Can We Choose Oblivion, rather than Continue Life on the oth

Originally Posted by inavalan

Meaning no disrespect ... To me sitting in meditation, in oblivion, is like watching tv without tuning into a broadcast.

I suppose it depends on the tradition. For instance Yoga is heavily focused on experience during meditation whereas the Advaita path of knowledge uses meditation as a tool to bring about clarity of mind in order to facilitate understanding and eventual Realization.

One way I heard gamma synchrony described is akin to an absolutely placid pond where if a small pebble is tossed in the ripples are easily visible even from the far shore, whereas a large stone can be tossed into a turbulent pond and no ripples will be apparent.

Swami Vivekananda often said what distinguishes a great man from an ordinary man is power of concentration.

Anyway my point was oblivion only applies to mind and not That which is aware of mind.

[inavalan]

It just happened that I watched three Krishnamurti videos, one about meditation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9IS1zW6In4
duration 19:44

from Saanen 1980 - Question #1 from Question & Answer Meeting #4

'Is our sitting quietly every day to observe the movement of thought by your definition a practice, a method and therefore without value?'

[utopiandreamchild]

Oblivion?, not for me thanks, too much fun to be had. There's a whole universe to explore and learn about. Could take me forever to learn about it but I'm keen.

Love and light
utopia

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 10 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by inavalan

Looking for knowledge and guidance from other people, gurus, and dogmas adds distortions you can't sift out. It is okay in the beginning, or if you just use them as conduits and not for what they claim.

Having written that, your next post 12 directs us to a video featuring another person, a guru to some people ... Krishnamurti.

https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/s...8&postcount=12

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by inavalan

from Saanen 1980 - Question #1 from Question & Answer Meeting #4 'Is our sitting quietly every day to observe the movement of thought by your definition a practice, a method and therefore without value?

The problem with Krishnamurti was that he discarded all practices and methods as having no value, and then became frustrated because no-one seemed to realise the truth he talked about for all those years.

Rather like describing a destination to a group of hopeful travellers and then saying don't bother with any means of transport to reach that destination.

Peace

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

QUOTE 10 EXCERPT
Having written that, your next post 12 directs us to a video featuring another person, a guru to some people ... Krishnamurti.

https://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/s...8&postcount=12

I don't see a contradiction ... I'll explain.

I stand by my recommendation to not put your faith in any guru, or dogma, and to trust only your inner-guidance, and only after you leave aside all your beliefs and expectations, because they distort your perception of your inner-guidance.

Originally Posted by inavalan

Meaning no disrespect ... To me sitting in meditation, in oblivion, is like watching tv without tuning into a broadcast. Meditation is one of the possible tools to turn inwards, and tap into the available knowledge and guidance, understand what you are, evolve.

Looking for knowledge and guidance from other people, gurus, and dogmas adds distortions you can't sift out. It is okay in the beginning, or if you just use them as conduits and not for what they claim.

This surely implies not to put your faith in what I recommend either. In fact, I only recommend a way of getting knowledge in the way that I believe to be the least distorted (and it is the way I do it). Although I share my beliefs, I don't intend to convince anybody of their validity.

On the other hand, in the video I was pointing to, that guru was actually recommending not to follow "techniques", but to be natural, which I kind of agree (so, it was an opinion I share). I don't follow that guru, I am not familiar with his overall work, and I don't subscribe to any religion or philosophic system.

It just happened that on another forum somebody linked to a youtube video, I was curious and watched it, then a couple more. The second video that I watched seemed to confirm my reticence toward why and how people meditate, and I thought it fit into this thread's discussion.

There is nothing more about J Krishnamurti, or that video that contradicts the recommendations I was making.

Not all, but many religions, gurus, dogmas are based on perceptions of the wider-reality by some people, everyone filtering and interpreting their experiences through their individual beliefs, intellectual and intuitive capabilities. That is why on one hand there are so many commonalities, and on the other hand there are so many discrepancies.

At individual level, what I do and recommend (again, not pretending that it is more than my opinion) is to look at everything around: events, situations, gurus, dogmas, dreams, and interpret them intuitively at your individual level of evolvement. Everything around has multi-layered symbolism, so everybody can get the interpretation that fits their needs, which differs from one individual to another, and even differs from a moment to another for the same individual.

If you disagree, or don't care about the opinions I expressed (here or elsewhere), I really don't mind and don't intend to argue for their validity.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by iamthat

The problem with Krishnamurti was that he discarded all practices and methods as having no value, and then became frustrated because no-one seemed to realise the truth he talked about for all those years.

Rather like describing a destination to a group of hopeful travellers and then saying don't bother with any means of transport to reach that destination.

Peace

Watching three videos, it was interesting to see the discrepancy between what the questions revealed about the perspective of some "hopeful travelers", and Krishnamurti's perspective. I am not familiar with this K's opinions, and there were several points in his answers that I disagreed with, but it seemed clear to me that he was more in line with what I learned through my experiences than what those questions revealed about the people who asked them. I'd say it was a "quantum leap" between the questions and the answers.

[utopiandreamchild]

Why oblivion and not another shot at life as we know it?, I'd love to come back to this experience and continue on.

But hey, thats my love for you, always keen to know more of myself experientially.

Love is eternal
utopia

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 15 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by inavalan

I stand by my recommendation to not put your faith in any guru, or dogma, and to trust only your inner-guidance, and only after you leave aside all your beliefs and expectations, because they distort your perception of your inner-guidance.

We are actually in agreement on the above point. What drew me to my teacher was her opening words:

"Question everything, even what I say, and, if a teacher can't POINT you to the DIRECT EXPERIENCES, then go elsewhere."

A good teacher (IMHO) is one who ultimately directs one to the "inner guidance", as you put it, and that is exactly what she did.

As for the "no technique guru" whose video you recommended, I am very familiar with him as my teacher was once a member of the Theosophical Society and knew krishnamurti personally.

I was just having fun with what might look to others as your outwardly contradictory statements. I understand. There's no need to reinvent the wheel, as the expression goes, and learning from the experiences of others can be helpful.

[hazada guess]

Hi Still-Waters, glad your ok.Id just like to point out that quote from inavalan you posted. It is so true.

I personally would never have a teacher/Guru,but it is up to you how you want to live your life.