Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening

Kinfonet Interviews - Question


Are there any aspects of Krishnamurti's teaching that you find implausible or difficult to accept?


Displaying answers 26 - 50 of 276 in total

The myth/implication/assumption/hint/denial or whatever of 'enlightenment' (although I'm aware his own wariness of that term)

Hendrik Mentz
Tue, 09 Jun 2009

Yes. His thoughts about dreams and relationships.

Daya Jayaratne
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

After read all (great deal of) the books by Krishnamurti I must say that I have not found any such aspects.

Kari Jansson
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

Most of it I can accept. Sometimes the wording is hard to decipher. Sometimes I don't "get it". But not because I think it is implausible.

Perhaps I should say what I mean here by "accept". I mean an absence of resistance. I mean that when I read a passage in K., and then reflect, and look at life, my life, the world, I can usually say to myself, "That's right!" I don't mean I just take K's word for it.

James Turner
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

When I feel its implausible or difficult to accept... that's usually promising!

Jackie McInley
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

Not so far. Only been at this for about 48 years.

Merlin Leach
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

Sometimes he got off the track, into fields in which he was not qualified to speak. But seldom.
He would not like us to accept his teachings! Rather to discover what is.

David McMullin
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

No... Mind you, come to think of it... er...I'll get back to you.

Ray Mutch
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

The implausibility or difficulty of K's teachings is in direct proportion to one's stupidity. The teachings have an infinite depth and there is always more to fathom.

H P Shukla (account deleted)
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

Yes. I am not accepting his views on Guru, as he Himself is looked by many as their Guru.

Ravi chandar
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

Not at all

Rolando Cubillos
Wed, 10 Jun 2009

No.

James PAUL
Thu, 11 Jun 2009

Yes, I find there are definitely some problems with the teachings. The main one being that he placed no importance on the need to undergo a kundalini or spiritual awakening experience such as he himself did in 1922. Another one being that he tossed aside the moral compass as time went on.

Robert Michael (account deleted)
Thu, 11 Jun 2009

Not so far at this moment.

Charly Mann
Thu, 11 Jun 2009

This would require some dialogue.

David Bruneau
Thu, 11 Jun 2009

As I said before one can see conditioning for oneself. As Krishnamurti said "Look for yurself" and also "its not difficult, it just takes hard work.

Terrence Webster-Doyle
Fri, 12 Jun 2009

K has often spoken of a physical transition in the brain as a pre-requirement to "enlightenment".
I disagree as K was raised free of conditioning (by Charles Leadbetter) and I feel that K did not fully understand the power of condidioning.
We were all once at where K's teachings are leading us.
As children, prior to the conditioning, we lived in the freedom that K speaks of.
We need to return to our childhood.

James Sarafin
Fri, 12 Jun 2009

NO maam & NO Sir!! For the intelligence that orchestrated those teaching is beyond any of duality's capacities.

Melbourne Smith
Fri, 12 Jun 2009

My life is running by drive of Krishnamurti teaching.

madhav mool
Fri, 12 Jun 2009

My life is running by drive of Krishnamurti teaching.

madhav mool
Fri, 12 Jun 2009

I have difficulty with "love." While I am most likely to attribute it to the people and/or place associated with that moment when I experience it most profoundly . . . maybe it has more to do with my capacity to feel it than to whoever or whatever I am being exposed to in the moment of the feeling of it. Yeah . . . still don't really understand what love is (but I'm getting a better understanding of what it's not: not dependant upon a particular person, place, or thing).

Linda Thorlakson (account deleted)
Fri, 12 Jun 2009

Some times,his expression is not direct.Any British or American Professor in dialogue witrh him has a more direct expression.
Some times,he is logical only half way.
To give an example,
He prefers "attention" to"reception" or concentration".He objects to"reception" with the counter "who is the receiver?"
One can formulate similar counters for any expression like "who is the attender when you attend?"
Some times, he uses an expression in different senses. For example, he uses the expression "reality" in different senses.At some places it is used as equivalent to "Truth". At other places, it is used as equivalent to the psychological baggage one carries. The two senses are vastly different.
i tend to believe, rightly or wrongly,that he was trying to communicate the incommunicable and so such lapses or inconsistencies are possibly inevitable.

prasad mulupuri
Sat, 13 Jun 2009

Perhaps there are some. His teachings are repetitious, he had much information but failed to reveal it. So you see so many struggling with his words.

Monic Devi
Sun, 14 Jun 2009

I have not as yet come across anything like that.... but again I have not as yet read it all!

malgosia plejewska
Sun, 14 Jun 2009

THOUGH I "BELIEVE" WHAT K SAID THAT "YOU ARE THE WORLD" I DON'T THINK I FULLY COMPREHEND THE IMPLICATION OF THAT STATEMENT-I DON'T REALLY FEEL IT SO.

GOVIND MANCHI KRISHNAMURTHY
Sun, 14 Jun 2009

Displaying answers 26 - 50 of 276 in total