This message from Saurab was originally posted on the email list J_Krishnamurti, and thank you very much, Saurab.
K wrote the following in one of his books:
“It was not the quietness of exhaustion, or of relaxation, but a stillness that was very alert. There was no point from which the mind was still; there was no observer of this tranquillity; the experiencer was wholly absent.”
Now, if the experiencer was wholly absent, how could K talk about it later ? The recording of the experience must have taken place with reference to an entity who could later recall what was recorded…. But when K says that the experiencer was wholly absent, it does not make sense to me…..
Comment by Wry: It might be worthwhile to inquire into what the “experiencer” who was reading those words was experiencing, to look carefully at the dynamic of creating a really vivid experience, even what what some might call (and K sometimes did use this word), a “sacred” experience, through the use of imagery and making inaccurate correlations, The poetry of his language in conjunction with a distortion of physical reality was obviously in some way effective in attracting and deeply resonating with many readers, myself at one time very much included. Illusion (and delusion:-) can be very alluring and seductive.