Scholar of religion, Huston Smith, talks about his 1968 interview with J. Krishnamurti.
Пікірлер: 163
@TheGarrettJames11 жыл бұрын
Krishnamurti wasn't trying to throw him off AT ALL. On the contrary, he was wanting him to understand the facts and things he was saying. He wanted Smith to go into it with him and think for himself to understand but I truly think that one has to pay COMPLETE attention and try very hard to grasp the things Krisnamurti was simply pointing out because we as humans are so deeply conditioned to think a certain way. I sometimes have to listen to the same thing 10 times with absolute attention
@murpieball31294 жыл бұрын
@@georgepanathas2009He repeated in so many talks so many times "we are discussing together. Not me telling you or you telling me." He often phrased his "field of thought" in the form of questions so that one can discover it alone and therefore need no authority. If it's true then it is true and K's specific view of it is irrelevant to fact.
@viclove23144 жыл бұрын
G.James ,,,,I agree with you 100% . Krishnamurti was not the person to overcome somebody . He was a teacher ,i think ,not a conquistador .
@zhizhi91383 жыл бұрын
Nobody can throw off Krishnamurti. He is on the top of mountain of Truth.
@sujanaryalaryal3 жыл бұрын
All krishnamurti is saying is that there is no difference between flowers and thrones..but Huston Smith is being a fragment person says that flower is good and thrones are bad...Just look at it sir 😂😂...saying this is good and other is bad is the nature of fragmented mind..
@etfeddiecrosley923 жыл бұрын
@G.James Agreed. Krishnamurti has a WALK WITH ME APPROACH and Huston was very set in his way, which aren't his way at all but as Krishnamurti said CONDITIONED!
@etfeddiecrosley923 жыл бұрын
90 years old, literally 42 years after the interview and they expect the man to remember it like it was yesterday. That being said for a 90 yr old he's got a sharp mind!
@MikeB-in1nd2 жыл бұрын
Great point
@dineshuthaman12 жыл бұрын
All these western scholars want to use their knowledge to understand what JK was saying. Unfortunately JK's first step towards the truth was self-inquiry with no knowledge ( illusioned "I") hence they were caught in a paradox therefore off balanced. JK never tried to convert/influence anyone in his whole life. In fact, he was opposing it everytime.
@TheSolsonia20034 жыл бұрын
Jiddu Krishnamurti was totally Awakenened beyond this worldly illusory realm ... 🙏🌿💚
@Sydebern10 жыл бұрын
What Smith didn't realize and still does not, is that Krishnamurti treated him with nothing but respect back in 68. Krishnamurti didn't resort to any superficial gentleness, but was simply being sincere with him. Of course, for a person who is so identified with his beliefs as Smith, this feels like a sort of attack. The only thing Krishnamurti ever wanted, was for him to step out of the dream of illusion. I know from experience how difficult it can be when these two types of conscioussness (of course only one of them is reality) are in conflict with each other. They are not compatible at all. The danger of the "new" conscioussness is also, that when someone gets a glimpse of it, it almost always turns to a superiority complex when the glimpse is over and the "normal" conscioussness takes over again. This happened to me and it's an ugly thing. Why it works this way? I don't know, nobody knows. But the 'why' should not even be of any concern to us. The fact is that things are as they are. Krishnamurti wanted the world to see that. Not as a concept, but for yourself as a fact.
@SBha304 жыл бұрын
Sydebern, you provided such a beautiful description of what I observed as well. I am glad that I saw that interview because I had a lot of difficulty trying to understand Jiddu Krishnamurti. A light bulb went off today after watching the video from the 1968 video. Being raised in the west, we are so conditioned with the media, society, etc. on what happiness and love is.
@mikenicoletti38992 жыл бұрын
Thank you
@DihkFace_Mcghee Жыл бұрын
Needs more highlighting.
@linw53025 жыл бұрын
Very, very honest response of his own feelings about the interview. Who am I to even think about commenting, but J.K. was conveying his truths. To someone who did not share a common language. This came in the first question asked..."lucidity". Without agreed understanding of word meanings all conversations get stymied. The 'interview' was not an interview. Such a concept would not be possible for K. Atmost it was a conversation. The social K was in evidence when they met years later. Very much appreciate Mr. Smith agreeing to tell his thoughts about the conversation with K.
@giovannaiamele87822 жыл бұрын
I really wished Krishtamurty would live forever! He was a wonderful man! I love him!!!
@DihelsonMendonca3 жыл бұрын
When J.K finds a mind too glued to principles and dogmas, not elastic, the first step he used to do was trying to shake the person, disconcerting, so, the conversation can have infinite possibilities. It´s not possible to have a true, good conversation with J.K if you are glued to patterns learned or based only on thought.
@MCSubZero14 жыл бұрын
Huston Smith is a simple man. He was not able to grasp the pinpoint accuracy of mindful clarity, experience and origin of thought by Krishnamurti because Krishnamurti was living in the present without any ideal, experience or past motive. This is the art of NOTHINGNESS. This is the only way to TRUELY learn and without understanding this you cannot catch a breath with Jiddu
@scot_smith8 жыл бұрын
It is too bad Mr. Smith felt that way, he seems a good guy seriously interested in the topic they were discussing. Unfortunately, the immense gravitational pull of such a serious topic can sometimes drag one's ego across the event horizon.
@scot_smith2 жыл бұрын
@Fanabud Rogh idk. All I would say is that judging others, given our limitations of knowledge and understanding, seems quite a waste of energy. (BTW, I don’t even remember this vid from 6 years ago 😉)
@edmissonmassingue61405 жыл бұрын
That interview made me remember of and understand that saying: Only when the cup in empty can it be filled. Huston wasn't listening, he refused to learn as K puts it.
@sumitbhandari54874 жыл бұрын
and as k meets him for the 2nd time he already knew that this guy is not able to grasp what he said so he mate him in a way as the guy thought off...
@paulstuart5514 жыл бұрын
This was too radical for a scolar of religeon like Huston. He was stuck in intellectual quicksand of his own conditioning & had no comprehension of what was said. Huston's attempt to reduce all to thought & judgement made it incomrehensible to him & impeded the interaction in going beyond any superficial level.
@adityapatil85003 жыл бұрын
still the same mindset , krishnamurti was right we all live in past
@Caramuel11 жыл бұрын
That interview is the only good and absolutely splendid speech of krishnamurti that i know. A kind of seminar rather than an interview, philosophicaly correct, but not really sophisticated, simply genius.
@Shubhasish201112 жыл бұрын
I think, jk had never intented to give an ANSWER to anybody's question, because to give an answer is to IMPLY that he knows and the other not. And you can NEVER know weather the other knows or not when the other says he knows. You can only BELIEVE that the other knows. Jk had always opposed BELIEVE. So he never said, look this is the answer. He always said- LETS FIND OUT THE ANSWER TOGETHER. Husten was there, looking for a answer, a theory from him. The rest is history..
@thedarkriver113 жыл бұрын
I wish I could have met Jiddu
@truth-is-now67455 жыл бұрын
Robotic mind wants to reduce everything to a formula, so the interaction pattern can be replicable and mimicked. K was about freeing the mind from this robotic structure operating in our psych. Only way one can get there is by being aware of the moment with one's senses / entire Being and this has nothing to do with thought. Academics cannot grasp this because that robotic structure is too deeply embedded in their minds. Through years of training the mind in a 'how' pattern, faculty of thought is extremely well developed ed but the faculty of deep sensory perception is not. Huston Smith seems like a good example of this.
@TheTiger6696 жыл бұрын
Thx Excellent example of Ego!
@cloifsonluizdacosta11634 жыл бұрын
Perfect observation!!!
@illsuive11 жыл бұрын
Krishnamurti is the man
@DihelsonMendonca3 жыл бұрын
I understood by watching the interview, that Krishnamurti "read" the interviewer immediately, and he ( Not to be bad ) tried to show him that things aren´t so simple and needed to be analysed in detail. Mr Smith was too accostumed to the questions and to people, and J.K noticed that and tried to "shake" him, wake him up, because those topics are much deeper and need a sharp mind. It´s not like interviewing a comedian. J.K questions are serious stuff. Watch J.K talks with the scientist David Bohm and you will notice how things can get. It´s not for trivial questions and answers or to be displayed on the afternoon TV session as people used to do with him. When he was faced that way, he always reacted that way.
@paragtrivedi21784 жыл бұрын
Dr. Smith says JK was not conversing with me but he was working on me, trying to change me , that is something JK would never do to any body.I thing since Dr. Smith was professor of philosophy he was only looking for something which could be academically useful to him.
@miracle23328 жыл бұрын
Thought is never "new" because: 1. Thought can only come from memory. 2. Memory can only be of the past. Therefore, a combination of two past thoughts do not equal a "new" thought. "New" thought is past thought...always.
@bowerscott1238 жыл бұрын
+miracle2332 but also probably not possible for most of us.....maybe even for him.
@Rob-7775 жыл бұрын
agree with you but, and so ?
@Thegooob954 жыл бұрын
Very true, one of the things I’ve noticed by listening to k, when I’m actually listening I’ve found that any explanation of thought even if it’s absolutely correct isn’t enough to make thought aware of its nature. This is where that frustrating duality comes. The meditation that was part of their interview was an attempt by k to make smith look into the nature of his own thinking. Eventually we come to a point where the question becomes who or what is it that thinks? The answer becomes what ever I think about is thought, which means when I have a thought about myself, even my entire life and all the things I’ve experienced.. when I’m having that thought, the one having the thought is the thought that it’s “having”. we immediately reject this. We like to think we exist outside of thought, and it seems like that’s true. But if I examine the thought that I as I know myself, or I as I don’t know myself am completely independent of thinking then there are 2 outcomes: I am independent of thought, or there is a realization that everything I am under any circumstance is purely thought. When I exist, I can’t be anything other than thought. The fact that I’m a human is a fact, I know that fact by thought. Every human has the same brain more or less. There’s nothing in the brain that is the physical “me”. It doesn’t exist. Yet we value the “me” infinitely more than any fact, like the fact of the brain, or anything that simply is. Meditation is coming to terms with the “me”.. it’s the me meeting the now. It’s meeting the now as it’s being generated, it’s not meeting an idea of the now, or an idea based off of meeting the now as it’s generated. This is the split between k and another. K speaks from this generation. The me needs to actually see this process and voluntarily die to the now, that’s where the idea of resurrection and transcendence comes. But the me even hearing this will not do it because it loves the flesh and the world in the Christian sense. From here we get lost in religious language and back into the process of the me. We can understand this with words. We always try to understand with words and symbols and idols because we think if we understand by thought then we can bypass needing to die to the now and yet experience that thing. We can’t, there’s absolutely nothing you can do except see. And that’s terrifying. Simply put, thought is so cunning in its desire to live that it created you. Smith wouldn’t see this so he never got to share the process of realization with k.
@chrisbatson34023 жыл бұрын
The only way "new" thought can happen is for it to be a absense of thought to create a new. Example Nikola Tesla.
@Bobany2 жыл бұрын
But you've got something called a consciousness, so thoughts can be new.
@terryfitzsimmons14 жыл бұрын
Fantastic! Be sure and watch the 1968 interview he is describing!
@dineshuthaman12 жыл бұрын
You still don't get it Dr. Do you? JK only lived in the present. When he met you second time, his past exeprience with you didn't distracted him. Because he was living in the present. That's the very essence of his teaching. Left you wondering why he is acting differently. Just get out of your conditioning to see the truth. One wonders how long it would take to realize the truth...
@terryfitzsimmons13 жыл бұрын
The original interview is called, J. Krishnamurti - The Sage of Our Time
@maxwellcooper212 жыл бұрын
The end of the video is nice, when huston smith talks about meeting krishnamurti on a second occasion at a private home and he was entirely friendly, casual, sweet... Interesting also to hear his story ... Smith is clearly getting on a bit in years but its good to see still doing things
@behzadmahagmail2 жыл бұрын
I just watched the interview this morning and read Huston Smith's wikipedia. I really wanted to know how he felt about the interview esp years after the interview. You uploaded what I deeply wished. Thank you!
@sysphus1314 жыл бұрын
Wow! This is historic. I just watched that interview and to see this is so revealing. I only see the first 10 minutes of it on here. I hope I can find the rest.
@venkatm2154 жыл бұрын
Full interview here: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ZrdnqKR8x9nLoH0.html
@neilfoucher3 жыл бұрын
Mr. Smith obviously entered the interview armed with a particular philosophical paradigm and a Krishnamurti dialogue requires complete EGO dissolution to discover , together, what one truly does not really know and only from that point can one even attempt Truth. It is a wonder how Mr. Smith at the end of his life stilled held his opinions so strongly?
@SectaSociedadHermetica3 жыл бұрын
Bravo !!!
@maxwellcooper212 жыл бұрын
love to both krishnamurti and huston smith !
@ashrafulhaque8759 Жыл бұрын
Love it! it is so wonderful to see him talking about that interview and gave us the behind the scene pick at it. Both of them were wonderful human being.
@goodsirknight10 жыл бұрын
just watched the interview with JK, i have to say i was impressed by Huston's ability to remain good natured and continue to try coax some semblance of a conversation from Krishnamurti. JK was quite elusive and almost purposefully disagreeable but did make some salient points; he was I think trying to hammer home the importance of living in the moment, not giving into habits of thought, authority and fear and he did that so emphatically at times that he came across unreasonable, abrupt. I think it might have also been an attempt to cut through language and highlight its tendency to control and influence how we encounter life moment to moment. Interesting to hear he was a completely different person when they met later.
@djmixin16 жыл бұрын
This interview stands out because it is so Elementary. There is so much common sense that Mr. Smith just cannot see because he thinks it is complex and cannot see the simplicity of it and therefore he blocks himself. At times I think he gets it and then expresses his perception by questioning and Krishnamurti right away says no because Mr. Smith adds humor to it like it's child's play but K is serious on purpose and for a real reason. Btw I'm here at the Claremont School of Theology right now :)
@metanoia2725 жыл бұрын
El mismo Aldous Huxley confeso que hablar con Krishnamurti era hablar con el máximo acercamiento e idea viva de un BUDA ¡¡
@gtcstorm406 жыл бұрын
Yup , he was off balance. That was what JK did to the mind :-)
@RussMcClay4 жыл бұрын
Krishnamurti was cold and ruthless in that interview. He would only address Smith as "sir". He repudiated every question Huston Smith asked. This interview is here, make up your own mind: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ZrdnqKR8x9nLoH0.html
@endlessvoid19183 жыл бұрын
JK would address every man as sir in his talks and interviews. And he was not being ruthless, just taking him through a path where he could snap out of his preconceived ideas, and that's not pleasant for anyone.
@counterintuitivepanda45553 ай бұрын
I'm sorry but that's absurd. That is how K acts in ALL his interviews. He always uses the word "sir" to address the other. It's a sign of respect, I dont know how you've managed to think that it isn't.
@RussMcClay3 ай бұрын
@@counterintuitivepanda4555 It's my opinion and I stand by it four years later.
@aryafin4 жыл бұрын
J.K talks about much deeper ideas. May be Smith should watch it again.
@jacobsolace1777 жыл бұрын
Enlightenment is actually Living Love, Peace, Joy, Goodness, Kindness, Beauty, Creativity, Compassion (Passion for All), Wisdom, Truth, in each and every moment of daily life. Enlightenment is actually being in Total Communication, Communion, Connection, Relationship with everyone and everything. Totally Free from stories, experiences, knowledge, images. Totally Free from fear, anxiety, personal sorrow, hatred, loneliness, inner conflicts, inner contradictions, jealousy, envy, greed, possessiveness, competitiveness, and attachments. Totally Free from beliefs, philosophies, ideologies, theories, opinions, perspectives, biases, prejudices, nationality, and identifications. Totally Free from the I, the me, the self, and the so-called True or Higher Self. Totally Free of thousands of years of past conditioning of the brain. All of which limit, color, shape & distort Perception, which prevents Lucidity. They who are Totally Enlightened actually treat everyone, without exception, with the same intensity and quality of care and affection that you would give your dearest closest friend, lover, or child, without any sense of division, separation or distance and without an iota of bias or prejudice, in each and every moment of their daily life.
@torqueindia36463 жыл бұрын
Did you ever noticed jk, shaking his body like smith
@atamtaki93364 жыл бұрын
It was really sad watching Mr. Smith being so schematic and limited and closed minded. Titles can boost ego but not the mind.
@MikeB-in1nd2 жыл бұрын
I agree but at least he got an interview
@rohinir57442 жыл бұрын
What a good memory he has God blesse
@punkempireinterviews12 жыл бұрын
What do you guys think of Prem Rawat ? Anyhow i think it's great this person interviewed Huston Smith about Krishnamurti and i think it's great that you people are commenting !
@counterintuitivepanda45553 ай бұрын
It seems... this man wasn't with any malificient intent. However, he was trying to "do his job" and interview K, while K was trying to really have a genuine conversation and inquiry. I think what I understand from this is that it wasn't Krishnamurti who created the the distance between them during the first interview, it was him who treated K as "the other" and wanted something out of him - hence competing with him. K would not allow competition as he would not give into that game. On the second occasion, he most likely didnt have that ego as he was not trying to do his job (an interviewer) and therefore his competitiveness did not interfere.
@TheAirSchool12 жыл бұрын
The impression is that Krishnamurti was obsessed by "unconditioning" himself and everybody.
@edmissonmassingue61405 жыл бұрын
Andre Louro Almeida Conferencias what do mean "obsessed"???????????
@remitraut Жыл бұрын
The only problem in conversation with k was he sometimes not let other person complete the sentence.Otherwise his approach to the concept and generalization of it with considering the other factors, without any superficial nonsense is, at least to me, is very unique(unfortunately) and amazing.
@gc73043 жыл бұрын
It's really not easy for a person to understand JK at first sight. In the interview Mr. Smith was quite ok trying to get going with JK. The interviewer in this video asked some provocative questions I guess
@aprk6 жыл бұрын
It was the conditioning that was thrown off-balance!
@bhurso9 жыл бұрын
THIS SO CALLED PROFESSOR CAN NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT SIMPLE THING J.K WAS TELLING. HE IS BOOSTING HIMSELF BY SAYING JK COULD'NT CHANGE HIM. J.K WAS TELLING THE SAME THING TO HIM AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT NO BODY CAN CHANGE THE OTHER. JK WAS JUST GIVING HIM HINTS TO FIND THE TRUTH HIMSELF. CERTAINLY JK COULD NOT CHANGE HIM AS HE CAN NOT CHANGE ANYBODY. JK IS A PERFECT TRUTH SPEAKER.
@bhurso9 жыл бұрын
+sandwichappy OKEY FINE YOU DISAGREE. BUT YOU MUST AGREE THAT FOR HUMAN TO GET FREE HIS MIND SHOULD BE FREE OF ALL FEARS, ANXIETY, ANGER ETC. FOR ACHIEVING THIS OUR MIND SHOULD BE FREE OF ALL THE THOUGHTS(CONDITIONING). TO CLEAN THE MIND THERE ARE TWO FOLLOWING OPINIONS. 1. TO GO THROUGH OLD SCRIPTURES, ANALYSE THEM. LIKE HINDU SCRIPTURES, BUDDHISM, CHRISTIANITY AND SO ON. AND TRY TO FIND ANY SOLUTIONS.(OPINION OF HUSTON SMITH AND MOST OF THE GURUS) 2. EACH HUMAN HIMSELF CLEAR HIS OWN MIND OF ALL THE CONDITIONING.(OPINION OF J.KRISHNAMURTHY, ARROGANT AS PER YOU) IF YOU ANALYSE BOTH J.K 'S OPINION IS THE ONLY POSSIBILITY IN FREEING THE MIND. TO FREE MIND MEANS TO CLEAR ALL THE THOUGHTS WHICH ARE IN THE FORM OF WORDS. THIS CAN NOT BE DONE BY READING BIBLE OR QURAN OR HINDU SCRIPTURES. BECAUSE THESE WILL ADD SOME MORE WORDS IN OUR MIND AND WE CAN NOT BE FREE. TO CLEAN THE DUST WE CAN NOT USE SOME MORE DUST, BUT WE HAVE TO WIPE IT OUT. THIS IS J.K'S. MESSAGE. THIS IS LOGICAL SOLUTION. HUSTON SMITH WANTS TO LIVE IN OLD SCRIPTURES ALL HIS LIFE. ANALYZING INTERPRETING ETC. WHICH IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE ANY PROBLEM.
@auggied67606 жыл бұрын
Houston Smith was a brilliant, insightful, caring individual. You would know this if you read his books and watched his presentations. Krishnamurti's message is only clear to those who can put away their past and listen with all their attention in the moment. This is not an easy thing to comprehend on the first try, as Smith was trying to do.
@Debunker2465 жыл бұрын
Oh come now, that is an opinion...lose the caps..it is not effective.
@sriraj39103 жыл бұрын
Sometimes JK gets totally Excited that it's seems he is overtaking the conversation but he was not
@longstrandna114 жыл бұрын
It's no surprise sheep don't get K's teachings.
@iiurt11 жыл бұрын
pretty honest, i think.
@miracle35853 жыл бұрын
This happens when don't listen with all your heart. If people come this video, please watch the interview. There is different when people realize that he is conditioned between people who is denying the fact that he is conditioned.
@staedtlerseries11 жыл бұрын
After all these years, he still doesn't get it.
@freebazar.online3 жыл бұрын
knowledge puffs up
@paragtrivedi21784 жыл бұрын
JK would never try to throw anybody off balance. It must be misunderstanding by Dr. Smith or this is the difference between Indian way of talking and American way of talking.
@bobhijita10 жыл бұрын
Maybe Huston should have boned-up on KM's stuff before he decided to sit down and interview him, and then he wouldn't have found himself trying to argue, getting his ego up, with KM. He would have had a better, maybe not advanced, but yes, maybe basic, understanding, and he wouldn't have been in a place where he "had no idea where that guy's head was at". Huston thought he could "wing it" with KM, and plainly he was very unprepared, so it was his own fault for feeling off balance. And it wasn't KM's job to make Huston feel all warm and fuzzy about his programmed thinking. KM was/is our gift out of the programmed thinking that leaves no room for the new to appear.
@bobhijita9 жыл бұрын
I watched the interview, and it hasn't anything to do with me thinking Smith needed to be agreeing with JK. He says here that within 30 seconds of the interview he realized he had no idea where JK's 'head was at'. He somehow knew where all those other luminaries' heads we at. That tells me he had no idea of JK's ideas. So either he had not boned up on JKs ideas before the interview OR Smith was merely a victim of western thought and rhetoric himself and therefore had no imagination therefore ability to "tease" anything out of JK. Maybe because his westernized perspective, ultimately, couldn't value a perspective that to its root challenges western thought and tradition itself.
@petevan11 жыл бұрын
if you need to "believe what an "enlightened person" can be argumentative" then obviously you do not understand the "quality" of "enlightenment",so you believe right? could it be K was cutting through the ego?
@nitinnegi75156 жыл бұрын
Rondereeo mon thak hippio hippi nush.
@sumitrashankarchamoli85473 жыл бұрын
This man could undestand him.
@SHAHNABI5 жыл бұрын
Jidu offers only the essentials, which is essentially rather simple and easy, how dare he tells a religious man he is not religious, the intelligent not so, the civilized uncivilized etc etc. To me he is the most difficult to accept yet easiest to understand, do we really want that?
@loboestepario23726 жыл бұрын
if you listen to the 68 interview, what mostly stands out is Smith's inability to understand K teachings. Smith was constantly trying to get K to say only what he wanted to hear....something repeated over and over with different "scholars" impresive K patience !
@lordbyron36035 жыл бұрын
I watched that discussion between him and K. My first impression was this guy Smith was heavily conditioned and he couldn’t see passed it.
@tablababa13 жыл бұрын
@terryfitzsimmons where shall i find the interview?......not interview about the interview......
@bhurso8 жыл бұрын
may be he wanted somebody to tell him what went wrong in interview
@thuscomeguerriero Жыл бұрын
Funny thing..lotta people think they know what Krishnamurti was trying to do..but offer zero insight as to what the man was saying
@amitranjan37876 жыл бұрын
See carefully..he is suffering..and was suffering all his life
@sysphus1314 жыл бұрын
@longstrandna1 Not sure if you were directing your comment toward me, in which case you would be jumping to the wrong assumptions as Krishnamurti is who I consider the ultimate human being to have ever lived,and the one person I would consider complete-in all of history. But even if you were not directing this toward me,it seems you get a bit of satisfaction by comparing your self to the "sheep" as if they are all below you, where K was only concerned with freeing the sheep-maybe u misunderstood
@Scott-M113 жыл бұрын
Forget Krishnamurti. All subjects aside. It's so great to see this man again talking about what he did in '68. Good on you sir.
@naykidape977411 жыл бұрын
BOO YA exactly
@taoist7712 жыл бұрын
"People who are heavily conditioned like Huston......" Do you know what 'conditioning' actually is? It is something everything in existence is subject too. Conditioning is not something that you can "transend" or sweep aside. I read Krishnamurti over and over for more than a decade. (I guess you could say Krishnamurti was 'conditioning' me). But then i woke up. Krishnamurti was very articulate and correct in many ways, but there are some fundamental flaws in his reasoning.
@MuharremSari7 жыл бұрын
" but there are some fundamental flaws in his reasoning." what kind of?
@uoykcufelohssa724 жыл бұрын
@@MuharremSari That flaw is language.. Truth can't be described in language..That's y he said until we experience it directly..
@MuharremSari4 жыл бұрын
@@uoykcufelohssa72 But K does it. He explain everything until the silence, and yeah silence and it's effect cannot be described.
@uoykcufelohssa724 жыл бұрын
@@MuharremSari After three years bro😁😂
@uoykcufelohssa724 жыл бұрын
@@MuharremSari Have a great time though..😊 Peace✌
@williamcallahan5218 Жыл бұрын
Not really possible for most anyone to understand JK without some context and understanding of the mind and how it rolls prior to.
@soohyunshin82194 жыл бұрын
SMITH NOT ABLE TO CHANGE IS OLD PATTERN THOUGHT PROCESS.
@Cristano2.03 жыл бұрын
Lol finally after 50 years real truth functioning inside Smith came out it's own way though he was laughing during interview........... Jk Is phenomenal guide , but sometimes the way you put across facts matters , it depends how others perceive during those times.... Any way j.krishnamurthi is greatest, no matter what.......
@enlightenedprophetss2 жыл бұрын
JK the goat
@robot20426 ай бұрын
The second time you weren't pursuing some personal agenda and using the interview to 'see what was in the guy's head'. Krishnamurti was no fool. He probably knew exactly what was happening, hence leaving without delay. At least, that's my guess.
@Physics147284 ай бұрын
I watched that interview. Jk always tried to observe the fact. But always Smith tried to make a logic or ideas upon it. And he failed to understand.
@ThrashGaming14 жыл бұрын
@melcat63 Ego! LMAO! With all due respect!!
@ashwinwriter4 жыл бұрын
Great example of EGO in action. Mr. Smith, you didn't get it!
@bodhiheeren2 жыл бұрын
In all fairness to Huston Smith he was conducting an interview and was not being prepared to act as a student of a teacher.
@u.can.do.wonders3373 жыл бұрын
Was he thinking about light all the time (good or bad) while interviewing JK... Thinking about what people were thinking...one is clueless about himself thinking about the whole world... For Global Peace one has to find Peace within...
@sysphus1314 жыл бұрын
@JMierek CON MAN??? For what gain?? And do you have any intuition?? Even if you put these videos on mute, you can get the message...this man was the incarnation of his message...something that is 1 in a billion!!!
@artpinsof58364 жыл бұрын
Not a flattering thumbnail frame... Very interesting insight from Mr. Huston
@zhizhi91383 жыл бұрын
Well... When you meet people like J.K. Don’t forget your balancing ball, or any other “ life-guards remedies”.... J.K. Is free-mind Man. Free.
@gonetoheaven74784 ай бұрын
legendary interview
@Debunker2465 жыл бұрын
Huston Smith was a life long respected scholar for me J. K. is an unknown for me.
@MikeB-in1nd2 жыл бұрын
Only thing to do is just listen to K
@chiflee6711 жыл бұрын
Its really a shame that the so called professor this and that cannot actually see things simply. Knowledge has its place but its also a hindrance for direct perception. Too bad he missed the boat .
@Imperativism13 жыл бұрын
@thedarkriver1 There never was a Jiddu to meet.
@Helmutandmoshe11 жыл бұрын
Simon, are you OK? Why all the anger? Are you feeling frustration with not having figured out how the world works? Take some time off my fellow man, you're probably making a fool of yourself left and right with such arrogance.
@avalanche9026 Жыл бұрын
With all respect no sir. You were not up to his inteligence. I show the interview. He took you places that many thinkers don’t have that capability. He was unique psychologist. 2023 nobody close to his capacity. Period
@naykidape977411 жыл бұрын
nah he just was limited to time so he had to be breif i agree that he did stop him but only becuase he wanted to squeeze it in and even then if you listen to his 18 hour session with dr anderson you see that huston is looking for an awnser there isnt any awnser, enlightment is an idea its like the tooth fairy and santa forget about it
@XidiotX12 жыл бұрын
c'mon, look at this guy. that says enough.
@getlokeshsir5 жыл бұрын
Mr Smith brought the best out of Krishnamurti.
@mahanteshs72132 жыл бұрын
Mr. Smith is a gentleman. Wise and highly professional. but jk was an enlightened soul, such are in separate realm. That is the cause of this sense of disharmony. Smith got best out of K
@raginald7mars4082 жыл бұрын
... as a German Biologist ... I studied this confrontation - and I am appalled about the arrogance and tyranny of JK. In any "discussion" you see- the other MUST surrender to the High Priest - or you are doomed... despicably... makes me allergic...
@horler10012 жыл бұрын
why are you interested in prem rowat ??
@HajtomY12 жыл бұрын
@JMierek I wonder if such acts that your wife has done can be considered wise.
@bhurso8 жыл бұрын
why the f..k he used to show the film of interview in his workshop.
@anlynch98604 жыл бұрын
J's approach is useful in small doses and it is good to understand, to 'feel' it, but it has a fundamental flaw - the identification of right and wrong. J implies we 'should' do it his way, but the very idea of an 'ought to' is contrary to his basic philosophy. This is an internal inconsistency that he cannot answer.
@normannfrederiksen4 жыл бұрын
Hi! He points out many times that he is not talking about right or wrong. When he mentions "do it" he talks about putting the questions to yourself and not wait for an answer from him that you might accept or not. To "do it", is to be aware of what is happening inside your own mind, and from there discover further parts than the thinking mind. Cheers
@counterintuitivepanda45553 ай бұрын
No, that is a flaw of the listener, not of the speaker. If someone says, "do not follow me", and you choose to follow his advice to not follow him - you have created that gap, not the speaker. No matter what K says, that flaw will exist if the listener chooses to have it (or more accurately, if the listener is unconscious to it). Moreover, it is really a flaw of thought, logic and language. It, in fact, creates a paradox which is only present when we exercise our systems of thinking to try and understand it. "Do not follow me" has the added unconscious layer of "I am following you" and therefore "i will not follow you". That "inconsistency he cannot answer for" is a flaw of our language and logic. Exactly how "observer without observed" really makes no sense if you try and see it with logic. How can there be an observed without an observer? Absurd. It can only be when you are "living" it, and not trying to think about it and understand it. Bohm pointed this out very intelligently. It's exactly the same as our attempts to be free of, say, fear. Everyone (including K) tell us that to be free of fear, we must face it directly. However, we go on to try and face it, only with the added unconscious of desire: "in facing it, I want to not feel it anymore". I say this in my honest experience of listening to K (among others) for a long time, then being fed up of not getting anywhere. I stopped listening, and eventually... found myself getting a glimpse of the light on my own. Everything K says is 100% correct. In fact, there are many others who are great teachers. However, they can never lead you to freedom unless it comes from within.
@chipkyle542810 ай бұрын
Smith's perceptions are well founded. If you watch 100's of hours of K lectures, discussions, dialogs, and interviews, you will understand what Smith felt about K. If you invest the time and "go into it" as K has said many times. "Just try it!" K said. If you do, You will understand what K meant. "AND!" lol. .... as K sometimes exclaimed, you will also realize that some of K's starting assumptions were wrong. But I don't get hung up on K's incorrect generalizations. K was often purposely vague. He would not give examples. He knew not to answer How. K's understandings have been known for 1000's of years. You can understand them. All of us can understand them. It just requires time and commitment. You can be totally free.
@user-tk9ht1th9e6 ай бұрын
Krishnamurti was indeed an Ass IN THAT VIDEO
@dominique98982 жыл бұрын
Lots of commenters seem to be defending their guru JK via their “enlightened” criticisms of Dr. Smith. Just like every other comment thread on social media the “experts” come out in droves to make sure their viewpoints are protected.