J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: What is the Dark Night of the Soul in Buddhist terms?

Post by Saengnapha »

Yan kong wrote: Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:39 am
It's a flawed religion at best since there is no lineage. There's a doctrine, I've read just three threads on this forum where people go on and on and on about it.

Also, the quote about violence is rather silly. It's a bit ridiculous to ignore the complex conditions that make people different.
All religions are flawed. Just take a look around you! If you feel that JK has a doctrine, you are missing his points or haven't really read very much of what he has said. Perhaps you are looking for something that doesn't exist. Whatever that might be, it might be a good idea to examine your own motivations and see what it is that you want and how you might go about getting it. Getting it is the hard part because there is nothing to get, yet your whole being is looking for some kind of identity. Lineage is an idea that you've latched on to and given some 'special' meaning to. This is just more conditioning coming from our shared past.
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

Hello everyone.

I feel krishnamurti is right.

Krishnamurti and Buddhism (for me) is understanding about yourself. What is desire fear lust.

Krishnamurti said something like : when you understand how bad are thought, you just cut them.
Buddha said : to remove thought (ego) we have to cut the fioul. So cut anything can create to us desire.

Please look this short video :



It's about krishnamurti speaking about guru Osho when he said I am enlightment, I stop my desire.
And would like explanation about krishnamurti reply with his simile with water and wind.

In this video we have a clue. But my brain is too stupid to get it.

The big big big difference is about time. Krisnaji said you can not improve yourself because improve have a sense of time. Be enlightment is timeless. How can you rich timeless with time? The idea about improving yourself is a false!

Buddha said : slowly slowly life by life, put merits etc...control your desire.


I read many many books of krishnamurti. I read digha nikaya, most of it.
Please can you give an hand to understand to relationship. Both have right. So this is two way or it is the same meaning but we lose understanding?

Please reply with sutta and arguments.
Points of view like : Buddha gave to the world many arahant. Krishnamurti no. Buddha the best. Ok this kind point of view could be pretty useless but we are on a free thinking forum.


One idea : Buddha spoke about cutting dukkha. Nothing more. Krishnamurti say on my understanding something more holistic.

Thank you for you help. I am on it since two weeks everyday.
auto
Posts: 4579
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by auto »

fornoxe wrote: Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:20 pm Hello everyone.

I feel krishnamurti is right.

Krishnamurti and Buddhism (for me) is understanding about yourself. What is desire fear lust.

Krishnamurti said something like : when you understand how bad are thought, you just cut them.
Buddha said : to remove thought (ego) we have to cut the fioul. So cut anything can create to us desire.

Please look this short video :


It's about krishnamurti speaking about guru Osho when he said I am enlightment, I stop my desire.
And would like explanation about krishnamurti reply with his simile with water and wind.

In this video we have a clue. But my brain is too stupid to get it.

The big big big difference is about time. Krisnaji said you can not improve yourself because improve have a sense of time. Be enlightment is timeless. How can you rich timeless with time? The idea about improving yourself is a false!

Buddha said : slowly slowly life by life, put merits etc...control your desire.


I read many many books of krishnamurti. I read digha nikaya, most of it.
Please can you give an hand to understand to relationship. Both have right. So this is two way or it is the same meaning but we lose understanding?

Please reply with sutta and arguments.
Points of view like : Buddha gave to the world many arahant. Krishnamurti no. Buddha the best. Ok this kind point of view could be pretty useless but we are on a free thinking forum.


One idea : Buddha spoke about cutting dukkha. Nothing more. Krishnamurti say on my understanding something more holistic.

Thank you for you help. I am on it since two weeks everyday.
by he way most of the comments say its not Osho he is talking about.

similes of sea, wind and earth was made to make sure he would understand when he said.

The man who he was talking about said he has reached the end, enlightenment having control over senses, body and desires. He used that simile to provoke him asking what are you holding, Words?
JK told:
"Do you see the sea, can you hold that water in your hand, when you hold that water on your hand its no longer the sea."

that above sentence he uses it to destroy those who follow traditional path(what has step and destination). The one he talked about said he reached the end(enlightenment).

lets see a Sutta,

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .wlsh.html
"As for this 'I am' you mention, friend Khemaka, what is it? Do you say this 'I am' is the body or not the body,... feelings,... perceptions,... mental formations,... consciousness or not consciousness?"

"No, friends, I do not say this 'I am' is the body,... consciousness, nor that it is other than the body,... consciousness. Yet with regard to the five groups of clinging,[1] 'I am' comes to me,[2] but I do not consider it (by way of wrong views) as 'This I am.' It is just like the scent of a blue, red or white lotus.[3] If someone were to say, 'The scent belongs to the petals, or the color, or the fibers,'[4] would he be describing it correctly?"
"Surely not, friend."

"Then how would he describe it correctly?"

"As the scent of the flower, would be the correct explanation."
So the water on hand doesn't belong to the sea, but is seawater.

But likely JK doesn't meant that and no further explanation(doubt the conversation were wholesome anyway there). Also at the end of the video he says "learning about the pleasure and fear, gets you free from tortures of fear and pursuit of the pleasure"(that he just says like a winner of a match)
idk how much compatibility is there with budhism, he uses it to challenge traditional paths what pretty much are about sense restraint and following path.

JK sound more like an entertainer for those who don't follow path and doesn't have any fear of God and using knowledge what bewilders listeners into being high.
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

Thank you for you reply.

Even with your explanation, I could not understand.

Krishnamurti took this simile about water and wind in a particular way.

Does not matter if it's Osho or someone else. It's someone who attain enlightment with control desire.

Krishnamurti say it's impossible because the one who control the desire is the same who want it. So control desire make you kind of psychotic in one way (no judgement here, I try to explain).

So water and see should represent something : I don't understand what it is.
The hand who collect water should represent something but I don't understand what it is.

And the impossibility to take all water in your hand means something I could not understand.

For krishnamurti, following a path, a technic must not works because the brain, the conscious is on way is here to understand and apply the technic.

So we want to remove conscious by using conscious...that a point about krishnamurti.

And the another : the idea to improve yourself slowly can not works because conscious and time are link.

I am still trying to understand deeply his meeting about desire and pleasure. I will listen some krisnaji now...

Thank you. I hope we will find a krishnamurti expert here

Peace and love
sentinel
Posts: 3236
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:26 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by sentinel »

Hi fornoxe ,

Can you listen completely ? When you do that , thought is suspended only awareness at work . Comparatively , this is similar to Buddhism Mindfulness training .
But JK awareness is something very broad , not like Buddhism Mindfulness scope less embracing , inclusive and comprehensive .
You always gain by giving
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

Sadly I can't eat again because I am inside a Sri Lanka monastery with a very bad connection. Even surfing is very hard.

But I think I remember a bit. Maybe I miss understood something because I am French.
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

I finish the video and yes at the end he say something about understanding fear and desire.


But the simile about water and wind is still understood.
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

I did not give up and during one read about krishnamurti book :
threshold of silence , he explain with the same word.

About holding the water or wind is your hand.

And now I know the water and the wind mean : reality/truth.


Good bye
auto
Posts: 4579
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by auto »

fornoxe wrote: Mon Dec 31, 2018 6:16 am I did not give up and during one read about krishnamurti book :
threshold of silence , he explain with the same word.

About holding the water or wind is your hand.

And now I know the water and the wind mean : reality/truth.


Good bye
What Khrishanmurti meant by that simile?

also you should have write down the quote. And does Khrishnamurti has a book called "threshold of silence", or you mean the threshold of silence is the meaning of that quote?

Also the notion you don't have to practice, meditate etc is controversy part of his demographics.
the OP post quote:
Questioner: ...but you say nothing about any intimation of the transcendental, the divine, or whatever you like to call it.

J.Krishnamurti: The intimation of that can be found only in freedom, and any
statement about it is the denial of freedom; any statement about it becomes a
verbal communication without meaning. It is there, but it cannot be found or
invited, least of all imprisoned in any system, or ambushed by any clever tricks of
the mind. It is not in the churches or the temples or the mosques. There is no
path to it, no guru, no system that can reveal its beauty; its ecstasy comes only
when there is love. This is enlightenment.
if you take it out of the context you can lead to belive something what he himself doesn't even follow..

Just look around there are 10000x times more people who do progress and advange with meditation, discipline in and out of tradition, you don't even teach dog to sit without discipline.
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

So, why krishnamurti mean with water.

On my point of view.

Stop by force desire is not a way to that we call enlightment. Why? Because you push yourself against. Like masturbation for a monk. That could create a lot of suffering. But if you understand why you masturbate, the deep meaning of that, you stop without suffering. How many monks I meet trying to apply rules without understanding? I could not say (I am living inside monastery since 3 months in Sri Lanka).

Furthermore, when you control your desire, you have a entity who want to control. Duality again. Suffering between the perfect I want and the reality.


threshold of silence : is a krishnamurti book. But I think the translate from my own language is not correct.

And krishnamurti said we have to do meditation. You even have a book who is call the right meditation or something like that.
For him, meditation, if I understood properly is analyze. As Panna we can say. Be honest with you about my fear about this point : I am suffering on this path but at least I know it. What will happen if I try something else? I don't know. So I do nothing. In a shortcut.

And I am not a dog. Your example is pretty famous monk is that : a dog who like and apply discipline and make him a robot.

One thing we forget is the sentence about Bouddha teaching : I can learn only the end of suffering. So the Buddha teach the end of suffering. But it's easy to see how many are not happy. Stuck in routine, because they apply as a blind something they don't understand.
Buddha teaching was 2500y ago. Maybe something is wrong with that. Teaching was corrupt.

A monk life , I feel, dry your heart. And you think you are free because you are insensitive. Maybe you will reach nibbana with that. But maybe I want to give love and happiness. Nothing more. Fear and pain must not be hide. Reach nibbana is not acceptance about life. And not acceptance is suffering. I will suffer. Again and again. But between two tears I want to love share. Jhana happiness is lonely thing. And even big monk here looks not like so happy... Happiness is the only compass. And to reach true happiness and love, you have to do nibbana. But I feel monks are going further to nibbana/happiness/love



Ps : heuuu sorry.... not from krishnamurti. It is more about my own understanding.
auto
Posts: 4579
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by auto »

fornoxe wrote: Tue Jan 01, 2019 12:56 pm So, why krishnamurti mean with water.

On my point of view.

Stop by force desire is not a way to that we call enlightment. Why? Because you push yourself against. Like masturbation for a monk. That could create a lot of suffering. But if you understand why you masturbate, the deep meaning of that, you stop without suffering. How many monks I meet trying to apply rules without understanding? I could not say (I am living inside monastery since 3 months in Sri Lanka).

Furthermore, when you control your desire, you have a entity who want to control. Duality again. Suffering between the perfect I want and the reality.


threshold of silence : is a krishnamurti book. But I think the translate from my own language is not correct.

And krishnamurti said we have to do meditation. You even have a book who is call the right meditation or something like that.
For him, meditation, if I understood properly is analyze. As Panna we can say. Be honest with you about my fear about this point : I am suffering on this path but at least I know it. What will happen if I try something else? I don't know. So I do nothing. In a shortcut.

And I am not a dog. Your example is pretty famous monk is that : a dog who like and apply discipline and make him a robot.

One thing we forget is the sentence about Bouddha teaching : I can learn only the end of suffering. So the Buddha teach the end of suffering. But it's easy to see how many are not happy. Stuck in routine, because they apply as a blind something they don't understand.
Buddha teaching was 2500y ago. Maybe something is wrong with that. Teaching was corrupt.

A monk life , I feel, dry your heart. And you think you are free because you are insensitive. Maybe you will reach nibbana with that. But maybe I want to give love and happiness. Nothing more. Fear and pain must not be hide. Reach nibbana is not acceptance about life. And not acceptance is suffering. I will suffer. Again and again. But between two tears I want to love share. Jhana happiness is lonely thing. And even big monk here looks not like so happy... Happiness is the only compass. And to reach true happiness and love, you have to do nibbana. But I feel monks are going further to nibbana/happiness/love



Ps : heuuu sorry.... not from krishnamurti. It is more about my own understanding.
Well if you suffer and notice suffering then

https://accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors ... el277.html
"Faith, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for faith? 'Suffering' should be the reply.
Faith has suffering as a supporting condition. You should get faith, it is supporting condition for joy.
"The knowledge of destruction with respect to destruction has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for the knowledge of destruction? 'Emancipation' should be the reply.
"Emancipation, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for emancipation? 'Dispassion' should be the reply.
"Dispassion, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for dispassion? 'Disenchantment' should be the reply.
"Disenchantment, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for disenchantment? 'The knowledge and vision of things as they really are' should be the reply.
"The knowledge and vision of things as they really are, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are? 'Concentration' should be the reply.
"Concentration, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for concentration? 'Happiness' should be the reply.
"Happiness, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for happiness? 'Tranquillity' should be the reply.
"Tranquillity, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for tranquillity? 'Rapture' should be the reply.
"Rapture, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for rapture? 'Joy' should be the reply.
"Joy, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for joy? 'Faith' should be the reply.
"Faith, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for faith? 'Suffering' should be the reply.
"Suffering, monks, also has a supporting condition, I say, it does not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for suffering? 'Birth' should be the reply.
"And what is the supporting condition for birth?. 'Existence' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for existence? 'Clinging' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for clinging? 'Craving' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for craving? 'Feeling' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for feeling? 'Contact' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for contact? 'The sixfold sense base' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for the sixfold sense base? 'Mentality-materiality' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for mentality-materiality? 'Consciousness' should be the reply.
"What is the supporting condition for consciousness? 'Kamma formations' should be the reply.
"Kamma formations, monks, also have a supporting condition, I say, they do not lack a supporting condition. And what is the supporting condition for kamma formations? 'Ignorance' should be the reply.
Hey even gamblers pray for to get good results but still fail, this way they can cultivate more faith when they pray for their lives when running away from loansharks. Obviosuly faith elements needs be fulfilled.
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

Faith, Faith for what?

Why should I get Faith? To be sure Buddhism teaching is a good one?

I know things about desire fear and ego. And with this knowledge, I can not chose anymore the Monk's life? Why, because security. It's so secure to live as a monk here. I want insecurity. Unfear.

Sadly, very very sadly, I did 5 6 monastery in few months. everything's who said krishnamurti in this book (to come back to the topic) is truth. Monks become cold, hierarchical, with plenty of duty for some. I saw some sad, really sad. I saw jealous, interested by money, living, eating (8/10 monks are overweigh), receiting in Pali sacred text without apply what they say.

How many happy : maybe I meet one happy.

Play a game : where this sentence come from?

Muslim are untrustful people.
Muslim are angry people.

This 2 sentence come from 2 :
A. Extremist party
B. Hitler
Ç.dailai lama
D. Ganghi
E. Theravada monks
F. Obiwan Kenobi

Of course you need a disciple, if you go to a 5 days party taking drugs you will play as you desire want.

What I say : monks are not the best choice to apply Buddhism anymore. Trust me it's hard to me to say that because I was here to become a monk (I left everything I have in my country).

For me (looks about personal experience, if you wish, I created a topic few months ago), we must not try to go and find enlightment. Because when we say that, that mean you try to escape. Escape is a way from insatisfaction about what the reality is. Removing ego. Of course this is the point. How? Living inside the reality. Not the city, job etc...life's reality. That's mean living with people. Inside a community for exemple. Rainbow gathering is the best one as far as I experience. Why living inside a community? To meet people, share, help, singing together. And something can happen if you do that not for enlightment, you start to really love. Love without "I".
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

Religions, all around the world, they created suffering. Buddhism became a religion. I am sure it's was not like that or what the Buddha wanted. But it's a fact.

And people say I am Buddhist. If they think that, if someone attack Buddhism (someone attack a Buddha statut un Sri Lanka one week ago), they will attack back with a lot violence (some Buddhist ask him the death sentence because he removed a part of Buddha face). It's because they are attach about the idea : Buddhist fill up my I. I create my identity from Buddhism.

I deeply feel organization and system are not what we need.
Switch on your TV, and you will see thousand years about system, rules and fear. If I become a Buddhist monk, I don't have choice to say I am Buddhist. And when that start, nothing good can happen.
fornoxe
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by fornoxe »

I upload this file for 30days

https://ufile.io/cs395

I think everything is inside this 45ko krishnamurti's extract book.

My own extract from extract

You want more and more and more and more, and ‘‘the more’’ means that the past sensation has not been sufficient.....A mind which is seeking the ‘more’ is never conscious of ‘what is’ because it is always living in the ‘more’-in what it would like to be, never in ‘what is’. ....meditation is actually seeing ‘what is’...when no identification....not identified by thought.....There are only sensation.
So we are asking, is there a holistic awareness of all the senses, therefore, there is never asking for the ‘more’. I wonder if you follow all this ?. Are we together in this even partially?. and where there is this total-fully aware-of all the senses, awareness of it-not you are aware of it....the awareness of the senses in themselves-then there is no center-in which there is awareness of the wholeness. If you consider it, you will see that to suppress the senses...is contradictory, conflicting, sorrowful....To understand the truth you must have complete sensitivity. Do you understand Sirs?

I am in discussion with a monk who want me inside ... Of course. I don't say neither no. But what khrismurti say is so clear for me.

Every one know the simile sutta about castle. I try to find it...
auto
Posts: 4579
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: J.Krishnamurti discussion.

Post by auto »

fornoxe wrote: Wed Jan 02, 2019 8:28 am I upload this file for 30days

https://ufile.io/cs395

I think everything is inside this 45ko krishnamurti's extract book.

My own extract from extract

You want more and more and more and more, and ‘‘the more’’ means that the past sensation has not been sufficient.....A mind which is seeking the ‘more’ is never conscious of ‘what is’ because it is always living in the ‘more’-in what it would like to be, never in ‘what is’. ....meditation is actually seeing ‘what is’...when no identification....not identified by thought.....There are only sensation.
So we are asking, is there a holistic awareness of all the senses, therefore, there is never asking for the ‘more’. I wonder if you follow all this ?. Are we together in this even partially?. and where there is this total-fully aware-of all the senses, awareness of it-not you are aware of it....the awareness of the senses in themselves-then there is no center-in which there is awareness of the wholeness. If you consider it, you will see that to suppress the senses...is contradictory, conflicting, sorrowful....To understand the truth you must have complete sensitivity. Do you understand Sirs?

I am in discussion with a monk who want me inside ... Of course. I don't say neither no. But what khrismurti say is so clear for me.

Every one know the simile sutta about castle. I try to find it...
So what keeps you away from doing what Krishnamurti said right now(test it out)? You can be in your room observe sensations as they are..are you now free and happy, biggest happiness ever?

hmm what is more important is it coming aware of mind what is conscious of 'what is' or notice when mind wheren't conscious of 'what is'?
If you come aware of mind what is conscious of 'what is' then what, what i should do then??

i get it that he used the reasoning to outline why suppressing the senses is contradictory, conflicting, sorrowful etc.

SO,
He says there is 'never asking for the more' if mind is conscious of 'what is' because we are asking is there a holistic awareness. Basically when you are aware of your mind being conscious then you are enquiring about is there a holistic awareness,
namely:
'And where there is awareness of the senses in themselves-there is no center-in which there is awareness of the wholeness'
---
i get what JK says and what he points on.

1. being aware of mind being conscious
2. while at it, you are looking for the holistic without center point awareness
3. get it done, make it happen

i can make peace with JK..but how much you see his adherers say this, well you have lots of different ideas what JK says..
as i understand,
the point is why suppressing of the senses is contradictory is because when you are aware of the mind being conscious of "what is" at that time you don't seek. The contradictory part is of seeking and suppressing the senses to stop seeking.
Post Reply