Neetu Singh is a Teacher and Program Coordinator at the
Study Centre of the Valley School, a school established in 1978 based on the
teachings of the eminent philosopher and thinker, Jiddu Krishnamurti.
The school is located in
South India near
Bangalore in a picturesque valley with undulating hills and
farms with a reserve forest on the fringe. It has 110 acres of dense
vegetation, with a lake on one side and a running stream. The school,
Art
Village and the Study Centre are located on the same
campus. Peggy Whalen-Levitt Interviewed Neetu on
May 4, 2005.
PWL: I understand that there was a year-long
search for the land where the school now resides. Krishnamurti knew that the
land should be about 100 acres. When he walked through the wilderness site that
included streams, a lake, woodland and meadows, he knew the school had found its
home. What is it about this site that supports the vision of the
Valley
School?
NS: One of the things that perhaps
attracted Krishnamurti to this land was the giant Banyan tree and he had some
special attraction towards that tree. In fact, the other schools
in
India have a huge banyan tree. And this one happens to have a
fairly old banyan tree, perhaps a hundred years old. That’s my guess. But I
think it was more on the feeling level. From what I understand, he walked the
land and when he came out he said “This is the right land, the right place to
start the school.”
PWL: As I learn more about The Valley School,
I am struck by the ways in which the school nurtures a sensitivity to place. In
creating a walk to the
Art
Village, for example, an attempt has been made to create
a natural ambience of bamboo grove, stream, tall trees and pond. How did the
school’s founders go about creating this environment?
NS: When the original educators started the
school, it was just a barren land. There were two or three trees like the banyan
tree and the tamarind tree, and you could actually see the whole expanse. But
now the whole area has been regenerated into a forest. So, they had to figure
everything out from the beginning. What would we like the school to be?
Twenty-seven years ago this place was very far away from the city. When they sat
down to decide how to make a school, how to organize 110 acres of land, they
put the structures at the borders. So that when the children walk from the
school to the
Art
Village, or from the school to the Study Centre, they
have to walk through the forest. They don’t really have to make a deliberate
effort or time to go into the forest. They have to do it, it’s part of being
there.
PWL: The school art director has said that
“The (Art) Village offers a silent space for the creative minds to meet in the
midst of trees, the rushing stream and the call of birds. All of these keep
changing each moment to celebrate life in its silence and serenity. And in this
silence may sprout a movement, which is the chant of Nature, within and around.
Here, the child and the adult may free his mind from its limitation and awaken
to the ageless mind that is beyond space, beyond time.” This is a very
different view of art from the Western notion of self-expression. Would you say
that art is experienced as a form of participation with the natural world?
NS: I would say, quite a bit of it, because
when the children go to the
Art
Village, the structure is simple. There’s a water pond,
there’s a huge banyan tree where the children have classes under the tree, and
there’s a bamboo grove, and the children spend a lot of time outdoors beside the
pond, where they will do some drawing and painting. And the representation of
the natural world in paintings or drawings is very beautiful. It’s extremely
touching. And also there’s a music room, so you can listen to the music. The
sound of music spreads everywhere. So when the children go there, it creates a
very nice atmosphere.
PWL: I understand that it was a series of
talks that Krishnamurti gave in
Bangalore in 1971 that laid the foundation for the opening of
The Valley School in 1978. During those talks, Krishnamurti gave a wonderful
example of looking at a bougainvillea as follows: “There is not only the
sensory perception with the eye: you see this bougainvillea. . . . . Then as you
observe that colour, you make an image, you have already an image; you have a
name for it. You like it or dislike it, you have preferences. So through the
images that you have about that flower, you see. You don’t actually see, but
your mind sees it more than the eye . . . . So you are looking, observing with
the images, conclusions that you have formed. And, therefore, you are not
actually looking at life. . . . . So in order to look at your life as it is,
there must be freedom of observation.” Can you help us understand this “freedom
of observation” that seems to be the impulse for the
Valley
School?
NS: : Many years ago when I started reading
the writings of J. Krishnamurti he posed the question – Have you ever looked at
the tree? As I examined this question I realized that I had never really
looked. I was not really paying attention to what was around me. Because in
the kind of societies that we live in, everything is perceived to be for use.
So I think in this quote, what is interesting to realize is that Krishnamurti
uses the metaphor of looking at a tree to also pose that question, “Have you
looked at your own images?” Whether it is the images between a boyfriend and a
girlfriend or a husband and a wife, we take those images for granted. We assume
that those images are helpful in knowing the other person. What Krishnamurti is
asking is, “When you look at that image, what do you see? Is that image helpful
or is it actually preventing you from having a direct relationship with the
other person?” Then, he has a very famous quote where he says that if you don’t
have a relationship with the Earth, with a tree, with the flowers, you don’t
have a relationship with other human beings, because the same principle is
involved. When we are looking at the natural world, when we are looking at a
tree, are we looking only through our images that it gives us pleasure, it gives
us a soothing effect, or can we just look at the way it is? Because if we look
at the way it is, it tells a different story. When I look at a tree, for example
today on a rainy day, it will change. In the morning, the same tree will seem
to wake up, there will be hardly any light on it, and when the sunlight comes,
the whole structure and the nature of the tree changes. In the evening, the
tree has a sombre look. So when I look at it, it is giving a different story.
Am I in touch with something? Similarly, in relationship, am I really in touch
with the other person? Or am I only approaching the person with the image I
have of yesterday, which includes all the hurts and pleasures I’ve accumulated
about the other person? Am I really in touch with that person, because every
human being is changing, is evolving, is growing. They are not the same. And
they don’t like to be treated the same as they were yesterday. Even I don’t
like to be treated the way I was six months ago. So, that is the main
question. Can we really examine the images?
PWL: In the same talk, Krishnamurti spoke the
following words. “Look at the sky, look at that tree, look at the beauty of the
light, look at the clouds with their curves, with their delicacy. If you look
at them without any image, you have understood your own life . . . . And so the
question is: What is this observer, the observer who has separated himself from
the observed? . . . . . At the moment of experiencing anything, there is no
observer. When you look at that sunset - and that sunset is something immense -
when you look at it, at that moment there is no observer who says, “I am seeing
the sunset.” A second later comes the observer. So how does the observer come
into being? When you look at this flower, at the moment you observe it closely,
there is no observer, there is only a looking. Then you begin to name that
flower. Then you say, “I wish I had it in my garden or in my house.” Then you
have already begun to build an image about that flower. So the image-maker is
the observer . . . So when you observe, the observer looks at that flower with
the eyes of the past. And you don’t know how to look without the observer.”
Would you say that the
Valley
School is a learning community where teachers and
children alike are learning “to look without the observer?”
NS: That is a good question. There is a
distinction between the program that is at the school and the Study Centre. We
have a children’s program at the Study Centre and the school addresses mostly
the academic issues. How the teachers address this really depends on the skill
of the teachers and their understanding of what Krishnamurti is saying and their
own work with nature.
Now, what we do at the Study Centre is somewhat different.
When children come to us at the Study Centre, we are mainly interested in, “Can
the child be silent?” Because we feel that in silence there is
this possibility of observation. If the mind is constantly chattering and
involved in some activity, then the capacity to look is somewhat diminished.
When the children come to the Study Centre, our whole idea of creating an
activity or a program is “Has that activity led to an observation, or to a state
of silence first and then to an observation?” So, there is an activity, the
movement into silence, and then observation. For example, when the
children come to the Study Centre, one of the first things that we do is ask
them to sit quietly and just listen to the sounds of birds. We ask
them to sit in a proper posture where they can breathe easily and observe their
breath. And then we have various activities when they come for a three hour
session. Sitting quietly is only one part of that session, perhaps
for fifteen or twenty minutes. And then sometimes we have them listen to a
piece of music, for example, music of the rivers, or music of the wind.
So, when they listen to it, we ask them to construct a story which comes
to their mind, or images which come to their mind. And each child is given some
time to explore that and share with others what they felt when they were
listening to the music. Sometimes we just sit quietly, we don’t
listen to music. Later, when we ask them of all the activities they did at the
Study Centre for three hours which includes sitting quietly, perhaps having a
discussion and going for a nature walk, we ask them to write what they felt
about the program at the Centre. One of the key things that they
come to is that “I could sit in silence, I didn’t know that I could sit in
silence for such a long time.” I think we assume, as adults, that children are
not able to sit quietly, that they are quite mischievous and cannot sit quietly.
And we try to downplay that activity. But we find that when children
leave, that is one of the key activities which they really enjoy.
It’s something that they go back with, “When I sat quietly, this is what
happened to me: I could listen to the birds, I could just watch my thoughts.”
We tell them, “Just observe your thoughts and feelings.” So, they have
that capacity, as they have the capacity to do other things.
PWL: How often do they come to you?
NS: They come twice in a term. Four times a
year.
PWL: And they would do that all the way
through their schooling?
NS: Yes. They start when they are in class
one and continue until class twelve. Right now we have children who have been
coming for twelve years.
PWL: Can you tell me more about how you
nurture the art of listening and looking at the Study Centre?
NS: When the children come to the Study Centre
we sit in silence for a while. And then we spend some time in the natural
world: going for a walk, drawing, sketching, writing, collecting, and so on.
And then we do some activity to develop a relationship with the body. For
example, learning very basic movements - yoga movements - to relax the body, to
learn how to calm the mind and body together. So, we engage children in various
activities to bring the children close to themselves, rather than just being in
the intellect. So the first hour is spent relating the child to the senses in
some way. And then we have a break where they can wander around the Study Centre
and socialize with each other. During this time some children go around the tree
and sing songs to the Peepal
tree.
And then, the key program
of the Study Centre is engaging the children in a dialogue, to be able to sit
and have an intelligent discussion with others on various issues that relate to
their daily life. Some issues are how they relate with their parents, their
teachers, with other children, with the world. And we look at social phenomena,
for example, environmental degradation. Before the children come to the Study
Centre, I go to the different classes and I ask the children to write down their
concerns, what they would like to discuss when they come to the Study Centre.
And that allows them to open up and be part of the program, rather than the
program coming from outside. And then we try to categorize the questions into
society, the self, the environment, relationships and so on. When they come to
the Study Centre, we may read some questions that they have written and we
divide the class into small groups of seven to eight children. In those groups,
we try to elicit responses from them to the questions. By engaging their mind
by asking questions and encouraging them to express themselves in small groups,
they open up and relate what is being discussed to what they are going
through. And quite often they come up with wonderful insights into the various
issues.
PWL: The
Valley
School makes a distinction between the cultivation of
intelligence and that of intellect, of memory and its skills. Can you help us
better understand this distinction between intelligence and intellect?
NS: Intellect is the capacity of the brain to
understand something verbally and express something and think logically and
rationally. Intellect is independent of emotion and feeling. In schools and
colleges, this cultivation of intellect is given the highest importance. And
even the whole issue of creativity is looked at in the field of intellect, which
is to be able to come up with new ideas and to find out new ways of doing
things. All that is in the field of intellect. And intellect, as we know, is
based on knowledge and memory. In fact, if we look at the advancement of modern
civilization, it is all based on intellect. Usually, in our society, whether it
is East or West, we often confuse intelligence with intellect. We assume that
if a person is intellectually quite capable, then he must be intelligent, which
is not always true if we really look at life. There are some highly capable
people who would admit that they don’t have complete intelligence, because
intelligence is a much vaster area than intellect. Intelligence would demand
that all the capacities of the human being would be paid attention to, which is
our capacity to look, to listen, to question, and to learn. Intelligence is the
capacity to feel as well as to reason. And I think, to a degree, these things
are being recognized now. Even with the work of Howard Gardner, I think, there
are listed ten or eleven areas of intelligence, and the list keeps growing.
PWL: At the
Valley
School, how do you create an environment where
intelligence is nurtured?
NS: There are certain areas that can be
addressed. One is that we approach learning as heuristic in nature, aimed at
self learning and self discovery. So we try to create materials and the
learning process in such a way that children are taking responsibility for their
learning. They are learning at their own pace. They are learning through their
own interests. The second area that we are interested in is to create an
atmosphere that is free from authority. So that means that the teacher is not
there to instruct the children in what they should think or how they should act,
rather, the teacher is also learning, he is in the mode of learning, always
learning along with the child. The third area which is addressed is without
reward and punishment, because we understand that reward and punishment brings
about fear, hurt, and self-protective reaction. The fourth area where we can
address intelligence is through learning without comparison and competition as
they generate envy and antagonism between one human being and another human
being. So, you have to see the connection between comparison and fear. And
when we see that we are in fear, then can we love? We also go into this
question of what is freedom and what is responsibility? Giving freedom without
discussing what freedom means, what order means, how they are connected, how
responsibility is connected with freedom - just to give freedom is not enough.
So, we have to constantly discuss these things among teachers, among children.
And then, we are concerned with self-knowledge, which is to understand how we
learn, what is our learning pattern, why do we get angry so easily, why do we
get irritated, why are we snobbish? All these things are learning about
oneself, a constant need for security, not only now but also in the future. So,
when we look at all these six areas, those are the kind of learning processes
that are necessary to create an atmosphere where intelligence can come about.
PWL: Krishnamurti has said that “if you pass
on through the meadows with their thousand flowers of every colour imaginable,
from bright red to yellow and purple, and their bright green grass washed clean
by last night’s rain, rich and verdant - again without a single movement of the
machinery of thought - then you will know what love is.” Would you say that,
ultimately, education at the
Valley
School is an education in service of the possibility of
love?
NS: Yes, if we understand the world love
correctly. Krishnamurti did explore the word “love” quite often in his talks.
His approach to love generally has been to discover what is not love. And
actually, putting those factors or those conditions aside, then we discover what
is love. For example, attachment is not love. One has to discover what is
involved in attachment. What are the implications of attachment?
Krishnamurti summarized the aims of education as (1) a
concern for the whole over and above the part and a non-sectarian approach free
from prejudice, (2) concern for man and the environment - ending of conflict
between human beings and a non-destructive relationship with nature, as humanity
and nature are one indivisible process, and (3) religious spirit and the
scientific mind working together.
The purpose of education is the cultivation of
the whole human being. Krishnamurti had a vision of looking at
life without separation and without breaking things down because the human mind,
which is based in thought mostly, breaks things down on the basis of
nationalities and religion. Then there is a feeling of separation at a personal
level that each human being experiences. So, he pointed out the
factors that divide people at various levels and urged people to go beyond
that. And then we have this fundamental concern for man and the environment
and the relationship between the two. The state of the earth, as
we see it, is deteriorating rapidly as the forests disappear and the planet is
dying off. There’s a worldwide degradation and the tragedy is that most people
are not aware of the consequences of their actions. The intention of education
at the
Valley
School is to raise awareness of the child to what is
happening and how their actions are connected to what is going on in the world
and to have love with nature and natural phenomena. By religious spirit,
Krishnamurti meant a quality of innocence and communion with all things, which
means natural things, physical things, human beings. A religious mind seeks to
go beyond the materialistic world, to discover something immeasurable, something
sacred. And by scientific mind, he meant an uncompromising commitment to the
observation and understanding of facts. For Krishnamurti, it was this religious
quality of wholeness that alone could bring about a new culture in which the
knowledge of science would find its right place.
