Datasets:
eliwill
/
krishnamurti_discussions

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
text
stringlengths
12
1.33k
You understand my question? In it, is there any sense of restlessness - no, don't please agree - this is a tremendous thing to find out, because we want to go beyond this. You see, sir, most of us are seeking a solution for the misery of the world, a solution for social morality, which is immoral, we are trying to find out a way of organising society in which there will be no social injustice, where man has sought god, truth, whatever it is, through centuries, and never coming upon it, but believing in it - and when you believe in it you naturally have experiences of your belief, which are false.
I don't know if you are following all this. So man in his restlessness, in his desire for safety, security, to feel at ease, has all these imaginary securities, invented, projected by thought. Now when you become aware of all this fragmentation of energy, therefore no fragmentation at all of energy, what has taken place in the mind that has sought security, because it was restless, it was moving from one fear to another?
Come on, sir, you have understood my question? Please, have I made the question clear? No?
Yes. Is it verbally clear even, intellectually? Then what do you do, what is your answer?
It is no longer isolated, there is no fear. The gentleman says, it is not isolated, there is no fear - sir, look, we've been through all this - sir, your question, unless you really see, it is so with you, don't say anything, because it has no meaning. You can invent, you can say, I feel this - but if you are really serious, you want to learn about it, then you have to go into it, it's your vocation, it's your life - not just this morning.
You know, as we were coming down, going through the village, all the people were going to the church - weekend religion. And this is not a weekend religion. This is a way of life, a way of living, a way of living in which this energy is not broken up.
You know, sir, if you once understood this thing, you'll have an extraordinary sense of action. Now let's go on. Sir, the moment you say, what do you do with the monkey within us.
No, sir, I did not say that - I said, where are you. Right. If you want to solve the question... No, I am only putting the question, sir, don't pick me up over words - I am only putting that question to see where you are.
(Inaudible) Yes. So there is one of the fragments - that is actually 'what is' - one of the fragments of this broken up energy, knowing, being aware - no, I won't use the word aware or knowing - one of these fragments, restlessly seeking security - that is what we are all doing. And that restlessness and this constant search, constant enquiry, constant putting this away, taking that up, going joining this society, then taking that society, you know, the monkey goes on endlessly, all that indicates a mind that is pursuing a way of life in which it is only concerned with security.
Now when that is seen very clearly, then what is the mind - what has happened to the mind that is no longer concerned with security? I'm putting the question differently. What has happened to it?
Obviously it has no fear - that's a very trivial matter. It becomes very trivial when you see how thought has fragmented the energy, or fragmented itself, and because of this fragmentation there is fear. And when you see the activity of thought in its fragmentation, then fear - you meet it, you act.
So we are asking, what has happened to the mind that has become extraordinarily attentive. Is there any movement of search at all. Please, find out.
Mechanical activity stops completely. Mechanical activity stops completely. You understand what I'm saying, my question?
When you are so attentive, is the mind still seeking? Seeking experience, seeking to understand itself, seeking to go beyond itself, seeking to find out right action, wrong action, seeking a permanency on which it can depend, permanency in relationship, or in belief or in some conclusion, is that still going on when you are so completely aware? The mind does not seek anything any longer.
The mind does not seek anything any longer. You know what that means, when you make a statement of that kind, so easily - do listen to this. Not seek anything, which means what?
It is ready to receive something new. It is ready to receive something new. That it cannot imagine.
That it cannot imagine. No, madam, you really, really have not understood. No, no, my question is this - you don't know what you are all saying - my question the mind has seen the activity of the monkey in its restlessness.
This activity, which is still energy, thought has broken it up, in its desire to find a permanency, security, a certainty, a safety. And so it has divided the world, as the 'me' and the not 'me', 'we' and 'they', seeking truth as a way of security. And the mind, one has observed all this and is the mind any more seeking anything at all?
You understand, seeking implies restlessness - I haven't found it here and I go there and I haven't found it there and I go there. The mind without a centre is not concerned with searching. A mind which is without a centre is not concerned with search.
But is it taking place, with you? At the moment you are attentive, it's taking place. No, sir.
Lots of things happen to the mind when it stops striving. Have you ever known, walking or sitting quietly, what it means to be completely empty, not isolated, not withdraw, not building a wall around yourself and finding yourself, have no relationship with anything - I don't mean that. When the mind is completely empty, not that it has no memories, the memories are there, because you are walking to your house, or going to your office - memory.
But the emptiness of a mind that has finished with all the movement of search. All is and I am. All is and I am.
What is 'I am'? Who is 'I am'? Who is this 'I' that says 'am'?
Monkey. Monkey? That somebody suggests.
What is the I - do look at it - what am I? Don't repeat what the propagandists have said, what the religions have said, what the psychologists have said - what am I? What are you?
Who says, 'I am' - the Italian, the French, the Russian, the beliefs, the dogma, the fears, the past, the seeker, and the one who seeks, finds, identified with the house, with the husband, with the money, with the name, with the family, which is all what? Words. No?
No, you don't see this. But sir, if you see this, that you are a bundle of memories and words, the restless monkey comes to an end. Why, if your mind is completely empty when you are walking to the office, are you walking to the office?
No, sir. Well, why are you still doing this? You have to earn a livelihood, you have to go to your home, you're going out of this tent.
You forget about going to your office, maybe. You may give it up, I'm not - don't bring in the office. Surely the question is, how can I be empty if the memories are there operating - this is the question.
Sir... It is split, part of the mind is empty and another part not. No, not at all.
The mind becomes energy. I give it up - I'll go home if you're not careful. No, no, stay here.
Now look, sir, because I want to convey something to you, I want to communicate something with you, about something, and you are throwing words at me - I want to tell you a very simple there is no such thing as security, this restless demand for security is the part of the observer, the centre, the monkey. And this restless monkey, which is thought, has broken up this world and has made a frightful mess of this world, it has brought such misery, such agony. And, thought cannot solve this, however intelligent, however clever, however erudite, however capable of efficient thinking, it cannot, thought cannot possibly bring order out of this chaos.
There must be a way out of it, which is not thought; that's what I want to convey to you, which is, in that state of attention, in that movement of attention, all sense of security has gone because there is stability. That stability has nothing whatsoever to do with security - when thought seeks security it makes it into something permanent, immovable, and therefore it becomes mechanical. Thought seeks security in relationship, you and I, in relationship.
Thought creates in that relationship an image. And that image becomes the permanent. And that image breaks up relationship, you have your image and I have my image.
In that image thought has established, identified itself as the permanent thing. And outwardly this is what we have done. Your country, my country, god, all that silly stuff.
Now when the mind has left all that, left it in the sense it has seen it, it has seen the utter futility, the mischief, use any word, it has seen - finished with it. Then what takes place in the mind which is so completely finished with the whole concept of security, what happens to that mind which is so attentive? I'm pointing out to you - description is not the described - that it is completely stable.
(Inaudible) What madam? (Inaudible) Others have disappeared? What are you saying, madam, I can't understand?
Can I say it in French? Yes, madam, surely. We do not feel the others as something separate.
They are ourselves and we are them. There is no more problem of relationship from one to the other because there is no more observer... Madam, are you saying that, all that, from your heart? (Inaudible) It is finished, madam, there is nothing more to say.
I am asking you - if you say that is so, then there is nothing more to be said. I am asking myself, and therefore you are asking yourself, when the mind, when thought is no longer seeking security in any form, and sees that there is no such thing as the permanent, the mind - see the importance of this, sir - the brain evolving, growing, remembering, with the idea of being completely secure. All right?
You are following this? The mind, the brain wants security, otherwise it can't function, it will function illogically, neurotically, inefficiently, therefore the brain is always wanting order. And it has translated having order in terms of security.
And if that brain is still functioning, it is still seeking order through security. Do get this. So when there is attention, is the brain still seeking security?
Don't answer me. Sir, there is only the present. He says, there is only the present.
Sir, I am trying to convey something to you. I may be totally wrong. I may be talking complete nonsense but you have to find out for yourself if I am talking nonsense.
I get the sensation that at the moment I am attentive, I am not seeking. But this attention may cease, then I am seeking again. Never - that's the whole point.
If thought sees that there is no such thing as permanency, sees it, thought will never seek it again. Which is, the brain, with its memories of security, with its cultivation in society, depending on security, all its ideas based on security, its morality based on security, that brain, has it become so completely empty of all movements towards security? Don't answer me.
Sir, have you ever gone into this question of meditation, any of you? Meditation is not concerned with meditation but with the meditator - you see the difference? Most of you are concerned about meditation, what to do about meditation, how to meditate, step by step and all the rest of it - that's not the question at all.
Meditator is the meditation. To understand the meditator is meditation. Now if you have gone into this question of meditation, the meditator must come to an end, obviously, by understanding, not by suppressing, not by killing the thought - by understanding, which is, understanding himself is to understand the movement of thought, thought being the movement of the brain, with all its memories.
And the movement of thought seeking security and all the rest of it. Now the meditator is asking, can this brain become completely quiet, which is thought be completely still, and yet out of this stillness thought operates and not as an end in itself. You've got it?
Probably it's all too terribly complicated to you - it's really quite simple. So, the mind that is highly attentive, has no fragmentation of energy - please see that, there is no fragmentation of energy, it is complete energy. And that energy operates when you go to the office without fragmentation.
Right? May be a real understanding could be realised without the help of the word, it's a kind of direct contact with the thing you are trying to understand, or you are understanding. You can understand without the word by getting directly into contact.
And consequently there is no need for words which are an escape. That's it. Can you communicate without words.
Yes. Wait. (laughter) Without words because words hinder.
Look sir, can I communicate with you without the word, of the quality of the mind that is so extraordinarily attentive and yet function in the world without breaking the energy into fragments? You've understood my question? Yes.
Now, can I communicate that to you without the word? Can I? Yes.
Yes? I can? How do you know I can?
What are you all talking about? I think you can. Look, I have talked for nearly three weeks, explained everything, gone into it in detail, poured one's heart into it - have you understood it?
Verbally, even. And you want to understand something non-verbally. Which means - it can be done, if your mind is in contact with the speaker with the same intensity, with the same passion, at the same time, at the same level, you will communicate.
Are you? Now listen to that train, listen to it. Now without the word, communication has been established, because we are both of us listening to the rattle of that train, at the same moment, with the same intensity, with the same passion.
Now, only then there is direct communion. Right? Are you?
Are you intense about this, at the same time as the speaker, you know, all the rest of it - are you? Of course not. Sir, when you hold a hand of another, you can hold it out of habit or of custom.
Or you can hold it and communication can take place without a word, because both are at the given moment intense, communication has taken place, without a word. But we are not intense, passionate, concerned. Not all the time.
Not all the time - don't say that, even for a minute. How do you know? I don't know.
If you are, then you will know what it means to be aware, attentive, and therefore no longer seeking security, therefore no longer acting or thinking in terms of fragmentation. So, sir, look what has happened to a mind that has gone through all the things which we have been talking about, all the discussions, exchange of words, what has happened to the mind that has really listened to this? First of all, it's become sensitive, not only mentally but physically - given up smoking, drinking, drugs, down that drain that goes by, which is called a river.
And when we have discussed, talked over this question of attention, you will see that the mind is no longer seeking anything at all, or asserting anything. And such a mind is completely mobile and yet wholly stable. Now out of that stability and sensitivity it can act, without creating, without breaking up life into fragments, or energy into fragments.
Now, such a mind - what does it find, apart from action, apart from stability and all the rest, what is there? You understand? Man has always sought what he considered god, truth, always striven after it, out of his fear, out of his hopelessness, out of his despair, disaster, death, he has sought it.
And thought he found it. And the discovery of that he began to organise. And, you remember that famous story?
- the devil and his friend were walking one day down the street and they saw a man in front of them pick up something very shiny. And the man looked at it in great delight, ecstasy. And the friend of the devil asked, what was that, what did he pick up.
Oh, he said, the devil said, oh, it is part of the truth. And the friend said, then it's a very bad business for you, if a man has found truth on a pavement, it's very bad business, you will have no place. He said, not at all, my friend, I'm going to help him to organise it.
Right? So sir, that which is stable, highly mobile, sensitive, is not asking, it sees something which has never been found, which means, time for such a mind doesn't exist at all - which doesn't mean he's going to miss the train. Therefore there is a state which is timeless and therefore incredibly vast.
Now, sir, I could go into it, which is something really most marvellous if you come upon it, but the description is not the described. It's for you to learn all this by looking at yourself - no book, no teacher can teach you about all this - don't depend on anybody, don't join anything - spiritual organisations, you understand, not physical organisations. So one has to learn all this out of oneself.
And in there the mind will discover things that are incredible. But for that there must be no fragmentation, and therefore immense stability, swiftness, mobility. And to that mind there is no time and therefore this whole concept of death and living have quite a different meaning.
Would it be of any use for such a mind to make an attempt to communicate? It's impossible, even for a minute. Finished, we have finished talking.
It is time - what is the time, sir? Quarter to one. I hope you'll have a nice journey.
Thank you. This is supposed to be a discussion, a dialogue or talking over together any of the things we would like to discuss. So what shall we start with?
Do you think it would be sort of off the point to discuss like a means of education, in other words an active thing, instead of like an individual thing... Discuss education. An application of these thoughts.
Application of these talks; education - could we discuss that. Do you want to discuss that or something else? Like the idea for a school for pre-adolescents.
An idea for a school for pre-adolescents. Don't you think that it is possible to have a school whereby these people would never be conditioned, so... We will discuss that, sir, we will discuss what is conditioning, whether it is possible to bring up children without being conditioned. That's what he wants to discuss.
Anything... anybody else? Perhaps that could be discussed if we approach the question how to bring about an education, or to educate a child, a student and ourselves not to imitate, not to conform. Could we discuss that?
Would that be worthwhile? What do you say, would that be worthwhile to what are the implications of conforming and whether it is possible not to conform at all, but yet live in the society, in this world, not in a monastery, but here. Would that be worthwhile?
Yes. Right, sirs. If you don't want to discuss that, please talk about something else that might be of interest to you.
So shall we start with that? Yes. Right.
Before we try to find out how to educate children not to conform or to conform, shouldn't we find out for ourselves if we are conforming - the educator, which we are, the parent, the teachers, the educator, the human being - are we conforming? Are we imitating, following a certain pattern, accepting formulas and fitting life to that formula? All that implies surely, conformity, doesn't following, accepting authority, having a formula or a principle or a belief according to which one lives, or rejecting the outer patterns of conformity imposed on us through culture, through education, through the impact of social influences.
We may have our own patterns of conformity, inwardly, and accept those and conform to that - you see, both outwardly and inwardly. Is one aware that one is conforming? Am I aware that I am conforming?
Not that one should not, or should, but first let's begin to find out if one is conforming. What does it mean? I mean all the structure of language is a form of acceptance of a pattern of speech, of thought, conditioned by words and so on.
That is, one can see one does conform there. And one does conform to outward social patterns - short hair, long hair, beard, no beard, trousers, short, mini skirts, and long skirts, and you know all the rest of it. And inwardly is one conforming, following an image that one has built about oneself - image, a conclusion, a belief, a pattern of conduct, and following that pattern.
Is one aware of all this? Not that one should or should not imitate, but is one conscious, know, aware, recognise that there is this outward and inward conformity all the time? Because if one is conforming obviously there is no freedom.
And without freedom there is no intelligence. So in enquiring within oneself, looking at oneself quite objectively, without any sentimentality, without saying this is right, this is wrong, just to observe and find out at what depth one is conforming. At a very superficial level, or does one conform right through one's being?
When one is conforming - it is really quite a complex subject this - when we have been educated to divide life as the 'me' and the 'not me', as the observer, the censor, and the thing observed as something separate. Basically that is one of the patterns of conformity - that's the way we have been brought up. When I say 'I am a Hindu', it is conforming to the pattern of the particular culture and society in which this particular mind has been cultured, brought up.
Is one doing that? Please, I don't want to talk about this by myself - I can talk by myself in my room (laughs). This is really quite extraordinarily interesting if one could go into this very, very deeply.
And then we can discuss how to bring about in a student, in a child - a student, let's keep it to that, a child is too small. Why? Wait, sir.
Don't jump to the 'why' yet. We will come to that a little later. We say first let us see how you and I conform.
And as we are the educators, whether we are parents, teachers, whatever, if we don't understand what it means to conform how can we help another to be free of conformity, or to say 'You must conform, that's natural'. We must be clear in oneself. Don't let's put the horse before the cart - or the cart before the horse, you know which it is.
Because I really want to find out, I want to learn about it. You see, it is really very subtle, and it has great depth if you really go into this question. Memory, the cultivation of memory is what education is at the present, about facts and this and that technology.
The path of knowledge - you follow? - is to conform. I don't know if you see that.
Following the past, accepting a tradition, calling oneself a German, a Russian, an Englishman, is conforming, and the revolt against that becomes another pattern of conformity. Therefore all reaction is a form of conformity. I don't know if you accept all this.
I don't like the particular system - the capitalist, or the communist system - I revolt against it because I want a different kind of system, and that different kind of system is the outcome of these two particular systems, and I prefer that and therefore I am conforming to that. I don't know if you see. Therefore in enquiring into this question - not how to bring up children, we will come to that very much later - one has to find out in oneself these patterns of conformity, imitation.
Go on, sir. Sir, if we are not following these systems which are existing in our civilisations, how we can educate our children to go through examinations - the civilisation is accepting certain routes. Yes sir, that's what we are saying.
You see again, don't let's talk about the children for the moment, let us talk about ourselves who are responsible for these poor unfortunate children, whether we are conforming. If we are, then whatever our relationship with the children be, we will always subtly or brutally bring about an educational system that will make the child or the grown-up or the adolescent conform. This is so simple, I don't know what's the difficulty.
If I am blind I can't lead, I can't look, I can't help another, and we are more or less blind if we don't know at what depths we are conforming. But isn't knowledge of these depths a continuous process, doesn't it become more precise? It does, sir, it does become very precise.