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

The beauty of it.


Displaying posts 61 - 73 of 73 in total
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 #61
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3032 posts in this forum Offline

Why we seek help here on the forum or from K...comments in parentheses by John Raica:

K: "Please let us put aside (these cultural ) generalities and consider what ( the spiritual) guidance or help means to each one of us. Does it not imply the resolving of our personal difficulties, pains, sorrows? If you are a 'spiritual' teacher, I come to you in order to be shown (how to create ) a happier way of life, or to be cured of some (karmic ?) disease.
We seek ( to be told how to achieve a peaceful ?) way of life from the 'enlightened' man, (as we expect some reliable ?) knowledge or information from the 'learned' (guy) .

We all want to 'achieve' (someting lasting?) , we want to be successful, we want to be ( care free and ?) 'happy' so we look for a ( certified ?) pattern of life which will help us to attain what we desire, sacred or profane. (And eventually ?) after trying many (worldly recipes & ) 'things' , we think of Truth as the supreme goal, the ultimate peace and happiness, and we want to attain It; so we are 'on the lookout' to find That which we desire.

But can ( the self-centred ?) desire ever make its way to Reality? Does not the desire for something, however noble breed (project its own ?) illusions? And as this (process of ?) desire acts, does it not set up (its own psychological -) structures (based on ?) accepting authority, imitation and fear? This is the actual 'psychological' process, is it not? And is
this 'help' , or self-deception?"

T: Now, as K says it's useless to seek help or guidance from another in 'spiritual' matters....in resolving our pain and suffering, why did he spend over 50 years and countless hours giving talks? He could simply have put up a sign outside of Saanen or Ojai, or wherever he was staying: "Go away...no help to be found here"

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Mon, 26 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 #62
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 190 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Now, as K says it's useless to seek help or guidance from another in 'spiritual' matters....in resolving our pain and suffering, why did he spend over 50 years and countless hours giving talks? He could simply have put up a sign outside of Saanen or Ojai, or wherever he was staying: "Go away...no help to be found here"

There are certain dilemmas inherent in K teaching, yes?

If spiritual teachers are of no use, why did K spend his life doing spiritual teaching? If freedom from the known is vital, what can one do when there is no method? If true meditation or awareness is choiceless, completely free of any intentionality, than what can one do when it doesn’t spontaneously show up? We are left paralyzed, without a solution.

So let’s take up the first of these dilemmas. We are K-interested people. (I assume or why else are you here?) We have, to one degree or another, been moved by K teachings. And now we return to his teaching about the uselessness of spiritual teachers and see that it contradicts that we have already been “taught” by him!

Is K a special exception? All spiritual teachers are problematic except K? Why would that be? If there is a problem with gurus then surely the same must apply to K. So we need to clarify, to be crystal clear, about what the problems with gurus are.

You know, none of us lives in isolation. Even if you go off to a cave in Tibet or something, you are still a social animal and you are connected to all humanity. You are relationship. You have an effect on others and others have an effect on you. If you never pick up a spiritual book, you are still in contact with others, some of whom have read spiritual books or been involved with some kind of spirituality. So there’s no purity; we’re all a jumble of connectivity.

Michael Krohnen, in his book 1001 Lunches with K, tells us about K relating little spiritual stories a number of times. Anyone with a background in Zen Buddhism will recognize these as Zen anecdotes! You have to conclude that someone, who had read Zen stories, passed them on to K, probably without attributing them to their Zen sources, and K apparently liked them and retold them. The man who “never read any spiritual books” got contaminated anyway!

So none of us live in a vacuum.

The best a spiritual teacher can do is to point you back to yourself, to your own investigation, which then eliminates the need for the spiritual teacher, doesn’t it?

Clarify for yourself what is problematic about gurus. How you get an image about what enlightenment might be and how you then aim for it. And how that image limits your discovery of actuality. And how ideas of the guru can close off your freedom to explore. Basically spiritual teaching is part of the known, the past, and with it you remain entangled in the known rather than free of it.

Only your own investigation right here right now has any chance of freedom from the known. The best spiritual teaching can really do is point you back to yourself. Then it is up to you to discover if there can be freedom from yourself, from the known, and from all spiritual teaching, including from K spiritual teaching.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Mon, 26 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 #63
Thumb_untitled5 Ken D United States 11 posts in this forum Offline

What did Krishnamurti say when Sidney Field told him "I'm going through a stage, Krishnaji, where I simply cannot hear another talk."?

A. "Krishnaji laughed. "Thank God for that," he shot back."

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 26 Jun 2017 #64
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3032 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
There are certain dilemmas inherent in K teaching, yes?

Don't forget K's statement when he disolved the Order of the Star...."My goal is to set man unconditionally free." Then he says not to seek help from others. Weren't the talks his way to give help....to set man free?

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 #65
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 207 posts in this forum Offline

You guys have the chic to make something that seems so simple very complicated. If someone with a good eye sees something and try to share it with someone else, and says: please don't accept anything that I say but see by yourself, see if what I say is true or not, discover by yourself what is true, then where is the dilemna ? All his work seems to me like but a description of what is, of what is reality. Though, whether one sees that what he says is true or not is another matter.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Tue, 27 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 2 readers
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 #66
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3032 posts in this forum Offline

Good point Rich. I never thought of the 'teaching' like that before. In a way K is describing how the human mind works and telling us to not accept his authority, but to investigate for ourselves....to verify for ourselves if what he says is true or not. In this sense he's different than a spiritual teacher or guru who tells you how to live or what to think. Interesting...there's really no authority in K. We elevate K to the status of teacher or authority because we want to be told how to live....we feel lost and want someone to show us the way.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 27 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 #67
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 190 posts in this forum Offline

Okay, which is simple and which is complicated:

1) Any spiritual teacher can be problematic.

2) Spiritual teachers are problematic, except Krishnamurti, because he just describes reality and asks you to verify it, even though lots of other teachers say they describe reality and ask you to verify it. K is not really an authority even though we sometimes take him that way.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 #68
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3032 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
2) Spiritual teachers are problematic, except Krishnamurti, because he just describes reality and asks you to verify it, even though lots of other teachers say they describe reality and ask you to verify it. K is not really an authority even though we sometimes take him that way.

The problem, if there is any, is when we’re seeking an authority to tell us how to live or what to think(isn't that what most gurus do?)....making K into an authority. If we just listen to what he says out of interest, where's the problem?

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 27 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 #69
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 207 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
2) Spiritual teachers are problematic, except Krishnamurti, because he just describes reality and asks you to verify it, even though lots of other teachers say they describe reality and ask you to verify it. K is not really an authority even though we sometimes take him that way.

Exactly. So is the problem the teacher, the speaker ? Or the listener ? Someone, anyone, your neigbour your girlfriend or a so called great guru say, pointed to something about life, about our confusion, or compassion etc .... Are we gone start to worship him or her and become a follower of everthing that will be said ? So we are creating the guru, the great wise man. But the message, if there was one, is lost. What is essential is the thing that is pointed out, which can be valid or not. Isn't it ?

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Tue, 27 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 27 Jun 2017 #70
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 207 posts in this forum Offline

There seems to be a dilemna about K. yes. He have a background that we can hardly imagine. He was in all this from childhood. Though, he says: I am not your guru. You can make a guru out of me, but I am not. So, as Idiot? says: we must be clear about if we merely accept or see by ouselves, what he ( or anyone ) say or pointed out. Generaly, the followers of a guru just accept what is said without questioning. They worship the man or the woman , and conform to the autority of the guru. K. is different in this, that he denied being an autority. He say: follow the truth, not me.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Wed, 28 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Jun 2017 #71
Thumb_3740 richard head United States 98 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
is the problem the teacher, the speaker ? Or the listener ?

The problem of course is the voices between the ears. We accept and reject authority "out there" but we rely on the authority of our own thinking, to decide. There, lies the problem.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Jun 2017 #72
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1030 posts in this forum Offline

Rich Nolet wrote:
So is the problem the teacher, the speaker ? Or the listener ?

Hi Rich,

Assuming it is true is this laying in the teaching, in the speaker or in the listener ?
Or is it that truth stands on its own and some is describing it and someone can find it.

Do we need any of them to find truth ??

QOTD: Ojai, California | 3rd Public Talk 28th May, 1944

Is it not very important that one must understand oneself above everything else?
For if we do not understand ourselves we shall not understand anything else for the root of understanding lies in ourselves. In understanding myself, I shall understand my relationship with another, with the world; for in me, as in each one, is the whole; I am the result of the whole, of the past. This concern to understand oneself may appear superficially to be egocentric, selfish, but if you consider it you will see that what each one of us is, the world, the State, society is; and to bring a vital change in the environment, which is essential, each one must begin with himself. In understanding himself and so transforming himself, he will inevitably bring about the necessary and vital change in the State, in the environment. The recognition and understanding of this fact will bring a revolution in our thinking-feeling.

Truth will unfold itself for those who enquire their own actions and only to them and for them and to or for no one else.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 28 Jun 2017 #73
Thumb_nolet Rich Nolet Canada 207 posts in this forum Offline

The quote is pointing to something that maybe we haven't seen before. I don't see anything wrong with that. Though, it bring us back to understand ourselves. So , the truth in what is being said is an indication, an awakening of something that , in my case, was hidden. From there, I am on my own, if I can say it that way.

This post was last updated by Rich Nolet Wed, 28 Jun 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 61 - 73 of 73 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.)