KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

A danger is a challenge to the organism, obviously.  If it meets the challenge, it survives.  The ego is just a challenge/danger also.  It is not a problem at all. Life has no problems....the universe has no problems....that is where your perception is limited.  It's quite obvious to see, but your perception is fragmented.

bruce sean wrote:

No challenges. But the whole thing is a huge danger, and so I'm not looking to fix just one fragment, like a spill or whatever, but the whole problem because it is a problem, it is our problem as human beings, and it must be solved at its core: the human ego.

The ego IS a fragment.  How can you separate life into the "ego" and then "everything else". That is textbook fragmentation.  The ego is just a another tar pit...just goes with the territory...in this case the territory is a larger brain.  Infants for example have a very strong "center" or sense of "I need to survive" "me me me".  It is very necessary for the survival of the child if you observe it.   There comes a point where it is no longer needed and some bodies don't grow out of it, but yet some do.  Those that don't grow out of it, will suffer the consequences, and egos wont survive on this planet for much longer.  Your "theory" is that the egos created by life itself will destroy everything....in otherwords, life will destroy itself.

Egos do destroy. Is ego a fragment? Or is it a bunch of fragments? An ego in the way humans believe it exists, doesn't! Humans believe the ego to be a soul, a psychological or a spiritual entity. And that 'perception' of a compact so-called soul divides, and thus creates conflicts, in oneself, and with others.
  Now that perception must change, nothing else, just a little tilt to the right, that's all that's needed. A false perception, by the way, is never needed, so there's nothing to 'grow out of'.

  To no.53.

Last edited by bruce sean (2012-05-12 05:06:07)

bruce sean wrote:

Eden wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

For a mind that is still there are no dangers, and so no challenges.

I am talking about the body, not some imaginary mind.  Every organism and animal on this planet faces dangers daily, and always will.  They may be small dangers, like moving away from a wasp nest or sheltering oneself from the cold, or big dangers like moving away from a nest of egos....but there will always be dangers facing every body/organism.

We aren't talking about psychological dangers or such non-sense obviously. That is beyond stupid.

Most dangers humans are facing in their personal relationships are psychological, therefore, imagined. Which is why the whole relationship thing is also imagined. Get rid of that, and people will relate, they will connect.

Indeed. And then there will be new dangers and new challenges.  Such is life on planet earth.  Aloha.

bruce sean wrote:

We cannot face the other type of dangers if we fight against each other, and you are the proof of that: you were trying to raise some awareness about Fukushima. It would've been much easier if the psychological division didn't existed.

  Nighty night.

Not only is Bruce over 10,000 posts, he added another 500 to it. Bruce, you sure like to write.

You really were writing a lot last night. I mean a lot.

I went to bed, and you and Eden were having a marathon writing fest.

Some have made hints that you might even be a troll on here.

I do not know, I cannot figure you out. If you are being serious on here, or if you just like to mess around with us....

sds wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

We cannot face the other type of dangers if we fight against each other, and you are the proof of that: you were trying to raise some awareness about Fukushima. It would've been much easier if the psychological division didn't existed.

  Nighty night.

Not only is Bruce over 10,000 posts, he added another 500 to it. Bruce, you sure like to write.

You really were writing a lot last night. I mean a lot.

I went to bed, and you and Eden were having a marathon writing fest.

Some have made hints that you might even be a troll on here.

I do not know, I cannot figure you out. If you are being serious on here, or if you just like to mess around with us....

Why would I do that? Perhaps bruce is not aware that he's actually doing something here.

What is truth?

I have heard a few definitions of what it might imply.

1. Something that cannot be simplified further
2. Something that cannot be transcended or gone beyond, or however way you put it

Then there is context. Truth could be about the truth concerning a dozen matters, or it could be about whether its possible to know if there is some truth regarding. WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON HERE.

we are the context...

Yeah, the context of context...I went last night to the Big Song Music House I built a few years back for a show by Ricky Nye and the Paris Blues Band.  Haven't danced that hard in a couple years but the boogie woogie would not let me sit quietly.  Still hearing some of their rhythms this morning, when I look.  No complaints works for me Bu...much easier that way, isn't it?

Babs wrote:

What is truth?

I have heard a few definitions of what it might imply.

1. Something that cannot be simplified further
2. Something that cannot be transcended or gone beyond, or however way you put it

Then there is context. Truth could be about the truth concerning a dozen matters, or it could be about whether its possible to know if there is some truth regarding. WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON HERE.

No definitions. It might be that it cannot be translated into words. It might as well be...

No. Maybe means that I'm no authority, and I'm inviting another to look with me.

That is illogical. It doesn't follow logically from what I said, inviting another to look at it, that I'm confused. Does anyone else think this is not so?

Obviously Eden any psychological authority, or concluder  is confused to, because that authority is also using memory. What most do not understand is a lightening of their mental baggage and load is what insight does. Insights do not give you more beliefs they make you lighter freer, and wise with less to defend, and nothing more in the form of knowing solutions, or conclusions  to  accumulate. Real Cooperation can never take place between believers anyway. The teacher student relationship in anything except the technical is false . :-)