WHAT SADHGURU SAID ABOUT KRISHNAMURTI

In the following video you can see what Sadhguru said about Jiddu Krishnamurti:

ALSIBAR ANALYSIS

Alsibar is a researcher who has studied spiritual guides extensively, and he commented on what Sadhguru said about Krishnamurti:

« Hello everyone, today we're going to talk about Sadguru and his view of Krishnamurti. Many people ask me what I think specifically about Sadguru. I haven't researched him yet, but I'll take this opportunity to discuss his statements about Krishnamurti.

Sadhguru starts by saying that Krishnamurti refused to use any method, which is true, but he also adds that Krishnamurti refused to use any parable, story, or joke, which is not true.

Anyone familiar with Krishnamurti's work will recall several anecdotes and parables he tells, some of which he even invented himself. If you'd like to learn more about the stories, parables, and jokes (some admittedly a bit lame) that Krishnamurti told, read the book "The Kitchen Chronicles: 1001 Lunches with J. Krishnamurti" by Michael Krohner, who was Krishnamurti's personal cook for many years.

Well, regarding the claim that no one understood what Krishnamurti was talking about, that's not true. Some did, but rarely.

And it's true that Krishnamurti refused to play the role of guru, to offer any kind of process. But Sadhguru makes another blunder by claiming that Krishnamurti said "it will happen anyway," because this is not true. Krishnamurti never said that, and knowing his way of thinking, I can assure you he would never have said it under any circumstances.

And Sadhguru also mentions something that is very common in Krishnamurti groups, that there is a lot of confusion, a lot of misunderstandings.

But Sadhguru makes his biggest mistake regarding Krishnamurti, saying that Krishnamurti's path is the path of intellect. He uses the correct word, jnana marga, but as far as I know, any basic student of Hinduism —well, anyone with even a minimal knowledge of Sanskrit— knows that jnana marga is about the path of wisdom, not intellect.

And Sadhguru is dishonest about Krishnamurti when he says that Krishnamurti's path is the path of intellect, which is false. Krishnamurti always criticized intellect, knowledge, and scholarship in the spiritual realm, though not in the practical realm of life.

This is one of the biggest lies Sadhguru told, which is very strange. I don't know if he did it in bad faith since he is a guru and a person who knows Indian culture and language.

Another misconception that demonstrates Sadguru's ignorance or superficial knowledge of Krishnamurti; first he says that Krishnamurti was "a fantastic person," that is, he praises him, right? And Sadguru adds that when Krishnamurti was in a place "he was a fragrance, but afterwards when Krishnamurti left only the books remained because there was no living process."

This is very similar to Osho's words about Krishnamurti. He has a phrase like this: "It gives no method," and then he says, referring to a supposed method that Krishnamurti uses, "that method will lead nobody anywhere." Which is contradictory.

Well, Sadhguru here does the same thing, first saying that Krishnamurti emitted an incredible vibration, but then adding that it only served as an intellectual exercise, which is contradictory.

But Krishnamurti also displays anything but intellectual exercise. Any beginner reader of Krishnamurti knows this; he abhorred intellect. And in so-called spiritual matters, there is nothing to do with intellectual exercise, and for Christians, absolutely nothing.

And finally, Sadhguru talks about his experience with education, saying that he really liked Krishnamurti's view on education, and that's why he enrolled his daughter in one of Krishnamurti's schools.

So what we perceive is that on the one hand Sadhguru praises Krishnamurti and on the other hand criticizes him, but it's not constructive criticism; I consider it dishonest criticism, or at least very superficial. »

CID ANALYSIS

I have observed that Sadguru makes great errors regarding Indian spiritual doctrine, which shows that he is quite ignorant of his native teaching, and his mistake of defining jnana marga (also called jnana yoga) as the path of the intellect instead of the path of spiritual knowledge, is further proof of his spiritual uneducation.

And I have also observed that Sadguru investigates superficially; for example, in his speech he said that Khalil Gibran entered the room where Krishnamurti was, but in reality it was the other way around, and Khalil Gibran related that it was Krishnamurti who entered the room where he was.

And I also note that Sadguru makes many mistakes and tells many lies. Here Alsibar detailed the mistakes and lies that Sadguru told regarding Krishnamurti, and I have published two articles where I detailed the mistakes and lies that Sadguru told regarding Blavatsky, Leadbeater, Besant and the Theosophical Society.

And finally, I note that Sadhguru (like Osho) displays a combination of admiration and contemptuous criticism about Krishnamurti. But as Alsibar demonstrated, his criticism is unfounded, and as for his praise, I consider it hypocritical, motivated more by Krishnamurti's fame than by genuine admiration, since Krishnamurti was strongly against deceitful and abusive gurus, and both Osho and Sadhguru are that type of guru.