text
stringlengths 12
1.33k
|
|---|
You don't say, 'Well I'll theorise about it' - you follow? - you go to the nearest drugstore, or chemist, or go to the dentist - there is action. In the same way when you realise... when the mind realises totally that you are conditioned, the content of your consciousness is its content - go slowly - and any movement that you do is still part of that consciousness - try to get out of it, or accept it, or reject it, it is still part - then what is the realisation of the truth of that, how does it affect your life? |
You can't answer it because - I'll show you why. The realisation of that fact is going to act. You understand? |
The truth of that fact is going to act, and that truth being so highly intelligent will act according to the moment. But can you realise that? (Laughter) But can you realise that when you are still caught in your fear and your... You can't. |
You can't. Therefore - we come back to the question - one fragment, which is fear, you are trying to overcome by another fragment. Right? |
And that way you cannot get rid of it. Right? So there must be a different approach to that fragment which you call fear. |
Right? And the approach is to do absolutely nothing about fear. Right? |
Can you? (Sound of train) I can't do anything about that train going by, the noise, therefore I listen to it. You understand? |
(Inaudible) Please listen to what I... I cannot do a thing about the rattle, the noise, the roar of that train, therefore I don't put up a resistance to it, therefore I listen. When I listen there is no noise. |
There is noise but it doesn't affect me. In the same way when I realise I am neurotic - neurotic, realise it - I am holding on to a particular belief, to a particular way of action, that I am a homosexual, whatever it is, that I have tremendous prejudices - god exists, god doesn't - you follow? When I realise that I am attached to one thing, just to listen to it, completely with my heart, not resist it, to listen to it totally. |
(Inaudible) Now, please, I'd better stop. Is this clear, this discussion this morning? That is, we started out by asking if I can look at the whole movement of life as a unitary process - the killing, the refugees, seven and a half million of them in India, which is already poor with all its tremendous business, the war in the Middle East, the Catholics, the Protestants, the scientists, the artists, the businessman, the private life, the public life, my family, your family - you follow? |
- the division, division, division, division, and this division has brought about such disorder in the world and in myself - can I look at all this as a marvellous single movement? I can't. That's a fact. |
Right? I can't, because I am fragmented in myself, I am conditioned in myself. So my concern then is not to find out how to live a unitary life but to see if the fragmentation can come to an end. |
And that fragmentation comes to an end only when I realise all my consciousness is made up of these fragments. My consciousness is the fragmentation. Right? |
And when I say there must be integrity, brought together, it is still part of that trick I am playing upon myself. So I realise that. I realise it as truth, as fire burns. |
You can't deceive me, it is a fact, and I am left with it, and I have to find how it operates in my daily life. I have to find it out, not guess, play, theorise, because I have seen the truth of it that truth is going to act. If I don't see it and pretend I have seen it then I am going to make a hideous mess of my life. |
Right, sir? We were talking over together yesterday the question of the unconscious, conscious, and the content of consciousness and what to do about it. Shall we go on with that? |
Or would you like to discuss another problem this morning? Go on with that. You are sure? |
Yes. Sir, I would like to discuss a bit more about the relationship between intelligence and thought. And the relationship between the intelligence, which is stillness, and death. |
Now let me get the question clear. Mr Signorini is asking, what is the relationship between intelligence and thought, silence and death. Bene. |
Do you want to discuss that? Yes. Sir, could we go into the question of freedom. |
How does freedom live in a society which ever encroaches upon it? I would like to discuss, he says, what is freedom and whether freedom can exist in a modern society. I personally don't know if we have completely finished with the question of yesterday and if we really went to the very bottom of no divisions in life. |
The questioner said, I don't think we have gone sufficiently deeply into the question of the motive, the deep down intentions and so on. I wonder if we cannot discuss this question of consciousness more deeply by considering what is intelligence and thought, the relationship between intelligence and thought, and perhaps if we can then go into the question of silence and its relationship to death. But before we go into that, there are several things involved in what we were discussing yesterday and I do not know if you have gone deeply into it yourself and what you understood, or how much of it is a reality. |
We said yesterday that most of us are conditioned by the culture, by the environment, by the food, the clothes and so on - we are conditioned. The conditioning is the content of consciousness and consciousness is the conditioning. What relationship is thought to that conditioning, and can there be intelligence where there is conditioning? |
Right, sir? Right. One is aware, if one has sufficiently examined oneself quite objectively, not with any kind of condemnation or judgement, if one has observed oneself one realises one is conditioned, superficially or in great depth. |
And is it at all possible not only to be free of the deep conditioning, which may be the result of the family, the whole racial accumulation, the influences which have not been obvious but nevertheless have penetrated very deeply, whether the mind can ever be free of all that. That is one question. And if it is conditioned can the mind unconditional itself totally? |
Or - this may be a relevant question - can the mind prevent itself, not through resistance, from being conditioned ever? You follow? There are these two things which you have to examine this morning. |
In relation to thought and intelligence, and what is said also with regard to silence and death. We'll go into, if we can, cover this whole field. Is that all right, signor? |
Bene. I am sorry you are going away today. Why does the mind ever get conditioned? |
Is it so sensitive, so capable of being hurt, it is like a tender delicate thing, and in relationship it gets invariably hurt, invariably conditioned, and whether that conditioning is ever possibly to be washed away. So, one realises the mind is conditioned, the brain itself is conditioned - time evolved through centuries upon centuries, and the brain is the storehouse of memory. You can watch it yourself, you don't have to read philosophical or psychological books, at least I don't, so you may. |
And it is always responding, the brain which has evolved through time, which is the past, which is the accumulation of memory, experience, knowledge, responds to any challenge instantly according to its conditioning, superficially or in depth. I think this is clear. Now can that response from the past be delayed so that there is an interval between the challenge and the response? |
It is not so difficult, is it? That is, one has been brought up - I am taking a very, very superficial conditioning - in a particular culture, in a particular belief or pattern, and when that belief or pattern is questioned there is instant response according to the background of the person. I am asking, can that response be delayed so that there is an interval between the challenge and the response. |
That is fairly simple, isn't it, no? No? Yes. |
You tell me I am a fool - my response is immediate, calling you, 'You are another', or getting angry with you, or this or that. Now, when you call me a fool, can there be an interval between your calling me and my responding, a space - right? - so that the brain is quiet enough to respond in a different way? |
Am I making my... Yes. (Inaudible) Just let me... |
Hold on a minute sir, hold on, one moment. The brain responds all the time according to its conditioning, according to various forms of stimuli, it is always active. The brain is the response of time, memory, it is the content of it. |
Right? In the brain the whole past is contained. If the brain can hold itself and not respond immediately then there is a possibility of a new response. |
Right? But this time itself is responsive. No sir, you are missing my point. |
Don't pick me up in words, just look at the meaning for the moment. The brain operates in the old habits established by the culture I live in, or by the past racial inheritance and so on. That responds all the time - judging, evaluating, believing, not believing, discussing, getting angry, violent, prejudiced - that is its response all the time to any stimuli - protecting, denying and so on. |
I am asking myself whether that brain can momentarily be in abeyance and not respond instantly. Right? I am asking, I don't know, I am going to find out. |
The brain cannot be denied of its past knowledge, it must have past knowledge - I don't know if you are meeting all this - otherwise it can't function. So I am asking myself - myself being... I am asking whether that brain which is the old, will allow itself to be quiet so that a new part can operate. |
Right? When you flatter me the old brain says, 'How lovely'. But can the old brain listen to what you say, the flattery, and not respond so that perhaps a new movement can take place? |
Right? Right, sir? That new movement can only take place when there is silence - right? |
- not the machinery operating in terms of the past. Is that clear? Yes. |
No, clear in the sense watch yourself, sir, otherwise it is no fun. I am not explaining for myself, we are working together. I find when one examines one's activities, the old brain is always responding - as a Catholic, as a Protestant, whatever it is, all according to its limited knowledge, to its tradition, to its racial inheritance, and when that is operating nothing new can take place. |
Right? Now I want to find out whether that brain can be quiet, the old brain, so that a new movement can take place. Right? |
I want to find out. I can only find out when in relationship with another, watching the old brain in operation - right? - and the old brain understands the truth that it must be quiet in order a new operation can take place. |
The brain is not forcing itself to be quiet. If it is forcing itself to be quiet then it is the operation of the past still. In that there is division, there is conflict, there is discipline, all the rest of it. |
But if the old brain understands or sees the fact, the truth that as long as it is in constant response to any stimuli it must operate along the old lines. If that brain, the old brain sees the truth of that then that old brain becomes quiet. It is the truth that brings about the quietness, not the intention to be quiet. |
Have you - get it? Yes. Because you see sir, it is very interesting this question because one finds there are certain brains that are never conditioned. |
You say, 'How do you know?' Naturally. I only know it because it has happened to the speaker. |
You may not believe it, or disbelieve it. Just take the fact. I am asking why the brain must always be functioning in this old pattern. |
If it is not functioning in its old pattern it sets a new pattern according to its memories and setting a new pattern in opposition to the old. Right? Aren't you following all this? |
No? How do you know that you have not been conditioned? Oh lord! |
You see you have gone... I ought not to have brought that in. I thought you couldn't get it. |
It doesn't matter, leave it for the moment, we'll come to that. You see we only use a very, very small part of the brain - right? - and that small part is the past. |
There must be and there is parts of the brain which has not functioned at all, which are open, empty, new. Right? Do you know anything about it? |
No sir, don't agree to this. We only know the old brain in operation, when you are at all conscious of it. Now we are asking whether that old brain can be still to a stimuli so that a new response can come out. |
That's my question. I know... one knows the old brain either superficially or in depth is conditioned. Right? |
There is no question about that. Right? Is there any doubt? |
But how can you speak of conditioning if you say you are not conditioned? Don't bother about me, sir. I said leave it, throw it out in the wastepaper basket. |
Let's start. You see you are going back to something which you haven't understood. You will understand perhaps. |
Don't bring that in. If I brought that in, I am sorry. Forget it. |
I am asking myself, the old brain is constantly active, and responding according to its background, its conditioning. And the next question is, how can that brain which has been so conditioned not always respond to any stimuli, hold back a little? Right? |
Hold back a little. Can I go on? You seem to be so lost. |
No sir, it is very clear. Very clear? Yes. |
Thank god. And one finds when there is the necessity, the urgency, and the importance of this question is vital, the brain does hold back - right? - the old brain, so that a new quality of the brain which has never been touched, operates. |
This has happened, sir, this is not my only experience. Any top scientist - top scientist, not a scientist who is a slave to government - but top scientists free from government and environment, and the desire for success, position, those are not scientists at all, they are merchants - but the scientist who is free of government and the demands of government and so on, he must have asked this question because how does he discover new things? If the old brain is in operation all the time it can't discover anything new. |
So, it is only when the old brain is quiet something new is seen. Right? Like the man who invented the jet, though he had tremendous knowledge of the piston, internal combustion machinery, though he knew it all he had to find something new, and therefore the old brain said, 'All right I'll keep quiet with all my knowledge I have acquired, I am going to look', which means the old brain must be quiet, and in that quiet state something new is discovered. |
Right? This is a fact, you don't have to fight with me. Now without forcing the brain how can that quietness come, and the brain voluntarily is quiet? |
You have understood, sir? I want to find out whether the brain sees the truth that as long as it functions in the old pattern it can never discover anything new. It can discover something new only when it sees the truth that the old cannot find anything new and therefore the old becomes quiet. |
The truth makes it quiet not it wishes to be quiet. Right? If that is very clear, then can that quietness operate all the time and not the old conditioning, and the old conditioning with its knowledge operates only when it is necessary? |
Have you got my question rightly? Yes. Have you got my question? |
You say operate all the time, sir? All the time. Does that bring a conflict? |
No. Please, just listen sir. I don't say it must - I want to find out, I am enquiring. |
I am not saying it must be quiet. I see the old brain must operate. Right? |
Otherwise I can't go home, otherwise I can't speak English, drive a car, recognise you. Right? The old brain must operate, functionally, and as long as the old brain is not quiet no new thing can be seen - as I explained. |
Right? Have you gone to sleep? (Laughter) You are following? |
Yes. Good. I am asking myself, what is the relationship between the new quality of the brain which functions in quietness and its relationship with the old? |
The old is thought. Right? The old is the collection of memories and any response according to that memory is thought, and that thought must function otherwise you can't do anything. |
Sir, aren't you making divisions? No, no, it is not, it is not. No. |
No. No, it is not division. It is like a house, it is like the tent. |
The tent is a whole thing but there are divisions in it. And yesterday there weren't... No, no, no. You are wrong sir. |
You are missing the whole point. You haven't moved. Oh lord! |
You have got it, sir? Give an example. Don't give examples, sir - I am lost with examples. |
I have found two things, sir. We have discovered two things. That the old brain is the conditioned brain, which has accumulated knowledge through centuries upon centuries. |
That is the old brain we'll call that for the moment. It is just giving it a name, nothing more, just giving it a name, not dividing as the old and the new, its just to convey the meaning that there is this whole structure of brain, one part of that is the old, which doesn't mean it is separate from the new. It is different. |
But yesterday you said that from the unconscious... Wait sir, we come back to that. We'll come back to the whole business of consciousness. |
I am not contradicting myself. If I am contradicting myself from what I said yesterday, I will tell you I am contradicting. I am not such a silly person. |
I will go into it. Now I am saying to myself, I see this factor, that if the old brain is in operation nothing new can be discovered. The new can only be discovered when the old is quiet. |
And the old can only be quiet when it sees the truth that the new cannot be discovered by the old. Right? When the old sees the truth of that then it is quiet. |
Right? Are we together? Yes. |
Now, it has been proved by scientists, by others, that a new thing can be discovered only when the old is silent. Right? That is, when the old knows all the knowledge of internal combustion machinery, when it wants to discover something new the old must obviously be quiet. |
Now we have discovered this fact. The old must be naturally quiet to discover something new. Right, sir? |
Yes. Right? Is the discovery made by the new or the old? |
Is the discovery made by the new or the old. (Inaudible) That's enough, that's enough... Is the discovery made by the new or by the old? By neither of them. |
Answer it, sir. My brain - you see - now wait a minute! My brain says, 'I really don't know whether it comes or not, I am going to find out'. |
Right? You have asked a question, which is, does the old brain recognise the new - right, madame? - or does the new use the old? |
You follow that, sir? Just, sir, you don't enter into this because you haven't followed... (Inaudible) No, therefore keep quiet. You haven't entered into it at all. |
(Inaudible) The old brain is quiet because it has understood completely that it can never discover anything new, no new thing can happen. We won't even use the word 'discover'. No new movement can take place if the old is constantly in operation. |
The old sees the fact of that and is quiet. And a new... a new happening takes place. That happening, is it recognised by the old? |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.