Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00535)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Konstantin Zaitzev" 
<kay_ziatz@y...> wrote:
> 
recorded talks of Krishnamurti, the reader will find a clear 
contemporary statement of the fundamental human problem, together 
with an invitation to solve it in the only way in which it can be 
solved--for and by himself. The collective solutions, to which so 
many so desperately pin their faith, are never adequate. "To 
understand the misery and confusion that exist within ourselves, and 
so in the world, we must first find clarity within ourselves, and 
that clarity comes about through right thinking. This clarity is not 
to be organized, for it cannot be exchanged with another. Organized 
group thought is merely repetitive. Clarity is not the result of 
verbal assertion, but of intense self-awareness and right thinking. 
Right thinking is not the outcome of or mere cultivation of the 
intellect, nor is it conformity to pattern, however worthy and noble. 
Right thinking comes with self-knowledge. Without understanding 
yourself, you have no basis for thought; without self- knowledge, 
what you think is not true." 

This fundamental theme is developed by Krishnamurti in passage after 
passage. "There is hope in men, not in society, not in systems, 
organized religious systems, but in you and in me." Organized 
religions, with their mediators, their sacred books, their dogmas, 
their hierarchies and rituals, offer only a false solution to the 
basic problem. "When you quote the Bhagavad Gita, or the Bible, or 
some Chinese Sacred Book, surely you are merely repeating, are you 
not? And what you are repeating is not the truth. It is a lie: for 
truth cannot be repeated." A lie can be extended, propounded and 
repeated, but not truth; and when you repeat truth, it ceases to be 
truth, and therefore sacred books are unimportant. It is through self-
knowledge, not through belief in somebody else's symbols, that a man 
comes to the eternal reality, in which his being is grounded. Belief 
in the complete adequacy and superlative value of any given symbol-
system leads not to liberation, but to history, to more of the same 
old disasters. 

Selfknowledge is the beginning!Be Aware,Concentrated and 
Contemplative and live in the moment of NOW !

Christina

Ps. Do you mean that the scientist is less materialistic then Krishna 
J? I don't believe it!!!

By the way I have heard that Krishna get more insight after the death 
of his brother.

Christina

> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "christinaleestemaker" wrote:
> 
> > I think All is working through the brain.
> > Only the ways to the brain are different, o you call the higher 
> > mind the mind-brain entlightenend with the working Ajna(6 st 
sense) 
> chakra 
> 
> > And I am sure Krisnamurti would have know that.
> 
> He might have HEARD that but probably he didn't KNEW.
> For instance, he probably heard about life after death, but the 
fact 
> that he was so distressed by the death of his brother proves that 
he 
> had only theoretical knowledge, if he had any. Maybe those 
> pumpkin-heads which were around him in "Order of the star" didn't 
> guess that they could show to the "World teacher" one of those 
> booklets like "To those who mourn" which were kept in tons in 
> theosophical bookstores then. Whatever he have taught, he was 
> materialistic inside, even then. Some think that he taught vedanta 
or 
> so-called monism. Well, if one believes in one matter and nothing 
> beyong it, he may call it "monism", because only one element is 
> admitted, but it is no other than gross materialism. And it wasn't 
> advaita-vedanta neither.
> «Human beings, out of their fear, invented god. And they tried to 
> reach god, which is the ultimate principle, in India it is called 
> Brahman, the ultimate principle». (Krishnamurti on meditation)
> http://www.krishnamurtiaustralia.org/articles/meditation%201.htm
> He obviously saw no distinction between brahman and god, so he not 
> only didn't taught vedanta, but probably didn't know anything about 
> it.
> In later period he says more openly in favour of materialism:
> 
> «Thought is mechanical, as is the organism». (Krishnamurti on 
> meditation)
> 
> David Bohm writes:
> «Through close attention to and observation of this activity of 
> thought, Krishnamurti feels that he directly perceives that thought 
is 
> a material process, which is going on inside of the human being in 
the 
> brain and nervous system as a whole».
> (A Brief Introduction to the Work of Krishnamurti)
> http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/K/K1.html#BohmIntro2K
> 
> So both me and Bohm have understood Krishnamurti the same way, and 
the 
> russian translations from which I have read that brain creates 
thought 
> were probably correct. Though Bohm is a scientist, in his 
> conversations with Krishnamurti he is comparatively less 
materialistic 
> and shows himself rather as an occultist while Krishnamurti rather 
as 
> a materialist.