UG Krishnamurti - an example of why some people don't deserve brains

[Guest guest]

Have any of you read of this man UG Krishnamurti? His website is http://www.ugkrishnamurti.org/

 

I can't help but be astounded at how remarkably confused this man is.

 

For example, he says he is not enlightened, yet he says there is no such thing as enlightenment (how would he know if he admits to not being enlightened?)

He says there is "nothing to understand," yet that does not stop him from pontificating on any number of subjects.

 

It seems like his popularity is based on knocking down any idea that is not easy to prove based on empirical evidence. Big deal, anyone can do that. If you restrict yourself to tangible evidence as proof (in contrast to most religions which resort to some kind of texual authority), then you can debunk almost anything spiritual and appear as if you know something. But in reality this man has nothing to offer anyone. And yet, it does not stop his followers from creating websites to worship him.

 

He reminds me of Sai Baba in some ways. He builds a cult following based on admitting he has nothing to offer, while Sai Baba builds a cult following based on the blatant lie that he is God, he is enlightened, etc. But in both cases their followers receive nothing in the way of wisdom or practical information on how to make their lives meaningful, yet they worship their respective gurus thinking they are in the presence of someone great.

 

The introduction to his website reads:

 

"U.G Krishnamurti, an enigma--a person who defies all classifications--a philosopher, a Non-guru, guru, call him what you may. But, once you have read even a few words, seen a photo of his, your psyche will never be the same. He will permeate your being. His words and images will infect your mind like a virus. So, proceed with caution in exploring these conversations, quotes and photos."

 

In fact, I mostly found myself laughing at his miserable excuse for philosophy - which just amounts to telling burnt out spiritualists what they want to hear so they can give up and bury themselves in their passions. Examples:

 

"It is a little easier to talk to those who have attempted thought control--who have done some sadhana--because they experience the futility of it and can see where they are hung up."

 

"Forget the rosaries, the scriptures, the ashes on your forehead. When you see for yourself the absurdity of your search, the whole culture is reduced to ashes inside you. The burning up inside you of everything you want is the meaning of ashes"

 

 

It doesn't take any special intelligence to make statements like this, although it certainly takes quite a bit of hypocrisy to criticize God worship and instead allow oneself to be the center of attention for anyone (his website features 10 albums worth of pictures of, guess who? UGK alone -- no Krishna, no Shiva, no Ganesha, just UGK).

 

I guess UGK and Sai Baba prove that there is more than one way to become God. I can't imagine that any intelligent person would follow this crackpot.

 

Comments?

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

"It is a little easier to talk to those who have attempted thought control--who have done some sadhana--because they experience the futility of it and can see where they are hung up."

 

"Forget the rosaries, the scriptures, the ashes on your forehead. When you see for yourself the absurdity of your search, the whole culture is reduced to ashes inside you. The burning up inside you of everything you want is the meaning of ashes"

 

 

 

The tendency to knock down someone else's philosophy and refrain from having any convictions at all is not equivalent to be being knowledgeable. Anyone can criticize, but it takes courage to take a position and defend it.

 

People like UGK derive their popularity by negation. Just attack everything else, speak some flowery words that mean nothing but sound good on paper, or say completely straightforward things which no spiritualist will disagree with, and thus you will have followers.

 

One wonders who pays his bills? If it's so wrong to worship Krishna and give money to Him, why is it not similarly wrong to give money to prop up a pseudo-philosopher like this? But alas, such obvious hypocrisy is lost on the minds of the intellectually challenged who follow people like this.

 

 

 

[Gauracandra 1]

and keep his mouth shut. Here is one quote he gave:

 

 

If anyone says there is a way out, he is not an honest fellow. He is doing it for his own self-aggrandizement, you may be sure. He simply wants to market a product and hopes to convince you that it is superior to other products on the market. If another man comes along and says that there is no way out [1], you make of that another method. It is all a fruitless attempt to overtake your own shadow. And yet you can't remain where you are. That is the problem.

 

Sitting here discussing these things is meaningless, useless. That is why I am always saying to my listeners, "Get lost, please!" What you want you can get elsewhere, but not here. Go to the temple, do puja, repeat mantras, put on ashes. Eventually some joker comes along and says, "Give me a week's wages and I will give you a better mantra to repeat." Then another fellow [2] comes along and tells you not to do any of that, that it is useless, and that what he is saying is much more revolutionary. He prescribes "choiceless awareness," takes your money and builds schools, organizations, and tantric centers.

 

 

 

Now if he was sincere, he would just keep his mouth shut and go on with life. But he has to instruct us that other teachers are cheaters, but he himself is the real thing. He is simply marketing his own product.

[Guest guest]

 

Now if he was sincere, he would just keep his mouth shut and go on with life. But he has to instruct us that other teachers are cheaters, but he himself is the real thing. He is simply marketing his own product.

 

 

The funny thing about UGK is that he also claims to not be a teacher of anything, yet that is what he is doing. He just tries to pretend he is different, but he has assumed the role of a guru, only one who derives his popularity from negating everyone else.

 

Only extremely confused individuals who lack discrimination will follow this kind of person.

 

By the way, I believe Audarya Fellowship's very own SHVU is a UGK follower.

 

[Guest guest]

he is simply recycling the awful ghoulosh of Jadhu Krishna murthi, (even looks like him) the "Avatar" of the Theosophical Society.He was proclaimed "Avatar" when the head of the Theosophists, HW.Leadbeater, a notorious pederast, saw him swimming naked in the Bay of Bengal. He renounced his "Avatarship" and spent much of his life living like Michael Jackson, as far as I can tell. He still has gullible followers the world over. KBdas

[Guest guest]

Why does it matter so much to you guys if someone else has a view different from yours ? The violence with which others are being denounced in this forum makes it far from Krisna conscious

[yasodanandana 0]

if you have a different view on these subject please explain it, otherwise it is natural for people who love god to express their opinion when they see rascals usurping His name and cheating others with it...

 

imagine if i use your identity to go around and make silly things and saying nonsenses.. will you be happy? will your family and friends be happy of it?

 

they say to be god and it is only a different innocent view?

[Guest guest]

I truly pity you people for your hang-ups with manmade words and ideas about things like God- so much that as soon as someone else comes along with a different point of view you have to attack him. This is the root of all evil and why thoughout history so many wars and people have been killed in the name of religion. Remember what the Catholic church did to all the Indians in south america in teh name of God?

 

Same your minds are all so clouded by your delusions. this man's mind is crystal clear and you will never GET it. remember... the meek shall inherit the earth. this post is proof enough.

 

amen.

[Guest guest]

in saecula saeculorum

[livingentity 0]

which means if you just roll over and belly up and believe these pretend gurus and do not find a bona fide guru that can lead you to true love of God then you will be stuck here millenium after millenium in material body after material body.

 

no thanks...

[Guest guest]

Do not speak ill of J Krishnamurti. It takes guts to decline the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity of avarthood. UG is a nutcase who takes a poke at JK but says the exact same thing. he is super-fraud, but calls everyone else a fraud.

[livingentity 0]

in my post. So where do you pin point that I speak ill of any specific person? My post was generic.

[Guest guest]

but the bleh guest!!!

[livingentity 0]

You responded to my post when you said that. Anyway....haribol!!!

[Guest guest]

Yes your right, anyone could say what he says, just like anyone can say the things any of the great spiritual leaders say,at least he has some honesty and doesn't beat around the bush about beliefs which have been passed down for centuries. Your ignorance is obvious, youve read once and then condemn and say what you feel, your comments are funnier than his absurdities.

[Guest guest]

 

Yes your right, anyone could say what he says, just like anyone can say the things any of the great spiritual leaders say,

 

 

The great spiritual leaders I think about have written volumes of scholarly commentary on core Vedantic texts, something which requires intellectual rigor which UGK and others of his ilk lack. So no, it is not true that anyone can say what these greats have said.

 

 

at least he has some honesty

 

 

I don't see how UGK can be called "honest," when he merely tells others what they want to hear, denies a reality he does not know to exist or not to exist, and puts himself in the position of a guru when he decries all other gurus who have ever been.

 

 

and doesn't beat around the bush about beliefs which have been passed down for centuries.

 

 

That's not true. UGK is hardly original. His views have been around for centuries. I liked it better when it was referred to as the doctrine of Charvaka.

 

 

Your ignorance is obvious, youve read once and then condemn and say what you feel, your comments are funnier than his absurdities.

 

 

It is not an absurdity to call a spade a spade. If UGK is so set in his atheistic views, then why doesn't he get some honest work instead of making a profession out of his negationist views?

 

The answer of course, is that it is easier to make a profit by becoming a prophet, which is basically what UGK is, despite all his denials.

 

[Guest guest]

"It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt ... do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture ... nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' " - Kalama Sutta

 

Yeah. This guy's nothing new.

 

Neither's "1+1=2". It's still true.

[Guest guest]

Yep. A 6' by 3' plot......

 

Apologies to Robert A. Heinlein.

[Guest guest]

Just came across this thread and felt inclined to respond.

 

Personally I think a lot of what U.G says is on the money.

 

The abstraction of life, spirituality etc is the real problem and that can never be solved by thought, as thought is an abstraction also.

 

When the abstract falls away then there is only our biology the true foundation of our lives. The loss of self-consciousness is essentially "liberation" or "natural state" the loss of self-consciousness occurs when one is "embodied" without the neurosis & dissasociated perspective that our thoughts create. You become consumed in your body.

 

The very fact that we have seperate terms to describe the material and the spiritual show the fragmentation/abstraction in our minds. The moment you go abstract anything goes and therefore it becomes completely meaningless accept for the meaning we attach to it, it is completely personal. It doesn't matter if it's Krishna, Santa Claus or whatever it's all the same. Which if broken down can simply be seen as uneccesary signals in our nervous system.

 

 

[shvu 1]

I remember this...

 

This was from a time when there was a caustic e-mail exchange offline between X, myself and some others. We were younger then with more time and energy for such activities. For those who do not know, X is one of the leading lights of the Gaudiya tradition who as I recall frowns upon the idea of devotees watching television. The gentleman is the “Amish” version of the GV tradition, one might say. I am not naming X, just to intrigue you folks.

 

Following the e-mail exchange, X vented his frustration out by starting this topic as he considered me a "follower" of UG -- whatever that means. How nice it is to let off steam! Since that is what he was doing, I did not bother to post any responses on this thread at that time. But now since so many others jumped in, something should be said about UG.

 

Sitting here discussing these things is meaningless, useless. That is why I am

always saying to my listeners, get lost, please! What you want you can get

elsewhere, but not here. Go to the temple, do puja, repeat mantras, put on

ashes. Eventually some joker comes along and says, give me a week's wages and I

will give you a better mantra to repeat. Then another fellow comes along and

tells you not to do any of that, that it is useless, and that what he is saying

is much more revolutionary. - UG

 

People are more happy with someone who does their thinking for them and tells them what to do. People find it easy to follow a system where they are asked to wear a cetain type of Nama, chant a secret mantra a couple of dozen times daily and not eat dairy in exchange for a lavish afterlife. But if someone like UG comes along and tells people to stop relying on Gurus and think for themselves, they find it difficult to comprehend. It appears to be too much effort to think and ask some bold questions.

 

It does not matter if UG talks or not, if he spend big bucks traveling around the world or not. All of these are inconsequential. Is he a perfect man? - Most certainly not, for the concept is bogus. There is no perfect man - period. He is just another ordinary dude like 6 billion others. I do not believe in the mystical experiences anyone (including UG) claims to have gone through, however fascinating and real they may sound.

 

So what sets UG apart from the rest of the godmen who are a dime a dozen? UG has no product to sell; no promises like the others. He focuses on criticizing the religious system, pointing out its various defects. Other godmen do that too, but they invariably follow it up with the claim that their new teaching is perfect and above these defects. UG on the other hand, criticizes and stops there. There is no follow-up about his own new revolutionary teaching (he has none). Obviously, he cannot criticize without talking and for that he has to talk. Of course, if some smart, gifted people know of some way by which one can criticize without talking, I am sure UG would be interested to know how. I know I would be.

 

That is in short, the USP of UG. Many people get disillusioned about their religious beliefs at some point and for them a critical approach is what is required, where they get to exercise some intelligence. UG has been & can be of benefit to at least some of these people. But if anyone is looking to replace their current beliefs with a new and exciting belief, then they will get nothing from the man. Other than picking up the importance of questioning and critical examination, there is nothing else of use in his talks (in my opinion).

 

If this is understood, then it does not matter if UG smokes pot or eats Bengali sweets or turns cartwheels in Central Park. His personal lifestyle is of no importance to anyone other than himself. And since he has no product/teaching of his own, how can he have followers? I can hear some brains creaking…

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

If you tell people that you have something to offer, that you know the meaning of life etc. etc., they are not gonna believe because every tom, dick and harry says that. Try telling them that you know nothing, you have nothing to offer and so forth, and people might actually start believing that you DO know and you DO have something to offer.

 

It is simple psychology. It is human nature to be suspicious and believe the exact opposite of what you say. Tell people you have a teaching and they will avoid you, call you a fake. Tell them to get lost, and they will come to you thinking you have something to give, that's why you're soooo supercilious as to avoid them.

 

UG knows this very well and has succeeded in promoting the "I have no teaching, get lost" package. What's more, even after selling his product, he's convinced people that they are not buyers and he isn't a seller!! Clever dude, I admire his marketing techniques. He sells but people think he isn't a seller. People buy and they think they aren't buyers. Amazing, eh?

[Avinash 0]

>>If you tell people that you have something to offer, that you know the meaning of life etc. etc., they are not gonna believe because every tom, dick and harry says that.<<

 

If what you are saying is true, then why is it that there are so many followers to so many swamis who say that they have something to offer?

Different people take the same thing in different ways. There are many who claim that they have something to offer. Some believe them, some do not.

 

>>Tell them to get lost, and they will come to you thinking you have something to give, that's why you're soooo supercilious as to avoid them.<<

 

If I tell someone to get lost, some may think that I have something to give. But, there will be many who would not like to even look at me.

 

>>UG knows this very well and has succeeded in promoting the "I have no teaching, get lost" package. <<

 

I have never met UG nor have I had face-to-face talk with anyone who has met UG. So, I cannot agree or disagree with you. But, suppose that UG really wants to say that he has nothing to offer. How should he say it?

[Guest guest]

I am not suggesting that the "get lost" approach is the only way, that's just one strategy, that's all. Apparently, "I have a teaching" approach too has worked, which is why you find many takers. I never said that approach will always fail, just that it is an old trick and that the "get lost" marketing technique is new and improved method to brainwashing people.

 

Also your question:But, suppose that UG really wants to say that he has nothing to offer. How should he say it?***

 

Why should he say anything at all? If he has nothig to offer, let him say nothing, including that 'he has nothing to offer.' Don't you see the trick? We have nothing to offer, UG has nothing to offer, but we don't give speeches or write books on how we have nothing to offer, whereas UG does and becomes famous, all the while maintaining he has nothing to offer.

 

I am surprised you can't see this. If a person has nothing to offer, he doesn't have to make so much effort to show everyone that he has nothing to offer. He says nothing about it.

[Guest guest]

 

[quuote]I am surprised you can't see this. If a person has nothing to offer, he doesn't have to make so much effort to show everyone that he has nothing to offer. He says nothing about it.

 

 

[Guest guest]

you reckon UG is a bitter old man who likes to sit on his you-know-what and comment on things that don't concern him. Also, any thoughts on why this guy is desperate to imitate JK?