Hit the wikipedia. Unclear about the details of his subject matter. I would appreciate any help from anyone who has actually studied his method or has read his books. Pretty much Hinduist slash Buddhist, right? What about the affair with Rosalind Rajagopal--he did hide that from the public, didn't he?
No, not really. He's got a unique philosophy. You should read some of his work. http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/
I think J. Krishnamurti was an enlightened teacher. But he spoke on "top of the hill", and I don´t think his teachings are for everyone. Because not everyone will give them the real meaning.
I don't understand why you would say that. He was very approachable, down to earth and extraordinarily simple to grasp. What do you mean by 'he spoke on "top of the hill"'? Please rephrase that, as I am not familiar with the expression.
Saying that enlightened persons are "on top of the hill" as an expression, that we normal folks are down here listening to their teachings. I say this because of my interpretation of the following passage of the NT: "Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, and he began to teach them saying:... (The Beatitudes)" (Matthew 5,1) The crowds are down there, the enlightened persons already reached the top of the hill. Some of us are trying to climb it thought! Sometimes when a person reaches enlightment, cannot put the experience into words. Some don´t even speak at all. Some others are quite more reachable, but still speak in a language that most people won´t understand. And some enlightened teachers, like Jesus, spoke in ordinary language what we may call divine things. For me, Jesus was a poet of the divine. But J. Krishnamurti teaches that in order to reach enlightment, you don´t need any techniques or practices, he tought the "zen philosophy". And is true. I´m not against it. The thing is, "not doing anything", is a technique by itself. If an enlightment teacher tries to give you a meditation technique, and you are into the "there is no technique" philosophy, then you are applying that technique at that very moment. For some people, that ""don´t do anything technique may work, but in my opinion, you need to be in a certain level of consciousness in order for that technique to work for you. There are many other meditation techniques, and they are probably contradictory. But this is due to the fact that we are all different, had different experiences, and hence, need different approaches in order to reach awareness. To teach 1 approach for everyone is not the way. Nobody is the same. In order to reach awareness, we don´t need to do anything, because it is already there. But we are so consumed by society, that we need other meditation teachniques in order to reach a state of "not doing anything". I like reading J. Krishnamurti thought, his wisdom can reach many.
I would not characterize it as a "don't do anything" technique AT ALL - not in the least. Anyway, dogmatrauma, you have a link that leads to a lot of what he had to say - read it and decide for yourself.
