Krishnamurti
Krishnamurti - The iconoclast
Jiddu Krishnamurti
J. Krishnamurti on the Belief in Reincarnation
Jiddu Krishnamurti - Freedom From All Belief
Jiddu Krishnamurti - The Essence of His Philosophy
Jiddu Krishnamurti - On Choiceless Awareness - Understanding the Self
The Essence Of Jiddu Krishnamurti - Truth is beyond Time and Space
Jiddu Krishnamurti: The False Meaning Systems of Society Encage Your Mind
Videos - Jiddu Krishnamurti - The End of Thought is the Beginning of all Things
Video - J.Krishnamurti - Time is the psychological enemy of man
Krishnamurti: How am I to put an end to conflict in action?
Krishnamurti - Religion does not bring enlightenment
on Dhyna
On Dhyna
on Zen
On Zen
on Chan
On Chan
ZenFrog Navigation
ZenFrog Sitemap
The ZenFrog Feed Content
.
9 Comments
February 25, 2008 at 9:14 am
The crux of Krishnamurthy’s teachings revovles around, ” The art of listening, The art of learning.” Actully, what do these mind-boggling ideas mean? First of all one should understand, at least intellectually, that these ideas are not susceptible of any conclusion being arrived at, as according to K, anything psychological, a becoming, is an unmitigated illusion. What K talks can be equated with a non-volitional mind. But all the people who have listened to him, even the apparently serious ones, are disappointed that he does not give a method. Any psychological method is an antithesis of truth, according to K. Accustomed to heavily to the idea of doing something, rarely do we ponder that there is a state of being. For that being to flower, we must stand alone, not away from the external world, though it might be necessary at a certain level, but deep within not pursuing any psychological goal, not indulging in any analysis-in fact, creating a volt facie to the lives that we have been leading all along. One might ask whether all our security might not be taken away, little realising that there is no security within the field of thought. What a self-defeating and painful paradox.
March 13, 2008 at 12:53 pm
“You are seeking, asking, longing, to walk on the other shore. The other shore implies that there is this shore, and from this shore to get to the other shore there is space and time. That is what is holding you and bringing about this ache for the other shore. That is the real problem – time that divides, space that separates, the time necessary to get there and the space that is the distance between this and that. This wants to become that, and finds it is not possible because of the distance and the time it takes to cover that distance. In this there is not only comparison but also measurement, and a mind that is capable of measuring is capable also of illusion. This division of space and time between this and that is the way of the mind, which is thought. Do you know, when there is love space disappears and time disappears? It is only when thought and desire come in that there is a gap of time to be bridged. When you see this, this is that.”
The above statement of J.Krishnamurthy seems to be almost a revelation of the upanishadic knowledge of transcendental Brahman, the realization of which does not involve an action or movement in time, as all such actions, both the metaphysical and the mundane, belong to the realm of ignorance, believing in the becoming process of an illusory I. In the very introduction to his commentary on the vedantasutras, sankara has clarified this. This one chapter is enough; the rest of the sutras are mere polemics to entertain the academicians.
March 23, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Hi,
I thought you might be interested in adding Krishnamurti videos to your site.
I’ve made a portable video player which contains hours of Krishnamurti video. The player can be installed on your site by pasting two lines of code in to any of your pages. This is a free service.
http://krishnamurti-for-you.com/
If you have questions, or need assistance in installing the player, please let me know how I can help.
Have a good day,
Phil
March 24, 2008 at 6:47 am
Recently, I read a book called the inner life of Krishnamurthy, where the author traces the growth of K from the days of theosophy till his death. The author says that because Krishnamurthy thought that people might not be interested in the true message, if he acquiesced in the idea of the reality of the master, making a graven image of him, he confined himself only to the highest truth. The author says that K has accepted all that has happened to him as being true. Krishnamurthy has passed through all the chakras, in which process only he experienced terrible encounter with some pain. All the wisdom contained in the notebook, the author says, came to K during his encounter with the process. The author says that K is the greatest teacher of all times, being a tool for the highest of compassion to come to the world to guide the humainity, floundering in darkness.
March 26, 2008 at 1:14 am
Mr. Sankarraman, may I point out, one of your statements is a bit broad. In the Feb. 25 comment, you say, “But all the people who have listened to him, even the apparently serious ones, are disappointed that he does not give a method.”
I spend a great deal of time with people in the Krishnamurti community, where I live and around the world. They are in no way disappointed that he offered no method.
Most of them, particularly the serious ones, are quite clear that had K offered a method, he would have contradicted his core premise that “truth is a pathless land.” He offered no method for the simple reason that there isn’t one. A method implies a master who knows and a follower who doesn’t, which is separation, which is ultimately conflict. As Krishnamurti would say, “and one is again caught in the net.”
The news is very good. No method means absolute freedom.
For some, the news is bad. Freedom means it is completely up to the individual. That scares many people, who run to the shelter of their familiar self created prison. They are miserable, but their fear is greater than their misery. It is a tragedy played out in the violence that permeates every corner of the world.
April 7, 2008 at 7:03 pm
I don’t personally know whether the following is true or not.
The wikipedia page for Krishnamurti states the following:
“In a dismal prognosis, delivered 10 days prior his death in 1986, his words were simple, and emphatic: “nobody” – among his associates or the world at large – had understood Krishnamurti, his life, or the teaching he exposed.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiddu_Krishnamurti
If this is true (again, I can not verify this) then it would seem that “truth is a pathless land”, however true, may not be the final word in teaching technique.
Personally, my guess is that no path can bring one to a “radical transformation” or enlightenment as some may wish to call it.
However, most people do not require such a transformation, and methods may be very helpful indeed in assisting
them with their own needs, as they themselves perceive those needs.
Ruling out methods entirely may be as unhelpful as claiming that methods alone can bring one to the mountain top.
April 16, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Mr Troy
I am hundred percent in agreement with you that if K had given a method, that would have been a denial of his teachings. What I meant was, that the human mind conditioned to change within the field of thought, expects some reward. This is unconciously imbedded in the human psyche. Really serious ones would have understood the depth of K’s teaching, and should have understood that his message is centred around remaining in a state of not knowing anything, beyond the empirical world. Yes it is true: “The news is very good. No method means absolute freedom.
For some, the news is bad. Freedom means it is completely up to the individual.”
April 16, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Mr Phil Tanny,
What has been stated is true: ““In a dismal prognosis, delivered 10 days prior his death in 1986, his words were simple, and emphatic: “nobody” – among his associates or the world at large – had understood Krishnamurti, his life, or the teaching he exposed.” It is not an intellectual affair, but constitutes the core of life. Knowing that one has not understood itself is the first step.. One should have the honesty to acknowledge it. Further K said that the consciousness which animated his being would be dissolved, and that nobody can touch it. K didn’t promise like some self-styled avatars that he would come back to the world. Mind you, K is not an individual teacher, addressing some individuals, but is the very approximation to the highest, impersonal, essence, bringing about transformation at the root-level.
April 25, 2008 at 7:42 am
Krishnamurthy says that the word does not exist in the active present, but only in the past and future, as a movement of thought in time and space. This seems to be a remarkable statement, almost resembling the wisdom of the Upanishads and the yoga sutras of Patanjali. Krishnamurthy means, by the word, all conceptualisations and interpretations of what is. There is a verse in the yoga vasishta to the following effect: “Remaining in the immediate present that has come about inevitably, as a result of the externalised intellect, and not moving to the past and the future, the mind comes to ashes.” The wisdom of Vasishta seems to be almost similar to the, “What is,” of Krishnamurthy.
Leave a Reply