Unpublished Circular Related To J. Krishnamurti's Philosophy

Unpublished Circular Related To J. Krishnamurti's Philosophy

by Reza Ganjavi 

I found notes in my digital backlog for a circular in 2005 that was never released. Here are some excerpts that are still relevant:

December 27, 2005


“Dialogue” was like pulling teeth. The week before it was much more sensible with David Skitt there and an outspoken professor who was a newcomer to K.


At this week’s event I felt like crying. The poor man spent 60 years, talk after talk, going over some subjects which apparently people who followed him, against his wishes, who are now figures who run his dialogues, or those who carry a socially respectable façades to manage their neurosis dominate events organized and presented in his name.


Once again I saw this arrogance of ignorance. Arrogance of sitting in a far comfortable position and saying it can’t be done. “we” can not do it.


Why have you not done it after being at it for 30 or 50 years? And isn’t it interesting that the same mind makes K into an idol. Isn’t it the very act of idol-making that prevents one from seeing what one is in the moment?


Why are some of these old timers who are so close to this so clueless? Their numbers are luckily not many but their roles are significant enough that makes one worry, not only for their own sake, as there is affection and friendship, but for what they tell “the man from Seattle” who comes to these places.


Isn’t it time to stop being polite, not to be impolite, but to see the utter ridicule of the comfortable arrogant “can’t do” position? If you can not do it then the man wasted his life, except for earning you a salary now, and nobody else could do it. If you can do it, why have you not done it so far? And why have you slipped into a rot of “can’t do” and the arrogance of contending that it can’t be done? You have not said the latter but isn’t that a logical conclusion that if one has not done if after 40 years, it can’t be done?! Well my friend, whom I truly love and care for, it can be done.  


People came from faraway places, as far south as Mexico, to meet here at the healing waters.


There are four types of crowds in the valley: one, like that guy who is smoking, if these are still alive; then there are the noble ones whose numbers are few, who are interested in K, not as followers, the artists, and intellectuals. Another group are the rednecks. Another big demographical category are family people who are here for the school.


The hippies come to the healing waters smoking and drinking. I smelled them and I left.


He saw Krishnamurti many times. The last time Krishnamurti shook his hand to some people saying I have told you not to follow me, you've been following me for 50 years, you haven't changed.


His friend lived with Kay and said in the mornings when he woke up Kay was so infatuated with nature and he would just go walking forgetting his shoes on his caretaker with follow him to get him his shoes.


Satyam said it is much better to rent, in terms of price appreciation it is very risky, and maintenance is a huge headache, and so is property tax.


I was very helpful. He also said there are many upscale restaurants being built and they like  guitarists.


Even if I rent blue iguana at $1600 a month he said I could make up that money working in the restaurant.


I'm getting to an age where planning and preparation is enough I want to live fully. God willing investment will pay off that cloud will be removed. Or maybe I should sell out now? This week with the crazy time to sell.


I want to compose. I want to perform. I want to educate. I want to spread happiness. I want to help heal the mind, the wounded mind of human cut up by the arrogance and dominance of thought. 


Thought is so dominant in so many people’s lives. It creates complications because its nature is limited and it’s trying to deal with the unlimited. The tool is limited, the object is limited. And it is so strong, the movement of the self is so strong that the person doesn’t see this but when thought understands that it’s limited it shuts up and that is the essence of spontaneity.

Roland Vernon is an example of tendency to bash when something/one is not understood. His biography of K is pathetic.

December 29, 2005

1. [DISCLOSURE: The following is a set of impressions, understandings, and assessments which maybe purely subjective to the author, Reza Ganjavi, and do not constitute a claim of authority on Krishnamurti’s work by the author.]


2. Early on Krishnamurti shocked and disappointed many people by telling them they would have to do their own work and not to rely on him or anybody else to do their work for them. He dismantled a huge, wealthy, multi-national organization he was made head of because he contended truth was something to be found first-hand, by and for each person.


3. He went on to talk for over sixty years to convey a body of explorations and observations about the condition of humanity, which we may refer to as his teachings. These teachings are so vast and profound that in the opinion of the author who has studied most of the great thinkers of the West and East, K stands out as one of the most clear, insightful, and creative philosophers of psychology and education in history.


4. The term “vast” was used to convey that the teachings are big in scope. They cover a huge spectrum of subjects and issues which make up our experience and existence as humans. And most of these subjects are inter-related. One of K’s ingenuities is in how he presented this vast complex subject with great clarity, especially since he had had no academic training. The author knows of several academics who successfully use K’s work in teaching of a variety of subjects in universities, and he also know of academics who wished that K’s was a bit more careful about his use of certain phrases and words for the sake of academic consistency. On that subject, if you look at the long way he had come in terms of exploration, you would not fault him for not being 100% “consistent” and the quotations were used on purpose because consistence is a large topic by itself and can be explored further, but we won’t go there now.

5. The significance of the teachings being vast for this discussion is that just as with any other vast topic, such as sciences, it needs to be properly, diligently, studied. That means one who needs to put time and energy and interest and attention into it. There are three important factors that come to mind on the subject of proper study of K’s work:

a) To read one or two books or to hear a video or two is usually not enough simply because the subject is vast and the body of available material is huge and the teachings themselves somehow matured over the years, at least in terms of terminology, although the core of them remained the same. [Please note Disclosure in paragraph 1]. The well of wisdom is deep. Even one glass can quench thirst but to water a garden more than one glass maybe needed! 

b) Any study of the Teachings has to go hand in hand with examining the proposals in one’s daily life. This is an extremely important factor. If one sees and understands the truth of what someone is pointing to, then i) that someone is not important, ii) that truth has been understood first hand, whereas the mere repetition of it makes it a second-hand, boring, stale matter.

c) In talk after talk, year after year, K urged the listener to not follow him, to question and doubt what is being said. 

d) In talk after talk, year after year, K urged the listener to not make of him an idol. He wrote about this at length. It is not that this was just his personal wish, but it was at the core of his teachings, and, to the author, an objective truth, that : any form of psychological idol-making is rooted in measurement, comparison, and gives rise to psychological becoming which is an illusion. This is a deep pool which we won’t delve into presently.


6. The author, Reza Ganjavi, has traveled widely and happened to have met many who are interested in this work. He is not a missionary, and by the same token, he does not believe in this work as a doctrine. He has examined some of the questions and challenges presented by K and have found the truth of some of them in his own daily life. 

7. There are those who are relatively new comers to this work, like a professor who drove from Louisiana to California last week and he came to a dialogue and we went for a walk afterwards. New comer, studious, and clear. Enough said.

8. There are those who’ve been around this work for a long time and it has enriched their lives and they continue to explore wisdom, for lack of better word, in their own life and relationships.

9. And then there are those who are the main subject behind the author writing this article, the rest of which is dedicated to this subject. And this is very serious. 


10. As one travels and meets people and reads things, there seems to be a growing attitude which to the author stems from nothing other than laziness together with arrogance of ignorance. A Persian expression says “the bride doesn’t know how to dance, she says the room is asymmetric”.

11. There are those who are blaming K for having shortcomings in his teachings, as excuse for their lack of study and subsequent understanding. There are several examples of this, and one hears of various such excuses from time to time. One, for example, is that he had an easy life, he was taken care of, and I am not, so I’m not going to bother. You see the key is, whatever the excuse, the conclusion at the end, and, the motive behind it in the beginning, is: I am not going to bother. 


12. It’s up to each person to “bother” or not in taking on the challenges someone poses, but to not do it and then accuse that someone of having had shortcomings is not cool. Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying K had no shortcomings, and am not his defense attorney, this is not about the man, but the teachings. I am also not saying the teachings did not have shortcomings. K himself urged further exploration. But to accuse a body of teachings of having shortcoming without properly studying it is not a noble thing to do. 

13. Properly is the key. Please see paragraph 5 for that discussion, and please let’s reiterate that it involves not following it, to examine it in daily life, not turning K into a god, prophet or idol, and so on.


14. The latest such excuse I heard which was one of the most ridiculous one ever, specially since it is crystal clear that it is rooted in exactly what’s described above: lack of diligent study. Let’s have a look. Unfortunately this nonsense was publicized and enjoyed wide circulation by appearing in the latest issue of Friedrich’s most recent publication: The Link. It makes me wonder, because I “know” Friedrich quiet well, or at least, am familiar with many of his sentiments and know in fact he’s well aware that people who fault K have usually not bothered to study his work in depth. 

15. So then why was this printed? I have no idea. Perhaps they didn’t see how strong this trend is, and how rotten it is as it is rooted in nothing but laziness. Check out the title: “Why the Teachings Seem Not To Work”. How much more presumptuous can this get? Appearing in the newsletter of Friedrich, and a good friend, who’s practically given his life to this work! It was written by John Raica in March 2005.


15. Mr. Raica’s states that he’s been at it for 30 years and not only that it doesn’t work (whatever that means) for him, he thinks that it doesn’t work for many others who are “serious and dedicated students of all ages” either. Ok, the title told us a lot, that he thinks it doesn’t work. Like a lawnmower that doesn’t work. It’s supposed to work. For “me”. And he projects that and boldly (but falsely) states that it doesn’t work for many others who have seriously studied it (how many of them do you know?). The best (worst) part are the excuses he brings, and don’t be surprised that the excuses he proposes are all “out there”. 

16. Check it out: that K did not provide “spiritual logistics”! He writes: “It’s still not clear why K, who was supported and protected by spiritual forces, denied the idea of help”. As far as I remember the poor man spent so much time discussing this subject, about how first you need to “help” yourself to use Mr. Raica’s expression. Is that so tough to understand? That rules out help from outside as a start. In Persian the word blessing and movement rhyme, thus an old expression: you move, god blesses. But you need to move. You can’t sit on the couch licking an ice cream hoping to lose weight. 


17. Part of the vastness of this body of teachings is its references to the supernatural as well. This is a field, especially, that requires personal exploration. K talked about the inability to invite the breeze but the ability to open the window. He spent many person-years worth of work exploring what that opening of the window entails. (I  must refer to Disclosure in Paragraph 1 again). Have these serious and dedicated students that Mr. Raica knows done the ground work? Is the room in order? Is the body, heart and mind in tune, or are they “banging on my old piano” as the song goes? Have they gone into the many many aspects of this vast body of teachings and taken up the many challenges including the very basic questions of the true meaning of freedom and meditation, the nature of the image-making mechanism, the questions of time and thought and psychological death to mention just a few areas. Have they “helped” themselves, and if so, have they discovered that there is a different movement? Isn’t it “this” movement that requires logistics for “that” movement? (going off subject as this can be explored further).


18. The point is: have they gone through all this work before accusing K? And more importantly, what is the consequence of blaming K for one’s lack of understanding? Isn’t that merely a justification for not doing the very exploration that is necessary to reveal that which we accuse the teachings of shortcoming?!

19. One has come upon several people over the years who sense there is something magnificent there, but for one reason or other, they do not want to explore it. Some move on, but some, feel uncomfortable moving on because they’ve sensed something great but are not about to explore it (for reasons beyond the scope of this article), so the old Persian expression that “the cat can’t get to the meat he says it stinks” kicks in: suddenly K becomes the bad guy.

20. Mr. Raica’s continues with his confusion after 30 years of allegedly serious study -- doesn’t sound like it because K has covered these subjects in depth. This time Mr. Raica alleges that “K missed this step of the ‘dismantling of identification’, leaving it to other forces from other dimensions.” Really?! OK, I won’t go into it – it’s too easy to bring numerous references to the subject and show that the premises of the question itself are problematic. Again, the theme is clear: the person has issues / lacks understanding of certain things, and he blames K for it. Why not forget K? If he had shortcomings, why can I not investigate those gaps directly? 

21. Here another idea emerges. First response was: have you really gone deeply into X’s work before you accuse him, and from what I hear said the answer seems to be no, and therefore the accusation shaky. Now, assuming there was a shortcoming, why does it matter? Is it that that is only important if I want to make K into a doctrine? Why else would I cares if K had shortcomings? He is a person, a passerby who makes some suggestions. It is then totally up to me to find out if what he says is true or false. If I find truth in it I’ve found it, if it is false, I discard it and move on. Enough on that subject.


22. This is not a review of The Link. But to say a few sentences, it started as a “Dear Friends” personal newsletter in early 1990’s I think. That section, I still read with great enthusiasm. The magazine also, often includes some very fine articles, and some not so fine, and always amazing nature pictures. The reason I have an issue with giving a forum to such confused voices is because 

a) K worked for over 60 years to heal minds, and there is Plenty of material already. To have a forum for the confused to tell the world how confused they are will not help.

b) Most importantly, this kind of voice strengthens the already existing crowd who are lazy and don’t want to do the work, and reading that they find company to assist in their misery and strengthen their idea that, hey, I’m not going to dance because the room is asymmetric. I have proof for this:

23. Since Friedrich is far, I asked a close mutual friend why he thought the Link published this. He said maybe in order to stir controversy. But why? What purpose does that serve? I would never do that. 

24. Weren't the other teachings "protected" too, in history? Friedrich Grohe's Gang have had this group-thinking mentality that K's work is protected inherently or somewhat esoterically -- therefore they can be reckless with it -- and someone who points out that recklessness is bashed via their group-mentality and clout of money and power. Fact is there were several great teachings in history which were distorted by the very recklessness that K's work is being subjected to.


25. In the same fine magazine of my dear friend Mr. Grohe, there is a quote by K in which he says: “I know people in India, in Europe, and here who have set out deliberately “preparing themselves,” “studying,” “observing,” “meditating” – all these in quotation marks – and, somehow, though they think they have prepared themselves, it doesn’t seem to do a thing. I have friends whom I have known for forty years – if anything, they are far worse. Sir, is it a matter of preparation, or is it a quality of mind that has really gone through a great deal of trouble, a great deal of pain, and has not come to any conclusion nor put up any barrier, any resistances?”

26. What happened to those people? Who were close to K and were far worse? Are they still around? What do they do? I know many of them, and as accurate as subjectivity can get.