Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
General Discussion | moderated by Dev Singh

How does God figure in K teachings?


Displaying posts 31 - 44 of 44 in total
Wed, 17 May 2017 #31
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
However, K apparently experienced or realized something, which he characterized as "the source of all energy" and as "the ultimate, the beginning and the ending and the absolute." And that sounds, at least in some ways, like God, possibly a Creator God or possibly not. I have no doubt that some take these statements of K, like you, as having nothing to do with God really. And I have no doubt that others take these to refer to an actual entity that K was deeply in touch with. So this is the matter at hand, the question we are going into. This is the discussion. I hope we can continue to explore together.

K. felt it was of utmost importance to understand 'what is'....the conflict and violence and suffering that almost every man lives with. I'm not sure how this matter of 'God' or no God in K's teaching will help man to understand himself. I do suspect it's a distraction from facing 'what is'....from understanding ourselves as we are. No disrespect intended here. For those that feel the issue has some value in helping to understand themselves and their conflict/violence/suffering and choose to discuss 'God' in the teaching....well, you're obviously free to discuss. If K realized the 'source', what does that have to do with my problem with my spouse or mother in law...with my job...my kids...with booze or cigarettes...with starvation and the horrible extremes of poverty and suffering throughout much of the globe?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Wed, 17 May 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 18 May 2017 #32
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 80 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Are you trying to say that God has a place in the teachings

Yes, so long as it's not reduced to a known.

contraria sunt complementa

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 18 May 2017 #33
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
The very question that started this thread was a conclusion in itself. A subjective opinion, an assumption, a belief that has no provable basis in fact. The conclusion being that there is a god and "he" may figure into K's teachings.

Hi Jack and all. If I may I'd like to state what I understand this thread to be exploring. When I first read K many years ago, I found it very interesting when he talked about being in contact with this "source of all energy" or whatever other name he gave it. As I was so impressed by the sharpness of Krishnamurti's observations and the depth of his understanding across such a wide range of fields, I took what he said about "the source of all energy" very seriously. Krishnamurti was certainly not a person to indulge in fantasy, belief or speculation. He seemed to have direct contact with something which was very interesting. I've never actually discussed this topic with others though. Jack, can I ask you what you made of it when you read Krishnamurti talking about "the source of all energy" and all the rest of it? I know that we have to find things out for ourselves and not to take Krishnamurti's or anybody else's word for anything but surely we can discuss this topic.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 18 May 2017 #34
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Jack, can I ask you what you made of it when you read Krishnamurti talking about "the source of all energy" and all the rest of it?

Are you talking about speculating, Sean?

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 18 May 2017 #35
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3072 posts in this forum Offline

natarajan shivan wrote:
Tom Paine wrote:

Are you trying to say that God has a place in the teachings
Yes, so long as it's not reduced to a known.

I'm not sure that it's helpful to bring in the notion of 'God' at all. There's so many obvious associations to the word....which is likely why K avoided using it other than talking about all the false Gods.

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 18 May 2017 #36
Thumb_leaping_fire_frog_by_sirenofchaos natarajan shivan India 80 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I'm not sure that it's helpful to bring in the notion of 'God' at all

The question of help is a deviation from the original question posed, nevertheless I am in agreement with what you have written.

K would have objected to the notion of 'God' so long as it hinders one's understanding that one has to start working with oneself, but beyond that, imo, he wouldn't interfere. But K followers sometime's tend to be dogmatic and philosophize to elevate whatever he has said to be a truth which is valid at all times and therefore consider it as sacred and inviolable, the result is that, in-effect one is led back to the original theological ideas one has entertained as will be evident in their attachment to the words, the incomplete understanding eventually withering away.

contraria sunt complementa

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 18 May 2017 #37
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Are you talking about speculating, Sean?

Tom, I hope you're not speculating that I was talking about speculating. That would be spectacularly speculative of you if you were!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 19 May 2017 #38
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 4908 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Jack, can I ask you what you made of it when you read Krishnamurti talking about "the source of all energy" and all the rest of it?

Sean if I made anything of it at all I can't remember what it was. What I have been trying to bring out in my posts, and not doing a very good job of it apparently, is that the word "god" is an extremely loaded word. Specifically I mean there is a tremendous amount of baggage, ie conditioning that accompanies the word "god".

God is a concept with which most, if not all of us, are very familiar. I'm not sure any of us can discuss "god" objectively and completely free of our life-long conditioning symbolized by the word...."god".

Obviously, we each have our own perception, idea or belief of what god is or isn't. Personally I consciously stopped believing in any kind of god and ended any association with organized religion when I was nine or ten years old. When I was much younger, around five or six years old, I was told that there was no Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, etc. Several years later I also lumped "god" into this list of mythical, supernatural beings. It seemed natural to do so.

I'm not sure if I am just rambling in this post or have actually made a cogent point. I don't have much interest in any intellectual/hypothetical discussions and I don't do them very well.

So now I ask you to answer your own question to me if you don't mind. What did you make of it Sean?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 23 May 2017 #39
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:
So now I ask you to answer your own question to me if you don't mind. What did you make of it Sean?

Hi Jack. Thanks for your reply which made a lot of sense to me. I agree that the word "God" is very loaded and perhapd idiot? used it to stimulate debate in the title of this thread. Is this a fair assessment idiot??

Anyway, to answer your question Jack, when I first read K and he implied that he had some sort of direct experience of "the source of all energy" or whatever one can call it, I thought this was very significant. He seemed to have explored way beyond where the vast majority of us ever go and come across something "true". Of course we can't understand anything about this approaching it from "the known". I'm not sure where that leaves us. I suppose we have to explore for ourselves.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 23 May 2017 #40
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 209 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
I agree that the word "God" is very loaded and perhapd idiot? used it to stimulate debate in the title of this thread. Is this a fair assessment idiot??

I used the word "God" because K uses it. And he seems to use it fully aware that it has many meanings for various people.

One thing K frequently discusses with questions about "God" is how people project onto their belief in God. God becomes for them their own ideas about God. We hear statements like this from K and nod in agreement.

Then we hear descriptions from K about "the other," "the source of all energy," "the benediction." Do we say, "Ah yes, K is now projecting on God himself?" Of course not! We think, "K is describing direct contact with something profound and deep."

Now why is that? Why do we NOT cut people a break in their "beliefs" and "projections" about God? And why is what K describes not a projection at all, but rather reality?

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 23 May 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 23 May 2017 #41
Thumb_open-uri20171115-31086-13da1wu-0 Dan McDermott United States 1215 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Why do we NOT cut people a break in their "beliefs" and "projections" about God?

As I see it, K primarily uses the word God to refer to our fear of the unknown. We don't know why we are here or what is going to happen to us so we have invented beliefs in gods as a comfort. So in this sense 'god' is a direct outcome of our ignorance of what we are. Why not let others have their 'gods'?, I agree with you. (though we see in some cases that this 'belief' leads to terrible violence). But this here all has to do only with ourselves, our understanding. If we are unable or unwilling to get to the root of fear in ourselves, then criticizing another is just a cruel hypocrisy. That is what is valuable here I think, not speculation about what we can never know but this understanding that fear is rooted in the concept of psychological time. And that has created the chaos in us and around us.

This post was last updated by Dan McDermott Tue, 23 May 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 23 May 2017 #42
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 576 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Why do we NOT cut people a break in their "beliefs" and "projections" about God? And why is what K describes not a projection at all, but rather reality?

Hello idiot?. I don't know what you mean by "cutting people a break" in their beliefs and projections. Could you elaborate please?

Why is what K describes not a projection but reality? Well, we don't know, do we? The only thing we can go on is what K says about other things. I mean, when he talks about attachment, for example, he seems to be extremely observant and have great understanding. Based on that, I would say that K was a man who had a good grasp of differentiating between projection, imagination and reality but as he was a human being anything is really possible. What do you think about this idiot?.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 23 May 2017 #43
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
I used the word "God" because K uses it.

K used the word sparingly and qualified it's use with disclaimer of caution. If K used the word "poo-poo", would we discuss what he meant and the deep human connections? Which are very significant by the way.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 23 May 2017 #44
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 235 posts in this forum Offline

Dan McDermott wrote:
K primarily uses the word God to refer to our fear

Yes, our attempt to put the unknowable into packages that fit our mechanism of consumption (of knowledgeinformationauthority).

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 31 - 44 of 44 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)