Did he ever explain the basis for his rejection of paths?
Krishnamurti made a distinction between chronological time and what he called psychological time. Psychological time was understood to be the
distance, internally, between the present moment and the complete network, or
space, of an individual's mental conditioning. He felt that it was not possible to come to the sacred - which he located in momentary awarenesss - from a place of conditioned mental activity. This is why he rejected all paths and proclaimed that truth was a pathless land. I owe a great debt to the writings of Krishnamurti because I may never would have otherwise come to know about meditation, but on the other hand, when certain very auspicious opportunities were presented to me (to learn Pali and to encounter the Pali Canon, when my viriya was very strong indeed) I rejected these opportunies, because, "truth is a pathless land."
The first time I felt the ball of concentrated awareness in the head it arose very suddenly as I was experimenting with sitting meditation while reading along with one of Krishnamurti's books, ("The Wholeness of Life"; a series of talks with the psychiatrist Dr Shainberg and David Bohm). I remember trying to get a handle of what he meant by the phrase "the observer is the observed" and then it occurred to me, and at the same time this very palpable new sensation arose in the head. The beam of awareness had turned inwards on itself. This is the esoteric meaning of that perennial
ouroboros image. The first step is the last step, so to speak. Saying that, I don't think Krishnamurti was practicing Buddhist meditation. You can find a great deal of the occult throughout his life. Some of the people who were in his circle are the same people responsible for allowing certain meditative techniques, mostly originating out of Tibet, to fall into the hands of people in this world who have only sinister designs. Speaking of OTO, Temple of Set, and that sort of nastiness.
Yeah, that's it. Thanks, Tilt.