Re: Theos-World To ramadoss@g...
Mar 05, 2002 07:10 PM
Larry: Thanks for the msg.
I hope it helps.
I am sure there may be other statements that K made on this matter, which
can be found in other written material -- either under his name or related
by a third party who was present in a conversation or discussion - formal
and informal. If a historical researcher has interest on this issue, and
has time and interest, then first hand research into the material available
in publications (a search on Amazon will help) as well as Krishnamurti
Foundation Archives in Ojai, is likely yield valuable insight into what his
As I see it, there is another angle to this issue.
It may be recalled that he frequently mentioned that "the house is on fire"
-- referring to current human conditions and solutions that need to be
addressed with the greatest urgency.
I am reminded of the famous incident in the life of Lord Buddha when one of
his followers asked the Lord about the origin of the Universe. Buddha
responded that the current human condition of sorrow and suffering is like
a human being hit with an arrow and bleeding to death and hence what is of
importance is what actions are to be taken with greatest urgency to prevent
the person from bleeding to death.
Questions like who shot the arrow, which direction arrow came from, what
kind of material the arrow is made of, how fast arrow was travelling etc.
are non priority items considering the urgency of the current problem. I
think, Krishnamurti's emphasis has all along been to address the current
human conditions and solutions there of.
At 10:12 AM 3/5/02 -0500, you wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 07:54:15 -0000 "bri_mue" <email@example.com> writes:
> What did Krishnamurti say about the Theosophical Masters.
> Pls bring some actual quotes.
I have thus far limited my discussions to areas in which I feel I have
above average knowledge. I am certainly not an expert on K, but have read
a dozen or so book on his life or compilations of his talks. We also have
thirteen tapes of his talks.
As your question goes basically unanswered to this point, I thought I
would venture what little I can share on the issue.
First of all, for anyone interested, the subject of K and the Masters is
best covered by Aryel Sanat in is THE INNER LIFE OF FRISHNAMURTI. All I
am doing is sharing a few of his insights.
1-The most common understanding is that K rejected the notion of masters
following an experience in which Master KH appeared to him, and K,
wanting a fuller experience, i.e. wanting to touch him, walked right
through him. the impication most derive from this is that K found that KH
was a figment of his imagination , an illusion, and thus K from that
moment went beyond the need for contact.
This account is not K's own words, but the interpretive writing of Ingram
Smith. K himself later put the incident into poetic form. Here is what he
He was at the door of my room,
I passed through Him
Purified, with a new song in my heart,
He is before my forever.
Look where I may, he is there.
I see all things through him.
His glory has filled me and awakened a
glory that I have never known.
An eternal peace is my vision,
Glorifying all things.
He is ever before me.
J. Krishnamurti, "The Immortal Friend," in FROM DARKNESS TO LIGHT:POMS
AND PARABLES, vol 1 of THE COLLECTED WORKS OF KRISHNAMURTI, San
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1980, pp. 56-57.
Quoted in Sanat p 257.
This does not sound like he rejected the notion of Masters in the
2-Mr Sanat relates that in later years, K seldom used the word "Master"
but rather uses a term such as "it". Following is an explaination he gave
to Mary Lutyens and Mary Zimbalist. (Note that there a two witnesses)
"That thing is in the room. If you ask it what it is, it wouldn't answer.
It would say, "You are too small." I think we said the other day that
there is a reservoir of good that must be manifest...But all this is
sacred and I don't know how you will convey not only the sacredness but
everything else we have talked about....The moment you understand it, it
is no longer a mystery. But the sacredness is not a mystery. So we are
trying to remove the mystery leading to the source"
Mary Lutyens, KRISHNAMURTI: THE YEARS OF FULFILMENT, New York: Farrar;
Straus & Giroux, 1983, pp. 230-31.
Qouted in Sanat, p. 184.
If this is how K refers to the Masters, it is understandable that most
people don't understand how he really felt about them, as most of his
speech to quite straightforward while this is rather obscured.
3-Another explaination was given in the following quote from K:
"One of the questions is about the Masters, as they are explained not
only in Theosophy but in the Hindu tradition and in the Tibetan
tradition, which maintain that there is a Bodhisattva; and that he
manifests himself rarely...This boy was prepared for that manifestation.
And he went through all kinds of things...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 Bodhisattva. And there are various gradations,
initiations, various Masters and so on, and also there is the idea that
when he manifests all the others keep quite. You understand?"
J. Krishnamurti, TRUTH AND ACTUALITY, New York: Harper & Row; 1978, pp.
Quoted in Sanat p. 262.
This was a discussion with a small group in Brentwood Park.
The idea seems to be that just as the stars are obscured by the light of
the sun, so the Masters become silent in the presence of a Badhisattva. K
was believed to be such an one. Thus to him the Masters became silent
when the Advatar began manifesting himself through K.. But, again, K is
not repudiating the Masters of Wisdom, but explining why he daes not talk
about them and why they themselves were no longer speaking.
Well that's my little presentation. Maybe I've missed something but at
least I've given it a shot.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application