Datasets:
eliwill
/
krishnamurti_discussions

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
text
stringlengths
12
1.33k
That memory may be conditioned, may be a little more free, a little less dogmatic, a little less assertive, a little less aggressive, but it is still the response of memory. And is your memory so very different from mine, as the German, as a human being? Please, sir, this is quite important, go slowly in this.
(Inaudible) The problem arises when different people have a different awareness... We will go into that, madame. I am not at all sure - I am not saying that what you say is not true - but I am not at all sure that our thinking is not more or less the same. You, conditioned by the culture in which you live, and another conditioned by his particular culture, whether that culture is superficial or deep, whether it is conscious or unconscious, it is still part of the mechanism, or the process of thinking.
Isn't it? We are learning, please, wait a minute, sir, we are learning, aren't we? I am not being assertive, dogmatic.
We are trying to learn about this whole process of thinking. Right? Whether it belongs to you as an individual whose thinking is completely different from another - you follow?
- we are going to learn about it. Therefore don't be assertive, dogmatic, let's enquire into it. Right, sir?
Sir... There is somebody else, sir, before you. We have been discussing the question of the environment conditioning the thoughts of people and groups of people, but some people follow different lives and gain inspiration from those lives - there are great musicians.
Music, for example, of the great composers is not a condition to the environment because it is new, though it comes from somewhere. Sir, look, don't yet take examples of the musicians or the artist or the scientist or a religious person, but we are asking ourselves whether the process of thinking is so very different from yours and mine - thinking. The machinery of thinking, sir, not what you think about, not how you express that thinking in music, in painting, in this or that.
May we say then perhaps that if the process if the same, there is differences in emphasis in different... Different capacity? But thinking is the same mechanism.
Yes, indeed. That's all that we want to establish, first. Maybe the thinking, thought-energy, the original thought-energy appears to be different in different individuals if the cultures have different conditionings - there is cultural conditioning, a large number of people will have the same way of thinking about many things and an individual will be even different from his culture, from his society, and even different from his own family.
They are all different levels of conditioning. You are going... Sir, please, do let's stick... Look, sir, we are talking about the machinery of thinking, not how you or I express that thought. No, what I am saying is that thought-energy originally is all the same.
Stay there. Stay there for a minute. Stay there a minute.
The energy of all thinking is the same. That's what you say. Which may express itself according to the capacity, to the gift, to a particular tendency and so on, that might vary, but the machinery of thinking is the same.
Right? (Inaudible) Quite right, sir. (Inaudible) That's right.
You are saying, like the computer, we are all... we have got computer-like minds. And some are well informed, more alive, but it is a computer mind that is functioning all the time. Yes, our brains are all made of the same kind of cells...
Stick to that a little bit. All right. Therefore what does that mean?
Is there then - the next question - freedom in thinking? Freedom. No, sir.
It is playing over the same old record all the time. It is playing the same old record all the time, with varying themes and... depending on the circumstances. Therefore can thought, however capable, however efficient, however knowledgeable, can that bring freedom to man?
Freedom in the sense, from fear, from anxiety, from guilt, from sorrow. You understand my question? Is sorrow different from my sorrow?
Is your sense of guilt different from another? Is your sense of despair different from another? Or your loneliness, your misery, your confusion?
Please... Are you saying, sir, that my guilt is the same as someone else's guilt? No I am not saying your guilt is the same. No, no.
It is the thought that is conditioned... Look, sir, the first part of the question can thought, which is the repetition of the computer knowledge, can that thought free the mind from all the reactions of fear and so on. It never has in the past. It never has - till now?
It never will. It never will. How do you know?
It is obvious, sir. Why do you say that, sir? No, please sir, I am not saying you are right or wrong, I want to learn.
Why do you say thought can never free jealousy, or anxiety? I disagree. I have found that if you understand a person's motive for doing something you can be much more tolerant, understanding, less jealous by using your understanding.
When you use the word 'understanding', what does that word mean? Well it has to start with thought. It has to begin with thought.
I have to pay attention to the fact that I am jealous, I have to think about the situation that gives jealousy, get into the person's mind why they are acting the way they are, and by my thinking, change my living, my thinking, my attitude to that person, and gradually come to share their problem. Through thought - I'll have to repeat it. I must use my mind...
Wait a minute, madame, I have to repeat your question, your statement, otherwise they can't hear it. If I misstate it please correct it. The questioner says, I must use my mind.
I see, I am aware, or another is aware - I am aware of another's jealousy or my own jealousy. By understanding it, which is exploring, enquiring, I become tolerant, and therefore understand more of jealousy not only in myself or understand the jealousy of another. Or the cause of it...
The cause, the reactions, all the implications of jealousy. That is, you are saying, through thought, the exercise of thought, there is an understanding of jealousy and therefore freedom from it. Right?
Is that so? I am not saying it is not. It seems that what it is is sort of like less intense form of jealousy.
Sir, just let's enquire into this particular thing. We say, by exercising thought we learn more about jealousy and therefore are free from it. To put it quickly.
No, I would say, I would disagree because thought is just repeating the same... No, sir. Don't you see? What caused jealousy?
Thought. Thought. No, I disagree again.
Very profoundly I disagree. Jealousy is an emotion, it arises from a sense of loss... No madame - which is part of thought. ...is a childish infantile thing - it is loss, and if you understand what you have lost, and if it even matters that you have lost it, you mature to the point that you understand it doesn't matter.
I understand that, madame, just go slowly. I understand. Don't say, 'I profoundly disagree with you', we are trying to learn about things.
Thought - if you had feeling without thought would there be jealousy? - just feeling. Would you call it jealousy?
(Inaudible) People are usually jealous when they are unconscious. Not when they are conscious. No.
You are now moving away from - conscious, now we will have to go into that. Conscious and unconscious jealousy. I become conscious of a feeling which I call jealousy - a feeling.
The feeling of jealousy, the word of jealousy is remembered from the past jealousies. Right? Which is, the response of memory to a particular feeling which has been recognized as jealousy.
Right? Whether that response is the outcome of conscious memory or unconscious memory, we will leave that for the moment. So the response... the feeling is recognized as jealousy through a word which thought has given meaning to.
The recognition is thought, the feeling comes first. I am saying that. I have a feeling, then I recognize it as jealousy.
How do I recognize it as jealousy? Because I have had it before. I associate the present feeling with a past feeling which I have called jealousy.
So it is still within the field of thought. Thought must come from the experience. Wait, I am saying that.
Wait, madame. Listen. Otherwise I couldn't recognize it as jealousy.
I am angry, and I say, 'By Jove, I am angry' - why? Because I have had that feeing before, and recognition implies a previous knowledge, which is thought, otherwise I wouldn't know that was anger. A baby can become angry, so can an animal...
But isn't there an operation of thought there also going on, in a dog? They know... Therefore let us babies and dogs alone.
Let's talk about ourselves. We are babies. We are, I think we are very infantile...
I quite agree, I quite agree. I quite agree, but I want to find out if being infantile, whether that childishness is the result of thought. The result of lack of thought.
I think it is the result of lack of thought. You say it is the result of lack of thought. Yes...
Wait. Wait. Madame, go slowly - lack of thought.
Therefore what is maturity? Ability to face truth with your mind, your conscious mind. Wait.
Ability to face truth consciously, which means able to face facts, able to face 'what is'. And not go round it, not escape from it, not cover it us, not condemn it, not judge it, not give various evaluations about it. To face 'what is'.
Right? What prevents it? Fear.
What is fear? Go slow - you see... Without recognition, a new feeling, has it any significance?
I am full of antagonism today, I feel this. Before, without giving a name to it - which is the response of memory, which is the response of recognition - this feeling has no meaning at all. I just feel something.
It is only when I recognize it by using a word, as aggression, that it has significance; and the recognition is a process of thinking. Right? So without thinking, feeling has very little meaning.
Go slowly. Please, can I say something? You started by talking about sanity.
I work in a mental hospital, and it occurred to me with psychotics do not seem to have the same thinking processes we do - it is very hard to communicate with them. Why? They do not have your sense of recognition, some are terrible.
Yes, madame, I understand all this, I know what it means - I am not psychotic, but I can see, but please stick to one thing at a time and we will explore all this together. I am saying to myself, asking myself, has feeling any significance apart from thought? Yes?
Do first, before you say yes, let's find out. Uncertainty... I feel - wait a minute, sir - I feel a great sense of tenderness, a sense of love.
Right? Can thought be related to it? Go slow, go slow, go slow.
Then it becomes pleasure, doesn't it? Then it must be translated in terms of recognition. Oh, my lord!
Is love a product of thought? I don't think one can answer that. Wait, we are going to answer it.
I human terms, people only seem to be able to achieve love, go beyond emotions by using their minds to understand themselves. Now, is that so? By understanding themselves they go beyond the travail of love?
That is, love is not pleasure. Love is not desire. All of them, and pain.
Oh, so love is pleasure, desire, pain, sorrow, jealousy, hatred. Where do you draw the line? I think love goes beyond emotion and we get confused with our emotions and call them under the name of love and anti-love.
But we have to use our minds to deal with... I am not saying... We are using our mind now, as we are discussing. What is the thing we are trying to discuss?
We are trying to find out... You were saying can thought dissolve the problem of fear and pain. Yes, can thought solve the problem of fear? And is not fear the creation of thought?
No? Madame. If I was a child on a dark night, it isn't my thoughts, it's the feeling of dark.
Unless thought sustains the feeling, the feeling evaporates very quickly, but thought gives it an object, gives it a drive in time, you know, it sustains it. Now sir, let's you know what fear is, don't you? We all going in the dark, afraid of somebody and so on, so on - death, everything.
Right? We know all this fear. How does it come?
How does it come about? I go out in the dark and suddenly I am afraid. Isn't it a physiological reaction?
Which is a physical reaction. Suddenly finding myself in the dark in a strange place, and the feeling of uncertainty, insecurity. The feeling of insecurity.
That's fear by conditioning. Wait, look at it slowly, sir. Please go into it slowly.
I am not dogmatic, so please don't - we are trying to learn about it. There is sudden feeling of insecurity. What is that feeling of insecurity?
What has brought about that feeling of insecurity? Memory. Fears.
It is the thought that something might happen to one. Isn't it - something might happen to one, sudden danger, feeling of insecure, feeling of being lost, where you might get attacked and all the rest of it. All that is the result of thinking, isn't it?
It may be instant thinking. If there was no thought I wouldn't be afraid of the dark, I would walk through it. It's only thought... the swiftness, the rapidity of thinking has brought this feeling of uncertainty.
Otherwise I wouldn't be afraid of the dark. There is always a first time. Wait, I am talking the first, second, third, tenth time.
I am sorry, I am stuck. The fact this lady was saying, the first time I am afraid I didn't know what it was. Therefore what happens the second time?
I wasn't thinking about being afraid... No. But I said it was thought that was so rapid of which you are unaware. The next time it happens you already say well, I have had this fear, I won't be afraid so much; third time, tenth time you have got used to it.
But I use my mind to get over it. Wait! I am not talking how to get over it.
Madame, the question of getting over it is quite a different matter. We are pointing out that thought has bred fear, whether that thought is so rapid, of which one is not aware, or thought not so rapidly thinks of what is going to happen I might die, I have done something in the past - all that is a process of thinking whether it is instantaneous or gradual. It must be.
Therefore fear is the product of thought. How to get over it is another matter. Like pleasure is the product of thought.
No? I had a most extraordinary enjoyable evening yesterday in the woods, walking, looking at the sunlight, and it was marvellous. And that was a delight which I would like to have repeated tomorrow.
And this demand for repetition is the machinery of thought, the process of thinking. It's so simple. It is obvious.
The experience wasn't thinking. The recognition of that experience, we have said that. I looked at that sunset, it was splendid.
Finished. But thought comes in and says, 'I wish I could... it was so enjoyable, it was a marvellous feeling, I'd like to have it again'. Sir... Just stick to that simple example, you will see how this operates.
Fear, I realize, is the product of thought. And pleasure is the product or the continuity of thought. After all, all sexual pleasure is thinking about it, chewing over it, going into it, and saying - and on and on and on.
And fear is saying my god, what is going to happen tomorrow, I might die. No? If I do not recognize my feeling as jealousy, does not there remain sorrow?
A feeling of sorrow. If I do not recognize my feeling - what is the next... Jealousy or fear and so on, does not remain sorrow, a deep... Ah. If I do not recognize the fear or pleasure, or guilt and so on, it has no profound affect?
Doesn't sorrow remain? Just sorrow remains. Is that it?
Does it? Sir, please, what do you mean by... You see, when we use this word 'sorrow', what do you mean by that word? What is the content of that word?
There is a tremendous quantity of self-pity in sorrow. No? Is not the question when you have the feeling like jealousy, if you don't recognize it, is that feeling not still painful?
Is that feeling not painful. Sir, have you ever tried this? You have a feeling, can you remain with that - can the mind remain with that feeling without naming it?
Without recognition? Then what is it? Is it pain?
Is it sorrow? Look, the moment you say it is pain, there is the process of thinking involved in it. Is not sorrow the basis of our life?
Is not the sorrow the basis of our life. Is it? That's why, sir, when you use the word 'sorrow' we must go into it.
Sorrow. What does that mean? Sadness, grief, the feeling of insoluble problems of life, feeling the death of someone, feeling loneliness, feeling deeply frustrated, not being able to do anything in this world and so on and on and on.
Right? All that is implied in the word 'sorrow', isn't it? No?