KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

bruce sean wrote:

An animal may not be aware of what's happening in another jungle, on another continent. A human is, you are. And to be blind to that is the action of thought, unlike animals which know no better.
You're much clever than an animal, and that cleverness is blinding.

So when the body is thirsty I should solve the worlds struggles first, before I drink?  Ok...let me try that.....actually wait....you go first....

You're making a big deal out of drinking. You drink, you eat and then what? That is all you care about? Then pretty soon you won't even be abler to do that. By all means, drink, eat, but look around, too.

Eden wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

The mother is selfish still, if she's concerned only with her own.

breast milk for all.

In fact, most mothers are selfish. It is much more complex than breast milk, isn't it? When the mother is sending her own to war to save the country is she a mother at all, in the deep sense of that word? If you're a mother to your son only, then you're not a mother at all.

the body is not stupid, it is always aware of the perimeter, no matter how expansive that perimeter maybe.  the body is always aware of threats to its food source, water, shelter, life...with that comes awareness of the whole planet, and the whole movement of life.

Eden wrote:

The body needs shelter too, and a reliable food source, clean water, etc.   Obviously one looks around as the body is always interested in security.

And while that body has found what it needs others haven't, and likely never will(like shelter), or even food, in which case they perish.

  Caring only about the body works against the very body you're trying to protect. Psychological barriers lead to a losing of the very security you're trying to find.

  A body that truly understands this doesn't look for security that way.

BobD wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

Eden wrote:

breast milk for all.

In fact, most mothers are selfish. It is much more complex than breast milk, isn't it? When the mother is sending her own to war to save the country is she a mother at all, in the deep sense of that word? If you're a mother to your son only, then you're not a mother at all.

That baby is selfish.

The mother certainly is if she's concerned with only one person, be it herself, or her baby-which is the same.

bruce sean wrote:

BobD wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

In fact, most mothers are selfish. It is much more complex than breast milk, isn't it? When the mother is sending her own to war to save the country is she a mother at all, in the deep sense of that word? If you're a mother to your son only, then you're not a mother at all.

That baby is selfish.

The mother certainly is if she's concerned with only one person, be it herself, or her baby-which is the same.

She is the world, the world is her. She helps her baby...she helps the world

BobD wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

BobD wrote:

That baby is selfish.

The mother certainly is if she's concerned with only one person, be it herself, or her baby-which is the same.

She is the world, the world is her. She helps her baby...she helps the world

You missed the paragraph above. She helps her baby to become what? An integrated part of society? A society which forces you to go to war to defend it-if you're a man?

  What kind of help are we talking about here? Breast feeding? That's obvious, but beyond that, if the mother is only concerned with her babies, that leads to the ultimate destruction of them.

bruce sean wrote:

BobD wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

The mother certainly is if she's concerned with only one person, be it herself, or her baby-which is the same.

She is the world, the world is her. She helps her baby...she helps the world

You missed the paragraph above. She helps her baby to become what? An integrated part of society? A society which forces you to go to war to defend it-if you're a man?

  What kind of help are we talking about here? Breast feeding? That's obvious, but beyond that, if the mother is only concerned with her babies, that leads to the ultimate destruction of them.

There is no becoming

BobD wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

Eden wrote:

the body is not stupid, it is always aware of the perimeter, no matter how expansive that perimeter maybe.  the body is always aware of threats to its food source, water, shelter, life...with that comes awareness of the whole planet, and the whole movement of life.

But that awareness of the whole planet leads to what? What is the action of such an awareness?

It would seem bruce that you have seperated yourself from the whole world. What will you do? Not that I'm worried but it is your dilemna

No, as a human being in the world, what do you do when you are aware of what's going on in the world? You can't be aware of that unless you're aware of what's happening in yourself. And what is the result of such an awareness? Becoming a cow? You see, you're merely speculating about this: how would it be if a change has occured...

It is thought which doesn't ask that question, thinking that awareness exists. But awareness itself is the action I was asking about, and if it's missing then awareness is, too.

  Bottom line, you don't want to ask questions fine, with me. I'm here to talk with those who do.

That is all most people do: speculate that if such and such person 'saw the light', so to speak, they would do this or that, and they wouldn't do this or that.

  And I'm saying it's nonsense. Such a person can say anything they want, can do everything they want, and say it anyway they want to.