Curious about your identification of Krishnamurti's approach with Buddhist Dharma, in particular in the context of the Emptiness you discuss here.
Pivotal to my mind in the 'The Ending of Time' is Krishnamurti's pointing-to something *beyond* the Emptiness/No-thingness/Every-thingness. Implicit in the discussion (or so it seems to me!) is that this 'Beyond' has no prior cause. But It *is* in some sense the cause of the Emptiness. (Long story, but this apparently-esoteric nuance may have a lot to do with how we respond to things like the metacrisis ...)
My super-uneducated lay understanding of Buddhism is that there is supposed to be nothing beyond the Emptiness. (And no real radical-causality, with an emphasis instead on inter-dependent arising.)
Would love:
- an education on what Buddhism actually says about these things (to the extent there is such a well-defined thing as 'Buddhism'!)
- to hear your take on whether or not the second dialogue in the Ending of Time (in particular) aligns with Buddhist teaching ...
Brother :-) – in reply to your "Would love:" – for further education, I believe what you're looking for is the distinction between the "emptiness," and "other emptiness" views expressed in various schools of Buddhism. A good place to begin might be:
As for my take on the second dialogue… Krishnamurthy has struggled to keep my attention very fixed. I would have to go back and listen again in order to do justice to your inquiry and I am unlikely to take that first step. :-)
lighthearted Sufi quote on the subject from Mr. Joe Miller:
“You can get more stinking from thinking
then you can from drinking,
but to feel is for real.”
THANK you:)
My new life mantra:)
I am pondering here about the notion of emptiness. In a world that is so abundant, a thought quietness. The silence with no other.
Curious about your identification of Krishnamurti's approach with Buddhist Dharma, in particular in the context of the Emptiness you discuss here.
Pivotal to my mind in the 'The Ending of Time' is Krishnamurti's pointing-to something *beyond* the Emptiness/No-thingness/Every-thingness. Implicit in the discussion (or so it seems to me!) is that this 'Beyond' has no prior cause. But It *is* in some sense the cause of the Emptiness. (Long story, but this apparently-esoteric nuance may have a lot to do with how we respond to things like the metacrisis ...)
My super-uneducated lay understanding of Buddhism is that there is supposed to be nothing beyond the Emptiness. (And no real radical-causality, with an emphasis instead on inter-dependent arising.)
Would love:
- an education on what Buddhism actually says about these things (to the extent there is such a well-defined thing as 'Buddhism'!)
- to hear your take on whether or not the second dialogue in the Ending of Time (in particular) aligns with Buddhist teaching ...
Brother :-) – in reply to your "Would love:" – for further education, I believe what you're looking for is the distinction between the "emptiness," and "other emptiness" views expressed in various schools of Buddhism. A good place to begin might be:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1085685.Progressive_Stages_of_Meditation_on_Emptiness
As for my take on the second dialogue… Krishnamurthy has struggled to keep my attention very fixed. I would have to go back and listen again in order to do justice to your inquiry and I am unlikely to take that first step. :-)