Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
General Discussion | moderated by Dev Singh

Reza Ganjavi interview with Dr. Scott Forbes


Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 144 in total
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #61
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
How much were the people closest to K able to understand and live the teachings?

It's impossible to know, isn't it? Remember, K said, right before he died, that no one got it. Presumably, "no one" meant people close to him, since he didn't know people far away who were exposed to his teachings. (Unless you believe that he had remote viewing super powers.)

Maybe someone in Cadiz, Spain read a book or watched a video and completely transformed. Then this person quietly went about life with love. Who can say if this happened somewhere or not? Who can say if it is happening right now somewhere?

Sean Hen wrote:
In many ways they had access to explore them [the teachings] more deeply than we can here as they had such close contact with K himself.

Doesn't this assume the guru theory that being physically close to the master is important? I question that.

Did people close to K get personal or custom tailored spiritual training? Maybe they got a little, but I don't think there is much evidence for it. K came from the Theosophical tradition where there was extensive esoteric training for the elite insiders but I think he made his teachings public and open to all. He wanted to set mankind free, not a handful of devotees. He met people in private interviews and he suggested things to some people close to him but what we know about it is that it was in line with his public teachings: self knowledge - follow every thought, keep a journal, etc.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Thu, 30 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #62
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D wrote:
As far as I know the only books of Krishnamurti not fiddled with by others are Krishnamurti's Notebook and Krishnamurti's Journal.

And even those are published with spelling and punctuation corrections, aren't they?

Thanks for posting a handwritten page of his. Not so easy to read his handwriting.

Comparing K's handwritten page: "So it cannot formulate or understanding that whichis the total, the whole, the complete." To the printed book: "So it cannot formulate or understand that which is the total, the whole, the complete."

I pity the person who had to decipher K's handwriting.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Thu, 30 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #63
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Also, with regard to "living the teachings," did K always live them?

Was K free of belief? He may have believed in the Master or Masters (the Theosophical Masters), he may have believed he was protected, he may have believed in drawing circles for protection, he may have believed in fairies.

Was K free of conflict? Outwardly he was clearly in conflict with the Rajagopals, with Bohm when Bohm became disillusioned, with others such as specific gurus he criticized. Inwardly? Who knows. But according to Ken D. he was shaking when he got off the phone with Rajagopal or with regard to Rajagopal. Was the shaking fear or conflict? What else could it be? Which means that sometimes he may not have been free of conflict or fear?

Dishonesty? K may have deceived or given people the impression that he was celibate when he actually had an ongoing sexual relationship with Rosalind Rajagopal.

So there may have been times when K did not live the teachings. Of course, he may have lived them a great deal of the time.

Repeatedly K said the speaker is unimportant. K said you will never know him.

And I can't really know anyone but myself, yes?

So to me "living the teachings" only has relevance applied to myself. Was what K said true? And if so, how do I personally apply it myself? Of course, the "I" in this is of questionable existence.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Thu, 30 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #64
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1630 posts in this forum Offline

If you are interested in Krishnamurti's image go to kfa library in Ojai . They have books with many pictures of him while eating and walking and reading and so on. You can check out his clothing:)

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #65
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1630 posts in this forum Offline

And the first book that I read was the flight of the eagle and the second one was you are the world . k was alive then . The editing was just fine. You can keep your conspiracy theory that they were altered for yourself and make yourself more confused.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #66
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1404 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
when he actually had an ongoing sexual relationship with Rosalind Rajagopal.

You only know this by hearsay from a daughter who defended here fathers legacy....

Yes i know that also this is from hearsay....

Have a nice day ...;-)

Truth will unfold itself to those who enquire their own actions.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #67
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3176 posts in this forum Offline

Wim Opdam wrote:
You only know this by hearsay from a daughter who defended here fathers legacy....

Ah! Thanks Wim. I heard about the so called ‘affair’ K had so many times I assumed there was some truth to that. So the only source of that is Rosalind?

Let it Be

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #68
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 935 posts in this forum Offline

Idiot?, I don't think that the importance of being physically close to a great teacher necessarily implies a guru theory.

As I'm sure we've all noticed, K's teachings are not always easy to understand and are open to different interpretations. Imagine we had Krishnamurti here on this forum. He'd be able to clear some things up in our discussions, I'm sure! Also, just observing at first hand how someone like K behaved might well have helped deepen our understanding of the teachings. Of course, all the answers lie in ourselves and are observable there. But we have trouble with that, don't we?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #69
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1404 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
Ah! Thanks Wim. I heard about the so called ‘affair’ K had so many times I assumed there was some truth to that. So the only source of that is Rosalind?

Repeating the truth is a lie, but makes repeating in itself something true?

Asked yourself how her father became rich and started like K. with nothing.

Truth will unfold itself to those who enquire their own actions.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Thu, 30 Jan 2020 #70
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Tom Paine wrote:
I heard about the so called ‘affair’ K had so many times I assumed there was some truth to that. So the only source of that is Rosalind?

Of course not. Rosalind's daughter wrote the book Lives In The Shadow which revealed K's long time affair. In response, the book Krishnamurti and the Rajagopals by Mary Lutyens defended K, but acknowledged that the affair happened.

It's a fact and no one with any direct knowledge denies it.

Edit: I see I'm echoing Ken D. since we posted nearly simultaneously.

Also, contrary to what Mary Lutyens says, the physical relationship DID come as a shock to a lot of people, including possibly David Bohm.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Thu, 30 Jan 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #71
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 935 posts in this forum Offline

Thanks to Ken and Idiot? for clearing up the situation between Krishnamurti and Rosalind Rajogopal. I think if we are really serious about investigating we need to deal with evidence and facts rather than perceptions.

I don't see Krishnamurti's affair as undermining or being contradictory to the teachings. He often spoke of the repression and conflict the celibate monk faced. K was a man, not some kind of saint.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #72
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
I don't see Krishnamurti's affair as undermining or being contradictory to the teachings.

I do. And the reason is simple. An affair is not so much an issue of sex as it is of trust and betrayal.

When people marry or enter into a monogamous relationship, they establish a bond of trust between them. To have an affair is to dishonor and betray that trust. It is done with deception, not openly and honestly. Both parties engaged in the affair are involved with the deception and betrayal.

In this case there were also multiple abortions that were covered up.

To talk about the truth, to talk about seeing the truth in daily life, to talk about love for all, and then to engage in deception and betrayal is hypocrisy, pure and simple. That undermines the teachings. That is not living the teachings.

So I was greatly disappointed when I learned about this and still am.

Much less talked about, K also may have had another affair with Nandini Mehta, Pupul Jayakar's sister. And this may have brought on his break with Rosalind Rajagopal. So there may have been a betrayal of a betrayal.

It is not sex which is problematic. It is hypocrisy and deception.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #73
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1630 posts in this forum Offline

"Thou shalt not commit adultery", one of the Ten Commandments, is found in the Book of Exodus (Exodus 20:14) of the Hebrew Bible and Old Testament. What constitutes adultery is not plainly defined in this passage of the Bible, and has been the subject of debate within Judaism and Christianity.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #74
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1630 posts in this forum Offline

"Thou shalt not commit adultery", one of the Ten Commandments, is found in the Book of Exodus (Exodus 20:14) of the Hebrew Bible and Old Testament. What constitutes adultery is not plainly defined in this passage of the Bible, and has been the subject of debate within Judaism and Christianity.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #75
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1630 posts in this forum Offline

According to k "marriage is personal prostitution". So he had no respect for marriage and what ever he did with a woman is none of anybody's business. He didn't break any civic law. If a married woman wants to have sex with another she is free to do so.There is no law against it.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #76
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

One Self wrote:
According to k "marriage is personal prostitution".

Cite your source. I do not believe he said that.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #77
Thumb_profiel Wim Opdam Belgium 1404 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
It is hypocrisy and deception

And where was that coming to light in your mind or are you able to read his mind?

One Self wrote:
If a married woman wants to have sex with another she is free to do so.There is no law against it.

Indeed it's not our business !

Truth will unfold itself to those who enquire their own actions.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 #78
Thumb_coa104 Ken D United States 18 posts in this forum Offline

"To curb the sexual urge, to hold it within bounds, the institution of marriage has been created; and in marriage, behind the door, behind the wall, you can do anything you like and show a respectable front outside. By using her for your sexual gratification you can convert your wife into a prostitute, and it is perfectly respectable. Under the guise of marriage, you can be worse than an animal; and without marriage, without restraint, you know no bounds. So, in order to set a limit, society lays down certain moral laws which become tradition, and within that limit you can be as immoral, as ugly as you like; and that unrepressed indulgence, that habitual sexual action, is considered perfectly normal, healthy and moral."

Krishnamurti POONA INDIA 4TH PUBLIC TALK 19TH SEPTEMBER, 1948

"Sow the seed of freedom, which is to awaken intelligence; for with that intelligence you can tackle all the problems of life." Krishnamurti

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 3 readers
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Feb 2020 #79
Thumb_img_0244 Jack Pine United States 5795 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
So I was greatly disappointed when I learned about this and still am.

People who are not dependent on K, who do not make of him an authority will not give much thought, one way or the other, to things he did or didn't do.

Do we follow K making him our leader or do we look at what he was pointing to? It doesn't matter who K was it only matters what you understand about life. Your life, all life. We all have so many opinions and so little actual facts. For example, someone's supposition that David Bohm was shocked because of K and Rosalind. How do you know? Did you talk to Dr Bohm?

By the way, according to Mark Lee's book: KNOCKING ON THE OPEN DOOR, My years with J. Krishnamurti, K enjoyed a taste of white wine now and again. Gasp!

This post was last updated by Jack Pine Sat, 01 Feb 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 01 Feb 2020 #80
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 935 posts in this forum Offline

Is it possible to "live the teachings" of Krishnamurti or not? I think that's a valid question. Did K live the teachings? I think that's another valid question.

If you've dedicated a lot of time to reading and listening to K and you still find yourself in constant conflict with many people, then surely something is going wrong there. If you read what K says about observation and awareness but you are actually not really observing very much and not particularily aware a lot of the time, then something isn't working and it may be a good idea to ask why this is so.

Krishnamurti spoke about conflict, observation, attachment, attention, love etc. From what I know, K was highly sensitive, acutely aware most of the time and had many close, loving relationships with people he was close to. That, to me, shows that he was indeed living the teachings. That, to me, is the important thing here. Like all human beings, he had some conflict in his life and made mistakes. That is what human beings do.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 02 Feb 2020 #81
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Jack Pine wrote:

For example, someone's supposition that David Bohm was shocked because of K and Rosalind. How do you know? Did you talk to Dr Bohm?

It is well known that K and Bohm had a breakdown in their relationship in 1984. Accounts say that K began to treat Bohm "brutally," to challenge him, and this was very hard on Bohm and soon he fell back into severe depression. Here is part of what preceded this:

F. David Peat's biography of David Bohm, "Infinite Potential: The Life And Times Of David Bohm":

Krishnamurti had occasionally told young people that celibacy was significant, indicating that it encouraged the generation of great energy and intensity that could lead to psychological transformation. Krishnamurti seems to have raised the matter with Bohm as well, and the physicist believed that the Indian teacher led a celibate life.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 03 Feb 2020 #82
Thumb_spock Douglas MacRae-Smith France 159 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
Krishnamurti had occasionally told young people that celibacy was significant, indicating that it encouraged the generation of great energy and intensity that could lead to psychological transformation.

Sounds like Yoga style beliefs. Maybe some residu from hanging out with great masters on the astral plane? I would like to see a quote from K about that. Maybe there was some misunderstandings/simplification/interpretation on behalf of Bohm and Peat here?

Surely its dogma/confusion/conflict that wastes Energy? Sex may use physical Energy, but so does jogging.

Look, see, let go

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 03 Feb 2020 #83
Thumb_coa104 Ken D United States 18 posts in this forum Offline

What did Krishnamurti say was the connection between sex and tennis?

A. "...think of sex simply as energy, energy to be used to attain a goal."

He knew I played a great deal of tennis and asked, "Would you indulge in sex prior to a tennis match?"

I said no, not if I wanted to win.

"That's just the point," he said quickly. "If you want to climb a
mountaintop you conserve every ounce of energy."

"Does that mean a man who would attain the highest must be an ascetic?"

"Not at all. Asceticism as a goal is destructive. There is the biological
need for sex, and there is also the need to conserve energy in order to attain a goal." From The Reluctant Messiah by Sidney Field


How did Krishnamurti respond to D.H. Lawrence's observation that
liberation was only possible momentarily through sex?

A. Krishnaji laughed. Then he was pensively silent for a moment.

"Liberation is sex inverted," he said.

"What do you mean?" I asked, perplexed.

"Think about it," he answered, a half smile on his lips.

I'm still thinking about it." From The Reluctant Messiah by Sidney Field

"Sow the seed of freedom, which is to awaken intelligence; for with that intelligence you can tackle all the problems of life." Krishnamurti

This post was last updated by Ken D Mon, 03 Feb 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 03 Feb 2020 #84
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D cited Krishnamurti POONA INDIA 4TH PUBLIC TALK 19TH SEPTEMBER, 1948:
"To curb the sexual urge, to hold it within bounds, the institution of marriage has been created; and in marriage, behind the door, behind the wall, you can do anything you like and show a respectable front outside. By using her for your sexual gratification you can convert your wife into a prostitute, and it is perfectly respectable. Under the guise of marriage, you can be worse than an animal; and without marriage, without restraint, you know no bounds. So, in order to set a limit, society lays down certain moral laws which become tradition, and within that limit you can be as immoral, as ugly as you like; and that unrepressed indulgence, that habitual sexual action, is considered perfectly normal, healthy and moral."

As we know, the early K talks were transcribed by hand and may not be completely accurate. But let's say it's accurate. I challenge nearly every statement K makes here.

Does marriage "curb the sexual urge?" No. It establishes trust and monogamy. The benefits are you're less likely to get sexually transmitted disease and you're more likely to know who the biological parents of any children are. Also, many people feel a one on one relationship is deeper. If you want to have sex with a lot of people don't get married. Or get married and agree to an open marriage. But if you like the depth of the bond that comes with being with one person, then agree to a monogamous relationship, either one that is an official marriage or not. It's up to you.

Can you do anything you like "behind the wall of marriage" and remain respectable? Anything you both agree to and that doesn't harm either of you. Sexual abuse behind the wall of marriage is neither acceptable nor respectable. Otherwise you can be as kinky as you like within marriage. It's up to you.

"By using her for your sexual gratification you can convert your wife into a prostitute." Why? Because you share money with her? You share many things in marriage because you want to. Some couples share money. Some don't. Also, this is stated from the male, heterosexual perspective. If a wife gets sexual gratification from her husband, does that make him a gigolo? Marriage is not prostitution. It's jointly agreed sharing of sex and much, much more. Prostitution, on the other hand, often involves exploitation of vulnerable people, who may want out. As hard as divorce is for someone who wants out of a marriage, it is likely easier than for someone who wants out of being sexually trafficked, whose life may be threatened if they try to leave.

"Under the guise of marriage, you can be worse than an animal." Now what does that mean? Humans ARE animals. Sexuality is part of who we are. Adults can do whatever they want with each other, in marriage or not, as long as they agree and don't hurt each other. If someone is judgmental enough to think that that is acting like an animal, then that's their problem.

"That unrepressed indulgence, that habitual sexual action, is considered perfectly normal, healthy and moral." Yeah, because it is! Again, as long as no one is harmed and both people agree. What's unhealthy is the repressed point of view, the Victorian point of view, which evidently informed K back when he made this statement.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Mon, 03 Feb 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 04 Feb 2020 #85
Thumb_screenshot_20180710-010635 One Self United States 1630 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
As we know, the early K talks were transcribed by hand and may not be completely accurate.

Does that we mean idiot only in here?

idiot ? wrote:
But let's say it's accurate. I challenge nearly every statement K makes here.

You can challenge Krishnamurti as much as you want but he won't respond to you because he is no longer among us!

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 04 Feb 2020 #86
Thumb_001 Sean Hen Spain 935 posts in this forum Offline

Idiot?, what you say about marriage seems to make sense. Surely many married couples care for each other, are considerate, share many things and love each other. However, Krishnamurti takes this argument to what is an uncomfortable place for many of us.

As I understand it, Krishnamurti says that if in marriage there are two individual selfs in their own isolated envelopes, there is actually no relationship between the married couple. What there is is two self-interested entities acting to further their individual interests. In this situation, I think he would argue that there is no love. They may have joint projects, but these are driven by self interest.

Is this analysis an accurate one of how we live? Or is this a cynical view that ignores many successful marriages?

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 04 Feb 2020 #87
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Sean Hen wrote:
Idiot?, what you say about marriage seems to make sense. Surely many married couples care for each other, are considerate, share many things and love each other...In this situation, I think he [Krishnamurti] would argue that there is no love. They may have joint projects, but these are driven by self interest.

In a good marriage, the couple would no doubt say they love each other and they clearly would interact far beyond their own self interests.

The way that K uses the word "love" negates many of the ordinary understandings of the word. He negates emotionality and sentimentality. He negates love for a specific person or things. He uses the word as love for all, for the whole, indivisible. One could argue that almost none of us love in the K sense. If that is so, there is no reason to single out marriage.

By critiquing the "institution of marriage" in 1948, K seems to be making a radical argument, when in fact, looked at carefully, it is quite repressed and Victorian. By contrast, the modern acceptance of many lifestyles, which I have outlined above, is both more radical and more reasonable.

The irony is that while K was claiming that married people can be "worse than animals," he himself was "indulging" in a "habitual" sexual relationship. And that is hypocrisy.

This post was last updated by idiot ? Tue, 04 Feb 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 04 Feb 2020 #88
Thumb_coa104 Ken D United States 18 posts in this forum Offline

idiot ? wrote:
By critiquing the "institution of marriage" in 1948, K seems to be making a radical argument, when in fact, looked at carefully, it is quite repressed and Victorian.

Let's also not forget that he was speaking to an audience in India, which does not present the most sterling example of respect for women. This brutality is still rampant in India to this day. Pick up any newspaper.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/05/asia/india-rape-...

"Sow the seed of freedom, which is to awaken intelligence; for with that intelligence you can tackle all the problems of life." Krishnamurti

This post was last updated by Ken D Tue, 04 Feb 2020.

Sign in to recommend  This post has been recommended by 1 reader
Back to Top
Tue, 04 Feb 2020 #89
Thumb_avatar idiot ? United States 782 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D wrote:
Let's not forget that he was also speaking to an audience in India, which does not present the most sterling example of respect for women. This brutality is still rampant in India to this day.

Yes, good point. Thank you, Ken D.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 04 Feb 2020 #90
Thumb_donna_and_jim_fb_bw Tom Paine United States 3176 posts in this forum Offline

Ken D wrote:
Let's not forget that he was also speaking to an audience in India, which does not present the most sterling example of respect for women.

Thank you! Even in the U.S. men used to feel like the wife was the husband’s property....to gratify himself sexually...to cook and clean...to look after the children. In return he supported her financially...almost a form of prostitution. The Woman’s Movement is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Let it Be

This post was last updated by Tom Paine Tue, 04 Feb 2020.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 61 - 90 of 144 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)