The first question that arises after reading his words is: was K. an incompetent? The second is: was this declaration conditioned by the morphine he was being treated with? If somebody acts for 65 years doing something, being a doctor, engineer, teacher or whatever, and the person is unable to transmit anything to the listeners, he is incompetent. Was K. an incompetent? Not being present and without personal experience on the effects of morphine, I can say nothing about the second question. I assume that a revealing drug would not affect the awareness state of K... but a depressive-repressive one, probably would.

Secondly, it is also necessary to ask oneself about the intention of this super intelligent Energy. The writer, did ask this question to K., while washing the car together in Brockwood Park. In a different way, I asked him in relation to freedom and authority: "Are you a factor of freedom or a new conditioning?" K. stopped what he was doing and opened his eyes wide. Then he almost shut them while he arched his eye-brows. He looked piercingly at me, then inhaled deeply, took a 90: turn and stood completely still for a few seconds, uttered no words. He did not answer verbally, instead a strong wave of loving energy covered me until I felt my legs loose their strength. We continued to wash the car slowly and in silence. Therefore, love have not intention.

The last recording of K.'s words seems to indicate that the loving and intelligent Energy he talks about, did have a conditioning program, as had happened before with Jesus Christ. Krishnaji did show three general conditionings for which he paid a high price. Probably it was the price that Intelligence has to pay to ignorance in order to manifest itself without leaving signs of its passing on this Earth.

The first conditioning was his Victorian upper-class education and the influence of the people that surrounded him in his early years. The second arose from his total denial of followers, disciples and organisations. His definite rejection of what had happened 2000 years before and what has followed ever since, until the present day. The third was his constant battle against Indian traditions with its gurus, teachers, disciples and especially all dependence, blind obedience and submission. How can gurus really have any importance at all? If someone is a real or false guru, it is only a problem to himself. If the seeker is not a true seeker, what does it matter what the guru is? And if the seeker is authentic, then it will not matter at all if the guru is false. The only things that matters is the nature of discontent.

Trying to avoid repeating the old error and fighting the third conditioning, K. was obliged to say things in a very particular way. He was constantly preventing these mistakes from happening and thus he limited his words and lost the freedom to name what is as it is. He thus, fell into a self-created trap and this bred much confusion around him, caused psychological paralysis and heart constipation. His Victorian education made him deeply respectful of formalities and fearful of "what would be said if..." With these three conditionings dominating, he never really permitted the schools to flower into more than mere copies of other hundreds of schools: maybe good at formal academics but weighed down by prejudices, hypocrisy and cynicism. Is it unavoidable that hypocrisy and cynicism exist in relationship and education?

Whoever concludes that I may be criticising or attacking K. is totally mistaken. I am only describing facts, just as K. loved to do. When I came into personal contact with K. in 1962 and then from 1971 onwards, I had only read one of his books: the 1948 talks translated into Spanish as "The knowledge of oneself".

At the beginning of our relationship, I knew no English. I was fortunate, because I was forced to pay deep attention to what was behind his words. During the K. talks I was deeply interested in "where" he spoke from. I was aware of all the movements, specially of his tongue, which were very unusual and which taught me fundamental things. I followed his hands as they gestured, observed his eye movements and the way he used his body. As I attentively observed all this, I constantly tried to contact what moved and made K. utter what he was saying independently of the subject. I also paid much attention to the area surrounding his body, not the body itself. As time went by I could understand English properly, not because of special studies but as a natural development, and because of the practice above described, his words had by then become utterly uninteresting to me.

Because of the way all this happened, I was never really related to his words or to an image of K.. For me K. is a Feeling, an Energy within my heart that is The Heart. A perfume in the Heart. He has always been there and It has never stopped. Since his physical disappearance, this Energy has become still stronger. Consequently, I do not advise supposing or concluding anything about my relationship with K. and what I now write. This is not literature.

For me, Krishnaji was the most beautiful and pure being that I have ever met. I doubt there has been another like him or will ever be. Most krishnamurtians have become imprisoned by K.'s conditioning and function as automatons. They seem like human robots acting krishnamurtianly correctly or not, reacting just as Christians or Muslims do. What does it mean to act in a Krishnamurtianly correct way? Does it signify conforming to the expectations of the guru-bureaucrats in power? For them, the word understanding is highly dangerous. The lack of awareness and the insensitivity of others becomes their salvation raft.

In K. schools the day was totally filled with programmed activities. Organised to the smallest detail. The fear of leisure and creative idleness was deep. Free space and emptiness were frightening there. Every minute had to be filled with activities. There were long lists of forbidden issues.

There they worship social expectations and should be, and at the same time all krishnamurtian should not.

An obvious question arises: K. says in this cassette that during the 65 years when this marvellous Energy was vibrating in him, nobody understood what he was saying, nor felt it, nor lived it. How can it be at all possible for anybody to awaken now, without this Energy and having only some videos or cassettes with all the conditioning and limiting terminology? The answer is so obvious that it is not necessary to put it into words. Then, what can be the reason for the existence of archives, schools, correct acting robots and empty Study Centres? In 1973 in B.P., seeing the unavoidable bureaucracy that was created, I wrote a letter inviting him to put an end to his relationship with the schools and Foundations. Few days after he said to me: "Do you know why I do all this? I don't, really, I answered. In a very low voice, almost a sigh, he said: - "I know it. I know it. I do it out of love". The word love was the fact and it came with That indescribable energy which dissolves all separation or division.

Why did K. talk for so many years, transmitting an Energy that did not want to be lived or understood by others? Why did this Energy's greatest interest for everything to remain as it was and show the highest respect for the established order?

Could it be at all possible for anyone in that situation to awaken? Is not envy the leading force in such conditions? Without C.W. Leadbeater and Annie Besant who had the greatness of "seeing" and discovering him, what would have become of J. Krishnamurti?

A Christian, a Muslim, a Jew, differ very little from a Krishnamurtian, who has made K. an authority and takes his words as reference and limits. Can changes, modifications, progress or setbacks only happen in fantasy? Can what already happened be changed? Any problem that you are capable of describing or naming, is no longer a problem. Can one modify in the future what already happened? The real change only happens in the present. It is only in the present that you can be aware of awareness of being, and for that instant you are out of the fantasy room. It is in the present that the heart beats. It cannot beat in the future, if it is not beating now.

For awareness of awareness of being to take place, you must cease in all your desires to change or modify the world-you and you must accept unconditionally your sentence. You are condemned to be as you are and not the idea they sold to you, that you would have to become... something so they can exploit you.

In August 1929, Krishnamurti dissolved the Order of the Star, and among other things he said: "I have now decided to disband the Order. You can form other organisations and expect someone else. With that I am not concerned. Nor with creating new cages or new decorations for those cages. My only concern is to set men absolutely, unconditionally free."

Almost 65 years after this speech, he closes his life with the recording above transcribed and leaves a dozen schools and the K. Foundations. Are they all supposed to live the teachings and try to propagate a message that never existed and thus is impossible to understand and live? A few years after his death, some of them began publishing new books never written or spoken by him. Compilations of phrases on various themes, drawn out of context. One such book correlates each day of the year with one paragraph or quote. I never know that K. was so fond and acquainted with astrology! Whatever the intention was of the persons who had the authority to do it... I avoid making the comment it deserves. Or, is the question to survive at any price?

Another basic concept in his talks, ever since that first time in the same speech in 1929, has been: "I maintain that Truth is a pathless land and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever, by any religion, by any sect. That is my view and I adhere to it absolutely and unconditionally..." Often K. affirmed that he did not know how he had arrived at Truth. He always placed the land of Truth separated and far away from all else. During 65 years or so, K. tried in the poor English language and to no avail, to explain the significance of Truth and Awareness. For that he used innumerable amount of words and symbols. His effort to separate Truth and Awareness, from human possibilities, was a never-ending endeavour.

The word is the corrupted queen in the world of duality. This means that whatever one affirms or denies, immediately gives birth to its opposite. If it is a fact that there is no path, no technique, no way towards Truth, this becomes a path, a way in itself. If you name it, you make a path and therefore it is already a false one...

In the Divine language that is Spanish, the word Truth, "verdad", does not even need a dictionary to be understood. It is formed by two verbs: "ver" that means to see, and "dar", which means to give. Do you actually need someone to tell you the meaning of Truth then? In case it is necessary and owing to its beauty, I will not resist the temptation to say it: the meaning of Truth is that to see is to give. And to give is to see.

I add if I may, that Truth is not relative. It does not mean different things in different cultures or religions or among learned or ignorant people. Wherever it is, Truth is and always will be: to see is to give. Between the seeing and the giving, there is the ego-I arguing. Calculating. Supposing. The ego-I does all this and much more, while affirming that he is searching for Truth. But as K. said, "Truth is a pathless land", you can let your ego-I rest in peace, because you will never find it.

Even if you do not have it clear by now, it is certain there is no way to travel towards something that is so near to yourself, even nearer than your own blood. This is not a symbol, an image to transmit a concept. It is a fact, a reality. Truth is not something to search for, or something far away beyond the horizon. It is much nearer than anything else. Truth is right here and now. Even before. It is necessary to be aware before.

K. also used lots of words trying to explain the meaning of Awareness. In Spanish it is "darse cuenta". The word "darse" is also formed by two verbs. The verb "Dar", to give and the verb "ser", to be. The second word is "cuenta" and it means attention, is a verbal mirror. Awareness means to give being. Awareness of awareness, "darse cuenta de ser siendo", means to give attention to one's being-being.

Speaking English did not help my beloved Krishnaji in his explanations. Neither did Queen Victoria, nor his own battling against gurus and Jesus heritage.

Another key point in his teachings was his war against positive thinking. He spent most of his life describing the horrors of positive thinking and the world it created. He pretended at the same time and with equal intensity, to promote the idea that at the end of negative thinking we would come to "It". This has become a weapon in the hands of many followers that use negative thinking to dominate and subject students to a kind of affective starvation.

The authority of negative thinking is not seen as an authority. Now, that K.'s loving energy has gone, only the cold and empty concepts remain as conditionings. An immense error.

The negative thinking is the Buddhist form of describing what something is not, in order to understand what it is. It leads nowhere. Negative thinking need to be used in serious scientific investigation, but psychologically, when dealing with the human mind, the negative description only leads to psychological paralysis and heart constipation.

It is accurate to say that both, negative and positive thinking should be equally left aside and without discrimination. It should be done now. This very instant. If you have the strength and determination to do it, you have cancelled all your defence system. You will be totally naked and alone. Then, what is left? Only seeing and feeling exist. Between you and the others there are no arguments, no barriers. There is no such thing as forbidden or permitted. There is only being and silence.

I am not interpreting, I can actually see and feel that what you call life, society, the others, is your very own heart. The way you relate to others is the relationship you have with your own heart. Everything that separates one from another, separates one from his own heart. Your reaction against others is a reaction against you own heart. You react from the center of your own heart, and that is the air you breathe. It is not a concept, a symbol. It is an actual fact and absolutely tangible to anyone who wants to see it. You can see it here and now.

Variations on the same theme: "Are you the world and the world is you?" "Is the observer the observed?" Or you are not the world nor is the world you and you are neither the observer nor the observed? In the world of opposites, of duality, both things are true and false. True if you live them and false if you repeat them.

I have the strong impression that the three conditionings mentioned above said were assumed by K., though I do not really know. I do know that he had the power and the mental speed to avoid anyone from reflecting his human contradictions. He was a very sensitive instrument, so magnificent and totally given to the Divine Energy that permeated him and that was tangible around him. This was so strong that it made it practically impossible for him to be aware of his other human side, sometimes too visible and poor to others.

I feel it is necessary to try to show more what the mind sees. There is a "line" that divides right from wrong and this is marked by necessity. What is necessary is totally outside these boundaries of right and wrong. Opposites, duality, arise from the unnecessary. Ignorance considers necessary what is not. Another and more subtle frontier of right and wrong is the presence or absence of affection and love. When something is done with affection it is good and when it is done without it, it is bad. For example: if we consider the sexual act, lived without affection, it becomes a habit, a routine, an escape, or an obligation. When the same sexual act is done with affection-love, it is a communion that can be sublime.

In the mind, there is another deep problem that arises from the long history of ideas, idealisations, concepts and prejudices of all kinds that humanity has produced. Firstly an idea is projected as to how something should be and then starts an enormous effort to comply to this idea. Since the times of Caesar's wife, who not only had to be decent, but also had to appear to be so. We have created different ideal models and the constant demonstration of the virtues inherent in the chosen one, occupies most of our lives. Whether we are politicians, fathers or mothers, priests, lawyers, veterinarians, athletes, everyone is complying constantly to such models. The Buddha's, Jesus's, Krishnamurti's and all saints or enlightened beings, they have all been smothered with our own ideas of virtue or other characteristics we projected onto them. Once the ideal formula is known, it is not easy to tell the real from the false.

Humanity has always tried to create a relationship between what is said and what is done. It has tried to discover the contradiction by looking through the keyhole and finding something that invalidates what is said. As if words could have any value...

Humanity has given great value to words. Could the problem be hidden within this? How many people realise that words are only symbols that are used as a substitution for facts? How many are at present aware that the word is not the thing?

The word is never the fact, whether it be a material or a mental one. Is it necessary to remind you that the word love has nothing to do with the fact of loving? And the words freedom, death, life, suffering, sex or table, have they anything to do with the facts they represent?

Can the problem arise from giving to words a value that they don't have? Are you capable of not naming? Can you stop thoughts?

We should question what relationship exists between justice and the structure of trials and legal decisions. Obviously, none. What relationship exists between democracy and the fact that we relinquish power and freedom to another when we vote?

Near Krishnaji I could feel in my heart a love-compassion that is impossible to describe. His capacity to make it flow was so powerful that he seemed to do so whenever he wished to. The writer not only felt it when near him, but sometimes could even see this energy around K..

Whatever K. would do or say, even if false or mistaken or offensive and violent, this loving energy was always present and flowing. I feel really sorry for those who having been near him physically, did not perceive or feel such great loving energy.

In 1995 I heard for the first time that Rajagopal's daughter, Radha, had written a biographical book in which she describes the relationship of her mother Rosalind and her father with Krishnaji. I had never even known of its existence until January 95 when I visited Elena Greene. She did not have it and I went out to buy it, but in the end I could not find it. With Elena G. I have had a relationship of deep affection and sympathy since the very first day when we met in Brockwood Park in the early seventies.

It is impossible to know and synthesise who Radha's father was and his real relationship with K.. We can say, just to give an idea, that he gave up his brilliant and promising life as a lawyer and professor in order to dedicate himself entirely to K. for more than 40 years. He directed the publishing of K.'s works and organised all that involved his public life. He kept his word given to Dr. Annie Besant that he would dedicate his life to the World Teacher. It is difficult or impossible to know what happened and what separated them.

The biggest absurdity to which arrogance lead, is to believe that one can know what has happened between two or more people. Even being an eyewitness, it is not possible to have the minimal idea of the amount of objective and non-objective facts, that come together in a single instant. Because this error is one of the most habituals movements that the human mind makes, it happen almost inadvertently. It is the so-called freedom of opinion.

A year went by until a friend in Spain lent me the book. As often happens to me with books, I did not feel inclined to read it. I can seldom read a book for more than a few minutes at a time. Instead, because of its importance, I read it in a few days with interest. I do not have doubts about its veracity...

Better to said that I did not spend one second to considered if what she said had happened or not. It is irrelevant. I have been told that it has caused havoc among krishnamurtians and is not well looked on K.'s Schools. The more pious don't want to read it.

"Lives in the shadow with J. Krishnamurti" seemed a book... maybe necessary to fill gaps and dark areas in the pious official biographies. An illuminated being has not private life and does not stop being such because he is drinking tea, coffee, wine or having sexual relations.

I still ask myself how Radha could accumulate so much hate against Krishnaji? What an opportunity lost! She had also changed and retwisted things as only hate can do.

Rajagopal's daughter wrote a book that had made me come nearer to K.. I could even say that it made me come into deeper contact with K.. Much more than I had ever been before and more than I could have even dreamt possible. Many people pretend to relate to life through images and ideas. For them the K. described in her book is a deception. Their image of K. has been broken. Thank God it has happened.

Those who have read "The Fourth Movement" will have a more complete view of K. and maybe they will discover other ways of relating to Krishnaji.

Was K. an incompetent? Those who hide inside their fantasy room, are prisoners of the security provided by their defence system. It will be impossible for such a person to relate to another. Not even to his own self. In the fantasy room there can only exist conflict and contradictions. Have you ever been related with K.? Have you ever been outside your own fantasy room, aware of your self? If you have never been outside your own fantasy room and you have the honesty to admit this, then it might be possible to see the following: that you are constantly in it, inventing stories of every kind and through their repetition, you are eventually convinced of their veracity.

Whoever has had a relationship with K. can answer the question in any way they want. What does it mean to be in relationship with someone or something? From inside the fantasy room there can only exist dependency and some small interchange of pleasure-pain, just as prisoners in jail can have some exchange through the cell bars.

For the writer, Krishnaji was definitely not an incompetent. He was a Master of the most indescribable efficiency. What at some time of my life I considered to be his failings, his limitations and his misunderstandings, I have discovered later that they were mine. His passivity, sometimes exasperating to me, only hid an endless wisdom. It is also true that some of his so-called human functionings, as seen from the fantasy room often seemed to contradict the above. Within the fantasy room anything can be justified or contradicted. To contradict: to say against oneself.

In page 300 of the book by Radha, she affirms: "...One day history will reveal everything, but the division in Krishnamurti himself will cast a very dark shadow on all he has said or written" and then she asks a hypothetical question: "Because the first thing the readers will say is: if he cannot live it, who can?". What an extraodinary arrogance!

Never history reveal reality or events like really was happened. It's merely impossible. It's just a nonsense. Only commercial willing.

This is the "confession" and the acceptance by Radha of having been unable during her life of feeling love in her heart, and thus having been unable to feel the love that flowed in Krishnaji. She should have felt it more than anyone else, if one thinks about the amount of time she spent in his arms since birth. (?!)

So the question: "if he could not live it, who will ever be able to?", is not a real question and as an affirmation it makes no sense.

She acknowledge, without fatigue nor ridiculous sense, that she is a woman made of wood. "Invasion of the bodysnatchers"???.

Love is felt by the one who loves. The one who loves is not the love. Who feels it is love's instrument. As the guitar is the instrument of the music, but it is not the music... and without a guitar there is no music. Without the instrument there is no feeling love and neither can music be heard. Love is felt by the one who loves, and if you are waiting for another to love you, you have missed the train of life. Mrs. Radha, in her urge to defend her parents and discredit Krishnaji, has missed a link: to feel love.

Feel love loving now. Other things are fairy tales. Angles, points of view, perspectives, are always very incomplete and small though they intend to express the whole. Whoever can have the strength like K., to be simultaneously the totality and absolutely nothing, can have as many personalities as he wishes or needs. What really marks a difference is what he transmits. The lovingness that was in K. never left him, no matter his personality at the moment. He did sometimes take on someone else's behaviour, but transitorily and for some purpose.

When one is not capable of being simultaneously the whole and nothing, one falls prisoner of the ego-I. One tries with desperation to change gears and to go forward and back. Back and forward. Yes and no. Yes but no. No, but yes. Doubts without end in which one pretends to decide, what was already decided: not to be. The ego-I divides not being, into to be or not to be and Shakespeare made it famous.

But above all these descriptions, Krishnaji just like Jesus, is a feeling in the heart and is not an idea or a sum of concepts.

Whoever longs truly for freedom, has no other road than the one that leads past his own heart, travelling naked and alone. During 65 years K. worked very hard to leave a door or even a window or better still an empty space within your own heart. Do use it now.

Life from the instant of birth until the moment of death is a labyrinth. The sense of life is to find the way out before we die. The earlier the better. Where is the way out? How does one escape from the labyrinth? There is no exit or escape. It all lies in the entrance. It exists before one enters, in the moment before entering it.

If we die without having found the exit, then we feed the labyrinth as we did during our lifetime. Ignorance and darkness will continue. That is what makes the world remain as it is.

To write without mistakes, with a correct syntax, organising cleverly words held in memory is something anyone with some training can do. This is not my case. I write quickly and without doubts or effort, seeing in between the words what is being described. This is something else altogether different. Knowledge, consisting of deductions, suppositions, comparisons, conclusions and opinions, has to be demonstrated and needs accomplices to back it up. This is what science is. Seeing, needs nothing of this.

I don't want to leave any doubts which I do not have, on what I see and feel about J. Krishnamurti.

All that K. may have been able to say and do during his life, does not have any value, sense or meaning, isolated from the loving energy that flowed through him.

This something that is not something and that is unnameable, that flowed through Krishnaji, was love, compassion, intelligence and beauty. The intensity was such, that to give an idea I make an absurd suggestion: imagine that it never occurred before, and that it cannot happen again with the same intensity. These are forms of saying and naming what is unnameable. The being-being is always there. It is not something that comes and goes.

It also happened in Arunachala, India. Twenty five years after Sri Ramana Maharshi left his body, the same powerful compassion, love, intelligence, beauty and silence were present and alive.

What is illusion has never existed and never will, what is Real has never stopped Being.