What are facts and what are the consequenses of it?

There are facts. They change things. How much are we aware of them? There are facts we do not like. What do we do with them and why?

What is it to be together and when does the brain function wholly?

K brings it up regularly ‘to examine together’; as if this togetherness contains something which we have not discovered yet. At first we overlook the significance of it. Is there any? Working in a group what does this mean? What is happening most of the time and why? Is there an intelligent way of looking at it? Democracy is based on it. Can democracy function differently?

Consciousness, what is it, how does it relate?

What is consciousness? There is my consciousness and your consciousness. There is the consciousness of a group, a hole population or a country. - There is being conscious and the content of consciousness. The word comes of being aware, knowing, awake, to be concerned with. K talks quite a bit about consciousness. Can we go into this? Does consciousness separate?

Living the teachings?

Gpara: K actually said near the end of his life that nobody is living the teachings. And he said that something might happen if someone did. I agree that most people do not seem to actually do it -- there is an element of insincerity, in the sense that actions (and all of life) are not in accord with understanding. There is a sort of split personality.('fragmentation'?) He has mentioned that fragmentation can be seen as: saying and thinking one thing, and doing another. It seems that there is an opportunity both for wholeness (or non-fragmented living), and also an opportunity to explore the teachings in life, or in a more living way. This seems like a very meaningful subject. He also mentioned that the real meaning of the teachings comes alive in the living, not in the words, thoughts, etc, or in the unlived understanding. There is a related subject: K's statements about being willing to die (I haven't listened to them yet, but there are some talks on youtube about this, talks he gave in Rishi Valley). He said something similar in the book on livelihood -- the true vocation of man is to find truth; is it possible to stay with this, and not allow pressures or influences from society (and elsewhere)(our consciousness?)(desires?)(fears, security?)(ambitions, plans?) to sideline the finding of truth (or the living of the teachings)? ****Another side of this is: what is it not to live the teachings? (what actually happens in the way we live?) Are the teachings, and the study of the teachings, separated from or segregated from the rest of daily living?(Seeing these things clearly seems valuable, in understanding this subject.) ****--which brings in another point: "seeing" or "just seeing" -- sometimes it seems as if K is saying this. Clearly, though, he also indicates that living it -- not only 'understanding' (or 'seeing'?) -- is important as well. ****((--which brings up: is seeing divorced (or segregated) from living?--and is our seeing divorced from the teachings?)) ****(these subjects seem to me worth staying with for a while)(and exploring through actions and living as well as through dialogue)

Are we superficial? What does it mean to free the mind?

Can we rediscover the meaning of words we use? What does it mean to free the mind? It implies we are not free. We are conditioned. The conditioning is our self-made prison. Do we actually question anything? Questioning is disturbing? Is there a pattern? Does questioning provoke a crisis?

Reading K

Did you read any striking lines in K's books? You can propose to put it up here (include the reference please).

WSB: Looking through the books of K in my shelf late in the evening and reading some pages I do see so many striking lines; here is one:

'What will change man? .. Certainly not by an outside agency. Man has to face it, not avoid it, and examine it without asking for any aid; he is master of himself. He has made this society, he is responsible for it, and this very responsibility demands that he brings about a change in himself. But very few pay attention to all this. For the vast mass of people, their thinking is so utterly indifferent, irresponsible, seeking to filfill their own selfish life, sublimating their desires but still remaining selfish. .. One has to look at this. And you are the only one who can change yourself and society in which you live. That is a fact, and you can't escape from it..'
(K in 'K to himself' p 113-114)

So change is there when we face it and examine it without aid. I am the only one who can change myself and the society in which I live. Why? Because it is my resposnsibility.

WSB: Looking in one of K's books here are some lines I marke years ago. 'When the content of consciousness with its experiences, demands, its cravings for some new, including its craving for freedom from the known, has completely come do an end, then only does the other quality come into being. The former has a motive; the latter has no motive.. Motive is the known. .. when there is no movement of recognition, of experiencing, of motive, freedom from the known takes place .. when the brain , your mind is completely still, you don't see the still mind.. if you know it it is not still.' (K in 'Exploration into insight' p 32-33)

What does it mean to explore?

In exploring we discover. In discovering we see. With seeing we are aware. With awareness there is this potential to act without causing disorder.