Krishnamurti was not somebody to be followed. Although he stated facts, he was right in saying that nobody can have a guru while simultaneously being a light to themselves. Therefore, it isn’t his words which we should be memorizing. In fact we shouldn’t be memorizing any of it. So how about right here, right now, we all inquire into what it means to be a light to yourself.
Being a light to yourself isn’t something you achieve. Like, all of a sudden there is a realization, and you don’t have to do anything else… No, it has to be a constant movement, something in action, which is being sustained. Or am I wrong somehow?
Being a light to yourself doesn’t mean that you are your own authority, does it? Authority implies duality which wastes the energy that is required to see the false as false.
So then, no recognization of it. Authority basically doesn’t exist. That would make the facts of life be a lot more simple to see then. We are all on equal footing, it is simply our perception.
The “light side” being something to obtain is an illusion. When what is and what should be are the same thing. Or is it when what should be isn’t there at all? I suppose it’s means the same.
Clearly “authority” is never a concern for us. It is a digression from our main concern, and i.e., our deficiencies and our efforts to change it. So “authority”, for us, is a false concern. And the fact of the matter is, we, as we are, wouldn’t know what to do the next moment if you were free from authority. Most likely you would lose your ‘sanity’ or perhaps trip and fall and that will be the end of it. Jumping into bandwagons doesn’t really help.