The seeds have been sown

Kinfonet Discussion
41

Do you think that could be due to the possible fact that you may not understand what K was pointing out? In addition, I disagree with your statement that K and Hinduism are the same and so, apparently, did K.

K often pointed out that when one identifies with some organization such as organized religion or a particular nationalism or whatever this identifying expands the self. When you call yourself an American, German, Indian, Christian, Buddhist, Hebrew and so on you are identifying with something larger than yourself which gives one the illusion of being secure, of being important, of belonging to something greater than one’s self. Surely we can all see that this division is destroying the world.

We don’t want to expand or divide the self, which is just a collection of experiences and knowledge; the past. We want to understand how thinking has divided humanity into all of these opposing groups and organizations. Which, in turn, has caused unbelievable suffering, wars, famine, disease, starvation, mass murder and so on. This is just one way, an important way, what K pointed out is different from organized religion which ever one it may be.

Also, when we compare one thing with another do we really understand either? For anyone interested see what K had to say about comparison.

2 Likes
43

For one thing, isn’t Hinduism a belief system? And didn’t k point out the danger of that? OK…I admit I know almost nothing about it, but for K there’s only the raw naked ‘what is’ that is of any importance…life as it actually is now…that’s what is factual…that’s not a belief, but what actually is. To understand that we have to discard beliefs and ideals and all identification with thought. OK…don’t want to discount what Nat. was trying to say…perhaps there is something in Hinduism that relates to what K pointed out. I honestly know almost nothing about it.

44

And perhaps ‘there is something in K.’ , that Hinduism ‘pointed out’ many, many, many, years ago (before it was an ‘ism’?) …and no one “got it” then …either?

1 Like
46

Network of Thought
Second Public Talk in Amsterdam, Sept. 1981

“So one must be free, if one is serious in the enquiry into what is religion, one must be free of all the things that thought has invented, put together about that which is considered religious. That is, all the things that Hinduism has invented, with its superstitions, with its beliefs, with its images, and the ancient literature as the Upanishads and so on, one must be completely free of all that. If one is attached to all that then it is impossible, naturally, to discover that which is original. You understand the problem?”

"That is, if my mind, my brain is conditioned by the Hindu superstition, beliefs, dogmas, idolatry, with all the ancient tradition, my mind then is anchored to that, therefore it cannot move, it is not free. Therefore one must be free completely from all that - being a Hindu. Right? Similarly, one must be free totally from all the inventions of thought, as the rituals, dogmas, beliefs, symbols, the saviours and so on of Christianity. That may be rather difficult, that is coming nearer home. Or if you go to Ceylon or the Tibetan, North, Buddhism, with all their idolatry, as the idolatry of Christianity, they too have this problem: being attached as security to the things thought has invented. So all religions, whether Christianity, Muslim, Islam, Hinduism, or Buddhism, they are the movement of thought continued through time, through literature, through symbols, through things made by the hand or by the mind, all that is considered religious in the modern world. To the speaker that is not religion. To the speaker it is a form of illusion, comforting, satisfying, romantic, sentimental but not actual, because religion must affect life, the way we live, that is the significance of life. Because then only when there is order, as we talked about yesterday, in our life."

1 Like
47

Yes that’s all obvious to me and I’m sure to others who have spent years studying all this: the folly of belief in a ‘system’ or an authority. My point with the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, etc. teachings is that each sprang from a single human brain, didn’t it?. Something was seen, something transformative happened to that individual, they spoke about it…and the ‘rest is history’. The ‘circus’ began. The person who this happens to becomes a ‘saint’ in the eyes of those who ‘follow’. Traditions take shape, rites, rituals and the germ of what was seen is buried, (That becomes the ‘esoteric’ side of these religions) K. took great pains to put it off happening with him, no ‘successor’, no disciples, no followers, etc. But you can see a similar thing happening in his case I think, with the ‘quotes’ surrounded by flowers, the idyllic landscapes., etc…but the germ is there for those who are willing to work, experiment, it doesn’t come through the word. The ‘self’ may be “evil”, as he said, and we see evidence of that all around us, but to see oneself as that, and see our own judgements springing from that evil-ness is, rare, isn’t it?

48

The point was made in the quotes from K that were posted above that what K was pointing out was not anything like the drivel from organized religions. And as far as all religions being started “from a single human brain” I question that. For example, there is a growing opinion among Biblical scholars that there never was a person, a religious leader, named Jesus Christ.

There were and are no writings or manuscripts contemporary, to “Jesus” or Christ or Christianity until hundreds of years after the “last apostles died”. And there is no proof there were apostles. The King James Version of the Christian bible, “the word of god” is a book edited in the 17th Century from 16th Century translations of 8000 contradictory copies of 4th century scrolls that claim to be copies of lost letters written in the 1st century. That’s not faith. That’s insanity.

There comes a time when we have to let go of our most cherished beliefs if we want to find the truth. To use what K pointed out by twisting it to perpetuate those closely held cherished beliefs is a travesty and a waste of what K was here to do. Not to give us the truth but to show us what is not true, what is keeping us from seeing the truth. It’s up to us to see what is but we can’t do that if we refuse to let go or our conditioning.

1 Like
49

Have you considered that this is just our conditioning? Do we really know how each of these religions started? And is the folklore that surrounds the beginning of these religions a fact or simply dogma, mythology that has survived the ages? For example, look at all the folklore and myths of the ancient Greeks and Romans, and Norsemen and on and on: Thor, Jupiter, Zeus, Hercules, etc. Do we accept all that as fact? Of course not.

50

Let’s agree to disagree and move on.

There isn’t any compulsion to identify with organized aspect of any religion, but we could approach it as if it’s new and it works for me.

No comparison is intended, one is in the other and therefore no contradiction or the need to compare.

51

Since this is a K forum, can you say what it is that you found in Hinduism that is similar to what K spoke of in his talks and discussions? I for one would be interested to know. There’s no reason we can’t discuss this if in fact they were pointing to the same truth about man and his suffering.

1 Like
52

Tom? Did you not read what Krishnamurti himself said about Hinduism and all other organized religions? It was a direct quote I put up. I didn’t change a word. What is there about organized religion that is left to discuss? It’s over Tom. Time to let go of all of our attempts and dependency and security and face our condition. Face the truth.

53

It’s not a question of an “organized aspect” of any religion. It’s that the whole religion is organized conditioning. It has no relationship to what K pointed out. Did you read the quotes I posted from K himself about organized religion? There is no ambiguity about what K said concerning organized religion. Organized religion has nothing to with what K pointed out. He made it very, very clear any number of times. There is no compromise about this. Either we understand what K said about organized religion or we don’t.

54

I’m not interested in the religion Hinduism per say, nor even slightly interested in the rituals or beliefs. Only wondering if there was something pointed out or spoken of that is NOT a belief and that resonates with what K pointed out. This is a question directed to Nat so let’s let him answer.

1 Like
55

The basic ‘problem’ that I see for us with an established system that offers a ‘way out’ of our suffering is that certain ‘things’ have to be done, followed,etc, in order to attain freedom or enlightenment, satori… This is what K. identified as “becoming”. “I am not this now but I will be…” This for me is the new message he brought to mankind: that there is no time to become, there is only now. There is no other “shore” to get to, the shore is here…There may have been variations of this message by the mystics and the seers throughout time, before they were corrupted and 'organized ', who knows, but its subtlety and simplicity has still eluded us to this very day. Systems of belief, hierarchies of followers, rituals as reminders, symbols, etc. all to ‘get somewhere’ other than where one is: the ‘what is’ or as K. called it “the sacred what is”.

1 Like
56

This is a fact. Holding on to any part of any belief prevents truth from manifesting.

57

Was Nat. referring to a belief or beliefs or was something pointed out…a fact of man’s existence…that he found to be important? Let’s let him answer…hopefully he will clarify. I’ve read Nat’s posts for a couple of years now and I kind of doubt he holds strong religious beliefs. But I could be mistaken. Doesn’t matter…let’s see what he was referring to…a belief or a fact…a pointer?

58

Tom, I could relate most of what K spoke about back to the principles which I trust it is based on. I suggest we’ll leave it at that.

59

OK…lets get back to K then and leave Hinduism alone since others here are totally opposed to bringing it into the discussion.

1 Like
60

I question whether what K spoke about is based on any principles, Hindu or otherwise. It appears obvious from what K said over the years that K discovered for himself, saw for himself, what he brought to humanity. Isn’t that the whole point? We have to see the truth for ourselves. Was what K pointed out in anyway influenced by any existing philosophy or religion? K made it very clear that it was not.

Organized religion turns people into followers. People in organized religion are asked to accept the dogma, the beliefs of that religion. They are asked to accept this dogma on faith without any supporting facts or truth. They are not asked to discover anything new for themselves.

This is one of the important differences between K and any organized religion. This whole discussion may seem repetitive or “nit picking” but I don’t think that it is. I think it is important to understand that K’s discoveries have no roots in other belief systems or philosophies.

2 Likes
61

This is a powerful excerpt that Jack shared above and it’s worth revisiting, imo. Especially the first sentence about religions being “the movement of thought continued through time”. And the question that comes to mind is, why has all that failed to ‘affect life’? I have Christian friends who continue to believe that at some time in the future the teachings of Christianity will in fact ‘affect life’. That if they keep dedicating their lives to the teachings of the Bible it will bring change…to themselves and to the world. Now millions of people like them believe this even after over 2000 years of zero fundamental change in mankind since Christ was alive…zero! What is at fault here? Why do religions fail…always…to bring change?

62

What is ‘religion’ them? It’s a ‘breaking through’ the falseness, isn’t it. It’s not a ‘belief system’ to be added to the ‘self’. That’s why organized religions can never ‘work’ because its goal is belief not transformation or freedom (though it may claim it is). ‘Religion’ can’t be ‘organized’. In the same way that truth cant be organized. ‘Breaking through’ can’t be ‘done’ (if it can be done at all)… by an outside agency, can it. Only I can discover the psychological traps I am in. It’s not a group activity at all. And hierarchies among followers just confuses and takes away the responsibility of a ‘truth seeker’ and ‘de-rails’ it.

And not to forget, all organized religions are based on ‘time’. The psychological time, to get from ‘here to there’…‘Initiate’ to ‘master’, etc…K. shattered this whole notion of psychological ‘becoming’.