Secondly: I am an ignorant person. I am not a scholar. I enjoy reading books, but I read the Bible. the Gita, the Koran just as one reads novels; they are ancient, beautiful stories. Krishnamurti says he never reads any scripture; he reads only detective stories. I read the scripture, but I read in the scripture just the detective story and nothing else. And I would suggest to Krishnamurti that it would be good if he should look into the Bible; you cannot find a more beautiful story full of suspense. Everything is there: love, life, murder; everything is there. It is very sensational.
Scriptures, to me, have nothing special. Scriptures are as sacred as the trees and the rocks and the stars – or as secular. I don’t make a distinction so I am not very serious about scriptures. The only thing I am serious about is jokes. So when I quote the scripture I quote from memory, when I quote a joke I have it written here in front of me. I never want to make any mistake about the joke – I am really serious. About everything else I am absolutely non-serious.
So it is very obvious. Listening to me you must have understood it, that my emphasis is not on what the scriptures say – that is not the point: my emphasis is on what I am saying. If you go to a Christian priest, he quotes the scripture, his emphasis is on the scripture. He is very literal, he has to be – he himself is secondary, the scripture is primary. He is a witness to the scripture. With me it is just the opposite: the scripture is just a witness to me. Whatsoever I have to say, only that have I to say. If I feel the scripture can be a witness to it, I use it.
And I go on playing with the scripture, sometimes in one way, sometimes in another. Remember always, I am not trying to prove the scripture – that the scripture is right – I am simply using it as illustration. It is secondary, you can forget about it: nothing will be lost. Whatsoever I am saying is direct. Just to help you, because you are not capable of listening to the direct truth, you need a few witnesses. So Jesus, Krishna and Buddha and Lao Tzu and Lieh Tzu – they are just witnesses to me. I am not to adjust with them, they have to adjust with me.
And this should always be so: the dead should exist and adjust with the living and for the living. Why should the living adjust with the dead? Lieh Tzu has to adjust with me, because only in adjusting with me can Lieh Tzu again have a little life. Jesus has to adjust with me, I am not to adjust with Jesus. The past has to adjust with the present, not otherwise. So I go on playing….
These are all just stories to me and. deep down, this is the approach: the whole of life is a fiction, it is maya, it is a dream. Jesus and Buddha and Krishna and I and you are parts of a big dream – God is dreaming. Don’t be too serious about it. Scholars become too serious. I am not a scholar and I have no respect for scholars. In fact my attitude is exactly the same as Mulla Nasruddin’s.
Once it happened:
A man came to Mulla Nasruddin and said “Nasruddin. have you heard? The great scholar of the town has died and twenty rupees are needed to bury him.”