Tux

Thoughts on UG Krishnamurti

Recommended Posts

He passed away in 2007. I've listened to some of his later broadcasts. I got the impression this is what a slightly bitter person is like when they've become enlightened. Don't know how accurate that is, but its what came to mind watching his later videos. Enlightened, but grouchy!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has pretty deep insights but don't offer 'methods' on how you may realize it. He thinks enlightenment is some sort of freak accident

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like a story he told a story about a father trying to meditate, and then yelling at his kids for interrupting his meditation. He made a valid point that is this what 'meditation' does to people?

 

He is also the one who said he visited Ramana Maharshi and said he was not impressed, which I thought was funny:

 

http://www.realization.org/page/doc0/doc0031.htm

 

I haven't read too much else of him but he is an interesting figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like a story he told a story about a father trying to meditate, and then yelling at his kids for interrupting his meditation. He made a valid point that is this what 'meditation' does to people?

 

He is also the one who said he visited Ramana Maharshi and said he was not impressed, which I thought was funny:

 

http://www.realization.org/page/doc0/doc0031.htm

 

I haven't read too much else of him but he is an interesting figure.

 

I can recommend some good interviews of he's that will really get you thinking and seeing things differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

He is also the one who said he visited Ramana Maharshi and said he was not impressed, which I thought was funny:

 

http://www.realization.org/page/doc0/doc0031.htm

 

I haven't read too much else of him but he is an interesting figure.

 

Heh, he definitely has a perspective that I never look at.

 

Wonder how one can develop a mindset where they think Ramana Maharshi is being arrogant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone wrote on a Youtube video

 

U G Krishnamurti did not see the whole, he saw in part only.

 

 

 

The response thus follows;

 

How can the whole see itself? If there's a witness then there's still a division there. And all that UG was trying to say is exactly that there's neither an observer nor an observed. And if both are absent, there's nothing to be seen at all. That's all. It's your thinking that is creating them. And you have no way to see anything without the use of the knowledge that you have of what you're looking at. Even the looker is a product of this thinking. So any talk of seeing, seer, seen is hogwash.

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI6h3RVj4wE

Edited by jconnar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He seems to run down "other important figures" not because he wants to compete with them but rather he knows you are the only authority(I see for myself what the world is) of yourself and for you to give away that authority to another is irresponsible.

 

"When he teaches", he likes to take you with him to explore. Exploring with him requires clear thinking.

Many times I find myself re-reading/listening/watching pieces of he's stuff to follow what is being said.

 

Here is a good interview, it was the first one a friend refered me to:

Edited by BeforeThawt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He seems to run down "other important figures" not because he wants to compete with them but rather he knows you are the only authority(I see for myself what the world is) of yourself and for you to give away that authority to another is irresponsible.

 

"When he teaches", he likes to take you with him to explore. Exploring with him requires clear thinking.

Many times I find myself re-reading/listening/watching pieces of he's stuff to follow what is being said.

 

Because in his view, every field of human thought is false.

 

What thought doesn't separate? But this leads to more thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because in his view, every field of human thought is false.

 

What thought doesn't separate? But this leads to more thoughts.

 

I think its a pointer what you said there. "What thought doesn't separate?" I think it points you in a direction.

 

From what I understand (i will use my own experience as an example here):

 

Thought or thinking is a separation of "what is" or "the now moment". It fragments "what is" into concepts which are based on the past (based on my past conditioning).

 

This becomes very apparent to me for example if I watch myself meet someone for the first time, there is this looking phase of no thought, just observing for a second or two... and then thought sets in and begins doing its work (this person is quite tall, look at those nice eyes, what funny face this one has etc...) and I feel myself removed from the moment. Same thing when looking at a new car etc... No thought... then thoughts come in.

 

Another way you can notice this shift (or fragmentation of now);

Become present, go into the now moment (very little to no thought, dont create a mental idea of this, just slow down, breath, become aware, look without thinking).

Then after remaining there for a few moments, start thinking about something and watch as the now begins to slip away. Then start thinking deeply about something (a problem you have, something you really have to do and dont know how to do it) and watch and see your awareness of "the now" diminish or disappear.

 

Thought to me appears to fragment "the now" until I have little or no touch with it.

From observing myself and my family and friends I've realised I/we are trapped in thought (our own conditioning).

 

I think people like Krishnamurti and many others are pointing us in a different direction, away from the obsessive(or compulsive) use of thought.

 

 

cheers,

B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that you may be confusing UG Krishnamurti with Jiddu Krishnamurti.

Both had very different points of view.

 

Like thelerner, I see UG as an awakened curmudgeon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He seems to run down "other important figures" not because he wants to compete with them but rather he knows you are the only authority(I see for myself what the world is) of yourself and for you to give away that authority to another is irresponsible.

 

"When he teaches", he likes to take you with him to explore. Exploring with him requires clear thinking.

Many times I find myself re-reading/listening/watching pieces of he's stuff to follow what is being said.

 

Here is a good interview, it was the first one a friend refered me to:

 

But this is Jiddu Krishnamurti.

The only thing they have in common is their surname !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uppaluri Gopala Krishnamurti (July 9, 1918 – March 22, 2007), known as U.G. Krishnamurti, was an Indian thinker who said that there is no "enlightenment".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UG_Krishnamurti

 

 

Funny how he has been referred to as a thinker, when he was always pointing to that which is beyond thinking.

Edited by jconnar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is anyone familiar with this guy? Is he totally dead or just a disgrace? :P

He is what he is for all that is is all that is.

 

Like he would say: "for all that is, is really all that it is. I is what I is, why should I be more of all that is when I can be less of all that is?"

 

Don't get me wrong. He be nice peepol sometimes too you know? In all places, playing with less then his full capacity for playfulness with the player that he has been playing with. Self with out self. Place them in proper perspective for proper playing. Playing with the self with all that is. Don't play the dull player, play the playfull player, play with all that is. Right here and right now! You are all that is. That with you are not is all that is and that with you are not, you are also playing with. You are all that is playing with yourself. Enjoy this eternal game of playfulness. For that is who you are. A player playing with higher playfullness of play in all places possible for the sake play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts, on what I've been exposed to of UG Krishnamurti: it's possible to be enlightened and still be a jerk.

 

Interesting guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites