KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

so anyway, I liked the above very much, would anyone else like to talk about it?

firstly the premise that we know love in the flesh and so might know it in the spirit bears further thought.
what is the difference between physical and spiritual love, is there any?

Wilbro uses the extreme example of romantic love with its inevitable corollary of love lost but why not bring friends, children, anyone into that equation?

Does 'love' somehow exclude conflict, hate, violence just by its (wished for) presence?

Doesn't a truly loving relationship between people, any people, inevitably and eventually involve hurt, and therefore anger, with the possibility of reconciliation if their love was real?

And if that is true where does that put us in relation to the cosmos?

RJ wrote:

so anyway, I liked the above very much, would anyone else like to talk about it?

firstly the premise that we know love in the flesh and so might know it in the spirit bears further thought.
what is the difference between physical and spiritual love, is there any?

Wilbro uses the extreme example of romantic love with its inevitable corollary of love lost but why not bring friends, children, anyone into that equation?

Does 'love' somehow exclude conflict, hate, violence just by its (wished for) presence?

Doesn't a truly loving relationship between people, any people, inevitably and eventually involve hurt, and therefore anger, with the possibility of reconciliation if their love was real?

And if that is true where does that put us in relation to the cosmos?

when two trees seed near each other there is always conflict in the process of growing, as both are competing for the same blessed sunlight in order to thrive.  When their branches have come out and they have stretched adequately there is no need for conflict any longer, they both blow in the same breeze and drink in the same sunshine.

I think when it comes to relationships it is not that different.  Everyone comes into a relationship with their own understanding/conditioning and this, in the process of the blooming of willys first love description, has to shake out/be seen for what it is.  My oldest son for example got the brunt of my own parental conditioning, and a kind soul he is to understand.

That said, anyone can see in their own life and relationships what the power of thought does to interfere in a relationship that could truly blossom together.  The two wolves story comes to mind because it really does come down to what you feed.  First of course you have to see the pattern in your own thinking or all of this is for naught.  If we can not recognize an addicted or attached thought clearly we will just go on blindly following it.  Most all thought not interested in the present moment would fit that bill, so basically all of it when not seen for what it is.

joe wrote:

RJ wrote:

so anyway, I liked the above very much, would anyone else like to talk about it?

firstly the premise that we know love in the flesh and so might know it in the spirit bears further thought.
what is the difference between physical and spiritual love, is there any?

Wilbro uses the extreme example of romantic love with its inevitable corollary of love lost but why not bring friends, children, anyone into that equation?

Does 'love' somehow exclude conflict, hate, violence just by its (wished for) presence?

Doesn't a truly loving relationship between people, any people, inevitably and eventually involve hurt, and therefore anger, with the possibility of reconciliation if their love was real?

And if that is true where does that put us in relation to the cosmos?

when two trees seed near each other there is always conflict in the process of growing, as both are competing for the same blessed sunlight in order to thrive.  When their branches have come out and they have stretched adequately there is no need for conflict any longer, they both blow in the same breeze and drink in the same sunshine.

I think when it comes to relationships it is not that different.  Everyone comes into a relationship with their own understanding/conditioning and this, in the process of the blooming of willys first love description, has to shake out/be seen for what it is.  My oldest son for example got the brunt of my own parental conditioning, and a kind soul he is to understand.

That said, anyone can see in their own life and relationships what the power of thought does to interfere in a relationship that could truly blossom together.  The two wolves story comes to mind because it really does come down to what you feed.  First of course you have to see the pattern in your own thinking or all of this is for naught.  If we can not recognize an addicted or attached thought clearly we will just go on blindly following it.  Most all thought not interested in the present moment would fit that bill, so basically all of it when not seen for what it is.

This is good, and insightful, you make some strong points on the subject but do not really engage with any of my own questions so it is hard to make much more of a response than that. I hope you will think about it and say more.

oh Joe!
so quick from flowering poetic metaphor to the defensive scoring of points. It worries me how surely you can speak but how poorly you can listen.

in your free time, without a problem to solve, what do you wonder about in life Joe?

RJ wrote:

oh Joe!
so quick from flowering poetic metaphor to the defensive scoring of points. It worries me how surely you can speak but how poorly you can listen.

in your free time, without a problem to solve, what do you wonder about in life Joe?

you know, I had you pegged to react just this way to that post.  Do you really think I am trying to score points RJ?  Have you yet seen how the original post was directly addressing your questions?  Did you just listen to the flowing prose and forget what was said?

I was just being direct, RJ, and replying (quickly) to your saying I did not address your questions when I actually had and you just missed it.  I don't want you to see that to score points, and I didn't then either.

wilbro99 wrote:

I offer a quince, and it gets turned into an apple.

I get a sense of my words being misused, inadvertently or not.

Oh well; do carry on, RJ, as it suits your purpose…

why don't you use your intellect to put your 'sense' into words and we can look at it together.

I wonder if I will get cages for my tomatoes or let them fend for themselves...alas I have given my heart to flowers over the years and they get my time more than the vegetable garden does.  I can still spot a horned worm a ways away though.  The white moths I noticed the days before trigger the sight.

oh wait, that falls under a problem to solve, doesn't it?

Well, so much for love.

wilbro99 wrote:

Well, so much for love.

this is the perfect thread for such a talk.
tell me, what is the strongest feeling you have in your body these days? The urge to shit?

if tomatoes are what stir your passion then yes, love might seem...

what were you saying about love again Wilbro, don't wait for me to misdirect your words, speak for yourself...

RJ wrote:

so anyway, I liked the above very much, would anyone else like to talk about it?

firstly the premise that we know love in the flesh and so might know it in the spirit bears further thought.
what is the difference between physical and spiritual love, is there any?

Wilbro uses the extreme example of romantic love with its inevitable corollary of love lost but why not bring friends, children, anyone into that equation?

Does 'love' somehow exclude conflict, hate, violence just by its (wished for) presence?

Doesn't a truly loving relationship between people, any people, inevitably and eventually involve hurt, and therefore anger, with the possibility of reconciliation if their love was real?

And if that is true where does that put us in relation to the cosmos?

For most human relationships, I do indeed feel that hurt and anger and violence, conflict, etc is inevitable. That does not mean that there is not love in that relationship, it just means that one is not always loving towards the other. Love possibly includes all.

The love might have been real, or might not. That is a tough one. For on the one hand, we tend to say that if one is truly loving, hate cannot be there, even temporarily, and yet... Love seems to be able to contain all....

For my own relationships, I get caught up in all the negative emotions at times, and even hate or anger, etc, and yet I say I still love, still love the person. Now, is my love real or not? It is real to an extent I would say.

Now, we get into the semantics of what love really is, and can love be any of these limiting things. Is there love at all if it can turn into hate as K says. Is it love if one is not loving all the time. These are good questions that need to be looked into.

For me, I am not as absolutist as K was and do not ascribe at the moment to the all or nothing version of love.

What you say to any of this RJ, I do hope you share a little, if so moved....

Last edited by sds (2012-05-23 00:33:34)

RJ wrote:

Jayaraj wrote:

RJ wrote:

and accompanied by the same blissful sensation,

Is it RJ? Does not love require a great deal of freedom? So that it doesn't have a cause? Freedom so that the mind is not in turmoil, not suffering, so it's capable of concern because in itself it's not asking for anything.

Now in the former you mention in your post one, is it free of cause? Then is it love? Or just attachment to sensation which is beautiful so fills our hollow life? So is love sensation?

firstly you are questioning Wilbro as the first post is entirely his, I could have made that clearer.

secondly I think you are talking about some mental state in which some idealised form of true love is supposed to flourish. Which is simply Sad; millions of spiritual aspirants around the globe ignore the people living with or near them in search of such imaginary and 'just around the next corner' nirvana.

Can we talk more about this second part. This part about some idealised form of true love. I think this is a important topic and one that most spiritual aspirants make a mistake on.

They talk about love and quote scriptures and say everything is one, and yet.... Look at their daily lives, how they live, how they treat people, how they treat the people they come across in their daily lives...