[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re:Krishnamurti and theosophists, pro & con

Apr 07, 1998 04:15 PM
by M K Ramadoss

At 04:35 PM 4/7/1998 -0600, you wrote:
>Lmhem111 wrote:
>> In a message dated 98-04-06 23:59:47 EDT, Govert wrote:
>> I have problems with Krishnamurti myself. He was an alleged "non-guru" with
>> tens of thousands of devotees. He rejected the TS yet he always maintained
>> centers conveniently located near major TS compounds, Ojai and Adyar being
>> examples.
>I find him nihilistic and destructive. My search has always been for
>even from the time when I was a staunch atheist. I read one book by K in my
>early twenties and found that it had an "interesting" effect on my
>consciousness, precisely because of its nihilistic qualities. Yes, he may
>throw out some idols from people's minds, but he ultimately replaces them
>the idol of the intellect in a very pernicious and almost "invisible" form.
>Many years after I first made contact with K's writings I watched a video
>he gave a "lecture". My experience was one of emptiness, but not in the
sense of
>empty space filled with spiritual light and consciousness. Rather he
appeared to
>me to be a "Buddha in theory only".
>> His approach is basically that of a southern Buddhist, the neti-neti
path (God
>> is not this, God is not that). This is the most difficult of all paths to
>> follow in my opinion.
>It leads easily to a subtle nihilism, but can be very liberating in a
>way also, if endued with a passion for life, and surrender of the ego
>> Krishnamurti complained in his last days that no one understood his
>> philosophy (from Radha Schloss' book). People used to come to me with
the same
>> complaint and I told them I couldn't help them because I didn't
understand it
>> either.
>It is the lack of meaning and its nihilistic essence that makes it hard to
>understand. Basically there is nothing there to understand, which ultimately
>gets frustrating, and, rightfully so.
> Many acknowledge that he created a
>> great division in the TS which is still healing.
>Is it really? As long as theosophists do not choose to expose his
teachings as
>being incompatible with true theosophy there will not be much healing.
>PS Please forgive me for being so outspoken. I know that some on this list
>K in high regard and I do respect these people and their views.

Proof of the pudding is in eating. If K's teachings appeal to someone, they
should follow it. If not, even then it is ok. Who knows what true Theosophy
is and is not?


[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application