[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: re CWL (to Ramadoss)

Jun 05, 1996 04:43 AM
by ramadoss

 At 08:36 PM 6/4/96 -0400, Jerry wrote:
>Ramadoss asks:
>>>    You have brought a very interesting question. Let me add
>>>that when Krishnaji was "discovered" he was a very puny and not
>>>a bright looking eleven year old. What are the odds of chosing
>>>such a boy and who never passed a single examination and never
>>>had a formal educational certificate and who turns out to be a
>>>world renowned speaker?
> >>>>  clip  >>>>>

>I found that every year he would cover certain themes, which in
>the light of later knowledge, I find many of them to be ironic.
>For instance, I remember that he often talked about non
>attachment to material things.  Yet he owned a Mercedes Benz--a
>real social status car at the time.  He used to advise the


MKR: From what I have read and known from a friend who had known him for a
long time, K never owned any car or for that manner anything except his
clothing, a wallet and a couple of Patek Phillipe watches. I am sure the
Benz you saw was not owned by him.

        He always used to travel in First Class and he was asked why he did
so when Gandhi travelled in Third (Lowest) Class. His response was that he
would like to see everyone travel in First Class. An incident that Ravi
Ravindra witnessed (and has written about) showed that K was at ease in most
affluent surroundings as well as in the most simplest ones which should not
be overlooked.


>On the other hand, under the expert management of Rajagopal and
>some really slick legal maneuvers, the Krishnamurti Foundation

MKR: Can you amplify what these are?  Only legal maneuvers I know of
Rajagopal (who BTW is a lawyer educated and trained in London) and the K
Trusts happened on account of the suit filed by the Attorney General of CA
and the new K Foundation against Rajagopal and the old K Charitable Trusts.
Later, Rajagopal and the Trustees sued K and the Trustees of the current
KFA. Interestingly enough, one of those Trustees who was sued by Atty
General of CA (and has the unique honor of suing Krishnamurti and others) is
a member of TSA and was an elected Board Member of TSA and is currently an
appointed Board Member of TSA.


>was able to sustain Krishnamurti's stature as a spiritual teacher
>and maintain itself quite well with the income from K's
>books and his continuing lecture tours.  During K's lifetime, he
>was able to attract ample wealthy donors that kept him and the
>Foundation in the financial security he grew accustomed to while
>under the care of the Theosophical Society.
>So, regarding your question: "Was [CWL] all that off every time
>in all `his' opinions?"  I don't know.  The odds are that CWL had
>to have been right about some things.  But it is clear to me that
>Krishnamurti was not one of the things he was right about.

MKR: I agree that CWL was not right about CWL's expectation how K is going
to teach with the help of the Apostles created in LCC.

        However, K's ideas and discussion of various matters dealing with
human issues has arrested the attention of a large number of people and
based on what I see on the K's maillist, they have helped and affected the
lives of many. This contribution of his is important to be taken into
consideration. Anyone interested may want to subscribe to listening-l and
see for themselves.


>However, I must add that I deeply admire Krishnamurti's integrity
>in rejecting CWL's vision and for leaving the TS.  Also, I must
>point out that K's "Pathless land" speech reaches to the heart of
>HPB's teachings and goes directly against CWL's.  This, I believe
>to be evidence of real spiritual intuition on Ks part, since it
>is unlikely that K ever read a word of HPB in his life.  I like
>K's teachings very much, but is he the returned Christ?  I don't
>think so.
>  |Jerry Hejka-Ekins,                      |

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application