For a long time, i thought of keeping the following information to myself.
After a close second look, i figured it would be better to throw it all out and get it over with, even though this may lead to some controversy and misunderstanding.
The people who are familiar with the teachings of Jiddu Krishnamurti clearly see a lot of similarities between his and mine, and that is not a coincidence.
The fact: reading and listening to J. Krishnamurti’s words helped me a great deal in getting insight into my own life and the world as it is, despite some of his outdated and downright wrong views.
Frankly, most of Krishnamurti’s discourses still stand today and i have no intention of repeating, recuperating or reinterpreting them, but there is still a lot to dig deeper into, to clarify, and to reformulate in the context of today’s affairs. Sometimes i think we’re not far from “Krishnamurtism” being established by the people who continue to preserve and republish his teachings all over the world. I find it very disturbing and kind of sad that apparently nobody set forth his work like i am doing. Either nobody bothered to get dirty and/or managed to plow through the confusion or maybe i am just plain crazy to put my limited time and energy into the furthering of his meditations.
My hesitation to mention his name has to do with keeping my own unnoteworthy public image “clean” and this icon creating business around his figure, which he hated for sure. For this reason, i am not putting up clear pictures of the man, they only distract. If you really want to know more about him, search online for transcripts, or check YouTube, there is a lot of footage available.
To put things a little more in perspective, on my own path to insight, there were three authors that stood out for me: Henry Rollins (dead honest acceptance of one’s darkest thoughts), Friedrich Nietzsche (the killing of God and the will to move beyond) and, last but not least, Jiddu Krishnamurti (the anti-belief anti-authority anti-guru who traveled the world, out to incite a radical psychological transformation in anybody who cared to listen). Also worth mentioning: any dissonant voice i encountered that had some meaningful, enlightening things to say has contributed to my world view, and eventually my non-world view*, the embracing of emptiness. Certain comedians, scientists, artists and their works, crazy politicians, …, anybody touching upon something profound can be of “use”. Every once in a while they get some media attention, and as an effect, some of the truth seeps through occasionally, which can be very therapeutic in my opinion.
Still, no one can touch the energy and plain truthfulness of Krishnamurti’s words. His harshness and intensity discomforts a lot of people, but that’s what i like about him and what fired me up, and i am quite positive that there are no “soft” paths to truth.
Anyway, i shall continue by pointing out the main differences between K’s teachings and mine, to explain what i deem is necessary now and why i continue doing this ontoscopy written meditation thing.
1) K’s hypocrisy and personal biases
Due to his personal background, the severe Theosophical indoctrination with a lot of unnatural circumstances and childhood traumas, Krishnamurti kept a few bizarre idiosyncrasies, despite his renouncement of his past.
He fervently disliked any kind of authority but at the same time he felt absolutely infallible during a lot of his conversations, as if he was the only one who saw or had touched truth.
He considered himself an extraordinary being, which he was of course in several aspects, but he took it very far, seeing himself as the “World Teacher”, fortified by his entourage of course, and this created a large gap between him and the rest of the world, and it undermines many of his statements. Offstage he could also be quite different than who he insinuated to be in public, which of course does not tear down the whole of his discourses, but it makes one seriously doubt and wonder.
There is no way of comparing. My own upbringing was fairly calm, no traumas, no breathtaking stories. An atheist education, some artistic aspirations, a skeptical mind that tried to think its way through the trenches of solitude and alienation, and most of that has been left behind for good. There will still be unconscious biases in my thinking, and i strongly encourage you to point them out whenever possible.
There is nothing special about me. I only stand out in this day and age because the majority of mankind is caught in the illusions they lock themselves and others into. Anyone who is serious, self-critical and willing to put time, patience and effort into it can become much more aware and, with a little bit of luck, (s)he can move beyond psychological suffering. I still have some fucked up ways, i am far from a saint, but that is not the point. Laying bare the senselessness and the insanity makes one move away from it, but no one is absolutely free from aggression or illusion in an aggressive and illusion-fueled world. It’s up to us to get out of the trap, on all levels, not only psychologically (our messed up consciousness remains of course the root cause of most worldly misery).
2) Benevolent advances in psychology and neurology
One cannot deny some of the helpful insights psychology and neurology have given us. Since Freud, a lot has changed, some theories and methods have become much more realistic and successful. While it is still true that psychologists and psychotherapists can do a lot of harm, primarily because they themselves are still insane and most of them try to conform their patients to society’s insanity according to the rules they have learned, some have done some very important work. K failed to acknowledge this, or he trivialized it.
Ironically, he put a lot of emphasis on knowing and observing the self, which sounds a lot like cognitive therapy, and nowadays even mindfulness is seriously studied as a means to treat anxiety and other psychological dysfunctions. This can only be encouraged. Science alone is not the way to paradise, but it can prove very useful.
I am not too fond of most psychotherapists either, but there are exceptions, perhaps many more than i know of.
3) Difference in tone
I do not like to sound condescending. I do have a similar hard and dry approach with an occasional bit of humor, but i try to answer in more concrete terms instead of beating around the bush like Krishnamurti sometimes did. This is not always possible however, and i know a lot of people criticize K and other mystics for staying too vague and answering back with questions, but in many cases, there is no other way. There are no real solutions to our psychological problems, it is mainly a matter of asking the right questions and digging deeply into them, of seeing the intricacies of the whole for ourselves.
4) Subtle and larger differences in interpreting things
A big problem with most mystics, even the most sincere, is their interpretation of everything they have experienced and the projection they make out of their personal path to reach the end of suffering. Notions of existing religions may slip in, some things may get overlooked or considered unimportant, they may still be caught deeply into complex self-delusions, …
Krishnamurti is probably one of the most “clean” in this respect, being very radical and suspicious of any illusion, but he had his flaws too. I’ll give you an example.
K largely proposed his transformation of the mind as an all-or-nothing, immediate transition, and in my view this is true to some extent, though it can go other ways and it most definitely does not end there. Things are not as simple as he frequently put forward. Insights can come over time, piece by piece, extraordinary states may be experienced, things can be wrongly interpreted and new illusions may get installed inside your mind, etc etc. Constant awareness, wakefulness, is the key, which he relentlessly stressed, and i second him on that totally, but he shouldn’t have oversimplified and only regard the absolute, as some permanent state. The way i see it enlightenment is a movement, an ongoing process, of both the individual and the group, reflected in the interactions, which is the only indicator of value.
More of this and other nuances i will nail down later.
5) The age and time difference
Quite naturally, as a 29 year old, it is impossible to yet have grasped all of the depth the K-man plunged into during over 70 years or so. He commented on the 20st century, now we’re in the 21st. Not that a whole lot has changed fundamentally, but language and culture evolve, so the commentaries need to be updated as well, to keep them vibrant and relevant. Furthermore, i still have other activities besides this destroying of the false and the discovery of meaning. Maybe it will become more prominent in the years ahead, idunno, it depends.
(For those who wish to know, i have no idea where my life is going at the moment. I have great doubts about getting into the spotlight, but probably i will not have a choice. As long is can control the integrity of what i am doing and trying to say, it should be possible to work some things out.)
I still read some of Krishnamurti’s thoughts from time to time, to keep me sharp and to inspire me (just like he secretly read Buddha).
You could call me a “student” or “pupil” of, but certainly not a follower, and i am definitely much more a student of life and the mind than anything else. I regularly had to “kill” Krishnamurti to move further inside my mind.
I advise you to do the same with my words. It is an absolute necessity to move beyond them, to become free of them and face the essential questions with a clear mind.
K was completely opposed to referring to other teachings. I mostly prefer to do the same, but, on the other hand, it narrows down the dialogue, as if it all has to come from one man initially. In the end, the reader, who most likely consults other literature, always has the last word, and the goal is to get as wide and open as possible, despite all the unclarities, contradictions and half truths inside any form of communication. Of course, it is much easier to track down the mistakes of one musician playing solo than those of a full orchestra.
The last few years i have been putting a lot of time and effort in integrating insights from other fields into my global understanding, my teachings, which should become apparent soon, without going into complex, intellectual talk. To understand the self one does not need to have had a long education or have read a lot of books. Most intellectuals just get better at deceiving themselves by clinging to all sorts of philosophies and complex theories.
Maximum simplicity and depth are my constant concern, and i still have a lot of work to do in that direction.
There are trustworthy, valuable sources of wisdom out and in there.
In recent years i have read some very truthful and insightful texts by Osho for example (yes, he did some very nasty things, he lied a lot, but the man deserves some credit for his intelligence and his poetic and playful views), by Gautama Buddha, a couple of Zen masters (the Hsin Hsin Ming is a gem, also the 2 booklets by Shunryu Suzuki), the ancient Taoists like Lieh Tzu and Chuang Tzu, the challenging views of quantum physicist David Bohm, contemporary voices such as Charles Tart, Shinzen Young,…
You can also go out in nature, watch how life unfolds, outside and inside yourself. If you observe closely and without judgment, you will learn tremendously.
That’s about it. More will probably come up as i move further, and my approach will probably change in many ways in the years to come, we’ll see.
I hope i got my point across.
As always, feel free to ask questions.
This is mostly about you, about us, not about me or a dead man called Krishnamurti.
(*: Sorry for these recurring paradoxes. This is no deliberate mumbo jumbo or esoteric guru wordplay, they are simply necessary to go beyond the known, to address the limitations and pitfalls of language. Once you see, you’ll understand.)