JESUS OF INDIA News
News on the book, responses from the press, and inquiries from producer directors are posted here.5/25/05 Sales of the novel have risen since Mel Gibson's movie, The Passion, was released. Many are simply wanting to know more about Jesus, and many are wanting an alternative to The Passion. Jesus of India, will be THE alternative movie on Jesus' message. The Word was primed by the Passion, but when Jesus of India comes to the theaters, the universal Jesus will be more apparent. It's not really about the messenger, it's about the message. By now we should realize that you don't kill the messenger. For different directors/producers have written conerning film rights. The director I signed with has the passion, the insight, and the openness to do an excellent job. (1) The producers of the TV show, Bridging Heaven and Earth, requested a copy of the novel for consideration. Here's the text of the email request.Dear Maury, We are in receipt of an e-mail requesting us to take a look at "Jesus Of India" as a possible feature on our television show "Bridging Heaven & Earth." It sounds very interesting, especially since I spent 8 years in India. In Kashmir the local understanding for centuries is that Jesus is buried there. You probably visited the site. Anyway, our 9th season for "Bridging" is booked through April. Our 10th season will begin in June or July 2001 and we would be pleased to consider you as a guest if grace works it that way. Would you please send us a copy of the book to: S.F. *********************************************** *********************************************** (2) Journal of Vaisnava , review request Greetings, I am the editor of the Journal of Vaisnava Studies and we are planning a special 200-page issue on Jesus in India Traditions. Our book review section will play a prominent role in this issue, and one of our reviewers would like to review your recent book, Jesus of India. So, if budget permits, please send a reviewer's copy to Steven Rosen, c/o JVS, 30 Village Gate Way, Nyack, NY 10960. We
will naturally send copies of any Thank you. --S. Rosen, JVS, editor. ************************************************ If you have a review done by someone else you could send it to me and also if you could send the book then we could get the review done independently as well. S. D. indolink.com ************************************************* requested a copy for review. *************************************************
The Press Release is being carried on http://www.ritviknn.com the week of 12/11/00.
Response
to Martin Gardner's Article: David Bohm and Jiddo
Krishnamurti, ************* I was surprised that the Skeptic Inquirer allowed the article, David Bohm and Jiddo Krishnamurti to be published as it was. For a skeptic magazine, whose purport it is to take the high road of reason, rationality and good science, to let an article that verges on slander pass muster, is certainly a slip. Even Ayn Rand, as opposed to mysticism as she was, would have recognized the “argument through intimidation,” that was one of her hallmark criticisms. If you don't know what her term meant, this article is a good example. Basically, she reviled the use of arguments that didn't stand on reason, but instead, stooped to using derogatory proclamations, slurs and derogatory associations to dispose of their thought. This is what Martin Gardner did in his article. Examples were: “strange relationship…. dedicated Marxist,” …. noting that “Ex-Communists and fellow travelers have a habit of turning from Marxism to another ideology, ……..” associations with Krishnamurti, “one of the most peculiar gurus.” If Mr. Gardner thinks Krishnamurti was a standout for strangeness among Indian gurus, he certainly hasn't studied the lives of other Indian gurus. If he wants to find quackery, and real peculiarity, he should look a little further. Krishnamurti was rather normal in comparison. Noting that Krishnamurti was probably abused as a child by Mr. Leadbetter, “who was probably gay,” is just another unnecessary slur. Is a child perverted because he was prey to abuse? The whole tone of the article continues in this manner, setting up a theme whose intent was aimed at casting Bohm into a black hole of disrepute. Talking about Bohm's depressions and seeking therapeutic help, does not demean the man, but rather, shows openness, a willingness to search and to listen. This type of character assassination could well be applied to Abraham Lincoln, yet he was one of our greatest presidents. If one can read beyond the dispersions, Bohm is obviously a man of integrity, open-minded, and willing to look at anything. He was certainly willing to take the heat for his beliefs, standing up to Senator McCarthy's ideological court and paying a very steep price. If more physicists were as open minded as Bohm, perhaps QM would be further advanced today than it is. Having depressions and seeking therapeutic help is not an indictment of Dr. Bohm's ideas, nor of his logic, creativity, and open mindedness. It actually points to strength of character, a willingness to listen and learn. To paraphrase a well known quote, “if any man's entire personal history were made public, most people would be horrified. Mr. Gardner begins his reproach of Krishnamurti by relating his “mystical experience” as something weird, totally out of the ordinary. If Mr. Gardner would care to review the psychological literature on this type of experience, he would find it completely described in the work of Arthur Janov, Ph.D.. His book The Primal Scream, aptly describes this type of experience, and though not typical, is a valid therapy. Of course, being that John Lennon of the Beetles, once went through Primal therapy, probably invalidates such therapy, at least to Mr. Gardner's eyes. Insinuating
that Krishnamurti was a quack because he tried alternative medical
approaches does not make Krishnamurti's work less significant. The
fact that he survived his extraordinary childhood to become one of
the world's great lecturers, speaks volumes. “His teaching was a mix of dull platitudes and murky phrases such as, “The observer is the observed.” This particular phrase which Mr. Gardner does not understand is simply another way of expressing a basic tenet of non-duality. This concept is basic to Hinduism, Buddhism and mystics, world-wide. It is a subtle concept, and difficult for most Westerners to understand, but it is neither vague nor murky. “There is never a hint in Krishnamurti's writings of a personal God or the survival of personality after death.” What does this have to do with anything? I can only guess that Mr. Garner is insinuating that Krishnamurti was far from the Christian tradition. Does this invalidate his thinking? If you want to read a book from a Christian perspective that delves deeply into this, you can read The Impersonal Self, by Joseph S. Benner. Isn't it wonderful that Krishnamurti never quoted from other thinkers? It is also well known that he didn't read them. His reading consisted of mostly mysteries, a rather normal pastime for many people. As for Krishnamurti's “watered-down Buddhism,” I suggest that Krishnamurti actually spoke to the highest and most subtle aspects non-dualism, which is very difficult to understand, and more rarely yet, experienced. How easy was Jesus Christ to understand? Both Krishnamurti and Christ are “infuriatingly vague for the many. Let me explain for Mr. Gardner some of the “vagueness,” typical of Krishnamurti's talks. …..There is no such thing as doing right or wrong when there is freedom. You are free and from that center you act. And hence there is no fear, and a mind that has no fear is capable of great love. And when there is love it can do what it will.” Krishnamurti
is here referring to a level of awareness rather uncommon to the
human race. However, it is constant throughout history, and
universal, regardless of culture or religion. The mystics commonly
express this level of awareness with “union with God.”
In that state, fear is unknown, and one feels unlimited freedom.
Why? Because at this level of awareness, one is no longer
identified with the personal self, but with the larger Self, the
whole, nature, God. One is free because one is all that is. And
love is a result of this oneness, because, as the great Hindu
sages and mystics claim, “You are that.” This quote refers again to the state of non-dualism, or union with the larger Self. It is commonly called among the mystics and Eastern sages, Ego-death. Simply put, the Ego is a complex of thought—ideas, concepts, judgments, prejudices, condemnations. When this level of consciousness, which is normal, recedes into the background, another level of awareness arises which is experienced as non-local, universal, where personal issues relax and fall to the background. The ego goes through an experience which feels like death. Once free from it's self imprisonment, one feels free, non-judgmental, accepting, and therefore, feeling great love for all is then simple. Everything is new again, changed, mutated, as one is seeing from a different point of view—a different level of consciousness. Aldus Huxley's book, Brave New World, was in part, inspired by Krishnamurti, one of Huxley's good friends. We can all see what Huxley was driving at, because he made the mental prison so complete. Few of us are that aware that our normal thinking patterns, that we cling to so arduously, are also a prison. “As long as there is a time interval between the observer and the observed it creates friction and therefore there is a waste of energy.” I won't quote the whole paragraph, but again this is not so murky if you understand Krishnamurti. He is again referring to the state of egolessness, where one is not caught in the concepts, the thoughts that bind. There is no wasted energy because one is the other, “the observer is the observed.” Again, this is spoken from one who knew intimately the experience of oneness. It is only murky to those who do not understand the subtleties of non-dualism. As Mr. Martin notes, Krishnamurti's admirers were not just common folk, but the greats of our time. Why was this so? Were they all duped by this murky, unread, quack of a man? I think not. It doesn't stand to reason that so many world leaders, great thinkers and intellectuals were all attracted to and duped by Krishnamurti. The facts seem to point to a great thinker, a man of subtle perceptions, of a consciousness not easily understood by the common man. But those with the gift of perception, seemed to sense in Krishnamurti, something of a truth they knew, but could not quite grasp. Was Krishnamurti a perfect man, a saint? No. Was he as Nietzsche proclaimed, “human, all too human.” Of course. But, does this humanness, this willingness to be open and express what one sees, mean that one's thought or work is invalid? If so, we can throw out all the work of all the scientists, for each and every one is human, fallible, less than perfect. Would there ever be a scientific hypothesis if scientists did not first believe something, have an intuition of it. Many, many great men have experienced depression. In fact, it may be more common among the brilliant, because they question and unravel themselves, and put themselves at risk. These risks come at a great price, sometimes referred to as “the dark night of the soul.” Those of us who have not taken these risks, have not risked the dissolution of our personality in order to grasp some higher ground. Who are we to call those that do, hard to understand, vague, murky? We do so only at our own peril. My first experience of Krishnamurti was an accident. I happened across the book, You Are the World,” and began to read it, not knowing anything about the author, his philosophy, or his background. I can say this, I found it fascinating, profound, enlightening, and deeply moving. I was not prepared for the level of consciousness it contained, and it really did take my head apart. But, that head it took apart, was a prison, a prison I had been in a long, long time. To say the least, to come out was refreshing. The world was new again—unprejudiced, a view I had never experienced before. And, after reading many of Krishnamurti's books, I too read, Lives in the Shadow with J. Krishnamurti. Did it take away the insights I had gained? Did it take away from the higher levels of consciousness I experienced? No. I am a great skeptic. I discuss the articles in Skeptic magazine with my friends. Krishnamurti always reminded his audience not to accept him as an authority, or anyone else, but only accept that authority which came from within. He always reminded his audience to seek within, to find internal authority always, for no external authority is valid. I
hope that readers of Skeptic Magazine will read Krishnamurti and
experience for themselves what Krishnamurti meant by throwing all
tradition overboard and finding truth for oneself. Maury Lee Jesus of India Copyright © 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2005 by
Maury Lee
You Can Order Jesus of India from: The links below take you directly to the shopping cart purchase form for Jesus of India.
http://www.xlibris.com/jesusofindia.html
Xlibris is the publisher, and books ordered from them directly may ship faster. Click any link above to go directly to the purchase form for Jesus of India. Contact Information Electronic mail: maurylee#swbell.net (replace the # with @ to email) |
|
|
|
|