I am absolutely certain that Jiddu Krishnamurti was not enlightened, He was merely an intellectual. It DOSENT really take a lot to be an intellectual. Read a few books, have some folks funding whatever nonsense you want to dish out. And Voila, you have a deluded fool to fool other fools.
I mean I always doubted him, One look at this face and you know.
I would suggest stay away from his teachings, The guy is dead anyway. Won’t take you anywhere.
Lol yesterday you loved the guy 
yeah my opinions change (quite a lot ) 
If you keep looking for enlightened people and discard some good intelectuals you’ll find out soon enough that no one is worth reading. Isn’t it better to accept others mistakes and go on with your life?
I tried to examine his teachings - I could clearly see following flaws:-
a. There was no emotional connection in his teachings … It was dry and barren. As if someone has explained him something to preach and he is dishing it out.
b. It was very superficial and lacking depth of both matter and subject.
To give you an example:-
He keeps blabbering about moment to moment rebirth - I know I KNOW that an enlightened one lives moment to moment but can he explain more on this subject rather than just saying literal moment-to-moment in all of your teachings?.
In terms of subject too like I said it was completely dry and barren. Where is the topic about Compassion, Love, and revolutionary transformation that OSHO so beautifally talks of. Osho was truly transformed and you can clearly see it in his teachings.
I read in some of Jiddu’s teachings that he says that - One needs to be in a relationship always and that one cannot survive without that. I mean that is bullcrap …A truly Enlightened one is happy all alone.
Apart from that his face says plenty.
anyway. cheers
That IS the best post on me I have ever read in my life. So beautiful @Minnii i thank you so much and im in love.
There aren’t any true Mystics left? Osho was one and that’s about it.
I don’t know, I don’t really care about that anymore. You can always look for other authors and gt out of the the loop you’re on. That’s not healthy, to dismiss something great because you don’t like that he’s not enlightned…
If we talked two years ago about this I would say read all krishnamurtis work and leave osho to your bathroom 
osho loved being in bathroom and me too 
…what bliss
why is why I say JK was merely an intellectual - an arrow thats about it.
you should read Osho @Minnii
I’ve read it, I like it, deja vu, we had this conversation already.
I’m more into chinese philosophy now. Confuciunism and taoism.
arent both opposites ? i mean im fine if you want have all flavours.
No not really… taoism is observation of natures phenomenon and confucionism is applied to social behaviours.
they aren’t opposite to each other, but complete each other. That’s my opinion.
are you sure? I thought Confusciouism talked more about formal social behaviour, listening to family and elders and respecting/following the traditions and cultures and definitely he refuted individualism — that I am for sure.
Confusciouism and Taoism are different
I agree with @green5, they complete each other
Oshos passage on ego changed my life…made it difficult but it was for the better. Sugmund freuds ego ■■■■ just confused me further. But oshos was good and turned out to be helpful
Chinese society has been transformed both by Confucius (Confucianism) and Buddhism/Taoism
The control of the Chinese Monarchs over the majority of the population was due to the same Elitist Confucianism and Confucius philosophy. It is every similar to Hinduism in India. It is a truly elitist philosophy and chinese society was poor for ages thanks to Confucious
But thankfully Chinese society since 8th century AD was also transformed due to Buddhism and prior to that Taoism which talked more on Individual freedom and Love.
I think that’s a broad generalization. It was not his fault, but maybe of their leaders and they way the dealt with what confucious said.