Weird, even that wasn’t clear to me. I just found him to be largely incoherent. Watching him speak to David Bohm was particularly painful, though I had high hopes. I guess I just don’t get it.
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Conversation
There’s a bio video called “with a Silent Mind” that gives a good intro to Krishnamurti & his teaching. It’s horribly worshipful and treacly, but works as information nonetheless.
1
3
as best I can tell, Jiddu got enlightened as a teenager. He was also warped by his upbringing. The combination seems to have alienated him from ordinary experience, and filled him with contempt for a great number of people.
Remember enlightened does not mean nice.
3
4
Ian, do you have a 'go to' definition/frame for enlightened-ness?
I know very little about JK, I recall Shinzen saying that he seemed to 'get' something but that his teaching led to a lot of his students talking about JK instead of putting what he said into practice.
3
2
Shinzen was making the point that not all people with a deep awakening are good @ teaching it to others. He would use JK as the prime example. His point is that while it’s true that there’s nothing to get and nowhere to go, you still have to give people something to hang onto.
2
7
As for the go-to definition of classic awakening, the short version is that you realize that there’s no such thing inside you as a self.
There’s much more after that, but that’s considered the basic “qualification.”
(And, yes, I’m aware of all that’s problematic @ that def.)
1
3
Yeah, the other version (same thing, differently stated) is realizing "I'm just the witness". Which you get seems to depend on your tradition/previous learning/framing.
Or that's my understanding, I am (probably) willing to defer.
But awakening is not enlightenment.
1
2
Ian, you are very welcome to stick your dick into the blender of that discussion for as long as you can stand it.
I’ll save you a trip to the ER - people define those terms differently and idiosyncratically. So you’ll just end up chasing your tail.
3
1
11
My favourite is when people get angry because you use the "wrong" definition, as if this is how language works in any other modality.
Very serious people burn other people alive or blow them up over over the details of such religious definitions. And have for thousands of years.
2
It's just like with certain programmers who refuse to understand that homonyms can mean different things in the context of different languages.
I say "refuse", because it's often on purpose in both cases.
1
2
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Funny, but no, it is not.
1
Show replies