/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13660356]

Enlightenment is physiological.

[Anonymous No.13660385]

>>13660356
Basterds!

[Anonymous No.13660405]

>>13660356
more like biochemical.
And I say this: This man was the Jesus, Buddha, Confucius, Zarathustra of our time. He explained everything perfectly, but nobody listened or understood.

[Anonymous No.13660414]

> I tell you, you are not an ordinary being; you are an extraordinary being (Laughter.) There is no one like you. You are 'the one without a second' that the Upanishads talked about.
>It is not because of what you do or do not do that this kind of thing happens. That is why I use the word 'acausal' -- this has no cause. The structure that is interested in establishing the causal relationship is not there any more. The only thing that is left for this is survival. And the survival is limited: it has a momentum of its own, and when that is finished it is gone. This cannot reproduce another one, physiologically or otherwise -- that's why I say this is the end-product of human evolution. There is no need for the reproduction of another one, either as a flower or as another human being -- that is why the whole chemistry of your body changes. The hormones change, and you are neither a man nor a woman any more. Such a man is of absolutely no use to this society, and he cannot create another society. (Laughter)

[Anonymous No.13660420]

>>13660405
Based and krishnapilled. Fun thing I'm reading Hnery Miller's The Books of My Life and there's a pretty long tangent about Krishnamurti where he says in essence what you just said.

[Anonymous No.13660462]

>>13660420
Interesting. Is the book itself good? Might get it to see what exactly he had to say.

[Anonymous No.13660568]

>>13660405
Stfu
>>13660356
UG Krishnamurti was trash. J. Krishnamurti was okay.

[Anonymous No.13660598]

>>13660356
Is that guy supposed to be a pajeet? He sure doesn't look like one.

[Anonymous No.13660603]

His enlightenment was real, a real grocking of the nature of the beast. A peek below the veil of Maya.

His response was cowardice. He could not own his desires, so he disavowed them. He would not identify with his feelings, so he made them his body.

The mind is not the brain. The mind is the portion of the universe over which you claim ownership. You have been given a body, and a body's desires, for a reason. What that reason may be is for you to find, or to invent. But you can only release it in death. You may claim to walk in living death, but samsara will find you again. This is the time and place to live.

Fucking Buddhists. I don't care that he wasn't a Buddhist, he's a nihilist, and they're all Buddhists to me.

[Anonymous No.13660628]

>>13660598
He looks Northern Indian to me.

[Anonymous No.13660647]

>>13660356
Was his enlightenment simply kundalini or something else?

[Anonymous No.13660730]

>>13660603
Not all Buddhists are nihilists. Only some Mahayana strands embraced antinomianism, which I agree was a problem. I agree that karma is real and could be divided into a good and bad. Some Advaitan Hindus, though not all, also embraced nihilism and antinomianism though.

[Anonymous No.13660848]

>>13660603
All nonsense, all a play of words.
The brain is not created to understand the universe, but to allow us to survive. A simple look at evolution will tell you that.
There is a reason why he didn't make public appearances and that is because he didn't have anything to say. He didn't explain anything about how the universe works but just that there is nothing to explain.
Also nice try Pajeet.

[Anonymous No.13660924]

>>13660356
"no"

[Anonymous No.13661166]

>>13660356
U.G was studied by doctors.

>(Up and down his torso, neck and head, at those points which Indian holy men call chakras, his friends observed swellings of various shapes and colors, which came and went at intervals. On his lower abdomen the swellings were horizontal, cigar-shaped bands. Above the navel was a hard, almond-shaped swelling. A hard, blue swelling, like a large medallion, in the middle of his chest was surmounted by another smaller, brownish-red, medallion-shaped swelling at the base of his throat. These two 'medallions' were as though suspended from a varicolored, swollen ring — blue, brownish and light yellow — around his neck, as in pictures of the Hindu gods. There were also other similarities between the swellings and the depictions of Indian religious art: his throat was swollen to a shape that made his chin seem to rest on the head of a cobra, as in the traditional images of Siva; just above the bridge of the nose was a white lotus-shaped swelling; all over the head the small blood vessels expanded, forming patterns like the stylized lumps on the heads of Buddha statues. Like the horns of Moses and the Taoist mystics, two large, hard swellings periodically came and went. The arteries in his neck expanded and rose, blue and snake-like, into his head.)

>I do not want to be an exhibitionist, but you are doctors. There is something to the symbolism they have in India — the cobra. Do you see the swellings here? — they take the shape of a cobra. Yesterday was the new moon. The body is affected by everything that is happening around you; it is not separate from what is happening around you. Whatever is happening there, is also happening here — there is only the physical response. This is affection. Your body is affected by everything that is happening around you; and you can't prevent this, for the simple reason that the armour that you have built around yourself is destroyed, so it is very vulnerable to everything that is happening there. With the phases of the moon — full moon, half moon, quarter moon — these swellings here take the shape of a cobra. Maybe that is the reason why some people have created all these images — Siva and all those kinds of things. But why should it take the shape of a cobra? I have asked many doctors why this swelling is here, but nobody could give me a satisfactory answer. I don't know if there are any glands or anything here.

It is certainly not something he made up, it was confirmed by other observers.

>Enlightenment is physiological.

U.G called it Calamity.

[Anonymous No.13661280]

I need the sweet enlightenment guys. He must've known what triggered it, at least in part?

[Anonymous No.13661311]

>>13661280
>You have absolutely no way of knowing it. If by some luck, you stumble into it, it would be a completely and totally bewildering and puzzling sort of affair. You won't even bother to compare it with anybody else's.

>It isn't going to be the same...it isn't going to come about the way you imagine it, "spiritual awakening" or whatever you call it, isn't going to come about in the way you imagine it.

>It will come about contrary to all your imaginings.

>It will come about in a very simple and quite an unexpected way.

-U.G

[Anonymous No.13661330]

>>13660462
Yes imo, it's very enthusiastic and exhilarating. It shows a really appreciation for literature (even if Miller is fond of claiming that it's better to learn to live your life than to read lots of books). It's incredible that this guy is remembered as "the king of smut" when he touches so little on actual pornography and many excepts of his books almost sound like religious apology. The Christ figures there more proeminently than brothels.

Granted his autobiographical novels are another beast, but the man is too imbued with veneration for the Spirit to ever write a truly philistine book.

[Anonymous No.13661444]

As far as I can properly understand, his enlightenment necessarily entailed physiological change to match his newfound change in spirit. Enlightenment may indeed be partially physiological, but that does not mean that spirit emanates from matter, it still has to be the other way around. He acknowledges this as well by using some of Ramana's metaphors, but I think U.G. intentionally obscured his message for the secretly cynical new agers and occultists.

In my attempts to get what he was saying, I try to frame his teachings around what I think was the most important thing that Jesus taught. "The Kingdom Of God is Within you." So while you as a conscious individual may contain what is essentially some of the universe within you, you are still only a part of it. You may see yourself as the absolute, but really you are only part of the absolute, and even if you are enlightened you can only apprehend part of it. So this frustrated his search. Enlightenment charlatans and gurus promise true knowledge of that absolute, a point in space and time where the dialectic ends, but even when you get there you'll never get there. And since even at the very highest levels, your understanding can only be subjective nobody can help you. Until you use your own spirit to mediate and intuit what he's offering, it won't do anything for you, and since he can't confirm it himself until it's been confirmed, he is talking into darkness and we are listening into darkness.

How hopeless is that? Even when you think you're together with the world and you understand, your ego keeps you separate from the rest of the world; and theory alone isn't enough to reduce your separation, you have to actually take your own path where most fail. So faith is the the only thing that can get you to it, everything else is just the blind leading the blind.