• 11 months ago
Video Information: 03.11.2021, NIT-Talk (Online), Rishikesh

Context:

~ Does all spiritual teachers fraud?
~ Why sometimes Krishnamurti sound so different from any other spiritual teacher?
~ How to identify the real spiritual teacher?

Music Credits: Milind Date
~~~~~
Transcript
00:00 These days I am listening to UG Krishnamurthy. So UG Krishnamurthy in his videos he is saying
00:11 all spiritual teachers are conmen and with such audacity, sureness and confidence in
00:17 his face he is saying all this. So my confidence also shatters. My beliefs, my understanding,
00:26 I also like start questioning on my beliefs whether I am understanding things right or
00:32 wrong, whether I am following right things or not. So all these things what should I
00:38 do regarding these. So please say something about UG Krishnamurthy also and his liberation,
00:46 what he calls it as a calamity. Why sometimes he sounds so different from any other spiritual
00:53 teachers. I am very much confused. You talked about UG Krishnamurthy and you said that he
01:01 declared with great assertiveness and confidence that all spiritual teachers are fake. He was
01:10 not the first to do that. There have been many many others before him. In fact Jiddu
01:20 Krishnamurthy who mentored him for some time was saying much the same thing though in much
01:30 less abrasive terms. So I think I will give him the benefit of doubt. I will take his
01:50 statement in good faith. He has made a sweeping generalization but that generalization is
01:57 not far away from reality. So what he is saying, I think if you go to the spirit of it, it
02:08 has to be accepted. I too say the same thing and I endorse what he is saying that in general
02:20 spirituality is the favorite ground of fraudulence. Any other place even if you want to cheat
02:33 people you have to make some efforts. You have to know something. You at least have
02:40 to be a master at the art of theft or robbery or whatever. Spirituality you just have to
02:54 yak yak and the masses are all just too gullible. It's not bad to say something or to try
03:10 to uplift the other by teaching but then this other must have the sense to engage in a conversation.
03:27 Don't you want to understand what the other is saying? If you want to understand what
03:32 the other is saying, why don't you bring some depth to the conversation? Why don't
03:37 you ask him questions? But instead of questions what you have is discourses. In fact I face
03:47 this peculiar problem. People who come to me and have been with teachers before and
03:59 I used to sitting in sermons and discourses, they just don't want to talk. They just
04:07 want to listen. When I started speaking publicly I face this problem. They would say you come
04:23 and speak. I would say I have nothing to speak. I can only converse. I can't talk at you.
04:33 I can talk with you. Let's chat. They say but spiritual teachers don't chat. They
04:43 sermonize. I said I have no sermons. In fact there is very little that I have by way of
04:51 a message or something. If you have a question to ask I can answer it. If you have a topic
04:55 to raise we can talk and it would be an awkward situation many a times. I would be there on
05:07 the podium waiting for the audience to raise a question and in front of me would be hundreds
05:14 and not one person would be willing to say anything and then I would implore them again
05:22 and again. Please sir, please say something, please say something and then one fellow in
05:28 a feeble voice would mutter something and that would anyway give me some stuff to speak
05:35 on and I'll say and having said something heartfully now I'll wait for the audience
05:42 to reciprocate and the audience would be mum again and that comes from years of being dumbed
05:55 down. Your parents don't want you to speak, your teachers don't want you to speak and
06:02 religious preachers obviously they are very afraid if you speak up. So you don't ask even
06:09 the most basic logical sensible questions and you keep accepting even the most amusing
06:20 kind of trash as if it's the world of the gods. So in fact that's the reason why I prefer
06:35 the company of students rather than so called mature people. Mature people are so deeply
06:45 steeped in beliefs that they can't engage. They can follow you or they can walk away
06:59 from you but they cannot really engage. If you say something that violates their beliefs
07:10 they'll walk away. If you say something that reinforces their beliefs they'll follow you
07:24 but at no point is there an effort to really explore to want to know that youth, that vitality,
07:35 that love is missing and that's the reason why spirituality has such a bad name today.
07:43 They ask about me, the path that you are showing me, I am working on it, I am trying, I am
07:50 questioning, I am trying to understand everything but when these things happen I get deviated.
08:04 So from last 2-3 days I am deviated from my path as what I understand. So whenever I get
08:13 deviated from the path of understanding and spirituality what you are showing me, I suffer
08:22 and I am suffering from 2-3 days a lot. You see being, Asmit, I got it, I got it, right?
08:29 And I am keen to get into what you are saying. You see, it's better to be doubtful than to
08:37 be falsely assured, no? Is it not? What do you want? False assurance, false confidence?
08:50 And there are so many people who carry that. Very very deep and false confidence. You look
08:59 at their self-assuredness and you'll be impressed. You'll say, wow, this man knows so much.
09:07 This kind of confidence can come only from deep knowledge or deep understanding. No,
09:15 confidence is a mask you can wear even without having any knowledge or understanding. It's
09:24 far better to be doubtful. You said when you grow doubtful then you cannot walk speedily
09:33 on your path, on your path. Which path? If that path is indeed important to you, don't
09:40 you want to be sure that it's the right path towards the right destination? Which path?
09:47 Which path? If your journey is important to you, how is it not alright to question your
09:56 path a million times? If the path is right, then every successive round of questioning
10:07 will only deepen your trust in your path, no? Why are you afraid of investigating the
10:18 path you are treading? Investigate. And if you are saying that you grow doubtful of me,
10:27 I welcome that. In fact, doubt is not a bad position to start from. You see, if you are
10:34 doubtful of me, you'll be forced to inquire deeper into what I am saying. If what I am
10:42 saying is real and useful, then this doubt will result in you understanding me better
10:55 and developing a little more trust. And if what you are doubting indeed proves to be
11:05 false, then good riddance. You have been saved. You doubted me and I proved to be a fraudster.
11:15 Isn't that some relief for you? So, it's not at all a problem to doubt. I do not know
11:22 who taught you the virtues of easy and cheap faith. Faith is very very expensive and faith
11:33 must be very final. Only when you have traveled a great distance in your journey, must you
11:46 develop unconditional faith. Before that, remain doubtful even skeptical. Are you getting
11:58 it? So, forget about this being a thing of problem. It is indeed a welcome state for
12:08 a young man to be doubtful. Do you know how long did Vivekananda remain doubtful of Ramakrishna
12:20 and Paramhans? For pretty long and it's alright. Because he remained doubtful, because he
12:30 is a man of integrity, because he would not compromise with the false, that's the reason
12:35 why ultimately he could get a true teacher. Otherwise, teachers come a dozen a dime. I
12:47 am sure even in the times of Ramakrishna, that area Calcutta and Dakshineshwar was infested
12:58 with all kinds of fraud, Babas and the like. We have never had a shortage of them, be it
13:13 today or any other century in time. Vivekananda didn't fall prey to them. Why? Because he
13:22 was not going to accept anything easily. When you don't accept anything easily, then what
13:29 you accept means something to you. Whereas, if you are someone who just accepts anything,
13:43 then your acceptance has no richness, no meaning, no significance. Today you can accept this,
13:53 tomorrow you can accept the opposite of this. A rolling stone gains no mass and most people
14:01 are like this, shallow, fluctuating beliefs, not having any real center. Remember that
14:13 you cannot have faith without doubt. Faith that came to you without being initiated by
14:25 doubt is just flimsy trust, not faith at all. Let doubt be the interlocutor. Let doubt introduce
14:41 faith to you. Won't that be great? You are there, faith is there and doubt is the introducer,
14:55 doubt says on my own credibility here, I take the pleasure of introducing faith to you.
15:08 Now that's some statement. Faith being brought to you by doubt. Yes? So, even if I say yes,
15:24 you are not supposed to obediently say yes sir. It's my part to say yes and my yes comes
15:33 with a question mark. I am not asking you to follow me, I am asking you to answer me.
15:38 That much is alright, no? Yes sir, these things happen, it has happened
15:51 but it will keep happening, I have corrected it, I will keep doing it. No, no, how have
15:57 you corrected it? What do you mean by corrected it? In the name of correcting, don't kill
16:04 your doubt. I am not killing, I am saying that such doubts have come before, so I have
16:13 figured out what is exactly happening here, what is happening in this situation. So, after
16:18 understanding that, I move ahead from it, but that thought comes again to trouble me,
16:24 but that intensity decreases. So, for now, I was going through it, I thought I will ask
16:29 the same question. When doubt comes to you, it's a great opportunity,
16:39 don't use it, don't suppress it, don't think of yourself as mischievous or disloyal or
16:48 infidel. If doubts regarding even the most commonly accepted things come to you, doubt
17:00 the entire world, doubt the Gods and most importantly doubt yourself. Yes sir, can I
17:11 ask one more thing? I am here for you. In one of his videos, he is saying that perception
17:21 of eyes are not actually three-dimensional. So, what is it? I have not heard this from
17:32 any teacher. U.G. Krishnamurti neither says J. Krishnamurti nor Osho. Sometimes it feels
17:39 like there is something else that he has to say.
17:46 See I will have to go into that exact excerpt you are coming from, but it's obvious, no?
17:53 It's not the eyes that see, the mind sees. You are saying that the knowledge says that
18:03 it is three-dimensional, otherwise eyes don't see that it is a three-dimensional world.
18:09 That's alright, you see, even if you don't have knowledge that it's a three-dimensional
18:14 world, the fact that you live, eat, walk in a three-dimensional spatial reality will remain.
18:26 Animals don't have knowledge regarding the dimensions of space, x, y, z, axis, they do
18:32 not know and still their entire movement is in the three dimensions and the fourth dimension
18:41 of time. So, that's a bit regarding naming. You know, you must listen to the right teachers
18:54 with some empathy because they often speak from a state of meditative depth. So, sometimes
19:10 the words might be a bit incoherent or what they might be saying might be opposed to what
19:19 they have previously said. These things are there and when these things arise then you
19:26 are supposed to apply your own mind. Those words are always contextual. What is being
19:35 said might be applicable only in one particular context. So, do not get fixated on that. Read
19:48 on, move ahead and as you read on and as you read diversely, the meanings of what you are
19:56 reading will get progressively clearer.

Recommended