Jump to content

Jiddu Krishnamurti: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
minor - links.
Line 58: Line 58:
In 1922, Krishnamurti and Nitya travelled from [[Sydney]] to California on their way to [[Switzerland]]. While in California, they stayed at a cottage in then relatively secluded [[Ojai]] Valley, offered to them for the occasion by an American member of the Order.<ref>It was thought that the mountain climate of Ojai would be beneficial to Nitya, who had been diagnosed with [[tuberculosis]]. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 97.</ref> At Ojai, the brothers also met Rosalind Williams, sister of a local Theosophist, who became close to them both.<ref>Rosalind Williams, a young American who would play a significant role in Krishnamurti's life, had been asked to act as companion and nurse to the ailing Nitya. [[#refSloss1993|Sloss 1993]] pp. 54-55. Also [[#refML1991|M. Lutyens 1991]] p. 35.</ref> For the first time the brothers were without immediate supervision by their Theosophical Society minders; they spent their time in nature hikes and picnics with friends, spiritual contemplation, and planning their course within the ''World Teacher Project''.<ref>[[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 113.</ref> Krishnamurti and Nitya found the Ojai Valley to be very agreeable, and eventually a trust formed by supporters purchased for them the cottage and surrounding property, which henceforth became Krishnamurti's official place of residence.<ref>[[#refML1983|M. Lutyens 1983]] FSG, p. 6.</ref>
In 1922, Krishnamurti and Nitya travelled from [[Sydney]] to California on their way to [[Switzerland]]. While in California, they stayed at a cottage in then relatively secluded [[Ojai]] Valley, offered to them for the occasion by an American member of the Order.<ref>It was thought that the mountain climate of Ojai would be beneficial to Nitya, who had been diagnosed with [[tuberculosis]]. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 97.</ref> At Ojai, the brothers also met Rosalind Williams, sister of a local Theosophist, who became close to them both.<ref>Rosalind Williams, a young American who would play a significant role in Krishnamurti's life, had been asked to act as companion and nurse to the ailing Nitya. [[#refSloss1993|Sloss 1993]] pp. 54-55. Also [[#refML1991|M. Lutyens 1991]] p. 35.</ref> For the first time the brothers were without immediate supervision by their Theosophical Society minders; they spent their time in nature hikes and picnics with friends, spiritual contemplation, and planning their course within the ''World Teacher Project''.<ref>[[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 113.</ref> Krishnamurti and Nitya found the Ojai Valley to be very agreeable, and eventually a trust formed by supporters purchased for them the cottage and surrounding property, which henceforth became Krishnamurti's official place of residence.<ref>[[#refML1983|M. Lutyens 1983]] FSG, p. 6.</ref>


It was in August-September 1922, during the initial stay at Ojai, that Krishnamurti went through an intense, "''life-changing''" experience.<ref>[[#refJayakar1986|Jayakar 1986]] p. 46 onwards. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, chs. 18-21.</ref> It has been simultaneously, and invariably, characterised as a spiritual awakening, a psychological transformation, and a physical conditioning. The initial events happened in two distinct phases: first a three-day [[Religious_experience|spiritual experience]] which apparently lead, two weeks later, to a longer-lasting condition that Krishnamurti and those around him would refer to as "''the process''"; this condition would reoccur, at frequent intervals and with varying intensity, until his death.<ref>The events of August-September 1922 as well as the continuing occurences of the "''process''" would not be revealed publicly until the first volume of Mary Lutyens' biography, ''[[Krishnamurti: The Years of Awakening]]'', was published in 1975. ([[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]]). Details and first hand descriptions of the "''process''" were published 1976, in ''[[Krishnamurti's Notebook]]'' - a journal that Krishnamurti kept between June 1961 and March 1962. ([[#refJK1976|J. Krishnamurti 1976]]). Mary Lutyens, in the course of responding to certain allegations regarding the "''process''" made several decades later, briefly provided updated information in her ''Krishnamurti and the Rajagopals'', published 1996. ([[#refML1996|M. Lutyens 1996]]).</ref><ref>Krishnamurti and others with him at the time provided written accounts of the August-September 1922 incidents. These include accounts by Nitya and two prominent Theosophists. Rosalind Williams, who was also present, apparently did not provide any written account of the events. Documents held [c. 2001] at the Krishnamurti Archive, Krishnamurti Foundation of America ([[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] "Notes", p. 282, Notes 2-3). Other relevant material held [c. 2001] at the Brockwood Park archives, Krishnamurti Foundation Trust ([[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] "Notes", p. 282, Note 7).</ref> According to witnesses, it all started on 17 August 1922, with Krishnamurti complaining of extraordinary pain at the nape of his neck, and a hard, ball-like swelling. Over the next couple of days, the symptoms worsened, with increasing pain, extreme physical discomfort and sensitivity, total loss of appetite and occasional delirious ramblings. Then, he seemed to lapse into unconsciousness; instead he recounted that he was very much aware of his surroundings, and that while in that state he had an experience of [[Mysticism#Types_of_experience|mystical union]].<ref>"''There was a man mending the road; that man was myself; the pickaxe he held was myself; the very stone which he was breaking up was a part of me; the tender blade of the grass was my very being, and the tree beside the man was myself...I was in everything, or rather everything was in me, inanimate and animate, the mountain, the worm, and all breathing things. All day long I remained in this happy condition.''" [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 158. Quoting Krishnamurti's written account.</ref>
It was in August-September 1922, during the initial stay at Ojai, that Krishnamurti went through an intense, "''life-changing''" experience.<ref>[[#refJayakar1986|Jayakar 1986]] p. 46 onwards. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, chs. 18-21.</ref> It has been simultaneously, and invariably, characterised as a spiritual awakening, a psychological transformation, and a physical conditioning. The initial events happened in two distinct phases: first a three-day [[Religious_experience|spiritual experience]] which apparently lead, two weeks later, to a longer-lasting condition that Krishnamurti and those around him would refer to as "''the process''"; this condition would reoccur, at frequent intervals and with varying intensity, until his death.<ref>The events of August-September 1922 as well as the continuing occurences of the "''process''" would not be revealed publicly until the first volume of Mary Lutyens' biography, ''[[Krishnamurti: The Years of Awakening]]'', was published in 1975. ([[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]]). Details and first hand descriptions of the "''process''" were published 1976, in ''[[Krishnamurti's Notebook]]'' - a journal that Krishnamurti kept between June 1961 and March 1962. ([[#refJK1976|J. Krishnamurti 1976]]). Mary Lutyens, in the course of responding to certain allegations regarding the "''process''" made several decades later, briefly provided updated information in her ''Krishnamurti and the Rajagopals'', published 1996. ([[#refML1996|M. Lutyens 1996]]).</ref><ref>Krishnamurti and others with him at the time provided written accounts of the August-September 1922 incidents. These include accounts by Nitya and two prominent Theosophists. Rosalind Williams, who was also present, apparently did not provide any written account of the events. Documents held [c. 2001] at the Krishnamurti Archive, [http://www.kfa.org Krishnamurti Foundation of America] ([[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] "Notes", p. 282, Notes 2-3). Other relevant material held [c. 2001] at the Brockwood Park archives, [http://www.kfoundation.org Krishnamurti Foundation Trust] ([[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] "Notes", p. 282, Note 7).</ref> According to witnesses, it all started on 17 August 1922, with Krishnamurti complaining of extraordinary pain at the nape of his neck, and a hard, ball-like swelling. Over the next couple of days, the symptoms worsened, with increasing pain, extreme physical discomfort and sensitivity, total loss of appetite and occasional delirious ramblings. Then, he seemed to lapse into unconsciousness; instead he recounted that he was very much aware of his surroundings, and that while in that state he had an experience of [[Mysticism#Types_of_experience|mystical union]].<ref>"''There was a man mending the road; that man was myself; the pickaxe he held was myself; the very stone which he was breaking up was a part of me; the tender blade of the grass was my very being, and the tree beside the man was myself...I was in everything, or rather everything was in me, inanimate and animate, the mountain, the worm, and all breathing things. All day long I remained in this happy condition.''" [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 158. Quoting Krishnamurti's written account.</ref>
The following day the symptoms and the experience intensified, climaxing with a sense of "''immense peace''".<ref>According to Nitya's account, he and Rosalind Williams had [[ecstatic]] experiences of their own, while the other two people present were also affected, as per their, and Nitya's, accounts. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 118-119.</ref>
The following day the symptoms and the experience intensified, climaxing with a sense of "''immense peace''".<ref>According to Nitya's account, he and Rosalind Williams had [[ecstatic]] experiences of their own, while the other two people present were also affected, as per their, and Nitya's, accounts. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 118-119.</ref>


Line 87: Line 87:
Following the dissolution some Theosophists turned against Krishnamurti and publicly wondered whether "''the Coming had gone wrong''". Mary Lutyens states that "''after all the years of proclaiming the Coming, of stressing over and over again the danger of rejecting the World Teacher when he came because he was bound to say something wholly new and unexpected, something contrary to most people’s preconceived ideas and hopes, the leaders of Theosophy, one after the other, fell into the trap against which they had so unremittingly warned others.''"<ref>[[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 278. Select news reports: [[#refMG1929|Manchester Guardian 1929]], [[#refNYT1929|New York Times 1929]].</ref>
Following the dissolution some Theosophists turned against Krishnamurti and publicly wondered whether "''the Coming had gone wrong''". Mary Lutyens states that "''after all the years of proclaiming the Coming, of stressing over and over again the danger of rejecting the World Teacher when he came because he was bound to say something wholly new and unexpected, something contrary to most people’s preconceived ideas and hopes, the leaders of Theosophy, one after the other, fell into the trap against which they had so unremittingly warned others.''"<ref>[[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 278. Select news reports: [[#refMG1929|Manchester Guardian 1929]], [[#refNYT1929|New York Times 1929]].</ref>


Krishnamurti had denounced all organized belief, the notion of [[guru]]s, and the whole teacher-follower relationship, vowing instead to work in setting man absolutely, totally free. There is no record of him explicitly denying he was the ''World Teacher''<ref>While Krishnamurti did not deny being the ''World Teacher'', he "''baffled''" his followers by declaring that such status could be "''achieved by anyone''." [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 166-167. Several decades later, in discussions with close associates, Krishnamurti described the ''World Teacher'' or [[Maitreya_(Theosophy)|''Maitreya'']] association as "''too concrete''" to be an explanation of his life-story, and "''not subtle enough''." [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 234. [[#refML1988|M. Lutyens 1988]] KFT, pp. 92-93. [[#refJayakar1986|Jayakar 1986]] pp. 439-440.</ref>; whenever he was asked to clarify his position, he either asserted the matter was irrelevant,<ref>"''I think we shall have incessant wrangles over the corpse of Krishnamurti if we discuss this or that, wondering who is now speaking. Someone asked me: 'Do tell me if it is you speaking or someone else'. I said: 'I really do not know and it does not matter'.''" [[#refJK1972|J. Krishnamurti 1972]] p. 9. From the 1927 "Question and Answer Session" at Ommen.</ref> or gave answers that, as he stated, were vague on purpose.<ref>"''I am going to be purposely vague, because although I could quite easily make it definite, it is not my intention to do so. Because once you define a thing it becomes dead!''" Krishnamurti on the ''World Teacher'', from "Who brings the truth", an address delivered at Ommen, August 2, 1927. [[#refJK1928|J. Krishnamurti 1928]]. [Note weblink in reference is from the "Krishnamurti" section of the [http://www.norea.net/krishnamurti ''No Reality''] website (retrieved 2010-05-25). This is '''not''' an official J. Krishnamurti website].</ref> In a reflection of the ongoing changes in his outlook, he had started doing so before the dissolution of the ''Order of the Star''.<ref>As noted previously. In the 1928 Ommen "Question and Answer Session" he again reiterated and expanded on these themes. See [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 262, and related note on p. 315.</ref> The subtlety of the new distinctions on the ''World Teacher'' issue was lost on many of his admirers, who were already bewildered or distraught because of the changes in Krishnamurti’s outlook, vocabulary and pronouncements – among them Annie Besant and Mary Lutyens' mother Emily.<ref>[[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 189. Besant at some point had offered to resign as President of the Theosophical Society, feeling unable to reconcile its growing differences with Krishnamurti. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 236. Emily Lutyens wrote in the September 1928 ''International Star Bulletin'' that Krishnamurti left his followers "''naked and alone, their foundations shattered''". [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 177 and related Note 30, p. 287. Emily Lutyens was also desolate over the ending of the Order and its ''World Teacher Project'', and was unable to comprehend or follow Krishnamurti’s new direction. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 279. C. V. Williams, citing Emily Lutyens letters to Krishnamurti of 14 August and 16 September 1934 held [c. 2005] at the Krishnamurti Foundation India Archive, writes of her complaint that "''he might not deny being a world teacher but he constantly denied being '''the''' 'World Teacher' for whom Theosophists had given money''" [emphasis in original]. [[#refWilliams2004|Williams 2004]] p. 212. C. V. Williams describes Emily Lutyens' letters, which were prompted by pleas from Krishnamurti’s associates for donations, as "''rather stiff''". She provides part of Krishnamurti’s response of 27 August 1934, also found in [[#refML1983|M. Lutyens 1983]] KFT, p. 30: "''You know mum I have '''never''' denied it.''" [Being the World Teacher] "''I have only said it does not matter who or what I am but that they should examine what I say, which does not mean that I have denied being the W.T.''" [emphasis in original].</ref> He eventually disassociated himself from the Theosophical Society and its teachings and practices,<ref>M. Lutyens considers the last remaining tie with Theosophy to have been severed in 1933, with the death of Besant. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, "Postscript", p. 285.</ref> yet he remained on cordial terms with some of its members and ex-members throughout his life.
Krishnamurti had denounced all organized belief, the notion of [[guru]]s, and the whole teacher-follower relationship, vowing instead to work in setting man absolutely, totally free. There is no record of him explicitly denying he was the ''World Teacher''<ref>While Krishnamurti did not deny being the ''World Teacher'', he "''baffled''" his followers by declaring that such status could be "''achieved by anyone''." [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 166-167. Several decades later, in discussions with close associates, Krishnamurti described the ''World Teacher'' or [[Maitreya_(Theosophy)|''Maitreya'']] association as "''too concrete''" to be an explanation of his life-story, and "''not subtle enough''." [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 234. [[#refML1988|M. Lutyens 1988]] KFT, pp. 92-93. [[#refJayakar1986|Jayakar 1986]] pp. 439-440.</ref>; whenever he was asked to clarify his position, he either asserted the matter was irrelevant,<ref>"''I think we shall have incessant wrangles over the corpse of Krishnamurti if we discuss this or that, wondering who is now speaking. Someone asked me: 'Do tell me if it is you speaking or someone else'. I said: 'I really do not know and it does not matter'.''" [[#refJK1972|J. Krishnamurti 1972]] p. 9. From the 1927 "Question and Answer Session" at Ommen.</ref> or gave answers that, as he stated, were vague on purpose.<ref>"''I am going to be purposely vague, because although I could quite easily make it definite, it is not my intention to do so. Because once you define a thing it becomes dead!''" Krishnamurti on the ''World Teacher'', from "Who brings the truth", an address delivered at Ommen, August 2, 1927. [[#refJK1928|J. Krishnamurti 1928]]. [Note weblink in reference is from the "Krishnamurti" section of the [http://www.norea.net/krishnamurti ''No Reality''] website (retrieved 2010-05-25). This is '''not''' an official J. Krishnamurti website].</ref> In a reflection of the ongoing changes in his outlook, he had started doing so before the dissolution of the ''Order of the Star''.<ref>As noted previously. In the 1928 Ommen "Question and Answer Session" he again reiterated and expanded on these themes. See [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 262, and related note on p. 315.</ref> The subtlety of the new distinctions on the ''World Teacher'' issue was lost on many of his admirers, who were already bewildered or distraught because of the changes in Krishnamurti’s outlook, vocabulary and pronouncements – among them Annie Besant and Mary Lutyens' mother Emily.<ref>[[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 189. Besant at some point had offered to resign as President of the Theosophical Society, feeling unable to reconcile its growing differences with Krishnamurti. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 236. Emily Lutyens wrote in the September 1928 ''International Star Bulletin'' that Krishnamurti left his followers "''naked and alone, their foundations shattered''". [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] p. 177 and related Note 30, p. 287. Emily Lutyens was also desolate over the ending of the Order and its ''World Teacher Project'', and was unable to comprehend or follow Krishnamurti’s new direction. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, p. 279. C. V. Williams, citing Emily Lutyens letters to Krishnamurti of 14 August and 16 September 1934 held [c. 2005] at the [http://www.kfionline.org Krishnamurti Foundation India] Archive, writes of her complaint that "''he might not deny being a world teacher but he constantly denied being '''the''' 'World Teacher' for whom Theosophists had given money''" [emphasis in original]. [[#refWilliams2004|Williams 2004]] p. 212. C. V. Williams describes Emily Lutyens' letters, which were prompted by pleas from Krishnamurti’s associates for donations, as "''rather stiff''". She provides part of Krishnamurti’s response of 27 August 1934, also found in [[#refML1983|M. Lutyens 1983]] KFT, p. 30: "''You know mum I have '''never''' denied it.''" [Being the World Teacher] "''I have only said it does not matter who or what I am but that they should examine what I say, which does not mean that I have denied being the W.T.''" [emphasis in original].</ref> He eventually disassociated himself from the Theosophical Society and its teachings and practices,<ref>M. Lutyens considers the last remaining tie with Theosophy to have been severed in 1933, with the death of Besant. [[#refML1975|M. Lutyens 1975]] FSG, "Postscript", p. 285.</ref> yet he remained on cordial terms with some of its members and ex-members throughout his life.


Krishnamurti would often refer to the totality of his work as "''the''" teachings and not as "''my''" teachings. His concern was always about "''the''" teachings: the teacher had no importance, and all authority, especially psychological authority, was denounced.
Krishnamurti would often refer to the totality of his work as "''the''" teachings and not as "''my''" teachings. His concern was always about "''the''" teachings: the teacher had no importance, and all authority, especially psychological authority, was denounced.
Line 162: Line 162:
==Afterword==
==Afterword==


Interest in Krishnamurti and his work has persisted in the years since his death.<ref>Time-sensitive information in this section is current {{as of|2008|alt=as of mid-2008}} unless otherwise specified.</ref> Many of his books, as well as audio, video, and computer materials, remain available and are carried by major online and traditional retailers. The official Foundations continue with the maintenance of archives, dissemination of the teachings in an increasing number of languages, new conversions to [[Digital media|digital]] and other media, development of websites, sponsoring of television programs, and with organizing meetings and dialogues of interested persons around the world.<ref>Among them an effort to collect the entire body of his work into a coherently edited master reference entitled ''The Complete Works of J. Krishnamurti: 1910-1986''. [[#refKFA2004|KFA 2004]].</ref> According to communications and press releases from the Foundations, their mailing lists, and individuals' inquiries, continue to grow.<ref>See Foundation websites, listed
Interest in Krishnamurti and his work has persisted in the years since his death.<ref>Time-sensitive information in this section is current {{as of|2008|alt=as of mid-2008}} unless otherwise specified.</ref> Many of his books, as well as audio, video, and computer materials, remain available and are carried by major online and traditional retailers. The official [[Jiddu_Krishnamurti#External_links|Foundations]] continue with the maintenance of archives, dissemination of the teachings in an increasing number of languages, new conversions to [[Digital media|digital]] and other media, development of websites, sponsoring of television programs, and with organizing meetings and dialogues of interested persons around the world.<ref>Among them an effort to collect the entire body of his work into a coherently edited master reference entitled ''The Complete Works of J. Krishnamurti: 1910-1986''. [[#refKFA2004|KFA 2004]].</ref> According to communications and press releases from the Foundations, their mailing lists, and individuals' inquiries, continue to grow.<ref>See Foundation websites, listed
in section [[Jiddu_Krishnamurti#External_links|External links]].</ref> Similarly, the Foundation-affiliated schools and educational institutions report continuing growth, with new projects added in support of their declared goal of [[holistic education]].<ref>One such project is a ''Teaching Academy'', an introduction to the holistic educational philosophy of Krishnamurti targeted at educators. [[#refKFA2008|KFA 2008]].</ref> In addition, there are unofficial ''Krishnamurti Committees'' operating in several countries,<ref>[[#refKFTa|KFT (n/d)]].</ref> as well as independent educational institutions<ref>Not linked to the official Foundations or their affiliates. See [[#refKAEa|KAE (n/d)]] for a listing. [From a [http://www.krishnamurti-nz.org/ Krishnamurti Association in New Zealand (KANZ)] project (retrieved 2010-05-25)].</ref> based on his ideas. Biographies, reminiscences, research papers, critical examinations, and book-length studies of Krishnamurti and his philosophy have continued to appear. Cursory (and necessarily incomplete) examination of internet search traffic and group discussion forums indicates that among similar topics, interest in Krishnamurti remains high.<ref>Roland Vernon summarized some of these developments between the years of 1986 and 2000. He also commented on the {{as of|2010|alt=[continuing, as of early 2010]}} relative paucity of "official" material regarding Krishnamurti's early life, and of his talks, discussions, and writings prior to 1933. He considered this as the Foundations' way of de-emphasizing Krishnamurti's association with the Theosophical Society and the ''World Teacher Project'', and as following Krishnamurti's own assertion of being "''unconditioned by his past''", and of his further assertion that his "''mature teaching''" was devoid of Theosophical influence. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 261-265.</ref>
in section [[Jiddu_Krishnamurti#External_links|External links]].</ref> Similarly, the Foundation-affiliated schools and educational institutions report continuing growth, with new projects added in support of their declared goal of [[holistic education]].<ref>One such project is a ''Teaching Academy'', an introduction to the holistic educational philosophy of Krishnamurti targeted at educators. [[#refKFA2008|KFA 2008]].</ref> In addition, there are unofficial ''Krishnamurti Committees'' operating in several countries,<ref>[[#refKFTa|KFT (n/d)]].</ref> as well as independent educational institutions<ref>Not linked to the official Foundations or their affiliates. See [[#refKAEa|KAE (n/d)]] for a listing. [From a [http://www.krishnamurti-nz.org/ Krishnamurti Association in New Zealand (KANZ)] project (retrieved 2010-05-25)].</ref> based on his ideas. Biographies, reminiscences, research papers, critical examinations, and book-length studies of Krishnamurti and his philosophy have continued to appear. Cursory (and necessarily incomplete) examination of internet search traffic and group discussion forums indicates that among similar topics, interest in Krishnamurti remains high.<ref>Roland Vernon summarized some of these developments between the years of 1986 and 2000. He also commented on the {{as of|2010|alt=[continuing, as of early 2010]}} relative paucity of "official" material regarding Krishnamurti's early life, and of his talks, discussions, and writings prior to 1933. He considered this as the Foundations' way of de-emphasizing Krishnamurti's association with the Theosophical Society and the ''World Teacher Project'', and as following Krishnamurti's own assertion of being "''unconditioned by his past''", and of his further assertion that his "''mature teaching''" was devoid of Theosophical influence. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 261-265.</ref>


In 1991, the autobiography ''[[Lives in the Shadow with J. Krishnamurti]]'' by Radha Rajagopal Sloss<ref>[[#refSloss1993|Sloss 1993]]. Radha Rajagopal Sloss was the daughter of estranged Krishnamurti associates Rosalind and Desikacharya Rajagopal. She had spent her childhood at ''Arya Vihara'' (Krishnamurti's residence), and while growing up she considered him an extension of her family.</ref> was the cause of negative publicity and controversy regarding Krishnamurti. The controversy was centered on the author's depiction of his relationship with her parents, primarily (though not exclusively) as it concerned a secret [[Affair#Extramarital_affair|extramarital affair]] between Krishnamurti and her mother [[Rosalind Rajagopal]] that had lasted many years.<ref>In 1995, the KFA issued a 16-page pamphlet in an attempt to address some of the issues raised by Sloss's book. The pamphlet includes transcripts of tape-recorded conversations between Krishnamurti and KFA trustees that took place in January and March 1972, wherein Krishnamurti responds to related questions. [The matter of the "affair" had arisen in the course of the then (1972) ongoing legal dispute with D. Rajagopal, see also [[#refML1996|M. Lutyens 1996]]]. [[#refKFA1995|KFA 1995]].</ref> The public revelation was received with surprise and consternation by many individuals, and was also dealt with in a "''personal response''" - a rebuttal volume of biography - by Mary Lutyens.<ref>[[#refML1996|M. Lutyens 1996]]. Roland Vernon, while acknowledging that "''history will not view Krishnamurti in quite the same light''", questions the ultimate impact of Sloss' revelations when compared to Krishnamurti's body of work as a whole. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 203-204.</ref> Others, such as [[Helen Nearing]], who had known Krishnamurti in his youth, questioned whether his attitudes were conditioned by privilege, as he was supported, and in Nearing's opinion often pampered, by devoted followers starting as far back as his "discovery" by the Theosophists.<ref>[[#refNearing1992|Nearing 1992]] pp. 62-64. Nearing devotes a chapter to her relationship with Krishnamurti, including her description of a 1923 recurrence of the "''process''" at [[Ehrwald]], Austria, during which she attended him. She also thought that he was at such an "elevated" level that he was incapable of forming normal personal relationships. [Krishnamurti had fallen in love with then Helen Knothe in the 1920s; her impression of his inability to forge personal relationships was apparently a later development].</ref><ref>After the dissolution of the ''Order of the Star'', Emily Lutyens was on occasion another - private - critic of Krishnamurti in this regard, as evidenced by letters addressed to him. See [[#refML1990|M. Lutyens 1990]] KFT, p. 88, quoting Emily Lutyens' letter of August 1935. Emily Lutyens also wondered whether he was "''escaping from life''", adding that he was "''always 'retreating'.''" [[#refWilliams2004|Williams 2004]] p. 212, quoting from her correspondence held [c. 2005] at the Krishnamurti Foundation India Archive. In the same letter, Emily Lutyens stated that she still "''loved him with all her heart.''"</ref><ref>Among critics, a particularly vociferous one had been [[U.G. Krishnamurti]]. His criticism encompassed J. Krishnamurti's private life, his method of exposition of the teaching, and the teaching itself. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 257-258.</ref>
In 1991, the autobiography ''[[Lives in the Shadow with J. Krishnamurti]]'' by Radha Rajagopal Sloss<ref>[[#refSloss1993|Sloss 1993]]. Radha Rajagopal Sloss was the daughter of estranged Krishnamurti associates Rosalind and Desikacharya Rajagopal. She had spent her childhood at ''Arya Vihara'' (Krishnamurti's residence), and while growing up she considered him an extension of her family.</ref> was the cause of negative publicity and controversy regarding Krishnamurti. The controversy was centered on the author's depiction of his relationship with her parents, primarily (though not exclusively) as it concerned a secret [[Affair#Extramarital_affair|extramarital affair]] between Krishnamurti and her mother [[Rosalind Rajagopal]] that had lasted many years.<ref>In 1995, the KFA issued a 16-page pamphlet in an attempt to address some of the issues raised by Sloss's book. The pamphlet includes transcripts of tape-recorded conversations between Krishnamurti and KFA trustees that took place in January and March 1972, wherein Krishnamurti responds to related questions. [The matter of the "affair" had arisen in the course of the then (1972) ongoing legal dispute with D. Rajagopal, see also [[#refML1996|M. Lutyens 1996]]]. [[#refKFA1995|KFA 1995]].</ref> The public revelation was received with surprise and consternation by many individuals, and was also dealt with in a "''personal response''" - a rebuttal volume of biography - by Mary Lutyens.<ref>[[#refML1996|M. Lutyens 1996]]. Roland Vernon, while acknowledging that "''history will not view Krishnamurti in quite the same light''", questions the ultimate impact of Sloss' revelations when compared to Krishnamurti's body of work as a whole. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 203-204.</ref> Others, such as [[Helen Nearing]], who had known Krishnamurti in his youth, questioned whether his attitudes were conditioned by privilege, as he was supported, and in Nearing's opinion often pampered, by devoted followers starting as far back as his "discovery" by the Theosophists.<ref>[[#refNearing1992|Nearing 1992]] pp. 62-64. Nearing devotes a chapter to her relationship with Krishnamurti, including her description of a 1923 recurrence of the "''process''" at [[Ehrwald]], Austria, during which she attended him. She also thought that he was at such an "elevated" level that he was incapable of forming normal personal relationships. [Krishnamurti had fallen in love with then Helen Knothe in the 1920s; her impression of his inability to forge personal relationships was apparently a later development].</ref><ref>After the dissolution of the ''Order of the Star'', Emily Lutyens was on occasion another - private - critic of Krishnamurti in this regard, as evidenced by letters addressed to him. See [[#refML1990|M. Lutyens 1990]] KFT, p. 88, quoting Emily Lutyens' letter of August 1935. Emily Lutyens also wondered whether he was "''escaping from life''", adding that he was "''always 'retreating'.''" [[#refWilliams2004|Williams 2004]] p. 212, quoting from her correspondence held [c. 2005] at the [http://www.kfionline.org Krishnamurti Foundation India] Archive. In the same letter, Emily Lutyens stated that she still "''loved him with all her heart.''"</ref><ref>Among critics, a particularly vociferous one had been [[U.G. Krishnamurti]]. His criticism encompassed J. Krishnamurti's private life, his method of exposition of the teaching, and the teaching itself. [[#refVernon2001|Vernon 2001]] pp. 257-258.</ref>


Biographers and associates of Krishnamurti acknowledge another complaint against him, one that relates to his demeanor during talks and discussions: that Krishnamurti often comes across as too vague or too assertive, or both. David Skitt, who edited several Krishnamurti books, attempts to deal with this issue in the "Editor's Introduction" of the book ''To Be Human''.<ref>Skitt, who calls Krishnamurti's style "''emphatic''", proposes a context for such emphasis and also repeats the previously noted arguments regarding the limitations of language, and the special, evolving meaning Krishnamurti gave to certain terms. [[#refJK2000|J. Krishnamurti 2000]] "Editor's Introduction".</ref> He also comments on a point that Krishnamurti often made, one that Skitt admits could at first glance be thought of as "''condescending''" or "''arrogant''": that before considering any of the questions Krishnamurti was concerned with, there was a need to understand "''the nature of a mind capable of going into''" such questions.<ref>Among many other instances, Krishnamurti commented on the nature of the enquiring mind in [[#refJK1977|J. Krishnamurti 1977]]: "''And to investigate together you need a certain quality of mind that is meditative, that is not jumping to conclusions, that is not affirming or rejecting, but investigating - investigating without any prejudice, without any conclusion, without any end. After all that is a good scientist - not the scientist that is employed by governments, but the scientist who really wants to find truth, at whatever level''." (Context-based weblink: [http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamurti-teachings/view-context.php?tid=1237&chid=939&w=%22And+to+investigate+together+you+need+a+certain+quality+of+mind+that+is+meditative%22 para. 8] retrieved 2010-03-09). Krishnamurti often linked this issue with another recurrent theme, his contention that the human brain is deeply conditioned by evolution, experience, tradition, and culture. For example, see [[#refJK1955|J. Krishnamurti 1955]].</ref> Skitt puts these utterances by Krishnamurti in the context of recurring statements that Krishnamurti made in talks and dialogues: The proclamation (usually in the beginning of each talk) that his message should not be taken at face value, but that it should be "''shared''" critically, and be appraised by each listener; and also, the accompanying additional proclamation that he did not consider himself an authority of any kind.
Biographers and associates of Krishnamurti acknowledge another complaint against him, one that relates to his demeanor during talks and discussions: that Krishnamurti often comes across as too vague or too assertive, or both. David Skitt, who edited several Krishnamurti books, attempts to deal with this issue in the "Editor's Introduction" of the book ''To Be Human''.<ref>Skitt, who calls Krishnamurti's style "''emphatic''", proposes a context for such emphasis and also repeats the previously noted arguments regarding the limitations of language, and the special, evolving meaning Krishnamurti gave to certain terms. [[#refJK2000|J. Krishnamurti 2000]] "Editor's Introduction".</ref> He also comments on a point that Krishnamurti often made, one that Skitt admits could at first glance be thought of as "''condescending''" or "''arrogant''": that before considering any of the questions Krishnamurti was concerned with, there was a need to understand "''the nature of a mind capable of going into''" such questions.<ref>Among many other instances, Krishnamurti commented on the nature of the enquiring mind in [[#refJK1977|J. Krishnamurti 1977]]: "''And to investigate together you need a certain quality of mind that is meditative, that is not jumping to conclusions, that is not affirming or rejecting, but investigating - investigating without any prejudice, without any conclusion, without any end. After all that is a good scientist - not the scientist that is employed by governments, but the scientist who really wants to find truth, at whatever level''." (Context-based weblink: [http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamurti-teachings/view-context.php?tid=1237&chid=939&w=%22And+to+investigate+together+you+need+a+certain+quality+of+mind+that+is+meditative%22 para. 8] retrieved 2010-03-09). Krishnamurti often linked this issue with another recurrent theme, his contention that the human brain is deeply conditioned by evolution, experience, tradition, and culture. For example, see [[#refJK1955|J. Krishnamurti 1955]].</ref> Skitt puts these utterances by Krishnamurti in the context of recurring statements that Krishnamurti made in talks and dialogues: The proclamation (usually in the beginning of each talk) that his message should not be taken at face value, but that it should be "''shared''" critically, and be appraised by each listener; and also, the accompanying additional proclamation that he did not consider himself an authority of any kind.
Line 238: Line 238:
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1991 |reference=__ (1991). ''Collected Works''. Series. '''Volume 3 (1936–1944): The Mirror of Relationship'''. Kendall/Hunt Publishing. ISBN 0-8403-6236-6.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1991 |reference=__ (1991). ''Collected Works''. Series. '''Volume 3 (1936–1944): The Mirror of Relationship'''. Kendall/Hunt Publishing. ISBN 0-8403-6236-6.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1992a |reference=__ (1992). ''Collected Works''. Series. '''Volume 13 (1962–1963): A Psychological Revolution'''. Kendall/Hunt Publishing. ISBN 0-8403-6287-0.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1992a |reference=__ (1992). ''Collected Works''. Series. '''Volume 13 (1962–1963): A Psychological Revolution'''. Kendall/Hunt Publishing. ISBN 0-8403-6287-0.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1992b |reference=__ (1992). ''Collected Works''. Series. '''Volume 15 (1964–1965): The Dignity of Living'''. Krishnamurti Foundation of America. ISBN 0-8403-6282-X.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1992b |reference=__ (1992). ''Collected Works''. Series. '''Volume 15 (1964–1965): The Dignity of Living'''. [[Ojai]]: Krishnamurti Foundation of America. ISBN 0-8403-6282-X.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1995 |reference=__ & [[Pupul_Jayakar|Jayakar, Pupul]] (1995). ''Fire in the Mind: Dialogues with J. Krishnamurti''. [[Penguin Books]] India. ISBN 0-14-025166-9.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1995 |reference=__ & [[Pupul_Jayakar|Jayakar, Pupul]] (1995). ''Fire in the Mind: Dialogues with J. Krishnamurti''. [[Penguin Books]] India. ISBN 0-14-025166-9.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1996 |reference=__ (1996). ''Total Freedom: The Essential Krishnamurti''. [[Mary Cadogan|Cadogan, Mary]]; Kishbaugh, A.; Lee, M. & McCoy, R. eds. [[HarperCollins|HarperSanFrancisco]]. ISBN 0-06-064880-5.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK1996 |reference=__ (1996). ''Total Freedom: The Essential Krishnamurti''. [[Mary Cadogan|Cadogan, Mary]]; Kishbaugh, A.; Lee, M. & McCoy, R. eds. [[HarperCollins|HarperSanFrancisco]]. ISBN 0-06-064880-5.}}
Line 244: Line 244:
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK2003 |reference=__ (2003). ''Can Humanity Change?: J. Krishnamurti in dialogue with Buddhists''. Skitt, David ed. Boston: [[Shambhala Publications]]. ISBN 1-57062-826-2.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refJK2003 |reference=__ (2003). ''Can Humanity Change?: J. Krishnamurti in dialogue with Buddhists''. Skitt, David ed. Boston: [[Shambhala Publications]]. ISBN 1-57062-826-2.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refEBO2010 |reference=Kojevnicov, Alexei (2010). [http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/71634/David-Bohm "David Bohm"]. ''Encyclopædia Britannica Online''. Chicago: [[Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.]] Retrieved 2010-05-06.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refEBO2010 |reference=Kojevnicov, Alexei (2010). [http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/71634/David-Bohm "David Bohm"]. ''Encyclopædia Britannica Online''. Chicago: [[Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.]] Retrieved 2010-05-06.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refKFTa |reference=[http://www.kfoundation.org/links4.htm "Krishnamurti Committees"]. ''kfoundation.org.uk''. Krishnamurti Foundation Trust. Retrieved 2010-03-04.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refKFTa |reference=[http://www.kfoundation.org/links4.htm "Krishnamurti Committees"]. ''kfoundation.org.uk''. [[Bramdean]]: Krishnamurti Foundation Trust. Retrieved 2010-03-04.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refNYT1929 |reference="KRISHNAMURTI ENDS ORDER OF THE STAR; Theosophists' Society Dissolved Because Leader Believes Followers Ignore 'Truth.'". ''[[The New York Times]]''. p. N48. 4 August 1929. {{ISSN|03624331}}.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refNYT1929 |reference="KRISHNAMURTI ENDS ORDER OF THE STAR; Theosophists' Society Dissolved Because Leader Believes Followers Ignore 'Truth.'". ''[[The New York Times]]''. p. N48. 4 August 1929. {{ISSN|03624331}}.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refKFA1995 |reference=Krishnamurti Foundation of America (1995). ''Statement by the Krishnamurti Foundation of America about the Radha Sloss' book "Lives in the shadow with J. Krishnamurti"''. [[Ojai]]: Krishnamurti Foundation of America.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refKFA1995 |reference=Krishnamurti Foundation of America (1995). ''Statement by the Krishnamurti Foundation of America about the Radha Sloss' book "Lives in the shadow with J. Krishnamurti"''. [[Ojai]]: Krishnamurti Foundation of America.}}
Line 257: Line 257:
*{{wikicite |ref=refELutyens1957 |reference=__ (1957). ''Candles in the Sun''. London: R. Hart-Davis. {{OCLC|255420902}}. [[Philadelphia]]: [[Lippincott_Williams_&_Wilkins|Lippincott]]. {{OCLC|1548846}}.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refELutyens1957 |reference=__ (1957). ''Candles in the Sun''. London: R. Hart-Davis. {{OCLC|255420902}}. [[Philadelphia]]: [[Lippincott_Williams_&_Wilkins|Lippincott]]. {{OCLC|1548846}}.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1975 |reference=[[Mary Lutyens|Lutyens, Mary]] (1975). ''[[Krishnamurti: The Years of Awakening]]''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-3229-9. New York: [[Farrar Straus and Giroux]] [abbr. FSG]. ISBN 0374182221. (1983). (Reprint ed.). Discus. ISBN 0-380-00734-7. (1997). (Reprint ed.). Boston: [[Shambhala Publications]]. ISBN 1-57062-288-4.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1975 |reference=[[Mary Lutyens|Lutyens, Mary]] (1975). ''[[Krishnamurti: The Years of Awakening]]''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-3229-9. New York: [[Farrar Straus and Giroux]] [abbr. FSG]. ISBN 0374182221. (1983). (Reprint ed.). Discus. ISBN 0-380-00734-7. (1997). (Reprint ed.). Boston: [[Shambhala Publications]]. ISBN 1-57062-288-4.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1983 |reference=__ (1983). ''[[Krishnamurti: The Years of Fulfilment]]''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-3979-X. New York: [[Farrar Straus and Giroux]] [abbr. FSG]. ISBN 0-374-18224-8. (2003). Krishnamurti Foundation Trust [abbr. KFT]. ISBN 0-900-506202.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1983 |reference=__ (1983). ''[[Krishnamurti: The Years of Fulfilment]]''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-3979-X. New York: [[Farrar Straus and Giroux]] [abbr. FSG]. ISBN 0-374-18224-8. (2003). [[Bramdean]]: Krishnamurti Foundation Trust [abbr. KFT]. ISBN 0-900-506202.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1988 |reference=__ (1988). ''Krishnamurti: The Open Door''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-4534-X. (2003). Krishnamurti Foundation Trust [abbr. KFT]. ISBN 0-900506-21-0.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1988 |reference=__ (1988). ''Krishnamurti: The Open Door''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-4534-X. (2003). [[Bramdean]]: Krishnamurti Foundation Trust [abbr. KFT]. ISBN 0-900506-21-0.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1990 |reference=__ (1990). ''The Life and Death of Krishnamurti''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-4749-0. (2003). Krishnamurti Foundation Trust [abbr. KFT]. ISBN 0-900506-22-9.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1990 |reference=__ (1990). ''The Life and Death of Krishnamurti''. London: [[John_Murray_(publisher)|John Murray]] [abbr. JM]. ISBN 0-7195-4749-0. (2003). [[Bramdean]]: Krishnamurti Foundation Trust [abbr. KFT]. ISBN 0-900506-22-9.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1991 |reference=__ (1991). ''Krishnamurti: His Life and Death''. [[St Martin's Press]]. ISBN 0-312-05455-6.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1991 |reference=__ (1991). ''Krishnamurti: His Life and Death''. [[St Martin's Press]]. ISBN 0-312-05455-6.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1995 |reference=__ (1995). ''The Boy Krishna: The First Fourteen Years in the Life of J. Krishnamurti''. Krishnamurti Foundation Trust. ISBN 0-900506-13-X.}}
*{{wikicite |ref=refML1995 |reference=__ (1995). ''The Boy Krishna: The First Fourteen Years in the Life of J. Krishnamurti''. Krishnamurti Foundation Trust. ISBN 0-900506-13-X.}}
Line 298: Line 298:
| and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template. |
| and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template. |
=======================({{No More Links}})=============================-->
=======================({{No More Links}})=============================-->
* [http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/ Jiddu Krishnamurti Online] Official J. Krishnamurti inter-organizational website whose mission is [http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/contact/about-this-site.php "''to make the teachings of J. Krishnamurti available and freely downloadable and to guarantee authenticity''"]. Quotes from Krishnamurti included in this article have been linked to, or checked against, this website when feasible. An international joint venture of the Krishnamurti Foundations. Links retrieved 2010-04-30.
* [http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/ Jiddu Krishnamurti Online] - Official J. Krishnamurti inter-organizational website whose mission is [http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/contact/about-this-site.php "''to make the teachings of J. Krishnamurti available and freely downloadable and to guarantee authenticity''"]. Quotes from Krishnamurti included in this article have been linked to, or checked against, this website when feasible. An international joint venture of the Krishnamurti Foundations. Links retrieved 2010-04-30.
* {{YouTube user|Kfoundation|Krishnamurti}}. A multimedia project of the official Krishnamurti inter-organizational website ''J.Krishnamurti Online''. Hosted video material requires Adobe Flash. Retrieved 2010-03-09.
* {{YouTube user|Kfoundation|Krishnamurti}} - A multimedia project of the official Krishnamurti inter-organizational website ''J.Krishnamurti Online''. Hosted video material requires Adobe Flash. Retrieved 2010-03-09.


The following Foundations are listed by date of organization. Links retrieved 2010-03-09.
The following Foundations are listed by date of organization. Links retrieved 2010-03-09.

Revision as of 20:50, 3 June 2010

Jiddu Krishnamurti
J. Krishnamurti cir. 1920s
BornMay 12, 1895 (1895-05-12)
DiedFebruary 17, 1986 (1986-02-18) (aged 90)
Occupation(s)public speaker, author, philosopher
Parent(s)Narainiah and Sanjeevamma Jiddu

Jiddu Krishnamurti (Telugu: జిడ్డు కృష్ణ మూర్తి) or J. Krishnamurti (Telugu: జే . కృష్ణ మూర్తి, Tamil: கிருஷ்ணமூர்த்தி), (12 May 1895 – 17 February 1986) was a writer and speaker on philosophical and spiritual issues. His subject matter included psychological revolution, the nature of the mind, meditation, human relationships, and bringing about positive change in society. He constantly stressed the need for a revolution in the psyche of every human being and emphasized that such revolution cannot be brought about by any external entity, be it religious, political, or social.

Krishnamurti was born into a Telugu Brahmin family in what was then colonial India. In early adolescence, while living next to the Theosophical Society headquarters at Adyar in Madras, he encountered prominent occultist and high-ranking Theosophist Charles Webster Leadbeater. He was subsequently raised under the tutelage of Leadbeater and Annie Besant, leaders of the Society at the time, who believed him to be the likely "vehicle" for an expected World Teacher. As a young man, he disavowed this idea and dissolved the worldwide organization (the Order of the Star) established to support it. He declared allegiance to no nationality, caste, religion, or philosophy, and spent the rest of his life traveling the world as an independent individual speaker, speaking to large and small groups, as well as with interested individuals. He authored a number of books, among them The First and Last Freedom, The Only Revolution, and Krishnamurti's Notebook. In addition, a large collection of his talks and discussions have been published. His last public talk was in Madras, India, in January 1986, a month before his death at his home in Ojai, California.

Supporters, working through several non-profit foundations, oversee a number of independent schools centered on his views on education – in India, Great Britain and the United States – and continue to transcribe and distribute many of his thousands of talks, group and individual discussions, and other writings, publishing them in a variety of formats including print, audio, video and digital media as well as online, in many languages.

Biography

Family background and childhood

Jiddu[1] Krishnamurti came from a family of Telugu-speaking Brahmins.[2] His father, Jiddu Narainiah, was employed as an official of the then colonial British Administration. Krishnamurti was very fond of his mother Sanjeevamma, who died when he was ten.[3] His parents were second cousins, having a total of eleven children, only six of whom survived childhood.[4] They were strict vegetarians, shunning eggs, and throwing away any food that the "shadow of a European" had crossed.[5]

He was born on 12 May[6] 1895 in the small town of Madanapalle in Chittoor District in Andhra Pradesh. As the eighth child, who happened to be a boy, and in accordance with common Hindu practice, he was named after Krishna.[7]

In 1903, the family settled in Cudappah, where Krishnamurti during a previous stay had contracted malaria, a disease with which he would suffer recurrent bouts over many years. He was a sensitive and sickly child; "vague and dreamy", he was often taken to be mentally retarded, and was beaten regularly at school by his teachers and at home by his father.[8] Several decades later, Krishnamurti referred to his state of mind during childhood: "Ever since he was a boy it had been like that, no thought entered his mind. He was watching and listening and nothing else. Thought with its associations never arose. There was no image-making...He attempted often to think but no thought would come."[9] Writing about his childhood and early adolescence in memoirs he composed when he was eighteen years old, Krishnamurti described psychic experiences such as "seeing" his sister, who had died in 1904, and also his mother, who had died in 1905.[10][11] Elsewhere, he mentions another aspect of his childhood - a bond and closeness with nature - that apparently persisted throughout his life: "He always had this strange lack of distance between himself and the trees, rivers and mountains. It wasn't cultivated."[12]

Krishnamurti's father Narainiah retired at the end of 1907, and being of limited means wrote to Annie Besant, then president of the Theosophical Society,[13] seeking employment at the Society headquarters estate at Adyar. In addition to being an observant orthodox Brahmin, Narainiah had been a member of the Theosophical Society since 1882.[14] He was eventually hired by the Society as a clerk, and he moved his family there in January 1909.[15] Narainiah and his sons were at first assigned a small cottage that lacked adequate sanitation, and which was located just outside the Theosophical compound. Apparently as a result of poor living conditions, Krishnamurti and his brothers were soon undernourished and infested with lice.[16]

The "discovery" and its consequences

It was in late April or early May[17] 1909, a few months after the last move, that Krishnamurti first met C.W. Leadbeater,[18] who claimed clairvoyance. During regular walks to the Theosophical estate's beach at the nearby Adyar river, Leadbeater had noticed Krishnamurti (who also frequented the beach with others), and was impressed by the "most wonderful aura he had ever seen, without a particle of selfishness in it".[19] This impression was notwithstanding Krishnamurti's outward appearance, which according to eyewitnesses was pretty common, unimpressive, and unkempt. The boy was also considered "particularly dim-witted"; he often had "a vacant expression" that "gave him an almost moronic look". Leadbeater remained "unshaken" that the boy would become "a spiritual teacher and a great orator".[20]

Pupul Jayakar, in her biography of Krishnamurti,[21] quotes him speaking of that period in his life some 75 years later: "The boy had always said, 'I will do whatever you want'. There was an element of subservience, obedience. The boy was vague, uncertain, woolly; he didn't seem to care what was happening. He was like a vessel, with a large hole in it, whatever was put in, went through, nothing remained."[22]

Following his "discovery", Krishnamurti was taken under the wing of the leadership of the Theosophical Society in Adyar and their inner circle. Leadbeater and a small number of trusted associates undertook the task of educating, protecting, and generally preparing Krishnamurti as the likely "vehicle" of the expected World Teacher.[23] Krishnamurti (or Krishnaji as he was often called)[24] and his younger brother Nityananda ("Nitya") were privately tutored at the Theosophical compound in Madras, and were later exposed to a comparatively opulent lifestyle among a segment of European high society, as they continued their education abroad. In spite of his history of problems with school work and concerns about his capacities and physical condition, the fourteen-year-old Krishnamurti within six months was able to speak and write competently in English.[25] He later came to view his "discovery" as a life-saving event: "Krishna" [Krishnamurti] "was often asked in later life what he thought would have happened to him if he had not been 'discovered' by Leadbeater. He would unhesitatingly reply, 'I would have died' ."[26]

During this time Krishnamurti had developed a strong bond with Annie Besant, and considered her a surrogate mother.[27] Following his early close relationship with his biological mother, this was the first of several important and intimate relationships that Krishnamurti established with women during his lifetime. His father, who had initially assented to Besant's legal guardianship of Krishnamurti,[28] was pushed into the background by the swirl of interest around his son and in 1912 sued Besant and the Theosophical Society to protect his parental interests. After a protracted legal battle, Besant took custody of Krishnamurti and his brother Nitya.[29][30] As a result of this separation from his family and home, Krishnamurti and his brother became extremely close, and in the following years they often traveled together.

In 1911, the leadership of the Theosophical Society at Adyar established a new organization called the Order of the Star in the East, to prepare the world for the aforementioned "coming" of the World Teacher. Krishnamurti was named as its head, while senior Theosophists were installed in its various other positions. Membership was open to anyone who accepted the doctrine of the Coming of the World Teacher – however, most of the early members were also members of the Theosophical Society.[31] Controversy erupted soon after, within the Theosophical Society and without, in Hindu circles, and in the Indian press.[29][32][33]

Growing up

Mary Lutyens, in her biography of Krishnamurti,[34] states that there was a time when he fully believed that he was to become the World Teacher after correct spiritual and secular guidance and education. Another biographer describes the daily program imposed on him by Leadbeater and his associates, which included rigorous exercise and sports, tutoring in a variety of school subjects, Theosophical and religious lessons, yoga and meditation, as well as instruction in proper hygiene and in the ways of British society and culture.[35] Unlike sports, in which he showed natural aptitude, Krishnamurti always had problems with formal schooling and was not academically inclined. He eventually gave up university education after several attempts at admission. He did take to foreign languages, in time speaking several (French and Italian among them) with some fluency. In this period he apparently enjoyed reading parts of the Old Testament, and was impressed by some of the Western classics, especially Shelley, Dostoyevsky and Nietzsche.[36] He also had, since childhood, considerable observational and mechanical skills, being able to correctly disassemble and reassemble complicated machinery.[37]

His public image as originally cultivated by the Theosophists "was to be characterized by a well-polished exterior, a sobriety of purpose, a cosmopolitan outlook and an otherworldly, almost beatific detachment in his demeanor." And in fact, "all of these can be said to have characterized Krishnamurti's public image to the end of his life."[38] It was apparently clear early on that he "possessed an innate personal magnetism, not of a warm physical variety, but nonetheless emotive in its austerity, and inclined to inspire veneration."[39] However, as Krishnamurti was growing up, he showed signs of adolescent rebellion and emotional instability, chafing at the regimen imposed on him, and occasionally having doubts about the future prescribed him.[40]

Krishnamurti and Nitya were taken to England for the first time in April 1911, where Krishnamurti gave his first public speech, to young members of the Order of the Star.[41] Between that time and the start of World War I in 1914, they also visited several other European countries, always accompanied by Theosophist chaperones.[42] After the war, Krishnamurti (again accompanied by his brother) embarked on a series of lectures, meetings, and discussions around the world relating to his duties as the head of the Order of the Star. The content of his talks at the time revolved around the work of the Order and of its members in preparation for the "Coming", while his vocabulary reflected the prevailing Theosophical concepts and terminology. In the beginning he was described as a halting, hesitant, and repetitive speaker, but there was steady improvement in his delivery and confidence, and he gradually took command of the meetings.[43]

The "process", and the death of Nitya

In 1922, Krishnamurti and Nitya travelled from Sydney to California on their way to Switzerland. While in California, they stayed at a cottage in then relatively secluded Ojai Valley, offered to them for the occasion by an American member of the Order.[44] At Ojai, the brothers also met Rosalind Williams, sister of a local Theosophist, who became close to them both.[45] For the first time the brothers were without immediate supervision by their Theosophical Society minders; they spent their time in nature hikes and picnics with friends, spiritual contemplation, and planning their course within the World Teacher Project.[46] Krishnamurti and Nitya found the Ojai Valley to be very agreeable, and eventually a trust formed by supporters purchased for them the cottage and surrounding property, which henceforth became Krishnamurti's official place of residence.[47]

It was in August-September 1922, during the initial stay at Ojai, that Krishnamurti went through an intense, "life-changing" experience.[48] It has been simultaneously, and invariably, characterised as a spiritual awakening, a psychological transformation, and a physical conditioning. The initial events happened in two distinct phases: first a three-day spiritual experience which apparently lead, two weeks later, to a longer-lasting condition that Krishnamurti and those around him would refer to as "the process"; this condition would reoccur, at frequent intervals and with varying intensity, until his death.[49][50] According to witnesses, it all started on 17 August 1922, with Krishnamurti complaining of extraordinary pain at the nape of his neck, and a hard, ball-like swelling. Over the next couple of days, the symptoms worsened, with increasing pain, extreme physical discomfort and sensitivity, total loss of appetite and occasional delirious ramblings. Then, he seemed to lapse into unconsciousness; instead he recounted that he was very much aware of his surroundings, and that while in that state he had an experience of mystical union.[51] The following day the symptoms and the experience intensified, climaxing with a sense of "immense peace".[52]

"I was supremely happy, for I had seen. Nothing could ever be the same. I have drunk at the clear and pure waters and my thirst was appeased...I have seen the Light. I have touched compassion which heals all sorrow and suffering; it is not for myself, but for the world...Love in all its glory has intoxicated my heart; my heart can never be closed. I have drunk at the fountain of Joy and eternal Beauty. I am God-intoxicated."[53]

Following - and apparently related to - these events,[54] in early September a strange condition, which came to be known as the "process", started as an almost nightly, regular, occurrence. These new incidents continued with short intermissions until October; later, the "process" would resume intermittently. As in the separate three-day experience of August, "the process" involved varying degrees of pain, physical discomfort and sensitivity, occasionally a lapse into a childlike state, and sometimes an apparent fading-in and out-of consciousness explained - by Krishnamurti or those attending him - as either his body giving in to pain, or as him "going off".[55]

These experiences were accompanied, or followed, by what was interchangeably described as "presence", "benediction", "immensity", and "sacredness", said to have been often felt by others present. Krishnamurti would later often substitute "the other" or "the otherness" as shorthand for such terms in this particular context; and also as a way of conveying the sense of impenetrability regarding this "otherness", the strange sensibility it effected, and the unusual state of consciousness it precipitated, as described in his diaries and elsewhere.[56]

Several explanations have been proposed for the events of 1922, and for the "process" in general.[57] Leadbeater and other Theosophists expected the "vehicle" to have certain paranormal experiences, but were nevertheless mystified by these developments and unable to explain the whole thing.[58] During Krishnamurti's later years, the continuing "process" often came up as a subject in private discussions between himself and his closest associates; these discussions shed some light on the subject, but were ultimately inconclusive regarding its nature and provenance.[59] Whatever the case, the "process", and the inability of Leadbeater to explain it satisfactorily, if at all, had other consequences according to biographer Roland Vernon:

"The process at Ojai, whatever its cause or validity, was a cataclysmic milestone for Krishna. Up until this time his spiritual progress, chequered though it might have been, had been planned with solemn deliberation by Theosophy's grandees...Something new had now occurred for which Krishna's training had not entirely prepared him...A burden was lifted from his conscience and he took his first step towards becoming an individual...In terms of his future role as a teacher, the process was his bedrock...It had come to him alone and had not been planted in him by his mentors...it provided Krishna with the soil in which his newfound spirit of confidence and independence could take root."[60][61]

Finally, the unexpected death of Nitya on 11 November 1925 at age 27 (from tuberculosis and after a long history with the disease) fundamentally shook Krishnamurti's belief in Theosophy and his faith in the leaders of the Theosophical Society.[62][63] According to eyewitness accounts, the news "broke him down completely". He struggled for days to overcome his sorrow, eventually "going through an inner revolution, finding new strength".[64] The experience of his brother's death seems to have shattered any remaining illusions, and things would never be the same again:

"An old dream is dead and a new one is being born, as a flower that pushes through the solid earth. A new vision is coming into being and a greater consciousness is being unfolded...A new strength, born of suffering, is pulsating in the veins and a new sympathy and understanding is being born of past suffering - a greater desire to see others suffer less, and, if they must suffer, to see that they bear it nobly and come out of it without too many scars. I have wept, but I do not want others to weep; but if they do, I know what it means."[65]

Break with the past

Over the next few years Krishnamurti's new vision and consciousness continued to develop. New concepts appeared in his talks, discussions, and correspondence, together with an evolving vocabulary that was progressively free of Theosophical terminology.[66] The main themes in his meetings started to diverge from the well-defined tenets of Theosophy and from the concrete steps the members of the Order of the Star had to undertake, and into more abstract and flexible concepts, which would be "Happiness" one year, "Questioning Authority" the next, or "Liberation" the following.[67] His new direction reached a climax in 1929, when he rebuffed attempts by Leadbeater and Besant to continue with the Order of the Star. Krishnamurti dissolved the Order during the annual Star Camp at Ommen, Netherlands, on 3 August 1929[68] where, in front of Annie Besant and several thousand members, he gave a speech saying among other things:

"You may remember the story of how the devil and a friend of his were walking down the street, when they saw ahead of them a man stoop down and pick up something from the ground, look at it, and put it away in his pocket. The friend said to the devil, 'What did that man pick up?' 'He picked up a piece of the truth,' said the devil. 'That is a very bad business for you, then,' said his friend. 'Oh, not at all,' the devil replied, 'I am going to help him organize it.' I maintain that truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever, by any religion, by any sect. That is my point of view, and I adhere to that absolutely and unconditionally. Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, unapproachable by any path whatsoever, cannot be organized; nor should any organization be formed to lead or coerce people along a particular path."[69][70]

and also:

"This is no magnificent deed, because I do not want followers, and I mean this. The moment you follow someone you cease to follow Truth. I am not concerned whether you pay attention to what I say or not. I want to do a certain thing in the world and I am going to do it with unwavering concentration. I am concerning myself with only one essential thing: to set man free. I desire to free him from all cages, from all fears, and not to found religions, new sects, nor to establish new theories and new philosophies."[69][70]

Following the dissolution some Theosophists turned against Krishnamurti and publicly wondered whether "the Coming had gone wrong". Mary Lutyens states that "after all the years of proclaiming the Coming, of stressing over and over again the danger of rejecting the World Teacher when he came because he was bound to say something wholly new and unexpected, something contrary to most people’s preconceived ideas and hopes, the leaders of Theosophy, one after the other, fell into the trap against which they had so unremittingly warned others."[71]

Krishnamurti had denounced all organized belief, the notion of gurus, and the whole teacher-follower relationship, vowing instead to work in setting man absolutely, totally free. There is no record of him explicitly denying he was the World Teacher[72]; whenever he was asked to clarify his position, he either asserted the matter was irrelevant,[73] or gave answers that, as he stated, were vague on purpose.[74] In a reflection of the ongoing changes in his outlook, he had started doing so before the dissolution of the Order of the Star.[75] The subtlety of the new distinctions on the World Teacher issue was lost on many of his admirers, who were already bewildered or distraught because of the changes in Krishnamurti’s outlook, vocabulary and pronouncements – among them Annie Besant and Mary Lutyens' mother Emily.[76] He eventually disassociated himself from the Theosophical Society and its teachings and practices,[77] yet he remained on cordial terms with some of its members and ex-members throughout his life.

Krishnamurti would often refer to the totality of his work as "the" teachings and not as "my" teachings. His concern was always about "the" teachings: the teacher had no importance, and all authority, especially psychological authority, was denounced.

"All authority of any kind, especially in the field of thought and understanding, is the most destructive, evil thing. Leaders destroy the followers and followers destroy the leaders. You have to be your own teacher and your own disciple. You have to question everything that man has accepted as valuable, as necessary."[78]

This includes inward authority:

"Having realized that we can depend on no outside authority...there is the immensely greater difficulty of rejecting our own inward authority, the authority of our own particular little experiences and accumulated opinions, knowledge, ideas and ideals."[79]

However, such pronouncements were not endorsements of social or personal disorder; on the contrary, the total freedom he advocated, rather than leading to societal and personal disorder would in his view result in "complete order":

"Order is necessary, complete, absolute, inward order and that is not possible if there is no virtue, and virtue is the natural outcome of freedom. But freedom is not doing what you want to do nor is it revolting against the established order, adopting a laissez faire attitude to life or becoming a hippy. Freedom comes into being only when we understand, not intellectually but actually, our every day life, our activity, our way of thought, the fact of our brutality, our callousness and indifference; it is to be actually in contact with our colossal selfishness."[80]

Krishnamurti resigned from the various trusts and other organizations that were affiliated with the defunct Order of the Star, including the Theosophical Society. He returned the monies and properties donated to the Order, among them a castle in the Netherlands and 5,000 acres (20 km2) of land,[81] to their donors.[82] He spent the rest of his life holding dialogues and giving public talks around the world on the nature of belief, truth, sorrow, freedom, death, and the quest for a spiritually-fulfilled life. He accepted neither followers nor worshipers, regarding the relationship between disciple and guru as encouraging dependency and exploitation. He accepted gifts and financial support freely offered to him by people inspired by his work, and continued with lecture tours and the publication of books and talk transcripts for more than half a century.[83] He constantly urged people to think independently and clearly. He invited them to "easily, affably" explore and discuss specific topics together with him, "as two friends"[84] who, in a break with the past, make a fresh start towards a "journey of discovery":

"And to take such a journey we must travel light; we cannot be burdened with opinions, prejudices and conclusions - all that old furniture...forget all you know about yourself; forget all you have ever thought about yourself; we are going to start as if we knew nothing."[85]

Middle years

From 1930 through 1944 Krishnamurti engaged in speaking tours and in the issue of publications under the auspice of the "Star Publishing Trust" (SPT), in which he was involved with D. Rajagopal, a close associate and friend from the Order of the Star.[86] The base of operations for the new enterprise was in Ojai, where Krishnamurti, D. Rajagopal, and Rosalind Williams (by then the wife of D. Rajagopal), resided in the house known as Arya Vihara.[87] The business and organizational aspects of the SPT were administered chiefly by D. Rajagopal, as Krishnamurti devoted his time to speaking and meditation, "content to leave all practical matters, which bored him, especially financial matters, in Rajagopal's undoubtebly capable hands."[88] The Rajagopals' marriage was not a happy one, and the two became physically estranged after the birth of their daughter Radha in 1931.[89] In the relative seclusion of Arya Vihara, Krishnamurti's close friendship with Rosalind deepened into a love affair that continued for many years, a fact that was not made public until 1991.[90][91]

During this period of time, the Rishi Valley School, the first of several schools based on Krishnamurti's educational ideas, opened in India.[92] Proper, holistic education, and the overall rearing of children into "sane", "whole" individuals free of conflict, had been one of his major, continuing concerns.[93] This school and others in India and elsewhere continue to operate under the auspices of the Krishnamurti Foundations.[94] However, as of 1980, Krishnamurti's concern regarding right education[95] remained unsatisfied. When asked about the result of - by that time - nearly 50 years of educational work at the various Krishnamurti Schools around the world, he answered that "not a single new mind" had been created.[96]

After the dissolution of the Order of the Star and the break with Theosophy, there was no falling off of the audiences attending the talks, with new people taking the place of those that abandoned him, since several of the old devotees "were unable to follow him in what seemed to them mists of abstraction."[97] New people also joined the camps, which were by then open to the general public, and Krishnamurti was invited to many new parts of the world. Mary Lutyens states that "his audiences were to become, increasingly, of a different calibre, people interested in what he had to say, not in what they had been told he was."[98]

Throughout the 1930s Krishnamurti spoke in Europe, Latin America, India, Australia and the United States, garnering favorable interest, although in a few occasions he encountered hostility or opposition during this period of growing global turmoil.[99] Another matter was the audiences' apparent inability to grasp his message; he expressed exasperation over this both privately and publicly, and one of the reasons for his shifting vocabulary was the lifelong[100] effort to convey the teaching in a way that was both precise and easy to understand.[101] He wrote to Emily Lutyens that the meetings had "quantity without quality"[102] and he was vexed by the refusal of older Order of the Star and Theosophical Society members to let go of the past. He acknowledged that what he was articulating could seem just like another hard-to-understand theory; he asked his audiences to act on it instead:

"To awaken that intelligence there must be the deep urge to know but not to speculate. Please bear in mind that what to me is a certainty, a fact, must be to you a theory, and the mere repetition of my words does not constitute your knowledge and actuality; it can be but a hypothesis, nothing more. Only through experimentation and action can you discern for yourself its reality. Then it is of no person, neither yours nor mine."[103]

Krishnamurti introduced several new concepts and terms which became recurrent themes in later talks and discussions.[104] One such was the idea of "choiceless awareness", a type of awareness that is from "moment to moment", without the implicit or explicit choices that accompany biases or judgments.[105] Another new concept was his challenge of the existence of division between the conscious and the subconscious mind, maintaining that such division is man-made, and that in reality there is only a single consciousness.[106] Spurred by the relative isolation at Ojai, and the long sessions of meditation he was engaging in daily, Krishnamurti started talking about "right meditation".[107] He would touch on this subject in practically every subsequent talk or discussion.[108]

In 1938, he made the acquaintance of Aldous Huxley, who had arrived from Europe during 1937.[109] The two began a close friendship which endured for many years. They held common concerns about the imminent conflict in Europe which they viewed as the outcome of the pernicious influence of nationalism.[110] Krishnamurti's stance on World War II was often construed as pacifism and even subversion during a time of patriotic fervor in the United States, and for a time he came under surveillance by the FBI.[111] He did not speak publicly for a period of about four years (between 1940 and 1944). During this time he lived and worked quietly at Arya Vihara, which during the war operated as a largely self-sustaining farm, with its surplus goods donated for relief efforts in Europe.[112] Of the years spent in Ojai during the war, he was later to say: "I think it was a period of no challenge, no demand, no outgoing. I think it was a kind of everything held in; and when I left Ojai it all burst."[113]

Krishnamurti broke the hiatus from public speaking in May 1944 with a series of talks in Ojai, which would again become a regular venue for his talks and discussions. These talks, and subsequent material, were published by "Krishnamurti Writings Inc" (KWINC), the successor organization to the "Star Publishing Trust". This was to be the new central Krishnamurti-related entity worldwide, whose sole purpose was the dissemination of the teaching.[114] Meanwhile, he continued to introduce new concepts and concerns that were to become constants in his later talks, such as the idea that there is no duality between the observer and the observed or between the thinker and the thought.[115] The nature and qualities of the enquiring mind would become another favorite subject:

"It seems to me that the real problem is the mind itself and not the problem which the mind has created and tries to solve. If the mind is petty, small, narrow, limited, however great and complex the problem may be, the mind approaches that problem in terms of its own pettiness...Though it has extraordinary capacities and is capable of invention, of subtle, cunning thought, the mind is still petty. It may be able to quote Marx, or the Gita, or some other religious book, but it is still a small mind, and a small mind confronted with a complex problem can only translate that problem in terms of itself, and therefore the problem, the misery increases. So the question is: Can the mind that is small, petty, be transformed into something which is not bound by its own limitations?"[116]

Krishnamurti had remained in contact with associates from India, and in October 1947 embarked upon a speaking tour there, attracting a new following of young intellectuals.[117] It was on this trip that he first encountered the Mehta sisters, Pupul and Nandini, who became lifelong associates and confidantes. The sisters also attended to Krishnamurti throughout a recurrence of the "process", which took place during a 1948 stay in Ootacamund.[118][119]

Krishnamurti continued to attract the attention of large numbers of people in public lectures and personal interviews.[120] This was also true in India, where there had been a long tradition of wandering "holy" men, hermits, and independent religious teachers; a number of contemporary ones met with Krishnamurti, or otherwise regarded him favorably.[121] Krishnamurti had a "special tenderness for the true sannyasi or Buddhist monk", yet he consistently and unequivocally criticized their "rituals, disciplines, and practices".[122] He became friendly and in the following decades had a number of discussions with well known Hindu and Buddhist scholars and leaders; several of these discussions were later published, in print and other formats.[123] He also met with other prominent personalities in India, including the then young 14th Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso,[124] and prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru.[125]

Later years

Krishnamurti continued speaking around the world, in public lectures, group discussions, and with concerned individuals.[126] His inner life was also active, with continuing occurrences of the "process" throughout 1961, first while in Great Britain, and then in Switzerland.[127] In the early 1960s, he made the acquaintance of physicist David Bohm,[128] whose philosophical and scientific concerns regarding the essence of the physical world, and the psychological and sociological state of mankind, found parallels in Krishnamurti's philosophy. The two men soon became close friends and started a common inquiry, in the form of personal dialogues - and in group discussions with other participants - that periodically continued over nearly two decades.[129][130] Several of these discussions were later published in a variety of formats, and introduced a wider audience (among scientists) to Krishnamurti's ideas than was previously the case.[131] Through Bohm, Krishnamurti also met, and held discussions with, several other members of the scientific community. Their long friendship went through a rocky interval in later years, and although they overcame their differences and remained friends until Krishnamurti's death, the relationship did not reattain its previous intensity.[132][133] However, one result of Krishnamurti's contact with Bohm and the scientific community was the introduction of greater precision in his vocabulary, and the carefully defined use of terms such as consciousness.[134]

In the early 1960s, his associates again started noticing deep changes in Krishnamurti. Jayakar wrote that "he would never be the same again. The Krishnaji who had laughed with us, walked with us...this Krishnaji would vanish. A new Krishnaji would emerge - stern, impatient, questioning...He would be compassionate, but he would also be the teacher, demanding answers to fundamental questions. All great laughter and play had ended."[135] His audience was also changing: reflecting the cultural changes of the 1960s, which included an intensified search for alternative lifestyles and experiences, there was a noticeable influx of young people in his talks and discussions. Krishnamurti’s evolving philosophy apparently proved too austere and rigorous for many of the new young participants; however new regular gatherings, such as the ones at Saanen, Switzerland, eventually became a focus for "serious...people concerned with the enormous challenges to humankind".[136]

Along with his changing audience and outlook, Krishnamurti's subject matter had evolved to encompass several new and different concepts: the idea that individuality is an illusion,[137] the notion that true love, beauty, peace, and goodness, had no opposites - such duality being only a construct of thought[138] - and the need for a "radical" mutation.[139] In the early 1970s he mentioned that the new approach represented an "unfolding...the teaching is in the same direction", but "it is holistic rather than an examination of detail".[134] As far as he was concerned, the fundamental teachings remained unchanged.[140] In late 1980, he took the opportunity to reaffirm the basic elements of his message in a written statement that came to be known as the "Core of the Teaching". An excerpt follows:

"The core of Krishnamurti's teaching is contained in the statement he made in 1929 when he said: 'Truth is a pathless land' . Man cannot come to it through any organization, through any creed, through any dogma, priest or ritual, nor through any philosophical knowledge or psychological technique. He has to find it through the mirror of relationship, through the understanding of the contents of his own mind, through observation, and not through intellectual analysis or introspective dissection. Man has built in himself images as a sense of security - religious, political, personal. These manifest as symbols, ideas, beliefs. The burden of these dominates man's thinking, relationships and his daily life. These are the causes of our problems for they divide man from man in every relationship."[141]

In the 1970s, Krishnamurti met several times with then Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi, with whom he had far ranging, and apparently in some cases very serious discussions. His true impact on Indian political life is unknown; however Jayakar considers his attitude and message in these meetings as a possible influence in the lifting of certain emergency measures Gandhi had imposed during periods of political turmoil.[142]

During the late 1960s and early 1970s, Krishnamurti and his associates reorganized previous institutions into four geographically dispersed non-profit Foundations, designated the Official bodies responsible for disseminating the teachings and sponsoring the schools.[143] Meanwhile, Krishnamurti's once close relationship with the Rajagopals had deteriorated to the point where Krishnamurti took D. Rajagopal to court in order to recover donated property and funds, publication rights for his works, manuscripts, and personal correspondence, that were in D. Rajagopal's possession.[144] The litigation and ensuing cross complaints, which formally began 1971, continued for many years. A substantial portion of materials and property was returned to Krishnamurti during his lifetime; the parties to this case finally settled all other matters in 1986, shortly after his death.[145][146]

Beginning in the late 1960s and continuing until his death, Krishnamurti and close associates engaged in private discussions - some of which have been at least partially made public[147] - regarding himself, his "discovery", his later development, the meaning of the continuing "process"[148] - and the source of the teaching. It seemed that Krishnamurti "in later life begun to delve into the mystery of his background in an attempt to come to terms with his own uniqueness."[149] The discussions also broached subjects that Krishnamurti would not usually approach in public, such as the existence of evil,[150] a feeling of "protection" he had,[151] or the nature of the "otherness" – the non-personified "presence" that he, and sometimes others around him, felt.[152] The discussions did not reach any conclusions - Krishnamurti several times stated that he did not know what the truth was relative to these inquiries - and whether he could, or should, find it out. He nevertheless examined several approaches, some of which he considered more likely than others.[153] He insisted that he did not want to make "a mystery" out of all this; Mary Lutyens comments that "yet a mystery remains."[154]

In 1984 and again in 1985 he spoke to invited audiences at the United Nations in New York City, under the auspices of the United Nations Chapter of the Pacem in Terris Society.[155] In November 1985 he visited India for the last time, holding a number of what came to be known as "farewell" talks and discussions between then and January 1986. These last talks included the fundamental questions he had been asking through the years, as well as newer concerns related to then recent advances in science, technology, and the way they affected humankind. Increasingly, Krishnamurti's physical and intellectual resilience and vigor - after lifelong, almost constant travel,[156] and despite a lifetime of frail physical health[157] - was showing signs of abating. He had commented to friends that he did not wish to invite death, but he was not sure how long his body would last (he had already lost considerable weight), and had stated in several occasions that once he could no longer talk, he would have no further purpose.[158] In his final talk, on 4 January 1986 in Madras, he again invited the audience to examine with him the nature of inquiry, the effect of technology, the nature of life and meditation, and the nature of creation:

"That computer can do almost anything that man can do. It can make all your gods, all your theories, your rituals; it's even better at it than you will ever be. So, the computer is coming up in the world; it's going to make your brains something different. You've heard of genetic engineering; they're trying, whether you like it or not, to change your whole behaviour. That is genetic engineering. They are trying to change your way of thinking. When genetic engineering and the computer meet, what are you? As a human being what are you? Your brains are going to be altered. Your way of behaviour is going to be changed. They may remove fear altogether, remove sorrow, remove all your gods. They're going to; don't fool yourself. It all ends up either in war or in death. This is what is happening in the world actually. Genetic engineering on the one side and the computer on the other, and when they meet, as they're inevitably going to, what are you as a human being? Actually, your brain now is a machine. You are born in India and say: 'I'm an Indian' . You are encased in that. You are a machine. Please don't be insulted. I'm not insulting you. You are a machine which repeats like a computer. Don't imagine there is something divine in you - that would be lovely - something holy that is everlasting. The computer will say that to you too. So, what is becoming of a human being? What's becoming of you?"[159]

and also:

"So, we are enquiring into what makes a bird. What is creation behind all this? Are you waiting for me to describe it, go into it? You want me to go into it? Why (From the audience: To understand what creation is). Why do you ask that? Because I asked? No description can ever describe the origin. The origin is nameless; the origin is absolutely quiet, it's not whirring about making noise. Creation is something that is most holy, that's the most sacred thing in life, and if you have made a mess of your life, change it. Change it today, not tomorrow. If you are uncertain, find out why and be certain. If your thinking is not straight, think straight, logically. Unless all that is prepared, all that is settled, you can't enter into this world, into the world of creation."[159]

Krishnamurti was also concerned about his legacy, about being unwittingly turned into some personage whose teachings had been handed down to special individuals rather than to the world as a whole. He did not want anyone to pose as an interpreter of the teaching.[160] He warned his associates on several occasions that they were not to present themselves as spokesmen on his behalf, or as his successors after his death.[161]

A few days before his death, in a final statement, he emphatically declared that "nobody" - among his associates or the general public - had understood what had happened to him [as the conduit of the teaching], nor had they understood the teaching itself. He added that the "immense energy" operating in his lifetime would be gone with his death, again implying the impossibility of successors. However, he offered hope by stating that people could approach that energy and gain a measure of understanding "if they live the teachings".[162] In prior discussions he had compared himself with Thomas Edison, meaning by it that he had done the hard work, and now all that was needed by others was a flick of the switch.[163] In another instance he talked of Columbus going through an arduous journey to discover the New World, whereas now it could easily be reached by jet; the ultimate implication being that even if Krishnamurti was in some way "special", in order to arrive at his level of understanding, others did not need to be.[163]

J. Krishnamurti died 17 February 1986, at age 90, from pancreatic cancer. His remains were cremated and scattered by friends and former associates in the three countries where he had spent most of his life: India, England, and the United States of America.[164]

Afterword

Interest in Krishnamurti and his work has persisted in the years since his death.[165] Many of his books, as well as audio, video, and computer materials, remain available and are carried by major online and traditional retailers. The official Foundations continue with the maintenance of archives, dissemination of the teachings in an increasing number of languages, new conversions to digital and other media, development of websites, sponsoring of television programs, and with organizing meetings and dialogues of interested persons around the world.[166] According to communications and press releases from the Foundations, their mailing lists, and individuals' inquiries, continue to grow.[167] Similarly, the Foundation-affiliated schools and educational institutions report continuing growth, with new projects added in support of their declared goal of holistic education.[168] In addition, there are unofficial Krishnamurti Committees operating in several countries,[169] as well as independent educational institutions[170] based on his ideas. Biographies, reminiscences, research papers, critical examinations, and book-length studies of Krishnamurti and his philosophy have continued to appear. Cursory (and necessarily incomplete) examination of internet search traffic and group discussion forums indicates that among similar topics, interest in Krishnamurti remains high.[171]

In 1991, the autobiography Lives in the Shadow with J. Krishnamurti by Radha Rajagopal Sloss[172] was the cause of negative publicity and controversy regarding Krishnamurti. The controversy was centered on the author's depiction of his relationship with her parents, primarily (though not exclusively) as it concerned a secret extramarital affair between Krishnamurti and her mother Rosalind Rajagopal that had lasted many years.[173] The public revelation was received with surprise and consternation by many individuals, and was also dealt with in a "personal response" - a rebuttal volume of biography - by Mary Lutyens.[174] Others, such as Helen Nearing, who had known Krishnamurti in his youth, questioned whether his attitudes were conditioned by privilege, as he was supported, and in Nearing's opinion often pampered, by devoted followers starting as far back as his "discovery" by the Theosophists.[175][176][177]

Biographers and associates of Krishnamurti acknowledge another complaint against him, one that relates to his demeanor during talks and discussions: that Krishnamurti often comes across as too vague or too assertive, or both. David Skitt, who edited several Krishnamurti books, attempts to deal with this issue in the "Editor's Introduction" of the book To Be Human.[178] He also comments on a point that Krishnamurti often made, one that Skitt admits could at first glance be thought of as "condescending" or "arrogant": that before considering any of the questions Krishnamurti was concerned with, there was a need to understand "the nature of a mind capable of going into" such questions.[179] Skitt puts these utterances by Krishnamurti in the context of recurring statements that Krishnamurti made in talks and dialogues: The proclamation (usually in the beginning of each talk) that his message should not be taken at face value, but that it should be "shared" critically, and be appraised by each listener; and also, the accompanying additional proclamation that he did not consider himself an authority of any kind.

"What is important is to listen to what he has to say, share it, not only listen, but actually participate in what he's saying. You may agree, or disagree, which you are perfectly right to do, but since you are here and since the speaker is here, we are talking over together...Don't just listen to me...but share in it, tear it to pieces. Don't, please accept anything he says. He's not your guru, thank god. He is not your leader. He is not your helper."[180]

The fact that Krishnamurti was - and conceivably, after his death may continue to be - looked upon as a world teacher or guru despite his aversion or denials, has been considered ironic by associates, detractors and biographers.[181] In similar vein, people who knew him in his youth found his eventual transformation hard to fathom, as Mary Lutyens professed a few years before his death: "I find hard to reconcile the shy gentleness and almost vacant mind of the sixteen-year-old-boy...with the powerful teacher who has evolved a philosophy that cannot be shaken by the most prominent thinkers of the day - particularly hard since there is so much of that boy remaining in the man."[182] Such observations may then lead to the question of the source of Krishnamurti's inspiration and originality of his work, "the mystery that he preferred not to clarify for fear it might be leapt on in judgement or cheapened by the spiritually ambitious."[183]

Because of his ideas and his era, Krishnamurti has come to be seen as an exemplar of those spiritual teachers who disavow formal rituals and dogma. His conception of truth as a "pathless land", with the possibility of immediate liberation,[184][185] has been mirrored, or has been claimed as an influence, in the work of diverse movements and personalities.[186] However, his very emphasis on the uselessness - if not detriment - of outside help and guidance gave rise to complaints, as such emphasis was sometimes perceived as lack of compassion.[187] Krishnamurti's own indication of success remained the same throughout: whether individuals had truly understood, and therefore "lived and breathed", the teaching.[188] He had remarked in 1929, at the dissolution of the Order of the Star, that he was not interested in numbers, stating: "If there are only five people who will listen, who will live, who have their faces turned towards eternity, it will be sufficient."[69] In his later years he was sometimes asked why he kept on teaching, what motivated him after all these decades, as by his own admission, so few, if any, had changed.[189] He answered one such question in 1980:

"I think when one sees something true and beautiful, one wants to tell people about it, out of affection, out of compassion, out of love...Can you ask the flower why it grows, why it has perfume? It is for the same reason the speaker talks."[190]

Works

Further reading

Notes

  1. ^ Jiddu (alternately spelled "Geddu" or "Giddu") was Krishnamurti's family name. M. Lutyens 1975 Farrar Straus and Giroux (FSG), "Notes and Sources", p. 308. Mary Lutyens was an authorized biographer and lifelong friend of Krishnamurti.
  2. ^ According to a caretaker of their ancestral house, Krishnamurti’s family were Velanadu Brahmins. Williams 2004 "Notes", Note 13, p. 466. C. V. Williams, who interviewed the caretaker during a visit to the house, adds that "Velanadu are popularly regarded as high-class Brahmins". See also Jayakar 1986 p. 15. Pupul Jayakar (nee Mehta), was another authorized biographer and longtime confidante of Krishnamurti.
  3. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 5.
  4. ^ See Williams 2004 "Notes", Note 50, pp. 471-472. C. V. Williams points to discrepancies among various sources regarding the size and composition of the Jiddu household. The information provided here reflects a 1993 legal statement by Giddu Narayan, Krishnamurti's nephew.
  5. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, pp. 1-2. M. Lutyens considers such practices common among pious high-caste Hindus at that time.
  6. ^ 11 May according to the Hindu calendar. Krishnamurti was born sometime past midnight of 12 May, but prior to dawn, which denotes the start of the Hindu calendar day. M. Lutyens states that according to Hindu reckoning, the day lasts from 4 am to 4 am. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 1-2.
  7. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, p. 1. Krishnamurti means "in the image (or form) of Krishna".
  8. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, pp. 3, 4, 22, 25.
  9. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1982 p. 11. Entry of 15 September 1973. In most of his writings, Krishnamurti refers to himself in the third person. In his later public talks and discussions he consistently referred to himself as "the speaker", or as "K".
  10. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, p. 5. Quoting from Krishnamurti's memoirs, " 'I may mention that I frequently saw her' " [his mother] " 'after she died' ". [In 1913 Krishnamurti had started writing a never-completed memoir entitled Fifty Years Of My Life - M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, "Notes and Sources", p. 309.]
  11. ^ Krishnamurti was highly affected by the death of his mother, whom he describes as being, like himself, " 'to a certain extent psychic' ". M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, p. 5.
  12. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1982 p. 16. Entry of 17 September 1973.
  13. ^ The Theosophical Society, the "charismatic" personalities of its leaders, and Theosophy itself, had generated since the Society's inception in 1875 in New York City considerable interest among the cultural, business, and social elites of the late 19th and early 20th century. Heralded as a harbinger of "a new age", it attracted, at least temporarily, a number of wealthy patrons and eloquent, well-known supporters, of whom several eventually met young Krishnamurti. Campbell 1980.
  14. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, p. 7: "Theosophy embraced all religions". C. V. Williams states that at the time, "it would seem that there was no conflict between the values of the Theosophical Society and those of Hinduism" as far as Krishnamurti’s parents were concerned. Williams 2004 p. 4.
  15. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, p. 8. The family at that time consisted of Narainiah and four sons.
  16. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 41.
  17. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 20-21. The exact date is uncertain; M. Lutyens thinks it happened sometime after 22 April.
  18. ^ Melton 1996.
  19. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 21. Quoting Leadbeater's description to assistant Ernest Wood. According to occult and Theosophical lore, "auras" are invisible emanations related to each individual's "subtler" planes of existence, as well as her or his "normal" plane. Thanks to his proclaimed clairvoyant abilities, Leadbeater would be able to discern a person's aura.
  20. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 21. Leadbeater is described as a complicated and controversial character who remained a mystery even to those close to him - see M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, "Foreword", pages x-xi.
  21. ^ Jayakar questioned the account of the boy Krishnamurti's physical appearance. In her opinion, the cultural background of the European Theosophists had likely influenced their impressions. Jayakar 1986 pp. 26-28. She considered young Krishnamurti beautiful, basing her opinion on contemporary photographs. Jayakar 1986 p. 34.
  22. ^ Jayakar 1986 p. 28. Krishnamurti in private conversations during his later years would refer to this "vacancy" often, considering it fundamental to his later development. Apparently Leadbeater thought so too, although for different reasons. M. Lutyens 1990 Krishnamurti Foundation Trust (KFT), ch. 17, and M. Lutyens 1988 KFT, pp. 3, 31. Also Vernon 2001 p. 83, quoting Leadbeater's opinion that Krishnamurti's "vacant nature" was "the very quality that made him so ideal a candidate for Vehicleship".
  23. ^ According to Theosophical doctrine, the World Teacher is a messianic figure corresponding to, and combining aspects of, Christ, Maitreya, and the Avatar, among others. A founder of the Theosophical Society, Helena Blavatsky, had divulged to select associates prior to her death that the ultimate purpose of the Society was to prepare the way for this "imminent" arrival. See Blavatsky 1889 pp. 304-307. Also Hodson 1929 and Schuller 1997.
  24. ^ The suffix "-ji" in Hindu names is a sign of affection or respect. Jayakar 1986 "Preface".
  25. ^ Vernon 2001 ch. 4.
  26. ^ M. Lutyens 1995.
  27. ^ See M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 31 for Krishnamurti's letter to Besant dated 24 December 1909, and in p. 62 letter dated 5 January 1913. Also Vernon 2001 p. 47.
  28. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 40. In Jayakar's description, Besant had "prevailed" on Narianiah to "hand over" guardianship to her. Jayakar 1986 p. 29.
  29. ^ a b Jayakar 1986 ch. 3.
  30. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, ch. 7.
  31. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 46. The organization's name was later shortened to Order of the Star. See also the Six Principles for a list of the principles of the Order.
  32. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 56, 59; chs. 5-7. The news regarding Krishnamurti and the World Teacher were not universally welcome by Theosophists. Among others, Rudolf Steiner, at the time leader of the German Section of the Theosophical Society, rejected the claims of Krishnamurti's messianic status. The resulting tensions between the German Section and Besant and Leadbeater was one of the reasons that led to a split in the Society. Subsequently, the great majority of German members left the Theosophical Society in 1912-13 to join Steiner in a new group.
  33. ^ Part of the controversy was Leadbeater's role. He had a history of being in the company of young boys - as pupils under his spiritual and Theosophical instruction - and there was gossip concerning abuses. The majority of his charges, when asked, vouched for his "purity "; yet there had been scandals within the Theosophical Society over past accusations from boys in his care regarding improper sexual behavior. This was vehemently denied by Annie Besant, but the gossip greatly disturbed Krishnamurti's father. M. Lutyens 1975 Discus, pp. 15-19, 40, 56.
  34. ^ The Jiddu brothers initially encountered Emily Lutyens - nee Lady Lytton - (1874-1964), and daughter Mary during their first trip to England. Mary's mother, who was then 36 years old and active in the Theosophical Society, became another surrogate mother for Krishnamurti, apparently forming a strong and intimate bond with him. This was at times frowned upon by the highest ranking members of the Society as well as by her frustrated and skeptical husband, noted architect Edwin Lutyens. Vernon 2001 pp. 67, 80-83. See also Ridley 2003, and Emily Lutyens' 1957 autobiography, Candles in the Sun (E. Lutyens 1957).
  35. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 57.
  36. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 Shambhala, pp. 83, 120, 149.
  37. ^ M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, pp. 4, 20.
  38. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 53.
  39. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 52.
  40. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, chs. 10-15, deals extensively with these issues. Vernon 2001 offers a concise summation in chapters 5 and 6.
  41. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 51-52.
  42. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 65.
  43. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 134, 135, 171-172.
  44. ^ It was thought that the mountain climate of Ojai would be beneficial to Nitya, who had been diagnosed with tuberculosis. Vernon 2001 p. 97.
  45. ^ Rosalind Williams, a young American who would play a significant role in Krishnamurti's life, had been asked to act as companion and nurse to the ailing Nitya. Sloss 1993 pp. 54-55. Also M. Lutyens 1991 p. 35.
  46. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 113.
  47. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 6.
  48. ^ Jayakar 1986 p. 46 onwards. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, chs. 18-21.
  49. ^ The events of August-September 1922 as well as the continuing occurences of the "process" would not be revealed publicly until the first volume of Mary Lutyens' biography, Krishnamurti: The Years of Awakening, was published in 1975. (M. Lutyens 1975). Details and first hand descriptions of the "process" were published 1976, in Krishnamurti's Notebook - a journal that Krishnamurti kept between June 1961 and March 1962. (J. Krishnamurti 1976). Mary Lutyens, in the course of responding to certain allegations regarding the "process" made several decades later, briefly provided updated information in her Krishnamurti and the Rajagopals, published 1996. (M. Lutyens 1996).
  50. ^ Krishnamurti and others with him at the time provided written accounts of the August-September 1922 incidents. These include accounts by Nitya and two prominent Theosophists. Rosalind Williams, who was also present, apparently did not provide any written account of the events. Documents held [c. 2001] at the Krishnamurti Archive, Krishnamurti Foundation of America (Vernon 2001 "Notes", p. 282, Notes 2-3). Other relevant material held [c. 2001] at the Brockwood Park archives, Krishnamurti Foundation Trust (Vernon 2001 "Notes", p. 282, Note 7).
  51. ^ "There was a man mending the road; that man was myself; the pickaxe he held was myself; the very stone which he was breaking up was a part of me; the tender blade of the grass was my very being, and the tree beside the man was myself...I was in everything, or rather everything was in me, inanimate and animate, the mountain, the worm, and all breathing things. All day long I remained in this happy condition." M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 158. Quoting Krishnamurti's written account.
  52. ^ According to Nitya's account, he and Rosalind Williams had ecstatic experiences of their own, while the other two people present were also affected, as per their, and Nitya's, accounts. Vernon 2001 pp. 118-119.
  53. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 159-160. Quoting Krishnamurti's written account. M. Lutyens devotes "Chapter 18: The Turning Point" in this book to the initial three-day experience.
  54. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 165. Quoting Krishnamurti letter of 16 September 1922 to Annie Besant: "ever since I had that memorable experience" [of 17-20 August] "I have not been 'well'. "
  55. ^ In this context, the use of the term "going off" in the accounts of the early occurences of the "process" apparently signified so-called out-of-body experiences. However, in later usage, Krishnamurti seemed to indicate by it a special state of consciousness. See M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, chs. 18-21, especially ch. 19.
  56. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1976 "Foreword" (by M. Lutyens). Also: M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, pp. 226-227, 228, 230. M. Lutyens 1988 KFT, pp. 8, 31, 62, 100, 137. Krishnamurti (and others who occasionally experienced it in his company) made clear that any attempt at personification of this "otherness" would be totally inconsistent with the actual experience. According to Krishnamurti's writings and private discussions on the matter, "the other" would later often manifest independently of the "process". He also commented on the increasing, with time, intensity and frequency of his experiencing it. In his later writings and discussions he would refer to the "otherness" more often, sometimes explicitly or - arguably, and usually - as implied by his narrative.
  57. ^ The one most frequently put forth is the view that it represented the so-called "awakening of kundalini", a process that according to Hindu mysticism culminates in transcendent consciousness (see Jayakar 1986 p. 46n and M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 166). Others view it in Freudian terms. A theory expounded in the Harvard Theological Review (Aberbach 1993) contends that the experiences were basically a projection of Krishnamurti's accumulated grief over the death of his mother. Still others have viewed it as a purely physical event centered on sickness or trauma. Krishnamurti believed the "process" was necessary for his spiritual development and not a medical matter or condition. (M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, pp. 45-46). Per his written account, and as far as he was concerned, he had encountered Truth.
  58. ^ The original Theosophical explanation was that Krishnamurti was in the process of successfully completing a spiritual Initiation (M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 163-164), that may have involved the opening of his so-called third eye (M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 186). However, this view lost traction as the "process" continued unabated. Leadbeater eventually asked Mary Rocke, a trusted Star member and longtime Theosophist who was also a doctor, to form a medical opinion of the "process". She witnessed an occurence of it over the course of nearly two weeks during April 1924, and examined Krishnamurti, but was apparently unable to provide a diagnosis or other explanation. According to Krishnamurti, she accepted the events as genuine and not as the result of hysteria or suggestion; however there is no other known record of Dr. Rocke's opinion. She was the only medical professional to ever witness the "process" (M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 188). M. Lutyens writes that "if any strange doctor or psychologist had entered the house" [someone not known or not trusted by Krishnamurti] "the 'process' would undoubtebly have stopped." (M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, p. 45). See also Williams 2004 pp. 127-128 and 129, for Leadbeater's correspondence of 1 January 1924 regarding the "process", and for other related information.
  59. ^ For example, see Jayakar 1986 p. 133. Krishnamurti often spoke about a sensation of enormous "energy" while the "process" was going on, and in this discussion from the late 1970s he wondered whether the pain accompanying the "process" was the result of procedures to "polish" his body so it could accommodate this energy. See also M. Lutyens 1988 John Murray (JM), pp. 39-40.
  60. ^ Vernon 2001 pp. 131-132. See also M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, pp. 6-8, for description of Krishnamurti's "new stature and authority". M. Lutyens also offers that because of these experiences, "he became less vague and more beautiful."
  61. ^ Krishnamurti, throughout his Notebook, strongly suggests that these experiences, continuing unabated at the time of its writing in the early 1960s, served as facilitators of, and conduits to, the teaching and its public exposition. J. Krishnamurti 1976.
  62. ^ M. Lutyens describes Krishnamurti's conviction that "Nitya was essential for K's life-mission and therefore he would not be allowed to die." (M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 219). Elsewhere, she mentions the Theosophists' "assurances" about Nitya's importance to the "mission". (M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, p. 57).
  63. ^ In the meantime, the rumors concerning the messianic status of Krishnamurti had reached fever pitch as a visit to Sydney was planned. Leadbeater had been based there since 1914, and the Theosophical Society had then owned a local radio station. The Star Amphitheatre was built in 1923–24 at Balmoral Beach on Sydney Harbour as a platform for the coming World Teacher. According to sensational media reportage, Krishnamurti was to make a triumphant arrival, walking on water through Sydney Heads. Paralleling this increasing adulation was Krishnamurti's growing discomfort with it. See Gosling 2006 and Kohn 2001.
  64. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 220.
  65. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1926. From the editorial notes in the Herald of the Star, the official bulletin of the Order of the Star in the East.
  66. ^ M. Lutyens states that he started using his "own language" after the Ojai events of 1922, described in section The "process". M. Lutyens 1983 JM, p. 234.
  67. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 259-262; chs. 27, 29-30. Jayakar 1986 pp. 70-74, and Vernon 2001 pp. 171-180.
  68. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 272. The 1929 Star Camp commenced on 2 August; Krishnamurti delivered the "Dissolution Speech" the next morning. See J. Krishnamurti 1929 for the complete speech, and also D. Rajagopal 1929. [Both originally published in the International Star Bulletin, a successor of the Herald of the Star]. The Order held annual Star Camps for its members on the grounds of Castle Eerde (Ommen) between 1924 and 1929. The estate had been gifted to a trust affiliated with the Order. Vernon 2001 p. 102.
  69. ^ a b c J. Krishnamurti 1929.
  70. ^ a b M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, ch. 33.
  71. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 278. Select news reports: Manchester Guardian 1929, New York Times 1929.
  72. ^ While Krishnamurti did not deny being the World Teacher, he "baffled" his followers by declaring that such status could be "achieved by anyone." Vernon 2001 pp. 166-167. Several decades later, in discussions with close associates, Krishnamurti described the World Teacher or Maitreya association as "too concrete" to be an explanation of his life-story, and "not subtle enough." M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 234. M. Lutyens 1988 KFT, pp. 92-93. Jayakar 1986 pp. 439-440.
  73. ^ "I think we shall have incessant wrangles over the corpse of Krishnamurti if we discuss this or that, wondering who is now speaking. Someone asked me: 'Do tell me if it is you speaking or someone else'. I said: 'I really do not know and it does not matter'." J. Krishnamurti 1972 p. 9. From the 1927 "Question and Answer Session" at Ommen.
  74. ^ "I am going to be purposely vague, because although I could quite easily make it definite, it is not my intention to do so. Because once you define a thing it becomes dead!" Krishnamurti on the World Teacher, from "Who brings the truth", an address delivered at Ommen, August 2, 1927. J. Krishnamurti 1928. [Note weblink in reference is from the "Krishnamurti" section of the No Reality website (retrieved 2010-05-25). This is not an official J. Krishnamurti website].
  75. ^ As noted previously. In the 1928 Ommen "Question and Answer Session" he again reiterated and expanded on these themes. See M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 262, and related note on p. 315.
  76. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 189. Besant at some point had offered to resign as President of the Theosophical Society, feeling unable to reconcile its growing differences with Krishnamurti. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 236. Emily Lutyens wrote in the September 1928 International Star Bulletin that Krishnamurti left his followers "naked and alone, their foundations shattered". Vernon 2001 p. 177 and related Note 30, p. 287. Emily Lutyens was also desolate over the ending of the Order and its World Teacher Project, and was unable to comprehend or follow Krishnamurti’s new direction. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 279. C. V. Williams, citing Emily Lutyens letters to Krishnamurti of 14 August and 16 September 1934 held [c. 2005] at the Krishnamurti Foundation India Archive, writes of her complaint that "he might not deny being a world teacher but he constantly denied being the 'World Teacher' for whom Theosophists had given money" [emphasis in original]. Williams 2004 p. 212. C. V. Williams describes Emily Lutyens' letters, which were prompted by pleas from Krishnamurti’s associates for donations, as "rather stiff". She provides part of Krishnamurti’s response of 27 August 1934, also found in M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, p. 30: "You know mum I have never denied it." [Being the World Teacher] "I have only said it does not matter who or what I am but that they should examine what I say, which does not mean that I have denied being the W.T." [emphasis in original].
  77. ^ M. Lutyens considers the last remaining tie with Theosophy to have been severed in 1933, with the death of Besant. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, "Postscript", p. 285.
  78. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1975 p. 21. (Context-based weblink: para. 36 retrieved 2010-04-30). Similar remarks can be found in practically every talk he gave after the dissolution of the Order.
  79. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1975 p. 19. (Context-based weblink: para 31 retrieved 2010-04-30).
  80. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1968. (Context-based weblink: para. 57 retrieved 2010-04-21).
  81. ^ Castle Eerde (Ommen), previously owned by the van Pallandt family. After the dissolution of the Order Krishnamurti continued to hold meetings and camps at the estate until the outbreak of World War II, mainly at a 400-acre parcel that housed the original campground, and which was returned after the war. The bulk of the estate had been transferred to the van Pallandt family in 1931. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 276 and M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, p. 96.
  82. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, ch. 34, especially p. 276. Jayakar 1986 pp. 79-85.
  83. ^ See KFA 1997. Includes a Krishnamurti chronology and the complete listing of every place that he spoke at from 1923 to 1986.
  84. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1965. (Context-based weblink: para. 24 retrieved 2010-05-20). Also in J. Krishnamurti 1992 p. 245. Krishnamurti made similar remarks in many of his talks and discussions.
  85. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1975 p. 20. (Context-based weblink: para. 33 retrieved 2010-04-30).
  86. ^ Born in India in 1900 and of Brahmin descent, Desikacharya Rajagopalacharya (D. Rajagopal or "Raja", d. 1993), had moved in Krishnamurti's circle since early youth. Regarded as an excellent editor and organizer, he was also known for his difficult personality and high-handed manner. Being practical-minded and methodical, he was temperamentally the opposite of Krishnamurti. Upon Nitya's death, he had promised Annie Besant that he would look after Krishnamurti, and replaced Nitya in his role as Krishnamurti's frequent travel companion and aide, and also as official of the SPT. The Star Publishing Trust had been established several years prior; originally based in Ommen, it was reorganized and relocated to California following the dissolution of the Order of the Star. Methorst 2003 ch. 12.
  87. ^ Meaning Noble Monastery in Sanskrit, Arya Vihara was part of a later addition to the Ojai property that was Krishnamurti's official residence. M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 7.
  88. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, p. 17. Vernon 2001 pp. 199-200, comments on the business side of the SPT, reporting that by then it had become the principal source of funding for Krishnamurti, his associates, and his work, in addition to other income from donations and annuities. He describes D. Rajagopal's commercial accumen and rigorous work routine, and contrasts it with Krishnamurti's outlook, writing that their personality differences frequently led to "confrontations", and offering that after the relocation to Ojai, their "relationship teetered...between strong affection and mutual antipathy".
  89. ^ Sloss 1993 pp. 111-112.
  90. ^ Radha's autobiographical account, Lives in the Shadow With J. Krishnamurti, which publicly revealed the extramarital relationship between her mother and Krishnamurti, was first published 1991 in Great Britain by Bloomsbury Publishing. The book also contains a number of allegations and controversial statements, including the author's opinions that Krishnamurti's "process" may have been the result of epilepsy (Sloss 1993 p. 61), or at other times probably a "performance" to attract female attention (Sloss 1993 pp. 308, 316). It was soon followed by a rebuttal volume authored by Mary Lutyens: Krishnamurti and the Rajagopals, published 1996 by the Krishnamurti Foundation of America. M. Lutyens specifically addresses Sloss' opinions of the "process" indicated above, and other related statements. M. Lutyens 1996 ch. 32.
  91. ^ The two also shared an interest in education: Krishnamurti helped to raise Radha, and the need to provide her with a suitable educational environment was one of the reasons that led to the founding of the Happy Valley School in 1946. Sloss 1993 ch. 19, specifically p. 205 for concerns about Radha's schooling.
  92. ^ The Rishi Valley School (retrieved 2010-03-09), was built on land purchased in the mid-to-late 1920s. However, it started operations after the dissolution of the Order of the Star. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 199n, 267.
  93. ^ M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, p. 87. See also Vernon 2001 pp. 237-238. When asked by an associate, Krishnamurti enumerated the following as his educational aims: 1. Global outlook - A vision of the whole as distinct from the part; there should never be a sectarian outlook, but always a holistic outlook free from all prejudice. 2. Concern for man and the environment - Humanity is part of nature, and if nature is not cared for, it will boomerang on man. Only the right education, and deep affection between people everywhere, will resolve our many problems including the environmental challenges. 3. Religious spirit, which includes the scientific temper - The religious mind is alone, not lonely. It is in communion with people and nature. G. Narayan 1998 p. 64. [Krishnamurti's reply as presented here is non-verbatim. Edited for brevity only].
  94. ^ As of March, 2010. List of the Krishnamurti Foundation-affiliated schools: J.Krishnamurti Online (n/d).
  95. ^ "Surely a school is a place where one learns about the totality, the wholeness of life. Academic excellence is absolutely necessary, but a school includes much more than that. It is a place where both the teacher and the taught explore not only the outer world, the world of knowledge, but also their own thinking, their own behaviour. From this they begin to discover their own conditioning and how it distorts their thinking. This conditioning is the self to which such tremendous and cruel importance is given. Freedom from conditioning and its misery begins with this awareness. It is only in such freedom that true learning can take place. In this school it is the responsibility of the teacher to sustain with the student a careful exploration into the implications of conditioning and thus end it." Krishnamurti at Ojai, 1984. Journal of the Krishnamurti Schools (n/d).
  96. ^ G. Narayan 1998 p. 54. Krishnamurti's reply to a question by the Vice-Chancelor of the Sri Lanka University. G. Narayan, who was Krishnamurti's nephew and had been involved in his educational projects for decades, was present at the discussion and adds that he felt like "hiding under the table" upon hearing Krishnamurti's verdict. However, in a later private discussion, Krishnamurti stated that a new mind may yet emerge from the schools, offering a silver lining "to the whole cloud of our educational effort". G. Narayan 1998 p. 56.
  97. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, pages 17, 19, 20. Sloss 1993 p. 108.
  98. ^ M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, p. 279. Quote emphasis in original.
  99. ^ See M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 21 for death threats against him by religious nationalists while in Bucharest in 1930. C. V. Williams writes of an official ban of his lectures in New Zealand in 1933 - against which George Bernard Shaw protested on his behalf. Williams 2004 pp. 208-209. She also describes a campaign against him by Roman Catholic bishops in Argentina. Williams 2004 p. 222.
  100. ^ See Jayakar 1986 p. 301 for language changes in the 1960s; also Jayakar 1986 p. 296 for his special "use of language". M. Lutyens 1983 JM, p. 234 quotes Krishnamurti as stating during a 1979 discussion that "his perception" of the teaching was "not changing parallel to the language."
  101. ^ Krishnamurti sometimes commented on the limitation of language (and by extension, on the limitation of thought) as a tool to convey the teaching. In the opinion of Mary Lutyens, such limitation was responsible for the repetitiveness and the sometimes obvious contradictions in his early language. M. Lutyens 1983 JM, p. 63, and M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 281-282, 287. Jayakar 1986 p. 463 writes of Krishnamurti's "seeming contradiction" during a discussion held much later - and how she reconciled it. In another occasion where he was accused of inconsistency, Krishnamurti retorted, "to be consistent is to be mechanical"; however in later reference to this incident he remarked that one could discern the "undercurrent of unity" in the teaching if one studied it "with some care". G. Narayan 1998 p. 59.
  102. ^ Williams 2004 p. 191.
  103. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1936. (Context-based weblink: para. 18 retrieved 2010-03-09). Talk also included in J. Krishnamurti 1991.
  104. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, p. 42.
  105. ^ "Is the comprehension of truth a question of choice involving the study of various theories, arguments, and logical conclusions which demand only intellectual effort? Will this way lead us anywhere? Perhaps to intellectual argumentation, but a man who is suffering desires to know and, to him, concepts and theories are utterly useless. Or is there another way, a choiceless perception?...To discern truth, thought must be unbiased, mind must be without want, choiceless." J. Krishnamurti 1936. (Context-based weblink: para. 12 retrieved 2010-03-09).
  106. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, p. 44. See also J. Krishnamurti 1975 pp. 29-30: "We are occupied with one little corner of consciousness which is most of our life; the rest, which we call the subconscious, with all its motives, its fears, its racial and inherited qualities, we do not even know how to get into. Now I am asking you, is there such a thing as the subconscious at all? We use that word very freely. We have accepted that there is such a thing and all the phrases and jargon of the analysts and psychologists have seeped into the language; but is there such a thing? And why is it that we give such extraordinary importance to it? It seems to me that it is as trivial and stupid as the conscious mind - as narrow, bigoted, conditioned, anxious and tawdry. So is it possible to be totally aware of the whole field of consciousness and not merely a part, a fragment, of it? If you are able to be aware of the totality, then you are functioning all the time with your total attention, not partial attention. This is important to understand because when you are being totally aware of the whole field of consciousness there" [is] "no friction. It is only when you divide consciousness...that there is friction." [Krishnamurti, in this and other instances, used the term "subconscious" to mean what in early-21st century relevant scientific literature is formally called the unconscious.]
  107. ^ "Right meditation is really the most wonderful phenomenon one can experience" M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 58. Quoting from Krishnamurti's letter to Emily Lutyens of 31 August 1943. He had been articulating his views on meditation in general for several years prior, but there was a new emphasis on "right" meditation that would become a constant: "Do you know what right meditation is? Don't you want to discover for yourself the truth of the matter? And will you ever discover that truth if you accept on authority what right meditation is? This is an immense question. To discover the art of meditation you must know the whole depth and breadth of this extraordinary process called thinking. If you accept some authority who says, 'Meditate along these lines', you are merely a follower, the blind servant of a system or an idea. Your acceptance of authority is based on the hope of gaining a result, and that is not meditation." J. Krishnamurti 1964 p. 55.
  108. ^ He also took the opportunity to clarify his position on healing - there were rumors, and people would sometimes visit him seeking healing - when answering a related question in 1931: "I once had a friend whom I healed. Some months later was taken to prison for some crime. Which would you rather have: a Teacher who will show you the way to keep permanently whole, or one who will momentarily heal your wounds?" M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, p. 22. Originally published in J. Krishnamurti 1931. Mary Lutyens was convinced Krishnamurti had genuine healing as well as clairvoyant powers. She wrote that he was loath to talk about either, and not interested in developing them. M. Lutyens 1975 FSG, pp. 282-283. See also Williams 2004 pp. 328 and 340 for Krishnamurti's healing sessions and related private discussion with Vimala Thakar, and Jayakar 1986 pp. 87, 106, 438. [The above concern so-called spiritual (as opposed to physiological) healing, a term that may also refer to faith healing or therapeutic touch, among other uses. It is unclear whether Krishnamurti's reputed healing ability had anything in common with such practices].
  109. ^ Krishnamurti met with a number of famous individuals in California at that time, including the composer Igor Stravinsky, playwright Bertold Brecht, novelist Thomas Mann and the philosopher and mathematician Bertrand Russell. He also met with renowned actress Greta Garbo, who considered herself a "serious spiritual student." Vernon 2001 p. 205.
  110. ^ Huxley wrote the comprehensive foreword to The First and Last Freedom, a Krishnamurti book that generated considerable interest at the time of its publication in 1954. See Works by Krishnamurti. He also served as one of the original trustees of the Happy Valley School. Williams 2004 p. 307.
  111. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 209. See also J. Krishnamurti 1943. Currawong Publishing was known as a publisher or licencee of anti-war pamphlets and books from a wide variety of authors, as well as of other works of political nature.
  112. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 210.
  113. ^ Jayakar 1986 p. 98.
  114. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, pp. 59-60. Initially, Krishnamurti (along with D. Rajagopal and others) was a trustee of KWINC. Eventually he ceased being a trustee, leaving D. Rajagopal as President - a turn of events that according to M. Lutyens constituted "a circumstance that was to have most unhappy consequences."
  115. ^ Apparently first articulated in reply to a question at Ojai in 1944, see J. Krishnamurti 1944. (Context-based weblink: paragraphs 16, 18-19 retrieved 2010-06-02).
  116. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1956. (Context-based weblink: para. 3 retrieved 2010-03-09).
  117. ^ These included former freedom campaigners from the Indian independence movement. Vernon 2001 p. 219.
  118. ^ See Jayakar 1986 ch. 11, for Pupul Mehta's (later Jayakar) eyewitness account of the "process". Jayakar notes (Jayakar 1986 p. 131) that Krishnamurti asked them to keep the incident secret, which they felt was because Krishnamurti "did not wish it to confuse the precision, clarity, and directness of the teaching". Krishnamurti made similar requests of others through the years.
  119. ^ Around 1950, Krishnamurti again found himself embroiled - however tangentially - in a lawsuit in India. This time, concerning the legal separation and custody case of Nandini Mehta, Pupul's sister. There was a charge she had been influenced by Krishnamurti in leaving her husband and initiating the legal proceedings, actions that were unprecedented in India. Krishnamurti, in a series of talks in India at the time had addressed what he considered as the "hypocricy of Indian society, the moral stances of religious teachers and householders, the inferior position of the woman and her bondage to her husband and his family." Jayakar 1986 p. 156. Also Jayakar 1986 pp. 157, 179-180. Eventually, the court disregarded arguments of any improper influence by Krishnamurti or the teachings. However, because of this and similar cases, adverse or unflattering comments appeared in the local and international press, a segment of which apparently often considered Krishnamurti as a ripe celebrity-gossip subject. See Williams 2004 pp. 299-301.
  120. ^ Notwithstanding his repudiation of all authority and its trappings, Krishnamurti continued to occasionally be the object of unasked-for public admiration or adulation, especially in India. Jayakar 1986 p. 144. Vernon 2001 pp. 220, 246. This behavior surprized, and sometimes disturbed, a number of his associates. Sloss 1993 p. 253. Vernon 2001 pp. 255-256.
  121. ^ Among them the spiritual teachers Ramana Maharshi (Ramana 1958 pp. 46, 200), Anandamayi Ma (Jayakar 1986 p. 144), and Vimala Thakar (Williams 2004 pp. 340-341).
  122. ^ Jayakar 1986 pp. 144-145. In a typical exchange, Anandamayi Ma asked him, "Why do you deny gurus? You who are the Guru of Gurus". To which Krishnamurti replied, "People use the guru as a crutch".
  123. ^ Such as discussions with the Vedantin Swami Venkatesananda, the then Hindu [later Buddhist] scholar Jagganath Upadhyaya, and the Buddhist scholars Samdong Rimpoche and Walpola Rahula. See J. Krishnamurti 1987 Part IV, and J. Krishnamurti 2003. Also, J. Krishnamurti 1985 ch. 1, and J. Krishnamurti 1989 chs. 1-3.
  124. ^ The two men had good rapport and mutual admiration. After their first meeting, in 1956, the Dalai Lama characterized Krishnamurti as a "great soul ". Jayakar 1986 p. 203. Krishnamurti very much enjoyed the Lama's company, and by his own admission could not bring up his anti-guru views, mindful of the Lama's feelings. Vernon 2001 p. 231.
  125. ^ Nehru met with Krishnamurti before and after he became prime minister. Jayakar 1986 pp. 121-123, 142, 397. In his later meetings, Nehru, then head of government, was described as "anguished" and "tired", facing continuing political crises following India’s partition and independence. He spoke of his own confusion, and asked about "disintegration" and about "right action and thought". Krishnamurti elaborated at some length, saying in one instance, "Understanding of the self only arises in relationship, in watching yourself in relationship to people, ideas, and things; to trees, the earth, and the world around you and within you. Relationship is the mirror in which the self is revealed. Without self-knowledge there is no basis for right thought and action." Nehru asked, "How does one start?" to which Krishnamurti replied, "Begin where you are. Read every word, every phrase, every paragraph of the mind, as it operates through thought." Jayakar 1986 p. 142.
  126. ^ Among others, he was acquainted with, and (by their admission) influenced the works of, the mythologist Joseph Campbell, artists Jackson Pollock and Beatrice Wood, educator Terrence Webster-Doyle and counterculture author Alan Watts. Eckhart Tolle, author and speaker on spiritual subjects, and well-known self-help lecturer and author Deepak Chopra, both named Krishnamurti as one of their influences. Blau 1995 p. 233. Writer and philosopher Iris Murdoch also met with Krishnamurti (Blau 1995 p. 191), but their video-taped discussion failed to create a spark (M. Lutyens 1988 JM, p. 89).
  127. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, ch. 10. Those present were as usual mystified and initially alarmed by the visible effects of the "process". Again, several of them also reported sensing the (non-personified) "presence", that Krishnamurti referred to in a contemporaneous journal he kept, and which was much later published as his Notebook.
  128. ^ Britannica 2010.
  129. ^ Among other works, Bohm's Wholeness and the Implicate Order (Bohm 1980) embraces several concepts also present in Krishnamurti's teaching, such as the proposition that the "observer is the observed". See J. Krishnamurti 1975 "Chapter 15: The Thinker and the Thought". (Context-based weblink: [1] retrieved 2010-04-27). The chapter is devoted to an exposition of this idea - one out of many such presentations that Krishnamurti made over the years. Bohm was attempting to apply a similar idea to the field of quantum mechanics.
  130. ^ Bohm would eventually serve as a Krishnamurti Foundation and school trustee. Peat 1997 p. 228.
  131. ^ See Works by Krishnamurti. Although Krishnamurti's philosophy delved into fields as diverse as religious studies, education, psychology, physics, and consciousness studies, he was not at the time nor arguably is he currently [c. 2003], well known in academic circles. Nevertheless, Krishnamurti held individual discussions with a number of scientists, and less frequently within specially arranged seminars or through lecture series; among his counterparts were physicists Fritjof Capra and George Sudarshan, medical researcher Jonas Salk, biologist Rupert Sheldrake, psychiatrist David Shainberg, as well as psychotherapists representing various theoretical orientations. See Martin 2003, for a discussion on Krishnamurti and the academic world.
  132. ^ Their falling out was partly due to questions regarding Krishnamurti's private behavior, especially concerning the long and secret love affair that Krishnamurti had had with Rosalind Rajagopal, at the time unknown to the general public. Afterwards, Bohm criticized certain aspects of the teaching on philosophical, methodological, and psychological grounds. He also criticized what he described as Krishnamurti's occasional "verbal manipulations" when deflecting challenges. Eventually, he questioned some of the reasoning concerning the nature of thought and self, although he never abandoned his belief that "Krishnamurti was on to something." Peat 1997 ch. 15 and "Afterword", especially pp. 329-330. Also pp. 217, 226-231, 250.
  133. ^ Bohm was also distressed when Krishnamurti more or less abruptly distanced himself, with the implication that Bohm had become too dependent on him. According to his biographers, Krishnamurti often employed this tactic when in similar situations of perceived dependency. See Peat 1997, also Alev 1997. (Context-based weblink: p. 2 retrieved 2010-03-09).
  134. ^ a b Jayakar 1986 p. 369.
  135. ^ Jayakar 1986 p. 277. Also Vernon 2001 p. 231. M. Lutyens comments on the "near vehemence" with which Krishnamurti sometimes approached the subjects of his later talks and discussions, such as in this example: "There is an action, total, complete, holistic action in which thought does not interfere at all. Are you waiting for me to tell you? That’s rather cheap! The speaker does all the work and you listen and say, 'Yes, I agree'. What is the point of that? But if you really, desperately want to find out, like a drowning man desperate to find some kind of thing to hang on to, to save himself, then like him you exert all your energy." M. Lutyens 1983 JM, p. 221. From a talk at Saanen, July 1978. Verbatim text at J. Krishnamurti 1978. (Context-based weblink: para. 33 retrieved 2010-04-29). His regular admonitions - for the listeners to actively test his words - were taking a note of urgency, as seen in the same talk para. 40 (context-based weblink retrieved 2010-05-02): "That thought, stored up in the brain as memory, knowledge, those very brain cells have become limited. For god's sake see this...But when you have an insight into all this, the very brain cells are no longer limited. The brain cells are functioning totally differently. Do this, please, do it! Don't say, 'Yes, how marvellous', 'What a wonderful speech that was' - which is all romantic nonsense, emotionalism." In another occasion he echoed his earlier exasperation with his audiences, which he had started expressing after the dissolution of the Order of the Star : he remarked to a friend, after addressing a large crowd in Santa Monica in March 1970, that "he felt he'd been singing to the deaf". Williams 2004 p. 374.
  136. ^ Jayakar 1986 pp. 282-283. Williams 2004 pp. 386-387, briefly discusses the relationship between Krishnamurti and then contemporary counterculture, as well as his influence on the Western intelligentsia of the time. See also Vernon 2001 p. 230, for information on the talks at Saanen, and pp. 234-235 for a background on the events of the 1960s and Krishnamurti's position. Krishnamurti had started giving regular talks in universities and colleges at that time, while the meetings at Saanen were held annually from 1961 to 1985.
  137. ^ "The content of our consciousness is the common ground of all humanity...Your consciousness - what you think, what you feel, your reactions, your anxiety, your loneliness, your sorrow, your pain, the search for something that is not merely physical but goes beyond all thought - is the same as a person living in India or Russia or America. They go through the same problems as you do, the same problems of relationship with each other, man, woman. So we are all standing on the same ground, consciousness. Our consciousness is common to all of us. And therefore we are not individuals. Please do consider this. We have been trained, educated, religiously as well as scholastically, that we are separate souls, individuals, striving for ourselves, but that is an illusion because our consciousness is common to all mankind. So we are mankind. We are not separate individuals fighting for ourselves. This is logical, this is rational, sane. So we are not separate entities with separate psychological content, struggling for ourselves. But we are, each one of us is actually the rest of human kind." J. Krishnamurti 1981 paragraphs 4-5.
  138. ^ "Violence and its opposite must always contain violence - the observer who is violent, perceives that he is violent and creates the opposite which is non-violence, as an idea...The good is not the opposite of evil, but one has this tendency of the evil, which is to do harm, to get angry, to be violent, to be acquisitive, greedy, envious and so on, and realizing that, one demands to be good. The very demand creates the opposite, so in that way there is no change at all...if you deny hate, envy (deny it, not build resistance against it, not escape from it, nor accept it)...in that very denial is the positive which is love in which there is no hate. Love is not the opposite of hate." J. Krishnamurti 1967. (Context-based weblinks: paragraphs 514, 288 retrieved 2010-03-09).
  139. ^ Krishnamurti stated there was a need for "a new brain": a "radical", physical, "mutation" of the brain cells that would "wipe out" unnecessary baggage accumulated in human consciousness throughout its evolutionary history. This would then "naturally" result in direct perception of present reality, unencumbered by the filters of past experience. According to Krishnamurti, such mutation - regeneration of the brain - can only happen instantaneously and in toto; otherwise the "old" consciousness, in self-defense, will use the intervening time to distract from the task and so avoid its "death". He constantly reminded his audience to be aware of such actions by the "old" brain, and also to realize that "actually seeing" the need for a new brain as a matter of fact, objectively, and without judgement (and therefore without pondering it in time), can bring about the change. Among others, see Jayakar 1986 pp. 411-412. And J. Krishnamurti 2000 pp. 100-105, which comprise a partial record of J. Krishnamurti 1983. Also, several of his talks contained in J. Krishnamurti 1992, including J. Krishnamurti 1962. [See neuroplasticity, which posits that the anatomy of the brain changes through experience, and that new neural connections can appear in areas of the brain that were previously considered immutable. Also neurotheology, and d'Aquili 1999].
  140. ^ Krishnamurti denied that there had been any "inner change" in himself, or any evolution in the teaching, "since the beginning". The only changes he admitted were in "expression, vocabulary, language, and gesture." In reply to question by Pupul Jayakar at Brockwood Park, 11 June 1978. J. Krishnamurti 1995 pp. 15-16. This was in line with one of Krishnamurti's later themes, the "non-existence of psychological time", by which he refuted any psychological, inward, evolution or "becoming". This was also elaborated in several 1980 discussions with David Bohm which were published as The Ending of Time in 1985 by Harper & Row (J. Krishnamurti 1985, see also M. Lutyens 1988 JM, p. 19), and in discussions with Jonas Salk in 1983. (M. Lutyens 1988 JM, pp. 69-70). This concept was - in the opinion of his biographers - one of the harder to understand ideas that Krishnamurti introduced, along with the interrelated concepts of the "limitation of thought", and of the "ending of thought".
  141. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1996 p. 257. [This excerpt is from the original 1980 version of the statement. The statement was later minimally edited by Krishnamurti]. Full text: J. Krishnamurti 1980. In a 1974 discussion with associates in India, he answered a related question succinctly: "You were asking, 'what is the teaching?' Right? I say, the teaching says, 'Where you are the other is not' " [emphasis in original]. Jayakar 1986 p. 310.
  142. ^ Jayakar 1986 pp. 340-343. Jayakar was a close friend and biographer of Indira Gandhi, and had been a political and cultural activist in India since the end of World War II. Background information on the State of Emergency in India: Indian Emergency (1975-1977).
  143. ^ A fifth Foundation was organized later. The various institutions were not always free of problems. There had been recurring questions about how at least some of them should implement their mandate, occasional clashes of personalities, and difficulties with finances. Krishnamurti had taken a hands-off approach towards the running of the schools and other institutions, but in several instances - and to his declared discomfort - he had to intervene, "relentlessly" questioning his associates, some of whom felt they were under undue pressure. Jayakar 1986 pp. 282, 283-289, 308. M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, pp. 193-195. Also Vernon 2001 p. 238. There is general agreement among his biographers that at the time of Krishnamurti's death (February 1986) the institutions appeared to be running smoothly, overseeing what had collectively become by that time an efficient, worldwide, multi-million US dollar operation.
  144. ^ Following the dissolution of the Order of the Star, D. Rajagopal had been the head or co-head of a number of successive corporations and trusts, chartered to publish Krishnamurti's talks, discussions and other writings, and also to organize and finance his itinerary.
  145. ^ Lilliefelt 1995. The complicated settlement dissolved the K & R Foundation (a previous entity), and transferred assets to the Krishnamurti Foundation of America (KFA). However certain disputed documents remained in the possession of D. Rajagopal (it was agreed they would be donated to The Huntington Library in San Marino, California, upon his death), and he received partial repayment for his attorney's fees. Erna Lilliefelt, a founding trustee of the KFA, was the person principally involved with the litigation on behalf of Krishnamurti and the KFA. M. Lutyens placed the preponderance of responsibility for the acrimony of the lawsuits - and resulting damage to Krishnamurti's reputation - on the Rajagopals. In her view, they harbored personal animosity, related to their loss of influence in Krishnamurti's life. See M. Lutyens 1996, for her account of the troubled relationship.
  146. ^ The rift had started several years before the legal complaints were filed; since the early 1960s D. Rajagopal no longer accompanied Krishnamurti or acted as his aide - a function undertaken in late 1964 by Alain Naude, a young South African who Krishnamurti originally met in 1963, and afterwards by Mary Zimbalist - nee Taylor - (d. 2008), a New Yorker from a well-known family, who attended him for almost two decades, until his death. See M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 128 for Naude and p. 60 for Zimbalist. Also M. Lutyens 1988 KFT, p. 14.
  147. ^ As of early 2010. See Jayakar 1986 pp. 132-133, 292-293, 407-409, 439-440. M. Lutyens devotes the bulk of several chapters to some of these discussions, including M. Lutyens 1983 chs. 20-21. See also Vernon 2001 pp. 248-251.
  148. ^ The existence of the "process", its long history, and its effects, were originally revealed to the general public in 1975, thanks to the first volume of M. Lutyens' biography of Krishnamurti. (M. Lutyens 1975). First hand, in-depth descriptions can be found in Krishnamurti's Notebook. (J. Krishnamurti 1976). M. Lutyens devoted a whole chapter to this book in the second volume of her biography. Briefly, she also mentioned what she thought were "valid" objections raised against its publication - and Krishnamurti's responses to these objections. (M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, "Chapter 10: Krishnamurti's Notebook". Specifically, p. 119). In previous years Krishnamurti had asked the people who were present at, or knew about, the "process", not to talk of it. When Emily Lutyens tried to include an account in her autobiography in 1954 (E. Lutyens 1954), Krishnamurti forbade her to publish it, though he agreed to its "expurgated" publication three years later. Vernon 2001 pp. 227-228. Roland Vernon states that Krishnamurti "clearly believed, with good reason, that the sensationalism of his early story would cloud the public's perception of his" [then] "current work".
  149. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 269. M. Lutyens describes a related discussion held in 1979, writing that at the time Krishnamurti seemed as eager as herself to "make the discovery". He additionally remarked that if he had deliberately sat down to write the teaching he doubted he could produce it. M. Lutyens 1983 JM, p. 224 onwards.
  150. ^ He stated that evil exists, but not as an opposite to goodness, rather as something completely alien and unrelated to it. Jayakar 1986 p. 293, from a discussion held in the winter of 1969. Also see the 2nd discussion with Alain Naude, J. Krishnamurti 1987 p. 124 onwards.
  151. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, pp. 71, 226, 230, 234.
  152. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, pp. 226-227, 228, 230. Also M. Lutyens 1988 KFT, pp. 8, 31, 62, 100, 137 and "Introduction" (which includes a brief overview of the subjects of these discussions).
  153. ^ He seemed certain that everyone should be able to grasp the teaching. He stated that if the mind required to do so was unique to him then "it is not worth anything." M. Lutyens 1983 JM, p. 227. From the previously noted discussion of 1979, which was recorded by Mary Zimbalist.
  154. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 JM, pp. 235-237. Krishnamurti, when in the company of close friends, sometimes acted or spoke in a mystifying manner, as when he told Mary Zimbalist in 1985: "There are things you don't know. Enormous, and I can't tell you." M. Lutyens 1988 JM, p. 115.
  155. ^ M. Lutyens 1988 JM, pp. 84-85, 95. Transcript of the 1985 talk: J. Krishnamurti 1985. Video: Krishnamurti at the UN 1985. part 1 on YouTube (part 1 of 8). Requires Adobe Flash Player. Retrieved 2010-03-09.
  156. ^ For example, in 1970, at age 75, Krishnamurti made 130 public appearances around the world. Williams 2004 p. 375. These were in addition to frequent private meetings with individuals and small groups.
  157. ^ Roland Vernon notes that "his medical record reads like a catalogue of illnesses" and he adds that "his physical resistance to decay was spurred on by a mental capacity that he believed was increasing with age". Vernon 2001 pp. 239-240.
  158. ^ M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, pp. 187, 189. Also, Jayakar 1986 p. 496.
  159. ^ a b J. Krishnamurti 1989 ch. 11. Verbatim transcript: J. Krishnamurti 1986. Video: KRISHNAMURTI: The Last Talks - Talk 3. (Part 1 of 7) on YouTube. Requires Adobe Flash Player. Retrieved 2010-03-18.
  160. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 171, statement of Krishnamurti published in the Foundation bulletins, 1970.
  161. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 233. See also Trustees of the Krishnamurti Foundations 1986.
  162. ^ M. Lutyens 1990 JM, p. 206. Quoting Krishnamurti from tape-recording made 7 February 1986: "I was telling them this morning – for seventy years that super-energy – no – that immense energy, immense intelligence, has been using this body. I don’t think people realize what tremendous energy and intelligence went through this body...Nobody, unless the body has been prepared, very carefully, protected and so on – nobody can understand what went through this body. Nobody. Don’t anybody pretend. Nobody. I repeat this: nobody amongst us or the public know what went on...You won’t find another body like this, or that supreme intelligence, operating in a body for many hundred years. You won’t see it again. When he goes, it goes...They’ll all pretend or try to imagine they can get into touch with that. Perhaps they will somewhat if they live the teachings."
  163. ^ a b M. Lutyens 1983 FSG, p. 119.
  164. ^ M. Lutyens 1988 KFT, ch. 12. Also see M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, p. 201n. Select obituaries: Saxon 1986 (The New York Times), Weatherby 1986 (The Guardian [London]).
  165. ^ Time-sensitive information in this section is current as of mid-2008 unless otherwise specified.
  166. ^ Among them an effort to collect the entire body of his work into a coherently edited master reference entitled The Complete Works of J. Krishnamurti: 1910-1986. KFA 2004.
  167. ^ See Foundation websites, listed in section External links.
  168. ^ One such project is a Teaching Academy, an introduction to the holistic educational philosophy of Krishnamurti targeted at educators. KFA 2008.
  169. ^ KFT (n/d).
  170. ^ Not linked to the official Foundations or their affiliates. See KAE (n/d) for a listing. [From a Krishnamurti Association in New Zealand (KANZ) project (retrieved 2010-05-25)].
  171. ^ Roland Vernon summarized some of these developments between the years of 1986 and 2000. He also commented on the [continuing, as of early 2010] relative paucity of "official" material regarding Krishnamurti's early life, and of his talks, discussions, and writings prior to 1933. He considered this as the Foundations' way of de-emphasizing Krishnamurti's association with the Theosophical Society and the World Teacher Project, and as following Krishnamurti's own assertion of being "unconditioned by his past", and of his further assertion that his "mature teaching" was devoid of Theosophical influence. Vernon 2001 pp. 261-265.
  172. ^ Sloss 1993. Radha Rajagopal Sloss was the daughter of estranged Krishnamurti associates Rosalind and Desikacharya Rajagopal. She had spent her childhood at Arya Vihara (Krishnamurti's residence), and while growing up she considered him an extension of her family.
  173. ^ In 1995, the KFA issued a 16-page pamphlet in an attempt to address some of the issues raised by Sloss's book. The pamphlet includes transcripts of tape-recorded conversations between Krishnamurti and KFA trustees that took place in January and March 1972, wherein Krishnamurti responds to related questions. [The matter of the "affair" had arisen in the course of the then (1972) ongoing legal dispute with D. Rajagopal, see also M. Lutyens 1996]. KFA 1995.
  174. ^ M. Lutyens 1996. Roland Vernon, while acknowledging that "history will not view Krishnamurti in quite the same light", questions the ultimate impact of Sloss' revelations when compared to Krishnamurti's body of work as a whole. Vernon 2001 pp. 203-204.
  175. ^ Nearing 1992 pp. 62-64. Nearing devotes a chapter to her relationship with Krishnamurti, including her description of a 1923 recurrence of the "process" at Ehrwald, Austria, during which she attended him. She also thought that he was at such an "elevated" level that he was incapable of forming normal personal relationships. [Krishnamurti had fallen in love with then Helen Knothe in the 1920s; her impression of his inability to forge personal relationships was apparently a later development].
  176. ^ After the dissolution of the Order of the Star, Emily Lutyens was on occasion another - private - critic of Krishnamurti in this regard, as evidenced by letters addressed to him. See M. Lutyens 1990 KFT, p. 88, quoting Emily Lutyens' letter of August 1935. Emily Lutyens also wondered whether he was "escaping from life", adding that he was "always 'retreating'." Williams 2004 p. 212, quoting from her correspondence held [c. 2005] at the Krishnamurti Foundation India Archive. In the same letter, Emily Lutyens stated that she still "loved him with all her heart."
  177. ^ Among critics, a particularly vociferous one had been U.G. Krishnamurti. His criticism encompassed J. Krishnamurti's private life, his method of exposition of the teaching, and the teaching itself. Vernon 2001 pp. 257-258.
  178. ^ Skitt, who calls Krishnamurti's style "emphatic", proposes a context for such emphasis and also repeats the previously noted arguments regarding the limitations of language, and the special, evolving meaning Krishnamurti gave to certain terms. J. Krishnamurti 2000 "Editor's Introduction".
  179. ^ Among many other instances, Krishnamurti commented on the nature of the enquiring mind in J. Krishnamurti 1977: "And to investigate together you need a certain quality of mind that is meditative, that is not jumping to conclusions, that is not affirming or rejecting, but investigating - investigating without any prejudice, without any conclusion, without any end. After all that is a good scientist - not the scientist that is employed by governments, but the scientist who really wants to find truth, at whatever level." (Context-based weblink: para. 8 retrieved 2010-03-09). Krishnamurti often linked this issue with another recurrent theme, his contention that the human brain is deeply conditioned by evolution, experience, tradition, and culture. For example, see J. Krishnamurti 1955.
  180. ^ J. Krishnamurti 1986 paragraphs 6-7. In this quote, Krishnamurti refers to himself in both third and first person.
  181. ^ C. Jinarajadasa, a long time friend in India who eventually became president of the Theosophical Society, had pointed out to him in the 1930s that he (Krishnamurti) had "disciples" whether he wanted to or not. Williams 2004 p. 191. C. V. Williams adds, "that Krishnamurti was a guru with followers who disavowed other gurus who had followers was a charge that would be levelled against him for the rest of his life. Jinarayadasa" [alt. spelling] "realized the inescapability of the situation." See also Vernon 2001 pp. 187, 262.
  182. ^ M. Lutyens 1983 KFT, "Foreword", p. vii.
  183. ^ Vernon 2001 p. 245. The sometimes purposeful vagueness that Krishnamurti had invoked decades prior - when discussing the World Teacher issue - continued until the very end. In his last public talk, while speaking about meditation, and after asserting that "unfortunately" there is a "different kind of meditation", a "true" meditation unrelated to any idea or practice that the world normally associates with the term, he proceeded: "I mustn't describe it to you. I mustn't describe it because then you'll go off on descriptions. If I describe it, the description is not the real." From the Third Talk in Madras, 4 January 1986. J. Krishnamurti 1989 ch. 11.
  184. ^ Krishnamurti often related such liberation with sudden, unforced - and thereby impersonal - attention to the present moment, that is "total" and "complete". According to Krishnamurti, such "total attention" would be accompanied by a stoppage of the brain's "chatter". The brain would then be "completely quiet"; however, thanks to the completeness of its attention, it would simultaneously also be sharply focused, poised, and "awake". Krishnamurti held that such a brain would have "infinite space" or "potential" (he occasionally compared it to a frictionless, highly charged dynamo), as well as "tremendous" [latent] "energy". Further, that the genuine existence of such a state would immediately and irrevocably cause the collapse of the "petty", limiting, and limited, personality-based structures and modes of thinking that the human brain has evolved through the millenia of its existence. It was Krishnamurti's contention that such "revolutionary" psychological transformation would be accompanied by similar physical changes on the cellular level [of the brain]. Additionally, he differentiated between the now discarded "personal" thinking, and "impersonal" applications like the learning of a foreign language or the mental effort required in - for example - the building of a bridge; such applications he considered both obvious and necessary. Among other instances, see J. Krishnamurti 1970, for a more thorough exposition of the above and explicit "dynamo" reference in the context described here. For another example of comments on inward space see J. Krishnamurti 1983. (Context-based weblink: paragraphs 10, 12-13, 24. Retrieved 2010-05-31.)
  185. ^ For an account of "spontaneous realization", see Frazier 2007 and related website (retrieved 2010-03-09). Frazier names J. Krishnamurti as one of her inspirations.
  186. ^ Such as the martial artist and performer Bruce Lee (Thomas 1994 p. 270), the writer Svetlana Peters (nee Stalin, see M. Lutyens 1988 JM, pp. 76-77), and the rock band Live, whose recording Mental Jewelry has many lyrical references to Krishnamurti's teachings. (Live 1991).
  187. ^ Roland Vernon states that such complaints surfaced with some regularity in his audiences' questions over a period of five decades. He adds that Krishnamurti often addressed these complaints starting as far back as the 1920s, quoting him from the Order of the Star bulletin of October 1928: "A surgeon who sees a disease that is eating up a man, says, in order to cure him I must operate. Another less experienced comes, feeds him and lulls him to sleep. Which would you call the more compassionate? You want comfort, that comfort which is born of decay." Vernon 2001 p. 173.
  188. ^ M. Lutyens 1988 KFT, ch. 12, especially pp. 148-149. Failing that, he often implored his audience to at least grasp the teaching intellectually.
  189. ^ Krishnamurti's responses in interviews with Paul L. Montgomery for the New York Times, 28 March 1982, and with Catherine Ingram and Leonard Jacobs for the East West Journal, July 1983. (Brookline, Massachusetts: East West Journal Inc). ISSN 0191-3700. See M. Lutyens 1988 JM, pp. 58 and 71, respectively.
  190. ^ M. Lutyens 1988 JM, pp. 28-29. From a meeting at Gstaad, Switzerland, August-September 1980.

References

External links

The following Foundations are listed by date of organization. Links retrieved 2010-03-09.