The purpose of this article is to point out that in his reflections on
Krishnamurti, Wren-Lewis (1994) has (a) uncritically accepted as sour
ce material a highly suspect narrative, (b) misrepresented Krishnamurt
i's notion of spiritual transformation, (c) unjustifiably attributed u
nethical conduct to him, and (d) proposed an approach for assessing sp
iritual progress that is at variance with Krishnamurti's teaching. A m
ore sympathetic reading of Krishnamurti's life and work yields differe
nt results.