ENERGY BLOCKAGE REMOVAL
|2005 AND 2006|
VOL. 1, COME FOLLOW YOURSELF
Gods in Exile
WHO PREPARED THE WAY FOR YOU?
NOBODY HAS PREPARED THE WAY FOR ME, and neither am I preparing the way for anybody. This has to be understood.
There are four possibilities. One, the oldest and the most used, is what happened in Jesus' case. John the Baptist prepared the way; the disciple preceded the Master. It has its benefits, but it has its own limitations and defects also -- bound to be so. When the disciple precedes the Master he will create limitations which belong to him and the Master will have to function within those limitations. It has its benefits because when the Master comes he will not be worried about preparing the ground -- the ground will be ready; he can immediately start sowing the seeds -- but the ground will be ready according to the disciple. It cannot be according to the Master, so he will have to function under limitations. That's what created the whole trouble in Jesus' story.
John the Baptist is a different type of man from Jesus, a very fiery man, almost in flames -- and always in flames. He uses a language which fits him, but which can never fit Jesus. Jesus is very silent, very peaceful. John the Baptist is not that type of man.
He is a prophet, Jesus is a messiah, and the difference between a prophet and a messiah is great. A prophet is a religious man, deeply religious, but functioning like a politician: using the language of revolution, using a very violent language -- arousing the hearts and beings of men, stirring them. A prophet is like an earthquake. A messiah is very soothing, silent like a Himalayan valley -- lazy, sleepy. You can rest in a messiah. With a prophet, you will always be on the go.
Because of this, John the Baptist used the terminology of politics: revolution, the kingdom of God. And even that 'kingdom' has to be taken by force. It has to be, in fact. attacked. He was misunderstood because whenever you use the language of the outside world for the inner world, you are bound to be misunderstood. The politicians became afraid: "About what kingdom is this man talking? about what revolution? What does he mean by saying that the kingdom has to be taken by force?"
John the Baptist is very impatient. He wants immediate change; he cannot wait. He created the atmosphere in which Jesus had to function. John the Baptist died in imprisonment. he was beheaded by the rulers -- he was absolutely misunderstood -- but nobody was at fault: he himself was.
But because of him.... And Jesus was to follow him, Jesus was a disciple of his own disciple. He was initiated by John the Baptist because John the Baptist preceded him. He became linked. Then he had to use the same terminology. It was almost certain that he would be misunderstood.
John the Baptist died in prison, beheaded. Jesus died on the cross -- killed, murdered. John the Baptist was also talking about the kingdom of God. Of course he was not aggressive, but the very terminology appeared political. He was a very innocent man, nothing to do with politics.
But John the Baptist helped in a way. Jesus could work because all the disciples of John the Baptist were ready to receive him, he was not a stranger. John the Baptist had created a small opening, a small clearance in the wilderness of humanity. When he came he was received; there was a home ready for him -- a few people receptive to him. That would not have been possible if he had come alone without a predecessor. But the home was made by John the Baptist and the disciples whom he attracted were attracted by him. That created the trouble.
This is the oldest format: the Master is preceded by a disciple who functions as a predecessor and prepares the ground. Because of its defects and limitations, there has been another, the opposite.
Ramakrishna is succeeded by Vivekanand; he is not preceded by anybody. The Master comes first, then the disciple follows. This has its own benefits because the Master creates the whole climate, the Master creates the whole possibility of growth -- how the thing is to go. He gives language, pattern, direction, dimension.
But there are defects because the Master is infinite and when the disciple comes he is very finite. Then the disciple has to choose, because he cannot move in all directions. The Master may be showing all the directions, he may be leading you towards infinity, but when the disciple comes he has to choose, he has to select, and then he forces his own pattern on it.
Ramakrishna was succeeded by Vivekanand. Ramakrishna is one of the greatest flowerings that has ever happened; Vivekanand is the prophet. Ramakrishna is the messiah, but Vivekanand set the whole trend. Vivekanand's own inclinations were extrovert, not introvert. His own inclinations were more towards social reformation, political change. He was more interested in bringing riches to the people, destroying poverty and hunger and starvation. He turned the whole trend around.
The Ramakrishna Mission is not true to Ramakrishna; the Ramakrishna Mission is true to Vivekanand. Now the Ramakrishna Mission functions as a social service. Wherever there is famine, they are there to serve people. Whenever there is an earthquake, they are there to serve people. Whenever there is flood -- and there is no lack of these things in India -- they are there. They are good servants, but Ramakrishna's inward revolution has completely disappeared into the desert land of Vivekanand.
Ramakrishna functioned more freely than Jesus because there was no pattern for him. He lived more spontaneously than Jesus. There was no confinement anywhere; all the directions were open to him. He could fly just like a bird in the sky, no limitations existed. But then comes the disciple. He organizes it. He organizes, of course, in his own way.
Both ways have their benefits, both have their defects. Then there is a third possibility which has never been used before. Krishnamurti is the first in the world to have used the third possibility. The third possibility is to deny both: the predecessors and the successors both. It is negative.
Krishnamurti's method is VIA NEGATIVA. So first he denied those who prepared the ground for him, That was the only way to get out of the limitations. He denied the whole Theosophical Movement: Annie Besant, Leadbetter -- they were the people who prepared the whole ground and they worked hard for Krishnamurti. They were the John the Baptists for him. They created a vast opportunity in the world for him, but then he looked, when he was ready, and he saw the defects and the limitations: that the same would be the case as happened with Jesus. He simply denied. He denied that they created a ground or that there was any need to create the ground.
While denying them he was aware that he had to deny his messiahship also -- because if he said that he is the messiah then he could deny the predecessors, but the successors would follow. Then the same trouble would be there as it had been with Ramakrishna. So he denied: "There is nobody who has preceded me and there is nobody who is going to succeed me." He denied Leadbetter, Annie Besant and the Theosophical Movement, and for his whole life he has been denying that anybody is going to become his heir or successor.
This has its own beauty, but its problems also. You may be free, very free, absolutely free -- because there is no limitation on either side, before or after -- but your freedom is in negativity. You don't create. Your freedom comes to no fulfillment, it is futile -- you don't help. It is as if somebody is so conscious about not falling ill -- he continuously works and remains aware not to fall ill -- that he forgets that sometimes you have to enjoy the health also. Otherwise you may not fall ill but the very awareness that "one should not fall ill and must remain aware" becomes an illness of a sort.
Krishnamurti is so much alert about it -- that no bondage should be created anywhere, no fetters should be created anywhere -- that he worked hard, but couldn't help anybody. It was beautiful for himself, but it has not been beneficial for humanity. He is a free man, but his freedom is his alone. That freedom could not become a taste in thousands and thousands of throats; it could not create an urge. He has remained a pinnacle of freedom, but no bridge exists. You can look at him -- he is like a beautiful painting or beautiful poetry -- but nothing can be done about it, it doesn't change you. He has broken all the bridges. This is the third possibility -- never tried before. He is the first to try it.
I have tried the fourth. That has also never been tried. The fourth is that half of my life I have worked myself as John the Baptist, and now half of my life I will function as a Christ. That is the fourth possibility: to prepare the ground and to sow it also, to sow the seeds.
There are problems about it also; it is impossible to find a way which has no problems. It has its own benefits, it has its own defects. The benefit is that I am both, so I am, in a way, totally free. Whatsoever I have done in my first step I have done knowing perfectly well what the second step is going to be. John the Baptist in me was perfectly aware of the Christ who was going to follow, they were in a deep harmony. They are one person; there is no problem about it. So John the Baptist in me could not create any limitations for the Jesus to follow -- a total freedom.
And no Vivekanand is going to follow me. I am my own Vivekanand and I am my own John the Baptist, so nobody can put a limitation on me when I am gone. And I am positive: if Krishnamurti is VIA NEGATIVA, I am VIA POSITIVA. I have accepted both the roles and I have a certain freedom even Krishnamurti cannot have. He has to always deny, and denial in itself becomes a worry, a deep anxiety. I have nothing to deny; I just have to say yes to the total.
But there are problems, and the greatest problem is that I will always be contradictory. Whatsoever John the Baptist has said, the Christ in me has to contradict it. I will always be contradictory.
For many years I was moving around, reaching to every person, whomsoever had any capacity to grow. Nobody ever thought that someday the wanderer in me would simply sit in his closed room and would not even come out of the room -- contradictory! For years I was talking in terms of revolution: of course, John the Baptist has to talk that way. Then suddenly I stopped talking about revolution, the society, the welfare of humanity; I forgot all about it. Now only the individual exists.
Contradictory. If you look you can find two currents parallel, and the first current has been continuously contradicted by the other current. For those many years the Acharya, the John the Baptist, was doing one thing. Now the Bhagwan, something totally different, is doing a very contradictory thing.
It will be impossible later on to decide whether this man was one or two. And I suspect that somebody is going to suspect someday that this man was two, because the contradictions are so naked and there is no way to resolve them. This is the trouble with me -- but somebody had to try the fourth and I am happy that I tried it. On this earth everything has its own problem, so you cannot escape from the problem. From somewhere or other the problem will enter, so it is only a question of choice -- whatsoever fits you.
This fits me perfectly. To be free to contradict is a great phenomenon because then I am not worried at all about what I say. I don't keep any accounts, I need not be worried about what I said yesterday. I can contradict: this is a great freedom.
And if you love me I know that you will find somewhere deep within me that the contradictions are already resolved. But that will happen only to those who trust, that will happen only to those who come closer and closer to me. All the contradiction is on the surface: deep down within me they are already resolved because I am one.
I functioned as John the Baptist; now I will function as Christ. So nobody has preceded me, nobody is going to succeed me. I am a perfect circle.