Iris Murdoch and Jiddu Krishnamurti Talk (9/11)

I'm not sure how this came about, but British philosopher-novelist Iris Murdoch has a nearly two-hour long talk with Krishnamurti about his ideas. October 18, 1984.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• krishnamurti
• philosophy
• mysticism
• spirituality
• interview
• dialogue
• truth
• love
• freedom
• beauty

[melanheart]

It is not the problem of "Yes, I agree with you, I agree with that", etc. -- It is simply, please see it, live it.

A chattering mind is enjoying itself chattering, and it is not listening. Therefore, thought, the me continues, and that's the end, the end of communication.

[NoAddedAnything]

Yes im sure Iris is a lovely woman, but she seems for want of a better word 'afraid' When K says we need to sit down and look at things - she seems to not like the idea at all. Many people are like this, not willing to face themsleves.

[Imgoing2LoveYou]

Is she listening? Or is her mind filled with thought and chatter?

[mastakur]

Juddo you inorant idiot wh dare you be the face of truth

[singsungify]

@lunatampa Krishnamurti wouldn't agree with you that his thinking would be resilient to intellectual understanding.

[singsungify]

@NoAddedAnything I'm sure Iris Murdoch did face herself more than most of us. In her work for instance.

[Lindsayc73]

I think somewhere along the way, towards the beginning of this conversation, she couldn't understand something, which may have been the result of her inability to simply be and listen, and wasn't able to see that, so she has been resisting (in division) ever since. Until she deeply looks at this resistance towards her inability to understand, as K is suggesting we do with any division in ourselves, she won't get past this. This is a woman in resistance and she doesn't know it. Ironic.

[lunatampa]

Why doesn't she accept that K's statements are expressions of mystical attitudes, resilient to intellectual understanding? He is not arguing, he is just expressing his beliefs, not his intellectual wanderings. How different are the philosophers' and the mystical minds!

[DJpoppa35]

@NoAddedAnything totally agree and experienced that.

[newamannu]

the main problem here is they are speaking in two different level. one is asking question well speaking from earthly empirical sense and one is answering from spiritual or more higher plain. and the language and meaning of words are not necessarily the same. this is a long interview with not any fruitful outcome.

let say if i say i am thirsty and someone instead of handing me a glass of water comes up with the long formula how the water came about or lets say he explains me clearly 2O+H= H2O.

[capnyce]

What K is not fond of, in my estimation, is she who nods and agrees without trying to find this universal truth for herself. Although I see the beauty and truth in K's words i am still not aligned with his frame of mind completely, and so it was helpful to hear someone ask the the questions on our minds when faced with such an apparently simple yet revolutionary train of thought.

[capnyce]

I think K relished the opportunity to converse with someone who challenged him and and asked for an explanation of his theories. It showed him that she was truly invested in his words and that she sought the truth in them, despite what her whole education had taught her.