Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tt00101)

mkr wrote:

>No one can be sure if K did or did not qualify as a vehicle for Maitreya,
>and only possibly K knows what did happen and he never discussed this
>issue. There were several occasions when this issue was raised by many who
>were close to him, I believe he always stated that we would address it
>later, which was his nice way of saying that he does or cannot discuss it.

>From my "Krishnamurti and the World Teacher Project: Some Theosophical
Perceptions."

"Krishnamurti revealed to Mary Zimbalist another intriguing indication of
his self-perception when he discussed with her in May 1975 his forthcoming
biography by Mary Lutyens. She had asked him why the Masters, if they
existed, had spoken in the old days, but not recently. “There is no need
for them now the Lord is here” was Krishnamurti's reply. Mary Lutyens did
not think it was a serious remark, because of the tone of his voice. The
same idea appeared, this time apparently in a serious way, in a dialogue
between Krishnamurti and some persons at Brockwood Park, England, in the
autumn of 1975, when the subject of his biography came up: “there is the
idea that when he [the Bodhisattva] manifests all the others [the Masters]
keep quiet.” Is Krishnamurti referring to himself? When reading the whole
dialogue that specific question arises irresistibly. The just-quoted
sentence was preceded by an elaboration of the idea of the Bodhisattva:
“There is a very ancient tradition about the Bodhisattva that there is a
state of consciousness, let me put it that way, which is the essence of
compassion. And when the world is in chaos that essence of compassion
manifests itself. That is the whole idea behind the Avatar and the
Bodhisattva. And there are various gradations, initiations, various Masters
and so on...” I think Krishnamurti does refer to himself, but he is not
doing so explicitly, because for him it was “irrelevant,” though not
irrelevant enough not to mention it."

Govert