RELATED DOCUMENT: UNCOVERING OF X'S LIES [COMING UP] Outline of X's lies misrepresentations... I already sent the letter -- I may publish a anonimized version of it online.
Those
of you who "know" me for a long time may know that it takes a lot for
me to write the kind of document you find herein. I don't escalate
things easily, but this one is really bad.
Last year X acted
totally inappropriately in a number of ways (e.g. making foundation
policy, threatening, bullying) and demonstrated a disturbing level of
illusion and a self-made reality which was out of touch with facts, but
I let it go.
Recently it repeated again, but in a much worse
degree, involving physical violence, profanity, and total disrespect
for the space of the library he's entrusted with. It is now time to say
something to you about it -- not as a complaint, but for your
information.
This letter is solely intended to inform you of a
side of the behavior of your librarian which is not always revealed to
the powerful and rich.
Krishnamurti was not a vulgar man. The
least the foundations can do is to put people in charge of running his
libraries who are not vulgar. But having been close to K is apparently
used as a criteria for staffing decisions. All this will change in a
hundred years, so I'm not worried :-)
THE INCIDENT ============ It's
a long story. I was invited to participate in a talk in one of the
libraries. Before the talk I was talking to a friend and her adorable
9-month old son when your employee rudely interrupted this peaceful,
affectionate exchange and shouted from the back of the room, "Reza come
here".
Absolutely, 100% unprovoked, he demanded in his loud
voice, as though he was addressing the whole place, that I should
apologize for something I had written some years ago. Of course I feel
no regret whatsoever about what I had written and last time he had an
emotional eruption about the same subject ("the earlier incident"), I
invited a mediated session and asked him to point out exactly what he
has a problem with and I will review it. He failed to do so but
objected to anyone outside the foundations making comments about the
work of the foundation. This is also an invalid point and the
best proof is a recent case where I pointed out something which
resulted in a foundation resending their group mail and deleting a
reference to a tabloid written about K.
I have documented both
this and "the earlier incident" in further detail. If you like a copy
let me know. I rewrote the event in this email in order to present it
in a briefer format.
ILLEGAL ACTIVITY: PHYSICAL VIOLENCE. AND PROFANITY ============================================= The
vulgarity didn't stop there. I invited him to carry his (irrational)
argument outside but he continued, clearly aiming to make me react
which I did not. I asked him if he's representing the person he's
speaking for, and in return he said, right in the middle of the
K-library while he was on official duty, "F--- You" (100% unprovoked).
I felt intimidated and began to move away. He took a step, turned and
blocked me, and hit me in the chest. This is against the law. He
provoked me to respond at his level: to cuss or hit him back, but I
absolutely did not, because that is not my style -- I remained
calm, in total disbelief of witnessing how illusion can lead to
violence.
Because I am friends with the foundation, I did not
file a police report but another person might have, and you run that
risk with this kind of behavior.
WITNESS ======== The
discussion was wonderful. It was recorded and you can hear it if you
wish. Some of you were there. After the meeting one of the people
who had seen this saga came up to me and said the librarian's behavior
was a shame. He called his act and the foundation as "Fascist". I don't
know about Fascist but your employee appeared mentally imbalanced.
OUTSIDE ======== On
the way out, the librarian had his hat and coat out and as I left, he
followed me. He grabbed my arm. I was outside the door. He was inside.
I said: "don't touch me" and ran out of fear. One of the trustees was
walking towards us and was the only one out there. I told him,
instinctively, as I ran, that this guy is attacking me. I did not know
any better. An hour earlier he had attacked me verbally and hit me in
the chest. If he was so violent inside, I would not want to be with
this emotionally unbalanced, violent guy outside in a dark night.
NEXT DAY ======== The
next day, after a mutual friend / trustee talked to him, he approached
me to talk -- I requested a physical distance due to fear of another
physical attack -- he continued his crazy demand, but after I reminded
him of his crazy behavior the day before, he not only apologized but he
totally retracted his demand that I should apologize for what I had
written. It did not sound sincere as it seemed rooted in fear, but it
was helpful of course because when a person sees their wrong action, if
they do, it's a step in the right direction.
He rationalized his
grabbing my arm as I left the building as a friendship gesture. I don't
know of any culture where cussing, hitting, and backstabbing (which
he's done plenty of in his efforts to win political points and other
goodies) are acts of friendship.
WRONG ROLE? ============ This
person has no respect for the space of the library whatsoever. Do you
think he’s placed in the right role? He has positive qualities and
talents, but it's a typical management error to put the right person on
the wrong job, which ends up exposing them to many risks and problems.
So, as a friendly suggestion, you may wish to revisit how you allocate
your resources.
Krishnamurti's legacy might deserve better than to have an irrational vulgar person in charge of his library.
OTHER NOTES ============ -
It is undoubtedly not his business to make the demand he made because
he absolutely had nothing to do with it, and no such role was delegated
to him by anyone.
- What he says about my writings is very
cluttered. Unnecessarily and unfortunately, he has churned the subject
so much in his head, and in gossip, that he has developed a number of
highly illusive, distorted, senseless, and untrue conclusions about the
subject. At times he engaged in the old trick of “shoot the messenger”
and character attacks to win points. Remember how K warned about
pitfalls of concentration on the man vs. the message? That’s a long
story… So take everything he says on the subject with a grain of
salt. My published writings are all on my site -- I urge you to read
and think for yourself. If there is a trustee who think it is wrong to
write (one condemns them without having claimed he has not read them),
that outsiders have no business commenting on the foundation, there are
several trustees/staff in different foundations, and others, who
appreciate my writings and find some value in them. Anyway, I don’t
write to win appreciation.
- Even if he had a perfectly
reasonable case for discussion, it would be inappropriate and
disrespectful to the space of the Library for him to make such a public
scene. The fact that he was being irrational and unreasonable in his
demands (proof is the next day he completely withdrew his demands for
which he made that whole scene the prior day) makes it more
disconcerting.
- The offense took place while he was on official duty, working and representing the foundation.
-
It is extremely alarming that he takes the liberty to make imaginary
policies for the foundation in order to bully others (this is explained
in the expanded version of this as stated above), and then falsify the
foundation's stance in his communication to public. He has abused his
power as such on more than one occasion. Is having been close to K, and
apparently having security in one's job for life, a license for this
reckless behavior which exposes the foundation to serious risks?
-
There are a number of people who are reluctant to go to K library
because of the librarian's attitude. This was never the case in the
last 28 years. Perhaps the comfort and job security together with a
feeling of possessing K, a self-imposed sense of authority due to
proximity to K, lots of illusive thinking, emotional and mental
imbalance, deep frustrations, being put in the wrong role, or whatever
it might be, has created a situation that management ought to be aware
of. That is the sole purpose of this letter. I have no claims but will
be happy to answer any questions.
Best Wishes Reza Ganjavi 646-238-0212
THE LONG VERSION
[ This was the first letter I wrote but it was too long so I shortened it and didn't send this version]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This
is written in the utmost spirit of friendship. It is an act of
friendship and not a claim or a legal threat. I hope that this report
will help you mitigate your future risks better because what happened
to me could happen to someone else who might react differently. I could
have pressed charges against your librarian but didn’t. Someone else
might.
The librarian of a Krishnamurti library recently had an
emotional explosion which led to him polluting the space of the library
with profanity, threats, and illegal battery. The matter was 100%
unprovoked. The following article contains the sequence of events,
opinions on possible motives, and discussion on why this reaction was
utterly crazy and unjustified.
Presently the foundations are
faced with a challenge which will not be a long term one: Do people who
were close to K get a special privilege, and are resources allocated
based such a privilege, or based on their character and qualifications?
Everyone has talents and the challenge of good management is to
utilize those talents effectively, if there is a need for it, and if
not, to put people in the wrong roles usually leads to disasters.
PREFACE This
document is solely intended to inform you of certain facts regarding a
couple of incidents in relationship to the management of the library,
and simply share with you a set of observations through the eyes of a
fellow human, a professional management consultant, and someone who
cares for this work. There is no hidden agenda, and no axe to grind.
The first incident occurred recently. The second occurred last year and
is only recollected here to indicate that the recent incident was not
an isolated event.
In the past, the organization has been
quite “political”, and facts were twisted to suit political agendas and
power play. But it appears that something has changed and it is moving
in a good direction. Hopefully, you strive to make the foundation free
from the kinds of weaknesses which K challenges us as humans to be free
from, such as psychological image making. And as a philosophical place,
it ought to strive to find truth and not settle for anything less.
That
has not always been the case, and possibly the following incident is an
example of the residue of this attitude, and consequences of fake power
which is assumed by proximity to K.
INTRODUCTION I have
been a victim of bullying by an employee of the foundation, X, on at
least a couple of occasions, and that doesn’t count the number of times
he’s backstabbed me for his political gains which I ignored. I can
handle bullying but not at the vulgar and uncivil level the bully
intends. I deal with it rationally – as long as there’s some
rationality left in the world – and attempt to find out what the
problem is, and if it’s solvable to take actions to resolve it, and if
not, move forward.
Your bully shouts, cusses, threatens, hits,
and engages in vulgar behavior which I do not engage in because it’s
not my style. Such behavior is the result of lack of clarity and
rationality. When reason runs out violence begins. Truth has its own
power; it never needs violence to supplement it.
In life there
are people we befriend, find synergy, and enjoy spending time with, and
those whom we acquaint but not necessarily need to deal with them. I
have “known” X for a long time and have always been respectful to him
but in too many incidents it was proven to me, that he’s not a kind of
guy I could trust; we have different values, and different
temperaments.
The respect I mentioned was a basic respect we
owe to everyone: to relate without an image. In both of the incidents
below, I entered the situation with inner quietness, with no shadow of
the past, and with affection for X. Both unprovoked situations were
turned into bitter confrontations which I refused to get dragged into
at the level he intended.
My concerns which led me to write this, are: 1)
That this person may have been placed in a wrong role. In
organizational behavior it is well known that the best of people put in
the wrong role could create problems for the individual and the
organization. That is for you to look into if you wish to. I have no
intentions to insist on this possibility. 2) That having been close to K by itself is not a privilege that can be abused. 3) I believe that the space that is guarded by X deserves much more respect that it is getting now. 4)
Continuation of this type of behavior poses the organization at
undesired risks. I was actually hit by X, absolutely unprovoked, and as
far as I know this is against the law. Of course, being friend with you
and this work, I’d rather just to report this to you and leave it in
your hands.
INCIDENT 1 – PROVOCATION & ILLEGAL CONTACT Recently
I visited the library as per an invitation by a speaker who was there.
Met X upon entry, with no image, no fear, no past, with greeted him
with affection.
About 10 or more minutes before the program
starts I was talking to a friend and adoring her beautiful, precious,
alert, 9-month old little king when X rudely interrupted this tender
exchange by proclaiming in a loud voice from the back of the room:
“Reza come here” and continued with the same volume, issuing a decree
that I should apologize to Y, a wealthy woman, ex-trustee, who was
actually sitting next to the little king’s mother and there was a
peaceful atmosphere until X erupted. For what? For something I had
written three years ago which had nothing to do X and there was nothing
in it that was false, malicious, defamatory, or anything that I regret
or should apologize for, and plenty of time has past since its
publication for any claims, but X was not even mentioned in it!
I
suggested to him, that out of respect for others who didn’t need to
hear this loud, emotionally charged, irrational decree – and out of
respect for the library’s space – to take this to another room. But he
was on a roar and continued his offensive and open invitation for
confrontation by saying you’re almost not welcome here and you know it.
No, I don’t know it at all, and in fact I was welcomed there by the
owner on a number of occasions, and for this event, I was invited there
by the speaker himself and felt very welcomed by the love of many
friends there. That happens to be against the librarian’s dithered
sentiments but the librarian can’t make policy. Policy is made based on
rationality and facts not like and dislike based on a bunch of illusory
images.
He publicly provoked me to respond to him in his
vulgar way but I did not because I cannot relate to that vulgarity. He
was obviously intending on making a public scene that would lead me to
react and then he’d have a case against me. As it stands he has zilch,
nothing, against me except a bunch of illusions.
Instead, the
response he got was my saying “you’re entitled to your opinion”. I
meant it. But I do know as a fact that his opinion regarding this
matter is not the foundation’s opinion. He’s obviously making it up and
the proof is simply the fact that there is absolutely no ground for it
whatsoever, has never been, and will never be. In the event that a
person is not welcome it is the responsibility of the organization to
communicate such a sentiment and specify the specific reason. For the
librarian to communicate his irrational emotions to people as a
statement of policy is inappropriate.
The response I received from X when I told him he was entitled to his opinion was "F___ you!"
I
tried to move away from who seemed to be an out of control, mad man,
and a strong one – I truly felt scared a bit not knowing what he’d do
next – could not believe what I was witnessing – and almost by instinct
tried to move towards the front of the room where there were more
people.
X blocked my way by turning and taking a step in front
and hit me in the chest. I was bewildered but remained calm. I have a
black belt, but this situation only called for calmness. I guess he was
out of options because threatening cussing and hitting didn’t get me to
react, reciprocate, or say, do, or make a single vulgar move. I was
calm yet concerned. X left the room as I gently move away from him.
The
meeting was excellent. We spoke about deep philosophical questions of
life. The welcome spirit continued after the meeting with an old friend
appreciating one’s contributions.
WITNESS A man came up to
me after the meeting and said he saw the whole thing, how X attacked
me, said the librarian’s behavior was a shame and called it/the
foundation fascistic. The event certainly resembles something that
would happen in the Dark Ages.
AFTER THE MEETING After the
event X followed me as I was leaving, having his jacket and hat on. He
grabbed my arm as I stepped out in what appeared to be further
provocation and I ran away out of fear. If he behaved as he did inside
in front of other people, I didn’t want to imagine what he could do
outside in the dark.
NEXT DAY X walked up to me the next day
– for safety reasons I asked him to keep a distance because of the
practical image I had from yesterday’s attack (this is the right place
of images!)
I had to remind him that he hit me yesterday and he
uttered profanity in that room and grabbed me on the way out. He said
the physical contact was a gesture of friendship because “in your
culture” they touch each other. I don’t know what culture he’s talking
about but in none that I know of, what he did was a sign of friendship.
I found out that a mutual friend had talked with him and apparently it
had some effect – he apologized for using the F word and I think once
he realized the scope of his yesterday’s action he changed his mind
within minutes: His first statements that morning were a reiteration of
the same crazy demand about something that is none of his business at
all and there is no grounds for it whatsoever (see MOTIVES section
below). Within minutes, he took back that demand.
PROVEN FUTILITY OF X’S DEMAND If
the matter was so important as to make such an irrational public scene
out of it, how is it that in less than 24 hours the matter was not
important any more. One day he was threatening, yelling, cussing and
hitting me in reference to a crazy demand of his. The next day, he
totally withdrew the demand without me having made a single move in
meeting that demand. I’ll let you draw the logical conclusion about the
validity of that demand, and its significance as a justification for
his outburst! One day he threatens with “almost not welcome” and next day “you can come anytime, ask questions, make comments…”
INSIGHT VS. FEAR I
certainly welcomed the apology not as an ego-soothing step but as a
sign that he may have realized what he did was uncivil and wrong.
However, given the circumstances, I was not convinced of its sincerity
because it smelled like it had an element of fear.
We can
change instantly upon insight, and we can change instantly upon fear.
These have different qualities. Let’s hope in this case it was the
former, although life experience shows that generally, the probability
of a person changing fundamentally is much less than not changing. The
old mind is caught in such a deep mold of status quo that deep
fundamental change in that structure is pretty rare. But it can happen.
MOTIVES Possible motives I can think about for X’s irrational behavior: 1)
Placing himself in a position of authority as a representative of
another (I asked him if he was representing another, and the answer
indicated it was not the case because if he was, he would have said yes
instead of resorting to profanity. The person he pretends to represent
has never said a word or objected to anything I’ve said (probably
because she knows what I said was true and was said not in a spirit of
malice or personal attack but only in relationship to her apparently
being put in a wrong role).
2) Psychological
imbalance or cognitive unclarity -- the reason I suspect this as a
possibility is because I cannot justify in my mind how anybody could be
so worked up over another person’s comments about a third person, to
the point of polluting a special place with profanity and committing
battery, without being a representative of the third party or
authorized by an organization. Personal dislike ought not lead to such
an extreme behavior. But then again we live in an insane world and the
misapplied mechanism of thought and its image making process is at the
core of that insanity.
3) Desire to win points
-- unfortunately this is a real possibility because I know of another
case, by way of proof, where X provoked a person against another in
what appears to be a desire to win points. This is not so out of place
in the pre-reorganization history of the foundation where its culture
seemed prone to politics and power-play (games to maintain, gain, or
regain power). There is plenty of material in K’s work pointing to his
attitude towards organizations, which were related to these types of
issues and their consequence. (Things could be different in a 100 years
when none of the people who were close to K would be around, and maybe
not even the foundations as we know them).
4)
Placing himself in a position of authority as a self-designated
spokesperson for the foundation. I have failed to get a clear statement
from X as to what exactly he objects to. What I have gathered so far is
the fact that he has stated that he doesn’t think people outside the
foundations should comment on the work of the foundation -- and some
fuzzy paraphrase of things I supposedly wrote which I did not write --
which in either case, is none of his business because what he’s
objecting to was not written about him, he’s not representing the party
I wrote about, and he’s not a representative of the foundation the
party was a member of. So he’s sticking his nose in a matter which is
not his business beyond the means of suggestion an comments. And he
seems to be doing that as a self-imposed position of authority.
5)
A human is complex entity and true motives of another may be impossible
to understand, but here are other common possibilities which often
influence behavior, e.g., jealousy, and “causeless hatred”.
In
order to keep this letter short, if you like to read about the second
incident, it is available here. In summary, it demonstrates another
case of power abuse where the librarian assumes a policy making role,
exhibits unfounded anger, poor communication skills, illusions and
images based on conclusions which turned out to be nonfactual. I
initiated a moderated session
INCIDENT 2 – ABUSE OF POWER & BULLYING Last
year I was shocked when (the same) X blasted at me outside the
healthfood shop for having written something in the far distant past. I
was immediately alarmed over a few things:
a)
The kinds of things he was objecting to seemed highly illusory vs.
facts of the matter. If he had only bothered reality-checking a few of
his conclusions and images he wouldn’t be so angry.
b)
He had accumulated all this anger without ever expressing a single
sentence about it, which would have allowed me to present my point of
view which may have shattered his image/reality. This is precisely why
ignorance is cherished in our world: if we look, our images might just
have to drop. “The light of truth dispels darkness” but only if the
curtain is up.
c) He put himself in a
position of authority over the foundations’ matters and was implying
that he was making a policy which I was sure was not officially the
case as there has not been a single, sole reason, ever, to justify his
crazy idea other than his accumulated illusions.
d)
He seems to assume authority because he was close to K for practical
reasons; being put in an actual position of authority seems to
exacerbate this.
e) I wonder if being
“close” to K is enough to guarantee any person a position of security,
and what are the consequences of feeling such a security? Seniority and
friendship are valid factors in staffing decisions as long as it’s a
right match in qualification. Another factor ought to be the level of
respect for the quality, quietness and peaceful energy of these places,
which he clearly does not have.
f) Given
their history, these places should be respected and ought to be immune
from expressions of anger, filthy language, violence, and other crude
ways of the world. Visitors should feel safe in attending these places,
and should expect to be treated with basic respect. I have come to the
libraries for years and have never heard of people being intimidated to
go there until several cases recently.
It occurred to me that I
have to hear X out and proposed that we meet, together with a moderator
because I doubted he’d be able to have a rational conversation given
his irrational and emotional state and his history of getting into this
intense emotional state in dialogues.
We had a meeting with a
mutual friend and I was shocked at the level of illusions that had been
built up in X’s head which fed further illusions. For example, he said
that I had written the article about K’s attitude towards stimulants
because of what X had said. Talk about the egocentric predicament! The
fact is, I did independent research and X had nothing to do whatsoever
with what I had written. I did not quote nor paraphrase him nor even
hinted at anything he had ever said.
The list of such baseless
accusations was long (e.g., the utterly stupid assumption that I write
to the world instead of talking to a person directly, which is
absolutely false, and that I just sit down and write a circular off the
cuff and send it, which is also absolutely false: my circulars
sometimes take a year to write). Once the illusion train rolls there’s
no stopping it, and in this case the locomotive was his belief that
people outside the foundations have no business commenting on the work
of the foundation. He specifically said this in response to the point
raised by the moderator. Obviously, observations made by outsiders has
helped these foundations, and there are a number of recent examples of
this.
I told him that I am totally prepared to review and as
needed retract, correct, add, modify, any statement that I ever
published, if he points out to me specifically what he objects to. To
date, he has not pointed out a single specific sentence that he can say
is not factual, is not moral, and should be retracted. He has once made
a vague reference to something without understanding the context, and
he’s even admitted that he does not read what I write carefully,
because he doesn’t value them, because I am an outsider.
It’s
each person’s business if they want to fact-check their conclusions, or
if they want to live in comfortable illusions, or if they are angry or
not (as long as they don’t violate another person’s rights). But when a
staff member threatens another person with an imaginary policy
statement based on the staff member’s thought-and-image content which
was not fact-checked, not communicated, or given a single opportunity
to be responded to, I’d say this person is abusing his power and
bullying.
I wish X well and next time I see him I will pay the
same respect I’ve always paid to him and others: to be inwardly quiet,
to have no image – and by being in the present, love has no barriers.
COMMENTS
Dear Reza, ... I
read your journal and the letter regarding "vulgar librarian". This
reminds of an incident about six years ago in the very first KFI annual
gathering I attended in Chennai. In my return trip to Bangalore by
train, I met Prof. Krishnanath of KFI (Buddhist scholar) who
introduced me to a person (Steve? I think) who works in a <>
library. His (is a <> employee) behavior was a bit
strange (not acknowledging while we me met next day in Bangalore
centre) and then later at Hyderabad (a boring incoherrent presentation
by him) and at Pune (stepping on my legs with no regards in the
dining hall) about two years later. Our interractions were VERY BRIEF,
yet had left an impression about that person which is not pretty.
Images??!! What to do? regards, <>
---- RG's remark:
Dear <> No,
it's not the same person. I know Steve and it's not him. Who it is
doesn't really matter. He works for one of the several foundations. Steve
has been acting strange and I have no idea why. I can't rely on
psychic powers to read people's minds. You know, if I have a problem
with somebody
I tell them and try to work it out. Recently I had a job interview.
They asked how I handle conflict in work place. I didn't have any
examples to refer to because for the longest time I have had no
conflict in workplace. Years ago I learned the keys to conflict
resolution are a) emptying of consciousness of its content, and b)
having no image. So if you go to work every day as a new day, and see
people for the first time, it's magical!
Maybe like the librarian above, he might be one of those who feels people
outside the foundations have no business commenting on the work of the
foundation. Well, many disagree with this and it's been proven that such commentary has been helpful.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: ALL AUDIO AND VIDEO RECORDINGS, WRITINGS,
COMPILATION, AND OTHER WORKS BY REZA GANJAVI ARE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT
LAWS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.