Why Don't We Change After All These Years?

True Dan, but nobody seems to want to go really deep into it.

Oh, I donā€™t know about that. Iā€™ve gone into it pretty deeply. When you think someone is shooting at you the first thing you want to do is return fire as accurately and as intensely as you can. You want to take the shooter out. A hard habit to drop. Believe me. Is that evil or just survival?

Hi Dan

Do you think that dictators, manipulators, exploiters and criminals, and so on, have a bigger self?

Of course I believe you Jack!

One does not need to go far from oneā€™s own center to see that this is so. When one watches the videos of K.'s talks it is obvious that many saw K. as a shooter and some even reacted aggressively as has been perfectly recorded in some of those videos.

Evil or survival? The truth is that I am afraid to answer your question, in case that were the cause of another argument between us, which I do not wish at all. Anyway I will say that perhaps we should investigate or try to see what ā€œsurvivalā€ really means, especially ā€œpsychological survivalā€. And with regard to evil, I think it is only a consequence of that strong feeling of ā€œpsychological survivalā€. The ā€œIā€ feels attacked in some way so it reacts badly. But as you yourself say (ā€œwhen you think someone is shooting at youā€) such a reaction is only due to a thought. So as I said, perhaps the important thing would be to try to see where that thought or strong feeling of ā€œpsychological survivalā€ comes from, and why the ā€œIā€ feels in some way attacked or in danger.

(
Really good point fraggle. I think it illustrates why the ā€˜evilā€™ tyrant is essentially not that different from you and Iā€¦from the average ā€˜goodā€™ intentioned human being. He simply has a very strong feeling of being threatened (psychologically). Itā€™s as if his very physical survival is being threatened, so he protects himself at all costsā€¦often in very ā€˜evilā€™ ways. Hitler felt the Jews were a threat to the physical survival of the Ayrian ā€˜raceā€™ā€¦the White, Christian, Germans, that is.

Thatā€™s not too hard to understand. Itā€™s conditioning. It may not be your conditioning or someone elseā€™s conditioning but it is someoneā€™s conditioning. Have you ever been in a situation where you had to try desperately to survive being attacked by someone trying to kill you? This can lead to becoming highly conditioned to react defensively to any attack, physical or verbal, imagined or real. It may not seem like an attack to the one ā€œattackingā€ but to the one who feels he is being attacked it is real. As K pointed out illusion is real to the one having the illusion.

To be clear, I wasnā€™t at all implying that K was a shooter. He was the most non offensive person I have ever met. I have seen him at numerous public talks and several private small group talks in his home in Ojai and never once felt threatened. On the contraryā€¦

And do not the Israelis feel that somehow the Palestinians are a threat to Israel? If not, why are the Palestinians being persecuted and driven from their homes?

The Jewish people have been horribly persecuted throughout much of their history. Now, with their own homeland, Israel, to protect have they not become the persecutors? Persecutors under the leadership of a criminal Prime Minister, Netanyahu, with considerable help from a criminal United States?

Of course. This division is a universal phenomenon. Liberal vs Conservative, White vs Black, Jew vs Christian, American vs Chinese, and so on ad nauseum.

1 Like

Everything seems to follow from the presence of the so called center and what environment it finds itself in? If what we are is ā€˜nothingā€™ , thinking that we are something is the recipe for the disaster that is our history here? Is the aversion to being ,nothing ā€˜ (not-a-thing) a misunderstanding? Being ā€˜nothingā€™ psychologically is the end of suffering isnā€™t it? The body needs to be cared for properly, intelligently and being ā€˜somethingā€™ seems to be an impediment to that? Thought can function in the practical world without being a ā€˜something ā€˜ā€¦in fact even better without the competitiveness and ambition of a ā€˜something ā€˜? Without the center, thought can cooperate without all the ā€˜crapā€™ / baggage it brings to any challenge?

1 Like

Is occupation and apartheid also a universal phenomenon? Because thatā€™s what the criminal government of Israel under Netanyahu is carrying out against the Palestinians with Trumpā€™s help and also long before Trump.

You know I think these last few posts between us more appropriately belong under the Forum subject heading: Nationalism is Glorified Tribalism. My apologies to the other posters. Thomas, any more comments on this subject should be under the above mentioned subject. If or when you agree I will move my posts from this thread to the one on Nationalism etc. Even if you donā€™t want to reply any more on Israel I think this is a good idea. OK? Personally Iā€™m ready to move on. Iā€™ve said all I want to about Israel destroying Palestine.

Fraggle, lets assume that we have a new understanding of each other after yesterday and that we are pass the likelihood of having another such argument. At least this is the approach Iā€™m going to take with you.

I read somewhere recently where K defined the word ā€œevilā€ as doing something deliberately to someone to hurt them psychologically. Of course, there are many other ways for one to be evil. Iā€™m certainly guilty of the first one I mentioned here. By looking at evil this way and understanding that this is part of consciousnessā€¦who knows maybe something is changing.

As for survival. Isnā€™t that something we all do everyday whether consciously or not?

Hi Dan

My question was partly rhetorical. One might expect that if the self is evil, that evil people have a stronger or more developed and well-resourced self, than people who are less evil (or good). However weā€™re defining the self, if it is evil, then that seems like a reasonable deduction.

My understanding though of people who are sociopathic or strong in dark traits, is that it is as much about what they lack psychologically, as it is about the stereotypical ā€œbig egoā€. There is a lack of insecurity when it comes to the truth, about sensible social structures and other peopleā€™s feelings and well-being. There is a lack of remorse and guilt. There is a lack of positive emotional responses to the simple things in life, a feeling of boredom, and the need to seek excitement in potentially destructive ways.

Am I completely free of such traits myself? No, of course not, and I donā€™t think any of us are. And so Iā€™m not trying to preach from the pulpit here :D.

Judgement (good/evil) is synoymous with the self, it is a movement of the self (I want/donā€™t want).
The self is a mechanism for survival - and as such it is either effective or it isnā€™t - if the species survives it is effective and vice versa.
Evolution produces change : the self exists in billions of subtly different versions. some will manage to reproduce, help society progress etcā€¦; and others quite the contrary (and a whole lot in between)

If we believe that the self is bad (or good), then we will be (turning the wheel of Karma - sorry just being Buddhisty here - not quite the same as being Hinduey) believing the content of the self as usual, and merely strengthening our self conditioning.

Why we donā€™t change (as in come to a radical revolution that frees us from the veil of self) is that we are too dependant on thought (the content of self).
We think that by thinking about the teaching, we may come to some liberating insight.
Dependance on thought only leads to 2 outcomes as far as I can tell : either a confirmation of ones conditioning by circling continuously around inside our own heads or to a realisation that the circling leads nowhere.

I think weā€™ve touched on this before but thereā€™s bad versus good in the sense of concentration camps versus going for a nice summer hike. I assume no one in the forum is so nihilistic as to say they wouldnā€™t care which of those two fates they met. Thereā€™s also bad versus good in the sense of my religion, my country or my tribe says this is bad versus good, and thatā€™s the end of it, and donā€™t argue with me otherwise youā€™ll be put in a concentration camp.

You could say itā€™s all the same though, itā€™s all just judgment in the end. But I would say thatā€™s a comparison at a level of abstraction thatā€™s not especially useful. Yes itā€™s all some kind of mental process. Itā€™s all atoms (or cosmic strings, or whatever) whizzing around.

By the way, the Buddhists talk of right view, right intention, right effort ā€¦

This gives me the impression that I really have not managed to communicate what seems to be the only important point in the whole discussion

What is there to be gained by analysing and judging the content of our conditioning? Are we trying to improve our conditioning? Trying to become better versions of ourselves by coming to the best conclusions? Or are we trying to see what ā€œIā€ is, in order as to not be completely enslaved and deluded?

PS - Re Buddhism : there are only ā€œexpedient meansā€ of teaching, no true descriptions of reality, nor non-delusional paths to truth.

Again, analysing and judging in what sense? In the sense of authority? In the sense of organised religion? In the sense of getting Instagram likes? Or in the sense of this takes us down the path of the concentration camp, and this takes us away? And yes, we probably need to take a good look at ourselves to figure that out.

Great to hear itā€™s non-delusional :smiley:

Now Iā€™m confused! Is this a case of too many negatives?

(No non-delusional paths = all paths are delusional?) :face_with_monocle: :crazy_face:

1 Like

Looking at this again : your question shows clarity, it is actually an answer - You are describing what the self is for : analysis and judgement with the goal of security and progress.
It is the movement of fear and desire - what the Buddhists call suffering.

Yes, I think you are right about us giving importance to our thoughts. Is it also the case that we are slow to recognise that when a thought pops into our head, it is not immediately seen as something which will inhibit attention? Something which will distort our experience of the present moment?

1 Like

Hi Thomas. I would say that some things can be seen very clearly as needing fixing but that itā€™s easy to lose that clarity with other things that are often seen as acceptable. I mean a royal wedding in a cathederal with an archbishop dressed in full costume presiding and thousands of people waving flags outside. I see something deeply wrong there but others might think itā€™s a happy, festive occasion. Krishnamurti seemed to have astounding clarity of vision seeing straight through things and being able to go directly to the root of the matter.