Some feedbacks at the end
Thanks for those of you who attended and thanks to the organizers.
The video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8xNSuqrqhc
I wasn't watching the live chat during the event but saw a transcript of it afterwards. All were good comments. Except one person, Durga Rani Gedela who was dominating the chat with funny remarks, which exactly demonstrated the point I made about some people around this work who are so very complicated. So we're having a discussion about some extremely important matters -- and Durga writes on the chat window:
"00:48:28 Durga Rani: The speaker is not speaking from ego ?"
It's not "is the speaker" but "the speaker is..." -- so she clearly made an image of me speaking from the ego -- which is so silly -- ego means psychological sense of self. You can turn and twist things in life inside and outside your being, but simplicity is a virtue. The most important question is why does it matter where the speaker is speaking from. FYI, no I had no sense of self to be speaking from -- but you see the habit to focus on the person.
I forgot to mention this during the talk. A biographer referred to some people around K who got "burned by being too close to the sun" and that's why they focused on the person. K even warned against this. Durga appears engaged in the same thing: focus on the person.
"00:59:17 Durga rani: myth ? or statement made by k ?
00:59:30 Durga rani: why call it myth ?"
Here we go again: "God said it, I believe it, and that's all there is to it". Get my point? Same movement. K was very much against that -- he wanted us to question everything including him -- a spirit that is totally missing in some key K place where the leadership feels threatened by questions because it puts its fictitious weak authority under question. So instead of embracing question it quashes it.
"01:01:30 Durga rani: did k ever take names and dismissive of the people who were around him ?"
Who cares? Indeed he did but do you live your life based on a blueprint provided by K? "Don't follow me". He made it very very clear. We even spoke one on one and his message was very clear! Find out for yourself. Where is that spirit?!
Anyway I wasn't dismissing people around me :-) -- and people around K surely did. When he was dying they said what should we do with Mark Lee? K said I don't know, I'm leaving, it's your problem.
When I dismiss certain people like those in charge of KFA which I believe is beyond-hopeless of an organization thanks to Jaap SLUIJTER and Rabindra Singh & company -- and Nasser Shamim and Mina Masoumian and co. at Brockwood with help and support from their resident guru Raman Patel, plus some of the trustees there who are weak and under the thumb of the "management team"... it's for good reasons backed by evidentiary facts. All the details will get published in due time -- the "K world" or K's work or whatever, is being fast-tracked into a cult of mediocrity by some parties. Sit on a ton of money and suck the work into mediocrity.
Yes I did criticize Ravi Ravindra Durga -- sorry if you didn't like it -- the guy has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to K because he appears so caught in his traditional training and ego -- and even admits it. And his buddy Mark Lee who's made up untrue, factually bogus stories about K -- I guess it makes him become more in demand as a speaker -- the more exotic the stories, the more you're wanted. Mark also predicted a long time ago that K would be sucked into tradition -- totally discarding his role - my role - your role vs. that destiny which relieved him as head of KFA at the time from responsibility: if he's going to get sucked into tradition who cares, why care if it gets distorted.
A close friend of K said he put Mark's book into trash it was so bad. I can't handle reading them because I don't trust any of the things said in them.
It's very sad to see the fire K put forth is being quashed into mediocrity by people who've taken over the foundations -- and if you dig in deep you'll see the same trend in KFA and KFT. KFT is a step behind in becoming a totally hopeless entity. The common thread is Friedrich Grohe's "gang" as they call themselves.
The reports we have about the implosion of Inwoods -- and the mess created at Brockwood by Nasser & Co. in terms of mishandling of relationships, and even reports of lies they have said, are mind-boggling. K would dissolve Brockwood instantly if he'd seen it turn into what it is today under this management team.
Some of these people who've gotten themselves into position of power are acting contrary to K's life-long work -- stepping on some basic principles that K adamantly pressed.
"01:02:35 Durga rani: what are the value points from today's talk ?... [and she went off the deep end... ]
If you were listening Durga instead of being boiled up by all your reactions, judgments, conclusions -- had you been quiet inwardly and listened together you would have seen value in it that several others did. The video is available -- you can watch it again if you want -- you might hear something new, since during the talk you were busy throwing thought-darts on the chat window.
A number of others wrote on the chat window -- all very positive, constructive comments and questions. Thank you.
Here's the replay: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8xNSuqrqhc
I appreciate hearing your views.
The URGENT matter right now is Brockwood. The "house is on fire". I was asked to look into it and what we've found is very troubling. A small group are trying to pull all the facts together. The beneficiaries of status quo justify this disaster by saying Brockwood has always had problems. But this is at a scale which threatens the core values and spirit that K intended. Basic concepts like truth and love. Basic challenges like living without fear and the spirit of questioning. These are stepped on and quashed based on very consistent reports we have from a number of folks.
More here for now: https://www.rezamusic.com/writings/on-j-krishnamurtis-work-rough-draft
Feedback after sending the following email:
Thanks a lot for bcc’ing me. Hope this has reached a whole lot of people—rather than just Durga—including Mr. Dubey. A perfect befitting reply, to say the least!
Well, we all have our share of idiosyncrasies, but Durga Rani simply outclasses us.
My response to Mrs. Durga's Email:
So you reacted to the fact that some people's names were mentioned and you felt it shouldn't have been in such an open platform. I disagree. If you had listened instead of just reacting, and gave benefit of doubt instead of being so sure of your own reactions, it could have been different. For example, the people mentioned are all in charged or are in official roles of public, non-profit organizations, or have availed themselves to public scrutiny by speaking publicly and spreading their ignorance in the case of Ravi for example. Therefore, a public platform is very much the right place for commenting on their actions.