I'm wondering what people on this board think of U.G. Krishnamurti, who recently passed away. He claimed to be a radical atheist and materialist, anti-meditation, anti-spirituality to an extreme degree, yet I've had some very spiritual people tell me that they thought he was a fully Enlightened being. Also if you read his biography he talks about a number of paranormal experiences he's had that are truly bizarre, and yet he says these mean nothing and the body is the sum total of existence. There is no karma, spirit, afterlife, or anything.

Was he just another weirdo with a following or is there some deeper meaning to his teachings?

Hi mjk,

There's actually an old thread in the archive about U.G. Krishnamurti. Maybe there's something in there for you.

On the philosophical side, I like the non-supernatural ("atheist") view of nature. Nature will differ from our opinions about nature, but it's still nature, there's nothing "beyond" everything there is. I get that sense from the few U.G. quotes I'm familiar with.

On the practical side, I like clear instructions. I'm not aware of U.G. having taught technique. Maybe he didn't know himself how whatever happened to him came about.

Cheers,
Florian

I just realized I got J Krishnamurti and UG Krishnamurti, mixed up.

I'm not familiar with UG Krishnamurti's work, --more familiar with J Krishnamurti.

For any teaching, I'd encourage you to use it to practice diligently.

~Constance

Thanks, I checked it out. He is intriguing in his extremism but I agree with the conclusions of the old thread - he doesn't have any real teaching (not that he ever said that he did), and was damaged by his upbringing in the Theosophist cult and didn't know how to handle the "Kundalini" experience.

He emphasizes anatta to the point where it negates any kind of cause and effect. I can't agree with this doctrine at all. Of course he would say "oh, there's no doctrine here, you're a fool if you listen to me."

I think I'm inclined to agree with him on that point.