Though people may think i am some troll, i am the greatest troll. I trolled people that i was their savior!
i can be no such thing.
The only thing i can think of doing right now is to contact my good friend from some years ago named Michael,he said he would continously have dreams of him being "in somewhere with a lot of tents doing "something" that something being something very close to gods perfect plan for mankind.
As it occurs to me now, maybe this is what the occupy movement is, should i
Also, don't follow the false prophet of the dead aeon aleister crowley he and theosophy are the main reasons mankind is not evolving RIGHT NOW like they should be. It is SIMPLE to totally flip this reality on its head and start fresh for the golden age that has already come!
I will provide you with this insight, if you have ever seen a movie and been effected emotionally by the idea of the "good guys" finally winning you know for sure at that moment you are a soul. Simple
I am the actual reincarnation of krishnamurti and i think that, know well that we are in dire times here in febuary 26th 2012 and that even i cant conceve from my degraded vantage point of a way to lift this curse.
One of the only ways i can think of is by following that siva baba man who posts videos on youtube.
yet i read that i may have said this and that about not following false prophets etc.
Time is very short for some one to uplift mankind to the 100% material 100% spiritual life he speak
I think it's funny how you two are arguing over who understands Krishnamurti better when he constantly talks about eliminating the ego. However, here you both are fighting on the internet, driving by hate, and a self created ego....ironyyyyyyyyyyyy
DeadJesus does have a good point here. He said, "Of course thought can observe things." And also, "Human collective consciousness has been evolving for thousands of years through the thinking process." I think these are astute summations of K. I reference "Truth and Actuality, Chp. 2, Insight and Truth page 31" Also, "The Awakening of Intelligence, Second Public Dialogue in Saanen, August 1971." And there's a new book out by David E. Moody PhD, called "The Unconditioned Mind, chp 8, page 110.
@DeadJesus100 Your reading comprehension is not that good. Spare me the, "oh now you insult me because you don't know" gibberish. I've thoroughly answered all your questions of "observer is observed and "attention." I think you're not reading what I write and ignore anything that runs contrary to your conclusions no matter if K is cited unambiguously or otherwise. For you, thought creates the thinker. Period. You maintain this by ignoring the categories of thought clearly laid out by K.
@DeadJesus100 Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head
You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER AIDS
@DeadJesus100 You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER
YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS
ha thats a kicker..he never married and I don't believe that yogananda did either..there are some folks that you just can't imagine married and everything ain't for everybody but his elaboration on it was kinda stoical as opposed to others who have elaborated on relationships either in general or specific..like chodron but she has also had a tendency to be a bit more personal..or personable overall..
@DeadJesus100 oh no..everyone is not meant to get married..probably including 75% of the people who are..just my mini perception,,..when someone is not married people tend to Assume that they are bitter or have been hurt beyond repair..for one reason or another no relationships are just not for everyone period..his answer just seemed kinda removed from a part of what does make us human..of course anything anyone says here is just an annoying afterthought to K..since he is beyond the average joe.
@DeadJesus100 ha never had the pleasure of meeting him so i wouldn't know..if what you say is true then he had a tame ego..again which is a Rare find.I do wonder what was the lead up point was...how did he come to that definite realization..had he been marinating over that most of his life or...but i know that he had been primed for this position as a kid so I guess some worldy experiences he might have dodged. Just wondering if he was able to measure his belief against anything else or not.
@DeadJesus100 i think language is getting in the way of our communication right now..yes the need to remove the I or the me..observation/ perception obstacle well aware of that..but he obviously believed the marriage would cause attachments, attachments cause problems..so what would that be? a a belief, philosophy, principle, or practice? Im was just looking at this view on marriage not the doctrine as a whole.
@DeadJesus100 The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real
@DeadJesus100 Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile?
You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for? You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for? You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for? You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for?
@DeadJesus100 is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll
@DieTheDeath I actually do understand his teachings and i am not complaining about his teachings, i am complaining about his dishonest persoanl life. Would you like to discuss his teachings? He said the obsrever is the observed. What are your thoughts about his classic comment?
@DeadJesus100 it means that while mostly people think that they are observing the world, actually it is the human conditioning that is being observed (by unconditioned awareness). also it is meant to quiet the mind and disidentify from it because the mind cannot grasp it and it is seen that you are not the mind. only perceiving can see.
@DeadJesus100 yes the thinker and the thought are the same, though identification with thought makes it seem like it is separate from its source. but thought cannot actually observe anything, only consciousness can, and what consciousness is observing is thought, but it believes it IS the thought and therefore believes it is observing from the thought but actually it is from unconditioned awareness. the thinker is the observed, but the thinker believes it is observing but in actuality it is not.
@DieTheDeath Ofcourse thought can observe things. Don't you observe the world around you? Don't you observe your thoughts in your head? You are the THINKER.
Krishnamurti said that the content of human consciousness is the thinking process not consciousness as you incorrectly posted.
Human collective consciousness has been evolving for thousands of years through the thinking process.
What is unconditioned awareness? Have you ever experienced it or are you only miming, copying k?
@DeadJesus100 have you ever listened to k? his whole point was to STOP the thinking process... (and bring about an awareness that is beyond thought) duh! lol. this is why he talked about thought being limited and can never perceive the truth. he was trying to end thought!
@DieTheDeath I have studied K for 4 years. Yes he said the thinking process needs to stop and how do you think that comes about? That was what his talks were about for 70 years and on his death bed he said no one had a clue what he was saying all of his life
@DeadJesus100 there is no bigger fool on youtube than you sicko Nasa said they sent a monkey, they should have sent you monkey boy The world would be better off without retarded scum like you there is no bigger fool on youtube than you sicko Nasa said they sent a monkey, they should have sent you monkey boy The world would be better off without retarded scum like you Fuckwit troll ass-clown fuck you fuck you fuck you fuck you
@DeadJesus100 If you can restate your question clearly or perhaps send me a message via youtube, that will allow more space and we can avoid the character limitations here. I have a terrible headache right now after spending the whole evening talking to a friend. Thanks for your patience. Don't give up just yet.
@DeadJesus100 Sorry for the delay. If you mean that the process of thought that is operating within the order of self must end, then yes. If you mean the elimination of all thought as it exists within the stream of consciousness, then no.
A common follow-up question that usually occurs is: "Didn't Krishnamurti define 'thought' as the response of memory meeting a challenge in the present?"
@DeadJesus100 (part 1) Krishnamurti often had different usages of for the word "thought," which is the past participle of "think." One has to pay close attention to the use and context of the word. Often he will use it as a verb to indicate a process as in a current "thinking" and at other times, as a noun to represent "thought" as in memory. (I am 'thinking' now about a past 'thought' that exists in memory.)
@DeadJesus100 I switched to the more impersonal in address as you get insulted and intimidated easily and didn't want to say flat out, "you didn't pay attention to the context in which that word is being used." lol, I like how you type Observ. is obser in capitals to emphasize the point or something. lol, like that matters. *sigh* You're just lost in principles and maxims and are determined to arrive at a point where you habitually declare, "you don't know what you're talking about and K said so
K: That is, time is a movement either inwardly or outwardly. Right?
DB: You mean psychological time?
K: Yes. Psychological time, and time outwardly.
DB: Yes. And a certain relation between those two.
DB: Yes, but still we have often discussed a kind of thought that would be a response to intelligence. But thought as we have generally known it - let's try to put it that thought as we have generally known it is in time.
@DeadJesus100 no, I merely spoke impersonally with the address "One must pay attention,' in order to avoid saying, "you didn't pay attention to context and you really don't understand what your'e talking about," because you get inflamed easily. Again, I just don't think anyone has ever really taken you seriously and here you are slenderizing K with material that you didn't even read. For example, you didn't even know Raja had an affair. You're a sad and confused person.
@DeadJesus100 I've long seen that video. You should try reading books. Try reading chapter 1 of The ending of Time when K and bohm go over a type of thought that does not create the thinker. Read the last talk in Awakening of Intelligence where they go over the same thing.
@DeadJesus100 (part 3) K: Does it mean when there is no time there is no thought?DB: Well, no thought of that kind.K: No, there is no thought - I want to just go slow, slow, slow, slow.
DB: Because otherwise we may contradict some other things, you see.
K: Of course, of course, I know all that.
DB: Could we say that there is a kind of thought which is dominated by time - you know - which we have lived in. Right?
@DeadJesus100 Another instance, same discussion, they are discussing thoughts relation to becoming and time:
K: Inwardly it builds up, doesn't it, a centre, an egotistic centre.DB: Yes, if we could find some reason why it should do that. Does it do it when we do it outwardly? It needn't, it seems it needn't do.K: It needn't do. MEANING IT DOESN"T ALWAYS BUILD THE CENTER/OBSERVER/THINKER. For example, the thought involved in brushing your teeth does not create the tooth brusher. hahahahaha lmao
@EsiwGnog I agree with you. Maybe you're aware of Frank Kinslow that wrote in one of his books about "inner think" that comes spontaneously, is original and thus doesn't build the ego/center.
@DeadJesus100 Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real
You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete
@DeadJesus100 As in my previous examples from "The Ending of Time," thought is time. Footnote that idea alongside this next example from Mind Without Measure, New Delhi 3rd Public Talk 6th November, 1982: "There are only two kinds of time: time by the sunrise or sunset, time by the watch, time by the distance you have to cover, time that is physical. There is the other time which is psychological, inward."
There are 2 orders of time and likewise 2 orders of thought: 1 practical, 1 psychological
@DeadJesus100 (part 2) Prof.Hillary Rodrigues gave a talk last year hosted by the KFA in Pine Cottage (K's living room) where he pointed out that the word "knowledge" might have been a clearer term in place of using the word "thought" in some instances. Moving on, knowledge of a permanents self is incorrect knowledge and this incorrect knowledge is a distortion in the field of conscious thinking. And that is the thing that needs to be deleted. That is the process that needs to come to an end.
@DeadJesus100 The death bed quote is taken grossly out of context and pertains only to the matter of possible apostolic succession; to say nothing about the fact that if it where true that nobody understood, then your refutations are also equally baseless and absurd. lol, Anyway, you bore me. And it's clear to me based on your history of comments in conversation that you're unfamiliar with the subject matter though we all realize you think otherwise. You may resume your slander. Happy Holidays.
@EsiwGnog The death bed quote is a fact and was taken as an insult to his followers but it was the truth. Ofcourse i bore you because i am exposing your lack of understanding concerning the teachings of K.
I have not slandered you in any way, i have just exposed your incredible lack of comprehension of his teachings
Its extremely difficult to find anyone who can discuss his teachings honestly.
@DeadJesus100 Well, I can't convince you of anything. All evidence to the contrary is inadmissible according to you. I've read the transcript and talked to people that were actually there. But, hey, i can't convince you of anything. Cheers.
@DieTheDeath Sorry about that DieTheDeath. I responded to this guy, not so much to make him look foolish, but more for anyone else that happens to read this page and to show that those allegations can in fact be dealt with and dismissed. I'm not sure if I should delete my last 2 posts. It's your channel so you call the shots. But, thanks for giving me space to refute that twirp. I think the guy is alcoholic or on drugs or some such.
@EsiwGnog no i don't mind your comments. i think several of them are quite good. nasacriminals has been leaving many comments for awhile, including with his other channel deadjesus100. i have tried talking to him, reasoning and explaining, but it is like talking to a brick wall, and he is very divisive and hateful. but one noteworthy accomplishment he has achieved is being the only person ever banned on this channel.
@DeadJesus100 or NasaCriminals or sock-puppet character (part 1) I'll answer your questions but unless you change your tone this will be the last exchange I'm having with you as I have no interest in participating in a dialogue with someone like yourself. First, my only interest was in addressing the allegations that K misrepresented himself. This is an issue that seems to come up on the internet all to frequently and I feel I've been more than adequate in addressing that issue.
@DeadJesus100 (part 2) Secondly, its entirely bizarre that you would want to continue a discussion with someone you feel is simply pasting other peoples comments. It seems you just want to play some kind of 1 up game and I'm not interested. I'm not an authority or a genius nor do I have a degree in philosophy. I'm just an average person with my own set of problems and short-commings. But, I do read books and I do not cut and paste comments from outside sources unless I give the proper citation.
@DeadJesus100 (part 3) Now, the work of J. Krishnamurti is something I'm very serious about. It's for this reason that I have relocated myself an hour South of Ojai where the KFA is located. I participate in numerous dialogues, I'll be up in Pine Cottage this coming weekend and I just got done with a weekend seminar conducted by Rajesh Dalal, K's assistant for the last decade of his life. (see Pupul Jayakar's Biography). Again this does NOT make me an authority on anything.
(part 4) "Tell us what does he mean by content of consciousness?" He means that the content is the entirety of you without some other 'you' that stands outside of the content and is close to what is known as 'Bundle Theory' in modern philosophy. A common refrain from Krishnamurti is, "the content of consciousness IS consciousness." This statement is counter-intuitive for it always seems that from the standpoint of waking consciousness that there is a separate "I" that holds content.
@DeadJesus100 (part 5) "The content of consciousness IS consciousness" is also a statement of non-duality for there are no two things that are being considered here. (See Advaita Vedanta for more info) Next question: "Tell us how did he suggest we remove the content?" The answer is 'attention.' But what did he mean by attention? To attend means that you have no desire to overcome it nor to solve it like you would any problem. The very desire to solve the problem is ultimately what preserves it.
@DeadJesus100 (part 6) Instead, a different sort of action altogether is necessary. Again this is attention. When you 'attend' you find that a certain communion takes place in its own light where the content, which is the you, is consumed in the flame of attention. This is death.
Okay, I can tell that you're upset and struggling. Its obvious. I've struggled and hurt plenty myself. But, I'm not interested in winning a debate with you. If you change your tone, I may or may not continue this
@DeadJesus100 asked, "What is inside the content of consciousness? What is it made of?"
2 cups of sifted all purpose flour, 1 cup of sugar, 1 cup of milk, 1 large can of peach slices in juice, half stick of butter. Preheat oven to 350 F and bake for about 40 minutes. A very easy peach cobbler. DJ100: "Who is attending to what?" and "Who is the 'I'?"
I can't be sure but my "I" tells me that he's Yoda from Star Wars.
@NasaCriminals Is it adultery that he had an affair with a women who, by her own husbands initiation and insistence, was both emotionally and physically detached from her by her own husband? Well, I guess. By the standards of law alone. But, I still wait to here of any internal inconsistencies. May I ask, have you read only 1 book on the life of J. Krishnamurti? Was it because of the promise of juicy detail within?
@NasaCriminals It's absurd to think that with the number of people in K's inner circle that knew about the affair that Raja would've not know. It would be a most profound instance of willful ignorance. And that may have been the case. The fact is that Radha herself was the one who was deceived by her parents. And not being able to reconcile that troubling notion in her mind, she maintained that her father was also deceived.
@NasaCriminals Clearly you have not thought this through, are unfamiliar with the bulk of JK's work and with your odd language appear unbalanced. It's patently absurd that a man who's teachings clearly and repeatedly cast celibacy as a form of perversion (and publicly too) was maintaining a pretense of abstinence in front of his 'followers.' Furthermore, you're switching the outrage that you claim belonged to a deceived Raja that resulted in a lawsuit, to the outrage of K's followers. (tbc)
@NasaCriminals (part 2) You asked, "what was the basis of K's teachings?" The point is the transformation of the consciousness of man by attending to those images that he has attached himself to for security. To accomplish this, man must see himself in his relationship with the world, come to the perception that "the observer is the observed," and total annihilation of the illusion of self so that there is only free attention with no center from where it issues. Google "the core of krishnamurti"
@NasaCriminals (part 3) You then asked, "Did he believe in a soul?" No he did not. And this is replete throughout even a cursory examination of his work! Over and over again! Like Siddhartha, the historical Buddha, Krishnamurti dismissed and negated the soul, spirit, atman or any permanent self as well as reincarnation, resurrection or transmigration. The examples are way too numerous to list, but please don't take my word for it. Here are some examples and I invite you to check them all:
#1"The Mirror of Relationship: Love, Sex and Chastity; third talk at Rajghat, February 6, 1949.
#2 Collected Works Vol. 2 third Talk in Buenos Aires, July 19, 1935
#3 Questions by Krishnamurti Italy and Norway: first Talk at Frognerseteren, July 19, 1935
Questioner: Do you believe in the soul?
K: We think that there must be some other entity which is more spiritual than this. The idea of the soul is based fundamentally on egotistic continuance. -Buenos Aires, July 19, 1935
K: "We have stipulated that there is an entity who is beyond all this. But that entity is still the result of thinking and so still within the field of time; therefore, it is not timeless, nor something divine." -fourth talk in New Delhi, October 24, 1956
If these very few examples are not enough there is external references in Dr. Dr.Kalidas Joshi's book "J. Krishnamurti Demystified" where he goes over K's denial of Atman which is soul. And then further still (tbc next)
@NasaCriminals (part 6) ....and finally continuing on, if you dislike reading books, there is also a talk here on youtube titled "We Are All Caught in the Idea of Progress, a conversation with Buddhist Scholars" in which Dr. Arahula gives a summary of K in comparison to the Buddha's position of no self or soul. Its right at the beginning.
As I've said, these are only just a few of thousands of instances that can be found. I invite you and anyone else reading to check my sources thoroughly.
@NasaCriminals (part 7) I also invite you to continue in your ill-considered pronouncements. You're serving as a wonderful foil in which to highlight the absurdity to these/your claims. Also, I find your objective as stated by yourself as to"...show youtubers how dumb you really arebecause you have asked for it," quite interesting. Please make good on this claim. Oh how I wait eagerly to be shown how dumb I am.
@NasaCriminals This guy or gal, posted 8 replies and removed them all, but I have them recorded in my email account. I'd like to share some of his responses with you:
"stop pretending to be a pseudo intellectual you monkey :) Post your own thoughts and stop copy pasting others" "You are an idiot and your comments are proof of that." "EsiwGnog is copy pasting other peoples comments because he is too afraid to speak for himself"
@DJ100: "you like to complicate the issue because i honestly think you have no idea what K was talking about. You are a pseudo intellectual who is trying his best."
YODA: Much anger in him, like his father. A Jedi must have the deepest commitment. The most serious mind. This one, a long time have I watched. All his life has he looked away to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was! What he was doing. Adventure. Excitement. A Jedi craves not these things. You are reckless.
@DJ100 You talk a lot about yourself. Apparently, you feel that you're an immature, pseudo-intellectual that hasn't studied or listened to K, is confounded by the paradoxes that he presents and likes to complicate the issue. I think people never really took you seriously and now you want desperately to make some kind of impact to the point that you just want to crush and shatter someone in order to make an impression. You're sad, lonely and angry. And it makes me sad too. : ( What's wrong man?
@DeadJesus100 The "K" answer is that there is no observer. There is no observed. Only a state of observation. Observer IS the observed is a paradoxical statement. Our minds, meaning yours and mine, can't really ever fully understand that statement because thought can only deal in dualities, like cause and effect, before and after, etc. Observer is the observed is a paradox and when you try to rest your mind for a moment upon those words, your mind has to undergo a total paradigm shift.
@DeadJesus100 K himself said that there ultimately is no observer. The observer is actually created by the observed. Just as thought creates the thinker. May I ask you a question? I keep asking you if its okay to ask a question. You're kinda a scary guy.
@DeadJesus100 You're right, everything he said may not have been the truth. You've probably heard of UG Krishnamurti right? He was affliated with the Theosophists just like K and he participated in dialogues with him. Ultimately he hated Krishnamurtis guts. I mean hated him! Tore him down every chance he got. I read his book "Mind is a Myth" Check him out if you haven't. I know somebody down here named Kumar that participated in numerous talks with UG. Okay (tbc next post)
@DeadJesus100 UG was a cool dude. He's hated by most of the people I run into, with a few exceptions. My friend down here named Kumar is from Andhar Pradesh and knew him personally. He tells me all kinds of stories about UG and guru's in general and he and his friend Omar told me that privately, UG actually had much affection for Krishnamurti and was totally different in real life. Not the fire breathing contrarian you see on the videos or in his books. But I like the fire of UG!! I always have
@DeadJesus100 These are great questions, but first lets go slower. We agree that thought precedes the creation of the center which we identify as the self and the observer. But the self is obviously a creation of thought. So therefore logically, there is no observer and the statement observer is the observed which is a kind of monism is a statement of pure absurdity that actually has its own nihilistic property. So, if you can follow that, then once again, we do agree on something.
@DeadJesus100 I agree that we have to find out for ourselves. Don't take anything K said as granted. He's not a God. But, if you read back, your accusations had nothing to do with whether what he said was true or not, your charge was that I hadn't even studied him or knew what he said to begin with and was therefore a fraud. There's a enormously huge difference. You were saying nothing about whether these things were truth or not. You were quite clear on those points.
@DeadJesus100 (part 1) "Who in their right mind would like to put and end to their thoughts?" I've talked about this question in groups a lot. It comes up fairly often. Personally, I don't think thought can be completely annihilated. This is a confusing point it K's logic when he asks, "can the content of the consciousness be discarded?" We end up thinking of a space in which consciousness sits and then imagine it emptying, but I think that this is wrong.
@DeadJesus100 (part 2) Instead, what he means to do is to annihilate the illusion of the self that is holding on to what it mistakes as belonging to it. Which is its content, its identity. If such a thing were accomplished, then it would still be true to say, "the mind has been emptied of its content" because there is no mind.
@DeadJesus100 said, "no you do not know that the center is the is the creation of thought. That is what i am trying to share with you. Just because K said it does not mean its true." You're not clear on these statements. K didn't say the center creates thoughts. He said the opposite. Maybe he was wrong though, but that's another story.
"Self is generated by the personal thinking process." Look closely at that sentence. A "personal" thinking process implies a pre-existent self before thought.
@DeadJesus100 This is just my opinion, but you've made a few great observations in our chat tonight and I mean that. You and I have found a few points of common ground. Its fun to finally connect with you. But I gotta get some sleep, its almost 3 am here. We should continue this sometime tomorrow and do just what you suggested and "take it further and find out if it is possible to end the personal thinking process. How can it be done?"
even my own brothers have a hard time coming to terms with my odd self,so i don't expect people to believe me when i say im krishnamurti and im real.
Asdfwsfg1 6 days ago
expose myself and say im jesus or whatever im here to save the world?
I fear somewhat of being murdered but then again my heart tells me this would be of little issue in the long run.
Asdfwsfg1 6 days ago
Though people may think i am some troll, i am the greatest troll. I trolled people that i was their savior!
i can be no such thing.
The only thing i can think of doing right now is to contact my good friend from some years ago named Michael,he said he would continously have dreams of him being "in somewhere with a lot of tents doing "something" that something being something very close to gods perfect plan for mankind.
As it occurs to me now, maybe this is what the occupy movement is, should i
Asdfwsfg1 6 days ago
Also, don't follow the false prophet of the dead aeon aleister crowley he and theosophy are the main reasons mankind is not evolving RIGHT NOW like they should be. It is SIMPLE to totally flip this reality on its head and start fresh for the golden age that has already come!
I will provide you with this insight, if you have ever seen a movie and been effected emotionally by the idea of the "good guys" finally winning you know for sure at that moment you are a soul. Simple
Asdfwsfg1 6 days ago
I am the actual reincarnation of krishnamurti and i think that, know well that we are in dire times here in febuary 26th 2012 and that even i cant conceve from my degraded vantage point of a way to lift this curse.
One of the only ways i can think of is by following that siva baba man who posts videos on youtube.
yet i read that i may have said this and that about not following false prophets etc.
Time is very short for some one to uplift mankind to the 100% material 100% spiritual life he speak
Asdfwsfg1 6 days ago
Nice Bloke that Prince Charles
youlittlerocket 1 week ago
driven* by hate
FreedomIsInTheMind 2 weeks ago
I think it's funny how you two are arguing over who understands Krishnamurti better when he constantly talks about eliminating the ego. However, here you both are fighting on the internet, driving by hate, and a self created ego....ironyyyyyyyyyyyy
FreedomIsInTheMind 2 weeks ago 3
Answer of honesty man and finish of problem.
tvjoy100 4 weeks ago
DeadJesus does have a good point here. He said, "Of course thought can observe things." And also, "Human collective consciousness has been evolving for thousands of years through the thinking process." I think these are astute summations of K. I reference "Truth and Actuality, Chp. 2, Insight and Truth page 31" Also, "The Awakening of Intelligence, Second Public Dialogue in Saanen, August 1971." And there's a new book out by David E. Moody PhD, called "The Unconditioned Mind, chp 8, page 110.
EsiwGnog 1 month ago
Comment removed
PhilipBji 2 months ago
K spoke about the action of attention.
Does anyone know how to pay attention in this moment?
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
Comment removed
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 Your reading comprehension is not that good. Spare me the, "oh now you insult me because you don't know" gibberish. I've thoroughly answered all your questions of "observer is observed and "attention." I think you're not reading what I write and ignore anything that runs contrary to your conclusions no matter if K is cited unambiguously or otherwise. For you, thought creates the thinker. Period. You maintain this by ignoring the categories of thought clearly laid out by K.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head Don't fuck with Krishnamurti he is over your head
You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER AIDS
staIkervisions 2 months ago
@staIkervisions which mental asylum are you in coward?
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER You are a lying QUEER
YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS YOU GAVE me HERPES AND AIDS
FAGGOT BUTTHOLE RIPPER
FAGGOT BUTTHOLE RIPPER
FAGGOT BUTTHOLE RIPPER
FAGGOT BUTTHOLE RIPPER
FAGGOT BUTTHOLE RIPPER
Call me sizzler take your 'jackitoff'
staIkervisions 2 months ago
ha thats a kicker..he never married and I don't believe that yogananda did either..there are some folks that you just can't imagine married and everything ain't for everybody but his elaboration on it was kinda stoical as opposed to others who have elaborated on relationships either in general or specific..like chodron but she has also had a tendency to be a bit more personal..or personable overall..
asana1973 2 months ago
@asana1973 Why should a person get married? How was his explanation stoical, in what sense?
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 oh no..everyone is not meant to get married..probably including 75% of the people who are..just my mini perception,,..when someone is not married people tend to Assume that they are bitter or have been hurt beyond repair..for one reason or another no relationships are just not for everyone period..his answer just seemed kinda removed from a part of what does make us human..of course anything anyone says here is just an annoying afterthought to K..since he is beyond the average joe.
asana1973 2 months ago
@asana1973 lol :)
K had a huge Ego but he was brilliant and thats why none of his followers knew
what he was talking about
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 ha never had the pleasure of meeting him so i wouldn't know..if what you say is true then he had a tame ego..again which is a Rare find.I do wonder what was the lead up point was...how did he come to that definite realization..had he been marinating over that most of his life or...but i know that he had been primed for this position as a kid so I guess some worldy experiences he might have dodged. Just wondering if he was able to measure his belief against anything else or not.
asana1973 2 months ago
@asana1973 He did not have a belief. He said that the thinking process
was the power that controlled the human monkey race and that
if you pay attention to the movement of your thoughts then
they slow down and disintegrate and then you are free of thoughts.
lol he tried to explain this to his followers for 70 years but they
had no idea what he was saying
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 i think language is getting in the way of our communication right now..yes the need to remove the I or the me..observation/ perception obstacle well aware of that..but he obviously believed the marriage would cause attachments, attachments cause problems..so what would that be? a a belief, philosophy, principle, or practice? Im was just looking at this view on marriage not the doctrine as a whole.
asana1973 2 months ago
@asana1973 oh ok sorry, yea you are commenting on the video :)
Why get married?
Marriage is a man made law
K had a girlfriend who was in a sexless marriage.
He was not honest in his personal life because he feared
it would affect his teachings
Language always get in the way :)
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 oh interesting tidbit and thanks for the video :) Namaste
asana1973 2 months ago
@asana1973 :)
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real The brain dead troll sorry Apollo was real
staIkervisions 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile? Why do you hate the Jews pedophile?
You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for? You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for? You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for? You are as deep as a kiddy' pool, what are you here for?
Ass-hole Ass-hole Ass-hole
staIkervisions 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 I get sick and repeat myself when I see your idiotic spam ass-hole ..I puke ..Then...
I get sick and repeat myself when I see your idiotic spam ass-hole ..I puke ..Then...
I get sick and repeat myself when I see your idiotic spam ass-hole ..I puke ..Then...
I get sick and repeat myself when I see your idiotic spam ass-hole ..I puke ..Then...
I get sick and repeat myself when I see your idiotic spam ass-hole ..I puke ..Then...
staIkervisions 2 months ago
@staIkervisions is mentally retarded
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll is mentally retarded troll
staIkervisions 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 HE was not honest in his personal life?
HajtomY 1 month ago
@HajtomY He was dishonest in his personal life. He had a girlfriend who was married.
Read the book Lives in the shadows
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 if you actually understood his teachings then you wouldn't be here complaining.
DieTheDeath 1 month ago
@DieTheDeath I actually do understand his teachings and i am not complaining about his teachings, i am complaining about his dishonest persoanl life. Would you like to discuss his teachings? He said the obsrever is the observed. What are your thoughts about his classic comment?
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 it means that while mostly people think that they are observing the world, actually it is the human conditioning that is being observed (by unconditioned awareness). also it is meant to quiet the mind and disidentify from it because the mind cannot grasp it and it is seen that you are not the mind. only perceiving can see.
DieTheDeath 1 month ago
@DieTheDeath No it does not mean that
The observer is the thinker and the observed is the thinking.
It means that the observer is the same as what he is observing although
he thinks he is different from it.
The thinker (observer) has been made from the thinking.
Thought created the thinker
This is what Krishnamurti said countless times.
When the observer finds out that he is the observed then he stops interefering and judging the observation and then the mind quitens down
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 yes the thinker and the thought are the same, though identification with thought makes it seem like it is separate from its source. but thought cannot actually observe anything, only consciousness can, and what consciousness is observing is thought, but it believes it IS the thought and therefore believes it is observing from the thought but actually it is from unconditioned awareness. the thinker is the observed, but the thinker believes it is observing but in actuality it is not.
DieTheDeath 1 month ago
@DieTheDeath Ofcourse thought can observe things. Don't you observe the world around you? Don't you observe your thoughts in your head? You are the THINKER.
Krishnamurti said that the content of human consciousness is the thinking process not consciousness as you incorrectly posted.
Human collective consciousness has been evolving for thousands of years through the thinking process.
What is unconditioned awareness? Have you ever experienced it or are you only miming, copying k?
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 have you ever listened to k? his whole point was to STOP the thinking process... (and bring about an awareness that is beyond thought) duh! lol. this is why he talked about thought being limited and can never perceive the truth. he was trying to end thought!
DieTheDeath 1 month ago
@DieTheDeath I have studied K for 4 years. Yes he said the thinking process needs to stop and how do you think that comes about? That was what his talks were about for 70 years and on his death bed he said no one had a clue what he was saying all of his life
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 Stupid fucking brain dead troll... What do you know about Krishnamurti?
Stupid retarded monkey ass clown STFU what do you know retard
You're a brain dead fag troll Nazi STFU troll Nazi
STFU troll Nazi
STFU troll Nazi
STFU troll Nazi
STFU troll Nazi
Ass clown Krishnamurti was fake
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 Stupid assclown...What do you know about enlightenment you fuck
Stupid assclown...What do you know about enlightenment you fuck
Stupid assclown...What do you know about enlightenment you fuck
Stupid assclown...What do you know about enlightenment you fuck Retarded troll STFU you idiot..Does this guy know what an ass-clown troll you really
.Does this guy know what an ass-clown troll you really
.Does this guy know what an ass-clown troll you really are?
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions haha you should be a musician
DieTheDeath 1 month ago
@DieTheDeath No I'm a Apollo retarded troll believer.
Just ask our boy here.....He likes to spam people who believe-defend Apollo Moon Landings.
Sorry...Havin' fun & Just trying to show what a rude guy he is, he's had his share of interruptions on Y-Tube before....
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions the monkey troll :)
Apollo Disney Missions had no stars numbnuts
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 "the fuckhead belongs in an asylum."
Apollo Disney Bullshit"
.
What you don't like these posts?
These are your words, your posts, your text from your trolling.
staIkervisions 1 month ago
Comment removed
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@staIkervisions the monkey troll :)
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 fuck you
fuck you
fuck you
.
fuck you
.
fuck you
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions the mental retard trolling youtube from the asylum, hides his account
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 Thinks he's deep...As deep as a kitty pool in a drought.
Give any sheep reach arounds lately?
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions which mental asylum are you in? I will come visit you monkey brain
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 I wanna snap that elbow right off .....Come on give me your information....Where can we meet.
I'm waiting slime bag fuckhead troll queer.
staIkervisions 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 You wrote
"Meet me face to face you fucking coward hiding your troll account on youtube"
DeadJesus100 13 hours ago
watch?v=ROjGm34EfFc&lc
.
I'll bitch slap you ever which way sideways...Poindexter
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 Where are you? I'm waiting, I wanna' snap that little cap off the end of your elbow.
Sideways bitch....sideways
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions Lets meet , send me your contact details sick creature
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 What is a contact number?
Why are you violent scum-bag... I thought you liked trolls....Cuz you're the biggest one here on Y-Tube
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions were you born with brain damage? Come on monkey brain i dare you to discusss krishnamurti :)
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 Yeah AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
lIKE YOU CAN COMPREHEND WHAT j.k. WAS SAYING....hHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
YOU'RE AS DEEP AS A MUD PUDDLE FLUNKYASS
.
GOT YOUR HEAD IN YOUR ASS ALL THWE WHILE YOU GIVE YOURSELF A REACH AROUND
GIVE YOURSELF A REACH AROUND
GIVE YOURSELF A REACH AROUND
GIVE YOURSELF A REACH AROUND
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 here's a message DeadJesus100 wrote:
"Dude i will bash your sick head in fagboy"
.
You were saying? Deep as a mud puddle
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions is 100% retarded
Lol monkey boy you have no idea what krishnamurti said do you ?
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
@DeadJesus100 Sorry King of the dick tonsils I was at the Ojai lecture King of the DICK tonsils
Now King of the dick tonsils Go out and do your job troll...Braindead idiot
.
. King of the dick tonsils
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions what do you think K said at the Ojai lecture ?
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 the fuckhead thinks he know what enlightenment means.
"why did you block me from your channel retard?
Apollo trolls are all mentally ill cowards"
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@DieTheDeath I got turned on to J. Krishnamurti in the 80's by W.Harrelson...if you can believe that!!
I'm sorry to be rude on your video forum, I'll stop, but somehow showing my friend here what his behavior is like on other forums was irresistible!
Something like "the chickens coming back to roost".
staIkervisions 1 month ago
@staIkervisions which mental asylum are you in?
Lol you got "turned on" by K :)
What does a monkey like you know about K?
DeadJesus100 1 month ago
Some Thoughts, Krishnamurti
/watch?v=NM4vc2yhA78&feature=related
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
On his death bed K said that he had been talking for 70 years
and no one had the foggiest idea what he said.
That must have been a kick in the head for all his followers
Now i am trying to engage someone on youtube about the thinking process.
This is the essence of his teachings
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 If you can restate your question clearly or perhaps send me a message via youtube, that will allow more space and we can avoid the character limitations here. I have a terrible headache right now after spending the whole evening talking to a friend. Thanks for your patience. Don't give up just yet.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Ok let me try again
K said that thinking made the thinker and that personal thought is useless
His Meditation was that of awareness. So my question is do you understand that K said
that the thinking process must be deleted? the ME
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 Sorry for the delay. If you mean that the process of thought that is operating within the order of self must end, then yes. If you mean the elimination of all thought as it exists within the stream of consciousness, then no.
A common follow-up question that usually occurs is: "Didn't Krishnamurti define 'thought' as the response of memory meeting a challenge in the present?"
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog
How does thought stop moving?
How can the self be deleted?
His message was that it is possible for the thinking process that is the self
can come to an end
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 1) Krishnamurti often had different usages of for the word "thought," which is the past participle of "think." One has to pay close attention to the use and context of the word. Often he will use it as a verb to indicate a process as in a current "thinking" and at other times, as a noun to represent "thought" as in memory. (I am 'thinking' now about a past 'thought' that exists in memory.)
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog K said thought was the thinking process and it invented the thinker.
The observer is the observed
His famous saying
Don't digress from the subject matter
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 I switched to the more impersonal in address as you get insulted and intimidated easily and didn't want to say flat out, "you didn't pay attention to the context in which that word is being used." lol, I like how you type Observ. is obser in capitals to emphasize the point or something. lol, like that matters. *sigh* You're just lost in principles and maxims and are determined to arrive at a point where you habitually declare, "you don't know what you're talking about and K said so
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog The only reason you post in the 3rd person is because you can not articulate what you want to say personally about K.
What do you think the phrase
"the observer is the observed" means ? Have you no idea :)
You are unable to discuss any of his quotes are you?
You are lost in understanding.
Its hard to believe that you have gone to any discussions about him as you can not even tell me what the observer is the observed means.
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100
K: That is, time is a movement either inwardly or outwardly. Right?
DB: You mean psychological time?
K: Yes. Psychological time, and time outwardly.
DB: Yes. And a certain relation between those two.
DB: Yes, but still we have often discussed a kind of thought that would be a response to intelligence. But thought as we have generally known it - let's try to put it that thought as we have generally known it is in time.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 no, I merely spoke impersonally with the address "One must pay attention,' in order to avoid saying, "you didn't pay attention to context and you really don't understand what your'e talking about," because you get inflamed easily. Again, I just don't think anyone has ever really taken you seriously and here you are slenderizing K with material that you didn't even read. For example, you didn't even know Raja had an affair. You're a sad and confused person.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog explain to us how you pay attention? I dare you to have the courage to discuss what K said.
Who on earth takes you seriously?
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Have a look at this video about what K said about the thinker
/watch?v=NM4vc2yhA78&feature=related
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 I've long seen that video. You should try reading books. Try reading chapter 1 of The ending of Time when K and bohm go over a type of thought that does not create the thinker. Read the last talk in Awakening of Intelligence where they go over the same thing.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 3) K: Does it mean when there is no time there is no thought?DB: Well, no thought of that kind.K: No, there is no thought - I want to just go slow, slow, slow, slow.
DB: Because otherwise we may contradict some other things, you see.
K: Of course, of course, I know all that.
DB: Could we say that there is a kind of thought which is dominated by time - you know - which we have lived in. Right?
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog All you do is copy paste a few sentences of K. Thats meaningless jargon
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 Another instance, same discussion, they are discussing thoughts relation to becoming and time:
K: Inwardly it builds up, doesn't it, a centre, an egotistic centre.DB: Yes, if we could find some reason why it should do that. Does it do it when we do it outwardly? It needn't, it seems it needn't do.K: It needn't do. MEANING IT DOESN"T ALWAYS BUILD THE CENTER/OBSERVER/THINKER. For example, the thought involved in brushing your teeth does not create the tooth brusher. hahahahaha lmao
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog I gave you the video to watch about Ks comments about the thinking process. Did you watch it?
/watch?v=NM4vc2yhA78&feature=related
If you did then you still have no idea what K said
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog I agree with you. Maybe you're aware of Frank Kinslow that wrote in one of his books about "inner think" that comes spontaneously, is original and thus doesn't build the ego/center.
AylineLee 2 months ago
@AylineLee K said that there is no original thought
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real Moon landings were real
You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete dick You're a complete
staIkervisions 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 As in my previous examples from "The Ending of Time," thought is time. Footnote that idea alongside this next example from Mind Without Measure, New Delhi 3rd Public Talk 6th November, 1982: "There are only two kinds of time: time by the sunrise or sunset, time by the watch, time by the distance you have to cover, time that is physical. There is the other time which is psychological, inward."
There are 2 orders of time and likewise 2 orders of thought: 1 practical, 1 psychological
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog Thought is psychological time because it recreates the past and the imaginary future in its movement. That is what K always refered to.
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 2) Prof.Hillary Rodrigues gave a talk last year hosted by the KFA in Pine Cottage (K's living room) where he pointed out that the word "knowledge" might have been a clearer term in place of using the word "thought" in some instances. Moving on, knowledge of a permanents self is incorrect knowledge and this incorrect knowledge is a distortion in the field of conscious thinking. And that is the thing that needs to be deleted. That is the process that needs to come to an end.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog
LOL K's followers wioll always try and change his teachings to suit them :)
K on his death bed said he had been talking for 70 years and no one had the foggiest idea what he said.
You have no clue what K said that is why you try and intellectualise his teaching by making it in the 3rd person
What do you think " THE OBSERVER IS THE OBSERVED MEANS" ?
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 The death bed quote is taken grossly out of context and pertains only to the matter of possible apostolic succession; to say nothing about the fact that if it where true that nobody understood, then your refutations are also equally baseless and absurd. lol, Anyway, you bore me. And it's clear to me based on your history of comments in conversation that you're unfamiliar with the subject matter though we all realize you think otherwise. You may resume your slander. Happy Holidays.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog The death bed quote is a fact and was taken as an insult to his followers but it was the truth. Ofcourse i bore you because i am exposing your lack of understanding concerning the teachings of K.
I have not slandered you in any way, i have just exposed your incredible lack of comprehension of his teachings
Its extremely difficult to find anyone who can discuss his teachings honestly.
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DeadJesus100 Well, I can't convince you of anything. All evidence to the contrary is inadmissible according to you. I've read the transcript and talked to people that were actually there. But, hey, i can't convince you of anything. Cheers.
EsiwGnog 2 months ago
@EsiwGnog You need to get off your high horse and admit you do not understand Ks teachings
DeadJesus100 2 months ago
@DieTheDeath Sorry about that DieTheDeath. I responded to this guy, not so much to make him look foolish, but more for anyone else that happens to read this page and to show that those allegations can in fact be dealt with and dismissed. I'm not sure if I should delete my last 2 posts. It's your channel so you call the shots. But, thanks for giving me space to refute that twirp. I think the guy is alcoholic or on drugs or some such.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog no i don't mind your comments. i think several of them are quite good. nasacriminals has been leaving many comments for awhile, including with his other channel deadjesus100. i have tried talking to him, reasoning and explaining, but it is like talking to a brick wall, and he is very divisive and hateful. but one noteworthy accomplishment he has achieved is being the only person ever banned on this channel.
DieTheDeath 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog would you like to discuss Krishnamurtis teachings?
Tell us what does he mean by content of consciousness?
Tell us how did he suggest we remove the content?
You are the twirp kid
When people upload krishnamurtis videos and they have no isea what he said its rather sad
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 or NasaCriminals or sock-puppet character (part 1) I'll answer your questions but unless you change your tone this will be the last exchange I'm having with you as I have no interest in participating in a dialogue with someone like yourself. First, my only interest was in addressing the allegations that K misrepresented himself. This is an issue that seems to come up on the internet all to frequently and I feel I've been more than adequate in addressing that issue.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 2) Secondly, its entirely bizarre that you would want to continue a discussion with someone you feel is simply pasting other peoples comments. It seems you just want to play some kind of 1 up game and I'm not interested. I'm not an authority or a genius nor do I have a degree in philosophy. I'm just an average person with my own set of problems and short-commings. But, I do read books and I do not cut and paste comments from outside sources unless I give the proper citation.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
I am dead serious about what K said. I studied him for 4 years by myself.
On his death bed he said he had been talking for 70 years and no one
had the foggiest idea what he was talking about
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 3) Now, the work of J. Krishnamurti is something I'm very serious about. It's for this reason that I have relocated myself an hour South of Ojai where the KFA is located. I participate in numerous dialogues, I'll be up in Pine Cottage this coming weekend and I just got done with a weekend seminar conducted by Rajesh Dalal, K's assistant for the last decade of his life. (see Pupul Jayakar's Biography). Again this does NOT make me an authority on anything.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EsiwGnog
We all know that you are not an authority, dont worrry about that :)
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
(part 4) "Tell us what does he mean by content of consciousness?" He means that the content is the entirety of you without some other 'you' that stands outside of the content and is close to what is known as 'Bundle Theory' in modern philosophy. A common refrain from Krishnamurti is, "the content of consciousness IS consciousness." This statement is counter-intuitive for it always seems that from the standpoint of waking consciousness that there is a separate "I" that holds content.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Who is the observer and the observed?
You are a pseudo intellectual who is trying his best
Who is the "I" ?
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 5) "The content of consciousness IS consciousness" is also a statement of non-duality for there are no two things that are being considered here. (See Advaita Vedanta for more info) Next question: "Tell us how did he suggest we remove the content?" The answer is 'attention.' But what did he mean by attention? To attend means that you have no desire to overcome it nor to solve it like you would any problem. The very desire to solve the problem is ultimately what preserves it.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
What is inside the content of consciousness?
What is it made of?
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 6) Instead, a different sort of action altogether is necessary. Again this is attention. When you 'attend' you find that a certain communion takes place in its own light where the content, which is the you, is consumed in the flame of attention. This is death.
Okay, I can tell that you're upset and struggling. Its obvious. I've struggled and hurt plenty myself. But, I'm not interested in winning a debate with you. If you change your tone, I may or may not continue this
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
ATTENTION
Who is attending to what?
Lol you like to complicate the issue because i honestly think you have no idea what
K was talking about :)
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 asked, "What is inside the content of consciousness? What is it made of?"
2 cups of sifted all purpose flour, 1 cup of sugar, 1 cup of milk, 1 large can of peach slices in juice, half stick of butter. Preheat oven to 350 F and bake for about 40 minutes. A very easy peach cobbler. DJ100: "Who is attending to what?" and "Who is the 'I'?"
I can't be sure but my "I" tells me that he's Yoda from Star Wars.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@DieTheDeath is mentally impaired
Rosalinds daughter wrote a book about her life growing up with krishnamurti.
Her mother who was a married woman fucked him for 27 years.
Thats adultery
Take your medication
NasaCriminals 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals Is it adultery that he had an affair with a women who, by her own husbands initiation and insistence, was both emotionally and physically detached from her by her own husband? Well, I guess. By the standards of law alone. But, I still wait to here of any internal inconsistencies. May I ask, have you read only 1 book on the life of J. Krishnamurti? Was it because of the promise of juicy detail within?
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog I have no problem with adultery as i do not believe in man made marriage.
But K wanted his image to be pure and he did not have the integrity to tell the truth
about his affair.
He made rosalind have 3 abortions and i am pro abortion as there are far too many
human monkeys on the planet but his public life was nothing like his private life.
That is what i term a liar.
NasaCriminals 3 months ago
@DieTheDeath you back again monkey boy
K deceived his business partner and life long friend when he fucked his wife
for 27 years.
Lol i would call that dishonest
His daughter wrote a book about K's sexual exploits
NasaCriminals 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals It's absurd to think that with the number of people in K's inner circle that knew about the affair that Raja would've not know. It would be a most profound instance of willful ignorance. And that may have been the case. The fact is that Radha herself was the one who was deceived by her parents. And not being able to reconcile that troubling notion in her mind, she maintained that her father was also deceived.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
You forget how different life was in those years. Most of the followers had no idea K was fucking around.
They thought he was a saint who abstained from sex.
K broke Rosalinds heart and her daughter thankfully wrote a book about it otherwise
we would never have known of Ks deception. K was a genius but he had many flaws, one of which was exposed in Radhas book.
NasaCriminals 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals Clearly you have not thought this through, are unfamiliar with the bulk of JK's work and with your odd language appear unbalanced. It's patently absurd that a man who's teachings clearly and repeatedly cast celibacy as a form of perversion (and publicly too) was maintaining a pretense of abstinence in front of his 'followers.' Furthermore, you're switching the outrage that you claim belonged to a deceived Raja that resulted in a lawsuit, to the outrage of K's followers. (tbc)
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog Okay i will show youtubers how dumb you really arebecause you have asked for it
by defending K who forced a married woman to have 3 abortions
What was the basis of Krishnamurtis teaching?
Did he believe in a soul?
That only 2 questions to begin with, good luck kid :)
K was definitely maimtianing a pretense of abstinense in front of his followers
and although he always claimed he did not want followers he basked in their adoration
NasaCriminals 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals (part 2) You asked, "what was the basis of K's teachings?" The point is the transformation of the consciousness of man by attending to those images that he has attached himself to for security. To accomplish this, man must see himself in his relationship with the world, come to the perception that "the observer is the observed," and total annihilation of the illusion of self so that there is only free attention with no center from where it issues. Google "the core of krishnamurti"
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals (part 3) You then asked, "Did he believe in a soul?" No he did not. And this is replete throughout even a cursory examination of his work! Over and over again! Like Siddhartha, the historical Buddha, Krishnamurti dismissed and negated the soul, spirit, atman or any permanent self as well as reincarnation, resurrection or transmigration. The examples are way too numerous to list, but please don't take my word for it. Here are some examples and I invite you to check them all:
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@NasaCrim (part 4)
#1"The Mirror of Relationship: Love, Sex and Chastity; third talk at Rajghat, February 6, 1949.
#2 Collected Works Vol. 2 third Talk in Buenos Aires, July 19, 1935
#3 Questions by Krishnamurti Italy and Norway: first Talk at Frognerseteren, July 19, 1935
Questioner: Do you believe in the soul?
K: We think that there must be some other entity which is more spiritual than this. The idea of the soul is based fundamentally on egotistic continuance. -Buenos Aires, July 19, 1935
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals (part 5)
K: "We have stipulated that there is an entity who is beyond all this. But that entity is still the result of thinking and so still within the field of time; therefore, it is not timeless, nor something divine." -fourth talk in New Delhi, October 24, 1956
If these very few examples are not enough there is external references in Dr. Dr.Kalidas Joshi's book "J. Krishnamurti Demystified" where he goes over K's denial of Atman which is soul. And then further still (tbc next)
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals (part 6) ....and finally continuing on, if you dislike reading books, there is also a talk here on youtube titled "We Are All Caught in the Idea of Progress, a conversation with Buddhist Scholars" in which Dr. Arahula gives a summary of K in comparison to the Buddha's position of no self or soul. Its right at the beginning.
As I've said, these are only just a few of thousands of instances that can be found. I invite you and anyone else reading to check my sources thoroughly.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals (part 7) I also invite you to continue in your ill-considered pronouncements. You're serving as a wonderful foil in which to highlight the absurdity to these/your claims. Also, I find your objective as stated by yourself as to"...show youtubers how dumb you really arebecause you have asked for it," quite interesting. Please make good on this claim. Oh how I wait eagerly to be shown how dumb I am.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
Comment removed
NasaCriminals 3 months ago
@NasaCriminals This guy or gal, posted 8 replies and removed them all, but I have them recorded in my email account. I'd like to share some of his responses with you:
"stop pretending to be a pseudo intellectual you monkey :) Post your own thoughts and stop copy pasting others" "You are an idiot and your comments are proof of that." "EsiwGnog is copy pasting other peoples comments because he is too afraid to speak for himself"
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog none of the comments were removed by him, the uploader of this vdieo removed them
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DJ100: "you like to complicate the issue because i honestly think you have no idea what K was talking about. You are a pseudo intellectual who is trying his best."
YODA: Much anger in him, like his father. A Jedi must have the deepest commitment. The most serious mind. This one, a long time have I watched. All his life has he looked away to the future, to the horizon. Never his mind on where he was! What he was doing. Adventure. Excitement. A Jedi craves not these things. You are reckless.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Let me repeat my questions to you
Who is the observer and what is the observed?
That is a fundemental Krishnamurti question, the essence of his teachings
What is inside the content of consciousness?
If you can not answer these questions then you have not studied K
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DeadJesus100 You ask a lot of questions. Thats all you've been doing. May I ask you one?
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@DJ100 You talk a lot about yourself. Apparently, you feel that you're an immature, pseudo-intellectual that hasn't studied or listened to K, is confounded by the paradoxes that he presents and likes to complicate the issue. I think people never really took you seriously and now you want desperately to make some kind of impact to the point that you just want to crush and shatter someone in order to make an impression. You're sad, lonely and angry. And it makes me sad too. : ( What's wrong man?
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Its amazing that you can not answer my 2 simple questions :)
You are a fraud pretending to know about Ks teachings and yet you have no knowledge
about the fundementals
Seek help
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 The "K" answer is that there is no observer. There is no observed. Only a state of observation. Observer IS the observed is a paradoxical statement. Our minds, meaning yours and mine, can't really ever fully understand that statement because thought can only deal in dualities, like cause and effect, before and after, etc. Observer is the observed is a paradox and when you try to rest your mind for a moment upon those words, your mind has to undergo a total paradigm shift.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Nonsense
K said the observer is the observed and that is the essence of his meditation
that he spoke about.
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 That's what I just wrote. I think you an I agree.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog no you did not, you posted there is no observer
and by the way you don't write on youtube you type
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 K himself said that there ultimately is no observer. The observer is actually created by the observed. Just as thought creates the thinker. May I ask you a question? I keep asking you if its okay to ask a question. You're kinda a scary guy.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog K said the observer is the observed, its obvious you have
never meditated according to Ks teachings
Sure ask me
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EsiwGnog K said the observer is the observed, its obvious you have
never meditated according to Ks teachings
Sure ask me
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog What is your question? i am a scary guy to you because i am only interested in truth and not everything K said was truth
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 You're right, everything he said may not have been the truth. You've probably heard of UG Krishnamurti right? He was affliated with the Theosophists just like K and he participated in dialogues with him. Ultimately he hated Krishnamurtis guts. I mean hated him! Tore him down every chance he got. I read his book "Mind is a Myth" Check him out if you haven't. I know somebody down here named Kumar that participated in numerous talks with UG. Okay (tbc next post)
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog I have read UG and he was an amazing man
The strange thing is that when he had his life changing moment
which he said lasted for years, he had it a few hours after
going to a K talk :)
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 UG was a cool dude. He's hated by most of the people I run into, with a few exceptions. My friend down here named Kumar is from Andhar Pradesh and knew him personally. He tells me all kinds of stories about UG and guru's in general and he and his friend Omar told me that privately, UG actually had much affection for Krishnamurti and was totally different in real life. Not the fire breathing contrarian you see on the videos or in his books. But I like the fire of UG!! I always have
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog UG hated K with a passion
What i learned from K is that the thinking process is the Power
that controls the human race and it is the power of memory
and that is why we do not live in the moment because we are slaves
to our memories.
The question is this
How do we stop the Power that controls us from controlling us?
In other words how can thought be deleted?
Thats why Ks followers had no idea what he was saying in essence
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Who in their right mind would like to put and end to their thoughts?
Its sounds insane but it is the only form of real sanity and freedom.
Now if you can understand that then lets take it further and find
out if it is possible to end the personal thinking process.
How can it be done?
That is what Ks teachings were all about
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 These are great questions, but first lets go slower. We agree that thought precedes the creation of the center which we identify as the self and the observer. But the self is obviously a creation of thought. So therefore logically, there is no observer and the statement observer is the observed which is a kind of monism is a statement of pure absurdity that actually has its own nihilistic property. So, if you can follow that, then once again, we do agree on something.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EsiwGnog no you do not know that the center is the is the creation of thought
That is what i am trying to share with you. Just because K said it does not mean its true
unless you find out for yourself
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 I agree that we have to find out for ourselves. Don't take anything K said as granted. He's not a God. But, if you read back, your accusations had nothing to do with whether what he said was true or not, your charge was that I hadn't even studied him or knew what he said to begin with and was therefore a fraud. There's a enormously huge difference. You were saying nothing about whether these things were truth or not. You were quite clear on those points.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EsiwGnog i was trying to engage you but you were closed. I as posting about his love affair,
geez dude you just cant let the past go
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 1) "Who in their right mind would like to put and end to their thoughts?" I've talked about this question in groups a lot. It comes up fairly often. Personally, I don't think thought can be completely annihilated. This is a confusing point it K's logic when he asks, "can the content of the consciousness be discarded?" We end up thinking of a space in which consciousness sits and then imagine it emptying, but I think that this is wrong.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EsiwGnog so are you saying that K was a liar?
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 (part 2) Instead, what he means to do is to annihilate the illusion of the self that is holding on to what it mistakes as belonging to it. Which is its content, its identity. If such a thing were accomplished, then it would still be true to say, "the mind has been emptied of its content" because there is no mind.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EsiwGnog Self is generated by the personal thinking process.
Without thought there is no self
The conetent according to K is personal thought with all the emotions attached
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 said, "no you do not know that the center is the is the creation of thought. That is what i am trying to share with you. Just because K said it does not mean its true." You're not clear on these statements. K didn't say the center creates thoughts. He said the opposite. Maybe he was wrong though, but that's another story.
"Self is generated by the personal thinking process." Look closely at that sentence. A "personal" thinking process implies a pre-existent self before thought.
EsiwGnog 3 months ago
@EsiwGnog
Let me try again as you misread my last post.
THOUGHT CREATES THE CENTRE
That is what K said countless times.
By a personal think process i mean thinking about your SELF
me me me
K always said that one needs thought for practical life like
to remember where you live and how to drive your car etc
Thought as memory but not personal memory
DeadJesus100 3 months ago
@DeadJesus100 This is just my opinion, but you've made a few great observations in our chat tonight and I mean that. You and I have found a few points of common ground. Its fun to finally connect with you. But I gotta get some sleep, its almost 3 am here. We should continue this sometime tomorrow and do just what you suggested and "take it further and find out if it is possible to end the personal thinking process. How can it be done?"
Sleep well,
Jon
EsiwGnog 3 months ago