2012/3/31 – 2012 & U.G.K. – Is Enlightenment Possible?

While I don’t agree with everything he said, U.G. Krishnamurti got one thing right. “Enlightenment is a thought-induced experience.”

He correctly demonstrated how the very idea of “Enlightenment” is contingent  is linked to accepting the claims of  the “Great Sages” without question. This is very important to understand, as the mechanism of so-called enlightenment has only come down to us through the transmission of the traditions laid down by the sages and their proponents. In other words, “Enlightenment,” like the concept of “God” or the “Divine,” is something that one never experiences without first hearing all about it from somebody else. The narrative of “enlightenment” always involves a search for a guru who has experienced it and relates the alleged state to others. If one accepts the narrative of the Buddha, one has to imagine that nobody had ever experienced “enlightenment” before. Yet, the Buddha made it his mission, claimed to achieve it, and then told everyone else about it. But U.G. hits the nail on the head when he remarks in this interview that,

“…once one questions the whole idea of enlightenment, or as you put it, the concept of enlightenment,  we are questioning the teachers who have talked about it – and we have invested tremendous faith in them, so the sentiment comes into the picture, and we accept it as the gospel truth.”

According to the stories related by the Buddhists, Buddha actually achieved “enlightenment.” How he managed to convince others that he spoke the truth would be no great feat considering the way most people are willing to believe in any story, the more grandiose the better. This is why religion and spirituality still reigns in a world where any evidence of the divine is completely lacking. When Nietzsche exclaimed in the 19th century that “God is dead,” it seems that he spoke only for himself and the minority of European intelligentsia who surmised the role of religion as a control dynamic of the masses.
Nietzsche must’ve hoped that his view would become dominant in an empirical world of logical positivism, but could not have foreseen that the masses would  never be able to give up  their sentiment attached to religion, for sentiment, through its power of emotionalism and feeling is believed to be a higher form of knowledge (a “peace that passes understanding”), that ultimately  breaks down all common sense and the ability for discernment.

U.G.’s contention, which is correct in my opinion, is that enlightenment, the “soul,” or spirit, are all  inventions and projections of consciousness which demands some assurance of survival. When the interviewer asks U.G. that he imagines that the body does not survive after death but he hopes that his “ability to experience” (sentience) will continue at some level after death. U.G. asks in return, “Can you experience your body while you are living now?”

Of course, Western philosophy has always taken an interest in the nature of consciousness. When the interviewer brings up the famous maxim of Descartes: “I think, therefore I am,” U.G. says that Descartes asked the wrong question and references an old Indian adage:  “If you are not thinking, are you there?”

Clearly, U.G. considers that consciousness and its production of interpretation of experience, projections, thoughts, knowledge and emotions creates a vicious circle of impediments to any understanding of who we really are and what we are doing here.  When the interviewer expresses (almost in exasperation), “It sounds like we’re trapped,” U.G. offers only that “there is no answer” to getting out of the trap. Enlightenment, or rather, the enlightenment claimed to be in the possession of  so-called spiritual masters throughout human history has not elevated the whole of humanity one iota or solved a single problem confronting the human race. The enormous catalog of suffering, poverty, war and exploitation has grown larger with each passing century. U.G. correctly surmised what enlightenment actually is: an imaginary “solution” within the metaphysics of “hope.” This led U.G. to say that there was no “answer” and “no escape” from the condition of the world, and this was his big miss. He did not see or accept his responsibility to this world or how universal equality is the answer.

It’s a pity, because U.G. perhaps could have offered us even more than what he left behind.

About these ads

19 comments

  1. Juice

    You wrote – “This led U.G. to say that there was no “answer” and “no escape” from the condition of the world, and this was his big miss. He did not see or accept his responsibility to this world or how universal equality is the answer.”

    but the fact remains in his life he lived that he absolutely lived & breathed universal equality & responsibility to the world & that those principles operated in his life & being

    • Darryl Thomas

      I disagree. U.G. by his own admission claimed that the only thing that “impressed” him was how much money one had. Many quotes concerning what U.G. thought was the highest goal in life centered around money, not universal equality. Don’t believe me, check it out for yourself.

      http://www.ugkrishnamurti.org/ug/money-maxims/

      Where is U.G.’s concern for equality in these quotes?

      “Money-making must be the ultimate goal of life.”
      “Better make loads of money than have a content style of living.”
      “It is money, not divinity, that counts in life.”
      “Money-making must be the ultimate goal of life.”
      “What else is there to do than to make money?”

      • Juice

        That money thing was a big schtik to break down the brainwashing of eastern & western religious folk that money is evil, corrupts, that to be spiritual, money isn’t important … the fact remains that money flowed through him like water … it flowed in & out . he didn’t hold it or horde it

        and he may have said there was no escape or answer but in the very next sentence he would negate his prior sentence, which was his way

  2. Darryl Thomas

    As far as my research goes, U.G. never made much money on his own, but was mostly bankrolled (like his pal Jiddu Krishnamurti) most of his life by patrons who supported him and his message. Yeah, “money flowed through him,” all right.

    And I won’t touch the last claim you made, as this specific interview indicates what U.G. thought about the search for enlightenment and other aspects of life. On the subject of universal equality, U.G. said very, very little, if anything.

  3. Juice

    UG was born rich .. then he had nothing but the clothes on his back when his ‘calamity’ happened at 49 years old. Then, as you say, patrons ‘supported’ him, but of their own initiative. It remained that he never had much beyond the clothes on his back, or rather he only ever traveled around with one small suitcase and he always gave away the money given to him. He most certainly never hoarded money and the things he said about money were to break down the anti-materialism prevalent in religious & spiritual circles/organizations

    UG was consistent in his thoughts on enlightenment as described in Buddhist teachings, in that it is non-existing and is basically a trance state or a thought induced state. Buddha means “the enlightened one” or “he who possesses perfect wisdom”. This is impossible, because perfection is not and never possible. Perfection is always relative.

    Regarding what you won’t touch about the claim I made and his ‘philosophers way’ of negation: http://www.ugkrishnamurti.net/ugkrishnamurti-net/chapter2.html

    U.G.: “My interest is not to knock off what others have said (that is too easy), but to knock off what I am saying. More precisely, I am trying to stop what you are making out of what I am saying. This is why my talking sounds contradictory to others. I am forced by the nature of your listening to always negate the first statement with another statement. Then the second statement is negated by a third, and so on. My aim is not some comfy dialectical thesis, but the total negation of everything that can be expressed. Anything you try to make out of my statements is not it.”

    Regarding your assertion that UG never said anything about equality – he lived and breathed equality. I’m sure if I put in the time, i could find quotes related to the subject but you are the one who has asserted that he said nothing about equality. I doubt you have combed his words to come to such a conclusion and if so, you have not done your homework to make such a statement.

    I think this UG statement in itself, entirely covers the subject of equality –

    “Each individual by virtue of his genetic structure is unparalleled, unprecedented, and unrepeatable.”

    • Darryl Thomas

      Please provide the example where I said, “UG never said anything about equality.” I need it for my records. What I actually said: “He did not see or accept his responsibility to this world or how universal equality is the answer,” and “On the subject of universal equality, U.G. said very, very little, if anything.” I’ve looked at almost everything that U.G. said on the internet, including the book, “No Way Out.” Can you provide a U.G. quote where he negates that assertion that there is “no way out?” I’ve also Googled “U.G. Krishnamurti +equality.” I challenge you to do the same and meet me back here.

      Maybe if you have the time someday to research it, you can cite your claim that U.G. “absolutely lived & breathed universal equality & responsibility to the world & that those principles operated in his life & being.” So let me ask you – as someone who abandoned his wife and children, what sort of example of “responsibility” did U.G. make there?

  4. Juice

    You need it for your records?

    Like I said, his statement – “Each individual by virtue of his genetic structure is unparalleled, unprecedented, and unrepeatable.” is as good and comprehensive a statement anyone can make and in fact it goes beyond a question or answer of equality. The fact of the matter is, we are not born into this world equally, but we are all a one off and unique.

    Regarding UG’s statement of ‘no way out’, he also said “Anything you try to make out of my statements is not it.” … thereby resolving himself of all responsibility.

    As far as him abandoning his wife and children – who are we to judge what was going on in his personal life and any decisions he made regarding that? I don’t know the particulars, do you? Marriages/relationships end all the time. I don’t know exactly what he did or didn’t do for his children after that so I can’t comment. I think he left his family before his socalled calamity.

    I liked UG and perhaps he became something very unique in that he returned to a primal state that the animals live in, which he called the natural state and which may not be attainable through any method. He is the first to admit he was useless for society. Though, I think he had some use – more than some and less than others.

  5. Darryl Thomas

    When you say, “…his statement – “Each individual by virtue of his genetic structure is unparalleled, unprecedented, and unrepeatable.” is as good and comprehensive a statement anyone can make,” to my eyes, I don’t see a statement of equality, but of “individualism.” From my experience of people in this world, I find them mostly the same wherever I’ve gone. Individualism, especially the definition given by the project of liberalism, has caused more separation than unity, wouldn’t you say? And so what if people are ” unparalleled, unprecedented, and unrepeatable?” They still abuse and harm anyone they can find, don’t they?

    Even given a classic example of separation and inequality – the Indian caste system, which U.G. was born into as a top-of-the-pile Brahmin, he never openly repudiated the caste system from what what I’ve read about him He benefited and only thought about himself when he took the money that was created by his grandfather and spent it all, abandoned his family and then mooched off of the patronage of his followers. Whatever he “gave” to others could never really make a difference in their lives, but that’s a separate matter. U.G. may have said some interesting things, but he looked out for Number 1 at all times.

    There are two things here that you should take away from our exchange: U.G. has come and gone and things in this world has not changed one iota – the abuse continues… and your opinion of how U.G. stood with universal equality does not match his words or deeds. Philosophers are useless. They just talk. We need action.

    • Juice

      I agree with your 1st paragraph.

      Regarding the 2nd paragraph: He was very selfish in his pursuit of his goal of enlightenment. He has said that pursuing enlightenment is as selfish as any other goal. After his calamity, while he certainly survived off his patrons money, I think his patrons may disagree with your assertion that he looked out for Number 1 at all times.

      Would you say an animal in nature, a dog or cat perhaps, stands for universal equality, is an expression of it and lives & breathes it?

      Except for a few people, UG & his namesake cohort, JK, haven’t changed much in this world.

      Who has, who will and what is your solution?

  6. Juice

    in general, I don’t see how he is doing/saying any more (or less) than any of the other so-called gurus, teachers, etc … just another piece of the puzzle, another step, another building block .. another contributor .. as they have all contributed to humanities evolution in consciousness but really no more or less than all the others before him … or perhaps more than some & less than others and perhaps good for some at some point in their lives

    but I don’t hear any comprehensive solutions there, just a few phrases .. self-honesty, self-forgiveness …. it’s very incomplete

    • Darryl Thomas

      Obviously “comprehensiveness” won’t be found in a twenty minute video. You’ll have to research it, and there’s plenty to research. I’ve been researching this for almost five years, and to tell you the truth in the 30 years researching spirituality and the metaphysical, this line or research is worth the time to investigate. It will challenge all your beliefs, and I have seen that for most people, having their belief system questioned is something that brings up too much fear in them to face.

  7. Juice

    what does he mean by God and Jesus? Was there someone who went by the name Jesus Christ ? How much of his words were corrupted, altered, changed to enhance the power of those who changed his words which would subjugate others under the enslavement of faith/belief?

    • Darryl Thomas

      You won’t understand or believe what I’m saying unless you investigate “self-honesty” and “self-forgiveness” further, but Jesus did exist, and left behind some words (of which barely little has come down to us). He was not the “Son of God,” but a “pawn” of sorts. A pawn for whom or what? When you find the answer to that, you’ll know what to do.

      My whole point in these blogs for the year 2012 is to reveal through common sense analysis how religion and spirituality has only been useful (and I grudgingly admit, even necessary) in channeling human beings’ predilection for evil from utterly destroying everything. The elites have always been genetically inclined to understand this, which is why they act with such impunity. However, the elites have overplayed their hand, and even they can’t control everything anymore. Depending on which way the coin flips, this could be good or very, very bad for the rest of us. I suggest you listen to more of what Bernard Poolman has to say.

  8. Juice

    Darryl,
    Is this Poolman’s site? http://desteni.org/articles

    You guys for real about that interdimensional portal communication stuff?

    That’s pretty hard to swallow .. it seems those personalities supposedly coming through there aren’t correct

    • Darryl Thomas

      I lived in Bernard Poolman’s house for nearly three years and let me tell you, my purpose of going there was to see if he and Sunette were legit. They are. I did share some of my experiences on the forums.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s