Krishnamurti in Gnostic Exegesis
By James M. West. Copyright © June
21, 2009. All Rights Reserved.
E-mail:
ogdood@yahoo.com
Much has been said at Aeon Byte and
other forums regarding the genius and influence of Carl Jung and Philip K.
Dick. And without a doubt these two men were instrumental in igniting the
modern Gnostic revival. However, there is another great Gnostic figure out
there who also deserves to be mentioned. I refer to
the famous mystic and philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti (1895–1986), whom I personally
consider to be the greatest Gnostic of our age.
Of course I must admit that Krishnamurti
is special to me for personal reasons. In my life he was the one primarily
responsible for birthing me into Gnosis. Yes, just like the proverbial
“midwife” of Socrates, Krishnamurti was the one who helped me make that
difficult journey from the womb of ignorance into the Light of Gnosis. Worded
another way, he was the person whose ideas stimulated my spiritual awakening.
His words caused a light to flash in my head that I had never seen before. His
logic introduced me to a whole new way of thinking and a wholly different
perspective on the human condition, on spirituality, and on religion. And
indeed, it was only after this initiation that Gnostic tradition began to
become meaningful to me, and began to make sense.
On the other hand, I must point out that
Krishnamurti never claimed to be a “Gnostic” and he never made an appeal to any
Gnostic tradition or scripture. In spite of this I remain convinced that he had
some unique ideas which are compatible with the Gnostic world-view. While it
may be wrong to simply impose a system or tradition on this man that he never
laid claim to, I do believe it is a useful exercise to show how that
Krishnamurti’s thought does resonate with Gnostic thought at certain key points.
Personally I believe Krishnamurti was a living embodiment of Gnostic truth. But
he achieved this by virtue of his spiritual nature and not because of any
Gnostic tradition or dogma—which he would have rejected. (I consider this to be
a classic Gnostic irony!)
Certainly Krishnamurti never quoted
Gnostic writings or appealed to Gnostic sages; yet I can’t help but see him as
a man who inevitably lived out and fulfilled Gnostic Truth in his life. And in his
accomplishments he showed himself to be something more than the typical Gnostic.
In his example he was more like a Christ figure or Messiah. He was a teacher
who stood above other teachers and achieved a palpable level of divinity. And
of course it is no coincidence that he was a man who had actually been groomed
from childhood to be a Messianic teacher of this magnitude. He was supposed to
be the next Jesus, or Buddha, or Mohammed. With the backing of powerful
supporters he was supposed to deliver the wisdom of certain so-called “ascended
masters” to the world. This ‘wisdom’ was believed to be so powerful that it
would alter the course of human history and evolution. It may even be that
Krishnamurti was intended to be the world’s first philosopher king! His
supporters referred to him as the “World Teacher.”
Ironically, Krishnamurti’s defining and
crowning achievement was marked by the way he failed in this agenda.
When the time came for him to assume his ‘official’ Messianic office, Krishnamurti
refused to stand and lead. He renounced his Messianic authority and resigned from
the mother organization which had prepared him. That organization was the
Theosophical Society (TS) and its spin-off, the Order of the Star of the East.
In rejecting his mission Krishnamurti could be compared to the example of Jesus
in the Gospel of Matthew. In Matthew 4 Satan takes Jesus to a lofty mountain
top and shows him all the nations of the world and offers these to him in
return for his obedience. Jesus refuses, and chooses instead the life of a
simple itinerant teacher. Krishnamurti likewise made a similar choice:
rejecting the backing of a powerful movement which could potentially have
placed him in a position of great influence (as many Theosophists were wealthy
and politically connected [1]). Krishnamurti chose instead to conduct his own
low key itinerant ministry. In making this choice he had passed his greatest
test.
Now in comparing Krishnamurti and
Theosophy to the biblical account of Jesus and Satan, I refer to the truly
bizarre story that was Krishnamurti’s life, and the deep occult agenda that he
was pressed into as a child. (One might even regard this story as the most
bizarre example of exploitation of an aboriginal person by British
colonialists.) His bizarre journey began in early childhood in
(Note: some Theosophists distrusted
Leadbeater and accused him of being a pedophile. Krishnamurti’s father
eventually demanded that Leadbeater stay away from his son. Krishnamurti’s
‘training’ was then transferred to TS president Annie Besant. [3])
To gain a better perspective of
Krishnamurti’s situation (read: predicament) we need to have a brief overview
of Theosophical doctrine, into which this young boy was to be initiated,
educated and brainwashed. Now of course I will make no claim to know the deepest
and most esoteric secrets of this group. But I can present an account of
Theosophical doctrine as set forth by the Society founder, Helena Blavatsky; as
set forth in her massive two-volume work The Secret Doctrine (1888).
Blavatsky’s doctrine was based on a
synthesis of religious and occult traditions combined with modern
pseudo-scientific speculations. She claimed that all knowledge of the divine,
and of human origins, was revealed in certain teachings she had received from
Tibetan Buddhists, and was contained in an (alleged) document she referred to
as the “Book of Dzyan.” [4] She claimed that this document (copied by her hand)
revealed that human evolution and “karma” was to be completed through a series
of seven root races. She claimed that the human race “fell” eons ago during the
third race (the “Lemurians”), which in turn begat a mutant race of wicked
giants which was the “fourth” race. The fourth race established Atlantis which in
turn was destroyed because of its corruption. From the remains of the fourth
race came the fifth race which Blavatsky called the “Aryans.” She claimed that
where the Atlanteans marked the low point of human evolution, the Aryans
represented humanity’s gradual ascent toward the ether, which was the original
estate of the “third” race before it fell [5]. She claims that modern European
civilization, and the upper caste Brahmins, and Buddhist monks, Tibetans, etc.,
are all of Aryan descent.
Blavatsky’s ideas regarding the Aryans
represented a form of racism that fore-shadowed the Nazi movement that arose
some thirty years later. Here is an example of some of her statements:
“The
intellectual difference between the Aryan and other civilized nations and such
savages as the South Sea Islanders, is inexplicable on any other grounds. No
amount of culture, nor generations of training amid civilization, could raise
such human specimens as the Bushmen, the Veddhas of Ceylon, and some African
tribes, to the same intellectual level as the Aryans… The ‘sacred spark’ is
missing in them and it is they who are the only inferior races on the globe, now
happily—owing to the wise adjustment of nature which ever works in that
direction—fast dying out. Verily mankind is ‘of one blood,’ but not of
the same essence. We [Aryans] are the hot-house, artificially quickened plants
in nature, having in us a spark, which in them is latent.” (Emphasis added. As concerning this so-called
“sacred spark”, see below) [6]
Blavatsky’s statement here is worthy of
any Nazi. She observes “happily” that the “inferior races” are “fast dying
out.” Here is another example:
“Esoteric
history teaches that idols and their worship died out with the Fourth Race
(i.e. the Atlanteans), until the survivors of the hybrid races of the latter
(Chinamen, African Negroes, &c.) gradually brought the worship back. The
Vedas countenance no idols; all the modern Hindu writings do.” [7]
Blavatsky means here that “Negroes” and
“Chinamen” are really the “hybrid” leftovers of the corrupt and extinct
Atlantean civilization. Her reference to the “Vedas” means that the original
Brahmin wisdom came from the Aryans (as did the “svastica”), but that later
Hindus, having mixed with the lower non-Aryan Dravidians, corrupted the
original Vedic doctrine.
Blavatsky wrote of Jews that they were a
race of Aryan origin, but that they had become “degenerate in
spirituality and perfected in materiality.” [8]
Blavatsky’s notion of the “Aryan” race
reflected the pseudo-scientific speculations regarding human anthropology that
were then popular in the 19th century; and were propounded by such
‘intellectuals’ as Arthur de Gobineau (1816–1882) [9]. These intellectuals
claimed that certain historical evidence from Europe and India—which seemed to
refer to “Aryans”—pointed to the existence of a pre-historic master race which
was responsible for introducing civilization to ancient India. Northern
European races were said to descend from this same source. In
Helena Blavatsky took these racialist
theories and elevated them into an occult doctrine of the origin of the human
race as set forth in her book, the Secret Doctrine. She claimed to have
access to the esoteric ‘big’ picture of human history—that she supposedly
acquired from a mysterious order of monks living in
Blavatsky’s ideas would also give
support to a new form of anti-Semitism. She helped to popularize the notion of
a contrast between “Aryan” Europeans and Jews; meaning that the latter was an
example of a race which had lost all traces of its primeval etheric purity.
This idea would be picked up by certain Germans who later used this as a major
plank of the Nazi ‘social’ agenda—which was that the “Aryan” race had to be
protected from contamination: from interbreeding and the influence of the lower
races, especially Jews. Hitler regarded “Bolshevism” as a Jewish conspiracy to
destroy the “Aryan” race.
Hitler even sent a Nazi mission to
Blavatsky’s ideas were certainly
misguided; but the Nazis alone are to blame for applying her ideas in ways she
never intended. What Blavatsky had intended to do was to re-introduce the
supposed long-lost ‘secret knowledge’, once possessed by the “third race” (the
“Lemurians”), that would advance the cause of human evolution, and form a bridge
between modern science and the occult. She further claimed that there was a
hierarchy of ascended masters or “Mahatmas” who were prepared to impart this
knowledge. (These “Mahatmas” were also referred to as the “Great White
Brotherhood.”) These masters were said to be humans, mostly from past ages, who
had completely purified their “Karma” and evolved beyond the need for a
physical body. Some of these beings have remained here on the Earth in order to
guide the course of human evolution. According to later Theosophists these
masters live in an etheric city located somewhere in
“In
this case it is but natural—even from the dead letter standpoint—to view Satan,
the Serpent of Genesis, as the real creator and benefactor, the Father of
Spiritual mankind. For it is he who was the “Harbinger of Light”, bright
radiant Lucifer, who opened the eyes of the automaton created by Jehovah…”
And also:
“And
now it stands proven that Satan, or the Red Fiery Dragon, the “Lord of
Phosphorus” …and Lucifer, or “Light-Bearer”, is in us: it is our Mind – our
tempter and Redeemer, our intelligent liberator from pure animalism.” (H.
Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, vol. II, pp. 243, 513)
(Note: Blavatsky’s ideas regarding
Lucifer were based in part on certain New Testament passages in 2 Peter 1:19
and the Revelation of John 22:16. See my archive article Lucifer the
light-bearer for more details; archive.)
According to Blavatsky, the purpose of
Theosophy, and the teaching of the “ascended masters”, was to re-unite Aryans
with the power of “Lucifer” or “Satan” within themselves. By recovering this
power, and wisdom, the Aryans will be able to recover the lost knowledge that
was once possessed by the etheric Lemurians of the third race. This will in
turn advance the course of human evolution and cause a new race to come into
existence.
Returning now to the ordeal of
Krishnamurti; he was to be the primary instrument by which this ‘wisdom’ would
be imparted to the world. Charles Leadbeater and Annie Besant (being second
generation leaders of the TS) intended to initiate young Krishnamurti into the
mysteries of the ascended masters and to place him in direct contact with them.
Again, young Krishnamurti was to be the vessel by which these masters would
reveal their knowledge to the world. Moreover, Blavatsky believed that this was
the ultimate purpose of the Theosophical Society: to prepare the way for this
teacher. TS insider Mary Lutyens affirms the doctrine of the masters and the
Messianic expectations of Blavatsky:
“At
a certain stage in evolution the ego is ready to enter on the Path to
Discipleship which will eventually lead to Adepthood and membership in the
Great White Brotherhood of perfect beings who direct and govern the world.
… Above the Masters came a hierarchy of glorious beings, one of whom is
inseparable from any account of Krishnamurti’s life. This was the Lord
Maitreya, the World Teacher—the Christ in the West and the Bodhisattva in the
East… The Lord Maitreya…had twice taken possession of a human body in order to
bring to the world a new teaching at a period of dire need—first that of Sri
Krishna in the fourth century B.C. and then that of Jesus. The time would soon
be ripe when the Lord Maitreya would once again take possession of a human
vehicle and give a new religion to the world. …
“As
early as 1889 Madame Blavatsky had told a group of Theosophy students that the
real purpose of establishing the Society (TS) was to prepare humanity for the
reception of the World Teacher… Theosophists also believed that each time a
great religious teacher appeared it was to usher in a new sub-race.” [15]
Whatever it was that the Theosophists
initiated Krishnamurti into, it had real occult power. Krishnamurti described
how that he had been lifted from his body and was in the presence of the
masters. At one point both Krishnamurti and C.W. Leadbeater both left their
bodies together for several hours to make a journey to Shamballa where the
masters lived [16]. Krishnamurti even wrote a book that was channeled from one
of the masters entitled At the Feet of the Master. This book contains
deep philosophical and spiritual insights—all from an Indian boy who was only
14 years old. And then there was the mysterious event that occurred when the
Order of the Star of the East was established in 1911 which propelled
Imagine this bizarre scene at a
Theosophy convention somewhere in
Later, Annie Besant sent Krishnamurti to
For Krishnamurti there was a dark side
to all this and he came to doubt the wisdom of his teachers, both on the
Earthly plain and in the ether. He confessed later that he had no will in any
of the plans that were made for him. He was simply doing what others expected
him to do. Personally he felt that the billing (in major newspapers) of him as
the “Messiah” was embarrassing and was not really how he thought of himself [19].
He also found himself wrestling with dark spiritual forces and experienced
numerous psychic attacks that brought him near to death [20]. He also witnessed
petty infighting in the TS which was often of a most bizarre and scandalous
nature. The organization had split into factions, some of whom denounced Krishnamurti
and the whole “World Teacher” program as a complete fraud [21]. Others were
fighting over who would be the next incarnated Buddha on the planet Mercury [22].
It seemed to him that some Theosophists had really lost their minds.
From Krishnamurti’s early age Charles
Leadbeater and Annie Besant had served as his mentors in guiding him toward his
destiny as the next Christ or Buddha in world history. Annie had become a
second mother to him. But he came to a point where he realized that he could
not assume this office for which she had labored, with all her hopes, for
decades. The time was coming when he would be openly revered as the “Messiah”
and he had to decide how he would handle this authority.
When that day came, in 1929, Krishnamurti’s
first acts, as “World Teacher” and as president of the Order of the Eastern
Star, was to disband this organization and renounced his office. He also
resigned from the Theosophical Society; which he was also supposed to lead [23].
Krishnamurti reached the point where he knew that he could not allow himself to
be used to spread this bizarre conglomeration of doctrine. And indeed his
teachings are in part a contrast to the agenda and occult forces to which he
had been exposed. When asked later in his life whether he still believed in the
ascended masters, his answer was “Gods, masters, apparitions may exist; but they
are of no value to the man who is seeking truth...” [24]
The ascended masters supposedly
described their wisdom as “the Path” whereas Krishnamurti would later teach
that there “is no path to truth.” [25]
As a Gnostic I believe that Krishnamurti
was supposed to be a tool of the Archons, to unite the world under the final
reign of what the Cathars knew to be “Lucifer.” Lucifer was their name
for the Rex Mundi or “world ruler” (or “cosmocrator” in other
traditions). He realized that this agenda had nothing to do with “God” or
enlightenment. He devoted his life instead to teaching people how to discover
the truth within themselves, and he steadfastly refused to repeat anything
further from the supposed masters.
Krishnamurti’s teachings easily serve as
a beginner’s handbook for aspiring Gnostics. In very simple terms he teaches
the proper attitude that aspiring mystics should have toward the world, and
family, and conventional systems of religion and secular education. In a very
simple way he shows how all these institutions: organized religion, education,
and the tyranny of the family, all serve to condition a person in such a way as
to keep them in ignorance and in fear. Without getting into obscure myths and
theologies, he goes straight to the point in explaining how we can free
ourselves from our conditioning and open our minds to revelation. But again, I
can’t help but get the impression that there is a Gnostic system behind his
unvarnished statements. The advantage of Krishnamurti is that he did not hide
the truth behind arcane myths and symbols the way ancient Gnostics did. Today
one has to be an historian and scholar just to understand ancient Gnostic
writings, or what the Catholic Fathers said about them, or what the Bible
itself says. In Krishnamurti’s case, one need only know how to read to
understand his doctrine.
An excellent example of Krishnamurti’s
teaching can be seen in the book Freedom from the Known, which contains
a compilation of his lectures. When I first started reading this book its
opening words struck me. And today I see these words as an expression of
Gnostic thought:
“Man
throughout the ages has been seeking something beyond himself, beyond material
welfare—something we call truth or God or reality, a timeless state—something
that cannot be disturbed by circumstances, by thought or human corruption. … He
sees the enormous confusion of life, the brutalities, the revolts, the wars,
the endless divisions of religion, ideology and nationality, and with a deep
sense of abiding frustration he asks, what is one to do, what is this thing we
call living, is there anything beyond it? … And not finding this nameless thing
of a thousand names which he has always sought, he has cultivated faith—faith
in a saviour or an ideal—and faith invariably breeds violence. … The primary
cause of disorder in ourselves is the seeking of reality promised by another…” [26]
In these opening words Krishnamurti
brilliantly summarizes the paradox of human existence in a few words. Man
inevitably longs for something that is beyond the chaos of human existence; something
that is not disturbed or corrupted by human corruption and strife. In Gnostic
tradition this timeless, uncorrupted state is known as the “Pleroma.” The
Pleroma is the Gnostic symbol of all existence in its original, perfect and
uncorrupted state, which exists outside or our space and time. To experience
this timeless spiritual reality is to experience gnosis. Krishnamurti
does not describe it this way, but I am convinced that he is referring to the
same underlying idea: a timeless state where true God and true Reality exist
undisturbed by temporal human circumstances.
But not finding the truth, man turns
instead to “faith” which in turn “breeds violence” and that the “primary cause
of disorder in ourselves is the seeking of reality promised by another.” The
day I read these words I realized what my life had been, and what my religious
upbringing had been, and why I was so confused, unhappy and paranoid. I finally
realized the reality that my Christian faith wasn’t giving me life or bringing
me closer to God, or helping me understand why this world is so screwed up. I
finally understood that my faith was nothing more than an unfulfilled promise
and that my spiritual life was confined in a prison created out of ignorance,
false hopes and contradictory doctrines. (I set forth these contradictions in
my articles which are posted at Aeon Byte every week.)
Krishnamurti was the one who helped me
to understand that if I wanted to find the answers, to find “truth or God or
reality” then I had to look within myself. No priest or minister can simply
hand this to me. All alleged truth only becomes Truth when one has an inward
revelation and experience of that truth: this is the inward mystic experience
of gnosis. But of course Krishnamurti does not describe it this way. Again,
Krishnamurti informs his readers that “The primary cause of disorder in
ourselves is reality promised by another.” In Judeo-Christian tradition that
promise is the Messianic Kingdom; or in Theosophy it is the New Age as ushered
in by the “ascended masters” and their chosen vessel, the “world teacher” or
“Maitreya” or whatever. Krishnamurti described the plain truth this way:
“The
question of whether or not there is a God, or truth, or reality, can never be
answered by books, or by priests, philosophers, or saviours. Nobody and nothing
can answer the question but you yourself and that is why you must know
yourself. Immaturity lies only in total ignorance of self. To understand
yourself is the beginning of wisdom.” [27]
Krishnamurti claims that no saviour or
philosopher can answer the most important questions for you. Yet the words
above are saving words and are golden gems of philosophical truth. Krishnamurti
doesn’t waste time calling himself a “saviour” or a “philosopher.” But his
words are in fact the words of a saviour and philosopher. And in truth we all
have the capacity to be saviours and philosophers, and priests as well. Through
self knowledge we become the saviours of ourselves and each other. Not in the
sense that we hand each other the answers; but in the sense that we become
sources of spiritual insight. When teachers and traditions are viewed in their
correct context, they are sacred friends who provide insights. They never claim
to provide THE answers. Only you alone can provide the answers. Whether or not
you discover the answers is ultimately a matter between you, yourself and God.
In the passage above Krishnamurti
imparts one of the most simple yet important sacred truths: if you want to
discover “God, or truth, or reality” then you must look within yourself and you
must understand yourself. Krishnamurti was not the first guy to reveal this
information and he even admits that “I have nothing to teach you—no new
philosophy, no new system, no new path to reality.” [24] Plato and Socrates
both emphasized the importance of soul-searching. The ancient oracle of Apollo,
at
“When
you know yourselves…you will realize that it is you who are the children of the
living Father.” (3)
And also:
“That
which you have will save you if you bring it forth from yourselves. That which
you do not have within you will kill you if you do not have it within you.”
(70)
And again in the Gospel of Philip:
“Is
it not necessary for those who possess everything to know themselves?” (76)
And also:
“As
for ourselves, let each one of us dig down after the root of evil which is
within one, and let one pluck it out of one’s heart by the root.” (83)
And in the Book of Thomas the
Contender:
“For
he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself
has at the same time achieved knowledge about the depth of the all.” (138)
These statements above express this
doctrine clearly. And this concept is implicit in diverse passages throughout
ancient Gnostic texts. An example is in the Tripartite Tractate where we
read of the Father that “he alone knows himself as he is” (55). The idea here
is that we should follow the example of the Father and know ourselves as well.
Another example is from the Gnostic sage
Monoimus as quoted by Hippolytus:
“Abandon
the search for God and the creation and other matters of a similar sort. Look
for him by taking yourself as the starting point. Learn who it is within you
that makes everything his own and says ‘My god, my mind, my thought, my soul,
my body.’ Learn the sources of sorrow, joy, love, hate. Learn how it happens
that one watches without willing, rests without willing, loves without willing.
If you carefully investigate these matters you will find him within yourself.”
(Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, 8.15.1f.)
The point here is that God reveals
itself to us in our deepest thoughts, dreams and visions. But this is something
that one has to attune themselves to. Most people in the world care about
anything but self-understanding. Many people are even afraid of it; and they
run away from themselves by seeking the company of others, or other
distractions (hobbies, movies, TV, vices, etc.) rather than taking the needed
time to listen to and look within themselves. For this reason many people find
themselves confused and deranged. And this is why psychiatry is such a
lucrative profession in the modern world; because so many people find that they
need help to figure themselves out—because they won’t take the time to do it
themselves, and they don’t understand that a true relationship with God begins
with self-understanding.
The fact that so many people today have
no understanding of themselves—and even shun it—is tied to the fact that
“orthodox” Christian tradition has omitted this fundamental wisdom. Even the
New Testament writings (i.e. the “orthodox” Canon) lack a clear statement or
explanation of the value of self-knowledge. Certainly the concept is alluded to
in a few specific passages. Paul refers on numerous occasions to “Christ in me”
or “in you”; or that the spirit of God or Christ “dwells in you.” In the Gospel
of Luke there is an ambiguous passage where Jesus says that the “
“For
when at this time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you
again those things which are the first oracles of God; and are become such as
have need of milk and not solid food. For everyone who needs milk is unskillful
in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong food belongs to them
that are mature (teleion: initiated); even those who by reason of
use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
“Therefore
leaving the elementary principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us move unto perfection
(teleioteta: initiation); not laying again the foundation of repentance
from dead works (the Law), and of faith toward God; of the doctrine of
baptisms, and laying on of hands, and of the resurrection of the dead, and of
eternal judgment…” (Hebrews 5:14–6:1f. emphasis added)
In this unique passage the truth is
admitted that true Christianity, at its core, is about maturity and
discernment, and is an “initiation”, and does not simply revolve around
“faith”, baptisms and dogmas. The ability to “discern both good and evil”
refers to a matter of one’s inner consciousness and understanding.
Another advantage of Krishnamurti is that
he explains in clear terms exactly what the consequences of self-ignorance
actually are. His ideas here are most insightful. The crux of the argument is
that people must discern the difference between knowledge about themselves
(which everyone has) and actually learning about themselves [28]. The
knowledge we have of ourselves is rooted largely in the past, from past
experiences and education. This knowledge is not a form of understanding, but
is a form of conditioning. This kind of knowledge is not a product of the
present, but is a product of the past, and is dead. The present reality, our
consciousness and awareness is our life. It is the point at which we are aware
and alive. But that life can be smothered, or poisoned, by the
knowledge/conditioning of the past. This is what keeps our souls, our minds,
imprisoned in a state of blindness and death. This is what keeps us from truly
learning about ourselves and who we really are, and what reality and God really
are. All our knowledge of God and reality comes out of the past which in turn
smothers one’s awareness of the living present. We can only really know God in
the present and not through the past. The past can provide valuable insights
and lessons. But the actual gnosis of God can only be experienced in the
present.
Krishnamurti also explains in
brilliantly simple terms how that this false consciousness results in
self-ignorance and the fragmenting of human consciousness, which manifests in
our confused plurality of thoughts. Not knowing ourselves, we become whatever
it is that society expects of us. We have one identity at church, another in
front of our spouses, another for the guys at the bar. Without exception we get
caught in the cycle of hypocrisy which results from having no understanding of
why we have become who we are, and why we do what we do [29]. It is only
natural that one feels confused and ashamed deep inside—without understanding
why. Orthodox tradition claims that this sense of shame is guilt for both
disobeying the Law of Moses, and for the crucifixion of Christ. The
Theosophists claim that this is caused by a stain on one’s Karma that is
leftover from sins that were committed in a past life, in ancient Atlantis or
Lemuria! But of course none of these fables have anything to do with the real
issues that are rooted within ourselves and our lack of self-understanding—and
not what we were supposedly doing back when we were wicked one-eyed giants in
ancient Atlantis!
The result of all this confusion is that
we humans never achieve a unified state of consciousness. Instead, our minds
are divided up into conflicting identities, thoughts, memories and between what
we remember and what is forgotten. A part of us is conscious, but that
consciousness is a thin layer that covers our subconscious, which is that part
of ourselves that we have no knowledge of and do not understand. We also never
learn to distinguish between the reality of an object and the false image that
our minds conceive of the same object [30]. We never learn how to properly use
our minds, let alone achieve total consciousness.
If you can see the reality of what I
have described then it becomes easy to see why human civilizations rise and
fall, one after the other. Because to this day human society is filled with
people who never learn to understand and master their own consciousness. We
live out our lives wallowing and half-buried in the filth of our own ignorance.
This lack of consciousness, of fullness, is why the human race can reach no
consensus or unity on what God is, or what reality is, or on the purpose of our
existence, or of our origins and destiny. Collectively we humans remain
hopelessly ignorant and in conflict with each other and with ourselves. Our
consciousness and sense of ourselves is so woefully limited that the fall of
every new civilization is nearly pre-ordained.
Krishnamurti’s lectures were aimed at
helping people achieve perfect consciousness, which is another way of saying
that he wanted to help people reach true maturity. In that perfect
consciousness the mind is at peace. There are no chattering thoughts or
seething resentments about the past. The past is dead. The mind is an
instrument to be used; but it is not the seat of what we are. The ability of
the mind to solve problems is limited; and the mind is not the true abode of
where we live. The mind is not the highest part of ourselves. The mind can
serve us or it can be the trap in which we lose ourselves; in a maze of our own
confusion and ignorance and wrong priorities. When all of these issues are set
into their correct perspective, and the mind is at peace, what we find then is
Joy and Peace. We may not be able to solve the world’s problems. But we learn
that at the core we are spirits of joy and love; and that this is what God is
as well. This revelation is a great treasure that cannot be lost; and which no
one can take away.
I believe that Krishnamurti’s teaching
on the mind and thoughts corresponds to the Gnostic concept of the psychic
self (from the ancient Greek psyche: meaning the soul). Gnostic
tradition likewise teaches that the mind and soul are not the highest level of
human existence or being. Instead, the deepest essence of human being and
consciousness was described, symbolically, as the spiritual seed. This
represents the deepest part of ourselves that we are seeking to understand, to
know, that lays in the depth beyond our deepest thoughts. Only when we get to
know ourselves at this depth is there any chance of experiencing true Reality
and true God.
Before concluding I want to say again
that I in no way mean to say that Krishnamurti’s teaching is “Gnostic” at every
point. For example, Krishnamurti has no doctrine of dualism or a trinity of man
or natures. I believe his alliance with Gnostic thought is manifest in that his
doctrine is truly a doctrine of liberation. Krishnamurti teaches his readers
how to bring an end to the tyranny of the past, and how to live in the
present—and how to find God or reality in the present. As a writer I will admit
that I nowhere in my articles explain these issues nearly as well as
Krishnamurti does. My articles are aimed more toward readers who have a
background in fundamentalist Bible theology. I try to liberate people by
showing how the Bible has no “orthodox” theology. To a limited extent my
articles do help people; as many people in the West suffer from fundamentalist
brain-washing. (Bible theology is a subject that is so complex that a person
can be lost in the maze of “orthodox” dis-information for years. For this
reason I believe that a counter-perspective is needed and contributes to the
common good of humanity.) But Krishnamurti’s teaching, in this case, is universal.
There is very little cultural or theological context in his teaching. He simply
presents the truth in this troubled world as it is. The ascended masters may
“direct and govern the world” but Krishnamurti is a saviour and teacher who can
help us to deliver ourselves from the tyranny of faith and false knowledge.
There is much more I’d like to say
regarding Krishnamurti’s lectures and ideas. But space and “fair use”
limitations will not allow for further discussion. I recommend that all
aspiring Gnostics read Krishnamurti’s lectures as compiled in the book Freedom
from the Known, compiled and edited by Mary Lutyens (published by the Krishnamurti
Foundation and HarperCollins). Truly this book is a manual on how to be a
Gnostic in the here and now.
I would also like to inform my readers
that the interpretations above of Krishnamurti’s ideas, and his life, and Theosophy,
are mine alone. I recommend that my readers research my sources and decide for
themselves. If there are any Theosophists out there who disagree with my
opinions and research, then I encourage them to send their comments to the
e-mail address below. If I find that such information is compelling, and
without ad hominem attacks, then I will post this information as a rebuttal and
counter-perspective to this article. —jw
Notes
1] A prime example
of “politically connected” Theosophists is Krishnamurti’s mentor and Theosophical
Society leader Annie Besant (1847–1933). She was part of a circle of people who
made a profound impact in British politics and social policy, which is felt to
this day even in the
The Theosophical
Society itself was comprised mostly of wealthy, highly educated elitists. The
culture of the Society is revealed in a biography of Krishnamurti written by a
close friend named Mary Lutyens (1909–1999). The book is entitled Krishnamurti:
the Years of Awakening and is a source for this present article. Mary was
connected to the Society through her mother, Lady Emily Lutyens, who was a society
member. In Mary’s eye-witness account it is obvious that the TS members are
world travelers, forerunners of today’s ‘jet-setters.’ The Society held conventions
and camps every year in country after country; from
2] Evelyne Blau, Krishnamurti:
100 Years, Stewart, Tabori & Chang: NY (1995), pp. 4, 8ff. See also
Mary Lutyens, Krishnamurti: the Years of Awakening, Farrar, Straus &
Giroux/Avon: NY (1976), pp. 11f. , 21f.
3] M. Lutyens, ibid.,
pp. 15f., 43,
4] H. Blavatsky, The
Secret Doctrine, vol. I, pp. xx, xxii, 1, 13. The link below is to an
online text of the Secret Doctrine with original page format.
(http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-0-co.htm#contents
)
5] Blavatsky,
ibid., vol. II, pg. 300–301. Blavatsky claims that humanity lost its
spirituality and “third eye” beginning with the third race and is beginning its
recovery with the fifth race (Aryans). Blavatsky’s general doctrine of the
“root races” is contained in vol. II, pp. 263–275. Additional details are
provided in the following sections, pg. 276ff.
6] Blavatsky,
ibid., vol. II, pg. 421 (footnote). I acknowledge my gratitude and debt to
Wikipedia which contains an excellent, researched article on the subject of the
“Aryan Race” and Theosophy ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_race ).
7] Blavatsky,
ibid. vol. II, pg. 723.
8] H. Blavatsky,
ibid., vol. II, pg. 200. As concerning the “svastica” Blavatsky informs her
readers that it was “Born in the mystical conceptions of the early Aryans, and
by them placed at the very threshold of eternity…” (ibid., pp. 99–100).
9] See link for a
biography of Arthur de Gobineau and his writings (http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Arthur_de_Gobineau
).
10] Thomas R.
Trautmann, Aryans and
11] The following
Google Book link is to an 1890 edition of Blavatsky’s “Lucifer” magazine,
pg. 168, which features libel proceedings carried out by the New York Aryan
Theosophical Society against the
12] Both Nazis
and Theosophists looked to
13] In
14] M. Lutyens,
pg. 35.
15] ibid., pg.
11f.
16] ibid., pg.
35f.
17] E. Blau, Krishnamurti,
pg. 22. There is also the report of Lady Emily Lutyens “He always speaks in
English, which a large proportion of his audience, at least in
18] Blau, ibid., pg.
74. Lutyens, pg. 254f.
19] M. Lutyens,
pg. 155.
20] In August of
1922 Krishnamurti began to experience nightly bouts of extreme pain accompanied
by vision and meetings with the “masters.” C.W. Leadbeater began to believe
that this pain was not part of the plan and that something was going terribly
wrong; Lutyens, pg. 198f. The communications that Krishnamurti received from
the said masters became uncharacteristic of their “style”; ibid., pg. 204.
21] Lutyens, ibid.,
pp. 144, 151f., 240, 253, 276.
22] ibid., pp. 87,
229. There were also negotiations and arguments over who would be the spiritual
masters to the “seventh root-race” which had yet to evolve in the distant
future. TS leader George Arundale had been promised the position of “Buddha” on
Mercury but this was taken away by Leadbeater and handed to an Indian named
Rajagopal. It was later agreed that Arundale would be “Chief of Staff of the
7th Race” and that this was “his last incarnation, as henceforth he would be
sent all over the Universe and not attached to any one planet.” Arundale
threatened that if
23] ibid., pp.
293, 298. E. Blau, pg. 85f.
24] E. Blau, pg.
91; see also Lutyens, pp. 263, 267. Lutyens quotes from an official TS inquiry
in which Krishnamurti admitted that he never believed what was written in any
TS book; presumably he referred to the “Secret Doctrine” (ibid. pg.
269f.).
25] ibid. At the
Ommen Camp Krishnamurti proclaimed to his audience, in opposition to the
“masters”, that the “truth is a pathless land.” And in a later book he would
state plainly that there “is no path to reality anymore than to truth” (Freedom
from the Known, pg. 21). The words quoted are in stark contrast to
Krishnamurti’s very first book At the Feet of the Master which he wrote
when he was just 14, and was channeled from an ascended master named Kuthumi.
The opening words read as follows: “These are not my words; they are the
words of the Master who taught me. Without Him I could have done nothing, but
through His help I have set my feet on the Path.” In the two quotations we
can see that Krishnamurti’s teaching has become the diametric opposite of what
he learned from his “Master.” Whereas at first he affirmed that the truth is a
“Path” he later denied that there was any “path” to truth.
26] Jiddu
Krishnamurti, Freedom From the Known, ed. Mary Lutyens, HarperCollins:
NY (1969), pg. 9.
27] ibid., pg.
12.
28] ibid., pp.
22f., 29f.
29] ibid., pp.
30, 105f.
30] ibid., pp.
25, 95f.
By James M. West.
Copyright © June 21, 2009.
All Rights Reserved.
E-mail:
ogdood@yahoo.com