Theos-Talk Archives (May 2009 Message tt00479)

A very good question. Bill Quinn's is the only written account by someone
who was living in Ojai at the time the incidents described by Radha Sloss
took place. .
Also, Radha was quite young and I do not know how much of the book is first
hand. At least, she did not use someone else to write it, because that is
how some tricky string pullers keep their hands clean (hoping their
reputation is protected from gullible.) Truth comes out sooner or later and
everyone pays their Karmic dues.
.
MKR


On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Cass Silva <silva_cass@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> One must question why a person publishes a book about a romance after that
> person is no longer here to respond to its claims.
>
> Cass
>
> ________________________________
> From: MKR <mkr777@gmail.com <mkr777%40gmail.com>>
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>; theos-l <
> theos-L@yahoogroups.com <theos-L%40yahoogroups.com>>; listening-l <
> listening-l@zrz.tu-berlin.de <listening-l%40zrz.tu-berlin.de>>;
> K-and-C@yahoogroups.com <K-and-C%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 May, 2009 5:38:52 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Bill Quinn on Radha Sloss' Bio of K (better formatted)
>
>
> There are many reviews about the Radha Rajagopal's book on Krishnamurti
> which was published after the death of Jiddu Krishnamurti.
> .
> I just ran into an interesting feedback from some one who lived with K,
> Rajagopal, Rosalind and Radha in 1940s and I am sure it would interest
> many.
> Here is the letter.
> .
> MKR
> .
> +++
> .
> In the 1940s, Bill Quinn spent a year at Arya Vihara in Ojai, working in
> the
> garden. K was living there at that time and they often tended the garden -
> including cow, chickens and bees - together. Bill knew Alan Watts, was one
> of the founders of the Esalen Institute in Big Sur, California in the
> 1960s,
> and worked on the first Krishnamurti Index of subjects that later became
> the
> KFT's three-volume Index of all of the audio and videotapes. He died in
> Ojai
> in the mid-1990s.
> .
> +
> .
> +
> .
> April 20th 1993
> .
> Dear Friedrich,
> .
> Through the years Radha sent her manuscript to various publishers, and by
> chance the readers of two publishers to whom the book was assigned for
> evaluation were friends of mine. I deliberately read it once in one
> continuous effort so as to get an overall impression. I have not read the
> version published in England, and it's likely that changes have been made
> and editing done. What follows is based on my recollection of my first and
> only reading. I suspect that Radha is merely the spokesman for her parents.
> It has always seemed to me most unfortunate she was put in this position.
> She was not a direct witness to the alleged intimacy between K and R, but
> was told about it when she was a young woman by her mother. It is
> understandable that Radha, having been brought up in a seemingly magical
> world, should have been traumatised and embittered by Rosalind's claims.
> It's notable that early in the story it was K that Radha adored, like a
> father; yet she later is so condemnatory.
> .
> Having lived with the family during the period the affair was supposed to
> be
> taking place, I can attest there was a great intimacy between K and
> Rosalind, and I felt very much a part of a family which included them and
> Radha, and in which I was in daily close contact. It was an extraordinarily
> warm and simple life we had, extremely open so far as I could see, and so
> unconflicted I felt an absolute absence of self-consciousness. Rosalind
> appeared to me to be utterly generous and loving, and I count her among the
> dearest friends of my life. I felt less at ease with Raja, somewhat
> intimidated by his force and brilliance, but he too was warm and outgoing
> to
> me. However, he was seldom at Arya Vihara in those years, spending most of
> his time in Hollywood as he did. With Radha and David, her cousin, children
> then, I had a simple affectionate rapport. I must point out that I was a
> very young man at the time.
> .
> Since I felt part of this family, its breakup and the alienation of Raja
> from Rosalind and both from K, and the mystery surrounding it through the
> years, had disturbed me greatly. I was deeply affected by the book, and
> among my responses was a grief for everybody involved - so much pain! It
> seems to me, however, that one cannot form an opinion on the basis of the
> book about the allegations of an affair between K and Rosalind. The letters
> that are said to support this claim are unavailable. It's hard to see how
> one can presume to know what goes on between any two people. When a
> relationship is conflicted, a third person can know only the statements of
> the two parties, which are inevitably biased.
> .
> I feel strongly that it is important to establish the truth about K's life,
> and to affirm his humanity. I deplore the widespread efforts to mythologize
> and deify him, because doing so makes it impossible for people to recognise
> their kinship with him, and puts him in an abstract sphere, as a sort of
> icon. When I read the book it seemed to me possible that there had been
> such
> a relationship. Given the un-worldliness of both K and R, their innocence,
> such a thing could have come about through simple proximity and affection,
> as such things often do. Honoring the Rosalind I had known in earlier days,
> I even felt glad for K that he might have had such a relationship. And if
> there were an affair, the secrecy is understandable, given the social
> climate of those days. It would not have been K's concern alone to be
> either
> open or discreet: the lives of others were involved: Rosalind, Raja and
> Radha, Also, they might have felt that it was no one else's business.
> .
> What is lamentable to me about the book is that its motivation seems to be
> vindictiveness. To me, unfortunately, the book makes Rosalind, not K, to
> appear shabby and small. In part this is the effect of objectifying and
> blaming K and not going into Rosalind's character in depth. I think she was
> a much larger person, and for a long time I wanted to talk to Radha and try
> and dissuade her from publication for this reason. But I had not the
> courage; my old affection for her and her mother made the prospect of such
> an encounter too painful. The book seems to me naive in many ways, and to
> reflect little selfknowledge on the part of the Rajagopals. If there was
> such an affair in which Rosalind suffered so much, she was certainly also
> responsible. She was an adult. She was moreover a strong person and rather
> dominated K, to my mind, when I lived with them. The tone suggests a jilted
> lover. And through the years after their breakup, I had many hours-long
> conversations with Rosalind in which she poured out her hurt and rage. She
> was simply obsessed. I also talked to K about the breakup, and offered to
> be
> an intermediary. He said, however, "No! It is finished."
> .
> It seems to me that Rosalind's story, whether the allegations about K are
> true or not, is a common and doleful human tragedy, and my response is more
> compassionate than anything else. It's a story of how possessiveness,
> jealousy, suspicion and self-righteousness can destroy affection and lead
> to
> life long bitterness and a desire for revenge. It not only destroys
> affection, but the person. So many people wanted to possess K! I knew well
> another woman who was remarkably close to K, and I happened to be with her
> during a time when she simply went to pieces and became bedridden for days,
> raging and torn. She later came to literally hate him for some years, and
> did some real mischief. I think that when K went to India in 1947 a new
> life
> for him began when he met some wonderful minds, soon to include Pupul
> Jayakar and her family. Rosalind at that time stayed in California and was
> fully occupied with the newly formed Happy Valley School. At this time, I
> suspect, the Rajagopals began to lose control of K.
> .
> As for the allegations about Nandini, I don't take them seriously. It's
> well
> known that she and K had an extraordinary affinity, but to assume that this
> was sexually based seems unwarranted. K moved many people and was capable
> of
> a great intimacy with those who were open to him. I'm afraid Rosalind was
> overcome by suspicion.
> .
>
> Bill Quinn
>
> +
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> Need a Holiday? Win a $10,000 Holiday of your choice. Enter
> now.http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTJxN2x2ZmNpBF9zAzIwMjM2MTY2MTMEdG1fZG1lY2gDVGV4dCBMaW5rBHRtX2xuawNVMTEwMzk3NwR0bV9uZXQDWWFob28hBHRtX3BvcwN0YWdsaW5lBHRtX3BwdHkDYXVueg--/SIG=14600t3ni/**http%3A//au.rd.yahoo.com/mail/tagline/creativeholidays/*http%3A//au.docs.yahoo.com/homepageset/%3Fp1=other%26p2=au%26p3=mailtagline
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]