Although I joined in appreciation for Krishnamurti's work, I have since become a bit skeptical of the helpful nature of his writing.

I do wonder - how much of what he writes is actually helpful to those who study it? Has it brought significent benefits into their lives? I do think that some of what he says is quite dangerous to ponder too deeply, as it can unsettle the mental state and lead to isolation if readers are constantly are trying to throw off the conditioning that makes you able to be part of modern social groups.

I'd be interested in stories of how his work has measurably improved the quality of your life, so if you have such stories to share, please reply.

The most important thing is to never stop questioning.

Is the teaching of K about 'bringing significant benefits into (individual) lives'?

Read on David. It is much more about discovery of what is at the root of human disorder, and one's true responsibility in that.

There are plenty of 'feel-good' gurus. K is definitely not one of them.

And the 'mental state' can really expect to have its cage well and truly rattled by the teaching of K if one is at all serious - and guess what? No longer will one fit comfortably into 'modern social groups' - whatever they may be!

But then - who would want to succeed in a corrupt society anyway?

The question really is: Are you discontent? Or satisfied with the human condition as it is? And the answer is in the question.

So welcome David!

David C wrote:
Although I joined in appreciation for Krishnamurti's work, I have since become a bit skeptical of the helpful nature of his writing.

Welcome David. Being a skeptic is no wrong. It may actually help you understand K or any author even better.

I do wonder - how much of what he writes is actually helpful to those who study it?

I may try answering your questions to the best of my ability, but you have to make your own final assessment of everybody's opinions. Though the books are the same, some people claim to have been benefited and some not. However, some people call K's books as quite challenging.

Has it brought significent benefits into their lives?

Some claim so and some not.

I do think that some of what he says is quite dangerous to ponder too deeply, as it can unsettle the mental state and lead to isolation if readers are constantly are trying to throw off the conditioning that makes you able to be part of modern social groups.

K's books may be as good or as bad as other books. It depends on the reader to assess and make use of them. However, if you are apprehensive or aware of that danger, perhaps then you are actually safer. Because such dangers seem to overtake only when one is not aware of them or vulnerable and not because of the subject or the author.

How do you think that conditioning is necessary to be part of modern social groups? It is generally said that the least conditioned people actually form the best segment of all such groups.

Unless Advanced, K's Teachings May Remain As Ineffective As of Now

David C wrote:
I do think that some of what he says is quite dangerous to ponder too deeply, as it can unsettle the mental state and lead to isolation if readers are constantly are trying to throw off the conditioning that makes you able to be part of modern social groups.

Hi David,

It is true that as you change, so do your interests . . . and the social groups you become interested in, which may not be the same as before. Like attracts like. You lose one thing and find something newer and perhaps better. But it would be incorrect to think that change makes one anti-social.

Some people need to get drunk in order to keep the company of drunkards. And two weeks after rehab they are back in the pub because that is what gave any meaning to their lives. But if they find new meanings they would seek out those who they can share with.

Change is a natural process. And the urge to find new meaning, something real, is a sane and healthy one, so keep at it, even when it challenges your comfort zone.

"The ego is first and foremost a body ego." S. Freud

With all the sufferings,despairs,fears,the confusion & the terrible conflicts in relationship we find ourselves in, is there any option in this for us other than investigating ourselves?

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
is there any option in this for us other than investigating ourselves?

But fact is we are not investigating ourselves.Why?

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Well then we have not seen the total absurdity of the present social structure,our actions,our way of living.Then what do we do? Wait till life kicks us behind our pants to make us look? Then it will be too late.Our energies would have begun waning.So can we not question & see our plight now without waiting for circumstances? Here? For example David raised the question of isolation. Now what is it to be isolated? Is to be alone isolation? Can there not be isolation when we are with a group? Is not the very need to be with a group an indication of isolation? So what is it to be isolated?

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
So can we not question & see our plight now without waiting for circumstances?

Can we?

Don't need K or any, do yourself

If a person is unaware that thought is limited and connot resolve problems in the world he/she might spend years trying to understand problems exercising thought.The person might get worn out, might become neurotic even right?

Now can we not show to a shool boy/girl that thought is limited,that it's the outcome of the past which is knowledge stored as memory which has been put together through experience?Experience being limited however vast it is, the outcome thought must essentially be limited.So it cannot resolve problems.Now can we not discuss and show that to a kid and thereby save a lot of his/her time and energy and possibly suffering at a future point when he begins to question life?We can isn't it?

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Now can we not show to a shool boy/girl that thought is limited,that it's the outcome of the past which is knowledge stored as memory which has been put together through experience?

"Humko malum hai hakikate jannat 'galib', par dil bahalane ko khayal achha hai" (We know the fact/falseness of heaven, but to make feel good this is a good idea)

Leave the young children, Do we the elders understand the limitness of thought, our all understanding is at the level of thoughts.

Understanding the limitedness of thoughts is not different from insight, all are one, at once.

We can only replace old belief system with new.

Don't need K or any, do yourself

This post was last updated by Soham netti (account deleted) Mon, 04 Oct 2010.

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Now can we not discuss and show that to a kid and thereby save a lot of his/her time and energy and possibly suffering at a future point when he begins to question life?We can isn't it?

I feel to discus something is not to show anything. The direction of discussion can not be fixed in advance otherwise it will become spoon feeding. When the motive is to be free of suffering and pain in future, then essence of K's teachings will be missed.

Is it possible to leave the seed of insight in the mind of the child during discussion and let it germinate when,and if, it will?

For doing this, is it important that the teacher has to be a transformed person ? I don't feel it is necessary. If the teacher emphasises the need and importance of taking the journey of discovery alone without any previous authority, then he has done his job.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Soham netti wrote:
eave the young children, Do we the elders understand the limitness of thought, our all understanding is at the level of thoughts.

Thought is the response of the past which is knowledge as memory & knowledge is the outcome of experience.Now we'll ask a simple question.Can experience be limitless?Experience is only through sensory perception.Now our senses themselves are limited-you know it.(eg; our range of vision differs from other species.)So how can knowledge be complete of anythig? It's impossible.So thought is limited.

Understanding the limitness of thought is intelligence.All are one at once you say-no, once you see thought is limited thought ceases to act upon itself.You do not any more seek an answer.That is then observation without an observer.If we so observe without a seperate entity observing we may see.

Can we not break a belief? Please ask a person who believes in God whether he/she can say anythig about God if the person sets aside everythig the person read & heard since birth.If the person is humble & honest the answer will the person doesn't know anything.If you try with several people you will see we can break beliefs without replacing with a another belief.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
When the motive is to be free of suffering and pain in future, then essence of K's teachings will be missed.

K founded schools in several countries & implored the teachers to educate the children adequately to meet life.

NOW WAS THE ESSENCE OF K's TEACHINGS MISSED WHEN K HIMSELF FOUNDED SCHOOLS & WAS CONCERNED SO MUCH ABOUT THE CHILDREN'S FUTURE?

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Thought is the response of the past which is knowledge as memory & knowledge is the outcome of experience.Now we'll ask a simple question..........If we so observe without a seperate entity observing we may see.

You are just repeating K words.

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
If the person is humble & honest the answer will the person doesn't know anything.If you try with several people you will see we can break beliefs without replacing with a another belief.

Probably you have not inquired into belief.Whatever you have written in above post about thought-knowledge-observation without observer is replaced belief.

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
NOW WAS THE ESSENCE OF K's TEACHINGS MISSED WHEN K HIMSELF FOUNDED SCHOOLS & WAS CONCERNED SO MUCH ABOUT THE CHILDREN'S FUTURE?

These schools were to provide right kind of environment for understanding K's teachings. Now, the essence of K's teachings is on 'seeing is the doing and nothing more is to be done'. True understanding of this is sufficient in meeting all the challenges of life. Keeping this in mind, won't you agree that giving a limited motive to be free from suffering and pain will compromise the 'seeing' right from the start ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Soham netti wrote:
You are just repeating K words.

Dear dear Soham, If you think I am just repeating K's words I am just very glad about it.I am not repeating his words.However to try to prove that will be an ego business.(I think there may be quite a few people who are clear that thought is limited)

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
won't you agree that giving a limited motive to be free from suffering and pain will compromise the 'seeing' right from the start ?

Dear Dr, I was not talking about seeing. School kids may not be aware of the rigours of life. I was saying that kids can be shown that there are two forms of learning so that they are equipped to look at life when they begin to be aware of many aspects of life such as conflict in relationship which cannot be resolved by thought.

This post was last updated by Kapila Kulasinghe Thu, 07 Oct 2010.

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
However to try to prove that will be an ego business.

Well, Need not to prove.You can't.

This is tragedy. Memorization and then practicing K teachings.Everything are going in psych.Can there be any Ego or psych if one have a single flash of seeing/insight?

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
I was saying that kids can be shown that there are too forms of learning so that they are equipped to look at life when they begin to be aware of many aspects of life such as conflict in relationship which cannot be resolved by thought.

Sir, I am taking 'too' of your post as 'two'. I hope this is not wrong.

"Why should one not be disturbed in life ?" K has asked this question many times. Pain, suffering, conflict etc. are disturbances. We all want to avoid/be free of them.

What do you feel is the significance of the question asked by K when we consider it along with the universal attitude of avoiding psychological disturbances ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Soham netti wrote:
This is tragedy. Memorization and then practicing K teachings.Everything are going in psych.Can there be any Ego or psych if one have a single flash of seeing/insight?

Ah, this is memorizing and responding! K did say insight is instantly.K also said, "Sir, you can't do this overnight". In one interview he said you need about 10 years of observation for this!! By this I am not saying this is gradual!This doesn't happen in time. Please find out what it means.Please don't get offended-this is K conditioning!!

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
"Why should one not be disturbed in life ?" K has asked

Did K ever asked that? May be not in the context that we should undergo pain and suffering.Perhaps he meant by questioning life and facing and remaining with the suffering without avoiding and escaping from suffering and pain as is the universal attitude.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
I am taking 'too' of your post as 'two'.

Yes. Sorry.

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
In one interview he said you need about 10 years of observation for this!!

Will you provide quote please?

Don't need K or any, do yourself

"Please listen to this, not in order to achieve goodness - you won't be able to achieve it. You can't practice goodness. Goodness is a flower that bursts overnight; it comes into being without your wanting, without your seeking, without your cultivating. It can only come through listening. It will take place suddenly, in full blossom. Goodness is never the repetition of what has been; you cannot be good if you remember the past, either the pleasure or the pain, or the insult or the flattery."emphasized text

7th talk in Bombay, 1962.

Don't need K or any, do yourself

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
Perhaps he meant by questioning life and facing and remaining with the suffering without avoiding and escaping from suffering and pain as is the universal attitude.

Yes, he meant exactly this. So, when we want a child or anybody to understand the righ way of facing the challengs of life, on what should be the emphasis - directly looking at the disturbances or ending them ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Attention all K-parrots and Krishnamurtians:

Goodness is never the repetition of what has been; you cannot be good if you remember the past, either the pleasure or the pain, or the insult or the flattery.

7th talk in Bombay, 1962.

nick carter wrote:
Goodness is never the repetition of what has been;

Surely it is meant for you.
gb

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

Soham netti wrote:
Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
In one interview he said you need about 10 years of observation for this!!
Will you provide quote please?

perhaps this is similar.

And in striving to answer for myself the no-nonsense questions he posed, my ideas came tumbling down one by one. This was by no means an easy task and required many years of perseverance,

from Confessions of a K Fanatic by Dev Sing.

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

This post was last updated by ganesan balachandran Fri, 08 Oct 2010.

Soham netti wrote:
Will you provide quote please?

I'll try to find it.I assure you I read it.He said something about it's not his business to go about finding out whether anybody has changed in the same interview-if you too try to find it.

Soham netti wrote:
"Please listen

This doesn't contradict the statement that it takes about 10 years of observation. Even if it takes 10years it's still happenig instantly.That's because it's taking place always in the 'now'. Please consider the satatement by K, "Sir, are you prepared to take a very long journey." Now long journey generally implies time. However here it's not that because it's always happenig in the 'now'.

Dr.sudhir sharma wrote:
directly looking at the disturbances or ending them ?

Directly looking at the disturbaces.However we try to analyse & so on when we try to understand things.Futility of this must be clear to look directly.

Kapila Kulasinghe wrote:
This doesn't contradict the statement that it takes about 10 years of observation. Even if it takes 10years it's still happenig instantly.

Please listen, one by one..

1.What is observation? perception without thoughts.

2.How much time one will take to learn such observation? 10 years?Do it come from practice?

1. Once you have observed,you are transformed, then you have completed first step, which is last also.Now this observation has no end.

4.To observe, you can't be prepared/trained.It is matter of feeling of urgency.If you feel now, you can see now.And if you feel after ten years you can see then.But one thing more which I don't know K have said or not,that is If you can't see now, after 10 years possibility of seeing is more poor then now, even you would have read thousand more books, but chances are very low, because as we become older we become more conditioned, more compromising.

Don't need K or any, do yourself

This post was last updated by Soham netti (account deleted) Sat, 09 Oct 2010.

Practically speaking the duration of remaining with what is keeps on increasing.
gb

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

Soham netti wrote:
1.What is observation? perception without thoughts.

1. Or is it perception of 'what is' ?

Soham netti wrote:
2.How much time one will take to learn such observation? 10 years?Do it come from practice?

1. In all of us the energy has become used to flowing in the thought channel automatically. Won't these connection take time in weakening ? Is direct perception possible without first spending time + energy in self observation ?

Soham netti wrote:
Once you have observed,you are transformed, then you have completed first step, which is last also.Now this observation has no end.

Now perriod of attention and inattention will not alternatively come, is this what you are saying ?

Soham netti wrote:
If you can't see now, after 10 years possibility of seeing is more poor then now, even you would have read thousand more books, but chances are very low, because as we become older we become more conditioned, more compromising.

This is true but it will happen only when one has not understood the right meaning of 'observation' in the beginning, No ?

FLOW WITH LIFE!