Krishnamurti & the Art of Awakening
Experimenter's Corner | moderated by John Raica

Pages from the Book of Life

Displaying posts 271 - 285 of 285 in total
Sat, 15 Jul 2017 #271
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

More selected fragments From Mary Z's memos of K

October thirtieth 1979 ‘In the morning, Krishnaji had make a note for when he returns. “When attention is profound it includes everything.” ‘At breakfast, he said, “Give fifteen minutes a day to sitting quietly, finding out what is attention. Go into it deeply.” He gave me a letter last night to read on the plane. His flight to Delhi on British Air was to go at 13:45, and Dorothy would bring him for his British Air flight to Delhi. He is due there nonstop at 3:30 tomorrow morning, to be met by Pama and Pupul.

‘My TWA flight left forty-five minutes late. Once airborne, I could read Krishnaji’s letter as he instructed me. It was short and said everything I care about: “Partir, c’est mourir un peu.” “Be exceedingly watchful. Be very attentive driving. This attention must flow from the inner to the outer.” Stia bene e sempre sia benedetta.”’

December twenty-third, he mentions this about his talk the previous day. “Pupul & the others said that what one said was totally new and Pupul bent down to touch the feet; after the talk etc. people were touching with their forehead to the ground where one had walked! … It’s too long & too complicated to report what the talk was about; it passed out of one, words cascading.”  

February fifth 1980 ( back in Ojai) Krishnaji told me of the something new that is going on inside him. It began in Rishi Valley. He said, “It could be the "committee"—or some 'other'. What "other"? I asked. He didn’t know. “We will write about it”…“I am further away”…“Pupul and Nandini noticed it, and said, ‘We have lost you, you are not with us.’”
There’s something that began in Rishi Valley that has given him tremendous energy. The brain is charged. “I have changed my idea of how long I will live, maybe much longer.”

The twelfth. ‘Krishnaji slept nine-and-a-half hours in the night, stayed in bed all day and slept on and off another three hours. “This is luxury,” he said.’ ‘He dreamt I said, “I must write a book!’”
‘He read some poetry. He asked for the Oxford book of poetry, for some Keats, Shakespeare, Swinburne, Hopkins, O’Shaughnessy. When I said that Hopkins was a Jesuit, Krishnaji said, “Oh, that rather spoils it.”’

February thirteenth. ‘Krishnaji wished me a happy birthday.’ ‘He said, “We’ve had a marvelous relationship. It must be that way always. I am speaking as the world teacher. You are blessed.

We sat by the fire and he put to us the question of his not being “used” enough here. “Am I just going to talk to the teachers who understand nothing for two months? It is a waste.”’ ‘He needs the challenge of someone who can push him deeper, someone who has gone into all this. How can we find such a person? He dismisses scientists as not really interested, artists, musicians, journalists, and religiously oriented people as already committed to their own beliefs, etcetera. The 'ordinary' individual is hard to find. Where are the serious, intelligent ones who go in his direction? “Maybe there aren’t any. Maybe this is the way it is supposed to be. I’m not frustrated, but it is a waste.” There is a danger, too, that he will get further and further away. He feels this. It is a 'lack' that confronts him everywhere.

This morning he had not gotten up by 6:30, as usual, so I went into his room. He had the covers up to his chin, lying, as he does so neatly, in a straight line, but he was not asleep. He spoke but was vague, disinclined to get up, and when he did, he said he was “elsewhere” and “not quite here.” I asked nothing but felt his “absence,” which seemed to last until he later came into the kitchen where his breakfast tray was ready. He did no exercise.’ Krishnaji dictated a description, which Mary L. had requested, of the change in Krishnaji’s meditation which began in Rishi Valley in November and continues here. He said it is completely different and new, a movement that reached the source of all energy, a sense of the absolute; the whole universe is in it. There is the perception that there is nothing beyond this. “This is ultimate, the beginning and the ending, the absolute. There is only a sense of incredible vastness and immense beauty.”’ When asked how one knows it is the source of all energy, he said, “One can only reply, with complete humility, that it is so.”’

And today he said, “The body feels very young. Meditation has done something to the brain. I am not tired. On the contrary. Something has happened to the body, something I cannot put my finger on has happened to the whole mind. It is not what it was. What it was, was alright, but it is something entirely different. You have no idea how I worked in India at Rishi valley—the teachers and school, but I wasn’t tired. I was like a flame.”’
We walked in the afternoon and he asked me why haven’t I “this thing.” ‘“What’s the point if someone so close to me doesn’t have it?” He then asked me if I thought like a woman - he meant did I think beyond the reactions and the nature of a woman. “Is that you? Is it that you do not see instantly the whole of a problem? I want to change you.”

After lunch, Krishnaji drove along the ocean, looking pleased and very young. He hoped for a train, and one came by, keeping us company as far as Ventura.’ He told me that years ago, when he used to drive by himself, when a train would be parallel with the road, he would drive fast. And the train engineer would shake his finger out the window at him, and he would stop racing.’

April first, The first dialogue with David Bohm Eventually he described his own meditation, which is not deliberate. He wakes up meditating. In Rishi Valley it happened that he touched what he described as the source of energy. Toward the end, he spoke of a destruction (of all self-conscious thought, etcetera, as we know it) and that is a beginning. “Is it creation?”

The sixth, Easter Sunday. ‘It was a beautiful day. Krishnaji watched TV all morning (zapping) from the Pope in Rome to the Reverend Schuller, whom he watches with incredulous amazement that people are so taken in.’ Reverend Schuller was a fascination for Krishnaji because he was so awful; he was one of those television evangelist preachers. He built the Crystal Cathedral and it went on and on. Krishnaji would stare at this in fascinated horror.

Krishnaji said again, “I am wasted here.” And later to me, “Why am I doing all this?” He said, “The Committee may say that’s enough.”

‘After breakfast, Krishnaji said that he wanted a serious talk with me. We sat in the living room. He said he’s wasting his time here with school problems and talking to teachers who don’t understand. He’s been here three months, and what? He has woken up with intimations three times that he is being wasted. Ojai, he feels, is a sacred place, and he likes this house, but it is a waste for him. He could write, but he should be having living discussions; someone to talk to who can help him to go deeper. Bohm helps, but he can talk to him at Brockwood. More is happening there. If he doesn’t do something, something else will take a hand, something will make it impossible for him to be here. He wants to prevent that. What to do? He said sometimes it is as if something very far were calling him. “Something beyond the stars.” then he picked it up and said, “I have been sent.”

Then, on impulse, we went for a drive up Maricopa Highway. Krishnaji was delighted, and declared it “a place to worship” and “house of the gods.”

At supper, Krishnaji spoke of the Rosalind and Rajagopal days from 1935 to 1947: the quarrels, Rajagopal’s angers, both trying to humiliate him in public, ordering him around. She knocked Krishnaji down the stairs at Arya Vihara and luckily Weideman caught him’—that was a man that used to live around here. ‘“They must’ve thought I was an idiot to put up with it,” he said. “If my mind worked then as it does now, I would have said, ‘Enough. Go, both of you.’ I could have then. I still had the power. Amma”’—that’s Mrs. Besant—‘“had told me, ‘You are the ultimate head.’ It was before Rajagopal got control.”’
‘I asked, “Why didn’t you?”’
‘Krishnaji replied, “I just didn’t care. That was the way it was. I accepted it. Once Rajagopal had been angry, [and] I told him he was a bully and he piped down. The next day it was the same thing all over again.”’

November fourth, 1980, we landed in Colombo. Krishnaji is again a guest of the state. Officials met him; and a minister, Dr. Adikaram, and he were driven into Colombo.’ Dr. Adikaram was a nice old man who was the head of the Krishnamurti Center in Sri Lanka, chancellor of the university, and had known Krishnaji forever. ‘Pupul, Nandini, and I were in a second car. We are staying at Acland House, a government guest house built by the British. It has large rooms with a dining room sixty feet long’ ‘Parameshwaram oversees the food cooking and three young Navy bearers serve. Krishnaji has the largest and best bedroom with hot water and air conditioning. Pupul and Nandini share another room, but have only cold water. I have a small but adequate room, but it has an air conditioner. The weather is very hot and very damp

At 9:30 a.m., Krishnaji went with Dr. Adikaram to see Prime Minister R. Premadasa. In India, the prime minister calls on Krishnaji, a religious leader being second to no one.’ But we were in another country.
Krishnaji doesn’t consider this, but he felt somewhat uncomfortable there. Meanwhile, Devi, Nandini, Sunanda, Pama, and I went with a friend of Dr. Adikaram to see the Kalema Buddhist temple. At 4 p.m., Krishnaji was interviewed by Minister of State de Alwis for television.’

Asit took Krishnaji and me for a walk by the sea. Krishnaji liked it better than the park, which he thinks irritated his eyes. The sea air is better. The air seemed un-refreshing to me; sticky and heavy.’

In the evening, Pupul asked Krishnaji how much his early life had influenced him. He replied, “Scarcely at all,” and went on to say that most change in him came about after he had left Rajagopal.
Pupul spoke of gurus, and said that Krishnaji was essentially a guru. Krishnaji spoke of 'light', and he   disagreed. “There is only light. You don’t say, "‘I have come to light. I am that light."’ just ''There is light'. This has deeper significance; that other is too childish,” he said. “After all, goodness is that: to have total light. I think that is logical, sense. But gurus in the usual sense is leading you to light.”…“Light is compassion. See the difference. Jesus is supposed to have said, ‘I am the light.’”…“I shrink from that,” said Krishnaji.
He then went on to ask how Rishi Valley can be made beautiful. "Ugliness is darkness, and here they don’t see that".

He told me “that face” has been with him for four days. Whenever he closes his eyes, it is there; and with his eyes open, he sees it in his room. On the walk, he wanted to stop, close his eyes and look at it. During the music, it was not there.’ ‘He also showed me a small gold locket with JK engraved on it and a photograph of him when he was very young. He had me open it very carefully, and inside there were tiny jewels, the jewels that are in Pine Cottage. He had told Radha about the bad atmosphere in Adyar. She got the jewels and gave them in the locket to him, and when he returns them in their locket to her, they will go into the northeast corner of the main hall at Adyar.’

The next day: Krishnaji talked of the need for a sense of sacredness, which he feels in Rishi Valley is being nurtured. Krishnaji told of the jewels put in the Ojai house and the atmosphere there. He told too of his having worn them for Radha this week so that she can place them in Adyar. Pupul said similarly they had been placed in the assembly hall here. “Then why are they not working?” Krishnaji asked. He felt it has been spoiled by 'activities'—by playing drums, etcetera, and that Balasundaram’s wife—‘had practiced black arts there. Something sacred must be respected, not begged for help. Then it can act.
‘Asit then asked if this sacredness, which can be given to stones, could be given to a living thing, a tree. And if a tree, why not a person? “I think so,” said Krishnaji. He said he was not 'positive', but it might.
Krishnaji spoke of energy which, at one level, is in both the good and the bad, but beyond is the "unlimited energy'', which is the source of everything—the universal energy and beyond good and bad.’

December seventh: ‘Krishnaji says he thought over in the night what he had said yesterday and it is not possible: A human being is different from a jewel. He said this briefly en passant. When I asked him later what had made him change his mind, he said, “It is obvious: Human beings are too corrupt to receive it. And if they are not, then they have no need of blessing. They have it already.”
I asked Krishnaji if the sense of power was still there. He said it was, but he is very careful about it.’ In the evening, Krishnaji said to me, “Love has no death,” and that he 'must go into that'.’

. Dr. Parchure is asking whether Krishnaji is awake to his dissipation of energy, his irritability at times, and an inattention. Krishnaji says it is not irritability; it is urgency. In the afternoon, he said he asked Narayan, if an angel appeared and asked him what he most wanted, what would be his reply?’ ‘“Enlightenment,” said Narayan. Krishnaji was pleased. Then Krishnaji asked, “More than that lady?”’
‘In the car, Krishnaji, for Asit, gave a chart of the Theosophic hierarchy: initiates, disciples, arhats, bodhisattvas. Krishnaji, according to Theosophy, is an 'arhat', i.e., beyond the opposites, beyond ego, a master. He said that an arhat, or bodhisattva, supposedly can live on in his body or give it up. He said that if he did not travel about so much and consequently wear out his body, he probably might live much longer ‘I said, what about settling down in one place right now and keeping the body as it is. “No, it’s too late,” he said. All this was said in an amused way, not seriously.

Narayan is to create, at Rishi Valley, a place where the catalyst that changed Krishnaji as a boy can again take place. “The door is waiting to be opened.” At Madras, too, someone must be there to provide the atmosphere, and it must be for students who are there for Krishnaji’s teachings, and nothing else. There will be no education to become engineers, etcetera, but only a total involvement with Krishnaji’s teachings. “If you do this, the door will open, something will take place. I say this with scientific clarity. This has not happened because I have not stayed in one place.”…“If I stayed in one place, I would do it, but it is not my dharma. My job is different.” There is no goal in this. “Either you are inviting something tremendous, or you invite the devil, like any little ashram.”…“That is the devil, the real dangers—the Rajneesh, the Mahesh Yogi, etcetera.” …“If you ask heaven to bless you, it will bless this. The Foundation is nothing without this, and the Foundation has not done it. The door is there to be opened. It is not me. The "thing" is waiting, hoping. It needs a global brain. Don’t say, ‘I haven’t got it.’ It is a child waiting to be born.” He said to Narayan, to Sunanda, to Upasani, and to Krishnakutti, “You have said you would do it, and there is no going back. You must have a vital brain, global and dynamic. If you are a woman, you are not a woman anymore, even if you wear a woman’s body. You may have been egotistic in the school, but not here. And if you are not here, you will not do all that there.”’

February eighth. At 6:15 p.m., Krishnaji gave his sixth Bombay talk, a very fine one. “Meditation is the understanding and ending of knowledge.” There was a frenzy of hands trying to touch him through the car window afterward.’ Krishnaji asked me if yesterday’s talk was special, and he said, “It has done something to me.”’

forward through the early 80's )

1981 June twelfth. ‘I talked to Saral and David Bohm on the telephone. He has been in the hospital for an angiogram and needs a triple heart bypass operation as soon as possible. ‘After our lunch at Fortnum’s with Mary, Krishnaji and I went to visit David Bohm at his office at Birkbeck College. Krishnaji then talked privately with Dave, while Saral and I waited outside in the garden. We have not seen them since Ojai. Dave has lost weight and looked pale and vulnerable. Dave goes into hospital tomorrow for open heart surgery and a triple bypass.’ David was obviously frightened to have the operation. ‘Saral is frightened but strong. I sat there and talked very factually about it on the lawn behind the college while Krishnaji was alone with David for almost an hour, trying to reassure him. Krishnaji put his hands on him in healing. He said later that Dave clung to him

The twenty-fifth. ‘David Bohm was operated on for a triple bypass today. He was in surgery from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. They found arteries in worse shape than expected and there was some damage to his heart. The actual surgery went well, but afterward his blood pressure dropped critically. He was eventually able to be moved into intensive care and only late onto his own support system. On Saral’s behalf, Maurice Wilkins telephoned and reported at length to us. The next forty-eight hours are critical. Krishnaji, Dorothy, and I talked. It was a strong physical feeling of holding David with our combined strength—curious feeling of immovable strength, felt in the solar plexus, as if we were holding with total firmness something that could otherwise float out with the tide. It persisted all conscious hours. When we were alone, Krishnaji said that Dave is weak, is frightened. He described again how Dave clung to him.

( Later in Paris) We then drove down the Champs-Élysées, past Beauburg, which we hadn’t seen and found ugly.’ ‘The Marogers dropped us off by Notre Dame to walk home. “Let’s go in,” said Krishnaji. We walked around the left to look first at the western rose window, Krishnaji noticing the curve of the arches. He was disturbed by tourists turning away restlessly from a priest in satin vestments and dark glasses intoning a mass.’ . ‘We stopped at the blue east rose window, and Krishnaji was alive and eager at the fluted columns, massively holding up the huge cathedral. “They must’ve felt something to build all that,” he said. “But it loses its sacredness in the stream of tourists.” He noticed the crushed cigarettes at the door and was bothered by the empty faces. He would like to send them all away and let the cathedral be cleaned of them and be itself again. He talked impatiently, intently, and we walked along the little park; and he added that Indians, though it means nothing to them, would have lit candles with the rest.’

David Bohm is now in the normal ward and is up and walking. Krishnaji spoke of the book I am to write, saying that I must say who I am, how I came into all this, and how I went to hear a talk out of curiosity. ‘I told Krishnaji at supper of buying a booklet and being unable to finish a page because of arguing with it, then going to the next talk where it dawned on me not to argue, but simply to listen. “You must write that,” he said. “It shows you’re not a disciple, but understand something.” I also described to him my vivid memory of first meeting him alone on the path heading into the Grove just before a talk. The vivid cross of looks and that that is what I think of when he has said to me, “We should have met many years before.” He said we probably would have not been very passionate about the look, “but there would have been something continuing to this. We should have met.” Then he stopped. “No, it is right as it has happened. It is exactly right as it is.”’

( Later in Saanen) Krishnaji and I walked in a light rain to the edge of the wood and Krishnaji asked, “Why did Dr. Bohm care so much that I came to see him?”’
‘Me: “Because your affection, your regard, probably in a human sense, means more than anything to him.”’
‘K: “You mean he depends on me?”’
‘M: “I think there’s too much emphasis on dependence. Affection, friendship doesn’t have to be just dependence. You have known him a long time, and a few years ago I think he became quite depressed because you seemed to lose interest in talking to him. Then he cheered up when you renewed your talks. And two things have just happened: After knowing him for twenty years, when we were just in Ojai, for the first time you used his first name. And just now you went to see him. Something you would normally never do before his operation.”’
‘K: “When he is well I wonder if he can get some really serious people to talk about these things. More than always talking to the teachers.”’
‘M: “You do that over and over at each school you go to.”’
‘K: “Yes, but it should be more.” Later on the walk, Krishnaji said, “Let me ask you something: You have heard me talk so many times. Do you think this person learned it or is it totally new?”’
‘M: “He couldn’t have learned it, because it has not been said. Buddhist teachings have certain similarities, but fundamentally what you say has not been said before. Why do you ask that?”’
‘K: “Oh, I just thought of it.”’
‘A little bit later, Krishnaji said, “I’ve been thinking about consciousness for the talk.”’
‘M: “I’ve been reading in the book about computers and toward the end, he tries to define thinking and intelligence, answering all the criticisms people make of computers. He says that, in reply to most criticisms, humans and animals are equally programmed. Making a distinction between a program the baby is born with—breathing, moving, seeing, grasping, digesting, etcetera—and what is acquired.”’
‘M: “He is saying that they can do certain things laboriously, going through all the possibilities before choosing the answer, but man can see enough of the whole to choose without examining each option.”’
‘K: “But it is the same. Knowledge is operating and the computer does it very quickly.”’
‘M: “He seems to be saying that machines will be able to outthink man.”’
‘K: “Then what is man? What can he do that machines cannot?”’
‘M: “It seems to me the machine must always function in the field of knowledge. Man can go beyond, to another dimension.”’
‘K: “That is right. That is what I have said.”’
 “If ( Sheldrake's) 'rat theory' is correct it is as if a man can come along’—you, for instance—‘who can pierce limitations, see onto another plane, and that once it is seen, it is possible for others of the human species to see. In answer to your earlier question, you have perceived something not derived from knowledge. It is as if mankind sometimes, rarely, produces a human being with this ability to go beyond, and this becomes an opening in the total human consciousness. It really doesn’t matter if those people in the tent tomorrow understand what you will say or not. You see something, and you utter it.”’
‘K: “CWL,”’—that’s Leadbeater—‘“used to say it doesn’t matter if anyone understands.”’
‘M: “The TS believed an entity manifested.”’
‘K: “The bodhisattva came when the world was in a terrible trouble, every 2000 years or so.”’
‘M: “What I am saying is a little different, not that existing beings incarnate, but that the human species casts up one of its kind with this power to see beyond its limitation of consciousness. The TS wouldn’t have accepted it as intelligence manifesting, would they?”’
‘K: “No, they wouldn’t.”’
‘M: “They made it into personalities with names and lives outside of time. Even when I was very young, four or so, I had difficulty with the notion of God in the image of man. It seems somehow so petty. It had to be something much vaster than that.”’
‘K: “Yes, petty. Much vaster.”’
‘M: “Also, with you, I am not really interested in a bodhisattva who incarnates in the body of Krishnaji. You are bodhisattva. It comes from you, not from some other being.” On the return to the chalet, Krishnaji said, “Are you writing these things down? Will you write this?”’
‘M: “Yes.”’

July eighteenth, Jean-Michel brought a copy of All One, the first edition of the magazine that Alain Naudé is doing. Krishnaji picked it up and read parts of it, and said, “What has happened to Naudé? Oh no, he’s become a guru.” There are the bits about God that I looked at askance at Ojai in the sample he brought there, and the style is somewhat pontifical, but I will read it later. Krishnaji seemed saddened. “He was intelligent once. What happened to him?”

This post was last updated by John Raica Wed, 23 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 18 Jul 2017 #272
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

( continuing with selected excerpts from MZ's K memos )

MZ: I don’t know whether this could be linked with the episode in Ootacamund with Pupul and Nandini, when he went “off,” and then when he came to, he said, “Did you see the face?” …well, the implication was that it was the Buddha. And when they said they had, he said, “You are blessed.” They had seen “His” face. After a talk, he would sometimes ask, “Did the face change?”—meaning his face during a talk. I’ve seen…well, it’s hard to describe. I’ve also seen him change shape. I mean, I’ve seen him, though sitting, suddenly become a tall man. ( Things are so nebulous that I don’t like to take a position of what I know and don’t know or noticed, I mean… there’s a vast ocean of things I don’t know about, categories of things with regard to Krishnaji, which I have wisps of them in my mind, and I’m aware of them, but I don’t try and build a foundation of saying, “This is what was happening,” because I don’t know.) When he was in the hospital dying, one early, morning the light was just coming up over the hills and he turned his face and looked at the hills and it was the face of a very, very young man. I don’t know what to say. There was the Unknown - expressed in in a very simple way. I always felt that the extraordinary eloquence of the man, and the teaching genius that he had, was that it was "new" to him at that moment. He was…his voice, his mind, his perception was seeing something that wasn’t associated with anything else, and yet he was talking about the same things, in a way—it was the same area. He was talking about a dimensions of the human consciousness that most people don’t have. And it was new to him. He was not repeating what he’d seen twenty years ago or even last week.…and somehow this has, for me, has to do with his teachings. I mean, this was the way he lived and we should all live, in that things don’t repeat themselves. They are—they exist, "then". And they’re true, "then". He’s seeing, he’s talking about something that is there that moment—alive. And it isn’t repetitious.

August eleventh. We walked in the woods. He said, “I’ve had enough of Gstaad.” We flew on a Swiss Air flight to London. I am happily we are back at Brockwood. We went for a short walk. The country is soft with the fullness of late summer. I spoke to the Bohms, David is feeling better.’ ‘Krishnaji talked to David, then we all went for a short walk.’

Krishnaji talked to me at length about his odd memory. He says he has (only) two strong memories ( as a boy ) 1) Standing alone by the river at Adyar, empty of all thought; and 2) Mrs. Besant taking him by the hand, sitting on a chowki and asking him if he accepted as disciples the group present. He spoke of 'remembrance'. “No remembrance of Maria Z. I have fondness for you. It’s not a 'remembrance'. That is why it cannot change.”’
He used to say that he wrote me a lot of letters so that he wouldn’t forget me. But when we drove from Gstaad to Paris, he would remember where we had stopped in previous years on the road for a picnic breakfast, which Fosca used to make. And he would say, “Now, we are coming to it, it’s just down the road—it’s here.”

The eleventh of September . Krishnaji had a long, serious talk with me on what happened to him at 4 a.m. “The "door" opened and then shut.” He could have “slipped away.” What would I do if that happened in the future?’ That means he would have died. ‘He sees only Pupul and me to carry on the work. We talked for a long time, and he let me tape it.’

February sixteenth 1982 back in Ojai. ‘Krishnaji said at one point in India Dr. Parchure told him his body was deteriorating, so Krishnaji  “challenged the body,” and it responded with sudden strength and energy.’ ‘It is in him now.’ The body was always his responsibility, he thought. ‘We felt we have too much TV at supper, so we switched it off.’

The twenty-second. ‘ Krishnaji went down to the UCLA operating room before 7 a.m. He had showered with special soap as instructed, shaved, and lay in bed looking gleaming, immaculate. “One should dress elegantly before dying. Wasn’t it Haydn who put on his best clothes to compose?” I replied, “No talk of dying, please.” He responded, “Oh, I’m not going to die.” He said it very firmly. He laughed when I told him the chaplain had come by while he was in the shower to say words of encouragement before surgery. The chaplain, a pale-faced man in rimless glasses, said to tell the patient, “I’ll be rooting for him.”’ ‘Krishnaji laughed at the solemnness of getting on the gurney and went off down the hall on it. I asked the anesthesiologist to talk to Krishnaji during the operation. But it wasn’t until 10:30 a.m. that Krishnaji came down the hall. He looked pale, a little yellowish, and hardly spoke. An icepack on the wound. Krishnaji was in some pain and the spinal had not gone from his legs entirely. He asked me to hold his feet. Then he wanted to lie on his left side. Sometime after 11 a.m., he asked me, “Maria, talk to me. I could slip away. The door is open. Do you understand?”

‘At 2:15 p.m., he woke and looked vacantly side to side. I said he’d been asleep. Is he all right now? He said it had been very close. When I said 'he must shut the door', he hadn’t been sure he was strong enough. I said he had been given extra strength in India and he had it to use. He said I mustn’t order it, “If 'It' wants to go, It will go.”

At lunch at Arya Vihara, Krishnaji spoke of Goodness as an absolute, unrelated to any other thing; unrelated to evil; without an opposite. But evil projects an opposite: a pseudo-good, not the real. Thinking gets caught in these two, and so is untouched by the real good.’

July 1982 in Saanen

Vanda yesterday gave Krishnaji a letter from Rosalind and Rajagopal, which was to be read by Krishnaji in front of Vanda and then destroyed. Krishnaji refused to touch it. He had me open and tell him what it was. It was a six-page handwritten account of Rosalind’s life in relation to Krishnaji, Nitya, and Rajagopal. Rosalind had called Krishnaji a "congenital liar". And he asked (MZ) , “Do you consider me that?” He said, “I have lied when they attacked me, brutalized me. I’m not a violent man, and they were. I tried to avoid that.” He appeared shocked by the letter, but more concerned that I might be upset by it. This morning, he said that he had awakened thinking of the meaning of humility, to examine what one is or has done without a center.’

July tenth. This morning, Krishnaji asked me what actually are we fighting Rajagopal for. “Is it worth all this? Think of it afresh.”
Late in midmorning, Krishnaji came in to talk to me and to make me see, and therefore feel, as he does, that our going on further in this is to touch dirt. He is revolted by them and wants to have nothing further or ever to do with them. What are we fighting for? Are we to go on and on until Rajagopal dies with this? He said, “I am disgusted. Like that tennis court yesterday.” The Gstaad tennis tournament is on in the village, and was crowded with “meat-eating, vulgar people.”’

‘“I would do anything to get away from them”’—the two Rajagopals. ‘“I cannot be with having anything to do with them, and we are connected through this case. We were right in the beginning. I felt responsible to those who had given money, and it was right that we get the land and all that. But now it goes on and on. Don’t you want to be free of it?”

the first Saanen talk of the year, was to start at 10:30 a.m. It was very hot in the tent. Old faces. New faces. Krishnaji spoke strongly. Something new. “Living without a cause.” Toward the end, a tall, drugged-looking young man came into the tent, climbed over people until, grimacing, he reached the edge of the platform. Various people came quietly to prevent his climbing up, but Krishnaji said, “Don’t touch him.” The man echoed those words in a loud voice, and began an incoherent speech in German. A few in the audience yelled, “Be quiet!” but Krishnaji sat quietly. Then he said, “Shall we end the meeting?” But when the man ran out of words, he wandered out, and Krishnaji picked up exactly where he left off and spoke another eight to ten minutes.

Krishnaji and I walked to the river. He said he had felt something threatening in the wood when he walked there alone, but didn’t feel it with me there.’ He said that he would never walk in a wood at night because of 'something threatening'. And he also said how he wouldn’t go out at night alone. And I said, well, if I were with him, “Would you go?” Yes, he would
The twentieth of August. Krishnaji is reading The Elder Brother, the biography of Leadbeater, and is appalled at what went on.’

At lunch, he reported that he had had threatening dreams every night here. “What kind?” I asked. He said that in the dreams, he has to speak and is late; he is walking and there is a body of water suddenly that gets wider. He wonders what it is. Are the two Rajagopals threatening him? “Those two would be the only ones,” he said. He says he can close it off and not allow the dreams, but doesn’t want to close it off. Krishnaji said, “Rajagopal is playing a dirty game”…“He thinks I’ve done something to him. What have I done to him? I’ve done nothing.” At lunch, I said that Rajagopal responds only to being pushed. Krishnaji said, “We must push him.” I asked what should guide us this winter when he is in India and communication is difficult, and Krishnaji replied, “Whatever you think should be done.”

the ninth of February 1983 . Krishnaji’s arrival on flight 761 from London. ‘At Arya Vihara lunch, Krishnaji heard about the movie E.T. and that it was playing in Ventura, so he and I went with Erna and Theo for the 5:30 p.m. showing. Krishnaji liked it very much. “I like when there is something moral,” he said.’ Well, he also liked the little E.T. ‘We got back by 8 p.m., and had supper by 8:30 p.m Erna,
Fifteenth March. ‘Krishnaji saw a video cassette made from the Movietown News of a film of himself in 1928 in New York and 1930 in Ojai. He said, “I felt no relationship between that chap and this chap.”’

April seventeenth Krishnaji sat down beside me, and scolded me for being upset because, after ten days of concentrated work in New York and being too tired to get up yesterday, our first day at home, he said he would hold a discussion meeting with the Oak Grove staff tomorrow afternoon. Then he jumped to Mary’s book, the second volume of the biography, The Years of Fulfillment, which has just come out, and which the Indian Foundation members have criticized severely. He said, Mary does not deeply enough know about “all this,” as she had not been around with him in years. He has been thinking about it, and he wants me to write every day so that at some point, and it may be years from now, I will write a biography, which will be right. He said it must start with something about myself, that I am not some devotee. Then he jumped to the subject of memory; of how it had come up in discussions in New York this past week, and how he asked me the question, “Is there something in the brain that is not touched by memory?” He examined it Thursday night, and last night, he saw it—'there is' such a thing. Then he examined it—is it imaginary? Is it a projection, etcetera—rigorously, until he was sure. “From doubt to certainty, there is such a thing, and from that there is energy. When I got up this morning and did my exercises, I could have walked for miles. That is why I want to talk tomorrow. Now do you understand?”’

We lunched at Arya Vihara. “David Bohm is picking my brains,” he said. And later, as we left the kitchen, he had me stop in the hall and look into the living room northeast corner. “You asked what you can do when you are alone here. You must look quietly at that, not hastily.’ It is where the jewels are. ‘It has been neglected. It is a shrine and one must pay attention to it or it will fade.”’

The Bohms are here again. In the late afternoon, while I was marketing in the village, there was an earthquake centered in Coalinga near Fresno. I didn’t feel it and neither did Krishnaji, who was walking down Thacher Road at that point. I met him with the car. In the morning, at the Huntington, he had come to my room, and later he said he had awakened  “with something different” in his head, pointing to his forehead, “which frightened the body, so I came to you.” The feeling has continued, to a lesser degree, all day, but the fright is gone.’ The 'body', in Krishnaji’s terminology, is almost as though it’s another entity sometimes.
May twelfth. ‘It is Krishnaji’s eighty-eighth birthday, which he again ignored and brushed away with impatience. Everybody looks smilingly, but doesn’t say a word. He is, if possible, more beautiful, more endearing, and has that spring of energy that seems to keep his body going.

Yesterday, Krishnaji went into the west bedroom at Arya Vihara and said, “This is where I last saw my brother. This is where he died.” Krishnaji said he felt no connection with the photos of his young self. It was like watching someone else. ’

May ninth—‘Krishnaji told me that he had been awake that night on and off, and that Rajagopal had been in communication with him, when he was in Ojai, after the case. And when I asked what was its form, he said, “Oh, you know, when you feel that someone is thinking about you.” He said that two days ago it abruptly stopped. “This could mean,” said he, “that either Rajagopal has done something like sent the rest of the archives to the Huntington Library, or some other thing. Or it means that Rajagopal is dying.” But Krishnaji thinks it’s more likely the former.

May thirty-first. ‘The sun came out. In Doris’s car I went to Petersfield to get Apex flights for Krishnaji and me to Geneva on first of July. Krishnaji, Dorothy, and I walked; the grove is in full flower. The pink azaleas are blinding, and the handkerchief tree, late this year, is unfurling. I spoke to Betsy in London. There was heavy lightning and thunder and rain in the night, but I was too deep in sleep to be more than faintly aware of it.’

June fourth. ‘The Bohms came to lunch. There was a discussion between Krishnaji and David about doing two videotaped dialogues to be played in August, in Davos at the International Transpersonal Association Conference.’ . Dorothy is disturbed by the apathy and antagonism of some of the students and staff.’

June sixth. Montague had been told that Dorothy had had a heart attack. She will need to stay in the hospital for ten days, then rest at home for six weeks, and then be quiet and without effort for three months.

June tenth. ‘Years ago, Krishnaji had a letter from Svetlana Peters (Stalin’s daughter) and she was to have come to Malibu to meet him but called it off at the last minute. She now lives in Cambridge with her twelve-year-old daughter, Olga Peters. She read The Years of Fulfillment, wrote to Mary Links and subsequently to Dorothy about coming to Brockwood. A short, smiling, rather round woman with reddish hair and light blue eyes got off. We both smiled in recognition, as if we had met before, and talked easily on the way back. On seeing the Mercedes, she said, “Oh, I haven’t been in a good car in some time. I came back to bring her to meet Krishnaji in the West Wing. He came toward her in his warm, eager, welcoming way, and we immediately went off for a walk through the grove where the azaleas are still blazingly beautiful and the handkerchief tree flutters. We went the long way around the fields and came back by the lanes. She seemed in awe and also very happy to meet Krishnaji, to talk and walk with him. I invited her to tea afterward, but she seemed to need to return to her room. I talked to Dr. Reilly, who said Dorothy had a “severe coronary” and will have to remain in the hospital for some more days.’

On June tenth, 1983. The Bohms came to lunch. Svetlana Peters sat next to Krishnaji and Dave was opposite.’ A few people are aware of who she is, though not many, but they give no sign of it, which is as it should be, as one of the burdens of her life is the Stalin’s daughter image. Krishnaji and Dave talked a bit about international relations at lunch, and she kept silent on that subject. Svetlana Peters returns to Cambridge by bus.

( In Saanen) Krishnaji said, “Of course, mind reading is obviously possible.” Asit asked if Krishnaji could do it, and Krishnaji replied that he could, but that he refuses to. Krishnaji went on to say a person can block someone else reading one’s mind, reaching it. Rajagopal’s aggression is directed at him, but Krishnaji forms a 'wall' it cannot penetrate. On Krishnaji’s side, there is emptiness, which forms the 'wall', and within this, Krishnaji can function.’
Krishnaji went on to say that because Rajagopal’s sendings cannot penetrate, “It is like coming up against a rock,” and it returns to Rajagopal. “I do not want to hurt him. I am not doing anything to him,” but something may change, that stillness may reach him, or perhaps he is too full of hatred, it may not. “It will be interesting to see. That is one reason I want to go to California.” Krishnaji spoke in that way that may be serious or not, of those being high in Masonry, and to whom two angels are given. They watch over the welfare of a person or persons, though he may not ask for himself and may rarely ask an action from them. Krishnaji has never asked his until now. But he has “sent two angels to talk to Rajagopal” to make him turn from this ugliness.’ ‘Asit translated this into a force of goodness and Krishnaji smiled. He spoke of sensing an atmosphere when serious things are being discussed, which is different from the atmosphere when discussing computers.’ Asit asked if Krishnaji could convey to a friendly person instead of Rajagopal in ways that would change them. Krishnaji said that is what is happening in the tent, but the other person must be willing to 'listen'. (I understand this to be listening with emptiness, without the filter and chatter of thought). Krishnaji’s turning away Rajagopal’s aggressive projections seem to be empty and that emptiness creates the wall of privacy, which is impenetrable. His mind cannot be read if this happens. Krishnaji said he thinks the ancient Hindus knew about this. This is part of meditation.’

October twentieth ( 1983 in Ojai) Before going to sleep, Krishnaji said to me, “They are immature here. This place must become something marvelous. You must be careful. Look after yourself. Do you understand? I might die, and you must see that this place is marvelous. You must live as if I were already dead. Do you understand what I’m telling you? When I leave Ojai, it is out of my mind. The house, the roses, Rajagopal, and all that, and when I leave here, it will be out of my mind, and when I leave India, that too.” I asked him, “Are you telling me something more?” Krishnaji replied, “No, I’m not going to die. I will live a long time more, I hope. But you must understand how to live.”“The teachings themselves are the expression of truth which serious people must find for themselves.”

Krishnaji had a letter from David Bohm. His anxiety attacks began again on his return to England. It is a touching, sad letter.’
‘I spoke to Shainberg in New York about David Bohm’s condition. He has been in constant touch with him, and arranged for Dave to see a good therapist in London.’ .

on May eighteenth (1984) Krishnaji said that he dreamed that Rajagopal said to him, “Why didn’t you tell me you would turn out like this?” and Krishnaji told him, “Because you behaved like such a bastard.”’ later, we drove over to look at the new school building in the Oak Grove. Krishnaji kept saying,  “What a beautiful place,” and “Don’t those teachers see it? How can they quarrel about 'things'?”’

May twenty-fourth. ‘Krishnaji laughed suddenly in the kitchen at breakfast. “Why?” I asked. “I’m thinking of your smile. It made me feel very close to you.”’ In the car coming back along Grand Avenue, he said, “I may be going to faint,” but he didn’t. He just closed his eyes for a few minutes while I kept driving slowly. Then it passed. It is some time since he last fainted. As we stepped out of the garage, a green car rushed up behind us, and out jumped an aggressive, absurdly dressed German who had followed Krishnaji from the Grove, demanding to talk to him. Krishnaji had said no, and said it again here with the man shouting at him. I tried to stop the man and he turned on me, “Who are you? Mary Zimbalist?” “Yes,” I replied, but Krishnaji stopped me from saying all I wanted to say. He quietly told the man he couldn’t see him, and we went into the house. Later he told me that I mustn’t try to defend him.’
‘“Why not?” I asked.’
‘“Because they won’t attack me but they might take it out on you. I must defend you,” he replied.’
‘Me: “Isn’t it my job to protect you?”’
‘Krishnaji said, “Something else is doing that. And if you react…do you understand?”’
‘Me: “You mean that if I say something that it may jar that other thing?”’
‘Krishnaji: “Yes. I can tell by looking at their eyes how crazy people are. Of course, if they tried to break into the house, we would both act.”’
‘Me: “Am I supposed to just stand there if someone was physically attacking you?”’
‘Krishnaji: “No, that would be different.”’

July sixth. ‘I met Friedrich Grohe at the station and brought him to the chalet. He is giving another large donation to the KFA and wants to buy the Zalk House in Ojai. I helped Grohe fill out bank forms, and we telephoned Erna in Ojai with the news. Krishnaji is moved by Grohe’s generosity, and disturbed by the lack of responsibility at Brockwood. In the afternoon, I drove the car to the tent, walked to Saanen station, took the train back to Schönried, and walked up the hill to the chalet.

July thirtieth. As we come to the trees, Krishnaji says, “May we come in? You don’t mind?” He is also watching cars for the color of a possible 190 Mercedes he increasingly thinks we should have in place of my old gray diesel in Ojai.’‘He said, “I will live at least another five years,” but next year he wants to come here earlier and rest more before the talks.’

This post was last updated by John Raica Thu, 24 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 22 Jul 2017 #273
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

( Brief excerpts from MZ's Memos - the second half of 1984)

October twelfth 1984 . ‘Krishnaji slept well. He said that in the last two nights he had vague dreams of “the brother.” He “couldn’t see his face, but we were going somewhere, a doctor’s. He went to the doctor, then he went somewhere and I didn’t know where, and then there were a bunch of people saying, ‘We’re for Theosophy. Krishnaji felt it was funny. .

Asit asked him why there has always been turmoil around Krishnaji, TS people, Rajagopal, etcetera. Krishnaji said it was not surprising, “In good soil the tree grows and so do the weeds.”’ ‘There was talk too about the “quiet room” in The Study at Brockwood. There was rather a challenge from both Pupul and Asit. Krishnaji said it was “entirely different” from a meditation room or a temple. “It is a place to be quiet, not to bring problems, thoughts,” said Krishnaji. He said he had found it very difficult to live at Brockwood, in a house full of  “a hundred” people where there is turmoil. I went back to the hotel, afraid if I give in to sleep I wouldn’t wake up in time for a walk. So, I read, the archive correspondence I had brought from KFA to KFI, copies of correspondence between Krishnaji and Annie Besant, also with letters to her from Nitya. It was interesting to read in his letters of February seven, 1924 that Krishnaji, during the process, had said, “In one of the messages Krishnaji repeated from the Master, it was said that this house’—Arya Vihara—‘would become a center and that they will watch over it.”’

The twenty-seventh of November. ‘Dr. Parchure left early by train for Madras. At 9:30 a.m. yesterday’s discussion resumed with the addition of Rinpoche Samshong.’ That’s 'our' Tibetan Rinpoche. ‘Krishnaji went into what he means by 'mind', which he says is “totally different” from brain: when the brain is still and the self is not, then there is "mind", which is love, intelligence, compassion. Because of thought and self-centeredness, we live in disorder. Death must be the most marvelous thing because it ends disorder, and so it brings order. I queried this and he said "there is order in the universe" and my perception made the jump from the personal ending by death; so there remains the order of the universe. How far ahead he goes. Rinpoche stayed for lunch and Krishnaji, who had spoken eloquently of the highest use of all the senses during the morning discussion, several times asked why celibacy is insisted upon in various religions. Rinpoche did not respond very much to this, but he did describe the steps of the Tibetan Buddhist monkhood. Seven years of probation and many vows, etcetera. Krishnaji asked him about the Dalai Lama and his view of him. Rinpoche said that the Dalai Lama is in a "guru" position to him, as the Dalai Lama was involved in his ordination. He said he would obey the Dalai Lama, and Krishnaji took this up as "obedience" “is a terrible thing.” “Why should I obey? If I’m wrong, I’m wrong, and I will find out for myself.” He maintained that help is harmful because it weakens people. “Then why do you talk so much?” asked Rinpoche. Krishnaji says he does not want to 'help' people. “But Buddha continued to talk,” said Rinpoche after quoting the Buddha in similar lines to Krishnaji’s. He maintained that there is only "pointing the truth", not "help". The ( perception of the ?) truth is the only authority.

the first of December Krishnaji went in the afternoon to see the storm along the beach.’ I did manage to go with Krishnaji to the beach in the late afternoon and walked partially. Radha has had hepatitis but is up and around.’
December third. With a big wind still blowing from the fringes of a new cyclone, Krishnaji went to see the sea and came back exhilarated, hair flying.’ ‘Huge waves close in the sand, he said. It was getting dark but he said he hadn’t minded. At Rajghat he had talked to me about his unease when it begins to darken. He has always felt this way, he said, “I feel like a skeleton wandering.” If someone close to him is there, he feels more protected.’
Next morning we left Vasanta Vihar for Rishi Valley and reached here at 8:40 a.m. I settled into the same room I’ve had these latter years, next to the dining room and across from Krishnaji in the old guest house. There is great quiet in the valley; remoteness, and an ancient rhythm. There is also a drought as it is another dry year. The big old well is almost empty, and the streambeds are dry.’

The next day. ‘Krishnaji pursued the question he put yesterday to Uma and others: “How do you regard K? Is he different from you? And if so, why?” He was asking the family members, but they had no answer to it any more than the rest of us. Krishnaji teases Uma about her "sociologist" point of view. She smiles and was restrained in her replies. In the afternoon, Krishnaji, Radhika, and I walked toward Tetu. The simplicity of the earth, the hills, sky, and a sort of stillness. “This would be a good place to die,” said Krishnaji. It was dark when we got back, but he didn’t mind because Radhika and I were with him. The valley is moist from yesterday’s rain.’

The sixth. ‘I worked almost all day at my desk. Krishnaji, Radhika, and I again walked on the Tetu Road as far as the little temple. Krishnaji is moved by the beauty of the country.  “One could die out here.”’ He said it again.

The eighteenth of December: ‘On the afternoon walk with Krishnaji were Nandini, Bakul, Radhika, and me. We went on the Tetu Road where days ago Krishnaji had said that he was so moved by the beauty of the country that “One could die out here,” but today, we went as far as the small temple, where the head and torso of a goddess is fashioned in clay on the base of a tree and where the villagers sacrifice goats. One other day we walked there, and Krishnaji asked us if we felt something about the atmosphere. Radhika said she felt nothing. Nandini said she had once walked there with her son, Gansham, and they had not wanted to stop near that temple. There is something unpleasant about it. I have always been drawn toward the country there because it is beautiful, totally country, with fields, orchards, and a red sandy road and Rishi Konda at the end of the valley. But I’ve always tread carefully, feeling alien in the eyes of the land and the dark Telugu faces, even though the children offer a handful of groundnuts as a present, and once some custard apples were offered by an old, bent twig of a man. I would walk there alone, but warily, somehow. Today, Krishnaji and the rest of us stepped into the temple, which is a stone box, not very deep, empty except for a row of lingam-shaped stones, and there, after showing Nandi and Bakul the statue of the goddess at the base of the tree, we turned back on the road toward the school. It was late afternoon. The sun had dropped behind Rishi Konda. The sky was pale gold, but dark was beginning on the path.

About halfway back, Krishnaji asked me if I had felt anything behind us. I said I had felt I wanted to move away from the temple. He said he had felt something following him. He watched what he felt, and then he said to it, “Enough”…“I did something and told it to leave, and instantly it was gone.” He said the school land of Rishi Valley is peaceful, but the land beyond is not. “It is a dark land. There is "danger" in those villages. We must keep them at arm’s length.”

Leaving India is a desirable thought. Something dogs me on this trip, though everything is done to make my visit pleasant with great thoughtfulness. There is something about the country that is, as Krishnaji said, “ a dark land.”’

oDecember twenty-second. ‘Krishnaji had an extra discussion with students, at the students’ urging. As usual, the mid-aged ones were the talkers.’ That means twelve year olds. ‘He had six come to join him one after another on the dais. Unfortunately, the video equipment had gone to Madras and so, the lively, funny, and very good discussion was only on audio recording. Afterward Krishnaji was engulfed in children. “Can we talk again sir?” and “Why don’t you stay here, sir? You should be our principal, sir.”’
‘The older silent students now want a meeting, but they have waited too long, and Krishnaji will rest until he leaves on December twenty-sixth.’ The older students had that sort of adolescent embarrassment in making fools of themselves in their thinking they’re superior to the younger ones who chatted away and were wonderful. But when they finally decided they wanted to get into the act, it was too late. ‘I took photos as I have at other meetings. Krishnaji, later in the morning, saw Mr. Naidu with his three children. . I came back in time to walk with Krishnaji, Narayan, Rita, Grohe, Radhika, and a male teacher, Alo, along the Tetu road, past the temple to the crossroad. Krishnaji strode purposefully around the back of the temple. And when later along the road I asked him if he had felt anything following him, and he said, “No, I went deliberately around the temple, did certain things, and said ‘You stay here. This is your place."
‘Then I asked, “Did you feel a resistance?”’
‘Krishnaji, “It didn’t like it, naturally.”’

The twenty-third. ‘Pupul leaves today, so she, Radhika, and I had supper with Krishnaji last evening. During supper, there was a long talk about his life and some occult matters, and Pupul’s book on Krishnaji. She had given me an article supplied by Radha Burnier that Krishnaji had written sometime in the twenties after Nitya’s death. It describes his concept of Masters, not as remote, strange, beings, but as part of himself and his daily life. He said he had not seen them often and only “as the flash of a passing bird.” We spoke of whether Leadbeater could have made the vague dreaming boy imagine these things. Pupul says there is little direct testimony from Krishnaji in those days. Much of the accounts are by CWL. We even speculated whether Leadbeater might have given the young Krishnaji some drug that made him both sleepy and suggestible on the occasion of the “Initiation.” Radhika and I leaned to feeling that Leadbeater was an absolute charlatan. There was talk about the Ootacamund experience. Pupul and Nandini wanted to call a doctor, but Krishnaji refused. He said, “Both of you have had children. You can’t stop the baby from being born.” Pupul said that when she had returned to Bombay, on three nights running, she had gone to bed and felt death enclosing her as though in birth, and her body had fought back. It never came again.

‘Krishnaji had then gone on about “cleansing” the apartment of a presence. He then spoke of what he had done on the walk in the afternoon. He said he does and says certain things that he never was taught but has come upon it by himself. He spoke of cleansing the room in the hospital at Cedars-Sinai when we went there for his operation. He said someone had died in that room. I and he felt it, and he acted on it. He said he 'does things' to the car before a long trip like Madras to Rishi Valley. He asked Pupul if she knew a “real mantra,” and she and Radhika spoke of a mandala, which means a protected space. Krishnaji spoke of violence in animal sacrifices. What seems to make this killing of animals more dark than the usual widespread killing for food, etcetera is that this is done for "religious" ends. Radhika said that she uses what she calls “alertness” as a protection. Krishnaji said he would have difficulty in walking from here, the old guest house, to her house in the dark.’

‘Once in Ashdown Forest he had a bad time at night. When he had been speaking of his young days, there came into the room that curious atmosphere that so many times has seemed to appear when something innately concerned with him and his origins is discussed. “Do you feel the atmosphere?” he asked. Even Radhika said that she felt it, but when we began to speak of evil, it vanished, and instantly Krishnaji spotted it. He said that to speak of evil invites it. That good attracts evil, that one shouldn’t discuss evil in a room but out of doors, and not at night. He said he has never discussed what he does to dispel evil but asked Radhika if she would want to know, bearing in mind that there is danger in it. She backed away, and said she wouldn’t ask. This morning, I asked him if the same offer was open to me. He thought for a moment and said, “No.” I asked if it was offered to Radhika because she must protect this place. “Yes,” and that I would want it only to protect him, and something larger is protecting him. One cannot protect oneself.

He said also that I am not always sufficiently, deeply attentive, and therefore it would be "dangerous" for me to know these things. He said I must not get mixed up in these things. I said I was not interested in occult things, was not afraid. But he said the danger would be “if it gets into my mind without my realizing it,” so we left it at that. But he said that last night he had gone around and "cleansed" this whole house. The real protection is to be without anger, antagonism, envy, hatred, and self.’

December twenty-fourth. ‘Later yesterday we took what was planned as a long walk. Krishnaji is still exhilarated by having been able to walk to the mouth of the valley the other day, and seems rather pleased, as a child might, with his powers. So Dorothy was invited. “Can you stand a long walk?” she was asked, which arouses her mettle and also her wish not to be regarded by Krishnaji as old and enfeebled. Rita and Grohe, both long-distance walkers, Narayan, Radhika, and I went. The plan was the Tetu Road to where another branches to the right and joins the main road to the valley, if one can call it that. Passing the horrid temple, Krishnaji walked purposely, with a dominating stride around it, and told me later, “I have pulled its sting.” We turned right, where a wide road appears. The school van met us, but Krishnaji wanted to go on, so we walked as far as the village on the main road. He didn’t want to walk through that, so we all came back in the van.

December twenty-seventh. In the night, I decided not to stay in India till Krishnaji goes to Bombay but to go with Dorothy and Rita on January thirteen/fourteen. My spirits lightened. I’ve had enough of India. I am weary of the difficult food, the weather, the sights, the sounds, the tastes, and the smells. Nothing seems clean to any of the senses. Even the sea, the rolling surf off the Bay of Bengal, smells polluted to me. There seems no freshness in nature. Everything seems smeared with human insensitivity, soiled. The site of an old woman sweeping in the filthy streets with bare hands sickens me. So does the tolerance of it all. I cannot imagine wanting to stay alive in the conditions of life that millions and millions endure in this part of the world, and I am past the human capacity, if I ever had it, to do anything but shrink from all this. So I will flee to my infinitely cleaner, luckier, safety of life where atomic annihilation is as likely, but meanwhile, clean, sweet smelling fields, bed, house, food, and air is possible. Will I ever not wonder, as I have since childhood, why I have been so lucky, so blessed, really? And the supreme blessing is Krishnaji. How have I been allowed that?’ ever since I was a child, I thought, “Why am I so lucky?” Why have I got a clean bed to sleep in and enough food and beautiful things around me? I always felt that I’d have to 'pay for it' some day, that life would even things out.

December thirty-first. ‘I asked Krishnaji if his "meditation" has come to him here in India. He shook his head and said, “Too busy. One must be quiet for it to come.” There were showers on and off all day. At 7 p.m., Grohe went off to the airport to fly back to Switzerland. He spent a long time talking to me about building in Rishi Valley and at Brockwood. He thinks it is “bon marché” to build in Rishi Valley, so he is financing two bungalows, one for his own use when he is there and one for Krishnaji, even though Krishnaji says he prefers the old quarters. And the balance needed to build an “ashram” or study. He seems to think I can expedite having all this done by next year. I went with Prema and him Saturday to see a local architect’s work, and also another house. But I had to point out that this is India’s project and I would be intruding. He is curiously impractical.
So this year is ending tonight, with hardly a mark of its passing. I have said goodnight to Krishnaji and say only to myself how extraordinary is the grace and wonder of another year with him.’

This post was last updated by John Raica Thu, 24 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 22 Jul 2017 #274
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

THE K & MZ Story, 1985

January first, 1985, and we’re in Madras. A stubborn and determined rain gave no possibility of having the 7:30 a.m. question-and-answer meeting in the garden as usual, so everything took place in the big hall here at Vasanta Vihar. People kept piling in. ‘Krishnaji spoke wonderfully with power, authority, and what was called “a presence.”

January second. ‘Ninety-six-year-old Madahvachari came to lunch Krishnaji was amiable to him and invited him to come again. But later coming back in the car from the beach walk, Krishnaji said "how dreadful it is to live like that". I asked what choice Madahvachari had, and Krishnaji said he should “take a pill.”’ ( ‘Krishnaji seems to think that these lethal pills are available, so we muttered about ways of suicide all the way back to Vasanta Vihar.)

January fourth. To Krishnaji’s discomfort the rain held, so he gave the extra talk he agreed to give tonight, to replace the one that was rained out last Sunday, in the less crummy of the two halls, but crummy it was. It was a wedding place. And though he gave a good talk, it tired him because of the place. It was announced that the talks tomorrow and Sunday will be held at Vasanta Vihar and canceled if it rains. The drive past the slums along the beach disturbed him. These sights make me want to never come to India again.’

The next day. ‘At 5:30 p.m. in clear weather, Krishnaji gave his third Madras talk in the Vasanta Vihar garden.
The sixth. ‘Pupul arrived in the afternoon. At 5:30 p.m. Krishnaji’s fourth Madras talk in Vasanta Vihar garden. Very fine.’
January seventh. ‘At 10 a.m., there was a KFI trustee meeting held upstairs. Asit arrived for it, and Dorothy, I, and Dr. Adikaram were invited.’ He was the head of the Sri Lankan Krishnamurti world, and a nice man. ‘I sat feeling that talk of more schools was mad. The shortage of teachers is constant. So is money. And most of all, the energy of those who do come for Krishnaji’s teachings is siphoned off into academics or supporting academics and the feeling for the teachings, the essential of what should concern us, is spread too thin. I said as much, but Pupul disagreed. She thinks there should be as many schools “as the ground of different human beings.”

It seems to me we are all, for the most part, occupied with the usual, schools. When we got back, a seventeen-year-old musician, Ravi Kiran, played a rare instrument called gottuvadyam. It is said to be very hard to play. It is veena-like but without struts, and has twenty-one strings. The boy came with his father and younger brother and sister. At the end, when Krishnaji approached to thank them and present the usual garland, which Sunanda had waiting, the father and then the boy and then the younger ones prostrated themselves in the old total way: flat out, whole body and arms outstretched, touching Krishnaji’s feet, at which Krishnaji put his hands on either side of the prostrate head. It was, to me, very moving. The instant and intense fervor of it. Krishnaji was touched by it. “They are real Brahmins,” he said. This was the real, ancient prostration, the way he and Nitya prostrated themselves to their father when they came back after the years in Europe. I think Krishnaji was more impressed by the actions of the children and father then by the playing, but it had lasted one and a half hours, and it was by this time 8 o’clock, and he had had no supper and has been working, i.e., talking, for four straight days, plus a morning of KFI meeting.

January ninth. Krishnaji had said to me that there is so much division in the KFI that he’s not going to interfere. “Let them run it,” he said. I pointed out that this means a dictatorship by Pupul, and that he is perceived as being afraid of her. He finds her much more assertive these days.

Pupul brought me a letter found among Shiva Rao’s papers The note is possibly in Krishnaji’s handwriting, though Krishnaji is not sure after looking at it. It is dated London, 10 October 1925, and purports to be from "Maha Chohan" to Krishnaji, commending him for his work. Krishnaji has no recollection of it, and has no explanation to offer, though he said at one point that Leadbeater had invented the current concepts of the Masters.The tenth: ‘There was the second meeting at 9:30 a.m. of the two-day seminar. It went a little better. In the afternoon Krishnaji met Major Rakesh Sharma, the Indian astronaut who participated in a Russian space mission. He talked with him almost an hour, liked him, and invited him to come on the beach walk along with Radha, Dorothy, Pama, and me. Krishnaji had me walk and talk to Sharma. A very nice, intelligent, and easy-to-talk-to man. ‘Pandit Jagannath Upadhyaya arrived.’

January twelfth. ‘At 9:30 a.m. Krishnaji held a discussion in the hall with Upadhyaya, Pupul, Radha, Achyutji, and most others were onlookers. The long-winded Hindi of Upadhyaya and its translation, which often turned out to be, “The Buddha says etcetera, etcetera, etcetera” makes a fair amount of tedium. Krishnaji kept wordlessly catching my eye, and eventually he told Upadhyaya to "leave aside what the Buddha said and say what he himself thought". Major Sharma was at lunch and Krishnaji put him through quite a questioning. Was he a Brahmin? Yes. With that background, what did he feel about being in the Air Force? Sharma said it troubled him. That he had not killed anyone, and did not intend to, but when he was seventeen years old, all he thought of was flying one of those marvelous machines without measuring the implications he now sees. Krishnaji was cooking him a bit. ‘In late afternoon, Krishnaji, Radhika, who went to Palamaner yesterday and came here afterward, Radha, and I walked on the beach. For me it was the last walk. I am leaving tomorrow, and will put this depressing place away.

January thirteen. ‘Krishnaji has worn my rings and rudraksha on the chain for two nights and gave them back to me this morning after walking to the window with them.’ He did something, "magnetized jewelry. ‘It is painful to leave Krishnaji as always. He and I spoke briefly, then Dorothy and I left at 9:30 a.m., and I took a 2 a.m. Lufthansa flight out of Indi

February seventeenth: ‘Krishnaji’s TWA flight 761, arrived in LAX in time. Krishnaji came out quickly, because of the wheelchair, with Asit and luggage. Krishnaji came with me, and Asit went with David and Jack. Krishnaji wanted to go the quiet way by the sea, so again, we came through Malibu Canyon and along the beach with the yellow flowers in bloom.’
Krishnaji talked of his worry that the KFA will wind up, when we older ones are gone, in the hands of the current younger generation, which he does not want, especially as one has a wife becoming a bull in a china shop.’He has the idea of bringing in someone from outside of the US who would “run things( the 'dutch'- way ?) ”’

The eleventh of May. I heard him starting his day at 5:45 a.m. He had slept well in spite of the agitation last night when I returned to Ojai later than Krishnaji expected and he thought of motor accidents. He had made tea for Pupul, but was so upset his hands shook so much he could not carry the teacup. Pupul described finding at Adyar in the Theosophical Society archives, which Radha let her examine, a letter from Nitya to Mrs. Besant describing much more about Krishnaji’s pepper tree events: the "child entity" talking to his mother, describing “they” working on his body, "cleaning his eyes" so that he could “see,” and his telling some entity “beyond the wall” to go away. Krishnaji seemed to understand what this meant, and admonished Pupul and me not to inquire too far into esoteric things because if you 'open the door' to that, you also open the door to “what is beyond the wall.”’

‘After Pupul left he found it extraordinary that the guru of Upadhyaya’s guru, Vishudhananat, apparently had told Mrs. Besant that there was to be a "manifestation of the Maitreya", and later told Upadhyayaji’s guru that Krishnaji was that manifestation.’
Later, after supper, Krishnaji renewed the subject of what was spoken of last night: Upadhyaya’s telling of his guru’s guru’— Kavirath—‘foretelling a “manifestation.”’

The nineteenth. ‘Krishnaji gave this fourth talk in the Oak Grove to a huge crowd. Later he told me once again, “You must outlive me so you can look after me. After that you can follow me.”’ He said I must pay more attention to the way I sit, to my health, etcetera.

**May twenty fourth. ‘At 2:50 a.m. Krishnaji collided with the table near his bed and fell, hitting his left hip and scraping his leg. I heard it and came rushing in, put a dressing on his leg, and he slept again till 6 a.m. He only very rarely got confused when he got up in the night. In other words, he walked to the window instead of the bathroom, where he probably wanted to go

July fourth (Saanen) . ‘Krishnaji slept nine hours. Pupul left in the morning. Krishnaji had supper alone. He is hypersensitive. He said to me, “You’re not paying attention. It is very serious. The body is under attack.” He was very irritable that summer.

The seventeenth of July. ‘At 10:30 a.m. Krishnaji gave his fourth Saanen talk. It began in a remote voice, which deepened and strengthened as he went to greater depth. It was a special talk. “Self-centeredness is corruption,” he said.

July nineteenth. ‘There was the annual general meeting of all the International Committees held again at the Ermitage Hotel in Schönried. Krishnaji asked their opinion on moving the Saanen talks to Brockwood after next year. Then he spoke of Dorothy, her retirement as principal after this year’s talks at Brockwood, and of all she had done.
‘Then as he talked it developed that travel is too tiring, but he cannot stay too long in one place.’ there were all these conflicts in his needs. : ‘He has become hypersensitive. He feels people are impinging upon him, focused on him. If he stays in a place too long, there is a pressure he cannot stand now, and he must talk or the energy will 'go out of him' as he is here to talk. If not, he will weaken and end. “It wants to disappear,” and he needs someone to challenge him. Bohm used to do it and it made Krishnaji go deeper, but Bohm can’t now. Pupul can’t. No one can. No one we know.

July twenty-fifth. ‘Krishnaji held the third question-and-answer meeting and the last ever of the Gatherings in Saanen. There was no goodbye, just a profound silence as he sat for a few moments and then asked, “May I leave?”

July twenty-sixth. ‘There was a long talk with Krishnaji in the morning about all the foundations. “It is watching,” he said. He speaks as if that "something" is deciding what happens to him. “It” will decide when his work is done and hence, by implication, his life. He is disturbed by the divisions in the Indian foundation and their suspicion of the two Western foundations. He is disturbed generally by everything. He didn’t feel like walking but talked to me about KFA. Only the Lilliefelts and I are there, he said.Krishnaji said to me, “You are responsible for Ojai more than the other two.”’

After supper, Krishnaji had me wash and give him my rudraksha and gold chain, and he put it on for the night. Then he said, “Now, every day sit quietly. Don’t lie down but sit upright with a quiet mind. Do it for five minutes, but every day.”  Then, “I’ve never told anybody this.”’

In the afternoon, Krishnaji had me note a memoranda about making Brockwood a 'religious' place. “1: Look at trees, nature. Be aware of everything. 2: Study Krishnaji’s teachings to know (even intellectually) all he has said. 3: Are you really interested in this? If not, do your job well, as well as you can, but ease out.”’
He also had me note things he wants to tell KF India trustees. “1: If anyone gets hurt by what I’m about to say, they haven’t 'listened' to the teachings.”’ ‘“2: Organization has swallowed the teachings. 3: Krishnaji will be ninety-one in a few months and before he dies, he feels it is absolutely necessary to have a religious center. 4: Trust. K. questions whether you trust him. You have often said that K. is influenced, etcetera” ‘“5: Circumstances; pragmatism is not his way of action. 6: We—they. In publishing India considers it is separate from England.”

“You are responsible for Ojai more than the other two, Erna and Theo. You have been closest to Krishnaji. You must be sensitive to that. 'It' will go with K. when he dies, I think. I might have to stay in India or Brockwood or Ojai, but you are responsible for Ojai. You can’t ask for it. Just to be sensitive. Pay attention. Do you understand? This is very serious. You must keep the door open to That.”’

August tenth. In the Tannegg wood he felt well and away from the wrong atmosphere of the house.’ He really hated that ( Grohe's ?) house. : ‘On the way back he said, “The spirit has left Saanen. Probably that is why I feel so uncomfortable. It has moved to Brockwood.” He was more cheerful by evening.

Brockwood is beautiful and quiet. Only Montague, Doris, and Dominic were out on the driveway to meet Krishnaji.
I had trouble with the washing machine, and water came out on the kitchen floor, and in my efforts to mop it up, Krishnaji said I was not paying attention. “You start something and then you do something else. If you don’t learn to change, you may not be able to be with K.”’ ‘Later he had me sit quietly for a while.’

Since the end of Saanen,” something is going on in him. He said that if something has decided everything that happens to K., it is something extraordinary.” I asked if he thinks that all the foretelling that Upadhyaya spoke of is true. He replied, “I am skeptical.” I pointed out that he speaks of it as though it had impressed him. “I don’t know,” he said. The other day he had said in the very firm voice of stating a fact, “I am the World Teacher.”’ ‘Today I mentioned certain changes in him lately, and wondered if he was aware of them.’
‘Krishnaji: “What changes?”’
‘Me: “The hypersensitivity and manner.”’
‘Krishnaji: “What manner?”’
‘Me: “A roughness that is unlike you.”’
‘Krishnaji: “Am I rough to others?”’
‘Me: “No.”’
‘Krishnaji “Just to you?”’
‘Me: “Yes.”’ ‘He said he never did anything he was unaware of. I was "too hard to change", He was relaxed when he said all this, but it will recur whether through my own faults or other factors. Many things seem to be bothering him, notably the KF India situation. He wants the Patwardhans out, the publications done by the KFT, and Vasanta Vihar to be a religious center, which it isn’t with the Patwardhans in charge. He wants to end discord and set all things right “before I’m gathered to my fathers.”

The next day, ‘Krishnaji said, “I have to hold onto it. Death is always so close. “He mustn’t be seriously ill or it would be the end. No accident or it would be nip and tuck.”’
‘Krishnaji: “It is not a physical effort of the brain. It is something else. My life has been planned. It will tell me when to die, say it is over. That will settle my life. But I must be careful that ‘That’ is not interfered with by saying, ‘I will give only two talks.’’”
‘Me: “Do you feel how much more time is given you?”’**

‘Krishnaji: “I think ten years more.”’

M: ‘Me: “You mean talking?”’

‘Krishnaji: “When I don’t talk, it will be over. But I don’t want to strain the body. Also, too long a holiday is bad. I need a certain amount of rest but not more. A quiet place where nobody knows me, but unfortunately people get to know me.”’**

August twenty-eighth. ‘There was a discussion after breakfast with Krishnaji, Dr. Parchure and me about Krishnaji’s program for 1986. He feels he should give two talks on the East Coast of the USA. Boston?
August thirtieth. ‘I awoke wondering how to bring about what Krishnaji has said is necessary: a set of talks on the East Coast in March or early April. He has rejected so-called 'sponsored talks' (i.e., at a university), saying he didn’t want to talk just to students. That means finding a suitable hall in Boston or even Toronto, doing all the promotion, coping with the sound system difficulties, finding a place to stay, etcetera. All with the possible uncertainty of his being up to this after a heavy Indian tour. As it unfolded, the dilemma is, as he put it, the body exists to talk. If it doesn’t talk, the body will fade and that will be the end. But it needs rest too. What is the balance between these? He said speaking only in Ojai was not enough. He thinks little of discussions as people can’t be found to challenge him sufficiently. He seemed to accept the shape we worked out for Brockwood. June: arrive from Ojai, talk to students, and any other discussions. Rest in July till the Brockwood talks, beginning July nineteenth to August third. Go on holiday afterward. Return in September for an earlier school reopening. It was when I then brought up his Ojai winter that the extra talks came into it. Last evening I talked to Parchure, who is uncertain whether he will want such talks when the time comes. And then either he over-talks himself to fulfill the commitment or we have to cancel with all that that entails. Either would be a shock to Krishnaji. There was a heavy feeling all morning, and then after the massage, Parchure came to me and told me that Krishnaji had said he didn’t want the extra talks. It might be good just to rest in Ojai

Krishnaji was tense last evening, irritable just below the surface. He came to my room, sat me down, holding my hand, and said he was looking at his irritability. “I am not talking to you, I am talking to myself…Either I am getting old or have fallen into a habit of picking at you. It is my fault, and it must stop. We’ve been together a long time, and I love you deeply. The body has become hypersensitive. Most of the time I want to "go away", and I mustn’t do that. I’m going to deal with this. It is unforgivable.” Later he said of himself, “He’s had enough. If there were illness or an accident, he would slip out.” And then, “No one in all these years has changed.” And, “I want to give you a new brain. I love you; I will till I die.” Later he called me in: “Maria, I have a feeling it’s all been carefully planned. When the body goes, it may be tomorrow, it may be in ten years, but it is a strange feeling. It has all been completely planned.”’

September second: The K-Rajagopal settlement came for our signatures. Tilly von Egmond, who stayed till it came, signed for Holland. Krishnaji will sign for himself, KFT, and KFI. He had been in bed all day It rained too much for a walk.’
The next day, ‘Krishnaji signed the settlement agreement. Tilly left for Holland, and Dr. Parchure left for India. I mailed the signed settlement papers to Erna and telephoned her that I had. The house is becoming quiet and is almost empty.’
Now, for the next five days I don’t write much, partly because I had a cold, it seems. I don’t go on walks, Krishnaji talks with me about an 'empty mind'. I continue to work at my desk.

Then on September tenth, I asked him if he knew how long he would live. “Do you really know?”’
‘Krishnaji: “I think I do. I have intimations.”’
‘Me: “Are you willing to tell me?”’
‘Krishnaji: “No, that would not be right. I cannot tell anyone.”’
‘Me: “Is one to live thinking that at any moment you might leave?”’
‘Krishnaji: “No, it’s not like that. It won’t be for 'quite a while'....”’

The fourteenth: ‘After breakfast, Krishnaji talked to me about Ojai. There is no one we wholly trust to carry on, and we are all getting old. So what is going to happen there? What is he going to do there for three-and-a-half months? He can’t go on perpetually talking to the Oak Grove staff who don’t understand. He is sure he will settle things in India. Should he then return to Brockwood and stay there until the Ojai talks, even though it is winter? Ojai doesn’t attract people. They come for him. He asked, what if, after the rest, he were to hold open discussions every weekend for anyone who wants to come? He cannot, and will not, do nothing. “I am for it.” He wants to be in our own place, not elsewhere.

September eighteenth. Krishnaji said, “I have complete leisure.” He urged us for a week to write down everything, every thought, etcetera.” He said he used to do this, and Rajagopal tried to find the papers but never did: Krishnaji put them under a stone outside.’ Krishnaji motioned to me that I was putting out my tongue, another lack of awareness of what I am doing. He now calls for deliberate action by "will" as general awareness doesn’t seem sufficient. I feel like a robot at times but realize this is a defense.’ I don’t feel a shrinking from my own, as far as I can tell, but Krishnaji had admonished me over and over, “You must outlive me” to look after him, and each of us urges healthful things on the other.

Today he said to me during the tea in the kitchen before the walk that the unifying factor should be intelligence. “To be free in the real sense, that freedom is intelligence. Intelligence is common to all of us and that will bring us together, not organization. If you see the importance that each one of us is free and that freedom implies love, consideration, attention, cooperation, and compassion—that intelligence is the factor to keep us together.”

“How do you instantly, without time, make the students see that self-interest is the root of conflict?” He was talking about intelligence. If each one of us is intelligent, in the sense that he means (i.e., sensitive, loving, compassionate), then that intelligence, which is neither yours nor mine, is acting, and, therefore, though we are separate physical bodies, we act as one. And can you make the student see this? Not only see it but instantly be transformed? Then he mentioned that out of all the hundreds of students who have passed through Rishi Valley, not one has been different.
After the meeting in the room, I said that if no student in all these years had changed, one may ask what is the point of them? If no one, with all his effort, has changed, how can the rest of us, who apparently haven’t changed, expect to bring this about in others, the students? If you haven’t done it, is there any likelihood that we can change others? “I don’t know,” he replied, but it was said a little jokingly, not wanting to go on with a serious discussion.

September twenty-second: ‘Krishnaji spoke to the whole staff in the sitting room at 11:30 a.m. He went slowly into freedom of mind in the approach to students: freedom from problems, not adding to the students’ problems.
Krishnaji came to me in the early morning while I was doing my exercises and wanted to see what I do and corrected everything. He is a very demanding exercise master.’
September twenty-third. ‘Krishnaji again came in the early morning and taught me exercises and breathing. A hard taskmaster, but very touching

September twenty-fourth, 1985, ‘Krishnaji gave me another lesson in breathing and neck exercises. A severe teacher.’ ‘He also asked me to note, “Independence without freedom is meaningless. If you have freedom you don’t need independence.”
‘I was upset and Krishnaji took that moment to point out that I hadn’t finished the breakfast dishes.’ ‘I felt harried by his constant criticism of me “not paying attention.” And “Will you kindly listen,” followed by a slow reiteration of what you have heard and understood is wearing. He asked a question, but if you answer it too quickly, this happens.’ ‘He seems to need to say all his criticisms at length and get them out of his preoccupation. I was finally able to tell him that Mary Cadogan reports that Harper’s Clayton Carson wants an introduction by David Bohm to round out the next book, which is only two dialogues long, and Krishnaji agreed to it.

September the twenty-sixth. ‘“Did you sleep well? Did I bully you too much? We’ll have a nice quiet day today,” he said.’
‘I replied, “It doesn’t matter. Will I see you again after you go to India?”’
‘Krishnaji: “Why do you ask?”’
‘Me: “I don’t want to be apart from you. You said yesterday you knew when you would die.”’
‘Krishnaji: “Yes, more or less, but it is not right away. If I’m going to die, I’ll telephone you, and you can come. I won’t die all of a sudden. I’m in good health. My heart, everything is all right. It is all decided by someone else. I can’t talk about it. I’m not allowed to. Do you understand? It is much more serious. There are things you don’t know, enormous, and I can’t tell you. It is very hard to find a brain like this, and it must keep on as long as the body can; until something says, ‘enough.’ If I die, you mustn’t mourn. We’ve been very close, but you are beyond all that and you mustn’t mourn as you would have in the past.”’
He talked jokingly about “the committee.” I don’t know, obviously, but my thoughts tend to go toward a group of something because of a strange dream I once had.
I was being judged in the dream by a group of beings, and it wasn’t…it was just a sort of brief dream, but it was very vivid. It woke me up, actually. And what I felt at the time, and, probably still feel was that I was being 'judged' whether I was suitable to be with Krishnaji and do things for him and be useful to them. Because I always felt if there’s something protecting him that thing has to have an instrument or instruments. There has to be some human being who can do things for him. That was my interpretation of the dream. And sometimes he speaks, as in this, “it is serious, and he can’t talk about it". And other times when he uses the word “Committee,” it’s sort of joking.

Before supper, Krishnaji had me sit quietly, with him touching the back of my head. “I am trying to reach your brain but you keep slipping back. You have a habit of eating too fast. Pay attention.”’
‘Krishnaji supervised my breathing and other exercises again
‘At 11:30 Krishnaji spoke to the school. “Why do we need to study academics? What should we learn beyond that?”

These seem to be things that he said to me and I wrote down on little pieces of paper.
 ‘One: “To think simply and clearly.” Two: “To clear the brain of agreement and disagreement.”’ And then it says, ‘“Simplicity.”’ Then, in the same writing, so I guess it’s at the same time, is: ‘One: “Deliberation, to deliberate.” Two: “Decision.” Three: “Execution.”…“No political activity. Political equals to power seeking. No maneuvering for better power or salary. There is no climbing to higher positions or authority, for Brockwood represents not authority but the teachings. The 'captain' of the team could be, can be, and should be replaced if he is not moving in the right direction.”

“Samadhi—thought when necessary operates, otherwise the brain is quiet. "K—quiet" equals no association, recognition, reaction, planning, no time in sense of remembering. Maybe I may change it. It is a state that is always deep but has no depth.
‘“There are two kinds of energies in those who are committed and those who are not committed and are therefore free. The committed—missionaries, priests, monks—their energy becomes committed and therefore is limited.”’

This is about India: ‘Before he dies, he feels it absolutely necessary to have a religious center. The trust. Krishnaji questions whether you trust him. You have often said Krishnaji is influenced…’ This is what he’s going to say to them.

The third of October. ‘Krishnaji got a little more rest. When I brought in his breakfast, he said he had just had a remarkable meditation. Perhaps that will wipe away some of the sense of problems that have harassed him. The soft 'Indian summer' has fled, and a strong wind is flailing the trees, rushing in from the Channel.
‘ After supper Krishnaji again said to me in a most serious voice, “Will you listen? I am watching for you, but you must pay attention on the walk. You are not walking on the sides of the road.”’ ‘(my shoes had picked up a lot of dirt).’ Then, ‘“You must watch everything you do.” It is at the end of the day when he is most tired that the least thing seems impossible to him. Things seem black and white. The least thing is irritating, seen as part of larger wrong things.

The next day, ‘There was rain in the morning, but Dr. Rahula and friends came to lunch. At 4 p.m. Krishnaji gave an interview to a Lella Russell Smith for articles in the Friends Journal, a national Quaker magazine in the United States. Then tea and walk.’
It was a bright beautiful afternoon with cool air and a light breeze. Krishnaji had turned on the lights when I brought his supper tray and said he wasn’t tired. After supper he said to me, "as long as we live together he will point out things to me. After that, it is up to me".

Krishnaji asked us how to bring about trust in the Indian Foundation. He said they do not trust each other or him, and he has been unable to change this. He spoke again about the teachings being put second to structure in Ojai, India, everywhere. I said that was an unfair indictment, and it was a damning thing for anyone who has been close to Krishnaji to put the teaching second to organization. Krishnaji said he was not making an indictment. I say he may not have meant it to be, but to me it would be a shocking fact or act to put the teachings second to anything. I said some people (by implication Ojai) had situational trouble, which they had to cope with, but it didn’t mean they felt the teachings were secondary.

The ninth of October: ‘Krishnaji, in the elegance of one of his blue suits, and I, in my tweed coat that is descended from an old favorite brown one, went to London on a bright autumn morning and on the 10:23 a.m. train. Both Mary and Joe met us at Waterloo and took us to Huntsman for Krishnaji’s fitting. Then Mary came with Krishnaji and me to Fortnum’s for a leisurely lunch. We stopped at Hatchards for books and took a taxi to Waterloo. A simple day in the warm, gentle mold of so many almost identical ones. I rode down White Hall with Krishnaji holding my hand in a haze of happiness. The clear country air was part of it when we came home,
‘At 4 p.m. Mrs. Barbara Jackson brought the venerable Ananda Maitreya and two “attendant monks” to see Krishnaji. They brought a nice plant offering, too, appreciated more by me.’ ‘It seems the venerable Ananda Maitreya has also arrived at ninety years and seemed to wish to share this eminence. I provided tea. Krishnaji was charming and joking, but impaled the venerable with the question, “What did the Buddha really say?”’ ‘He went on to enlarge on the fact that no one really knows. The venerable giggled a bit’ ‘but gave nothing much in return.’ ‘The attendant, Mrs. Jackson, seemed to enjoy this. “He needs to be talked to this way,” she said.

This post was last updated by John Raica Fri, 25 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sun, 23 Jul 2017 #275
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

The K Story ends here...

(Last part of MZ's Memoirs )

October fifteenth, 1985, ‘Krishnaji came into the kitchen for tea and talked to me about "trust". Are there a few we trust to carry on the work and to protect the teachings? He spoke of there being virtually nobody in Ojai except the Lilliefelts and me. India is pulling away and is still a concern to him. He trusted Mrs. Besant.
He never said, “I trust Amma,” but from the way he spoke of her; it was with veneration and affection, and in that there was obviously trust. Even if she would get gaga—which she did later on. He also talked about what I should do after he was gone, and it was to guard the teachings. And I’ve said this to various trustees in both Foundations I’ve been in. I’ve said this is what I feel my function is because this is what he told me he wanted.

October eighteenth. Krishnaji, he, and I made an audiotape about what Pandit Jagannath Upadhyaya had told him about the ancient text that the Pandit had been told by his teacher to find and which, after decades, he found, foretelling a World Teacher manifestation. After Krishnaji described it, he said, “I could probably investigate this, but I don’t want to. It wouldn’t be right.”

The nineteenth of October there was a videotaped discussion with Krishnaji, and me on what is the ground of a religious place, of something sacred in a center or a school. He finally said, “It should be a religious center. A center where people feel there is something not 'cooked up', not imaginative, not some kind of ‘holy’ atmosphere; a religious center, not in the orthodox sense of that word; a center where a "flame" is living, not the ashes of it. If a flame is alive, and if you come to that house, you might take that flame with you; or you might 'light your candle' and be the most extraordinary human being, not broken up; a person who is really whole, has no shadow of sorrow, pain, and all that kind of thing. So that to me is a "religious center".”

October twenty-second. ‘In the early morning, when I went in to see Krishnaji, he asked me to lie down quietly, and I did for a while. When I got up, he said, “I’m glad you lay down. It calms the body.”’ I just lay there, and the 'presence' seemed to do it.
‘When he falls asleep during the day, what he calls “shouting” comes upon him. He cries out, and it wakes him with a start. He had been doing that, and apparently my lying quietly calmed and quieted him. But he was tired.’

Krishnaji didn’t want any book at the airport, they are due to land in Delhi in the morning at 10 a.m. This flight has a single seat, the one Krishnaji likes on the right side forward. It is a nonstop flight. ‘The first letter from Krishnaji arrived, written October twenty-eighth to November eleventh in Delhi, Benares, and another letter from Dr. Parchure reassuring me about Krishnaji’s health.
On the twenty-fifth, Krishnaji went back to Delhi.

December twenty-seventh. ‘I got a letter from Dr.Parchure about Krishnaji’s health written on December eleventh.’
Krishnaji wants to give two Madras talks (today and tomorrow) and one question-answer and two days of KFI trustee meetings.’ And then it says: ‘Krishnaji gave his first Madras talk on this date.’
He is giving three talks in Madras, then attending KFI trustee meetings, then he leaves. Bombay is canceled.

On the first of January, 1986. I am in Ojai, and Krishnaji is still in India.

January tenth: ‘I made final preparations of the house for Krishnaji’s arrival tomorrow. Krishnaji’s flight from Singapore and Tokyo arrived at 9:30 a.m. He came right out in a wheelchair looking very frail and very, very thin. As soon as we were alone in the car he told me that for two to three days I must not leave him, even for a moment,  “Or he may 'slip away'.” He told me that in India he had said to himself, “I mustn’t be ill because then I wouldn’t see you again,” and “‘It’ doesn’t want to inhabit a sick body, one that couldn’t function. We must not have an accident because if I were hurt that would be the end.” Later he said to me, “While I am here I want to share my meditation with you. I’ve never said that to anyone”…“I came back to see you and to die. If I die, it’s alright. If I live, it’s alright. But one must not invite death, and I don’t. I came back to be taken care of by you.” I stayed with him constantly, sleeping on cushions on the floor by his bed. In the evening, his fever was 100.9. He slept fairly well that first night. But his fever went to 101.6, so Dr. Parchure gave him aspirin and it dropped to 98 by evening. He remained in bed.

Thirteenth January: I drove to Santa Paula where Dr. Deutsch examined Krishnaji at 11 a.m. He found Krishnaji’s prostate to be soft and thinks that’s a possible site of the infection behind Krishnaji’s fever. Krishnaji’s blood sugar count is 243. He doubled the dose of Rastinon to bring it down, and prescribed Restoril instead of Halcion for sleep. We went to Santa Paula hospital for blood chemistry, etcetera, and were home by 1:30 p.m. for lunch. Krishnaji had some energy for the trip and then slept all afternoon.’

January fourteen: ‘Krishnaji was weak and drowsy, with a fever of 101.4. I stayed by his bed constantly, as I have right along, and it was a difficult night, with him needing to get up many times.’
Wednesday the fifteenth. Dr. Deutsch wants a sonogram of Krishnaji’s liver, gallbladder, and pancreas.

The seventeenth: ‘Dr. Deutsch wants a sonogram done in the Ojai hospital Monday. I stayed close to him. “I need protection,” he said.’
The twentieth of January: ‘Krishnaji had a sonogram in the Ojai hospital. Dr. P. Miller reported to Dr. Deutsch a 'mass' in Krishnaji’s liver. Dr. Deutsch says he cannot tell if the 'mass' is malignant or benign and wants a CT scan on Wednesday, which should tell.’
The twenty-first of January: ‘Krishnaji finds the food uneatable and blames it on Michael’s cooking, but it isn’t that.’ Michael was cooking so delicately, I remember. The new medical scale I purchased ‘says Krishnaji’s weight is ninety-four pounds. Krishnaji got up and looked at the new rose garden. Then he walked with Dr. Parchure to the end of the drive, and Krishnaji wanted to go on. So they went up McAndrew and into Arya Vihara, resting on the way. Then across the new stones in the drain are of the orchard and to the pepper tree. Krishnaji rested, and then he entered the house.

January twenty-two. ‘Krishnaji began to have pain across his upper abdomen, which woke him at 2 a.m., but though I asked, he denied it till 4 a.m., when he accepted a Tylenol. His temperature at 5:30 a.m. was 98. At 7:45 a.m. another Tylenol, but he still had no relief. Krishnaji used to say to me when I first was with him to never let him go into a hospital. He always said, “I’d rather die at home,” was the way he put it.
At the Santa Paula Community Hospital, Krishnaji was put into intensive care. He was given Demerol and an IV. X-ray and blood chemistry checks begun. Dr. Deutsch came to meet him. The X-rays showed a bowel obstruction. Krishnaji agreed to a tube through his nose into the abdomen to pump out the fluid and relieve the pressure. Rocephin and high alimentation were given intravenously. Krishnaji is severely undernourished. I spent the night on a reclining chair by his bed.’

I telephoned Vanda in Florence to let her know Krishnaji was sick and in hospital.’ I thought she should know and she might want to come. I thought she would come, but she didn’t do that.
‘Late in the afternoon, Parchure had told Krishnaji that he might die. I had wanted to wait till the CT scan on Monday, but Parchure said he had long ago promised to tell Krishnaji if medically he, Parchure, saw a danger of death. When I came in after Parchure told him that, Krishnaji said to me, “It seems I’m going to die,” as though he had not expected it so soon but accepted the fact.’. When Parchure was telling him this, Krishnaji kept saying “What? What? What?” in a louder-than-usual voice, as though he was astonished to be hearing this. But he seemed to be most surprised because “the other” hadn’t gone.

. January twenty-fourth. Parchure, told me in the car that he had noticed jaundice beginning in Krishnaji and feared a hepatitic coma.
‘I telephoned Vanda and Mary Lutyens and said it was uncertain how long Krishnaji could live. The latter is coming when she can get a visa. I told Vanda the uncertainty of how long Krishnaji might live, but Krishnaji seemed better by evening.

The twenty-sixth of January. ‘I spent the night with Krishnaji in the hospital. He had many awakenings but spoke of meditation having been present. I barely dozed, waiting to help him, watching the pattern, like Sanskrit, of his heartbeat on the monitor. Life becomes that beat. The rise and fall of his breathing. He is alive and so all the ugliness, the violence, the wretchedness of the world seems held at bay by that small body and its vastness of spirit. He is, as always, infinitely beautiful. He turned his head this morning and looked out the window where he could just see the hills, and his face seemed suddenly thirty years old. Dr. Deutsch found him well this morning. The jaundice is gone and he has gained two-and-a-half pounds on the IV hyperalimentation.

Yesterday, Krishnaji said almost to himself, “What have I done wrong?…I’ve tried to take care of the body,”
Krishnaji said to me, “I want to tell you something. It is hard to find words. You must have an insight into it. I will die, and I want to leave you something. In India they are too quick to think they understand these things. I am skeptical. One must be. But Americans are immature. You must just listen without trying to understand. I feel it is something more vast than one can ever put into words.”’

‘Krishnaji had a CT scan that showed a three-inch mass in his liver but cannot show if it is malignant. Dr. Deutsch wants to do a liver biopsy tomorrow. Krishnaji is still running a fever and is on antibiotics and hyperalimentation. Parchure stayed in the hospital with Krishnaji. I slept at home.’
The twenty-eighth of January. Krishnaji is feeling stronger, and he talked to me most of the morning about how I should live when he is gone. He says he will probably live until the end of February. “You must not grieve as you did before. You must be strong. You have a lot of work to do. You reflect me.

I stayed with him till late, but he insisted I sleep at home. “It is alright. The pain pushed ‘it' (‘the other’) away but ‘it’ wants to come back. It is beginning to come back.” I said to him, “You told me this morning do not let him slip away.” Krishnaji replied, “Nothing will happen tonight. I know what I’m talking about. You must rest. When I’m home, you will have a lot to do. I don’t know why ‘it’ wants to come back.”’
‘In the morning he had also said, “It is strange: ‘the other’ doesn’t want to 'let go' of the body. The last two nights ‘the other’ has taken control.” And then he said to me, “I want you to live as when I was your companion. Go to Brockwood. The West Wing is yours. I have said this before.” And in the afternoon, he said, “I wonder why ‘the other’ is not finished with the body.” And then, with humor, he said, “Who was it that said, ‘I cannot imagine a world without me?’” …

January twenty-ninth. ‘Krishnaji had a restless night. Dr. Deutsch gave him a steroid for strength and talked to him about what he, Krishnaji, wanted. It was a bad day. Pain came again. Krishnaji asked, “Can I last till they come?” meaning the three he has sent for from India, Dr. Krishna, Radhika, and Maheshji. In the evening, Dr. Deutsch persuaded him to try a catheter and then he slept undisturbed all night. Deutsch said that…some test C19 The normal reading of this test is 0 to 40. Krishnaji’s is 105,000. That is the final piece of knowledge. Krishnaji will go home tomorrow. He said to me, “There is so much love and so much pain in the air.”’ That was the deciding day. That was the end of the hospital. Nothing could be done. He could go home.

January thirtieth. Krishnaji came home in an ambulance through heavy rain. “I feel better here,” he said when he was in his room again. And soon he began to read in his Golden Treasury. And then Paul Theroux, The Consul File.’
‘He wanted something to eat, and I brought him some clear soup and a little homemade ice cream. Later he had tea and asked for a sandwich, “with a little green,”  meaning watercress and “something tasty,” tomatoes. But it was a mistake and later there were gas pains. He asked too for music, “something gay.” Pavarotti singing Neapolitan songs was chosen, and for a bewildering time the house rang with Napoli.
In the afternoon, he talked a little about a responsible group to hold the three Foundations together and see to the teachings. Later, there was pain again in his stomach. It was a hard night until 2:30 a.m., when he slept. He had said to me, “Don’t be unhappy” and “Maria, will it be this all night? I want to go.”’

January thirty-first. ‘Krishnaji was in almost a stupor when Dr. Deutsch telephoned. He thought it was the effect of the morphine and came at 2:30 p.m. to see Krishnaji and counteract the morphine. Krishnaji was better. Dorothy, Jane Hammond, Mary, and Joe arrived from London.

The first of February. ‘Krishnaji was weak, sleeping most of the morning. He barely spoke when Pupul, Radhika, Asit, and Dr. Krishna came in briefly in the morning. But he was free of pain and very lucid at 2 p.m. when Deutsch came, and Krishnaji then saw Radhika and Dr. Krishna, two of the four he had summoned. Deutsch answered Asit’s questions. All are in agreement for giving whatever Krishnaji wants to help the pain and sleep. In the evening Krishnaji slept without morphine or sleep medicine.

The second of February. ‘Krishnaji slept without morphine or sleep tablets and was alert and without pain all day. He talked to me about being strong when he is gone; that I reflect him; and that I must live the way that I have lived with him. Deutsch came to see him in the morning, and Pupul came to meet Dr. Deutsch. Krishnaji saw, in the course of the day, Pupul, Mary Links, Radhika, Dr. Krishnaji, Asit, Mary Cadogan, Erna, Dorothy, and Jane Hammond.’

February third , 1986. ‘Krishnaji was without pain. He held a meeting on publication matters with representatives of all three Foundations. Only England is to correct his works. Pupul was not there, but her certain opposition was expressed. Krishnaji has energy but wants “to go.” He said he had a marvelous meditation in the night. In the afternoon, in a wheelchair, we took him outside, down the path to the pepper tree, where he could see the hills. He asked to be alone there and sat motionless and silent and then asked to return indoors.

The fifth of February. ‘In the morning Krishnaji spoke to a group: Pupul, Radhika, Asit, Krishna, Maheshji (just arrived), Dr. Parchure, Mary L., Mary C., Jane Hammond, Erna, Theo, Mark Lee, and David Moody. “As long as the body lives, I am still the Teacher.” He wept. In the afternoon, he spoke alone with Dr. Krishna and Maheshji and recorded his wish that no one be president or secretary of the Foundations who is not doing that primarily—not people who have other jobs.

February sixth. ‘Krishnaji slept through the night but had nine awakenings during the evening. He talked to me in the early morning, “Who are your friends? I want you to be looked after when I’m gone. K has protected you, but he can’t when he’s gone. I love you and want you to be protected. You must be careful. You must drive as if I was sitting beside you. Who will go to Huntsman with you?” ‘“Will you and Mary lunch at Fortnum’s? I have been your companion. We’ve done things together. I want you to be looked after. You must go to Paris, the Dordogne, on holiday to Switzerland. You must use the money in the Teacher’s Trust, it is yours. I give it to you to use as you choose. Have you enough money? You mustn’t go to India anymore. India is bad for you. I love you, and K loves you. That is why I’m telling you this.”
‘His voice was high, and he cried when he said some of these things. I couldn’t control a rain in myself. A little later he saw Mary and Joe alone and apparently asked them to look after me. Pupul and Maheshji sat in the living room, she waiting to see Krishnaji. But after his bath, he wanted me to clean his hair with a hot washrag, dry it, massage in it the Biokosma lotion’—that’s his hair tonic. ‘which he rubbed in himself. He is caring for his hair as he always has, but he said, “I’m becoming a zombie, having to let people do all these things for me.”’

‘Pupul had gone when all this was done. I am sitting by his bedside. It is around noon, and he sleeps. Earlier he spoke of walking such a short time ago in Madras. ‘I like to see air,’ he said. I asked or said that perhaps one of these days we might be able to drive to the beach in the car early in the morning. He said, “I have been watching the dawn, a new day beginning. It is good to watch the dawn.”
‘Later, lying on his side, looking out at the sunlight and wind in the trees, he said, “What a beautiful day.” The large eyes seemed all-seeing as always for a few minutes then folded, with the long dark lashes covering them.”’ He had extraordinary eyelashes, and I go on about it because I once asked him, “Krishnaji, don’t you need dark glasses?” And he said “No.” He said, “I can’t wear them because my eyelashes are too long.”
3 p.m. Mary and Joe have just come to say goodbye.’ I was writing while sitting with him. ‘They fly back to London tonight. Krishnaji’s nephew, Narayan’s brother, Krishna’—that’s the name of Narayan’s brother—‘came to see him briefly. Then around 6 p.m., unexpectedly, Gary Deutsch came soon after Krishnaji had wanted to walk to the living room but had been too weak, so we took him on that wheelchair. He sat by the fire in the living room for about forty-five minutes. Gary found him weaker and ordered full Surex for sleep instead of a half-dose. He may try an internal catheter on Saturday.’ I don’t seem to have written it here, but when Mary and Joe said goodbye and went to the car and I went with them to wave them goodbye—when I came back, Krishnaji wanted to know what kind of a car it was.

February seventh. ‘Krishnaji slept with a full Surex pill and only three awakenings in the night. He watched the light on the hills. He said, “A fresh new morning. I looked for the old brain.”’
‘Then I said, “Did you find it?”’
‘He replied, “Only a little.”’
‘Me: “Did meditation come in the night?”’
‘He shook his head. “The sleep was too deep,” he said. Later he said, “You have been very sweet to me. You are the only person very close to me. You must be with me till the very last, till they put the body in the incinerator, with me till the end of my life.”
His voice was weak.

Asit, Dr. Krishna, Jane, and Dorothy are leaving today. They came to say goodbye. Krishnaji has begun to have pain. Morphine relieved it. He spoke on the cassette about the energy and intelligence that has gone through the body for seventy years.’ That was that day. ‘He was too weak to get up in the afternoon.’
The eighth. ‘Krishnaji at 4:30 a.m. told me I must walk, so I went around the block at 6:30 a.m. with Erna. Dr. Deutsch came to see Krishnaji, who talked to him at some length, “as a friend, not a doctor.” Higher alimentation with a pump machine was started. Krishnaji saw Sarjit Siddoo briefly, Pupul, and Radhika. Pupul is not leaving tomorrow but is moving to Grohe’s. Krishnaji woke up five times in the night.

February ninth. ‘Krishnaji saw briefly Mary Cadogan, then Pupul, Radhika, and Maheshji. Radhika later left to see her daughter, Sunanda. Gary Deutsch came around lunchtime. He gave Krishnaji a more permanent catheter, and Krishnaji then wanted to go in the living room, so we brought him in that little contraption, his wheelchair.

The tenth. ‘Krishnaji slept better with the catheter. He sent me on an early morning walk. Pupul, now staying at the Grohe’s, came with Maheshji. Krishnaji was in the living room on the sofa. She stayed briefly. Krishnaji was able to stand and to get in and out of the wheelchair. He spent the whole day in the living room. At 10 p.m. he had pain and morphine.’
The eleventh. ‘Krishnaji slept but restlessly. After a bath, I washed his hair in bed then he wanted to go into the living room, where he stayed all day. Pupul and the Grohes came by briefly. Also Maheshji. Lailee telephoned. I rang Vanda. Dr. Deutsch came in the afternoon and stayed a long time and took blood samples. Krishnaji had only one morphine in the night at 7 p.m.’

February twelfth. ‘Last night Krishnaji had pain. At 7 p.m. he took morphine, which quieted it, and he slept the rest of the night. The nurse, Patrick Linville, said he was amazed at Krishnaji’s strength in being able to stand for moments. This morning Krishnaji was clear, maybe because of no Surex sleeping pill. He asked me to file his nails. He did his teeth and face. He wanted to be in the living room again, so I moved him in there, but within minutes his stomach bothered him and he had to come back to bed.His fever went to 103, but Tylenol brought it down. By phone, Deutsch ordered a resumption of Rocephin, the antibiotic
Krishnaji was too weak to see Pupul when she came from Grohe’s with Maheshji. Later Krishnaji told me to tell her, “Don’t wait around, he has gone for a walk in the hills.”

‘Gary Deutsch came in the afternoon. Krishnaji had said half an hour earlier to me, “I want to go. I want to die.” And when I could only say, “I know, I know,” he said, “You say you know, but you don’t do anything.”’ I didn’t know what he meant by that. ‘If he gets antibiotics now, it only prolongs his time a little until the next fall in the state of his body. I suggested Deutsch talk to Krishnaji, who was quite lucid, and ask him his wishes. This he did.’ ‘Deutsch came back and said that Krishnaji had understood. He doesn’t want to go on as he is and said, “Do what you think is right.” So what seems right to us was not to bring all extreme ways of medicine to prolong his life, with death inevitable, but to continue the IV feeding, relieve pain, fever, nausea; then the natural death that Krishnaji had spoken of earlier will come about on its own time. Krishnaji seemed satisfied when told this. I sat holding his hand a long time, and he had me press my hand on his stomach in the evening.’ He felt it relieved the pain somehow.

‘He asked what was going on in the world, “What is the gossip?” and we turned on the evening news with Dan Rather. Sharansky has been freed by the Soviets and was tumultuously welcomed in Israel. “The Soviets are cruel people,” said Krishnaji. Deutsch had said the results of the blood tests yesterday do not show much difference from when he was in the hospital.

The thirteenth. Krishnaji had a second morphine around 11 p.m. last night, but it failed to help with sleep, and the nurse gave him Surex at 1 a.m. I got up soon after 3:30 a.m.,, and I carried him in a hammock of sheets to the couch in front of the living room fire.

Maheshji, Pupul, and the Grohes came briefly to see him. Krishnaji told Pupul he was sorry he didn’t see her yesterday. “He was off in the hills all day.” He looked all beauty lying there. He had me read to him from the Paul Theroux’s story. but then switched to the newspapers. He had a fit of shivering, then fever. Parchure massaged him, and he fell asleep. In the living room he had suddenly said, “Do you remember the place in Holland? The ducks. How each day there were fewer of the baby ducks.”’ ‘He was thinking of the place where we used to walk near the thatched farmhouse in 1967. A very happy time. Later he said, “I am very fortunate.” Yesterday he asked me obliquely—the nurse was present—“I suppose you haven’t heard from 'that person'. Meaning Rajagopal. We never heard one word from those people.

February fourteenth: ‘Krishnaji slept without pill or morphine till 2 a.m., but at 4 a.m. the pain returned. A new nurse, gave morphine. In the ten minutes it took to work, he had me press on his stomach. “Too good to be true. Sorrow, I thought I’d lost you.”
The high voice groaned with pain and the low voice came in, “Don’t make such a fuss about it.” At 4:20 a.m., he said the pain was gone and I must go to sleep another two hours.’ At one point, when he had me press on his stomach, I must have said, “Can’t you heal yourself?” you know, the pain. And he said, “Put your hand, and I’ll put my hand on your hand,” so mine gave the pressure, and his hand would do whatever it did. Of course, it didn’t work for the pain. ‘We took him again in a hammock of sheets to the living room, where the fire burned beautifully and outside the heavy rain fell. We were having a big, big storm, and I was afraid we would lose electricity, so I have rented generators and rigged them so that if there was a power failure he would still have light and warmth in his room, and the infusion pump to his vein will carry on.

We had carried him back to bed when Gary Deutsch came in to see how he was and to bring him a bunch of Clint Eastwood films he had taped. He ordered light morphine, one milligram, to be given routinely while Krishnaji is in pain because Krishnaji admitted to me this morning that the pain doesn’t come all at once but builds up before he lets us know it is there. If this amount is insufficient and pain occurs, more can be given. He also changed the sleeping prescription from Surex to Restoril. This Krishnaji took at 8 p.m.’

The fifteenth. ‘Krishnaji slept through the stormy night.
Pupul and Asit came in the morning while Gary Deutsch was here. Deutsch came with slides of Yosemite for Krishnaji to look at. For a while he did but fell asleep, and Deutsch left, not before talking to Pupul, Asit, Erna, and Theo. Pupul leaves tomorrow morning. She saw Krishnaji in the afternoon, and so did Radhika, who had arrived this morning from Philadelphia. She, too, leaves tomorrow for India. Asit asked me if it was all right for him to stay for as long as Krishnaji lives. He will stay at Grohe’s. He said he felt he could no more leave then if his father were dying. I said of course; he should stay if he wished and is welcome to come to the house whenever he likes. Also he can use the gray car.

Krishnaji asked me to wash his hair; clean it with a hot towel—a hot washrag, brush it, and in the evening massage almond oil into his scalp. This evening I stood doing this, behind the top of the bed, holding in my hand, this warm, beautiful head that holds the brain that is the light of this world. It is there, alive, marvelous, beyond any knowing. The source of his teaching is an endless giving. My hands, when he said the massage was enough, held the scent of his aliveness, a perfume. The last time Deutsch was here, that they were talking alone and when we came in, Krishnaji was telling him about knowledge, intelligence, compassion, and what 'love' is. His voice was rather high, and he paused with the effort. But he kept on. It was his last teaching.’ That’s the end of the big book. And as Dr. Deutsch had said, he felt he was Krishnaji’s last pupil.

‘Krishnaji didn’t want to go to the living room. He remained in bed and watched part of an Eastwood movie brought by Gary Deutsch but was tired and stopped it and slept by 8.’
February sixteenth: ‘Krishnaji woke at 3 a.m. with pain in the abdomen. Morphine was changed to a drip. In spite of the morphine, Krishnaji was clear. Pupul came to say goodbye before lunch and left after for a flight to London. Radhika had left earlier in the morning. Deutsch thought there was a hemorrhage in the liver that was causing the pain. Restoril for sleep was taken at 7 p.m. The pain lessened, and Krishnaji slept, but it became a coma. Deutsch came at 11 p.m. and Krishnaji ‘s breathing…he was breathing only three times a minute.

February seventeenth: Krishnaji’s heart stopped beating at ten minutes past midnight. We bathed his body, wrapped it in a cadi silk and an Italian embroidered linen sheet. He lay on his own bed which was in his sitting room till 8 a.m. when I rode beside him to the crematorium in Ventura.’

This post was last updated by John Raica Fri, 25 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 29 Aug 2017 #276
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

Recycling a few interesting anecdotes on K as related by P Krishna in his recent book A Jewel Offered on a Silver Platter

In the early 80's K entered the TS campus at Adyar for the first time after 48 years . He was walking with Radha Burnier by the Garden of Rememberance, where the ashes of many TS leaders are buried. At the entrance to the garden K stopped and said : Something has been altered here !
So Radhaji went to John Coates who was the president at that time, who said that there was an architect who came from Europe and wanted to improve the setting of the garden When he tried to move one of the pillars he found a box containing several jewels kept inside the pillar. Later K said: That's it, those jewels were 'magnetised' by me and Amma for the protection of the TS and placed there. They should never have been removed.

Radhaji offered to bring them to K to magnetise them again. K said, No, they are useless now. But you can bring a new set of jewels and I will magnetise them again and we should place them else where in the TS building and they will protect. So this was done

Narayan recollected that once K came to the Rishi Valley campus , walked around it and said. Narayan, I'm not getting the right vibration from that hill. Tell me what is wrong in Rishi Valley ?
Narayan said ' Sir, the teachers are divided in two groups and are 'fighting' with each other. That's it ! Said K

In 1948 Achyut Patwardhan was alone with K in a cottage in the Himalayas ; One day, K told him
Achyut, your entire life lies before me like an open book : the past, the present and the future ! Tell me, how did you happen to kill someone when you were 22 ? Achyut said, Yes it is true, I was driving a car when suddenly a villager came in front of it and I could not stop before the car hit him We took him to the hospital but could not save him. But nobody knows this, so, how did you know ?. K smiled and replied : It is all written some place !

One day K was going with Radha Burnier in her car when he suddenly asked her : ' Do you believe in Masters, Radhaji ? 'She said: yes
He replied : No, not like this You know what it meant to Amma ? She would give her life for it !
Knowing that, , now tell me, do you believe in the (existence of?) Masters ?
'Yes' said Radha emphatically. K held her hand and said 'Good !'

A question was put to K in 1926 : Q : Sir, is reincarnation a fact ?
K : Sir, reincarnation happens to be a fact for me, as I remember certain things, but I do not want you to 'believe' in it !

One day K said : 'You know, sir, all the sorrow in the world is because we have never loved from the bottom of out heart !'

Mr Grohe and his wife bought a house in Ojai and he told K : ' I spent a lot of money buying this wonderful house here , but we are not able to get (a quiet) sleep in it.
K said : You take me there and I will 'set it right' so that you will be able to sleep' K went in the room and 'did someting' to it . Next day he asked Friederich : Were you able to sleep 
Yes, sir, but I wonder if it's not someting up here (in my head) . K said : 'Me too, sir' !

At a Foundation meeting in '86 someone started asking K a question with ' Sir, when you walked out of the TS...' K suddenly interrupted him :
' Just a minute, Sir, let me make it very clear : I never 'walked out' of the TS. They did not want me there'

In another KFI meeting in Jan 86 K was talking to the trustees about Creation :
' Sir, it all started from the tiniest of points. All this which we see around came from there'

One day K was asked at the end of a dialogue : ' Sir, don't you think all these dialogues tend to become just an intellectual activity ?
K answered ' Where is even the intellect, sir ? It is not a first rate intellect !'

When once asked why is it so difficult to understand his teaching he replied :

' The teachings are not 'out there' in a book. You are not (supposed to) understand the teachings ; you are to understand yourself. The teachings are only a means of explaining the necessity of understanding ourselves. What the speaker says acts as a mirror in which you can look at yourself. When you look at yourself in that 'mirror', the mirror will not be important. You will be able to throw it away'

Once K was asked to summarise his entire teaching in one sentence. He said : ' Attempt, without effort, to live with death in timeless silence'****

One day K was asked : Sir , I've read in your biographies that you were very shy as a young man ; how did you overcome it ? He replied : I have not overcome it, sir, I am still shy !

Once K was invited to witness a play staged by the students from Rajghat. K told PK in private:
'They have invited me to see the play this evening. You know how I hate these ( festive) things, but I will go !'

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Tue, 29 Aug 2017 #277
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

Professor Krishna's interview with Achyut Patwardhan in March 1988 :

Q : Why do you think K left the TS ?

AP : The TS provided a very good intellectual perspective for preparing the mind for understanding him, but the idea of the World Teacher was personalised by saying that K is going to be this world teacher. This created a climate of (strong) belief and disbelief and I shall believe and all that. It had nothing to do with (self-) understanding but it was dependent upon the revelations brought by Annie Besant. The matter became further complicated when various cults grew up of people who were near to AB and those close to K and by the hierarchical order of spiritual progress. So an atmosphere was created in which faith had submerged reason. This reached a point of absurdity when AB anounced that the World Teacher had chosen certain persons to be his closest disciples and the word 'Apostles' was used and they were claimed to be 'Arhats' . Also this atmosphere of a 'chosen few' was not conducive to the freedom K was talking. So the gulf was widening and it seems that even Leadbeter did not coroborate what she said, by saying that some of the named 'arhats' were not even 'initiates'. But K questioned this whole edifice of faith which has begun to dominate the TS and he just blew it by a breath and it collapsed like a castle of cards. So the break from TS was inevitable and I think it was good that K freed himself of it.

Q : What was the impact of his decision on AB ?

AP : She must have been dismayed. She fell ill but she was willing to go with him to whatever extent it was possible- she even closed down the Esoteric Section. And when she opened it again it was clear that it was for those who could not go along with K the whole way and she felt she could not leave them in the lurch

Q : What do you think of Leadbeter's prediction that K would be the manifestation of a divine entity called Maitreya ? Or was K an ordinary being like us ?

AP : There's no doubt in my mind that Leadbeter had an extraordinary moment of clairvoyant insight when he discovered the young boy and said 'I have not met another human being with so little ego dominating as in him'. When they named it as Maitreya it was because the TS had its own mythology where a big place is assigned to Lord Maitreya. It is not possible for us to verify this but undoubtly K was a 'channel' through which a tremendous Cosmic Energy – which is also Insight and Compassion- flowed throughout his life.

Q : But was he before his mystical 'experience' in 1922 an ordinary being with an ego, with self interest, attachments, sorrow and conflict- and then moved out of that or he was out of it right from the beginning ?

AP : I think that K was undoubtly an extraordinary human being and he must have had moments of ordinariness and moments of transcendence. But the important thing is that his body was capable of receiving and holding such a force which any normal being would not be capable of holding. As he himself said, the brain had to be 'prepared for it' and he had to pass through a period of novitiate in which he ( they?) prepared the body to be strong enough to sustain this. It required extraordinary purity and goodness and I think he had both these qualities in abundant measure. Whether you differentiate that Cosmic Energy from the body is not important because there is such a thing as the 'body elemental' which does its normal operations K put in a more direct way : When this is , 'That' is not' So he had moments of total subsidience of his own consciousness as a separate individual and therefore his teaching is the manifestation of an Energy which is both Light and Wisdom.

Q : But my question is : If he he was in a sense a 'divine' being , why did he tell us that everybody can make the transformation in consciousness that he was speaking about ?

AP : I think that every ( spiritual) phenomenon like K is a paradox wrapped in mystery.. My feeling is that K wanted us to understand that he is he was expressing the human potential in its absolute, so he was not a 'freak' individual but a positive demostration of what the human principle is capable of. It is not to be taken personally but it has to be understood : what is man ?
The whole problem is that today we think that man is only the (physical) body – that's what any average man thinks, inspite of his 'beliefs'. He tried to show that the body is like a wonderfully tuned musical instrument. The 'music' that comes is not your own because the 'self' cannot even touch the infinitude of that 'music' . It is your business to perfectly 'tune-in' the musical innstrument to that (cosmic) harmony . I think he was a man who lived only in order to 'fabricate' ( perfect?) this instrument and to keep it in the very best condition a man who had absolutely no other wish or will of his own and no caprice. Everything that was inconsistent with this (purpose) was surgically 'cut out' of his life. It was an 'extraordinary' life in the sense that he has shown what a (spiritually awakened ?) human being can get. I think that it is very important to see that 'truth' is not a continuum, and that freedom is not at the end of our evolution. I believe he's saying that moments of that ( spiritual clarity of?) 'Insight' can flash through any person who is capable of that elevated state where there is a total 'subsidience' of the 'self' (- identified consciousness )

PK : I have heard that K had healed several people of physical diseases just by touch ? Is this true ?

A : I had the occasion to talk to him about this. That he was able to heal people was first discovered by Annie Besant- she asked him to give her some massages and she received physical relief, and even for her eyes she received help when her sight was diminishing. Once he explained to me what this 'power of healing' is. He told the story of a man who took him by force, pulled him into a room and made him touch a spot on the spine where there was pain. He was 'healed', but within 6 months that man was in jail for some perversion ; so, K said that healing is a dangerous business because man's pains and ailments are related to his mind, and sometimes it is the mind that has to be healed (in the first place) , not the body. But K was uncompromising in saying that no other person can heal your mind- you must heal it yourself. But where it was a case of possession , some evil spirit dominating some person, he was able to rid him of that. He could just get the spirit out and say : Get out and don't touch this person again'.

I have never seen him so sad as when he said to me ' Look, this chap is ill and I've healed him. He was living stupidly and I gave him a chance , but will he take the chance or he will go back and live as stupidly as before ? To him the pity of it was heartbreaking.
He accepted that healing was a fact, but he told me that healing powers are not a sign of spiritual insight. So, man may have healing powers though he may not have any spiritual enlightenment. And also he warned about using these powers for ends which are not desirable. When asked 'Have you got healing powers ? He said 'I don't know Then he told me that ''there is a moment when I am face to face with a person in sorrow and something happens'', some Compassion flows through his hand and That does the healing.

Q : Coming to another enigma around him, one wonders how is it that a man with such (spiritual?) insight could not distinguish a wicked or fraudulent person from a sincere and truthful one and was often wronged in his own life ?

AP : He explained it like this : that if he wished he could 'see through' a person. He could see the past the present and the future (of that person) if he so wished . But he said 'Just as if somebody is dressing in a dressing room and you turn your back, so I like to be utmost respectful of the people's private selves and I have no desire to look into it.'
He said that once a woman came to him and said : ' Krishnaji you speak of (self-) images- do you see my 'image' ? He did not say anything, but the person insisted : 'You must be seeing it , so please let me see my 'image' . So K said something to give her a sketch of that 'self'-image . He said : ''That person never came to see me again.''

Q : Yes, if someone would reveal us totally we may not like to face that. But what do you think was the real reason for the break between K and Rajagopal ?

AP : It is a complex phenomenon and it cannot be explained. I 've found Rajagopal very opinionated and I found that he was kind of an impresario to K's 'prima donna' . K was incapable of managing his own affairs and more or less he has 'opted out' of that. So he needed someone, but that someone could not manage him and anyone who thought he (or she?) could manage him, was out of the picture. I think K was a man who wanted nothing from anybody. He did not want anyone to form a 'sangha' (spiritual community?) and to further the teachings. He said : ''don't do anything for another unless it is an authentic expression of your own uniqueness''.

Q : May be he did not want to give any comfort to the 'ego' by accepting someone as a disciple or giving someone encouragement ?

AP : Not only that, but even about himself and about everybody else he said that an 'eternal vigilance' is absolutely essential and there is no knowing when a lapse will come unbecknown because that is the nature of the 'self'

Q : Do you think it was wise for K to leave behind him the organisations which now bear his name ?

AP : I think that Krishnaji has sown a seed, but he (his teachings?) need researchers dedicated to that in the utmost measure.

Q : Even if there were 5000 people in the hall, he said he was talking to each one individually. ; on the other hand he has created these 2 or three organisations (K-foundations) which are now to carry on the work. To many people it appears as a dicothomy .

AP : No, it has a very material aspect : He wanted the Teachings to be handed over to posterity undistorted and some 'guardians' (custodians?) who will see that his word is not twisted out of its context. Second part is to make the Teachings available to people who were not fortunate enough to listen to him and also to make available the ressources for 'listening'
But apart from this, that has set in motion a 'transcendental psychological laboratory' .
Once he said that a mother's love performs the miracle of transforming the body's plasma into milk.
He says that in the process, (of sharing insight) your brain cells will be transformed, as well as those of the student.

Q : You said that K could see the entire past, present and future of someone.. Does it mean everything is predestined ?

AP : No, no. He has explained it like this : whatever you are at this moment is that which has emerged out of the 'seed of the past' embedded in your psyche, but this is not a continuous (predestinated) process. So every moment of your life you are putting into the soil the 'seeds' of your own doing

Q : Why is it that no-one has been able to make this radical transformation in consciousness he was talking about ?

AP : Annie Besant said that this (transformational) process should not be understood in the framework of one life's span. This is an ongoing destiny of many, which is unravelling itself and you have a role to play. I think K has indicated : ''Don't wait for the ultimate liberation or mutation, but at every moment unbecknown to you if you can rise to the full stature of your manhood and negate the factor of the 'self' (centredness) then in the total communion with 'what is' there is a release'' . But don't try to hold it for 'that' (liberating experience?) is out of time.

Q : What would you say is really new or unique about K's Teaching ?

AP : I have pondered over this matter for years When I was studying the teachings of the Buddha I felt the tremendous potential for it, and that K has opened a (new) window to it. Several people who studied Vedanta and yoga said the same thing : that when you listen to K a 'window' opens, a clarity comes to your mind so that you could see more in it that you could have seen by yourself. Apart from that, K has some unique insights of his own

The entire Teaching can be summed up in a single word -'attention'. I would say that the Ground of everything is this 'Cosmic energy' which renews itself and which is totally beyond our comprehension.. When it is expressed, it is (crystallised as) 'matter'. That ( pure spiritual ?) Energy is incomprehensible and it permeates everything. Now this Energy passing through the human brain-which is subjected to the principles of pleasure, continuity and security- you can become conscious of it. Now K says that this faculty of 'attention' is not of the brain. Though it operates through the brain it is not of the brain. And this 'faculty' can see the biological reflexes , it can see what comes through the brain. So this 'attention' is really a 'flash' of the Cosmic Energy, like a high voltage (frequency?) is tied. We cannot (usually) touch this 'high voltage' (& frequency?) because we are on this 'low voltage' ( temporal mode)

Q : Yes, so this has to end ?

AP : First you must see this whole phenomenon in its totality and 'do nothing' about it.. Now, with this ('non-doing' inner attitude ?) you turn away from all this without any 'achievement' or orientation. You are observing the sky, the sea without wanting anything, and sometimes in this communion with nature this whole (thought-time) process stops. But before it stops you have to come to the ( objective inner ) perception of a 'camera lens' which is an absolutely accurate recording without the desire to change 'what is' . The brain is only (passively) recording. In this state of 'only recording' there is a miracle - the miracle of (total) attention. It is this 'attention' which- if you are able to put a foot onto it- is already free.

Q : Because then, that is the 'new' ?

AP : That is the 'new' . Now this is a teaching which I have not got anywhere else

Q : What do you thing it was K's aim in starting these schools ?

AP : You see, Annie Besant started with the feeling that you have to rear human beings who bear witness to this great process. If there are human beings who can be reared with affection , they may come and go independently but out of this harvest there is something that comes to you unsought. But as K said, the peasant who sows the seed in the soil must not pull it out to see if it is sprouting. So, what one does for man is an act of faith- not in this person (K) but in man. I think that very few people in these schools have grasped that underlaying all our efforts is this tremendous 'faith' of the man who sows the soil of the human mind and cultivates it , tills it, with his affection and dilligence and plants the ( spiritual) seed and offers it to God.

Q : Would you think that the physical absence of K is not a great deprivation for someone ?
AP : I would not say that, because even his physical presence could not impart that 'something' to you.

Q : Finally, any advice for those seriously interested in K's teaching ?

AP : I feel that you must observe how a ( mental) prejudice and a word born out of it can put a 'distance' (a barrier) between people .One must see that these walls between 'you' and 'me' are created by my words. And I think this 'wall' can be washed only by the 'tears of the heart'. Unless you are washed in the tears of your heart- which brings you close to a sense of affection with those you are intimately working with , I don't think you can get anywhere.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 30 Aug 2017 #278
Thumb_beautiful-nature-wallpaper pavani rao India 4 posts in this forum Offline

' The teachings are not 'out there' in a book. You are not (supposed to) understand the teachings ; you are to understand yourself. The teachings are only a means of explaining the necessity of understanding ourselves. What the speaker says acts as a mirror in which you can look at yourself. When you look at yourself in that 'mirror', the mirror will not be important. You will be able to throw it away'

Don't wait for the ultimate liberation or mutation, but at every moment unbecknown to you if you can rise to the full stature of your manhood and negate the factor of the 'self' (centredness) then in the total communion with 'what is' there is a release'' . But don't try to hold it for 'that' (liberating experience?) is out of time.

Hi John

Thanks a ton for bringing in those rare, very precious, and in a way priceless extracts of and on K with two of the people who were very closely connected to him through out his life . Especially some how I have great respect for Achyut Patwardhan and I think K too had great deal of affection for him .

This task of ' research ' work of bringing in rare and not so well known texts of K and presenting them in your forum is a deed worth appreciating John . It's very easy for people to find fault with others but what and where they are in relation to K teaching (? ) .. No body bothers to ask themselves . As you rightly stated this whole reading of K texts of and on is indeed good meditation . and in those texts every time one goes through them some thing ' new ' and not seen earlier comes to surface .

Well as K is stating very clearly , emphatically , it's not like once for all kind of a thing . Once the ' seed ' is sown , one needs to keep vigilance and watchful of its growth ...

The teaching starts acting when human being asserts his / her SELF , free will / responsibility and starts acting ' consciously and conscensciuosly ' ....
What ' rubbish ' it can be as few people who write in here repeating like parrots , there is no ' self ' and what all is only 'present '.... It sounds nothing short of blasphemy . If one acknowledges where one failed to grasp and accept ones limitation ... Then that act still may be of some respect ... But then well it's very difficult to accept responsibility , falling into dead patterns and habits come easy ....

This post was last updated by pavani rao Wed, 30 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 30 Aug 2017 #279
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

pavani rao wrote:
Thanks a ton for bringing in those rare, very precious, and in a way priceless extracts of and on K with two of the people who were very closely connected to him through out his life

You're most welcome, Pavani. In fact I was 'actualising ' some of the older posts that 'stood the proof of time'. There is always something new that the 'eyes of our mind' can see - providing they are open. One rather funny point is that P. ( as in...Professor ?) Krishna's book is as a whole, rather boring- but some deeply insightful excerpts are truly beneficial for myself and probably for all who bother to read them. My point is that taken out of their 'personal' or "spatio-temporal" context, such timeless insights appear as pure spiritual jewels. It may be the case with most of K's Talks & dialogues - quite often the eye does not see 'the' tree because of the forest...

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 30 Aug 2017 #280
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

Excerpts from Professor Krishna's interview with Radha Burnier (July 2001)

PK : Radhaji, you have known K for a very long time, so I would like to ask you a few questions so that we can keep an accurate record of what K was as a person and as a teacher. What are your earliest memories of him ?

R : I was a very young child when he lived in the TS compound at Adyar, in the beautiful second floor apartment which Annie Besant has got constructed for him. K always seemed to have a special feeling for children and my brother and I were in Adyar, enjoying the beauty of the compound and living close to Krishnaji. We used to frequently wander around there. I have vague memories of K walking there or playing tennis , going to his appartment and playing games with him, or of his coming occasionally to our house for a meal. He used to play games and in the 20's we loved to go to the tennis court to see him play and to pick up the balls for them.

PK : And who would he play with ?

RB : : There were various people who were playing tennis in those day: Rajagopal was there and perhaps Jadunandan Prasad.

PK : Was he a good player ?

RB : No idea whatsoever but my mother used to go there and I remember his telling us ' Amma playing tennis, by Jove !' so we learnt to say 'By Jove !' it was one of his favourite exclamations. . The curious thing is the feeling his contact created of an exceptional joyousness, of meeting someone with a "special" atmosphere around him.

PK : When did you meet him and have a talk with him ?

RB : From time to time I've heard him speaking- for instance in Benares in 1948. I could not understand much of what he was saying. It was only much later when he spoke in Rajghat that I went regularly to hear him, but I never made attempts to meet him personally.. I always had this feeling that if one really grasped what he was saying there was no need to question him further. What one had to do is to ponder over what he said, experiment with it and know it for oneself.

Around 1960 I had gone to Saanen with a couple of my friends. I used to walk around the little stream to hear him talk. After the talks, people would chatter and chatter, but I did not care much for that so I used to walk back to Gstaad slowly along the stream. On one occasion Madam Scaravelli's car passed by with K in it and stopped . They were looking back and called me . I went up to them and K said : 'How is it that you are here ?' The way he said it it sounded as if he knew who I was. He said : "We will meet, I will give you a ring". Later I received a phone call and was invited to have lunch with him . So I went to the chalet of Mrs Scaravelli and an italian lady who cooked was also there. K asked me what I did and I told him I was the general secretary of the Indian section of TS in Benares. After that, whenever I went to Saanen he would invite me for lunch. I started going to other places to listen to him, but I felt that just hearing him over and over again was not of much benefit, that one's ability to assimilate what he said was what mattered ;
Incidentally, I wish to say that in a sense no one could really 'know' him- the depth of his consciousness was such, that one was not really 'knowing' him. I feel everybody knew him from different angles

PK : In your listening and interacting with him you had the feeling that he was a great scholar or teacher or was something dimensionally different about him ?

RB : I don't think he was a scholar at all. He frankly said he never read books- which was not strictly accurate – he told me once that he read the Bible, not so much because of the contents, and he certainly knew some of the beautiful phrases in the Bible

PK : It is true that he said he had no recollection of the books he read, but it is inimaginable that a young man growing up in that TS athmosphere never read any books.

RB : Obviously he read some books, like the Bible . He said Dr Besant asked him to read it to get a feel of the English language at its best. But I have been told that Leadbetter made it a point not to inculcate anything into him because they were so deeply convinced that a great Voice was going to speak through him. But probably in what was known as 'the 'process' some of the memories recorded in his physical brain might have been washed out. Annie Besant said that the 'Maitreya Consciousness' would blend with that of Krishnaji and his message and influence would pervade and go out to the world through him. So from the earlier days there was a great respect for this vehicle which was being prepared and perhaps they did not feel that they should tell him what to think. And Madam Blavatsky had even mentioned in her writings that the Teacher had to be prepared to teach in a way that would be right for such a changing world.

PK : Was this documented, did they keep a record of what he was put through ?

RB : I do not think there are such records But I think that CWL imposed certain ideas about health on K, and they brought him up perhaps according to the limited ideas of 'health' and 'good upbringing' of those times. Particularly CWL, since Annie Besant was too busy at that time with her manifold work. What she gave was abundant love and advice as a mother would have done.

PK : Now, K advocates that we should observe each reaction in the mirror of relationship and to question it in order to learn about ourselves . But if he did not go through this whole process how did he come upon all the wisdom which he so obviously had ?

RB: I think wisdom is in every consciousness in a 'germinal' form. Otherwise for a man like Krishnaji to talk to audiences would have no meaning. He himself accepted that the door is open for every person to become free. To be free inwardly is to open up to the well-spring of Wisdom , so I think that in his case there was no barrier for this to happen. The outer mind being a pure mind, with almost no traces of selfishness- which is what CWL noticed for the first time in his aura- created no blockage and the inner wisdom just came up when the time was ripe. I remember him saying about his early interests in cars and clothes : ' Yes the time was not ripe for anything to well forth from him'. Then someone asked ' Who decided when the time was ripe ' ?' He said : ' The Powers That Be 'When asked :who are 'the Powers that be' ? He would not answer and just waved his hand.  To me he was refering to what he sometimes called ' the Powers of Goodness' There are energies at subtler levels, in dimensions of (consciousness) which we have very little or no concept, which are perhaps 'watching over the world'

PK : You mean something like the universal Intelligence, beyond the field of thought and knowledge, which cannot be explained ?

RB ; Yes you can't explain the Source of Things. In the last few years of his life he kept asking 'What is the source of Life ?' There is a dimension from which something comes down here

PK : So when the theosophists talked about the Masters, were they supposed to be personifications of this larger Intelligence ?

RB : Madam Blavatsky said that she was doing whatever work she did under the inspiration of certain Masters of Wisdom. One of the prominent theosophists at that time, AP Sinnett received a number of letters from the Masters and they said something about what the Masters are : One is that they are completely unselfish. The qualification for becoming a Master is is the daily conquest of the self. In other words, to give up the idea of a separate self. In another letter they say 'only your evolving spiritually can bring you near to us .They say that there is a latent meaning and a hidden purpose in every individual existence- not just human existence. The whole universe is 'happy' and you wake up in that ( creative happiness?) when the mind gets cleansed of all selfishness, any desire for yourself. This purification of the self means the practice of what K might have called 'attention'-which in the first book he wrote is called 'discrimination'- it means you are constantly giving attention to what is real and what is not real, . Madam Blavatsky asked: What people who say 'they want to see the Masters' mean ? Because the Master is not a physical body, it is a state of consciousness and it is everywhere.

PK : Krishnaji has also talked about the 'Other'. Mr Mahesh Saxena asked him a straight question, as to whether he denies the existence of the Masters and K said : ' No, Sir, I have never denied the Masters, but some of the theosophists brought what was sublime to the ridiculous, and I denied the ridiculous'

RB : But the Master perhaps implies that vast consciousness which you call the 'other' manifesting itself through an individuality

PK : In that sense, do you think K was in contact with the Masters or himself was a Master ?

RB : Both. There was a conversation in 1976 whan K wanted the trustees to meet in Ojai and we were invited to dinner in Mary Z's house in Malibu. At the dinner table K himself asked ' What is a Master ?' I said  "from the theosophical point of view a Master is someone who have come to a state of inner freedom, but out of compassion remains in contact with ignorant humanity- to help and to teach them, like Bodhisatva" And I added, "Sir, I believe you are a Master". That put an end to our conversation. There was a period of silence and then he turned to something else ; But I think he was in contact wit other (invisible?) people, perhaps they were his teachers, perhaps there is a veil after veil that lifts. So it is possible that K himself had been guided by certain 'people', because if you read Pupulji's description of the 'process' she noted down that he spoke about 'they' ; Who are 'They' ?

PK : Yes, that is a mystery.

RB : Mark Lee said that just before he died, K said "I'm ready to go. 'They' are waiting for me, but the body has its own programme". So, who were the 'they' who were waiting for him ? I think he was in contact with 'people' (spiritual entities?) who were at that level of consciousness.  Apart to what he said to Mahesji, on one occasion he said to me that the mistake the Theosophists did was to make the Masters into something 'personal' and 'concrete'. They are not that.

PK Why do you think he left Theosophy ?

RB : I think because there was a lot of folly in the TS at that time. There were many people who imagined, or maybe pretended that they were in touch with the Masters, bringing 'messages' , claiming occult positions and K rebelled strongly against that . But I am wondering also whether the 'Powers That Be' did not intend that he should associated with any organisation. But it was Annie Besant who prepared the ground ' Now Krishnaji is out on his own and he needs people to assist him so you go and help him'. That was how Sanjiva Rao left the TS and began to work for Krishnaji

PK : It seems to med that Annie Besant had this larger vision and the relationship between her and K was not based on agreement or disagreement.

RB : I think there was a deep feeling of love which bound them together. But in her last years when her body had somewhat broken down, her mental powers were not on the same level. She became much more subject to the influences of other people. So it was a shock to her when Krishnaji left and there was all this commotion of breaking up. Once I asked Krishnaji : "You have been talking for so many years and nobody seems to have undergone that 'total revolution' Is there anybody you feel was near it ?" He said : "I think if Amma had been younger it would have taken place in her" He referred to Annie Besant as Amma

PK : I remember that in his last visit here the only person he asked me to read about was Annie Besant . Normally Krishnaji never asked anybody to read about someone . So, would it be correct to say that K was not particularly against theosophy as it's commonly maintained by many people, but that he was against all 'crystallised' forms of belief ?

RB : ...and against creating ( a climate of spiritual ?) 'authority' , and the TS was in danger of going in that direction at that time.

PK : I personally feel that he had a great affection for the TS.

RB : Yes, I was told that when someone in a dialogue spoke in a derogatory way about Annie Besant and CWL , K corrected them saying : ' You know, they were very serious people'. Once he asked me : what is going on in the TS ? Who is going to succeed your father as president ?' So I picked up courage and said : Sir, why do you ask all these things ? I thought you have written off the TS . And he answered ' You know, I have a great affection for it.

PK. People have asked me how do you reconcile being the TS president with being a KFI trustee ?

RB : I don't think there is anything for me to reconcile. For example the fundamental work of the TS is to establish a nucleus of brotherhood for humanity, irrespective of religion, chaste, etc. Now how can that 'brotherhood' come unless one is free of all prejudice and barriers ? If the mind is free like that, is it very different from the 'unconditioned ' mind that K spoke of ? So, I see no contradiction : the TS has officially said, years ago that there is no authority in the society, not even Madam Blavatsky. Every person, through his own reflexion, purity of life, enquiry, has to discover the truth for himself.

PK : Were you shocked by reading Radha Sloss' biography ?

RB : It took me by surprise, specially since K said so many times about the normal, wordly living : ' You people you have gone through all this but this person has never gone through all that' So, I called Mary Lutyens and she confirmed that it was a fact. But the more I thought about, the more I've felt that K's words were true. Once I was walking with him on the Adyar beach and asked him' You have said that you never suffered- but Shiva Rao who was with you in the ship cabin when the news of your brother's death came said that Krishnaji cried and cried for three days. So, you went through that sorrow of parting, but after those three days you were completely at peace and radiant with happiness. So I understand that the consciousness who went through (the pain of) parting was not the Consciousness that came out of that ; He only said : Yes, that's right'. So, when he said I've never gone through this', that explains it

PK : Much of what K said is there also in the Hindu scriptures. So, what would you say is 'special' about his teachings ?

RB : Well, first of all the (ancient Hindu) scriptures are so mixed up that for the average person it's impossible to say what is true and what is not. And even for the non-average person, since the mind is conditioned, we can't say that our idea of what is true is actually true. So I think that when the teachings come directly (from an original source?) as it did for K, that mixed 'adulteration' is not there . The second thing is that he 'explained' things that were put in brief or epigrammatic form by various other people. One time in Saanen he asked : Has anybody said this before ?. I said 'yes' and gave him a concrete example: In Yoga-Vasista there is a verse which speaks about 'a mind which is completely in the present, which never wanders off to the past or to the future' and it says 'to live in the present is immortality'. But it is only a short verse and I don't think I would have understood anything of that if I had not heard Krishnaji. Maybe between the ancient teachers there was someone who explained it, but that was lost. Here was something authentic

PK From someone who was living it...

RB : Living it and speaking out of his own perception. Take this other thing : they say that "listening, pondering or reflecting makes for constant learning" ; What traditionally is called 'listening' is 'listening to the scriptures', but having heard Krishnaji we can understand the deeper meaning of it. Also K was speaking (in the context ) of the modern world and he was giving something which would help humanity to emerge out of the (psychological) disaster of the modern way of life- and all that didn't apply in the old days. So I think the ancient teachings came in a new form with all the power of personal knowledge and clarity.

This post was last updated by John Raica Wed, 30 Aug 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Wed, 30 Aug 2017 #281
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

Excerpts from Professor Krishna's interview with Vimala Thakar in 1995

PK : Vimalaji, for all of us who have been students of K, both the man and his teachings are an enigma. When did you first come across K and what was the impact of this first meeting on your mind ?

V : I came across Shri J Krishnamurti in December 1956 at Rajghat, where I was a guest of Shri Achyut Patwardhan and his brother Rao Saheb. I was in Varanasi in connection with my lectures on Bhoodan (donation of land) but Achyutji asked me if I would like to attend K's talks. I have not heard the name, but Achyutji' request was enough for me. I cancelled my talks and went to attend his talk. Krishnaji entered the room and the first impact of his presence was an indescribable integrity and purity of this person. There was no difficulty to understand his discourse, or 'dialogue' as he called it. It gave me the confirmation of many truths that I perceived but not understood clearly. I attended two talks and on the third day, at Rao Sahib's suggestion I went to see Krishnaj. The first three talks have moved me very deeply. There was nothing to ask. Every word was the breath of clarity and what he had to say was verbalised sanity. Our dialogue which lasted for one hour and a half was so free and frank that the young woman from a middle class Indian family had not imagined to be so affectionate and simple. At least twice someone entered the room to tell him that it was an hour, and he would say, Yes, sir, wait a little more. His glance could hold you spellbound ; there was such a depth in his looking that it reminded me of my communion with the oceans and one felt that the eyes were not focussed on you, but were seeing through you.

PK : We have heard that K healed you of your deafness in one of the ears ?

V : In 1959 I was returning from a visit to Nepal when a car accident took place and I hit my head against a tree trunk. There was profuse bleeding in my ear and was taken to hospital for an operation. When I returned to Kashi K was visiting the Rajghat centre of the 'Foundation for New Education' as it was then called.When he saw me in one of the meetings looking like a ghost of myself- after months in the hospital- he asked Achyutji : What's wrong with that lady ? And after he was told he said : send her to me. I went and he said : Look here, my mother used to say these hands have a healing energy. Shall we try ? It might work, it may not. I said, sir, if my ear gets healed I would feel obliged to you for the whole of my life He said : 'Oh, silly girl , I am not going to do anything to you ; it is the 'power'- it may work or not work. I felt reluctant to accept his offer, but after 3 weeks Vinoba arrived and said "Vimala, why did you refuse ? You have not asked for it. It would have been wrong for you to ask, but it was a spontaneous offer of love ; It is neither the person of K nor that of Vimala who are important in it. Will you go back and apologise to the great person ? Do you know what the energy of love is ? He does not even need to touch you. Haven,'t you read of the life of the Christ ? K 'is' that energy of Love."

So I went to him next day and apologised. K smiled with that beatific smile and said : Come tomorrow morning. So the sessions began : I would sit on a chair and he would stand behind me, put one hand on my heads and the other on my ear. I don't know what he did because by the time he would sit behind me there were vibrations of energy and my eyes would get closed without my knowing and they would open when he would come around and stand in front of me and say 'Vimalaji, open your eyes' The energy that I have experienced through the presence and the touch was something that I had not experienced before . Three sessions per week, I had six sessions in Varanasi. Then he said, come to Bombay, we'll have some more sessions there. In between those 2 months the bleeding had stopped after the first three or four sessions. The hearing had not returned but there was something like a movement in the artificial ear drum ( they had cut some skin from my hand and inserted as the artificial ear drum) .Very faintly I began hearing faint sounds. Then I went to Bombay in Pupulji's house and he gave me three more sessions. When I went for the fourth I said : Krishnaji, I can hear ! He said, You are not imagining it ? 'No sir, I can hear ! He was very glad, one could see the joy in his eyes : 'Oh yes, take it easy ; Don't talk about it to anyone' He gave me 2 more sessions and then asked me to go to the surgeon who operated and go through a test for audition. And give me the report before I leave Bombay. So I went to Pune for the test and the hearing recovered to 65 percent ; The doctor was stunned : What have you been doing ? I said nothing but took the report to K and he was very happy.

PK Scientists today would regard it as a miracle.

V : I myself called it a miracle and so did the surgeon. And because they could not understand the phenomenon they sent me to London for another audition test. There was a 75 pc recovery !
So I told K about this report and asked : Sir, was this a miracle ? He said : "What miracle ? What are you calling a miracle ? It is just an interaction between energies. It takes two to happen and it has happened. Why don't you keep it simple ? And you don't have to feel obliged to me ; I have not done anything . It has 'happened'" .

So I came back with this explanation 'interaction of energies' . One energy I could understand : that of the extraordinary phenomenon called K- but the 'other' energy I did not know what he was refering to. But I thought it would be audacious to ask himagain, so I kept quiet. To me, whether you call it a 'miracle' or not is is an inexplicable phenomenon on the cerebral or rational level. It is non-rational. Krishnamurti himself was more of a phenomenon than a person. Though I have not known him closely I understood that he was more of a (psychic?) phenomenon arising in response to the needs of human evolution, along with being a 'person'.

PK : But reading his biography one finds that he went through several illnesses and suffered a lot physically...

V : According to Yoga and Ayurveda, such healing powers cannot be used by the person for himself , or else they fade away

PK : Another mysterious happening is the 'process' which he went through at various periods of his life. Do you think this is the same (phenomenon) as the awakening of kundalini ?

V : No, the awakening of kundalini does activate unconditioned (psychic?) anergies in the body but not for a prolonged duration. It must have happened to him for 6 months of his early life in Ojai when they spread mattresses in the room- he would roll when not able to bear the intensity or the agony caused by the pain. Now for K as a person it seems to me that he was 'manipulated' by the Supreme Intelligence with the help of invisible powers or energies left into orbit of the Earth by exceptional human beings of spiritual attainments. So they must have found this boy in South India who had that completely innocent, vacant mind. That innocent mind was not 'passivity' or 'blankness' but a very rare quality So 'they' could shape this consciousness , refine and sensitised as the world was needing a (spiritual) teacher that neither belonged to the east or to the west, an unprecedently independent consciousness.So this person (in his own words) was used by these 'super-powers' .

So there seem to be 2 'K entities' – the boy with his family conditioning of hindu conditioning or indian racial consciousness and the other 'entity' was developped by the 'process'. He had not asked for it; but it was 'forced' upon him because of a cosmic need.. It was a very precious (mind) instrument that they came across. So he had to go through the torture of that 'process' for a very long time. He did not need it for his transformation ; it was a 'sacrifice' made for the Supreme Intelligence.. I haven't come across a sannyasy like K.

PK : In the last tape recorded on Feb 7 1986 he mentions that there was this 'supreme intelligence' that operated through the body and also the body was developped over a long period of time and one may not find a body like this for another few hundred years

V : I think he was entitled to say so. I don't know about 'thousands years' but 'they' surely worked at it throughout his whole life. I call it a 'torture' because he was of a poetic nature, so gentle, so sensitive, and the austerity that was demanded of his living was so sharp. And he had to live both. He had not much time for himself to live the 'poetic gentleness', the 'humane' aspect of his personality. I feel sympathetic for the person who went through all that.

PK : So you think that he had to sacrifice himself for completing the rôle of the world teacher ?

V : I have no doubt about it , sir. May I mention an event which no one around me has known up to now ? I was a guest in England, of Mary Lutyens in the 70's and one day I was given a bundle of letters written by K to Mary. Some ( biography) book was in press and those letters would have been included in it. They were like any other love letter a young person would write to a girl that he loved.. Publishing those letters in that stage of his work around the globe was something, my sensitivity could not stand. So I threw them in the fireplace, willing to to go through any consequences. I wanted - not to 'save' but to help the teachings of K, the only teachings of sanity and clarity from 1930 onwards and the people who listened to his words could be misled. The human race - in all the countries- is stupid to a great extent- they would misinterpret them, as if he had no right to love anyone or live a normal life. In one of the letters he had said : ' Why was I picked up, otherwise I could have married you ?' It is not relevant what I went through for doing that, but I don't regret having done it ! His life was a (personal) sacrifice since he was discovered by Leadbetter. Till 1925 perhaps he was not aware of that but after that what he did and withstood was a sacrifice gone through willingly at a great price for his emotional life.

PK : From some of his bios and his writings it seems that he was in contact with some 'divine' powers. Why then did he deny the Masters ?

V : Deny ? When and in which way ?

PK : He didn't publiclly acknowledge his contact the Masters, didn't want to.

V : Yes, sir he didn't acknowledge his contact with the 'invisible masters' as he would say with a little sarcastic smile on his lips- that was up to 1930, but between '25 and '30 he seems to have transcended these 'super' powers and was in communion with what he liked to call 'the supreme Intelligence' (the Lord?) - which I call the 'divinity of life'. Why he did not acknowledge that, or talked rather sarcastically – if not in a derogatory sense about the Masters was because of the 'milieu' surrounding the intellectual and scholastic world (of his time) . The organised religions have vulgarised these 'powers' and dragged them down to the level of being exploited by (personal) psychic ambitions and motivations. Maybe he was afraid that if he would acknowledge the Masters that would be a sanction given by him that he was the World Teacher' . That rôle he had to play, everything was set for it ands he could not budge an inch from it. So perhaps he did not want to use that divine sanction. His was a 'scientific' spirituality .

PK : Can it be due to the realisation, at the time of his brother's death that these messages from the Masters can sometime be mistaken because one's own imagination can distortthe message or even create a message where none existed? Therefore it is necessary first to free oneself of the distortions of the ego ? Rather than try to have communication with 'super' powers

V : Yes, you have put it rightly . But prior to that journey, that event of the Flame of the Buddha entering the centre between the eyebrows was a very significant, mystical event. So the transcendence from the clutches of the 'super' powers and and the communion came about through the interaction between what he calls the 'flame' – what I call the Buddha Consciousness- the fusion between the two that has given him the authenticity. So what happened on the ship, the sorrow of Nitya's death confirmed to me that the 'transcendence' has taken place

PK : K, like Buddha, seems to have seen the whole nature of freedom and freed himself of it. Why doesn't this happen to us ?

V : Because for them perhaps the 'personal' suffering caused by the irreversible separation by death had not too much importance. So when the suffering invaded K- he must have shed tears for Nitya. But this transported his consciousness into the fact of vulnerability of human life. Thinking gives continuity to the emotional sting of suffering, but one who has seen the limited utility of thought and does not allow that thought structure to intrude, then the 'sting' of suffering subsides by itself.
K used to say 'Ending the psychological suffering is the essence of religiosity ' So it ended to him ; that one death was representative of millions of deaths happening And that one betrayal of those who had given him assurances in the name of the Masters was the betrayal of the whole humanity. He lived the life of the whole humanity perhaps in those three days- and the Buddha perhaps in three hours- and so that suffering ended. We get stuck in our own suffering : it's the personal consequence in our daily life of loneliness. So it seems to me that we don't end suffering because it gives us the sadistic pleasure- to feel it, to talk about it, the self-pity

PK : I have read that during these 15 days he spent travelling to India he suffered, but he learned from this suffering and freed himself. He wrote a letter to a friend saying : ' I have experienced personal sorrow. I'm through with it . I have cheated death.'

V : Yes sir, we do not learn and he was busy learning. For him living was equated with learning.

PK : It was mankind's sorrow, it was not 'his' sorrow.

V : Exactly.

PK : What would you say was 'unique' about Krishnaji- both the man and the teaching ?

V : I don't think I am entitled to talk about the man. But in all the religious teachers, all the spiritual celebrities – none of them were self-reliant in their enquiry. My quest for truth began when I was five and there is not a single Ashram that Vimala has not visited before she was 25 out of the love of enquiry. And none of these teachers were self-reliant - they were tethered to the Vedas, the Upanishads, etc. And here was this person I call a 'phenomenon' because of his non-authoritarian enquiry and totally self-reliant transformation . This was the need of the 'nuclear age'- the synthesis of science and spirituality. A human being who lived with that self-reliance, without any fuss about it, not trying to show it off in any way for more than half a century ! He would rather conceal it .
So K's life cannot be compared with any one of those I've come across in my long quest. In the teaching I find traces of Upanishadic truths in his communications. He had not read them, but it was in his blood.... So, it is incomparable.

PK : Yes, he repeatedly told that one has to be a light to oneself...and to such an extent that there is no teacher and no taught ; That is the extent to which he carried Buddha's precept 'Atmadipo Bhava'- Be a Light to oneself' . So you think that the care and nurture that the TS gave to him was a contributory factor, but not a determining factor ?

V : Yes sir, you have said it. It was surely the most valuable contribution because if the world teacher had lived in a small vilage in India as Sri Ramana did, what would the West have done? How would it have bearing on the challenges that the 20-th century world was facing ?

PK : In your view, what has been the impact of Krishnaji on human consciousness ?

V : Krishnamurti, with his own life has paved the way for one global, human religion, one global ethos, one global way of enquiring into truths and living those truths . Because all the 'organised' religions are (eventually?) going to collapse ; they have lost their relevance. If K had not lived and not taught, there would have been a vacuum in the orbit of human consciousness. He has paved the way for the 21-st century

PK : For the serious enquirer ?

V : That's right, such people come for the 'few'- for "the salt of the earth".

PK Do you think K was born like an ordinary man, with an ego and eventually became free or was he, in some sense, born free ? I am asking you this question as he asked himself' Why did the boy K not get conditioned and trapped (in time?)

V : I am too small a person to answer this question. But I think that one who does not want anything from this world or the other- from humanity or from divinity- does not get conditioned. K must have had his 'ego-structure' -the mischief that the 'ego' plays in ordinary trivialities of daily living, but it was non-operative when it came to the realm of spirituality, the realm of truth . And I have faith in his words when he says : ' The boy never got conditioned'- the wealth, the prestige, the fame- nothing touched him- and yet the tiny little ego of that boy who never had the opportunity to live a normal childhood, to enjoy the various expressions of youth it was there in his life. That's why he remained so human.

PK : How did it happen that Leadbeter and AB pick out K ? His brother was much brighter than him ?

V : As far as my perception goes, there are 5 bodies  within this gross physical body : those who felt that the boy was 'unintelligent' saw only the outer layers, while Mr Leadbetter must have penetrated beyond them. We must give credit to his (spiritual) perceptions, refined by his occult practices, were sensitised by them and he must have perceived the 'core', the existential essence in that boy.

PK: Do you think K succeeded in his mission to set man unconditionally free ?

V : What are 70 years of one person's hard work against thousands of years of human evolution or civilisation ? Neither the 'success' or the 'failure' is perceptible. He has sown the seeds, has ploughed the human psyche on the global level and inserted some truths into the orbit of human consciousness. They are taking time to sprout, to express, to function in the normal society, but it seems to me that they have sunk deep.

PK : Whereas most religious personages collected a group of (remarkable?) people around them who were friends or disciples and collected a community around them, K appears to have 'fallen out' with most people he was close to. What in your view is the reason for this ?

V : Well, didn't he say that he did not want followers or disciples ? He did not perhaps wish to leave behind him any organisation or a rigid group .That is one aspect. The second may be that temperamentally he was not a person of socialisation. Like a true sannyasi he did not relish much people coming close to him. I might almost call him a loner. So his ways of expressing the truth, which was very sharp, his strategy of throwing people back on themselves and merely compelling them to become self-reliant in their enquiry, positively discouraged their dependence on him. Now, tell me, such a person how can people be around him ?

PK: But he also talked about the need for co-operation, that a true co-operation is out of love... He once remarked that he will never desert anybody but they will all desert him

V : Well, it was his destiny to live in isolation- affluence isolated him, the rôle of world teacher isolated him...The austerity of his truth was frightening ; people went near him, they enjoyed the company, but when it came to his teachings, the razor like sharpness of the truth, the austerity of the non-authoritative approach and unconditional self-relance frightened ( dissuaded?) them. They were attracted towards it intellectually and they were frightened emotionally

My dear friend, I feel human beings are very much afraid of freedom : attracted towards it intellectually, but afraid of it emotionally ; this inner division did not allow them to remain with him, to his side. The moment they understood the (inward) implications of the teaching, the withdraw.

PK : It was said that K as a person was very different from K as a teacher, that he may have been a 'medium' of some sort for another Consciousness to operate. What do you think ?

V : I am inclined to agree that there were 2 streams of consciousness, but they were operating simultaneously. He would 'slide' from one to another so spontaneously and people would remain stuck with one or the other. So, I'm inclined to say that his life continued with these 2 parallel streams. That his consciousness has been used by some 'power' has been said by him in so many ways : I'm a telephone, so take the message, don't worship the telephone .

PK : Some people say that what K is advocating is inherently impossible to do.

V : No, sir, it's not impossible, and Vimala's life is a proof for it. But what is 'impossible' is total dedication to living the truth as soon as it has been perceived. Even if it is grasped academically or verbally, if you don't allow any time lag between your understanding and you allow it to live, then I think there is no problem. But the 'time-lag' (delay ) is created by so many factors, and that's why it 'doesn't happen'.

PK : But for the man who is caught up in the 'ego' field there is a vicious circle- the 'ego distorts the perception...

V : The vicious circle might have existed in the pre-K era. In the K-era, the educated, intelligent person has been pointed out to him how the 'ego' has no factual substance. So why is not there the (liberating) energy ? Somehow one feels that it's maybe the 'attachment', maybe the sense of security, maybe the sense of 'individuality' that one gets out of the 'ego' - that doesn't allow it to drop away. Krishnaji used to say : Sir, it is not difficult to perceive the 'truth', but you do not allow the 'untruth' to drop away' That's the difficulty.

PK : Some people feel that because K had a sexual affair in his youth, therefore he can't be a 'holy' man. What do you think ?

V : What has ( spiritual ?) holiness to do with sex relationship ? Sex itself is a 'divine' energy, but if it's gone through with a feeling of guilt, then it becomes wrong. But we don't know about his life... (this spiritual) transformation transports you into a Consciousness where the sex-consciousness is absent. The non-duality makes you into a non-sexual person

PK : He says somewhere that "Love is both the personal and the impersonal and that it makes no distinction , that it is a state of mind out of which it functions and then everything that is done is part of that love, of that state of mind". Once I've asked him : 'How can you know about sex when you have never experienced it ? And he said : Sir, I get the same joy in holding your hand as you do when you do that'

( To conclude our discussion, ) Would you have to narrate some of your personal interractions with him, for posterity ?

V : As I've told you, I have been brought in a totally Indian surroundings, so When K asked me "Come for lunch tomorrow in Gstaad" I said, "No, sir, I don't know any (western) table manners !" So he said : "come and do as I do". So I went. He said : I've cooked spinach and put curds over spinach. He made Madam Scaravelli also eat the Indian way !

Another day he tells M-me Scaravelli ' Go and fetch Vimala'. He was sitting under a tree of the chalet and he beckoned me to sit by his side 5 minutes 15 minutes, half an hour- doesn't even look at me. After half an hour he said : ' Wasn't it wonderful ? Now you may leave!'

Once he was in England, he gave me an appointment ar 2:30 pm. I went to Wimbledon. He opens the door wearing an apron 'My God, did I give you an appointment today ?' Yes sir. ' Would you mind having the interview in the kitchen ?' I said ; no, but would you allow to help you in the kitchen ? So whatever conversation we had it went while working. Then at the end he said 'You Indians are notorious for your addiction to tea. Would you like a cup of tea ?' Yes sir. ( he could be mischievous like a boy) So I allowed him to make a cup of tea standing there in the kitchen and there was only a stool on which he was sitting. So I had my cup of tea, 'So long' and I went away.

Once he was a guest of Dr Kharan Singh in Kashmir and there is a palace in Srinagar – he was a guest there. So we went to see him. He was not well. So Dada said, Krishnaji, I was in Srinagar and I thought I could make a courtesy call' K said ; Courtesy call on me ? Sir, I'm not a 'social animal' ! But do please sit down. And said ' I apologise for receiving you in a palace ! ' He had a subtle sense of humour. These occasional meetings with him lasted 10 or 15 minutes and are nothing worth anyone to know, but the human touch was superb !

PK; Thank you Vimala for sharing these sacred things with us.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Sat, 02 Sep 2017 #282
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

Here are some 'recycled' pages from Mrs Evelyn Blau's interview with David Bohm (cca 1995)

EB: Dr. Bohm, could you say how you first came into contact with Krishnamurti or his teaching?

DB: Well, the background is that in my work in physics I was always interested in the general philosophical questions as they related to physics, and more generally, universally as it might relate to the whole constitution of nature and of man. One of the points arising in physics which is somewhat related to what Krishnaji is doing, is in quantum theory, where you have the fact that energy is found to be existent as discrete units which are not divisible.

EB: Could you clarify the word 'discrete' in that context?

DB: One view is that matter is continuous, flowing, and the other view is it’s made of atoms, which are discrete, but there are so many atoms that it appears to be continuous. Like grains in an hourglass, they flow as if they were water. But obviously they are made of discrete units. So the notion of the atomicity or discreteness of matter had already been common for many centuries, but in the early 20th-century there arose a discovery that energy is discrete as well. Energy comes in units, though they’re very tiny; therefore, we don’t easily see them, and the number is so great that they appear to be continuous. Now this has important consequences because it means that things cannot be divided from each other. If two things interact by means of an energy that cannot be divided, that link is indivisible. Therefore, fundamentally, the entire universe is indivisible, and in particular, it means that the thing observed and the apparatus which observes it cannot be really separated. Now, we already had this point that the observer cannot be separated from the observed. In fact, whenever you observe, the thing observed is changed because it cannot by this interaction be reduced below a certain level. Therefore, you have the transformation of the object observed in the act of observation.
I had already noted the similarity to our consciousness: that if you try to observe your thought in any detail, the whole train of thought changes. That’s clear isn’t it? So therefore, you cannot have the separation of the observer and the observed in consciousness. The observer changes the observed, and the observed changes the observer, therefore, there was a mysterious quality which was not really understood in physics.

EB: Was this part of your observation, scientificallv, as well as philosophically, when you first came in contact with Krishnamurti?

DB: That’s right, let me add one more point. My interest in physics...l had always had a tendency to say that what I was thinking about in physics should be taking place within me. I felt that there was a parallel between what is in consciousness, and what is in matter in general, and I felt 'movement' was also a question, that the movement that you see outside, you 'feel' inside. In general therefore, I felt that we directly apprehended the nature of reality in our own being.

EB: Had you pursued this through contacts with other teachers, or philosophers, or was this a purely scientific matter and vour own self-observation?

DB At that point, it was probably mostly my own. The question of "the observer and the observed" was obviously looked at in quantum mechanics as to its implications, especially by Nils Bohr, who in fact was influenced by the philosopher William James, an American who had developed an idea of the "stream of consciousness", along the lines I have been saying. But as a matter of fact, that idea occurred to me independently as soon as I read about quantum theory. There was an analogy between this "stream of consciousness" and the behavior of matter. That was the background of my interest in science. I was also trying to understand the universal nature of matter. Questions like causality and time and space, and totality, to grasp it all.

EB: Is this something that is shared by other scientists, are there similar observations?

DB: Those who are inclined that way do, but most do not. Most scientists are very pragmatically oriented, and mainly want to 'get results'. They would like to make a theory that would predict matter accurately and control it, but a few are interested in this question. Say Einstein. I should say that I had some discussions with Einstein on the quantum theory when I was in Princeton. Most physicists know the quantum theory cannot be understood, they take it as a calculus, as a way of getting results, predicting. They say “That’s all that really matters, and that a deeper understanding might he nice, but it is not really essential.

E B: So with the background of this kind of interest, you came to reading a book by Krishnamurti?

DB Yes. As I said, scientists have an interest in cosmology, many of them are trying to get a grasp of the totality of the cosmos. Einstein particularly wanted to understand it as one whole. What happened in regard to Krishnamurti was that my wife and I were in Bristol. We used to go to the public library where I got interested in philosophical or even mystic or religious hooks, such as those of Ouspensky and Gurdjief because I was somewhat dissatisfied with what could he done in the ordinary sphere. My wife Sarel and I came across The First and Last Freedom. She saw a phrase there, “The observer and the observed,” so she thought it might have something to do with quantum theory, and she pointed it out to me. When I read the book, I was very interested in it. I felt it was a very significant one, and it had a tremendous effect on me. That the questions of the observer and the observed were brought to the psychological level of existence, and I had the hope that one could tie up physics and psychological matters. I also read the Commentaries on Living. Thev were the only other books in the library. I wrote to the publisher in America, and I asked whether one could get more books, or whether Krishnamurti was around. Somebody sent me a letter suggesting that I get in touch with the people here in England. I wrote to them and they sent me a list of books.

EB : Do you remember what year that was?

DB It could have been about 1958, or 1959. Then somewhere around 1960, he came hack to England and gave talks. It could have been 1960. In my letter ordering books, I asked if Krishnamurti ever came to England, they said, in fact he was coming and there would he a limited number of people who could come to hear him. I came with Sarel and, while I was here, I wrote a letter to Doris Pratt, asking if I could talk with Krishnamurti, and then I got a phone call from her arranging to make an appointment. They were renting a house in Wimbledon, and I waited for him with Sarel. Then he came in, and there was a long silence, hut then we began discussing. I told him all about my ideas in physics, which he probably couldn't have understood in detail, but he got the spirit of it. I used words like 'totality', and when I used this word 'totality', he grabbed me by the arm, and said, “That’s it, that’s it!”

EB: What was your initial impression? You had read books by Krishnamurti. What was your impression as vou first met this man?

DB: Well, you see, I don’t usually form those impressions, I usually just go ahead. But the impression I got was that when see we remained silent, which was not usual, but it didn’t seem odd to me at the time, and there was no tension in it. Then we began to talk. Now in talking I got the feeling of close communication, instant communication, of a kind which I sometimes get in science with people who are vividly interested in the same thing. He had this intense energy and openness, and clarity, and a sense of no tension. I can’t remember the details, but he couldn’t understand very of what I said, except the general drift of it.

EB: You were speaking on a more scientific level?

DB: I was speaking about the questions I was talking of earlier, like quantum theory, and relativity, and then raising the question of whether the totality can be grasped. I should also say that my interests had turned toward understanding thought, which I’ve forgotten to mention. I gradually began to see that it was necessary to understand our thought. In going into philosophy, and going into causality, and questions like that, it was a matter of how we are thinking. I had earlier been influenced by people who were interested in dialectical materialism and when I went to Brazil, I talked to a man who had read a lot of Hegel, and raised the question of the very nature of our thought. Not merely what we are thinking about, but the structure of how our thought works, and that it works through opposites. Our thought inevitably unites the two opposite characteristics of necessity and contingency. When I got to Israel, I met another man who was very interested in Hegel. What he said was, “ You should pay attention to your thought, how it ’s actually working.” So I had become very interested in how thought proceeds. Considering thought as a process in itself, not its content, but its actual nature and structure.

EB So you found similarities between what Krishnamurti was saving, and someone like Hegel.

DB: There is some similarity, yes. I found a relationship, and that was the reason I was fascinated by Krishnamurti. He was going very deeply into much deeper than Hegel, in the sense that he also went into feeling and into your whole life. He didn’t stop at abstract thought

EB: So over a period of years you became deeplv acquainted with Krishnamurti’s thought. In the course of that how did you look at the source of Krishnamurti’s teaching?

DB: Well, I didn’t raise the question for a while. What happened was that we began to meet every time he came to London and had one or two discussions. In the first year I wanted to discuss the question of the "universal and the particular" with him, and we raised the question “Is mind universal?” and he said, “Yes.” We used the word 'individual', is intelligence 'individual', and he said, “Yes” at the time. We had quite a good discussion on that. When we left I had the feeling that the state
of mind had changed, I could see that there was no feeling, but clarity

EB: When you say "the state ol mind had changed", do vou mean both of your states of mind?

DB: I don’t know, I assume that he was similar since we were in close communication. I said that I had no feeling, and he said, “Yes, that's right,” which surprised me, because I had previously thought that anything intense must have a lot of feeling, and then when I went out I had a sense of some "presence" in the sky, but I generally discount such things...saying that it’s my imagination.

EB: Was that a physical sense?

DB: Yes.

EB: You actually could see some... ?
DB : Feel. Not 'see' anything there, but 'feel' something there, something universal.

EB: Had vou ever felt anything of that nature before?

DB: I had hints of that, but my whole background was such as to say, I didn’t tell mv parents or anybody, they would have said, “You’re just imagining that.”

EB: Did you feel that there was any relationship between the intensity of vour discussion and what was happening?

DB: Yes, I probably felt that they were related. In fact I might have explained it by saying I was projecting the 'universality' into the sky, this I might have done as a child.

EB: When was your next meeting?

DB: I didn’t see a lot of him, but we had discussions every year in London when he came in June, and when I went to Saanen in Switzerland. We began to have discussions in which at least for a while I could feel that was some change of consciousness, but by the time I got back to England, it went away. When you go back into ordinary life.

EB: What would you say are the salient characteristics or qualities of his teaching that differentiate it from that of others?
DB: Well, first of all, the total concern with all phases of life and consciousness, and secondly the question of something beyond consciousness, which began to emerge in our discussions in Saanen.

E B: Did Krishnamurti ever describe any particular influence on his teaching? He says today that he doesn’t read books of a religious or philosophic nature, but in his earlier years he mav have come into contact with that.

DB : Well he didn’t describe it to me, but I’ve heard people say that he read the “Cloud of Unknowing,” which was influential, and probably other books. My feeling is that he must also have been familiar with what the Theosophists were saying. The other things he’s read or heard may have awakened him to some extent.

EB: Did you ever feel that he was drawing you awav from vour scientific interests?

DB: No, because I was going on with my scientific interests, at that time I wanted to understand this whole question of the "observer and observed" scientifically, and the question of dealing with the universe as a totality. So it didn’t really draw me away front the scientific work. I became more and more interested in the question of the nature of thought, which is crucial in everything, including science, since it was the only instrument you had. When I was in London with Krishnaji, I did discuss what to do about scientific research, and I remember he said, “Begin from the unknown. Try beginning from the unknown.” I could see that the question of 'getting free of the known' was the crucial question in science, as well as in everything. For example if you take scientific discoveries— I’ll take a very simple case: You may have heard of Archimedes and his discoveries. He was given the problem of measuring the volume of a crown of irregular size in order to see whether it was gold or not by weighing it, and it was too irregular to be measured and he was very puzzled, and then suddenly when he was in his bath he saw the water displaced by his body, and he realized that no matter what the shape, the water displaced is equal to the volume of the body, right? And therefore he could measure the volume of the crown. He went out shouting “Eureka!” if you recall.
Now, you consider the nature of what went on. The basic barrier to seeing was that people thought of things in different compartments, one was volume by measurement, and two, water being displaced would have nothing to do with that, right?

EB: Exactly.

DB: To allow those to be connected, the mind would have to dissolve those rigid compartments. Once the connection was made, anybody- using ordinary reasoning could have done the rest, any schoolboy of reasonable intelligence. The same happened with Newton. Obviously Archimedes, as Newton and Einstein were in states of intense energy when they were working, and what happens is that the moment of "insight" is the dissolving of the barrier in thought. It is "insight" into the nature of thought, not into the problem. All insight is the same. It is always insight into thought. Not its content but its actual physical nature, which makes the barrier. And that is what I think Krishnamurti was saying, that "insight" transforms the whole structure of thought and makes the consciousness different. Now for scientists that may happen for a moment, and then they get interested in the result, working it out, but Krishnamurti is emphasizing "insight" as the essence of life itself. Without coming to a conclusion. Don’t worry too much about the results, however important they may be.
Insight, fresh insight is continually needed. That insight is continually dissolving the rigid compartments of thought. And that is the transformation of consciousness. Our consciousness is now rigid and brittle because it’s held in fixed patterns of thought due to our conditioning about ourselves, and we get attached to those thoughts, they feel more comfortable.

EB: Krishnamurti always seems to be able to make the distinction between using thought as a tool and then putting it aside when the tool was no longer needed for a specific reason. Putting it aside leaves space for further inquiry.

DB: Yes, one could feel this space was present in our discussion

E B: What would you say are the most characteristic features of Krishnamurti’s teaching?

DB: I think there are several features you could say are characteristic.The emphasis on thought as the source of our trouble. Krishnamurti says that thought is a material process, he’s always said that. Most people tend to regard it as other than that, and I don’t see that emphasized anywhere. Now it’s very important to see that thought is a material process, in other words, thought can be observed as any matter can be observed. When we are observing inwardly we are observing not the content of thought, not the idea, not the feeling, but the material process itself. If something is wrong with thought it’s because erroneous things have been controlled in memory which then control you, and the "me" has to be changed physically. You see with a tape you could wipe out the memory with a magnet, but you would wipe out the necessary memories along with the unnecessary ones.

EB: Krishnamurti seems to indicate that a certain tabula rasa can be achieved through clear perception.

DB: That’s right, but it’s necessarily happening intelligently, so that you do not wipe out the necessary memories, but you’ll wipe out the memories which give rise to the importance of the self. He says that there’s an energy beyond matter, which is truth, and that truth acts with the force of necessity. It actually works on the material basis of thought and consciousness and changes that into an orderly form; So it ceases to create disorder. Then thought will only work where it’s
needed and leaves the mind empty for something deeper.

EB: People often raise the point that they lack sufficient energy to continue this investigation in their daily lives. How would you respond to that?

DB: That’s probably because there’s not an understanding of the nature of energy. They 'see it' at certain times, but it goes away. You have to see what is essential and universal, and that will transform the mind. The 'universal' belongs to everybody, as well as covering everything, every possible form. It’s the general consciousness of mankind. We come now to energy, this whole process of the ego is continually wasting energy, 'getting you low' and confusing you. In other words, the individual’s perception of themselves as a separate being, is a waste of energy.
Yes, because if you see yourself as a particular being you will continuallv try to protect that 'being'. Your energies will be dissipated.

EB: Earlier you were saying that since thought is a material process, it’s necessary to observe the process of thought rather than its contents. How is one to do that? How is one to make that shift anti observe the material process when it appears as if the only thing that consciousness is aware of is content?

DB: Well, there are several points. Before we get to that, another important difference of Krishnamurti is his emphasis on actual life— on being aware of everything— and also his refusal to accept authority, which is really extremely important. There were Buddhists who said, Krishnamurti’s talking much the same as the Buddhists, but he says, "why do you begin with the Buddha, why not begin with what is here now?" That was very important, he refuses to take seriously the comparison with what other people have said. Now to come back to what you were saying, about observation of the material process. You have to see what can be observed about thought asitle from the pictures and feelings and its meaning. Whatever you think appears in consciousness as a "show". That’s the way thought works to display its content, as a "show" of imagination. Therefore if you think the 'observer' is separate from the 'observed', it’s going to appear in consciousness as two different entities. The point is that the words will seem to be coming from the "observer" who 'knows', who 'sees', and therefore they are the truth, they are a description of the truth. Thatis the illusion.
The way a magician works is exactly the same, you see. Every magician’s work depends on distracting your attention so that you do not see how things are connected. Suddenly something appears by magic 'out of nothing'. You do not see how it depends on what he actually did.

EB: You miss that missing link ...

DB: By missing the link you change the meaning completely.

EB: So what appears to be magic is actually not realizing the connection ol all of these links.

DB: Yes, and that kind of 'magic' take place in consciousness, the observer see things appear and the observer appears to be unlinked to the 'observed'. Therefore it comes out as if from nothing.
Anti if it came from nothing it would be truth. Something that suddenly appears in consciousness out of nothing is taken as real and true. But if you see the link to thought, then you see it as not all that deep.

EB: You’re saying then that thought is more shallow than we believe it to be.

DB Yes, in fact it’s extremely shallow. You see, most of our consciousness is very, very shallow.

E B And what we see as our most profound insights are really rather superficial observations.

DB: Yes, or not even observations. Many of them are just delusions, a great deal of what we 'think about ourselves' is just an illusion. The analogy that is often made in Indian literature is if you have a rope that you think is a snake, your heart’s beating, your mind is confused, and the minute you see that it ’s not a snake everything changes. The mere perception is enough to change the state of mind, and the perception that, for example, the ol r and the observed arc not independent, will mean lie things which the observer is thinking arc not regarded as truth . more. They lose that power. Now if you see the whole, you could say the whole energy of the brain is ''aroused' and directed bv the 'show' which thought makes of it’s content, it ’s like a map. There is a 'show' in which this whole content is regarded as truth, as necessary. Then the entire brain is going to restart up around this show. Everything is going to be arranged to try to make a better show. Now the minute you see it ’s only a 'show', this all stops. Now the brain quiets down and it ’s in another state. It’s no longer trapped and therefore it can do something entirely different. But to do that it’s necessary not merely to say so, but to see it in the way we've been suggesting.

I thought of another case where you can see the ( liberating ) power of ( direct ) perception.
It was this case of Helen Keller you may have heard of her, she was blind, deaf, and dumb. When she couldn’t communicate she was rather like a wild animal. They found this teacher, Ann Sullivan.
What she did was to play a game, as it were, to put the child’s hand in contact with something, that was her only sense, and scratch the word on her hand. First it was clearly nothing but a game she didn’t understand what was going on. Then, Helen Keller recalls that one morning she was exposed to water in a glass and the name was scratched, and in the afternoon to water in a pump, and the name
was scratched, and suddenly she had an insight, a shattering insight, and it was that everything has a name. If water was one thing in all its different forms, this one name “ water” could he communicated to the other person who used the same name. From there on she began to use language, and in a few days she learned words, in a few days she was making sentences, and her whole life was transformed. She was no longer this violent, wild person, but entirely different. So you can see that this perception transformed everything. Once she had the perception there was no turning back. It was not to say she had the perception and then forgot about it and had to have it again. And I think Krishnamurti is implying that to see that "the observer is the observed", would be a perception enormously beyond what she had. It would have a far more revolutionary effect.

EB: You feel then that the concept of "the observer is the observed" is a key one in K's teachings.

DB: Yes; in fact they are identical.

EB: I wonder if you would recapitulate some of the other key factors in his teaching?

DB: Well, the question of time , psychological time being merely produced by thought. You see, ending 'time' is just the same thing as the observer and the observed. The ending of the (division between) observer and the observed is identical with the ending of psychological time and therefore a timeless state comes.

EB: And with the perception of the 'observer and the observed as one'; all of the phenomena of suffering, the human difficulties that we all go through are ended.

DB: That's right, because they all originate in ignorance of the true nature of this question. Then, the emphasis on compassion arises. Passion for all, not merely passion for those who are suffering. That is part of the passion which goes beyond suffering.

EB Authority is certainly another major factor in his teaching.

DB: Yes, you can see now why 'authority' is so important. One of the points you have to add is the enormous power of the mind to deceive itself, which he recognized . Authority is one of the major forms of self-
deception. That is, the authority in the mind , not authority in other matters, they are not necessarily self-deception. If somebody comes out as an "authority on truth" , the danger is that you say that you had begun to doubt certain things yourself but now you take what he says as true. Because you want it to be so. It’s basically that 'truth' for me is what I need it to be. I feel uneasy, frightened, worried, and on, and so the authority— the religious authority- comes along and says, “God will take care of you as long as you are good and you believe" and so on. Therefore I "want to believe" and therefore I say that "that’s the truth". I was on the point of having to question all this and along comes the "authority" who makes it unnecessary. You have to ask why you accept authority. You see, the authority gives you no proof whatsoever, so why do you accept it? Because you want to, you need to, right? I must have comfort, consolation and safety . And here comes this impressive figure, very nice looking, perhaps clothed in certain ways , with certain ceremonies, and vert nice music and consoling thoughts and a good manner, and he says, " You're alright, everything’s going to he all right. You just have to believe"

EB: One of the major characteristics of authority is that it has great power, and that power displays itself, as you said, in rituals, in ceremony. Just as a worldly power, a king, would show himself through his trappings, through his crown, etc.

DB: That’s right. But you see, it’s an empty 'show'. The whole point is that authority builds an 'empty show of power' around itself. A 'display', as you called it. There’s nothing behind it whatsoever, except our belief that it’s there.

EB Have you been able to observe in Krishnamurti’s writings any 'breaking point' where his teaching deviated or went in a completely different direction?

DB: No, I can’t see any fundamental change.

EB: Even as a young man, this teaching was implicit within everything he said ?

DB: Yes, yes.

EB: And there was no learning from other models?

DB: No. I think it comes from a Source beyond the brain which is, in principle, open to everybody.

This post was last updated by John Raica Sat, 02 Sep 2017.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 04 Sep 2017 #283
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

Another recycled Evelyn Blau interview with Mrs PUPUL JAYAKAR(cca 1984)

P J : Krishnaji returned to India in 1947, after the war and an absence of several years. In January of 1948, I had gone to see my mother, a social worker, who had an interest and was involved in politics at this time, but no interest in anything at all connected with a religious life. My father had died a few years earlier and my mother had never got over the shock. There was an old friend of my father’s, Sanjeeva Rao, who had been connected with Dr. Besant for many years, who at the time was responsible for organizing Krishnaji’s visit to India. He had come to see my mother, and when I went there he told me that he was taking my mother to see Krishnaji. As a child I had been in the Theosophical girls school in Benares. I remember seeing Krishnaji for a minute and being overwhelmed by the extraordinary beauty of Krishnaji as a person. As I had nothing else to do, I thought I would go with my mother to see this very beautiful person. We went to Carmichael Road where he was staying and after a little while Krishnaji walked in. If you had seen him at the was like a sudden explosion of a presence, the sudden entrance of a presence unlike anything that had ever be seen before. He had great beauty, which he still has, but seeing it ; the first time, the impact was total.

He was dressed in Indian clothes. I remember he used to laugh a lot in those days, and he was laughing when he came in. Sanjeeva Rao introduced us and Krishnaji sat down and my mother started telling him all about my father. After a little while he turned to her and said, “Amma, you’ve come to the wrong person. I have no sympathy to give you.” This came as a blow, I didn’t know what he meant. He said, “Which husband do you miss? the husband you married, the husband who was the father of your children, or the man he would have been if he had been alive. Do you miss the memory of the man?” It was all confusing- I felt a little disturbed and distressed and a little angry he couldn’t give my mother the solace she needed. Then he looked to me and asked, “ And what do you do?” I said, “ I do social work " He started laughing. I was again very disturbed as to why he should laugh at this. He said, it’s like a person who takes a bucket to a well, the bucket has a hole, and the more water you put in the more water flows out. He talked in this way for a little while. We were there for about one hour. When we came home I swore to myself that I’d never go again, but I couldn’t keep away and when I heard he was giving some public talks I went to hear him again. I couldn’t understand a word of what he said, but went again. Then Sanjeeva Rao came and said to me that Krishnaji wanted me to come to his smaller talks. I started going and after that there was no turning back.

E B: What was said at that time that was decisive in your thinking ?

PJ: Right from the beginning he had very small group discussions in India, where twelve, fifteen people used to gather round him. In those days he used to sit every morning and evening and people would walk in, sit round him, and ask him questions. There was a tremendous openness, and a tremendous compassion which flowed from him.
It deeply moved me. I remember he used to speak to individuals, relentlessly challenge them, question them, till listening to him, there arrived a point when one could see. This instant of 'seeing', which itself is impossible to describe, transforms the whole nature of the self. It happened to me and I think that instant of seeing, listening was for me the most significant thing which took place, I actually saw myself as I was in that instant.

EB That must have been an overwhelming experience, and that was what you felt you could not turn back from?

P J : Yes, and from there the teaching started unfolding. He was quiet.. .there was this tremendous outpouring of energy. He gave a lot of time, he met people in groups mornings and evenings, had small and large discussions, gave public talks, and a number of private interviews. Krishnaji is totally different in each of these areas, and when he used to give private interviews it was as if he literally became a mirror which he held up to you. The individual Krishnaji was not, it was just a m rror in which the very presence of Krishnaji made you look at yourself for what you were. He refused to allow you to move away from the seeing of what you were. In the discussions, one of the most interesting things for me, was to see this man start at the same level as all the people who sit around him. As he questions, he questions himself as much as another. He’s prepared to withdraw and look at what he says. I think another very vital clement was the quality of 'listening' which was manifest in Krishnaji. One was not used to that type of listening. I don’t think it exists in the world. A 'listening', in which there is no movement of the self. A listening which takes in the totality. You felt it. It is something that is tangible.

EB: During those years were you able to see him in another context, other than as a teacher, in a more informal way?

PJ : Yes. He used to go for drives with us. He often came for dinner at our house. Two or three things I remember very vividly. It s difficult to say that Krishnaji has 'personal' relationships. Each individual feels a sense of uniqueness in his or her relationship to Krishnaji. He responds to each individual by supplying that which each individual lacks. He laughed a lot and my mother, who was a very good cook, used to specially cook for him . He enjoyed good food. He enjoyed excellence, whether it was the way a house was arranged, or the way a meal was prepared or served. He would participate in situations in a very human way.

EB You mentioned his relationships, and said that there is a line or perhaps something where people are not capable of being in total relationship with him .

P J : No, I say that when he is the Teacher, sitting on the platform, gjving his talks, you cannot imagine yourself having a relationship to him because there is a 'totality' ; he is an empty vessel, and yet there is fullness in him. There is no personal element in him at all. When he gives an interview, even though you feel the warmth and compassion, gentleness, and love of the man, there is nothing 'personal'. When you meet him at a dinner table , or you drive with him he would tell and listen to jokes, ask all about India, all about our children, our families and our problems. He was also concerned about the position of women in India. You could see this concern reflected in many of the talks he gave.

EB: Would you say that his understanding of the position ol women in India was allied to an understanding ol the extreme poverty there?

P J : No, it had nothing to do with the poverty of India. It was the social position and the economic position which the Indian woman had at the time, where she was dependent on the husband. Inheritance laws had not made her a sharer in the inheritance of the father. Krishnaji’s talks were full of sections where he expressed his distress at the plight of women in India.

EB: You mentioned that he likened social work to "carrying a bucket with a hole". Does he still view it in that light? Is there no other action worthy of complete attention in the social sphere?

PI : He used to often tell me, “ Why are you wasting your time, Pupul?" Yet he was greatly interested in the weaver and crafts, I was concerned with. It was very strange, after I gave it all up, which was last year, he said, “ You know, you have created this over the years, are you going to abandon it?” I said, “ Why do you ask? It ’s over now.” He said, “But are you going to abandon it?” I think, to him , the creative moment is very important. Out of that creative moment things happen

EB: Would you say that Krishnamurti has had close friendships in his life?

PI : Yes. I would say so. He in fact said a very strange thing to me very soon after I met him. He said, “ People usually adore me, treat me like their divinity, or they hate me. To be a friend is difficult.”

EB: Krishnaji has shown a great interest in a variety of things over his lifetime, in automobiles, in clothes, would those be areas where he might be more playful?

P J : He would be playful. There’s a side of him which relaxes, laughs, is human. Sometimes an individual who doesn’t kow Krishnaji misunderstand his capacity to relax. l don’t think that side of Krishnaji is as spontaneous as it was. He has become much graver.

E B : You said previously that you and your sister were with K
at Ootacamund in 1948. Could you tell us about that ?

PJ : Well, I had known Krishnaji for just five months. I was beginning to know him but, he was still very much the 'unknown stranger', if I may put it. He asked us to come to Ooty. We had no intention of going to Ooty

EB: Could you tell us first where Ooty is?

PJ : Ootacamund, or Ooty, is a hill-station in the south, in the Nilgeris at a height of about eight thousand feet. It is very heavily wooded . It has great avenues and forests of pines and trees, meadows green. Krishnaji agreed to stay with a friend there for six weeks or so.
I suddenly got a letter from him asking my sister Nandini and me to go to Ooty. We went. Nandini had many domestic problems, a whole family, but we went. After about a fortnight he suddenly asked us if we would mind staying on in the evening. He asked us to come to his room. We went to his room. He said, “Whatever happens, don’t be afraid. Under no circumstances be afraid. If I faint and my mouth remains open, close my mouth. Just sit at a distance of about four feet from me. Just keep on watching me.”

EB: Just you and your sister were present?

PJ : Yes, just the two of us. He first started complaining of tremendous pain in his tooth. We thought he had a toothache but, he said “No no, you don’t understand. No no, sit quietly.” So we sat. Then he complained of a tremendous pain in his head and in his spine. There was a stream of poetic language that came from him. He used to keep on moaning and then this stream of marvelous language would flow

EB: Was that language part of his teaching?

P J : He used to talk of nature and leaves and stones, and then he would sav. “They’re having a great time with me. Do you know what they’re doing? They’re completely emptying my mind.”
I’ve got it written out, I don’t remember the exact words today. He implied there were some 'forces' that were working inside his brain, cleaning up the brain, making it totally empty so that it could receive. This used to go on for hours, it went on for sometimes four hours, five hours, sometimes six hours.

EB: Over a period of successive nights?

P J : Fifteen or sixteen nights at a stretch. There was a tremendous sense of sacredness in the whole place. We were quite new to it, but we couldn' t help feeling this tremendous sense of being in a temple. Not an ordinary temple, but in a great Presence. There was another very strange thing. He kept on shouting his own name. “Krishna has gone away, he’s left me. Oh no, no, he’s told me not to call him. I mustn't call him, he’ll be very angry. I mustn’t call him.” Then one day he said, They' re back, don’t you see them? Washed by raindrops, spotless. After this went on for some time he would faint. Then he would come to and he would be completely Krishnaji again for a little while. Then again he would start this and the three things were the tremendous pain, the tremendous sense of 'presence' in the room and the great flow of language.

EB When he spoke in that way was he speaking in his own voice?

PJ : When he spoke about nature it was his own voice, but when he used to call out for Krishna it was a different voice. It was a voice which was an empty voice. Totally empty as if it were... how shall I put it? It was an 'empty bubble' who was calling him. There used to be times when the body would suddenly grow. You felt a tremendous fullness.

EB: It appeared physically larger?
PI: When you say that it sounds so stupid that it’s difficult to say, but it was as if suddenly a 'light' would come.

EB Would he be unconscious then?
PI: He would he unconscious then. Once I remember very well, it was the end, he fainted. As he fainted his face was worn with pain, but suddenly it changed. It became totally quiet. Every vestige of pain disappeared. It became a deeply meditative face, with a beauty that cannot be contained in any words. We just kept on watching, we got a strange feeling of wanting to fold our hands. Then, it was as if he came out of his faint. He lay there and then turned to us. He said, “Did you see that face?” We said “yes.” He said, “The Buddha was here."
I don’t know how we remained quite balanced and sane through it, because we didn' t know where we were. Here we were like two babes in the wood, suddenly thrust into a situation which was incomprehensible, completely beyond anything we could ever have conceived. Then one day it didn’t happen.

Another incident I remember very well, in the middle of this period.
We went for a walk. He said he wanted to walk in the woods. It started to rain, so we took the car as we thought he would get wet and we could bring him back. We went along that road but couldn’t find him, so we came back. Within two minutes he entered the room. He was completely dry. We said, “Krishnaji where did vou walk?" He said, “Along that road.” I said, “You were not there, we went on that road and you were not there.” Suddenly he 'switched off', lay down on the bed and started speaking. He said, “They covered me with leaves, I was covered with all the leaves that fall from the trees. I nearly didn’t come back.” To this day I don’t know 'where' he went lor a walk. He said he went for a walk on that road but he was not on that road. Il was a strange, strange experience for us.

EB During this time did he carry on his regular activities?

PI : Oh yes. The moment he came through with this he was perfectly well. He’d grown a beard at that time. He used to go for walks. I remember he used to have a great stride in those days.

EB He still does.

PI : He used to walk down the hill and we used to sometimes watch him come down. I remember a group of women carrying wood on their heads who on seeing this figure walking past removed the loads from their heads, and prostrated themselves on the ground as he walked by.

EB: Did the thought ever occur that a doctor should been called at these times ?

PJ: Right at the beginning, yes. We said: “Shall we call a dentist ?"
Then he said, no, no, just sit. Don't be afraid. Whatever happens don't be afraid.He was very concerned that there should be no fear That incident which took place in Ojai, when he said that inside the house he felt everything dirty. He couldn't bear the touch of anything and therefore he had to go under the tree and take a mat and lie down there. He never spoke of any kind of pollution. If there is one feeling which I came away with it was a sense of sacredness. Great sacredness

EB: Do you think this is something that is happening to this day ?

PJ: Not in that (dramatic) way. The 'presences' which were there in that room, the throbbing presence, happens sometimes.

E B: Those things that he's written about in the Notebook ?

PJ: Yes, it's a continuous thing that takes place.

EB: During that period did he ever talk about the Masters or any such things ?
PJ: Except that one time; “They are here, they are here. Spotless", I think he used that phrase ' like dew drops or raindrops, but he never spoke of the masters. He used to say they are having fun with me. They won't leave me". He felt that his brain was being completely 'emptied'.

EB; In the Notebook he speaks of his brain being 'carved out'.

P J : Well it was that kind of a thing going on, but it was an intense physical thing. What else it was one doesn’t know.

EB What would you say was the relationship between the physical, the pain of that, and the other...

PJ: When the pain became too great he used to faint.

EB: I’m trying to understand the role of that pain.

P J : I really couldn’t tell you. It was not possible to say. I remember asking him, “You speak of Krishna as if he were some outside person? Are there two entities?” He said, “ No, no, Pupul it ’s not quite like that, it’s not quite like that.” He implied that there is only one entity.

EB: Culd you observe any change in his teaching after these experiences?

PJ: I think 1948 was a period when his teaching was, in my view, different from the teachings which took place previously. Whether it was due to this or something else I don't know. I have noticed that whenever has gone through this kind of an experience it has had an effect. It has not had an effect on the teaching but the teachings have shown a new dimension. I would say that as far as teaching I would consider thye main phases to have been 1947-48 , 1960-61 and 1972-73 . These are the three main periods. In 1948, he used to take you literally by the hand into self-knowledge . He would lead you from thought to thought till there was an ending of thought. He would do this, for example, with the thought of 'greed' or with the rising of fear. He would keep on saying “And then what arises?" So that you started observing, “ what is" , as it arose. You also observed, “ what should be” as it arose in thought. So that one was awake in that instant of “ what is."

In 1961 that phase was over. In 1961 he said, "step by step is the process of analysis". He wiped out all that (gradual approach) , and he said, self-knowledge is necessary, it is essential. But he concerned himself with the 'whole' not with the fragment, with the total seeing of a thing. It has become, as I’ve often told Krishnaji, far more 'abstract'. It was most 'personal' in 1948. In 1972 there is no 'personal' relationship in his teaching. It is a teaching which is 'absolute', which has no relationship to the 'personal me'. While in 1948 there was a relationship to the 'personal me'. There has been a deepening and maturing and a widening of the teaching. It has become 'universal'. For the first time now he is talking about a "life of correctness", which is a life which is completely free of self-centered activity. He said that is essential before anything else can be. He never said that in 1948.

EB: So that there has been constant change actually.

P J : I say there is a constant change, there was a time when he told the members of the foundation that “I have nothing to to do with the (K) foundations. I have nothing to do with 'institutions'. Don’t use my name in the institutions or use me in any sense as an 'authority'. It’s not 'my' wishes which are in the picture. I’m only concerned with the individual and awakening self-knowing in the individual. I’m not concerned with anything else.”
He said once, “My real dharma is that.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 04 Sep 2017 #284
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

And a shorter one with Mrs Sunanda Pathwardhan

EB: Could you talk about the 'physical' dimension of Krishnamurti’s teaching?

S P : Krishnaji shows the importance of the role of the senses in bringing about a quietness of the mind and in awakening a new sensitivity. It is not by suppressing the senses; it’s not by denying or sublimating the senses, but rather by awakening your eyes, your ears, your touch, sense of smell, everything. Generally we use or are aware of only one or two senses at a time, whereas he talks of "all the senses" operating simultaneously. Then there can be a (sensitivity ?) 'ground' of a deep non-verbal state. This awakening of the senses has in it vibrancy and vitality without an (egotistic ?) center.

EB: You said earlier that a Teacher like Krishnamurti only comes along once in a thousand years. Can you explain what you mean by that?

S P : You see, the Buddha belonged to the great "break-away" traditions of India. That was more than 2500 years ago. He repudiated everything traditional, ritual, rites, orthodoxy, etc. Like the Buddha, Krishnaji has broken away from the mainstream of Indian tradition. He was brought up, denying his mother tongue and was taught English and French. In a way he was brought up to speak to the whole of humanity in the English language which is understood in many countries of the world. I think this is a very significant thing so that whatever he says can be understood directly by many persons in many parts of the world.

EB . There are hundreds of gurus and Krishnamurti, in some sense, has functioned as a "guru". In what way was he different?

SP : I think Krishnaji was quite different and unique because he was very emphatic in saying that there is no spiritual authority; that there is no authority whatsoever in spiritual matters. Many people may have looked upon him as a guru; he was known as "the guru who was a non­-guru." He held each one of us to be responsible for ourselves in this journey of inquiry; there is no authority in spiritual life. Therefore, he never gave answers. He said; “ Look at the problem. The problem will reveal itself, you have to inquire, you have to observe what is and in that very observation what is will reveal itself and a transformation can take place. For this to happen, no guru can guide you. If you are suffering, if you are in a state of agitation, no guru can help you. You have to observe it, and that awakens a capacity to be independent and inquire in freedom from the very beginning.”

EB: Did affection have any place in Krishnamurti’s teachings?

S P : I would say, emotion had no place in his teachings. Sentiment had no place in his teachings. The mere response from the intellect too, is limited; it has no basis of affection and sensitivity in relationship between human beings. It is only when we human beings come together in affection that there can be a new quality in our daily living. He certainly has given tremendous importance to affection and love. If we have that, relationships pose no problem.

I am reminded of a conversation with him . A friend of mine told me "You know, in Krishnaji’s teachings there is place only for compassion. There is no place for ordinary human affection, pleasure or fondness. How does one live then?” Later when I met Krishnaji, I talked to him about this. He said, “ Compassion is a very vast thing, it can be quite abstract. Many people cannot understand or comprehend what Compassion is. It is very difficult. But that Compassion can touch a person. It can relate itself to an individual and when that happens you will understand it.” Compassion can remain a concept, but affection one can feel where there is no prejudice, no demands of reciprocity. Then it is possible to have effortless understanding and empathy for each other

EB: Did the 'presence' of the teacher in any way prevent an understanding of what he was talking about?

S P : What does the presence of a person who is a so-called “realized person,” a witness to that supreme intelligence and compassion do? We have descriptions in scriptures, in books, of those states of “otherness,” of transcendence. But when a person actually lives in the presence of such a person, he experiences a different quality because there is a communication in silence of 'that' which is sacred, not just through word, symbol or thought. The living presence of an indivi­dual who is a witness and a holder of that extraordinary sacred dimen­sion and pure energy; has a significance which is beyond all measure.

EB: In what way did Krishnamurti change as he grew older and did that change reflect in the talks?

SP : I think Krishnaji changed over the years a great deal. I first met him in Madras when he came to India in 1947. Of course, personally speaking, I absolutely fell in love with the teachings, with him, and it meant a whole lot of change in the direction of my life. He was a delight to be with; he would walk with you, he would talk with you, such fun it was, being with him. I would say, perhaps the end of the fifties this 'personal' factor gradually started diminishing. Personally, I observed that he became more severe, very serious, and from then onwards, there was very little of the 'personal' in him. I could see that he was deeply concerned with the state of humanity. For fifty years he had taught, spoken and travelled all over the world. Why was not a single person transformed? He was certainly concerned with this problem. Therefore, there was hardly any place for the 'personal' factor.

EB: Do you think that Krishnamurti’s teaching may create the foundation for a new civilization?

SP: I feel so, though I may not be able to substantiate it; it is onlv a 'gut feeling' about this direction. Today, Krishnaji is addressing ( to the total consciousness of ?) humanity, which has already become closer together as a global village. He is addressing humanity as one unit. Therefore, human consciousness is being spoken to, being touched through word and through non-word by his presence, and therefore the whole stream of human consciousness is being affected in depth. This awakening of the collective consciousness of humanity, could be the ground for the release of a new creative process. New energies in perception, in relationships, can be released. One can be related to other human beings w ithout images; a new creative process is set in motion, in dialogue with oneself, in dialogue with nature, in dialogue with people.

EB: Are there aspects of Krishnamurti’s teachings that can only be understood non-verbally?

SP : We all know that the word is very limited and thought is limited. Our relationship to each other is based on mutual pleasure, pain, dependence, insecurity . We have observed all this— and the word is not the thing. Not because Krishnaji has said it, but we have also comprehended it e of the great things which he said was that images in relationship prevent you from being really related to another. It is only when there is sensitivity, a listening, a sharing without wanting anything, that there is real relatedness. One of the grounds of the non-verbal quality is to be sensitive and be related in affection to each other. If human beings can love each other, have affection for each other, perhaps we may find a way out of all the extraordinary chaos in this world.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Mon, 04 Sep 2017 #285
Thumb_photo_reduite John Raica Canada 666 posts in this forum Offline

Evelyn Blau's interview with MARY ZIMBALIST

EB: You became quite close to Krishnamurti. You were doing many tilings for him ; did you detect any difference between the man and his teaching at that time?

MZ: Absolutely none. One of the many extraordinary things about him was that there was never any 'shadow' in Krishnamurti. He really was what you saw, what you sensed, and infinitely more, but nothing was ever in contradiction. I don’t know if many people realized it, I’m sure you do, but he was also a very human person. He loved to laugh, he liked funny jokes, he looked at television and went to the movies. He liked Westerns, as is w ell-know n, and sometimes when the mayhem on the screen had me ducking and closing my eyes, he would say, “Look at those mountains!” meaning the scenery of Monument Valley. While people were being slaughtered in the foreground, he was lost in the desert scenery. At some time he had asked me things about movies and I must have told him that it wasn’t really blood on the screen, so when I would quail he would reassure me by saying, “It’s all right, it’s just tomato juice.” He had this very endearing and almost childlike quality about many thnigs and yet there was also this limitless extraordinary man

E B : What were his other in terests? Was he interested in art, in literature , politics , nature ?

MZ: He was keenly sensitive to the beauty of language. Apart from his well-known enjoyment of detective stories— 'thrillers', he called them — and which he read for relaxation, he read mostly poetry and used to read the Old Testament, not for religious reasons but for the language. In art he always spoke of m arvelous architecture— the Acropolis, the Gothic cathedrals, and he found something almost sacred in the beauty of the Winged Victory and the great Maheshamurti statue at Elephanta. As to politics, he followed the news, often on television, and in the weekly magazines. Also he would talk to people, question them, he was well-informed, more than you might think.

EB: Would you say that he fitted in any particular category, politically speaking? Would it be liberal or more conservative? Did he express those kinds of views?

MZ He wasn’t sophisticated in matters of politics, hut he didn’t tolerate the pettiness of divisions of people, the fighting between countries, political groups, divisive beliefs, he would be most dismissive or impatient of such things in general conversation, but he was always enquiring.
He liked to listen to music in the morning while he had breakfast.
After giving him his tray I used to ask what he would like to hear and almost invariably he would reply, “ You choose.” So I tried to guess what he would enjoy. Most of all he loved Beethoven. Then Mozart, Bach, Haydn, and sometimes he would take a fancy to a particular performer. I think he liked Richter which I played often, and the great Italian pianist, Michelangeli. I once asked him which of those two he preferred; he thought for a moment and said, “One is like snow and one is like sunlight”

EB: Most people tend to view Krishnamurti as more, I won’t say intellectual, but the fact that he liked Beethoven was certainly more romantic.

MZ: Beethoven was his favorite. But what moved him deeply was chanting— the Sanskrit chants in which he joined most wonderfully and also Gregorian

E B It is also known he had a special affinity to nature, that it was beyond just our envitonmental concerns— a really deep link to nature.

MZ: He reacted more to nature than to visual art. He felt looking at a tree or a mountain was more moving than a Leonardo painting. He didn’t dismiss it but he said the beauty of nature, of a tree, is beyond anything that man can create.

EB: Which puts artists in their place, doesn’t it? A chastening experience. He had, and this is also well-known, a rather 'mechanical' aptitude which is somewhat at variance with the other aspects of his life.

MZ: He used to say he had once taken a car apart when he was quite young, and then put it together again. And he took great care of his watch, checking it carefully in Geneva so that it was correct to the second. He liked that. Once I asked him what he would do in India if he were not what he was? How would he earn a living? He said, “Oh, beg around.”

E B : It’s rather interesting to think what would have happened to Krishnamurti had he not had a European English education. He might have been “begging around” in India.

MZ He said that he would probably be dead because he was a child his brother had TB and we know K rishnamurti had scars on his lungs. His must have been an arrested case and only because his health was looked at very carefully did he think he was alive.

E B: Now another question about his ( educational) interests ; K was not a good student when he was a young man. How did that translate into his innterest in education for children and for adults with the founding of the schools and centers?

MZ; As you know, a central part of his teaching is (understanding the right) the role of knowledge- both the good of knowledge and the limitation of knowledge. We need knowledge even to speak, but the mind mustn’t be confined by knowledge, it must have the ability to go further. He was endlessly explaining the limitation of thought, which is so fundamental to his teachings. He used to feel that to help young people who are more pliable, less conditioned , to understand the role of knowledge was very im portant. I remember one of the first summers in Gstaad he used to lunch with some friends who had a photograph of him as a child with his little brother, Nitya. He stared at it a long time as though it were of someone else and said he had no memory of it at all, but when I asked him what was going through his mind when he looked at it, he said, “If we could understand why that boy was not conditoned , why in spite of all the adulation and the fuss that went on around him , it left no mark on him , perhaps we could help other children to be less conditioned.” I think that was why he wanted to bring about a different kind of education in which there is an understanding of the function of thinking, and also understanding the potential of the brain - not simply to reflect what it had been taught or what it had already experienced. That, I think was the reason behind his creating schools. After starting the Brockwood Park School in England, he thought of beginning with younger children, in the Oak Grove School in Ojai, to see if they would be less conditioned. I'm afraid that one came to feel, eventually, that ( most of the ) children are conditioned practically from the crib, that was what he was trying to see— if you could free children from the grip of conditioning.

E B Do you think that he ever felt that the schools were a success? Did they help the children?

MZ: I think what he wanted in all this was something unlimited, so he never would say, “This is good,” he would point out what was wrong and go into how to make it right Approbation was not given as such, but it didn’t mean he was carping. He would see an insufficiency or where there was need for something and try to open that door, but there was never a moment when he said , “That’s a good job." I don’t think he ever thought in those terms. Excellence was, 1 think, the quality he looked for and it wasn’t defined.

EB: Was he disappointed if things didn’t live up to expectations?

MZ. Oh, he would point it out in no uncertain terms. When things went wrong he would really chastise people, not in a personal, hurtful way, but saying, “Look what you’re doing.”

EB: Krishnamurti's language changed greatly over the years, he seemed to speak with increasing clarity and a 'scalpel-touch' somehow to words.

M/ Yes, he was precise about his choice of words. Often before talks he would ask me to look up dictionary meanings, most often for the derivation of the word, He didn’t prepare the talks the wav most people would, but he often had some direction in mind.

EB: He didn’t make notes?

MZ: Never in my time. In fact, many times in the car driving to the talks, he said, “What am I going to talk about?” I never answered, but almost invariably a great and extraordinary talk would take place.

EB: How did you weigh that in the balance of your own early experience of hearing him talk and being overwhelmed by the words that would come out, against someone who asked “What shall I talk about?.”

MZ: It would 'come'. He didn’t like to listen to his own tapes. When it was over, it was finished. He wanted to come to things afresh and when he started taking written questions he didn’t want to see them ahead of time. People dropped them in boxes and he would have me collect them and I would sort them by subject. Questions about fear—always the most numerous— and nationalism, jealousy, greed, gurus, all these different topics and I typed them onto the paper he took with him. He didn’t plan what he would say, but he would choose a question, read it out to the audience, explore it as if he were looking through a celestial microscope, and this marvelous reflection would come out in his language.

EB : When you were driving him to a talk did he ever resist talking, did he ever say “I’m so tired” or “I really don’t want to do this today?”

MZ: No. Talking w as his job, his responsibility, and even when he was ill he would, if he could, fulfill that. I don’t think many people realize how very hard he worked. For over seventy years his life was spent giving talks, writing, seeing people privately, holding discussions with teachers, students, very erudite people, and the continual traveling. It was gruelling constant work. Only when he was physically unable to do so did it let up. And even then there were times when he was seriously ill for two days before the talks, but on the day of the talk he was astonishingly able to speak. On such days he would be ready and erything would be exact. He would be up early, the car would be in front before the time to leave. If I were driving, when I heard him coming I would have the engine started, the door open and in Saanen, for instance, the tent was reached exactly at the moment for him to walk in and climb onto the platform. He didn’t want to pause or, heaven forbid, be late!

EB: Mary, you’ve heard it said that some 'being' was speaking through Krishnamurti; this was particularly prevalent in the early days. Did you ever have the sense of some 'entity' speaking through Krishnamurti?

MZ: No, I have never had such notions. To me that is nonsense because Krishnamurti could speak at any moment as he spoke on the platform. If at the lunch table conversation became serious, he would talk with the same depth and perception. In interviews, private or public he spoke that way. This was the man himself, not some 'spirit' talking through him. But often on the platform one could feel in him a tremendous energy and it seemed that it was out of that 'energy' and 'ability' to go to the heart of things that he spoke. This may be speculation, but one felt it intensely. I felt it. It was out of his intelligence, his own perception.

EB: And yet he seemed to have a connection with what he described as “ the Other,” what was the line if any, between the 'other' and his speaking, or for that matter, his life?

MZ: Me never spoke of a 'line', but he spoke very often about 'otherness', the 'immeasurable'— all the marvelous words he used about it— and this, that he called 'meditation' would come to him, usually in the night.

EB: Would he be sleeping and then wake up?

MZ: I don’t know, because he would only talk a little about it, but he would often say, “ I had an extraordinary meditation last night,” and some­times when alone with him or on a walk— particularly on a walk when he liked to be silent and look at nature— one felt he was very 'far away'. Something was happening or was 'present'. It was almost palpable at times.

EB: You yourself would have a sense of the 'otherness'?
MZ: I would feel some 'invisible force'.

EB: It’s rather like when you listen to the radio you are able to tune in and get a concert or the news or whatever. Apparently, K was able to 'tune in' to this energy which surrounds all of us.

MZ: In a way. Again this may be just my imagination, but it is as though there is 'something' that is nameless but can be called 'intelligence' or 'truth' or 'beauty'— any of those things— but most of us are 'blind' and do not sense it.

EB: Was it something that he could do deliberately?

MZ: He said meditation cannot be done deliberately, 'it' has to come to you.

EB: Did he describe his sense of meditation? Of course he has written and spoken about it in his talks, but did he talk with you about meditation?

MZ: He talked about being very quiet and not letting thought have its way in your mind. Not letting all the 'train of association' that generally streams through our heads, not to stop it by will, but not to pursue it. It goes by and you watch it and you let it pass. You 'learn' from it. So when we talked about these things it would often be in terms of being quiet, of just watching the mind, not doing anything about it, not pushing or stopping it. He had many descriptions of meditation, they are in almost all his writings. An essential element was a quiet mind. He could have that quiet, even once on a flght to somewhere this 'meditative state' came to him.

EB: But as he described in his writings, never something that he deliberately sat quietly to do.

MZ: You cannot induce it, he said. When he was so ill at the end, still that 'extraordinary thing' continued to come to him through all the pain and suffering. He said, “Something else controls what will happen to me. When the body can no longer do the things necessary to speak, the life will end.” And that is what happened.

EB: Does that imply there is 'something else'?

MZ: 'Something else'. Not that he was just an instrument of That, but the expression of that 'Other' was his task; from that he spoke, and when physically he could no longer talk his life would end.

EB: He felt that the reason for his life was to be able to give these teachings?
MZ: Yes, that was his life. A personal life existed but that 'Other' was the Reality.

EB: His last days must have been quite overwhelming for you.

MZ: He had spoken of his death for some time. He knew he was dying, he wanted to do his job to the end, and he did. He was entirely rational, his mind was not touched by the illness, the pain or the medication, and as his body grew weaker, his way of talking became infinitely painful to hear because his voice was so weak, but he was Krishnamurti to the very end in the fullest sense of all he ever was.

EB: You have described Krishnamurti as a fountain giving forth his teaching; what was the 'wellspring', where did it come from?

MZ: I cannot say. All I could say would be my imagining, and that has no value. I can try to put it into words, but it is only my speculation. It is as though there are ''abstract realities''— intelligence, beauty, love— qualities that he spoke of. They are not the product of the human mind. One could use the word 'God' too as long as it is not an imagined God in one’s own image. Different words can be used but they are aspects of one infinite life force. I think this was Reality for Krishnamurti, and if you want, a well-spring.

E B : It has been suggested that Krishnamurti might represent an evolutionary step in humanity, a 'prototype' of something new. Is that a possibility?

MZ: I don’t know about a 'prototype', but to me his life was proof that a human being is capable of extraordinary intelligence and perception, and a way of living that is very different from most human life. It was 'real' in him, not something I imagined. Doubtless some will say I am projecting onto him some ideal. But for me it was incontrovertibly evident that this man was what he was talking about and he lived that way. In all the years I was with him I never saw anything that denied that or was inconsistent with a life lived that way. There were no contradictions. At many, many times there was undeniably a sense of something I can only call 'sacred'.

EB: Mary, obviously Krishnamurti has had a tremendous impact on your life; how would you describe that impact?

MZ: I don’t know how to characterize it. I’m not being trivial when I say that I don’t know why I was lucky enough to be able to be with him as I was. If there was 'something' that was looking out for him in life, people who came along, I suppose, were instruments of 'that'. I don' t mean that I was sent from heaven to do something for him , I simply was 'at hand' and it came about, and the good of it was overwhelming for me, but I can ’t measure or describe it. I was privileged, I was blessed beyond any words to be able to be around him and in small ways be just useful in a human sense, doing things that needed to be done.

E B: What would you say was K’s impact on the world?

MZ: I feel that his impact on the world is almost in a very seed-like state. I feel that perhaps in years to come, in one hundred years, history will look back and see this as an extraordinary time when Krishnamurti was alive on this earth . If you look back at human history, how many people knew the Buddha was there at the time, or for many centuries afterward, but what was said and spoken has grown and entered the lives of millions and millions two thousand years later. I feel that K is of that order and we must do what we can to make his teaching known because it is and will be something vast for humanity.

I feel our responsibility now is to keep the accurate record of what he said and taught. For those of us who knew him that is our most essential responsibility: to preserve and protect the authenticity of his teaching so that it is there for centuries, as he gave it, uninterpreted by others. But the another even deeper responsibility for those who have known and listened to him: The ultimate one is to reflect his teachings in our lives, in our relations to others, to whatever life brings. It is to live the reality, not just the words of his teaching.

Sign in to recommend
Back to Top
Displaying posts 271 - 285 of 285 in total
To quote a portion of this post in your reply, first select the text and then click this "Quote" link.

(N.B. Be sure to insert an empty line between the quoted text and your reply.)