Help ( was 'thanks' )

[Clive]

Hi David, glad you found your way onto the group :-). You wrote:

“Can conversation, dialogue - words - actually help? “


This is a very interesting question. I do have an answer – which is
that I don't know.

Sometimes it feels right to participate in dialogue with others, while
at other times to contemplate on one's own seems harmonious.

But what I find interesting in the question is the idea of 'help'.

Why do we seek help? And what does it reveal about ourselves? Surely
we can only look for help if we want to achieve something? This is
true both materially and in the psychological/spiritual world, but I
am concerned with the latter here.

If we are not trying to achieve something, not trying to become
something, then the idea of 'help' does not arise. And does not being
in the state of wanting to achieve psychologically, wanting to 'be'
something, mean that we are never at peace, never at ease within
ourselves?

Also, there are many people who offer to help, who claim to be in a
position to give help (usually at a price), the psychological priests,
the gurus, the 'self-help' brigade. But if one accepts that
relationship, then one is in a state of dependency, and so 'helpless'
and in fear. It encourages us in weakness.

What do you say?

Regards

Clive

[David Lynch]

Hi Clive

I wonder how K views the mind-body relationship?

Am I wrong in feeling that he regards the body as of less importance, as in his remarks about the futility of yoga, Zen, breathing exercises, and so on? He says he does yoga purely for his health in one of the books, as if the body was a separate issue, whereas we surely can't leave it out of consideration?

You ask why we need 'help' and I can see the impossibility of thought "thinking its way" out of its own self-made trap, but isn't it true that both the body and mind are conditioned by our environment, experiences, etc? Doesn't this amount to a kind of illness? We see (feel) this and seek help for a cure. Obviously we wouldn't need to do so if we were perfectly healthy.

We can solve problems theoretically in the mind, but the body, including the nervous system, tends to go on reacting in the same old way to the same influences.

david

[malcolm idoine]

Dear David, Clive et al.

Wow - what a huge topic - one I am interested in as a psychotherapist

Where to start - if I remember rightly K was fond of distinguishing fact
from truth

If we start from there then

- surely it is a fact that the mind is split from the body - much of the
body goes on doing its thing totally outside of mental awareness
- surely it is a fact that the mind is fragmented - just think about dreams,
slips of the tongue, irrational beliefs & behaviours, the capacity to lie
etc etc
- surely it is a fact that we are psychologically dependent on others - just
think about shared language, culture, relationships, family, child
development etc

Again if I get K rightly he would say we are in deep dodo if we don't face
the facts any only by acknowledgement of the facts there is the possibility
of truth

Kind regards
Malcolm

[David Lynch]

Dear Malcolm

Where does the mind leave off and the body take over, or vice-versa?

In a sense the body IS the mind, or at least the so-called "subconscious".

Perhaps the sense of a 'split' between the two is where we go wrong? It could be a major delusion?

However, I feel I am getting out of my depth again, so probably need to ponder these questions a bit more by myself.

One gathers K wasn't too keen on psychotherapy either:-)

David

[Clive Elwell]

Dear David,

I do not claim to be an expert on K, but from what I read, K gave a lot of importance to the health of the body. Mary Lutyens in her biographies said he looked after his body “like a cavalry officer looked after his horse”. He said one could not have a sensitive mind without the body being sensitive.

Yes, he did make some comments about Yoga and other exercises that could be regarded as dismissive, and I believe he himself did Yoga 2 hours a day, most days. But he did not force the body, if it was tired, he desisted. And yes, he did deny that physical practises could lead to 'enlightenment'.

You wrote, David, “ but isn't it true that both the body and mind are conditioned by our environment, experiences, etc?”.

Yes, surely. And it makes sense to seek help for a disease or illness from the enormous body of knowledge and skill that science has accumulated in that area (not that I accept uncritically all that main stream medicine offers). And yes, it could be said that we are indeed, “mentally ill”. And there may be a case for accepting 'help' in the case of some extreme mental conditions, psychosis, neurosis.

This is not the same, surely, as accepting another as a spiritual authority? Someone who promises that they will lead us to enlightenment?

What do you say?

Regards

Clive

[David Lynch]

Dear Clive

I don't think Zen, for instance, claims to lead one to enlightenment. They do claim (and a couple of thousand years of experience should not be dismissed IMHO) to help establish the environment in which one "might" be able to achieve psychological freedom. 

You asked earlier why we need help. Speaking for myself it is because I am aware I am not free, so any system, method, or practice that offers a possibility of freedom appeals. I don't mean to doggedly stick to this argument to try and contradict K, in fact I find his comments about ends and means extremely appealing, and can see the futility of chasing rainbows. 

But we seem damned if we do and damned if we don't when it comes to 'trying' to change.

The Vipassana meditation system focusses on 'sensations' in the body and being aware of these in a non-judging way until the 'knots' created by all the bad effects of the mind (and experiences) on the body. Equanimity is achieved through this awareness. I did one of their 10-day courses and towards the end had a realization of the impermanence of the body which felt fantastic; though I fell into the trap  of wanting that feeling again and of course it didn't come back the next day. They warn against this just as K does.

It is this kind of experience that prompted me to mention the body, and I am glad to hear K saw a healthy body as essential, even if he didn't appear to support the concept of 'sitting in a certain way, doing breathing exercises' etc. 

However, I also recognize a tendency  to trot out other disciplines and (paltry) experiences as probably yet another way of postponing actual work.

Cheers,

david

David Lynch

363 Mill Creek Road

RD1

Whitianga

Sent from my iPad

[Anita Emanuelson]

Hi David,
I'm not very verbal but I do appreciate reading all the posts.
 
I have come across in my reading that K did 45 minutes of breathing exercises and 45 minutes of yoga everyday at sunrise. FYI
 
cheers
Anita
 
 
 

---

Subject: Re: [krishnamurti-nz] The mind-body
From: da...@aikido.co.nz
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:50:29 +1300
To: krishna...@googlegroups.com

[Clive Elwell]

           David: I don't think Zen, for instance, claims to lead one to enlightenment. They do claim (and a couple of thousand years of experience should not be dismissed IMHO) to help establish the environment in which one "might" be able to achieve psychological freedom.

Clive: Well, sorry if I used the term “enlightenment” inappropriately. But is there a difference between enlightenment and freedom? Can you explain the distinction?

Actually it seems to me that there is absolutely no difference between any goals pursued in the religious/spiritual search, because all goals are projected by the mind anyway. The mind is merely pursuing its own projections, is it not?

I don;t see why a couple of thousand years of experience should not be dismissed, put aside as irrelevant. Or 8000 years, or the experience of the last second. If the issue is to be free of the past ie conditioning, how can any sort of experience whatsoever be relevant? This is a fundamental question.

After all, where have all the religions got us? Here we are in this tremendous confusion, on the verge of the collapse of all civilisation, how can we still have any faith that any belief system, any practice of meditation, can help us. They have had their chance, and have they not failed to bring about meaningful change in human consciousness?

       David:You asked earlier why we need help. Speaking for myself it is because I am aware I am not free, so any system, method, or practice that offers a possibility of freedom appeals.   { cut }

Clive: But is not a method, any method, a denial of freedom? The means is the end, and if the means is bondage to a system, then the end result can only be bondage, wouldn't you say?

          David: But we seem damned if we do and damned if we don't when it comes to 'trying' to change.

Clive: Not sure what you mean by this. Care to explain?

David:The Vipassana meditation system focusses on 'sensations' in the body and being aware of these in a non-judging way until the 'knots' created by all the bad effects of the mind (and experiences) on the body. Equanimity is achieved through this awareness. I did one of their 10-day courses and towards the end had a realization of the impermanence of the body which felt fantastic; though I fell into the trap of wanting that feeling again and of course it didn't come back the next day. They warn against this just as K does.

It is this kind of experience that prompted me to mention the body, and I am glad to hear K saw a healthy body as essential, even if he didn't appear to support the concept of 'sitting in a certain way, doing breathing exercises' etc.

Clive: Actually I have heard him leading students in sitting in stillness at the end of his discussions at Rishi Valley school.

[David Lynch]

Clive: By "damned.." I meant that, superficially at any rate, K says years of Zen (or whatever) are of no use. But, not doing anything (e.g., simply talking about 'freedom') seems to be useless as well. But that was a superficial observation and should probably be dismissed as such. Alas, we seem to be superficial creatures.

"Freedom" to my (unenlightened and non-free) mind is the same as 'enlightenment'. The whole idea and especially the attempts to describe it is paradoxical. We live in a dualistic state,  with occasional flashes of insight,  and read and hear about people (like K) who apparently don't. The various traditions seem to offer a way, then K comes along and says 'there is no way'. But I  speak  from ignorance.

As for the state of the world I have never expected much improvement in the masses from any religion or discipline; and I don't know if K's 60 years of teaching has helped them much either, has it? Perhaps it   has, and may yet. I hope so.

thanks.

david

David Lynch

363 Mill Creek Road

RD1

Whitianga

Sent from my iPad

[Clive Elwell]

My immediate response, David, is to ask if you have actually ever "not done anything". Or are you imagining what that would be like?

I am not being personal, this question has great validity to each one of us.

To be free of all 'doing', psychologically, that is all sense of becoming, surely implies an utterly different state of mind?

regards

Clive

[David Lynch]

Get your point, and appreciate it.

I'll try not to try and see if I can recognise a totally different state of mind.

Right now mundane things force me to 'do', so the non-doing will have to wait.

Thanks.

david

David Lynch
Koru Dojo
http://www.korudojo.co.nz
Ph: 07-866-2248

[Clive Elwell]

{ cut } The various traditions seem to offer a way, then K comes along and says 'there is no way'. But I  speak  from ignorance.

Clive: "What is important is to see the full depth of that ignorance, its breadth, its vast extent. Nothing more is needed, I feel"

As for the state of the world I have never expected much improvement in the masses from any religion or discipline; and I don't know if K's 60 years of teaching has helped them much either, has it? Perhaps it   has, and may yet. I hope so.

Clive: "I don't know. It is a question I have been asking a lot of late, a question I have been sharing with many people. What has been the impact of K's teachings? Has anyone fully changed? I suspect there is no way of answering the question. Any judgement made of the state of mind of another human being is made from that ignorance that you talk of.

Certainly there are may people around the world who are engaging with the teachings in various ways. Perhaps there is no 'big, absolute, enlightenment', only lots of little insights which have their affect on human consciousness. K was adamant that there was no individual really, only this collective consciousness.So what does it mean, for the individual to change?

Meanwhile, the challenge is ours, now."

[David Lynch]

Clive: We can only hope, and look to our own sails.

I am greatly encouraged by your comments.

Thank you.

david

[Clive Elwell]

Hope? What do you think that we should hope for?
Clive

[David Lynch]

I was "hoping" K's teachings might yet take hold in a wider sense and counteract the downward slide of the world.

I appreciated being alerted to the "Discard all Methods" piece, which coincided with my watching a documentary on how computer technology may have influenced people to believe that "systems" can be applied to humanity and to Nature ("social systems", "eco-systems") in the same way they work in computers -- with the disastrous results we see all around us.

david

[Clive Elwell]

Well, one thing is certain, whether it is driven by K's teachings or whatever, a fundamental change in human consciousness is absolutely essential if the human race is turn aside from the disastrous path it is on.

Clive