Видео

@@daybreaksyellow Hi sir/ma'am, I saw this coming. Behind the camera are some pine trees against the sky, flying flocks of swallows, light passing clouds. I would send a picture but that is not a feature

@@lucarinaldi01 Oh, beautiful! Looking out a window at nature is how I do some of my best thinking too.

​@@daybreaksyellowThat's lovely. If you want, you can share some of that thinking. There is an email in the description

Yes sir/ma'am, the existence itself of a goal demands certain behaviours of those who participate We wonder if there is any path at all for the establishment of security among people, and if that is what the achievement of any individual goal would want to attain Maybe the fact itself that all are out to achieve security for themselves only makes for an insecure context, which then we try to change from the outside

@@epicpotato8700 I understand what you mean. Duality is born of the same thing: experience. I remember something I like, alongside with something I don't like; both are experience, both are ramifications of the same structure of memory. If one sees preference in action, and all its implications, then preference collapses. When preference, which is a rigid structure made of set convictions is no longer there, then intelligence comes about

Hi sir/ma'am, Words are a mean which points out at something deeper, which, if perceived, makes the abstraction vanish Also: sensation is included and never denied, we're not looking to escape the body into another realm

If something is true, anyone can come to it sir

@@lucarinaldi01 I'm right though, aren't I. I can tell by the way you speak. You might as well be Krishnamurti, SIR.

@@petereames3041 I can call you ma'am too if you like

@@lucarinaldi01 😆

@@petereames3041 K. might have been a bit more serious than I am

@@freemanjames Hi sir, I see you're in the process of enquiring too. If you feel like sharing anything interesting please do via email, I would gladly read, and in time we could even arrange discussions

@@IndigoPhoenix-wc9lh Hi sir/madam, we do not seek to look inside through the eyes of a specialist, but to do so ourselves

@Elite244 Hi sir. The person here has gone to therapy, written music, journaled for years, been on stages, painted, done yoga, studied psychology, listened to and read all kinds of content put out by different gurus, given a go to meditation - not to try and solve a problem, but because one was interested, and speaks from knowing those. Also very respectfully, the person is using words to communicate, which is not to have emotional control, as inner control is chaos; the entity controlling is as disorderly as that which they are looking to control. Looking inside with the intention to find something is not looking inside at all, as willingness is effort, and it distorts true observation - if I look at a bird, I don't make the effort to to look: I just look. About the wisdom of the past, the person also sees knowledge as a barrier to direct observation. We also aren't interested in using any word to define what we speak about, like "normal" or "abnormal", as judgement is conclusive and makes actual watching impossible. The individual is also not giving you any therapeutic advice, but pondering problems alongside you, like a friend taking a long walk. Unfortunately it is RUclips, and one cannot actually take a walk together

Shall we go through that in the next video, sir?