|
|
Post by Reefs on May 16, 2022 12:23:05 GMT -5
Wikipedia said that a sage, in classical philosophy, is someone who has attained wisdom. If the wise guy and the idiot both see the same thing, then why did Ramana make a distinction between the two?
[...] Well, Ramana didn't say they the saw the same thing. He said they said the same thing. (According to Reefs; I don't have quote in front of me.) Maybe the meaning of the word "body" differs. Correct. Here's the quote: |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on May 16, 2022 12:41:15 GMT -5
Well, Ramana didn't say they the saw the same thing. He said they said the same thing. (According to Reefs; I don't have quote in front of me.) Maybe the meaning of the word "body" differs. Wow, you are right. I jumped to the conclusion that people say what they see. Now, why would the idiot say something he didn't see?
Yes, the term "body" may mean one thing to the wise guy and another to the idiot. Anyway, you are a sharp guy. I like that. I prefer sharp guys to wise guys. I consider myself a sharp guy but you have beaten me to it this time.
Well, ask yourself, does your body (or body-mind) define you or does it merely describe you? From the ignoramus perspective, the body-mind not only describes you, the body-mind actually defines you. That's your world. There are clear boundaries. There's you and then there is the other. From the sage perspective, the body-mind may describe you but in no way does it define you. There is only what you are. And so there are no such boundaries. And there are no others. |
|
|
|
Post by sree on May 16, 2022 14:01:03 GMT -5
If you feel protected then you shouldn't be questioning my statement. You should agree with it since I was expressing what unchanging freedom is in the midst of changing phenomena - without squirrels though, one of whom chewed through my fiber optic cable and brought my internet down incidentally. I bear no grudges. He can have all the nuts he wants. That's my statement. It has nothing to do with what Krishnamurti said. What do you think I meant when I said "I feel protected"? I have a sense that we are not talking about the same thing.
You are talking about one's eternal timeless nature and living a mortal life in a body. Does mortal life has to be one of suffering? On the other hand, why do we assume that our eternal timeless nature is free of misery? Like other spiritual teachers, Krishnamurti did mention (in his Notebook, Journal, and Commentaries on living) about a bliss when the self is not. This aspect of "spiritual" human experience is not inaccessible to everyone. It is quite commonplace for anyone - a dancer, a musician, a sportsperson, even a chef - to have a spiritual high in moments of artistic perfection. I get it too when I write a great post to guys like you.
The bottom line is mortal life and human nature: our nature as we observe it now and the way we are living. The protection I am talking about comes from the abandonment of conventionality: the way we are living a mortal life. Sure, Ukraine is still there but the madness it is churning up won't suck me in to either side of the divide and feed the conflict. And if I were the President of the US, I would and could diffuse evil and restore peace not only in Ukraine but worldwide immediately without a war machine.
Detachment from convention does not grant separation from humanity. As Krishnamurti said, "I am the world and the world is me." Mankind is sick and I am suffering. And the sane thing to do is deal with the ailment now and not tough it out because one's eternal timeless nature is waiting on that other shore.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2022 22:24:43 GMT -5
If you feel protected then you shouldn't be questioning my statement. You should agree with it since I was expressing what unchanging freedom is in the midst of changing phenomena - without squirrels though, one of whom chewed through my fiber optic cable and brought my internet down incidentally. I bear no grudges. He can have all the nuts he wants. That's my statement. It has nothing to do with what Krishnamurti said. What do you think I meant when I said "I feel protected"? I have a sense that we are not talking about the same thing.
You are talking about one's eternal timeless nature and living a mortal life in a body. Does mortal life has to be one of suffering? On the other hand, why do we assume that our eternal timeless nature is free of misery? Like other spiritual teachers, Krishnamurti did mention (in his Notebook, Journal, and Commentaries on living) about a bliss when the self is not. This aspect of "spiritual" human experience is not inaccessible to everyone. It is quite commonplace for anyone - a dancer, a musician, a sportsperson, even a chef - to have a spiritual high in moments of artistic perfection. I get it too when I write a great post to guys like you.
The bottom line is mortal life and human nature: our nature as we observe it now and the way we are living. The protection I am talking about comes from the abandonment of conventionality: the way we are living a mortal life. Sure, Ukraine is still there but the madness it is churning up won't suck me in to either side of the divide and feed the conflict. And if I were the President of the US, I would and could diffuse evil and restore peace not only in Ukraine but worldwide immediately without a war machine.
Detachment from convention does not grant separation from humanity. As Krishnamurti said, "I am the world and the world is me." Mankind is sick and I am suffering. And the sane thing to do is deal with the ailment now and not tough it out because one's eternal timeless nature is waiting on that other shore.
So I think I'm correct in assuming that what you call the abandonment of conventionality is a psychological detachment from that which causes suffering, a mental change of attitude and it is from that which you derive your sense of protection. I was hoping you would have aligned more to my meaning since you asked the question, does mortal life have to be one of suffering? Based on my own experience the answer is no if it is discovered that the very essence of your nature is bliss. So to answer your rhetorical question, yes your eternal nature is free of suffering and that can be realized while living in a human mortal body and it is accessible to everyone. But it's not an intellectual realization. It's a shift of consciousness. And it doesn't mean one becomes detached from the world either. Quite the opposite, There is a greater involvement in it because the world is nothing other than your own Self. . As Ramakrishna said, "for the Self-realized the world becomes a mansion of delights". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2022 2:06:12 GMT -5
If you feel protected then you shouldn't be questioning my statement. You should agree with it since I was expressing what unchanging freedom is in the midst of changing phenomena - without squirrels though, one of whom chewed through my fiber optic cable and brought my internet down incidentally. I bear no grudges. He can have all the nuts he wants. That's my statement. It has nothing to do with what Krishnamurti said. What do you think I meant when I said "I feel protected"? I have a sense that we are not talking about the same thing.
You are talking about one's eternal timeless nature and living a mortal life in a body. Does mortal life has to be one of suffering? On the other hand, why do we assume that our eternal timeless nature is free of misery? Like other spiritual teachers, Krishnamurti did mention (in his Notebook, Journal, and Commentaries on living) about a bliss when the self is not. This aspect of "spiritual" human experience is not inaccessible to everyone. It is quite commonplace for anyone - a dancer, a musician, a sportsperson, even a chef - to have a spiritual high in moments of artistic perfection. I get it too when I write a great post to guys like you.
The bottom line is mortal life and human nature: our nature as we observe it now and the way we are living. The protection I am talking about comes from the abandonment of conventionality: the way we are living a mortal life. Sure, Ukraine is still there but the madness it is churning up won't suck me in to either side of the divide and feed the conflict. And if I were the President of the US, I would and could diffuse evil and restore peace not only in Ukraine but worldwide immediately without a war machine.
Detachment from convention does not grant separation from humanity. As Krishnamurti said, "I am the world and the world is me." Mankind is sick and I am suffering. And the sane thing to do is deal with the ailment now and not tough it out because one's eternal timeless nature is waiting on that other shore.
That's an action statement. And it warrants a comparable action. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 17, 2022 3:39:12 GMT -5
So even if you discover that you are indeed unbounded and infinite consciousness, Ukraine is still happening. I respectfully question what you have asserted here. Krishnamurti said that he “felt protected”. I don’t have the citation to back this up but I remember reading that in one of his books. Anyway, it resonated with me because I do feel “protected”. I may be deluded but let me explain why I have felt this way ever since I began this quest to inquire into the “Krishnamurti teaching”. (I put that in quotes because I do not regard Krishnamurti as a teacher. We are all one humanity in communion.) I welcome any criticism you may have to set me straight. We are inquiring together and “two heads” are better than one. About ten years ago, I was 35 when I came across a used Krishnamurti Penguine reader at a sidewalk bookstand in New York’s West Village. It was so arresting that I hunted out everything about the guy, his foundations, and his schools. It led me to a life-shattering decision to give up my professional career in corporate America. There was no way I could keep on working at my job if I wanted to find out the truth in what Krishnamurti was talking about. My work projects ran 15 months out with new ones coming on line without a break. I was living in time that could never come to an end. I had to quit.
Giving up a stable income was scary. Breaking personal relationships was emotionally wrenching. Folks in my life were convinced I had gone nuts over some Indian guru. It happens, right? Looking back, I can see that my new path in life had lifted me out of the common herd. I have no family, no wife to deal with, no children to raise, no burdens to bear. Ukraine is happening. Now that I am free, I am watching it – like a squirrel in my garden - without any movement of thought. I feel protected. But the you that feels protected is temporary, ephemeral, bound for death in the end. Like all of us.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 17, 2022 3:43:18 GMT -5
I respectfully question what you have asserted here. Krishnamurti said that he “felt protected”. I don’t have the citation to back this up but I remember reading that in one of his books. Anyway, it resonated with me because I do feel “protected”. I may be deluded but let me explain why I have felt this way ever since I began this quest to inquire into the “Krishnamurti teaching”. (I put that in quotes because I do not regard Krishnamurti as a teacher. We are all one humanity in communion.) I welcome any criticism you may have to set me straight. We are inquiring together and “two heads” are better than one. About ten years ago, I was 35 when I came across a used Krishnamurti Penguine reader at a sidewalk bookstand in New York’s West Village. It was so arresting that I hunted out everything about the guy, his foundations, and his schools. It led me to a life-shattering decision to give up my professional career in corporate America. There was no way I could keep on working at my job if I wanted to find out the truth in what Krishnamurti was talking about. My work projects ran 15 months out with new ones coming on line without a break. I was living in time that could never come to an end. I had to quit.
Giving up a stable income was scary. Breaking personal relationships was emotionally wrenching. Folks in my life were convinced I had gone nuts over some Indian guru. It happens, right? Looking back, I can see that my new path in life had lifted me out of the common herd. I have no family, no wife to deal with, no children to raise, no burdens to bear. Ukraine is happening. Now that I am free, I am watching it – like a squirrel in my garden - without any movement of thought. I feel protected. If you feel protected then you shouldn't be questioning my statement. You should agree with it since I was expressing what unchanging freedom is in the midst of changing phenomena - without squirrels though, one of whom chewed through my fiber optic cable and brought my internet down incidentally. I bear no grudges. He can have all the nuts he wants. That's my statement. It has nothing to do with what Krishnamurti said.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 17, 2022 3:53:58 GMT -5
If you feel protected then you shouldn't be questioning my statement. You should agree with it since I was expressing what unchanging freedom is in the midst of changing phenomena - without squirrels though, one of whom chewed through my fiber optic cable and brought my internet down incidentally. I bear no grudges. He can have all the nuts he wants. That's my statement. It has nothing to do with what Krishnamurti said. What do you think I meant when I said "I feel protected"? I have a sense that we are not talking about the same thing.
You are talking about one's eternal timeless nature and living a mortal life in a body. Does mortal life has to be one of suffering? On the other hand, why do we assume that our eternal timeless nature is free of misery? Like other spiritual teachers, Krishnamurti did mention (in his Notebook, Journal, and Commentaries on living) about a bliss when the self is not. This aspect of "spiritual" human experience is not inaccessible to everyone. It is quite commonplace for anyone - a dancer, a musician, a sportsperson, even a chef - to have a spiritual high in moments of artistic perfection. I get it too when I write a great post to guys like you.
The bottom line is mortal life and human nature: our nature as we observe it now and the way we are living. The protection I am talking about comes from the abandonment of conventionality: the way we are living a mortal life. Sure, Ukraine is still there but the madness it is churning up won't suck me in to either side of the divide and feed the conflict. And if I were the President of the US, I would and could diffuse evil and restore peace not only in Ukraine but worldwide immediately without a war machine.
Detachment from convention does not grant separation from humanity. As Krishnamurti said, "I am the world and the world is me." Mankind is sick and I am suffering. And the sane thing to do is deal with the ailment now and not tough it out because one's eternal timeless nature is waiting on that other shore.
Pain is real, it happens. Suffering can be understood as different from pain. This understanding is non-conceptual, the distinction is only a pointer. A person's suffering is also real, but in a different sense of the word "real". In a subjective sense, their suffering is real, to them. So, what I propose as "real" is that which cannot be denied without resorting to illusion. But there is no suffering without pain, and pain is ephemeral, while the awareness that you are, would "be here" regardless if the "big bang had ever 'happened'" and will "be here, now", eternally, even in the face of the "heat death of the Universe". And this isn't to say that the Earth, and humanity, are of no consequence, but resolving the biggest of pictures with the personal subjective, is the great matter of self-inquiry. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2022 3:55:17 GMT -5
I respectfully question what you have asserted here. Krishnamurti said that he “felt protected”. I don’t have the citation to back this up but I remember reading that in one of his books. Anyway, it resonated with me because I do feel “protected”. I may be deluded but let me explain why I have felt this way ever since I began this quest to inquire into the “Krishnamurti teaching”. (I put that in quotes because I do not regard Krishnamurti as a teacher. We are all one humanity in communion.) I welcome any criticism you may have to set me straight. We are inquiring together and “two heads” are better than one. About ten years ago, I was 35 when I came across a used Krishnamurti Penguine reader at a sidewalk bookstand in New York’s West Village. It was so arresting that I hunted out everything about the guy, his foundations, and his schools. It led me to a life-shattering decision to give up my professional career in corporate America. There was no way I could keep on working at my job if I wanted to find out the truth in what Krishnamurti was talking about. My work projects ran 15 months out with new ones coming on line without a break. I was living in time that could never come to an end. I had to quit.
Giving up a stable income was scary. Breaking personal relationships was emotionally wrenching. Folks in my life were convinced I had gone nuts over some Indian guru. It happens, right? Looking back, I can see that my new path in life had lifted me out of the common herd. I have no family, no wife to deal with, no children to raise, no burdens to bear. Ukraine is happening. Now that I am free, I am watching it – like a squirrel in my garden - without any movement of thought. I feel protected. But the you that feels protected is temporary, ephemeral, bound for death in the end. Like all of us.  You will have heard that lovely story about instead of continuing to give fish to someone who has no food, instead you teach them to fish for themselves so they have a lifelong skill for obtaining food. Well they're still gonna die! |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 17, 2022 4:06:00 GMT -5
But the you that feels protected is temporary, ephemeral, bound for death in the end. Like all of us. You will have heard that lovely story about instead of continuing to give fish to someone who has no food, instead you teach them to fish for themselves so they have a lifelong skill for obtaining food. Well they're still gonna die! People in my old mill town here talk in an accent that is a blend of the midwest and brooklyn and are full of folksy aphorisms of blue collar Catholics .. like .. "ya' gotta' take the good with the bad", the ever delightful "life's a b1tch, and then you die", and I'm certain it's where the screenwriters from Taxi Driver got their mirror scene.  |
|
|
|
Post by sree on May 17, 2022 17:31:19 GMT -5
But the you that feels protected is temporary, ephemeral, bound for death in the end. Like all of us. What do you mean by "the you that feels protected"?
I am yoked to the "human body" that is indeed temporary, ephemeral, and bound for death.
All of you are convinced that consciousness is private and personal, and it comes out of the human brain. I don't share that belief which, incidentally, is a scientific one.
I know for a fact that my consciousness is not sree's consciousness, and it has nothing to do with that grey stuff inside the human skull.
Let's debate this and have a good laugh at each other's expense without malice. What do you say, my ticklish friend?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2022 23:55:30 GMT -5
But the you that feels protected is temporary, ephemeral, bound for death in the end. Like all of us. What do you mean by "the you that feels protected"?
I am yoked to the "human body" that is indeed temporary, ephemeral, and bound for death.
All of you are convinced that consciousness is private and personal, and it comes out of the human brain. I don't share that belief which, incidentally, is a scientific one.
I know for a fact that my consciousness is not sree's consciousness, and it has nothing to do with that grey stuff inside the human skull.
Let's debate this and have a good laugh at each other's expense without malice. What do you say, my ticklish friend?
I don't know what led you to that conclusion. I don't think anyone here thinks that consciousness is personal. It's taking yourself to be yoked to the human body and therefore identifying with the human body which contradicts your view that consciousness is not personal. It's good to exchange ideas. I get a real spiritual high from writing good posts to guys like you. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on May 18, 2022 10:14:26 GMT -5
But the you that feels protected is temporary, ephemeral, bound for death in the end. Like all of us. What do you mean by "the you that feels protected"?
I am yoked to the "human body" that is indeed temporary, ephemeral, and bound for death.
All of you are convinced that consciousness is private and personal, and it comes out of the human brain. I don't share that belief which, incidentally, is a scientific one.
I know for a fact that my consciousness is not sree's consciousness, and it has nothing to do with that grey stuff inside the human skull.
Let's debate this and have a good laugh at each other's expense without malice. What do you say, my ticklish friend?
Do you have any questions about the source of consciousness? Not to me, personally perhaps, but, generally speaking? Please know, that you are yoked to nothing, there are no bars, there is no chain, no prison. "debate"?  , debate is a slapstick, without the satisfying physicality of a near-head-on-collision. "feel protected" were your words. "Consciousness" can point to an ineffable nondual totality, such as what ZD writes about THIS. His writing on it strikes me as a sort of poetry, even though I don't think he intends it as poetry as he writes it. Are you familiar with Nisargadatta? Niz often spoke a poetry of Consciousness. JK seems to me to sometimes refer to the pointing, but then, other times, he intellectualizes, and in that sense "consciousness" is a heavy duty concept. Consciousness will always ultimately confound the intellect, and the first step out of such counfoundry is to recognize the nature of existential context, which is this:  The death of the person is defined by the cessation of the brain, while Consciousness, is eternal. The brain is ultimately one of those boundaries that is contrived by the mind. Where does the brain end, and your spinal chord begin? Where does that pair end, and the rest of your body begin? "Your" body, and what your body are not are also more contrived mental boundaries. Where is it that "you" end, and the "rest of the Universe", begins? |
|
|
|
Post by sree on May 18, 2022 14:20:48 GMT -5
I don't know what led you to that conclusion. I don't think anyone here thinks that consciousness is personal. It's taking yourself to be yoked to the human body and therefore identifying with the human body which contradicts your view that consciousness is not personal. It's good to exchange ideas. I get a real spiritual high from writing good posts to guys like you. Everyone believes that consciousness is personal and it comes out from the human brain. Those who don't think so are you, and guys like Ramana and Ramakrishna. You think consciousness can switch from personal mode to eternal timeless nature while still living a mortal life yoked to the body. This is similar to the steptronic transmission in my BMW X5 that allows me to shift from automatic to manual when I want to floor the pedal and power past an annoying guy revving his pony car at the traffic lights. Deep down, I am as much of a showoff as a celebrated guru from India.
Look, satch. I am here to inquire, to find out, as Krishnamurti said. I want to find out if the knowledge that has been handed down, through science and religion, is distorting our perception of reality in living mortal life. If we can't see straight, we continue to suffer.
My rejection of the belief that the brain gives rise to consciousness doesn’t contradict my view of the nature of consciousness mainly because I don’t have one. I am certain that it doesn’t come from the brain and that’s about it. Zendancer said that it comes from Source. You said it’s explained in Advaita. Science says it comes from the brain. Even Krishnamurti muddied the waters when he said that thought comes from the brain cells. I will give Krishnamurti a pass because he had no formal education and was trying to communicate with academics in terms they could relate with. |
|
|
|
Post by sree on May 18, 2022 22:14:39 GMT -5
What do you mean by "the you that feels protected"?
I am yoked to the "human body" that is indeed temporary, ephemeral, and bound for death.
All of you are convinced that consciousness is private and personal, and it comes out of the human brain. I don't share that belief which, incidentally, is a scientific one.
I know for a fact that my consciousness is not sree's consciousness, and it has nothing to do with that grey stuff inside the human skull.
Let's debate this and have a good laugh at each other's expense without malice. What do you say, my ticklish friend?
Do you have any questions about the source of consciousness? Not to me, personally perhaps, but, generally speaking? Please know, that you are yoked to nothing, there are no bars, there is no chain, no prison. I like your post. You raise several questions that deserve serious reflection. So, I will just address them one at a time.
All I know - for certain and without doubt - is that consciousness is not generated by the brain. Where it comes from is a mystery to me. Of course I am curious about the source of consciousness, its very nature, and why it exists. Consciousness is me. It is what I am.
Frankly, I don't like being alive, being conscious just to ponder incessantly about the predicament of human existence. I have been pacing like a tiger in a circus cage, back and forth, back and forth, without rest pondering. Krishnamurti is fascinating, not his worldly life which was a mess, but his intimations of an "otherness", that timeless state that I had a glimpse of myself on a boat when that circular rainbow appeared at sea.
Yes, I am yoked to "the body". In the face of ignorance about the nature of reality, the body is the cause of human misery.
|
|
, debate is a slapstick, without the satisfying physicality of a near-head-on-collision. "feel protected" were