A quick correction to Nisha's comment before I offer mine:
She missed the word 'true' in the second paragraph. The corrected sentenc is: JK's words seem [true] to people who have already been on some journey of self-discovery.
Well, strange at it sounds, one could see here that Nisha's comment is apparently contradictory to JK's statement. JK says that there is no path and Nisha says that JK's claim would seem to be true to people on some 'journey' - which implies the existence of a path.
Is Nisha wrong? Is JK a fake intellectual?
I agree with Tristan that semantics plays a huge role in creating confusion in how people interpret words and extract meaning.
I agree with Nisha that whoever could benefit from JK's words must already have some experience of self-discovery.
I sympathize with Brother. I too used to get quite frustated at people who keep asking me to "just be" and never tell how (the path) and even go further and say that there is no how.
I am with Xiaoshan who is gently requesting us to see the difference between being and becoming.
I am encouraged by Anonymous that after all there may be no need to "seek" truth.
Finally, I conceptually see what JK is saying and I also see that my ability to live that concept is limited. Limited by what? As JK says, it is limited by all the conditioning I have gone through. Whether I like it or not, I am on some path formed and shaped by all my conditioning. The act of removing my current path (my conditioning) can be called 'a journey to end my path'. I think JK is asking us not to create a path out of actions taken to remove conditioning.
For example, let us say that reading and understanding JK's words are actions that help remove conditioning. To be able to read, I need the to have knowledge of the English language, a good vocabulary and good reading skill. To understand what I read, I need to have some life experiences (a kid who can read cannot relate to JK's words) and some experience in interpreting words from different perspectives.
Now all these needs are needed to read and understand not only JK's words, but anyone's words in English. I am sure JK would agree that these are real needs. But I think what he is warning us of is not to get caught up in English language alone. Not to get stuck to a limited vocabulary, not to stick to just one way of reading words, not to use just one perspective in interpreting words etc. It is by doing these things we end up creating a "method" or a "path". While knowledge, skills, tools etc are very much needed, there is no need to go to the extent of creating a path by repeatedly using the same knowledge, skills and tools everywhere at all times. I think JK is asking us to use knowledge, skills, tools, perspectives etc in a dynamic way as appropriate for the present moment guided by whatever principles make sense to us. "Being" like this allows us to have real growth (to become) whereas concentrating on "becoming" all the time could never lead us to "be" someday.
When I started writing this, I had not idea what I was going to write. All sorts of reactive thoughts popped into my mind when I read the quote and the comments. I paused and looked at everything again. Brother's last lines caught my attention: "Anyway, it may have some effect in the end, because everything happens for the best". Now that is a perspective that is different from the rest of his comment. I took a clue from that line and looked at the quote and comment asking myself, "Is there something here that is valuable?" which resulted in this note.
I will end by saying that how I respond to a person has lot more impact on myself and that person than the actual words of that person. If that person offers something valuable, I could respond in a way that appreciates and may be even enhances that value. If that person offers something that is messy, my response could bring in more clarity.