Comments on: My disillusionment with Jiddu Krishnamurti

By: Nothing2saynow

Nothing2saynow — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 05:36:01 +0000

“The problem I have with Jiddu Krishnamurti is the same problem I have with a lot of post-modern anti-guru’s. They break down but they don’t build up…”

No one can build anything for anyone because there is nothing to build. What he broke down for us was just an exercise to demonstrate how our misdirected beliefs and actions are muddying the very waters that we need to be able to see through clearly to become aware of the intelligence that operates within. A feeling of emptiness because of this is nothing but the temporary feeling of letting go of what we held on to for so long. The satisfaction of knowing us through ourselves easily fill every such void.

Thanks.

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 24 May 2011 00:17:48 +0000

It seems that you are equating Krishnamurti’s teachings to a “spiritual path” in your last sentence, but Jiddu K’s teachings were based on truth as “a pathless land.” I understand your concern towards his lack of ethical teachings, but he held firm for the last 65 years of his life that when one labels something as either good or bad, there can be no complete understanding of that which is being labeled. So when we say that we should or shouldn’t do certain things, we are simply reacting based on our conditioning, constantly altering what is into what we think it ought to be, thereby creating ever more conflict. By searching for solutions to our problems, we never fully understand them. They are therefore merely reformed into more problems and as a result, we are never free from them. Only when the mind doesn’t label circumstances as either good or bad can there be that stillness which is necessary to observe the totality of life. This stillness involves a choiceless awareness, and if he were to say that we should or shouldn’t do certain things, he would be speaking from the fragmented realm of choice. My problem with ethics is that I don’t know the future of things to come and can therefore never be sure what is best. I may think that it is morally wrong to let a child starve, but what if the child were to grow up and kill thousands of people? What if having less people on the planet is actually a good thing? The point is that nothing is good or bad in and of itself. We only know it to be good or bad based on what others have told us, which may be lies. We are all of us violent. The fact is that we cannot survive without another organisms dying. Eating is violent and if we don’t eat, we are violent towards ourselves. We create the ideal of nonviolence which is just an escape from the fact that each one of us is violent. If it weren’t for the fact that we are selfish, insecure, envious and angry, we could never be joyful, compassionate, sympathetic or loving.
In 1912, a 17 year old Jiddu K. wrote the short book “Educaton as a Service,” which I highly recommend if you are looking for his takes on ethics.

By: Bruce

Bruce — Sun, 09 May 2010 00:33:35 +0000

I think you misunderstood a couple things J. Krishnamurti was talking about. He didn’t talk about escaping the world but talked about remaining in the world and having “awareness in relationship”. i.e., in relationship to the world.

Also he talked about getting rid of all authority including himself.

In other words choicelessly observe your thoughts and you can notice how you defer to authorities rather than look and decide things for yourself. While he talks about seeing being action and being instantaneous, the falling away of our conditioned dependence on authority will happen gradually as we see each dependency. We might not immediately see that we can see things on our own. We might re-actively run to another authority.

As you get rid of conflict in the mind you will have more energy to see more. Losing dependence on authority frees energy. Look at your values. These are just internalized authority.

This meditation can all be done while living a normal but more aware life.

By: Katinka - Spirituality

Katinka - Spirituality — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:31:31 +0000

Perhaps the problem is something else too: in the West authority is eroding to such an extent that K read superficially can be quite harmful: making young people disrespect authority to a dangerous extent.

The world has changed. When Jiddu Krishnamurti started, authority was eroding already. K and Nietzsche have that in common: at the time it was the thing that needed to be said, that in matters of personal and spiritual truth, authority is not to be trusted.

Now that message has become, in the West at least, perfectly commonplace.

I’m not denying that there is a deeper level to K, just that the way to get there for Westerners is not directly to Krishnamurti. I’d advise Western youth to start with Theosophy or Buddhism first, Jiddu Krishnamurti later. I’d also not advise anybody to limit themselves to K. Then again, Krishnamurti himself would agree on that.

What the situation is in other countries, like say India, I cannot tell. My trip to India may change that. Right now I’m writing from a Western perspective.

As for the ‘intellectual understanding’ – I don’t think Jiddu Krishnamurti was in practice quite so pessimistic. He did advise Professor P. Krishna as a leader in his schools, didn’t he? This was based on the fact that the latter had at least an intellectual understanding, which was better than nothing.

By: haridas

haridas — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:38:21 +0000

Much of the bellyaching by those ‘disillusioned’ with JK comes from an utterly inadequate understanding of his messages. Very very few indeed in the history of human thought have quite gone into the depths of the ‘human condition’ the way JK has. But I suppose it is difficult for Westerners to quite understand the core of his teaching since they are still caught in the question-answer (‘problem’-solving) stage. And of course there is the ‘intellectual understanding’ of his messages, which is, as JK himself used to say, no understanding at all.

By: Katinka Hesselink - All Considering

Katinka Hesselink - All Considering — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 07:20:46 +0000

And that’s what he would have wanted for you, probably…

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:25:54 +0000

My disillusionment with Krishnamurti is not total. Ultimately, its I who is to be ” blamed” for my choices and actions. Here “blame” is not in the traditional sense but in a more reflective way. My disillusionment with K , if I keep myself out of it and looking at it in an objective way, is that there are points in the teachings that are very inspiring and truthful but which are difficult to find roots in the contemporary societal context. What K represents is a beautiful insight into contemporary problems . Having gone through my experiences, I am willing to sharpen it through reflection to see how the insights can help people to meet society without the friction. So, all has not been a waste, though it is a failure, but it will remain a marvellous pathbreaking effort. Now, the insights are mine and not K’s.

By: Katinka Hesselink - All Considering

Katinka Hesselink - All Considering — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:45:48 +0000

Sorry to hear it. Of course Krishnamurti can’t be blamed for you not facing your problems – as I think one of the main points of his teachings is that one has to face problems. Teaching is the kind of career not everybody is suited for. I tried it myself, but failed miserably (though I did not stick to it for eight years like you did).

I like that phrase ‘quest into nothingness’ – I guess that’s my main concern: taken too seriously, Krishnamurti’s teachings can certainly be that. And because he avoided the stereotypical advice given in the traditional spiritual traditions, there is no safeguard for people who do go to extremes – like you apparently did.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:26:11 +0000

Hello,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on your disillusionment with Krishnamurti. I am also one of those who went gung-ho on Krishnamurti’s teachings, leaving everything connected with society – degree, career, money, power, position- and attempting to lead a life of goodness and sensitivity – but right now I am stranded in the midst of complete misery. On one hand, I have to still deal with the problems of society, such as earning money, meeting people, relating with my family members, having a family and am in no way better off in mind or body from any other normal people. I dedicated eight years of my life to a quest into nothingness by being a teacher but ended up with bad memories of teaching and life in complete disarray. K gave the hope of liberation as he was against authority but finally became an authority from which I had to rescue myself. I am basically trying to be more earthy and being in touch with problems however messy they are.

By: Andras Nagy

Andras Nagy — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:05:56 +0000

I have read the story of the relationship between Krishnamurti and David Bohm (whom I admire and studied). Bohm was apparently infatuated by Krishnamurti who in turn treated Bohm like a snotty schoolboy is being treated by an menopausal headmaster.
Actions speak volumes and I have decided, not on the basis of the core teaching of Krishnamurti, but how he treated another human being is that he is not worth listening to.