How can we use I-Ching to divine politics?

Answer in Quora

Originally the I Ching was written as a book about divination in general, later versions were written oriented towards the social and military. 
Obviously, language and visions of the I Ching are located in the circumstances of thousands of years ago; so, what is really important is to learn the energetic meanings of bigrams and trigrams, because that's where everything else comes from.
If we understand well their different meanings and combinations, we will not need to resort to any further interpretation: we will see directly in action those energies in everyday circumstances.

How would Maitreya actually come back and get a message out?

In fact, it has already come ;)

Buddha Gautama's prediction that Maitreya would come when the Buddhism taught by him would no longer exist, has been fulfilled with the advent of Jiddu Krishnamurti.

The teachings of Krishnamurti are the blossoming of Buddhism. Gautama also predicted that his doctrine would be subject to degeneration, but not so the Buddhism that would be taught by Maitreya.

But while this is the main factor (the continuity and perfection of the teachings of the Buddha) there are others: the story of Krishnamurti is perfect from every point of view, going through the esoteric, scientific and astrological.

And also as it happened with the teachings of the Buddha, it will probably take about 200 years before there is an explosion of Krishnamurti's teachings.

Truth has its own rhythm.


Waking up

I dreamed that I was under a wonderful sky, that the planets shone in a celestial sky.
When I woke up I went out onto the terrace and saw that there was, indeed, the sky dreamed a few minutes earlier: the waning moon floating in the middle of Mars, Venus and Mercury, and the dawn bursting behind the mountains.
It was a glorious dawn, with restless spring breezes celebrating the birth of winter. The trees, the mountains, and the whole valley were wrapped in this dancing happiness, and the birds were awakening in the midst of all that.

Post on my old blog, June 23, 2003
The video is not from that day, but it was filmed in the same place
Thank you, Ignacio Drubich, for reminding me


The explainers of Krishnamurti

The issue is as follows:
There are already many analyzes of the teachings of Krishnamurti. There are whole books explaining it. Someone even once said that there was already a "K literary movement" in which many authors deal with explaining the teachings to others, something against which K warned a lot.

For me, each and every one of these analyzes are harmful because inevitably the teachings are filtered and distorted by the author's conditionings.

There are very few people in whom meditations arise and can amplify the shock wave of the teachings (so to speak), but such people never focus on K's personality or take the teaching itself as an object of analysis; rather, these meditations (as with K) are directed to the understanding of reality, of life.

That is, the person who lives the teachings is not going to deal with the logical dissection of what K has said; instead, it will direct its empty gaze towards reality and something that is not himself will be expressed.

 Originally posted on Facebook



First bloom

By 2011 I made several attempts to plant "silk floss" (Ceiba speciosa) in our land of San Marcos Sierra, but the low temperatures of the area proved to be deadly unless the trunks and branches were protected in the winter nights.

Once the trunk reaches a diameter close to 10 cm the tree seems to withstand the cold by itself.

This year of 2017 its first bloom is a celebration.


The "self-help attitude" and the "scientific attitude" regarding the teachings of Krishnamurti

"Arbol solitario en un campo de lavanda con un paisaje de cielo tormentoso con profundidad de campo" 
"Lone tree in a lavender field with a stormy sky landscape with deep depth of field"
AnthonyZ Photography

Too often the understanding of Krishnamurti's teaching is much like the understanding of scientific facts.

When you study astronomy or zoology, you do not do that seeking to improve yourself "as a person"; You do it impersonally, without expecting results that affect you because you simply want to understand the facts of the universe.

But when we face the investigation of the facts of the human mind it seems that we become disoriented and we are already in the stream of "if I understand this, that will make me a better person."

It is a completely irrational leap and obstructs research. In fact, because there is a deviant interest, an inclination to see certain facts and not others, all inquiry ends.


When we speak from the intellect there is a recognizable atmosphere. There is a rhythm, a poetry (say) different than when we speak from meditative states.

That is, one does not transmit only words; instead, we also transmit the state from which these words arise.

Even if we say only one sentence, the meditative state charges that phrase with new meanings.

The meditative states are the only ones that instantly harmonize the other planes.

From a conversation


Just another "shoddy Krishnamurti" more. This time, even more dangerous

I found this photo after writing the note.
It is curious the liking that false teachers have about
placing flowers near them, when they are lying.

I think that Foster is even more dangerous than Tolle in the sense that (more shrewdly than Tolle) has avoided several points that could typecasting him as K's "interpreter":
    • There is no way to know how he makes money out of this, except for his books. He does not charge - as does Tolle - even to witness the recordings of his videos.
    • Adopts a position of "we are friends, I am not a guru" avoiding the stage with flowers like Tolle.
    • He does not mention K in the sense that he is someone who exposes his teachings; however, many things he says, K said it years before.
      I think that this introduction on his website can largely define Foster's message:
      "I do not see myself as a spiritual or self-help guru, or even a 'teacher', really, although some people like to call me that. I see myself rather as a loving friend, who simply reminds you of what, deep down, you have always known: that there is nothing wrong with you ... and that you are loved beyond words, always, just as you are, in this moment ... " 

      Wow. Hard to find anything more contrary to what K has said. The question is: why do people associate Foster with something similar to Krishnamurti's teachings? Just because they feel good when are close to him, or because he's good-looking, or because he's a Cambridge astrophysicist?

      Because if we refer to his words, he is proclaiming the deepest acceptance of the "Me" that can be expressed by the most threatening New Age guru I can know about.