KFA - Krishnamurti Foundation of America

alone is not a word of future. alone is not a superficial thing. so one standing in a group, at a party, can be also be alone. so alone is relationship. so planning is a word of future. the new year is time. if one, or better none stands alone, so what?

Bruce, make that two.When one becomes two what will YOU do?

-- Love to have discussing-parties with intelligent people!

-- Who are they?

-- They all are living inside of me.

I understand that. I was asking who was actually alone on Christmas-Eve or Day. Not just talk about being secure and alone, and then run along and be with a group who otherwise might find you weird, or because you simply can't be alone when most people ARE SUPPOSSED to be together. So the image of 'I must be with somebody' makes you act, makes you seek others.

farmer wrote:

Bruce, make that two.When one becomes two what will YOU do?

What do you mean by 'one becomes two'?

awareness wrote:

alone is not a word of future. alone is not a superficial thing. so one standing in a group, at a party, can be also be alone. so alone is relationship. so planning is a word of future. the new year is time. if one, or better none stands alone, so what?

But why be with a group on a certain day, which is suppossed to mean something when it doesn't? Is that aloness?

bruce sean wrote:

awareness wrote:

alone is not a word of future. alone is not a superficial thing. so one standing in a group, at a party, can be also be alone. so alone is relationship. so planning is a word of future. the new year is time. if one, or better none stands alone, so what?

But why be with a group on a certain day, which is suppossed to mean something when it doesn't? Is that aloness?

aloness has no dependency, opposite.

bruce sean wrote:

awareness wrote:

alone is not a word of future. alone is not a superficial thing. so one standing in a group, at a party, can be also be alone. so alone is relationship. so planning is a word of future. the new year is time. if one, or better none stands alone, so what?

But why be with a group on a certain day, which is suppossed to mean something when it doesn't? Is that aloness?

Well,if being with a group on a particular day has meaning to you then obviously you are not alone because you are then attached to some tradition, which means you are carrying something with you which denies aloneness.That which you hold onto makes you separate which makes you isolated not alone.So you are really escaping from your monotony.

However you may be really detached & therefore alone but may find yourself with some people who celebrate these things & just take part in some harmless things becuse of others. What do you say sir?

farmer wrote:

Bruce #11,One = unity. Two= duality.There is no escape.Look at it.The entire non history.See the cries of attachment. The blind groping in the dark. Never ending struggle.Heart ripping separation.Alone and aware of no struggle,no attachment and no division.

But is two a reality? Or is it an invention of the mind?

bruce sean wrote:

awareness wrote:

bruce sean wrote:

But why be with a group on a certain day, which is suppossed to mean something when it doesn't? Is that aloness?

aloness has no dependency, opposite.

So no dependency. Then why not be alone? Were you alone on that day?

alone is there, where the me is not. can you remeber aloness? so there are a lot of things why to meet the family. oh yes, they will say, bruce, i did not know any bruce, yes it was my son, so what? yes, he died. ah, hm..but isnt he still alive. no its other, how to explain. no thanks, he is in a group which some krishnabrothers. you heard about. ah yes, the do sing that music: haare, haare krishna.........

bruce sean wrote:

You didn't answer my question, though: were you alone, or were you not? Physically, I mean.

yes, i was physically alone.

My Christmas wish is that everyone will be physically alone on Christmas next year.  It's a long shot I know, but I'm putting it out there.