Krishnamurti - Reflections on the Self

Reflections on the Self

Copyright 1997 by Krishnamurti Foundation of America and Krishnamurti Foundation Trust, Ltd.

KRISHNAMURTI:

Reflections on the Self

J. Krishnamurti

Edited by Raymond Martin

CONTENTS

EDITORS PREFACE

I N THE SPRING OF 1993 the Krishnamurti Foundation of America asked me to edit a volume of J. Krishnamurtis talks and writings. Their idea was that there should be an anthology that would be particularly interesting to academic philosophers and students of philosophy. The request reminded me of how difficult it had been twenty years earlier for me to understand what Krishnamurti was saying and its relevance to my work as a philosopher. Although I had some misgivings, I agreed.

My misgivings were due, first, to the fact that, as things stand, Krishnamurtis thought is quite removed from academic philosophy, particularly in the analytic tradition. There is a simple reason why this should be so: Krishnamurti wasnt interested in presenting theories; and theories are what academic philosophy is all about. Second, it seemedand still seemsto me that my having been an analytic philosopher had actually made it more difficult for me to understand Krishnamurti. The reasons for this are complex and not entirely clear to me even now. I think the heart of the difficulty was that I couldnt understand what Krishnamurti was saying unless what he was saying was clear and it wasnt going to be clear until I had processed it in the way I had been trained as an analytic philosopher to process any view I was considering. As it happens, it is hard to process what Krishnamurti is saying in that way. (The problem I was having is analogous, I think, to the problem the Buddhist scholars were having in the As a Human Being section below.)

In the end what enabled me to overcome my misgivings about editing this volume was the realization that Id been moved and instructed by Krishnamurtis thoughts, and in ways that connect directly with my academic interests in philosophy, particularly in the topics of self and personal identity! For instance, Krishnamurtis observations on identification and on the observer/observed distinction are, I think, importantly relevant to post-Parfitian concerns about what matters in survival. And, in my opinion, quite apart from its relevance to academic philosophy, what Krishnamurti has to say is important.

Others had different misgivings. The Krishnamurti Foundation Trust Ltd. (England), in particular, was worried that by my focusing so much on what Krishnamurti had to say about the self and topics directly connected to the self, I might mislead readers into thinking this was all he talked about. Its not all he talked about. The scope of his concerns was extremely broadas diverse as life itself. The purpose of the present anthology is not to present a balanced view of what Krishnamurti had to say, but only to present that part of it that may be of most immediate interest to philosophers and students of philosophy. Readers may, if they like, seek out other more representative anthologies of Krishnamurtis writings, many of which are available.

The selections that follow not only emphasize certain of Krishnamurtis concerns more than others, they are also heavily edited. The reason for their being so heavily edited is primarily that almost all of what follows is taken from spoken dialogues Krishnamurti had with live audiences. In these dialogues the flow of his thoughts is often interrupted by questions or other audience reactions. In responding, Krishnamurti sometimes goes off in directions perhaps less interesting to the intended audience for this book than his development of his original theme. So, to make the following read well I have edited out most of what, in my opinion, interrupts the orderly flow of Krishnamurtis ideas. Of course, in doing that I may unintentionally have distorted what Krishnamurti was trying to say. My misgivings on this score are eased by the fact that anyone who would like to see what has been edited out can do so easily. The Krishnamurti Foundation Trust has produced a CD-ROM on which is included the complete published works of Krishnamurti, from 1933 to 1986. All of the selections in the current volume are from this source.

Many people have been extremely helpful. Tom Heggestad, in particular, of the Krishnamurti Foundation of America provided both a great deal of technical assistance and also assisted with the selection and editing of texts. Frode Steen, Michael Lommel, Kathleen Quinn, Hillary Rodrigues, Ray McCoy, Rama Rao Pappu, and Mark Lee also made valuable contributions. The idea that there should be such an anthology is due originally to Albion Patterson. Finally, thanks are due to several friends of mine, many of them philosophers or psychologists who had no prior acquaintance with Krishnamurtis writings, who were kind enough to read an early version of the anthology and offer criticisms, suggestions, and encouragement. These include Allen Stairs, Richard Garner, Anna Taam, Michelle Higginbotham, Lynn Bernstein, John Barresi, Tara Brach, Magali Theodore, Stiv Fleishman, Tina Angle, Supriya Goyal, and Udaya.

INTRODUCTION

I S IT POSSIBLE TO LIVE without relying psychologically on authorityeither on external authority or even on the authority of ones own past experience? For Jiddu Krishnamurti that, suitably qualified, is the key question. His answer is that it is possible and that only in this way can one connect fully with what is real.

Krishnamurti was not a philosopher in the classical sense. He wasnt interested in presenting theories or in arguing for his views. Still what he was up to is continuous with philosophy. Like Socrates, who through his example and questioning encourages his audiences to examine critically the assumptions on which their beliefs depend, Krishnamurti, through his example and questioning, encourages his audiences to examine critically the assumptions on which their very experience of themselves and the world depends. In other words, whereas Socrates encourages what today we would call critical thinking (or, simply, philosophy), Krishnamurti encourages what we might call critical looking (and what he sometimes called choiceless awareness).

What Socrates asked the Athenians to do is by now commonplace, at least to philosophers and to students of philosophy. We have learnt the lesson he was trying to teach. But to his original audiencethe Athenianswhat he was asking them to do often must have seemed strange and even pointless. What good could possibly come, many of them must have wondered, from giving the axe to conventional wisdom? Why, they must have asked, should we start freshly when we have accumulated so much? But the distorting weight of what you have accumulated, Socrates tried to point out, is precisely the problem.

At the time Socrates proposed critical thinking there was not much reason for the Athenians to suppose it would bear fruit. But it did. Science is part of that fruit. So is the modern disposition to question the authority of received views.

Have we learnt all we need to know about questioning authority? Have we gone far enough? Or is our questioning still seriously limited? Contemporary philosophers and students of philosophy tend to think that we have carried the questioning process about as far as it can go. Many even think we have taken it too far. But up to this point we have questioned mainly only explicit beliefs. In addition to these beliefs, might we not still take a great deal that is questionable for granted? And if we do, couldnt this also be an obstacle we need to overcome?

Krishnamurti thought that in our doubting we have not gone far enough. He thought that our questioning is seriously limited and that this is a major obstacle we need to overcome. Could he be right?