Theos-Talk Archives (March 2009 Message tt00015)

This is indeed a good and important conversation, and we don't have 
to agree with everything with each other.

Govert wrote:
 
> 2) I agree that K's 'Beloved' can be construed as his higher self, 
but also as Maitreya's or any other Self, realized like a Master or 
not realized like ourselves. My understanding is that K had to get to 
that level to be able to be overshadowed. 

I think that Aryel Sanat says in his famous book "The Inner Life of 
Krishnamurti" that theosophists had the problem that they made the 
Masters too concrete. So sometimes the Masters may be archtypes, 
sometimes the higher self, sometimes mere astral views. Also Ernest 
Wood thinks like this in his book "Is This Theosophy?".

Of course, sometimes the Masters can be real, too. Personally I 
believe that the Masters were behind J. Krishnamurti, but often not 
in the manner how theosophists believed. I tend to interpretate like 
Radha that it was JK's mission through negation to save the TS Adyar 
from make-believe theosophy. So maybe eventually things went like 
they were meant to be. The 14 years old boy were lifted to a becoming 
messiah, and theosophists were attached to outer authorities... This 
was so crazy and untheosophical that it is hard to believe! I think 
JK didn't fail at all; he did what he had to do.

Govert also wrote:

> 5) Actually another 'entity' involved in K's psychic life was 
something he called the 'tyrant' or something similar and then in 
Latin. I have been waiting for 10 years for the collected early works 
of K to come out to do more research on this, but the project has 
stalled. Anyway, there is some writing by K in which he described to 
be egged on by something interior that drove him into full 
independence. This was not his Beloved and I'm not sure in what time 
period it was written, though it was around the crucial year of 1927. 
This might have been his residual lower self that came popping up 
again and asserted itself against Maitreya and Theosophy and tricked 
K's soul into re-interpreting and re-calibrating the WT project to 
its own desires evenwhile convincing others there was no ego left. 
>From that perspective it's either breath-takingly cunning or 
perplexingly naive how K pulled that off.


Might this "egging tyrant entity" just be the mental pressure of 
expectations around him? Osho has some interesting comments. You guys 
probably know that Osho was pretty critical towards JK's ideas, but 
he said that JK did very well because he walked out from his cult. 
Osho said that the imprisonment made JK independent and alert. Osho 
has got several so called "Krishnamurti Talks".

"If you ask me I will say one thing: if there had been no 
theosophical imprisonment for him in his childhood, it would have 
been difficult for him to become a free man. Annie Besant and 
Leadbeater and other theosophists created the whole situation -- 
unknowingly, of course, they were not meaning it. They were trying to 
do something else. They were creating a dogma around him, a cult 
around him. And they were so hard upon him that it became really 
impossible to live in it. He had to get out of it. 

The credit goes to those people -- Leadbeater and Annie Besant. If 
the prison had been a little more comfortable, if the prison had not 
been so hard and if the discipline imposed had not been so arduous, 
if the ideals had not been so superhuman, if he had not been asked to 
play a role so unnatural to him, he might have relaxed, he might have 
accepted it. That's what has happened to you. A Christian remains a 
Christian because Christianity is no longer a great pressure. On 
Sunday you can go to the church -- it is a formality. It remains the 
life of a non-Christian."

(SNIP HERE)

"It is so convenient and comfortable that you have become adjusted to 
it. It looks almost like a good policy, a good compromise. 
Krishnamurti fell into the hands of a very fanatical group -- 
theosophists. It was a new religion. Whenever a religion is new, it 
is very fanatical. By and by, it relaxes and compromises and becomes 
just a social phenomenon; then it is no more religion. Theosophy was 
just in its beginning, and Krishnamurti was only nine years old when 
he fell into the hands of those fanatics. They tried hard. 

They wouldn't allow Krishnamurti to meet and mix with ordinary 
children -- no -- because they had a goal that he had to become the 
world Teacher, JAGADGURU. He had to become the coming-Buddha; he had 
to become the incarnation of Maitreya. He was not allowed to move 
with any girl, because he might have fallen in love and the whole 
dream of the theosophists would have been shattered. He was 
constantly guarded. He was not allowed to move alone; somebody was 
always with him, watching him. 

And he was forced to follow very strict rules: three o'clock in the 
morning he had to get up and take a cold bath; and then he had to 
learn Sanskrit and he had to learn French and he had to learn English 
and he had to learn Latin and Greek -- because a World Teacher should 
be well cultured, sophisticated. Just a nine-year-old child!

When he was twelve years old, they started forcing him to write a 
book. Now what can a twelve-year-old child write? In fact, the 
teacher, Leadbeater, he was writing in his name. 

Krishnamurti would write and Leadbeater would correct it and make it 
perfect. The book still exists. A beautiful book, but you cannot 
expect it of a boy just twelve years old. It is not from him. Even 
Krishnamurti cannot remember it. When he has been asked he has 
said, "I don't remember when I wrote it -- I don't remember at all 
how it came into being." And they were talking nonsense -- esoteric 
nonsense: "In his dreams he goes to the seventh heaven, and there God 
Himself is teaching him.""

(SNIP HERE)

He brooded over it: he has become a slave, and they are all do-
gooders; they have made you a slave because they want to do good to 
you; and they love you and their love became nauseating; and their 
well-wishing became poisonous. The whole night he brooded: what is he 
to do? Whether he has to continue and become part of this nonsense, 
or get out of it? 

And blessed he is that in the morning when they had gathered and they 
were waiting for God to descend in him and to declare that he is now 
no more Krishnamurti but Lord Maitreya -- Buddha has entered in him --
 he suddenly declined and he said, "It is all nonsense. Nobody is 
descending in me. I am simply Krishnamurti and I am nobody's Master. 
And I am not a Jagadguru, not a World Teacher. And I dissolve this 
nonsense and this organization and the whole thing that has been made 
around me."

They were shocked! They could not believe it: "Has he gone mad, 
crazy?" They had put much hope in him, much money; it was a great 
investment, years of training. But it was going to be so. If he had 
been absolutely a dead man, then only would he have accepted it. He 
was alive. They could not kill his life, that aliveness exploded.
If he had been a dull, mediocre mind, maybe he would have accepted -- 
but he has an intelligence, a tremendous awareness. He got out of it. 
That whole movement and the whole organized thing functioned as a 
positive challenge.

As far as I see, nothing can hold you. If you are alert, you will use 
organized religion as a challenge. If you are not alert, then 
organized religion or no organized religion, wherever you are you 
will create an imprisonment around you. You carry it around you -- in 
your cowardice, in your fear, in your urge to be secure and 
comfortable."

Source: from book "The Discipline of Transcendence, Volume 3" by Osho

http://www.messagefrommasters.com/Life_of_Masters/Jiddu/reason_for_dis
solving_title_of_jagadguru.htm


Sorry for long quotes. I just like to add that in spite of all 
criticism towards them, I think that sometimes CWL and AB are also 
very useful teachers.

Sampsa