'What do you want?' asked UG Krishnamurti to people asking him different questions. It is so funny to see that it is very difficult to realize that all this game of asking questions, even this is borrowed from outside and has not arisen authentically in one. He said that this culture has given solutions to nonexistent problems that never and cannot work and thus has created a neurotic condition in the body. The counter question 'what do you want' may seem out of context to the existential inquiries but it totally cuts through the facade that one is in need of an answer. Is there a question that is 'yours' he would ask. And any further discussion, any movement of thought is actually taking you away from it he would say. He also denied that there is anything you can do so that 'this' happens to you. The only instrument that you have is thought and it is useless in the search of 'that' and there is no other instrument, he would say.
I love how the 'realization', if we can use that word, has found different expression in different individuals. Particularity the expressions of J Krishnamurti and UG Krishnamurti I love even though (actually there is no 'even though' but a deep harmony) they deny the whole idea that there is something to seek. Somebody has said that JK reduced the idea of enlightenment to just psychology and UG reduced it to mere biology. I, myself have had this question that is this a process at all and if it is, is it physical or nonphysical. But now I see that all these are just words. We just say something is physical, something is psychological, something is conscious. It seems that more and more vocabulary needs to be created to counter and negate every description of 'that' as nothing of the language applies to it. The complex the personality is of one, the complex will be the gnosis. UG has condemned all the spiritual teachers and teachings including Buddha, JK, Osho, each one of them. He said that the thought has to die off on its own and totally denied that there is nothing one can do to make it happen. He just said that nature throws out some flowers time to time and the maximum you can do is to put them in museum and look at them!
JK himself has condemned the tradition, culture, religion so much that even in my wildest dreams I never thought that there would a realized one that would even condemn JK! That has been one of the epic moments of my life :D UG calls JK's practice of choice-less awareness a 'gimmick'. Hahahaha. What is common with both of them is there was a prophecy about both of them and people have tried to make them enlightened by loads of different types of Sadhnas, meditations etc and they revolted against all of that. Both are the realized ones and both deny that it is a 'result' of what was done to them, or what they were made to do. What wildflowers!
I myself have observed that when a seeker understands the whole gnosis from the realized ones and understands that the thought process is not going to lead him anywhere, the investment in the thought process is automatically broken, and slowly one can abide in the source, as the source. The source of the mind, source of the I-thought as called by Ramana and the whole illusion of you being a 'this person' collapses. There is just a field of awareness. Around 3-4 years before I came to see one of the Sadhguru's video where he was talking about a 'witness' to the thought process. That if the breath is watched, there happens a dis-identification between happenings and the witness. This was the first time I encountered something 'spiritual'. Immediately there was some 'understanding' happened in me and then I explored more and more of the knowledge of this sort. There were also some ideas that one must stick to one 'path' and not spend more time just 'gathering more information' about it. But from the initial dis identification, I never settled on any identity that I am a seeker or I am spiritual or this or that and it felt the most natural thing to me to read different awakened ones. After all they are not in conflict with each other. On the surface it may appear to be so but there is a deep agreement between all of them. And I found it even better to find out about my own 'cognitive dissonance'.
Ramakrishna is said to have realized god through all the paths such as that of the Jesus, Muhammad, his devotion for Kali and so on and he says that one must try out the different paths and realize on their own that its all the same!
To be continued....
I love how the 'realization', if we can use that word, has found different expression in different individuals. Particularity the expressions of J Krishnamurti and UG Krishnamurti I love even though (actually there is no 'even though' but a deep harmony) they deny the whole idea that there is something to seek. Somebody has said that JK reduced the idea of enlightenment to just psychology and UG reduced it to mere biology. I, myself have had this question that is this a process at all and if it is, is it physical or nonphysical. But now I see that all these are just words. We just say something is physical, something is psychological, something is conscious. It seems that more and more vocabulary needs to be created to counter and negate every description of 'that' as nothing of the language applies to it. The complex the personality is of one, the complex will be the gnosis. UG has condemned all the spiritual teachers and teachings including Buddha, JK, Osho, each one of them. He said that the thought has to die off on its own and totally denied that there is nothing one can do to make it happen. He just said that nature throws out some flowers time to time and the maximum you can do is to put them in museum and look at them!
JK himself has condemned the tradition, culture, religion so much that even in my wildest dreams I never thought that there would a realized one that would even condemn JK! That has been one of the epic moments of my life :D UG calls JK's practice of choice-less awareness a 'gimmick'. Hahahaha. What is common with both of them is there was a prophecy about both of them and people have tried to make them enlightened by loads of different types of Sadhnas, meditations etc and they revolted against all of that. Both are the realized ones and both deny that it is a 'result' of what was done to them, or what they were made to do. What wildflowers!
I myself have observed that when a seeker understands the whole gnosis from the realized ones and understands that the thought process is not going to lead him anywhere, the investment in the thought process is automatically broken, and slowly one can abide in the source, as the source. The source of the mind, source of the I-thought as called by Ramana and the whole illusion of you being a 'this person' collapses. There is just a field of awareness. Around 3-4 years before I came to see one of the Sadhguru's video where he was talking about a 'witness' to the thought process. That if the breath is watched, there happens a dis-identification between happenings and the witness. This was the first time I encountered something 'spiritual'. Immediately there was some 'understanding' happened in me and then I explored more and more of the knowledge of this sort. There were also some ideas that one must stick to one 'path' and not spend more time just 'gathering more information' about it. But from the initial dis identification, I never settled on any identity that I am a seeker or I am spiritual or this or that and it felt the most natural thing to me to read different awakened ones. After all they are not in conflict with each other. On the surface it may appear to be so but there is a deep agreement between all of them. And I found it even better to find out about my own 'cognitive dissonance'.
Ramakrishna is said to have realized god through all the paths such as that of the Jesus, Muhammad, his devotion for Kali and so on and he says that one must try out the different paths and realize on their own that its all the same!
To be continued....
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment