Compatibility of Buddha and Krishnamurti

[retrofuturist]

Greetings all,

Until now I've paid negligible attention to Krishnamurti, but I am currently reading a book called "Explorers of Inner Space: The Buddha, Krishnamurti & Kierkegaard" by Padmasiri de Silva and am now interested in the extent to which there may be overlap and even potentially synergy between what the Buddha and Krishnamurti taught.

I'm also interested in any incompatibility between the two - specifically, any instances where anything Krishnamurti has said comes into direct conflict with the teachings of the Sutta Pitaka.

Furthermore, if anyone has read the book I am reading (or anything else by Padmasiri de Silva) and wishes to comment on that, feel free to do so too.



Does anyone have any thoughts to open with?

Metta,
Retro.

[bodom]

Choiceless awareness...

[Viscid]

Dude! I love Krishnamurti, particularly his dialogues with David Bohm.

And this one with Allan W. Anderson:


There's a video of him on youtube getting a little fed up with Walpola Rahula:

It's not particularly interesting, as they get nowhere.

Krishna comes off as a douche, but I think he's really demanding us look into things ourselves, which Buddhist teachers don't do enough-- they simply prescribe belief and practice. Krishna is more concerned with the individual's true, honest investigation into truth rather than giving them results to strive for.

[robertk]

Sarh , from dhammastudygroup, told me when she went to a talk by krishnamurti and he was talking about choicless awareness etc. she stod up amd asked him directly why he didn't attribute the Buddha with what he was saying. He ignored her and asked for another question

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Choiceless awareness...

Well, discussion of that was the first thing a quick search of Dhamma Wheel yielded... which raises the question, is Krishnamurti's "choiceless awareness" (as distinct to the subsequent insight-meditation adaptation of the term) consistent or inconsistent with the teachings of the Sutta Pitaka?

Metta,
Retro.

[Viscid]

Sarh , from dhammastudygroup, told me when she went to a talk by krishnamurti and he was talking about choicless awareness etc. she stod up amd asked him directly why he didn't attribute the Buddha with what he was saying. He ignored her and asked for another question

It's odd he doesn't mention his Buddhist influence, because he supposedly had a fairly remarkable supernatural encounter with The Buddha when he was involved with the Theosophists:

The morning of the next day (the 20th) was almost the same as the previous day, and I could not tolerate too many people in the room. I could feel them in rather a curious way and their vibrations got on my nerves. That evening at about the same hour of six I felt worse than ever. I wanted nobody near me nor anybody to touch me. I was feeling extremely tired and weak. I think I was weeping from mere exhaustion and lack of physical control. My head was pretty bad and the top part felt as though many needles were being driven in. While I was in this state I felt that the bed in which I was lying, the same one as on the previous day, was dirty and filthy beyond imagination and I could not lie in it. Suddenly I found myself sitting on the floor and Nitya and Rosalind asking me to get into bed. I asked them not to touch me and cried out that the bed was not clean. I went on like this for some time till eventually I wandered out on the verandah and sat a few moments exhausted and slightly calmer. I began to come to myself and finally Mr. Warrington asked me to go under the pepper tree which is near the house. There I sat crosslegged in the meditation posture. When I had sat thus for some time, I felt myself going out of my body, I saw myself sitting down with the delicate tender leaves of the tree over me. I was facing the east. In front of me was my body and over my head I saw the Star, bright and clear. Then I could feel the vibrations of the Lord Buddha; I beheld Lord Maitreya and Master K.H. I was so happy, calm and at peace. I could still see my body and I was hovering near it. There was such profound calmness both in the air and within myself, the calmness of the bottom of a deep unfathomable lake. Like the lake, I felt my physical body, with its mind and emotions, could be ruffled on the surface but nothing, nay nothing, could disturb the calmness of my soul. The Presence of the mighty Beings was with me for some time and then They were gone. I was supremely happy, for I had seen. Nothing could ever be the same. I have drunk at the clear and pure waters at the source of the fountain of life and my thirst was appeased. Never more could I be thirsty, never more could I be in utter darkness. I have seen the Light. I have touched compassion which heals all sorrow and suffering; it is not for myself, but for the world. I have stood on the mountain top and gazed at the mighty Beings. Never can I be in utter darkness; I have seen the glorious and healing Light. The fountain of Truth has been revealed to me and the darkness has been dispersed. Love in all its glory has intoxicated my heart; my heart can never be closed. I have drunk at the fountain of Joy and eternal Beauty. I am God-intoxicated.

[bodom]

Well, discussion of that was the first thing a quick search of Dhamma Wheel yielded... which raises the question, is Krishnamurti's "choiceless awareness" (as distinct to the subsequent insight-meditation adaptation of the term) consistent or inconsistent with the teachings of the Sutta Pitaka?

Ive never read any of Krishnamurtis writings so I cannot say if his teaching on Choiceless awareness is consistent with the Tipitaka or not.

The term for me has always been understood in the Buddhist context as explained by Nyanaponika, Goldstein, Munindra-ji, Gunaratana etc. The way these teachers have explained the term as a practice and not mere theory has always seemed perfectly in line with what the Buddha taught, ie. Satipatthana sutta.

It was only later when using this term Choiceless awareness on Buddhist message boards that it was pointed out to me that this was a teaching of Krishnamurti and not the Buddha.

[tiltbillings]

Krishnamurti is one of those authors that is worth reading for any number of reasons, but he was also a flaming hypocrite, at least in terms of requiring his followers be celibate while he was boffing the wife of one of his followers. It is an interesting phenomenon that, genuine spiritual insight and spiritual failing going hand in hand.

[ground]

I think that Krishnamurti was anti-buddhist, very prejudiced against buddhism. Obviously he did not understand or confuse some traditions with buddha dhamma. Seems as if his approach has been based on thought only.
Once saw him talking with Chögyam Trungpa and he appeared like a child full of fantasies, babbling all the time while Trungpa kept silence most of the time. That was very revealing.

kind regards

[mikenz66]

A previous discussion on the Choiceless Awareness issue:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00&start=0


Mike

[tiltbillings]

Well, discussion of that was the first thing a quick search of Dhamma Wheel yielded... which raises the question, is Krishnamurti's "choiceless awareness" (as distinct to the subsequent insight-meditation adaptation of the term) consistent or inconsistent with the teachings of the Sutta Pitaka?

Ive never read any of Krishnamurtis writings so I cannot say if his teaching on Choiceless awareness is consistent with the Tipitaka or not.

The term for me has always been understood in the Buddhist context as explained by Nyanaponika, Goldstein, Munindra-ji, Gunaratana etc. The way these teachers have explained the term as a practice and not mere theory has always seemed perfectly in line with what the Buddha taught, ie. Satipatthana sutta.

It was only later when using this term Choiceless awareness on Buddhist message boards that it was pointed out to me that this was a teaching of Krishnamurti and not the Buddha.

Choiceless awareness is an expression taken over by Western vipassana teachers, and has been conflated with bare attention, which is a term coined by Ven Nyanaponika in his HEART OF BUDDHIST MEDITATION, who does put bare attention into a very definite Buddhist context.

My guess is that neither Krishnamurti and Ven Nyanaponika influenced the other, but I would not doubt that Krishnamurti got the idea of choiceless awareness from reading Buddhist texts.

[mikenz66]

Perhaps a little off topic, but my impression is that some Buddhist Teachers use "Choiceless Awareness" in a rather different way from either Krishnamurti or the "bare attention" terminology of some other Buddhist teachers.

For some, "choiceless awareness" seems to be used simply in the sense of not making a particular choice about what to observe. As opposed to choosing to watch the breath, abdomen, etc, or choosing to scan through the body. Basically like Mahasi-style meditation without a "primary object", one focuses on whatever arises.


Mike

[tiltbillings]

I think that Krishnamurti was anti-buddhist, very prejudiced against buddhism. Obviously he did not understand or confuse some traditions with buddha dhamma. Seems as if his approach has been based on thought only.
Once saw him talking with Chögyam Trungpa and he appeared like a child full of fantasies, babbling all the time while Trungpa kept silence most of the time. That was very revealing.

kind regards

[tiltbillings]

Perhaps a little off topic, but my impression is that some Buddhist Teachers use "Choiceless Awareness" in a rather different way from either Krishnamurti or the "bare attention" terminology of some other Buddhist teachers.

For some, "choiceless awareness" seems to be used simply in the sense of not making a particular choice about what to observe. As opposed to choosing to watch the breath, abdomen, etc, or choosing to scan through the body. Basically like Mahasi-style meditation without a "primary object", one focuses on whatever arises.


Mike

Agreed.

[Viscid]

Krishnamurti was raised to enjoy hearing himself speak. Most people you seem him in conversation with simply don't understand the way in which to engage him, and he has no patience for them. That doesn't mean that his reflections are mere babbling, however.

[Goofaholix]

Perhaps a little off topic, but my impression is that some Buddhist Teachers use "Choiceless Awareness" in a rather different way from either Krishnamurti or the "bare attention" terminology of some other Buddhist teachers.

For some, "choiceless awareness" seems to be used simply in the sense of not making a particular choice about what to observe. As opposed to choosing to watch the breath, abdomen, etc, or choosing to scan through the body. Basically like Mahasi-style meditation without a "primary object", one focuses on whatever arises.

That's my understanding as well, though perhaps awareness itself kind of becomes the object and the objects that arise and pass away do so within the field of awareness.

What's Krishnamurti's definition?

[Viscid]

What's Krishnamurti's definition?

[Goofaholix]

What's Krishnamurti's definition?

I think that's pretty compatible with how it's taught in Buddhist circles, though I guess it is just in the context of day to day activity whereas we would also practice it in formal sitting and walking meditation.

[Dan74]

The story about Krishnamurti's supposed affair with one of his closest students and subsequent abortions is controversial - I think there was a subsequent refutation but either way I don't know for sure.

As for his relationship with the Buddhadhamma, he always had a special place in his heart for Buddhist venerables and saw many. My friend Nadi tells me her grandfather who was a devout Buddhist brought him to speak in Sri Lanka. Evidently in those days many Buddhists had fondness for Krishnamurti as well.

As for his teachings, he emphasized broad ranging and deep inquiry, a unregimental personal and unque quest for liberation "truth is a pathless land" and the ending of all conflict in a very deep sense of the word.

Many report they would go into samadhi in his presence but there are also less that flattering anecdotes particularly to do with an irritable fussy and overly critical dispoaition.

One notion is that he was mostly a medium for a very insightful teacher which accords with many hints he himself gave and also explains many seeming contradictions and strange occurences.

[ancientbuddhism]

I think that Krishnamurti was anti-buddhist, very prejudiced against buddhism. Obviously he did not understand or confuse some traditions with buddha dhamma. Seems as if his approach has been based on thought only.
Once saw him talking with Chögyam Trungpa and he appeared like a child full of fantasies, babbling all the time while Trungpa kept silence most of the time. That was very revealing.

Every time I hear Krishnamurti talk with condescending derision about the ‘calamity’ of religious traditions of the East teaching meditation in the West, I think of this exchange between the Kālāma’s and the Buddha:

Sitting to one side the Kālāma’s of Kesaputta said this to the Sublime One: “Venerable Sir, there are some Brāhmans and ascetics that come to Kesaputta, who put forth and congratulate their own theories, only to revile, hold with contempt and disrespect as inferior the theories of others.
- Kesamutta (Kālāma) Sutta (AN.3.66)