Nice, add this fact to it - earth is not a globe and there is no solar system as they teach in schools and colleges. It is all lies. The size of the earth they teach is also lies.
I think Rupert missed the boat completely with what K was communicating. The reason he didn't leave a method or system is because that is part of the same system that we are caught in. We keep insisting on bringing about a change using the old instruments
By refering to "old instruments" , one can hint that there are "new instruments" : that is not the case , because there are no instruments at all, Only ATTENTION has to take its place and this ATTENTION is there the same manner that one breathes, all distractions (THOUGHTS) are to be put aside. I appreciate Rupert's position , as it comes to tackle that of those who unconditionally follow Krishnamurti, without making it totally their's.
Agreed, Sheldrake also seems to have misunderstood what K. meant with "I am humanity." Sheldrake says here at 17:51 that this statement would suggest that if I were enlightened, the whole of humanity would be enlightened. K. never said that, obviously that would be a rather foolish belief. K. used to compare the human stream of consciousness to a river, it's the stream of conditioning and sorrow. This metaphor I found to be very fitting since it gives you an idea how hard it is to step out of it, conditioning is so strong it just drags you along. But it also means that every wave that resists or steps out of the stream is a step towards ending it, just as every wave that doesn't resist contributes to the mess because they all drag along each other. But ofc one wave stepping out wouldn't end it either. K. didn't think of consciousness as being radically individual, just like you wouldn't think of the waves on the river to be seperate entities but rather momentary appearances in this ONE stream. Physical existence is individual in the sense that there are seperate people in seperate bodies with seperate brains, but consciousness ultimately cannot be divided in this way. instead, consciousness is shared by all humanity as one, but it has created the false notion of seperate *psychological* existence at some point and from that point onwards has been doing everything to protect this idealized self, which is perpetuating conflict, the stream of sorrow. This process of creating an indealized self, trying to become that and as a result producing conflict and sorrow is exactly the same whether it goes on in X's or Y's or Z's brain. Sheldrake seems to have completely missed the essence of it.
What Krishnamurti points out from all of his teachings is that there is a movement within oneself that is beyond the human mind function which could change and transform us to establish our relationship with each other. As a Christian, I see Krishnamurti's approach as very helpful to connect to the source on which we could get out from our individualistic conditioning. I think Rupert Sheldrake misunderstood Krishnamurti's point, but I do respect him very well and he has a lot of helpful and important points too.
It's nice to hear Mr.Rupert Sheldrake's talk in the present times. I heard his talks with Krishnaji. My understanding of Krishnaji's teachings is if human beings are able to see their conditioning and free themselves and allow the higher intelligence to flower then the pursuit of any activity be it religious/political/scientific can happen without somebody getting fooled or somebody getting selfish.
Even during discussion 40 years back in which he participated, it was clear from his responses that he could not understand what JK and Dr.Bhom were talking about. One example was while JK pointed out how human security is compromised due to our actions based on beliefs of nationalism etc Dr. Sheldrake was talking about a brother protecting sister etc,. While JK was talking about fundamental change in our approach to thoughts in our psychological enviornment, Dr sheldrake was talking about patchworks in the existing systems.
I would add however I respect Dr sheldrake's views about how the right practices help us merge into the Collective Whole. Reminds me of the Hindu Satsang - meaning - be in good company to absorb/radiate goodness. So in that sense sincere practice of rituals helps ...
To my understanding the conflicting troubles caused by the very act of believing is what prevents the human cognition from changing for the better. Whether the morphic resonance theory is true or not, no spiritual practices will ever summon nor trigger that change (or betterment), merely because of the factual reality in which any spiritual practice is based on a belief, ergo put together by conditioned human thought.
Dr. Sheldrake in his life met Krishnamurti he received the shock of Krishnamurti and then later on how to decide what he would serve. Would he let go of his conditioning his tradition or step into the unknown and enter a journey spiritually not of his own Making! This is Krishnamurti’s challenge! Anything that thought has put together divides us call it whatever you want it is a material process caught in time and leads to comfort and provides an illusion of psychological security. Rupert Sheldrake abandoned the challenge as most human beings do K radical counsel is a testament to his life.
Sheldrake never really understood what K. tried to convey in depth, as this interview reveals so clearly. At 17:51 Sheldrake gives his interpretation of what he thinks K. meant by "I am humanity". As you can surely see, Sheldrake draws some crudely trivializing conclusions from that quote which K. never would have agreed with.
I think we are very lucky to have Rupert around who can speak on intimate conversations he's had with K, i found this fascinating and would love to have a few more of these! There are so many questions id love to ask!
Yes you were courageous and intelligent and conversed as an equal no doubt, which is precisely why he liked you so very much. And yes, morphic resonance is so v v cool !
Even at the simpler level Of Education, i have seen students do the sane mistakes and correct themselves and get similar Ah ha moments on their 'journey of discovery'. So it seems almost like 'knowledge' is a stream flowing independently and one plugs in' at right time. Similarly with habits and procedures - a 'force' that shapes us when we are in resonance or 'ready to receive'. Like when the student is ready the teacher appears.
I deeply love and respect Dr. Rupert Sheldrake and I am glad that he draws something beneficial out of the Christian religion. But I stand with Jiddu Krishnamurti who rejects all religions and ideological groups because when he brings up the Tele Evangelists and talks about how terrible they are he uses that particular example as the caricature of the Christian religion in order to make a point which is that whether they are the Tele Evangelists like Benny Hinn et al or they are the Benedict Monks who care about all living beings and who are the poster children of the Christian religion, ultimately all people who do adhere to a specific ideological group have this core problem in common which is blind adherence to their group and their group's mental rules. We just see it more clearly in the caricatures among human groups such TV preachers, Islam, Cult gurus and the list goes on. But that same blind adherence is there also in those groups which appear to be more humble mannered. The critique is against all group adherence. We need to think for ourselves. We need to function based on compassion.
Very interesting to hear Rupert talk about his views & experiences with JK after so many years. It’s a shame he did not understand JK spiritual approach of no method or system. Rupert is very intelligent human being but it seems like the knowledge is not going to help the mind to be aware of its conditioning💓!
The moment he said "so he was an authority" @ 10:43, it was implicit that he did not understand the difference between helping/teaching, and authority. One can teach without having any authority over another, without having a status, or without any form of comparison. If I'm looking at a sunset and I tap your shoulder to say, "Hey look, there's a sunset happening with all those beautiful colors," then I have no authority over you. I'm simply pointing out that the sun is setting.
@@gnome3d750 That does not necessarily follow. Rupert might understand that distinction but still feel, in reality, K had inadvertently fallen into being an authority in his own way. It is a reasonable question. No human being is infallible.
@jonathanpinkey1413 my opinion, exactly. That is the paradox with JK, UG, Tolle, and all other spiritual teachers. Ramana Maharshi maybe... maybe Ramana was not an authority. He never seemed an authority to me in the way he addressed people. The others have had countless moments of authoritative behavior.
Thanks for sharing this valuable dialogue.. I just wish to add that there are people like me, who aren't interested in mysticism, who neither believe nor disbelieve in God or hereafter (that somehow doesn't interest us), but who feel grateful to K for showing us the alchemy of coming upon the right place of thought in life through "wide angle" attention and motiveless yet ardent observation. 🙏
"Alchemy of coming upon the right place of thought..." ... great image! One critical issue that still challenges my understanding has to do with "motiveless yet ardent observation"... Peacefully.
@@sidstar1001 Thanks. Motiveless in the sense that there is no motive to realize truth or God or relief or continuity of observation-mode; and ardent in the sense that it never goes away for good, always comes back after a week or a month or a year, and there is mutual welcome and no promises.
But he did explain, he just didn't tell us what to do. His investigation was absolutely thorough, our habit of wanting something from him or someone else is ridiculous. He was absolutely right.
You know about 1 enlightened man enlightening whole of Society - partial in fun but also Mostly true - it is like the person on the seashore was asked why he put a starfish back, there were innumerable ones and nothing good achieved - who replied his action - it - made a difference for that one starfish. So also K is extolling each one of us to take the leap into inquiry and reach our own Truths. All ways will work if intention is pure and attention is absolute - so no 'method' is needed. Hence no process as there is not 'one right way' Requires , as he said, often tremendous courage and intelligence. We people run away and hide behind 'practiced religion and rituals' afraid (again Fear like Insecurity we all have in spades :) as he saw) to set out on our own journeys of discovery.
Thanks for engaging Rupert Sheldrake (R) to discuss the dissimilarity between the virtues of traditional cultures endorsed by R and the non-traditional virtues espoused by J Krishnamurti (K) to see what has transpired over the period since they met in a series of talks with David Bohm and John Hindley about human suffering. Having recalled those discussions as raising matters of agreed concerns, it is interesting to catch up with R’s current comments on his recollections of having spoken with K on many occasions, particularly regarding the fundamental aspects of their respective approaches to challenges facing society at large and in person perspective. At the conclusion of the earlier discussions it was evident that K had aroused some intellectual concessions from R, but the response wasn’t necessarily deep enough to sway R into giving up his own particular religious or scientific knowledge which obviously sustained him in the stream of life inspired by his English background in education and church’s teachings. There is no suggestion that R has moved from his previous position. The question of morphemic resonance is very interesting because R has a take on it being the result of repeated practices or habitual consequences of collective actions affecting the group and individuals who partake in the rituals/practices according to the cultural teachings of the respective teachings. On the other hand, K clearly denounced all such practices outright and in doing so gave sound grounds to point out the limitations and dangers of being enslaved to the authority structures that underpins the reliance on past generations associated with the psychological continuity of ideas and ideals that were in K’s view illusions built on the brittle nature of images through the concepts and processes of fragmented thinking machinery. The difference may be summarised as positive accumulation (traditional) for R versus negative forces (non-traditional) for K. As things stand in society, tremendous weight is given to positive psychology and little attention is attributed to the natural occurrence of negation/ mutation/creation emanating from K’s perspective. The positive approach is evident in classical scientific theory in that it relies upon reductionist principles and binary methodology as the bedrock of discovering the laws of nature and human biological structures. K conceded that society’s advances in the technology world were undeniably impressive results of mankind’s concerted efforts. However, the thought processes when applied to the psychological realm produced conflict and contradictory outcomes due to the limitations of fragmented thinking processes. Ultimately, one is faced with either joining the traditional society’s social company or standing alone as a light unto oneself. Cheers!
Emotions are the code with which the animated ration of Life programs all lifeforms to generally think and behave in a rational manner. We place within the content of our intellect the irrational values of our culture and this creates a profoundly fundamental cognitive dissonance within our thought process. In our culture, Donald Trump’s total lack for the capacity of empathy, placed him at the pinnacle of the American, and our species, dream. Psychologists can see from data that stressful circumstances of our stressful lives usually precedes the onset of clinical depression. They can not see that this compels us to look for the ration and meaning of Life without the distortions of our species current values. This endeavour to free our thought process from the dominance of our ego’s selfish emotions is too great a burden for the depressed and atrophied selfless emotions of our conscience. Understand that our irrational cultural values are based to an excessive and irrational extent upon the selfish emotions of our ego. We are too corrupted by the power of our intelligence to consider that ration is the meaning of Life. Life is the animated manifestation of the ration which determines and governs the existence of the universe. That’s enough for now, with empathy Pete.
Thanks and very well put. Dr R remained a Scientist while K went beyond to Meaning of life and true happiness. One needs the thinking rational Mind, the other needs a deeper connection to Life - a stillness leading to perception. IMHO. personally I was disappointed and felt Dr R did not fulfill the promise he showed as a youth.
Pain or pleasure is a part of life , pain for love - pleasure by love , pain for relationship - pleasure by relationship etc are our memory ( past) ,and that memory are saved in form of thoughts. That's is ok. But when we start to give it more importance then present , it's become suffering.
He is correct in saying, “if one person becomes enlightened then all of humanity would become enlightened,” but barring an earthly situation in which all of humanity was about to be fatally struck by lightening, it won’t happen.. …because that’s becoming the known and the knower at the same time..equivalent to reaching absolute zero at which point everything shatters and disappears from form. ..but he is correct in revealing and saying that truth, because this encourages humanity to get spiritually as close to absolute zero as possible and form in the way of any structure, is a barrier to reaching this near absolute zero point of resonance. The sufi’s have a saying in that, “everything must go.”
Ok, i came here to observe rupert. I wanted to see has he grown since that 1982 video or not. He hasnt, in that video the least open minded and the most stubborn and egoistic individual was rupert and he is exxxxxactly the same guy as he was. Man its tough, i dont know why, but people find it so hard to change. Meeting even somebody like Krishnamurti can not open the eyes of a person who has just decided to stay blind.
The part of the discussion between K, Sheldrake, Bohm and Hidley I found most confounding was when Sheldrake saw in the world of nature the same kind of conflict and contradiction that he saw in the psycholology of human beings: i.e. he didn't see in nature a relm of profound order and beauty. I wonder if he's changed his mind about that: he betrayed how he was still biguiled by the Newtonian view of nature as discrete semi-autonomous objects and forces, rather then as an indivisible whole which is becoming more and more clear these days. Nature is the only perfection we know: if we don't know it as perfection we have lost our connection with nature owing to the activities of the divisive intellect. So what is the original factor in the human that divides it from nature? Social and historical accumulation, including the accumulation of language, memory, thought, but also habits, practices, material objects, attitudes, conventions etc etc etc. Social-historical development, accumulation and ossification is something that happens within the human mind-world as one indivisible movement. The material, outward, social accumulation of languages, habits, practices, material productions etc is both the product of, and productive of, mental accumulation. You can't seperate the two. I think social-historical accumulation and ossification is the missing element in the understanding of the fall of humanity from a state of nature (and therefore perfection) into a state of division and distruction.
Yes thank you Dr Sheldrake fir for saying "removes all morality "". And to Be a 'consumption centered' society. Exactly!!! In short my take is K just wants EACH ONE OF US to be people of integrity, character and non-self centered. Simple message - be a good human! But so impossible to be so ...
Feel disappointed. As a young man Dr Sheldrake showed more promise/understanding and K so obviously enjoyed talking to him! Now it seems the interviewer understands K better. Interesting ..
I think to Krishna the method is your own action your own doing/movement. If for instance you want to quiet your mind, you can but you dont need a method anymore than you need a method to open and close your hand. You just do it spontaneously once you understand and dispel the illusions/confusion/thefalse and realize what is true. Trying to quiet/control your mind is ego. The small little helpless thing you think you are and tries to control. That is the conventional intellect with its knowledge and thought going on. I think that was to Krishna such a small part of the greater you. Emphasized too much and blown up into something it isn't. Mistaken for you. He stated that we live lopsided lives with the intellect weighing too much. THought has its place, but not in the fore front of your life. It's like a hammer that is useful for driving nails but you dont go around hammering everything without causing destruction. Knowledge is limited (which is obviously true) and thus thought is limited since Knowledge is thought. To Krishna there exists something beyond thought. A life quite separate from the constructs of thought. The larger broader brain or mind if you will that sits unused in most ppl. I think this is what most ppl simply dont understand. It's a process to be experienced/discovered for oneself. Direct experience. So much untapped potential in ourselves we dont realize. It's like a baby for the first time realizing it can walk. We dont flower like this because we all want others to tell us the answer instead of doing the work ourselves.
Rupert Sheldrake was already blocked in his talks with K. back then. He has learned nothing and follows old patterns. I can follow Rupert Sheldrake's criticism of K., but he only uses the template of a guru as an accusation for this - but forgets the role of the observer here.
To understand very clear about JIDDU KRISHNAMURTHI SIR 3 vedios will help 1.Problems of living, 2. Is belief necessary 3. Urgency of change. This 3 vedios are sufficient to understand the rut or absurdity that has taken place today which he was trying to communicate to put a break to such a petty life which we are going through today. Life has lost the meaning fragrances values all which had deep deapth. Now we are all.living a life of battle for meaning less existence.
Sheldrake's failings in understanding K's teachings can be seen in his descriptions around 'enlightenment' and 'K's enlightenment'. K rarely used the term 'enlightenment' and in a serious discussion would never have considered himself enlightened. That's an important subtly missed th-cam.com/video/xU2XXpdluiw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=NF18p6mY0r1XhtLQ&t=1089
R.Sheldrake did not step in to it, and by doing so, excepted J.Krishnamurti being an authority to him, complaints he thinks Jiddu had about structural beliefs, came from himself being a lazy follower waiting for the miracle to happen to himself.. And thàt dear well-studied Rupert, will not happen ever in your life! Which after all these close encounters you've had with J.Krishnamuri, is a terrible loss. I doesn't feel good to all of us, seeing a human being drowning in it's own program, not able to reach for the hand..to be free. The only thing which is left to me, is please let go of every authority, inward end outward, not stepping in the same pit again..
completely random comment- i micro dose raw liberty caps every day for the entire season. incredible and useful. but if anyone plans on trying this: make sure you're 100% on identification, have some goals in mind before you start, are in a stable mindset, and protect the habitat and mushrooms from over exploitation. respect yourself and the organisms! all the best
Rupert looks like he didn't understand any of K's teachings. Any method or rule or Guru is the old method of conditioning. K requested again and again is to Question everything and to find out for yourself.
Pocas personas escucharon a Krishnaji ....sólo oían!!! Era como una charla entre amigos....era todo amor!!!
I ma 19 year old and I found something amazing in J krishnanmurtti dialogues..
Nice, add this fact to it - earth is not a globe and there is no solar system as they teach in schools and colleges. It is all lies. The size of the earth they teach is also lies.
All the best dear
I think Rupert missed the boat completely with what K was communicating. The reason he didn't leave a method or system is because that is part of the same system that we are caught in. We keep insisting on bringing about a change using the old instruments
So well intellectualized and spoken, thank you
By refering to "old instruments" , one can hint that there are "new instruments" : that is not the case , because there are no instruments at all, Only ATTENTION has to take its place and this ATTENTION is there the same manner that one breathes, all distractions (THOUGHTS) are to be put aside.
I appreciate Rupert's position , as it comes to tackle that of those who unconditionally follow Krishnamurti, without making it totally their's.
Agreed, Sheldrake also seems to have misunderstood what K. meant with "I am humanity." Sheldrake says here at 17:51 that this statement would suggest that if I were enlightened, the whole of humanity would be enlightened. K. never said that, obviously that would be a rather foolish belief. K. used to compare the human stream of consciousness to a river, it's the stream of conditioning and sorrow. This metaphor I found to be very fitting since it gives you an idea how hard it is to step out of it, conditioning is so strong it just drags you along. But it also means that every wave that resists or steps out of the stream is a step towards ending it, just as every wave that doesn't resist contributes to the mess because they all drag along each other. But ofc one wave stepping out wouldn't end it either. K. didn't think of consciousness as being radically individual, just like you wouldn't think of the waves on the river to be seperate entities but rather momentary appearances in this ONE stream. Physical existence is individual in the sense that there are seperate people in seperate bodies with seperate brains, but consciousness ultimately cannot be divided in this way. instead, consciousness is shared by all humanity as one, but it has created the false notion of seperate *psychological* existence at some point and from that point onwards has been doing everything to protect this idealized self, which is perpetuating conflict, the stream of sorrow. This process of creating an indealized self, trying to become that and as a result producing conflict and sorrow is exactly the same whether it goes on in X's or Y's or Z's brain. Sheldrake seems to have completely missed the essence of it.
What Krishnamurti points out from all of his teachings is that there is a movement within oneself that is beyond the human mind function which could change and transform us to establish our relationship with each other. As a Christian, I see Krishnamurti's approach as very helpful to connect to the source on which we could get out from our individualistic conditioning. I think Rupert Sheldrake misunderstood Krishnamurti's point, but I do respect him very well and he has a lot of helpful and important points too.
It's nice to hear Mr.Rupert Sheldrake's talk in the present times. I heard his talks with Krishnaji. My understanding of Krishnaji's teachings is if human beings are able to see their conditioning and free themselves and allow the higher intelligence to flower then the pursuit of any activity be it religious/political/scientific can happen without somebody getting fooled or somebody getting selfish.
Well said! Emphasis also not 'seeking' without fear or favor to understand one's life
Thank you fir this valuable video..I loved Rupert's perspective on Krishnamurti and on religion as well 🙏
Even during discussion 40 years back in which he participated, it was clear from his responses that he could not understand what JK and Dr.Bhom were talking about. One example was while JK pointed out how human security is compromised due to our actions based on beliefs of nationalism etc Dr. Sheldrake was talking about a brother protecting sister etc,. While JK was talking about fundamental change in our approach to thoughts in our psychological enviornment, Dr sheldrake was talking about patchworks in the existing systems.
I would add however I respect Dr sheldrake's views about how the right practices help us merge into the Collective Whole. Reminds me of the Hindu Satsang - meaning - be in good company to absorb/radiate goodness. So in that sense sincere practice of rituals helps ...
1984 to 2020, 36 years after that amazing series of talks!
To my understanding the conflicting troubles caused by the very act of believing is what prevents the human cognition from changing for the better. Whether the morphic resonance theory is true or not, no spiritual practices will ever summon nor trigger that change (or betterment), merely because of the factual reality in which any spiritual practice is based on a belief, ergo put together by conditioned human thought.
Dr. Sheldrake in his life met Krishnamurti he received the shock of Krishnamurti and then later on how to decide what he would serve. Would he let go of his conditioning his tradition or step into the unknown and enter a journey spiritually not of his own Making! This is Krishnamurti’s challenge! Anything that thought has put together divides us call it whatever you want it is a material process caught in time and leads to comfort and provides an illusion of psychological security. Rupert Sheldrake abandoned the challenge as most human beings do K radical counsel is a testament to his life.
Spot on!
Sheldrake never really understood what K. tried to convey in depth, as this interview reveals so clearly. At 17:51 Sheldrake gives his interpretation of what he thinks K. meant by "I am humanity". As you can surely see, Sheldrake draws some crudely trivializing conclusions from that quote which K. never would have agreed with.
I think we are very lucky to have Rupert around who can speak on intimate conversations he's had with K, i found this fascinating and would love to have a few more of these! There are so many questions id love to ask!
Yes you were courageous and intelligent and conversed as an equal no doubt, which is precisely why he liked you so very much.
And yes, morphic resonance is so v v cool !
Even at the simpler level
Of Education, i have seen students do the sane mistakes and correct themselves and get similar Ah ha moments on their 'journey of discovery'. So it seems almost like 'knowledge' is a stream flowing independently and one plugs in' at right time.
Similarly with habits and procedures - a 'force' that shapes us when we are in resonance or 'ready to receive'. Like when the student is ready the teacher appears.
Thanks Giani for this great interview! Much appreciated. .
bringing beings together in collective spiritual celebration: something worth creating for
Rupert Sheldrake is very right about rituals working through orphic resonance , his idea is very intelligent and progressive
I deeply love and respect Dr. Rupert Sheldrake and I am glad that he draws something beneficial out of the Christian religion. But I stand with Jiddu Krishnamurti who rejects all religions and ideological groups because when he brings up the Tele Evangelists and talks about how terrible they are he uses that particular example as the caricature of the Christian religion in order to make a point which is that whether they are the Tele Evangelists like Benny Hinn et al or they are the Benedict Monks who care about all living beings and who are the poster children of the Christian religion, ultimately all people who do adhere to a specific ideological group have this core problem in common which is blind adherence to their group and their group's mental rules. We just see it more clearly in the caricatures among human groups such TV preachers, Islam, Cult gurus and the list goes on. But that same blind adherence is there also in those groups which appear to be more humble mannered. The critique is against all group adherence. We need to think for ourselves. We need to function based on compassion.
Practice, practice and practice and get fitted in a nice repetitive yet, so called, acceptable groove!
Very interesting to hear Rupert talk about his views & experiences with JK after so many years. It’s a shame he did not understand JK spiritual approach of no method or system. Rupert is very intelligent human being but it seems like the knowledge is not going to help the mind to be aware of its conditioning💓!
The moment he said "so he was an authority" @ 10:43, it was implicit that he did not understand the difference between helping/teaching, and authority. One can teach without having any authority over another, without having a status, or without any form of comparison. If I'm looking at a sunset and I tap your shoulder to say, "Hey look, there's a sunset happening with all those beautiful colors," then I have no authority over you. I'm simply pointing out that the sun is setting.
@@gnome3d750 That does not necessarily follow. Rupert might understand that distinction but still feel, in reality, K had inadvertently fallen into being an authority in his own way. It is a reasonable question. No human being is infallible.
@jonathanpinkey1413 my opinion, exactly. That is the paradox with JK, UG, Tolle, and all other spiritual teachers. Ramana Maharshi maybe... maybe Ramana was not an authority. He never seemed an authority to me in the way he addressed people. The others have had countless moments of authoritative behavior.
Thanks for sharing this valuable dialogue.. I just wish to add that there are people like me, who aren't interested in mysticism, who neither believe nor disbelieve in God or hereafter (that somehow doesn't interest us), but who feel grateful to K for showing us the alchemy of coming upon the right place of thought in life through "wide angle" attention and motiveless yet ardent observation. 🙏
"Alchemy of coming upon the right place of thought..."
... great image! One critical issue that still challenges my understanding has to do with "motiveless yet ardent observation"... Peacefully.
@@sidstar1001 Thanks. Motiveless in the sense that there is no motive to realize truth or God or relief or continuity of observation-mode; and ardent in the sense that it never goes away for good, always comes back after a week or a month or a year, and there is mutual welcome and no promises.
Beautifully said !
But he did explain, he just didn't tell us what to do. His investigation was absolutely thorough, our habit of wanting something from him or someone else is ridiculous. He was absolutely right.
You know about 1 enlightened man enlightening whole of Society - partial in fun but also
Mostly true - it is like the person on the seashore was asked why he put a starfish back, there were innumerable ones and nothing good achieved - who replied his action - it - made a difference for that one starfish. So also K is extolling each one of us to take the leap into inquiry and reach our own Truths. All ways will work if intention is pure and attention is absolute - so no 'method' is needed. Hence no process as there is not 'one right way' Requires , as he said, often tremendous courage and intelligence. We people run away and hide behind 'practiced religion and rituals' afraid (again Fear like Insecurity we all have in spades :) as he saw) to set out on our own journeys of discovery.
Thanks for engaging Rupert Sheldrake (R) to discuss the dissimilarity between the virtues of traditional cultures endorsed by R and the non-traditional virtues espoused by J Krishnamurti (K) to see what has transpired over the period since they met in a series of talks with David Bohm and John Hindley about human suffering. Having recalled those discussions as raising matters of agreed concerns, it is interesting to catch up with R’s current comments on his recollections of having spoken with K on many occasions, particularly regarding the fundamental aspects of their respective approaches to challenges facing society at large and in person perspective.
At the conclusion of the earlier discussions it was evident that K had aroused some intellectual concessions from R, but the response wasn’t necessarily deep enough to sway R into giving up his own particular religious or scientific knowledge which obviously sustained him in the stream of life inspired by his English background in education and church’s teachings. There is no suggestion that R has moved from his previous position.
The question of morphemic resonance is very interesting because R has a take on it being the result of repeated practices or habitual consequences of collective actions affecting the group and individuals who partake in the rituals/practices according to the cultural teachings of the respective teachings. On the other hand, K clearly denounced all such practices outright and in doing so gave sound grounds to point out the limitations and dangers of being enslaved to the authority structures that underpins the reliance on past generations associated with the psychological continuity of ideas and ideals that were in K’s view illusions built on the brittle nature of images through the concepts and processes of fragmented thinking machinery. The difference may be summarised as positive accumulation (traditional) for R versus negative forces (non-traditional) for K. As things stand in society, tremendous weight is given to positive psychology and little attention is attributed to the natural occurrence of negation/ mutation/creation emanating from K’s perspective. The positive approach is evident in classical scientific theory in that it relies upon reductionist principles and binary methodology as the bedrock of discovering the laws of nature and human biological structures. K conceded that society’s advances in the technology world were undeniably impressive results of mankind’s concerted efforts. However, the thought processes when applied to the psychological realm produced conflict and contradictory outcomes due to the limitations of fragmented thinking processes. Ultimately, one is faced with either joining the traditional society’s social company or standing alone as a light unto oneself. Cheers!
Brilliant way to explain the synthesis of what this talk is all about. Gratefully. Double Cheers!
Emotions are the code with which the animated ration of Life programs all lifeforms to generally think and behave in a rational manner. We place within the content of our intellect the irrational values of our culture and this creates a profoundly fundamental cognitive dissonance within our thought process. In our culture, Donald Trump’s total lack for the capacity of empathy, placed him at the pinnacle of the American, and our species, dream. Psychologists can see from data that stressful circumstances of our stressful lives usually precedes the onset of clinical depression. They can not see that this compels us to look for the ration and meaning of Life without the distortions of our species current values. This endeavour to free our thought process from the dominance of our ego’s selfish emotions is too great a burden for the depressed and atrophied selfless emotions of our conscience. Understand that our irrational cultural values are based to an excessive and irrational extent upon the selfish emotions of our ego. We are too corrupted by the power of our intelligence to consider that ration is the meaning of Life. Life is the animated manifestation of the ration which determines and governs the existence of the universe. That’s enough for now, with empathy Pete.
Thanks and very well put. Dr R remained a Scientist while K went beyond to Meaning of life and true happiness. One needs the thinking rational
Mind, the other needs a deeper connection to
Life - a stillness leading to perception. IMHO. personally I was disappointed and felt Dr R did not fulfill the promise he showed as a youth.
Thank you for this
Thank you very much, Sir. Looking forward to watching the next interview with Rupert Sheldrake.
It's okay there will be always difference in opinions.
Pain or pleasure is a part of life , pain for love - pleasure by love , pain for relationship - pleasure by relationship etc are our memory ( past) ,and that memory are saved in form of thoughts. That's is ok. But when we start to give it more importance then present , it's become suffering.
Grateful for your clear description of one of the central teachings os JK. I finally understood it!! Blessings.
He is correct in saying, “if one person becomes enlightened then all of humanity would become enlightened,” but barring an earthly situation in which all of humanity was about to be fatally struck by lightening, it won’t happen..
…because that’s becoming the known and the knower at the same time..equivalent to reaching absolute zero at which point everything shatters and disappears from form.
..but he is correct in revealing and saying that truth, because this encourages humanity to get spiritually as close to absolute zero as possible and form in the way of any structure, is a barrier to reaching this near absolute zero point of resonance.
The sufi’s have a saying in that, “everything must go.”
Ok, i came here to observe rupert. I wanted to see has he grown since that 1982 video or not. He hasnt, in that video the least open minded and the most stubborn and egoistic individual was rupert and he is exxxxxactly the same guy as he was. Man its tough, i dont know why, but people find it so hard to change. Meeting even somebody like Krishnamurti can not open the eyes of a person who has just decided to stay blind.
The part of the discussion between K, Sheldrake, Bohm and Hidley I found most confounding was when Sheldrake saw in the world of nature the same kind of conflict and contradiction that he saw in the psycholology of human beings: i.e. he didn't see in nature a relm of profound order and beauty. I wonder if he's changed his mind about that: he betrayed how he was still biguiled by the Newtonian view of nature as discrete semi-autonomous objects and forces, rather then as an indivisible whole which is becoming more and more clear these days. Nature is the only perfection we know: if we don't know it as perfection we have lost our connection with nature owing to the activities of the divisive intellect. So what is the original factor in the human that divides it from nature? Social and historical accumulation, including the accumulation of language, memory, thought, but also habits, practices, material objects, attitudes, conventions etc etc etc. Social-historical development, accumulation and ossification is something that happens within the human mind-world as one indivisible movement. The material, outward, social accumulation of languages, habits, practices, material productions etc is both the product of, and productive of, mental accumulation. You can't seperate the two. I think social-historical accumulation and ossification is the missing element in the understanding of the fall of humanity from a state of nature (and therefore perfection) into a state of division and distruction.
What Rupert missing is that Krishnamurti not proposing any framework and Krishnamurti rejects any framework
I love this
Yes thank you Dr Sheldrake fir for saying "removes all morality "". And to Be a 'consumption centered' society. Exactly!!!
In short my take is K just wants EACH ONE OF US to be people of integrity, character and non-self centered. Simple message - be a good human! But so impossible to be so ...
The last speech was enriching.
Feel disappointed. As a young man Dr Sheldrake showed more promise/understanding and K so obviously enjoyed talking to him! Now it seems the interviewer understands K better. Interesting ..
I think to Krishna the method is your own action your own doing/movement. If for instance you want to quiet your mind, you can but you dont need a method anymore than you need a method to open and close your hand. You just do it spontaneously once you understand and dispel the illusions/confusion/thefalse and realize what is true. Trying to quiet/control your mind is ego. The small little helpless thing you think you are and tries to control. That is the conventional intellect with its knowledge and thought going on. I think that was to Krishna such a small part of the greater you. Emphasized too much and blown up into something it isn't. Mistaken for you. He stated that we live lopsided lives with the intellect weighing too much. THought has its place, but not in the fore front of your life. It's like a hammer that is useful for driving nails but you dont go around hammering everything without causing destruction. Knowledge is limited (which is obviously true) and thus thought is limited since Knowledge is thought. To Krishna there exists something beyond thought. A life quite separate from the constructs of thought. The larger broader brain or mind if you will that sits unused in most ppl. I think this is what most ppl simply dont understand. It's a process to be experienced/discovered for oneself. Direct experience. So much untapped potential in ourselves we dont realize. It's like a baby for the first time realizing it can walk. We dont flower like this because we all want others to tell us the answer instead of doing the work ourselves.
Sounds to me Rupert stuck to his own ideas about what learning entails as most people do. This will change nothing essential.
Yes ... sad!
What became of Dr. Hidley? Is he still alive?
Rupert Sheldrake was already blocked in his talks with K. back then. He has learned nothing and follows old patterns. I can follow Rupert Sheldrake's criticism of K., but he only uses the template of a guru as an accusation for this - but forgets the role of the observer here.
Yes
To understand very clear about JIDDU KRISHNAMURTHI SIR 3 vedios will help 1.Problems of living, 2. Is belief necessary 3. Urgency of change. This 3 vedios are sufficient to understand the rut or absurdity that has taken place today which he was trying to communicate to put a break to such a petty life which we are going through today. Life has lost the meaning fragrances values all which had deep deapth. Now we are all.living a life of battle for meaning less existence.
Sheldrake's failings in understanding K's teachings can be seen in his descriptions around 'enlightenment' and 'K's enlightenment'. K rarely used the term 'enlightenment' and in a serious discussion would never have considered himself enlightened. That's an important subtly missed th-cam.com/video/xU2XXpdluiw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=NF18p6mY0r1XhtLQ&t=1089
at 18:09
R.Sheldrake did not step in to it, and by doing so, excepted J.Krishnamurti being an authority to him, complaints he thinks Jiddu had about structural beliefs, came from himself being a lazy follower waiting for the miracle to happen to himself..
And thàt dear well-studied Rupert, will not happen ever in your life!
Which after all these close encounters you've had with J.Krishnamuri, is a terrible loss.
I doesn't feel good to all of us, seeing a human being drowning in it's own program, not able to reach for the hand..to be free.
The only thing which is left to me, is please let go of every authority, inward end outward, not stepping in the same pit again..
I wonder why K teachings have not transformed anyone deeply...
This guy totally doesn’t understand it .
completely random comment- i micro dose raw liberty caps every day for the entire season. incredible and useful. but if anyone plans on trying this: make sure you're 100% on identification, have some goals in mind before you start, are in a stable mindset, and protect the habitat and mushrooms from over exploitation. respect yourself and the organisms! all the best
What are those? Where can i buy them?
@@raznatovicanastasija You can use any kind of psylocibin mushrooms.
Rupert looks like he didn't understand any of K's teachings. Any method or rule or Guru is the old method of conditioning. K requested again and again is to Question everything and to find out for yourself.
🇺🇳23:21