How does he cut through bs? "Some question if there is a thinker, I question whether thoughts exist" Thats a thing he've said. Thats really stupid. Its comes from liberal philosophy that claims that the only things that exist is stuff you can measure. Since thoughts are metaphysical you cant measure them and prove that they exist. Its really stupid logic. Hes full of bull.
UG kino >There is no such thing as spiritual or psychological enlightenment, because there is no such thing as spirit or psyche at all >We use what we call thought to achieve our spiritual or material goals. We may consider the spiritual goals as 'higher'. The culture in which we are functioning places spiritual goals on a higher level than the materialistic goals. But the instrument which we are using is matter, which is thought. Thought to me is matter. Therefore, all our spiritual goals are materialistic in their value. >I don't give a hoot for a sixth-century-BC Buddha, let alone all the other claimants we have in our midst. They are a bunch of exploiters, thriving on the gullibility of the people. There is no power outside of man. Man has created God out of fear. So the problem is fear and not God. >Whatever you consider sacred, whatever you consider extraordinary — Buddha Consciousness, Christ Consciousness, Krishna Consciousness — is a contamination in that consciousness. It has to purify itself: all that, all that dross — all that is holy, all that is sacred — must go. >God or enlightenment is the ultimate pleasure, uninterrupted happiness. No such thing exists. Your wanting something that does not exist is the root of your problems. Transformation, moksha, liberation, and all that stuff, are just variations of the same theme: permanent happiness. The body can only take uninterrupted pleasure for long; it would be destroyed. Wanting to impose a fictitious permanent state of happiness on the body is a serious neurological problem.
This just seems like a philosophical naive version of embodiment and other phenomenological concepts. Anything that this guy says, Husserl, Heidegger and Merlau-Ponty already said.
Yeah, they were stuffy Europeans, who don’t look and sound the part of a Eastern wiseman, sorry it won’t be cool enough for you.
>
How can not stillness toward this world and a relationship with god not exist? You can cultivate both and when you practice, it gets stronger. You gonna trust 4000 years of thinking or a sad wannabe who couldnt become jiddu krishnamurti? Not that jiddu is any better. Both are fricking nutcases.
Yes you cant become enlightened because its a biological process that you cant affect, you should just give up. But if you give you try to get something so you havent given up. Thats his reasoning. His followers "wooooooow UG thats soo deep, really well put. MM yes i'll think about that". As i said i've read it all, its so fricking stupid.
You don’t want to be like him, you wouldn’t give up everything to be like him so why bother?
Ok, so what's the best book to start with?
He didnt write anything, he just talked.
mind is a myth or watch his talks
Listened the first 2 minutes and it's already a banger. He definitely knew what he was talking about.
Start with the Greeks
how do I get my hair like this
Eat Sattvic food, meditate and do yoga.
He was against meditation and yoga hated them actually
But anon got the digits!
Literally who?
An Interesting character
Most of his books are in conversation form. Ive read all and seen probably all his videos. Iiked him when i was 15. He's just a stupid nihilist.
>ug is a nihilist
Filtered he isn’t he affirms life to it’s fullest he just cuts through the bs
How does he cut through bs? "Some question if there is a thinker, I question whether thoughts exist" Thats a thing he've said. Thats really stupid. Its comes from liberal philosophy that claims that the only things that exist is stuff you can measure. Since thoughts are metaphysical you cant measure them and prove that they exist. Its really stupid logic. Hes full of bull.
There be a tree do you really see the tree you think youre looking at a tree but you’re not you don’t see it iykyk
>nihilism from non dualism
Filtered
Start with poppadoms and chutney, and a few samosas.
who dis guy ?
The same krishnamurti that Bessant said was the messiah? That's gotta suck
UG kino
>There is no such thing as spiritual or psychological enlightenment, because there is no such thing as spirit or psyche at all
>We use what we call thought to achieve our spiritual or material goals. We may consider the spiritual goals as 'higher'. The culture in which we are functioning places spiritual goals on a higher level than the materialistic goals. But the instrument which we are using is matter, which is thought. Thought to me is matter. Therefore, all our spiritual goals are materialistic in their value.
>I don't give a hoot for a sixth-century-BC Buddha, let alone all the other claimants we have in our midst. They are a bunch of exploiters, thriving on the gullibility of the people. There is no power outside of man. Man has created God out of fear. So the problem is fear and not God.
>Whatever you consider sacred, whatever you consider extraordinary — Buddha Consciousness, Christ Consciousness, Krishna Consciousness — is a contamination in that consciousness. It has to purify itself: all that, all that dross — all that is holy, all that is sacred — must go.
>God or enlightenment is the ultimate pleasure, uninterrupted happiness. No such thing exists. Your wanting something that does not exist is the root of your problems. Transformation, moksha, liberation, and all that stuff, are just variations of the same theme: permanent happiness. The body can only take uninterrupted pleasure for long; it would be destroyed. Wanting to impose a fictitious permanent state of happiness on the body is a serious neurological problem.
This just seems like a philosophical naive version of embodiment and other phenomenological concepts. Anything that this guy says, Husserl, Heidegger and Merlau-Ponty already said.
Yeah, they were stuffy Europeans, who don’t look and sound the part of a Eastern wiseman, sorry it won’t be cool enough for you.
>defines enlightenment as a state of happiness
brainlet ngl
No no he’s not that saying that he’s saying that’s how people perceive it but nothing like that exists
>
How can not stillness toward this world and a relationship with god not exist? You can cultivate both and when you practice, it gets stronger. You gonna trust 4000 years of thinking or a sad wannabe who couldnt become jiddu krishnamurti? Not that jiddu is any better. Both are fricking nutcases.
>Take the concept of enlightenment and the enlightened man. Redress it in biological jargon and you have U.G
Can anyone actually refute this?
Yes you cant become enlightened because its a biological process that you cant affect, you should just give up. But if you give you try to get something so you havent given up. Thats his reasoning. His followers "wooooooow UG thats soo deep, really well put. MM yes i'll think about that". As i said i've read it all, its so fricking stupid.
moronic pseud materialist
>How Can Mirrors Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real.
Holy filtered pleb
Holy kool-aid pseud
From the beginning