/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15058690]

What does /lit/ think about J. Krishnamurti‘s philosophy?

[Anonymous No.15059357]

Don't know much about it OP, what do you think?

[Anonymous No.15060410]

J. Krishnamurti, a man who struggled for ninety years - his last words have some great meaning. One of my friends was present there. Krishnamurti lamented, he lamented his whole life. He lamented that "people have taken me as an entertainment. They come to listen to me_." There are people who have listened to him for fifty years continually, and still they are the same people as had come for the first time to listen to him.

Naturally it is annoying and irritating that the same people_Most of them I know, because J. Krishnamurti used to come only once a year for two or three weeks to Bombay, and slowly, slowly all his followers in Bombay became acquainted with me. They all were sad about this point: What should be done? How can we make Krishnamurti happy?

The reason was that Krishnamurti only talked, but never gave any devices in which whatever he was talking about became an experience. It was totally his fault. Whatever he was saying was absolutely right, but he was not creating the right climate, the right milieu in which it could become a seed. Of course he was very much disappointed with humanity, and that there was not a single person who had become enlightened through his teachings. His teachings have all the seeds, but he never prepared the ground.

Zen does not deny entertainment the way J. Krishnamurti condemned it in his last testament to the world. He said, "Religion is not entertainment." That's true, but enlightenment can be vast enough to include entertainment in it.

Enlightenment can be multidimensional. It can include laughter, it can include love, it can include beauty, it can include creativity. There is nothing to keep it from the world and from transforming the world into a more poetic place, a more beautiful garden. Everything can be brought to a better state of grace.

https://www.osho.com/read/osho/osho-on-topics/j-krishnamurti

[Anonymous No.15060422]

>>15058690
I like his facial structure.

[Anonymous No.15060439]

>>15058690
gobbledigook

[Anonymous No.15060598]

>>15060410
That site is some weird shit, anon. Probably best to not form opinions of people based on the ramblings of some new age hack,

[Anonymous No.15060765]

>>15060598
nice try. try harder

[Anonymous No.15060802]

>tfw ug krishnamurti gets more attention than me on /lit/

>tfw you will always be the
shittier krishnamurti

[Anonymous No.15060855]

>>15060802
J. Krishnamurti is enlightened, and he is not orthodox—but he has gone to the other extreme: he is anti-orthodox. Anti should be underlined….

He hates orthodoxy, he hates all that has passed in the name of religion.

Remember the difference: I criticize it but I don't hate it. I don't even hate it! Krishnamurti has a relationship with it—I don't have any relationship with it—and that is where he has missed….

One time it happened, I was in Bombay, he was in Bombay, and he wanted to meet me. One of his chief disciples in India came to me and asked me—he knew me and he used to listen to me—"J. Krishnamurti wants to see you."
I said, "I have no problem—bring him."
But he said, "That is not the Indian way."
I said, "Krishnamurti does not believe in Indian or European or American ways."
He said, "He may not believe in them but everybody else does."

I said, "I am not going to meet everybody else. You say J. Krishnamurti wants to meet me: bring him. If I wanted to meet him, I would go to him, but I don't see the need."

But again and again his emphasis was: "He is older, you are younger"—l must have been only forty at the time, and Krishnamurti was almost double my age.
I said, "That's perfectly true, but I don't see any need to meet him. What am I going to say to him? I have no questions to ask, I have only answers to give. It will look very awkward if I start answering him when he has not asked anything. He will be expecting a question from me. That is impossible—I have never asked. I have only answers, so what can I do?
"And of course he is enlightened, so what is the need?—at the most we can sit silently together.

http://www.oshoworld.com/biography/innercontent.asp?FileName=biography5/05-30-mystics.txt

[Anonymous No.15060866]

>>15060802
U.G. Krishnamurti is a shadow of an unenlightened intellectual giant. U.G. Krishnamurti is not even an intellectual giant, but he goes on preaching the same words, the same language, and tries to hide the fact.

Just the other day I saw an article about him in a newspaper. He was asked by the interviewer, "When and where did you become enlightened?" And his answer was, "I don't know when and where."

Enlightenment does not happen in time or in space. "When" and "where" are time and space. It happens when you are nowhere, no one. It happens when there is eternity, no time. But his answer may impress many people -- people are very gullible.

I am taking his case for a particular reason -- because the whole of the Western intelligentsia has become immensely interested in Zen, but their interest remains intellectual. They have written great books, and we will be discussing in this manifesto almost everyone who has written books on Zen.

My effort is to make you really clear that all these intellectuals may have written very beautiful books... I appreciate their scholarship, I appreciate their articulateness of expression, but they are not men of Zen, to say nothing of masters of Zen. Hence this manifesto is absolutely needed to make the whole world clear that Zen is not a mind affair. It is a no-mind space.

I told you that all the religions are saying, "Drop the ego." Zen goes beyond the ego and beyond the self. Except Zen, no religion has come to the point of going beyond the self, beyond the atman, beyond your spirit, beyond your individuality. It is absolutely a single man's contribution to human consciousness -- Gautam the Buddha's.

Zen is the ultimate flowering. Slowly, slowly improving the image of Gautam the Buddha, each master has contributed something, a new dimension to it. Gautam Buddha is the only person in the whole history of mankind who said, "Just dropping the ego will not help. It can be easily dropped

[Anonymous No.15060900]

>>15060866
UG pissed off Osho

>http://ug-k.blogspot.com/2007/04/encounter-if-you-are-searching-for.html?m=1

Former follower of Osho, a famous movie director from India, meets UG, leaves Osho, this continued to happen, Osho was very upset and started berating UG.

>The front office of the ashram had warned the sannyasi against seeing U.G. After they met U.G., many of Rajneesh's very close devotees had quit the ashram. I remember in those days, Rajneesh gave four talks against U.G., calling him all sorts of names. 'U.G., you have not said a word in response to the repeated attacks Rajneesh has been making on you of late. Why? I have also noticed that you don't say much against any particular guru,' I asked.

>His reply was unusual: Gurus play a social role. So do prostitutes. Unfortunately, in society, what the gurus are offering is not only socially acceptable but also considered the be-all and end-all of our existence. The others are not. You choose what suits you best...

[Anonymous No.15060906]

>>15060765
Anyone offering you a religious experience for a fee is a hack. The world is full of religious centers and retreats and monasteries all of which allow people to come and stay for free because they are fully supported by donations. If the teachings are legit and the people running the place are legit and are interested in nothing but spreading their teachings then they should have no problem finding willing supporters.

A brief look through that site showed me, alongside constant references to "Buddha" and "enlightenment", such wonders as a $25 fee for a "one day meditation pass" to a "meditation resort" featuring "a jacuzzi, tennis courts, and a vibrant nightlife". This is the very definition of new age hackery.

[Anonymous No.15062206]

>>15058690
i love him personally, he calls everyone out on their bullshit

[Anonymous No.15062384]

>>15058690
I prefer U.G. Krishnamurti

[Anonymous No.15062394]

>>15060866
>Enlightenment does not happen
Fix'd

[Anonymous No.15062464]

>>15058690
>>15060410
ug was the superior hack.

[Anonymous No.15062475]

>>15058690
Wasn't he groomed by theosophists to be some new age messiah but it failed?

[Anonymous No.15062482]

>>15060906
>equates the teachings of Osho with the organisation that sprung up from the profitisation of them

[Anonymous No.15062541]

Problems with spirituality is unless you shift the assemblage point , until the perception is changed you cannot understand any of this.
Half of the retards think they can rationalize or analyze their way into spirituality,god , half cant tell intuition from emotion .

You cannot understand it truly no matter how much you read because to understand it you already need a huge shift of perception , thats why to brainlets all this seems like a con like meaningless platitudes .

Thats why there are stories of zen masters kicking the disciple in the chest or spine to shift the center of awareness ,dislodge the position of assemblage point and then they can understand the teachings.
When you read that you're not the body nor mind it is only true when you really know that it is rather than believe it is so. Theres a world of difference.

[Anonymous No.15062553]

>>15058690
A hell of a lot better than U.G.

[Anonymous No.15062556]

>>15062541
Based and Nagual-pilled.

[Anonymous No.15063108]

>>15058690
Hindus btfo everyone in philosophy/metaphysics really makes you wonder