/expeience/non-foolish one I feel, and share them to stop their search/movement.

Fools/foolishness is nothing but people who desire for Apple (i.e. Women,drinks,materials,fun,experience). They are fools. They are addicted to sensual enjoyments. They are fools. If I engage in that act, I’m also a fool.

In foolishness, nothing happens but falling to illusions as reality.

Does desire to eat an apple make a person fool?, I don’t think so. You can ask anyone around you.

How apple is related to Women, drinks and others sort of things you mentioned?

What happens after getting addicted to sensual enjoyments?

Why they are fools for being addicted?

Addiction to anything, physical or mental, is a recipe for suffering … right?

Enjoying sensual pleasures, without being addicted, is not a problem. In fact it’s a great joy!

Addiction means repetition. I think it will make the mind dull.

In my understanding, sensual pleasures are having sex and eating food. If they are done intensively, it creates problems both physically and mentally. Of course, doing without crossing the threshold limit is a joy. :slight_smile:

Yes. And the threshold varies depending on person, time, mood, etc.

By ‘sensual pleasures’ I meant anything that delights the senses: seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching.

The limit will change from person to person and I totally agree with that.

“By ‘sensual pleasures’ I meant anything that delights the senses: seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching.”

I said about only two of them. Then, I have to think again.:slight_smile:

Have you stopped? If not, ponder your own question and find out, if you can, why you can’t stop thinking and questioning.