eliwill/krishnamurti_discussions · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 12 1.33k
Now can you observe me, or your friend, your wife, your girlfriend, and so on, boyfriend, can you observe without the image that you have about her or him? A child can do this. But we are not children.
We are not babies. Please, don't let's go back to the babies. I am asking you, can you observe - please listen - can you observe the speaker, your neighbour, your wife, your husband, your girlfriend, your boy, without the image?
Normally we cannot. Normally we cannot. So, wait.
Normally we cannot. Generally we cannot. So we look at another, however intimate it be, through the image which we have built about the other.
Right? Now why does the mind so this? (In Italian) It is the same thing as before.
Why do I create an image about you, and why does the mind do this all the time? It is my security. It is my security.
Just listen. Don't deny, look at it. It is my security.
If I had no image of you, my relationship with you would be uncertain. Right? It wouldn't.
No, madam, you suppose that. No. You may, madam.
You may. You may. But most of us don't feel that.
So have a little patience with us. I have built an image about you because you have hurt me, you have given me pleasure, sexual or otherwise, you have been a companion, you have nagged me, you have bullied me, you have dominated me, I have built a picture about you. That's a reality.
And that image is the past. And I look at you through that image. Now why does the mind do this all the time?
You tell me, 'You are a fool', immediately an image - you follow? Why does the mind do this all the time? It's the way you defend yourself.
So, wait a minute, you are saying the image building is to defend oneself. What is the 'oneself'? Is that not also another image?
So you are defending one image by another image. Right? Now why does the mind do this all the time?
It doesn't all the time. Not all the time, most of the time. Because it is afraid.
So you are saying it does it because it is afraid. What is it afraid of? Of not being.
Wait a minute, sir. You say, 'of not being'. We are not discussing, having a dialogue verbally, actually we are experiencing, you know, going through this, not just words, words, words.
You say, 'the mind does this because it is afraid, it is afraid of not being'. Now, what is it that wants to be? I don't know, sir.
Wait, sir we are going to find out. The feeling is there. I know the feeling exists.
Sir, the feeling exists. Now what is this thing that is protecting itself by saying, 'I must be' - the being? I don't know.
We are going to find out, sir. I am not questioning. I am asking, sir.
The gentleman said, we are afraid of not being. And I asked, what is this fear based on? Wait, sir, wait, sir.
What is this fear of not being? What is it that wants to be? You understand, sir?
What is it that wants to be and not being it is afraid, therefore what is it that says, 'I must be'? (Inaudible) Does it mean life, daily living? Bread-and-butter, security, shelter, is that what it is afraid of not being, not getting food, clothes and shelter?
Surely not, that is part of it. So what is it afraid of not being? Don't say, mind, memory.
Please investigate it. Of having no identity. Of having no identity.
Now when you use the word 'identity' you say identity with, you must use the 'with'. Identity with what? Please, just listen.
I want to identify myself with my country - I see that is too absurd - with the flag - that's too absurd - with the church - that's too absurd. But now I want to identify myself. Now what is myself and what is it to be identified with myself?
Is there a myself, or is the myself a series of words, images, which thought has put together calling myself? And with that I want to identify. How silly I am!
(Inaudible) I know it is there. That is the illusion. Wait sir!
That is our culture, that is our verbal statement, that is the way we live. We say, 'I have identified myself with my country, with my god, with my flag, with my politics, and so on'. I have been identifying with all those and I say, 'How stupid of me, that has led to a lot of mischief, now I want to identify with myself'.
You see I have discarded all the identifications outside of me, now I want to identify myself with myself. What is myself? It is obviously a lot of images and words.
And so I say, look what I am doing. I am always trying to establish a fact which becomes a non-fact. Always trying to defend itself with an idea, with an image, with a conclusion, and those are all words.
That you discard. So the mind is afraid of being completely empty. Right?
Therefore it says, 'I must be'. Now the mind never finds out what takes place if it is really empty. You follow?
It is so afraid of being empty, therefore it must be occupied with the kitchen, with my sex, with god, with politics, with Mao, with a dozen things, because it is so afraid to be completely empty. Right? Now we must come back, sorry.
The observer is the past, and the observed is the present. Right? The mountain is the present.
The feeling of jealousy is the present, but I identify it with the past. Now can the observer observe without the past, only the present? Which means not naming jealousy, and if you do not name it does jealousy exist?
Wait. Look, sir, I am jealous because you have got a nicer car than I have, or more money, you look better, you look nice, you are smart, you are frightfully bright, intelligent, and all the rest of it. I am jealous of you.
That's a fact. The feeling is there. And I have given it a name, I have said, 'I am jealous', and I see by calling it jealousy I have strengthened the feeling.
And I say to myself, 'How silly', I realise this. Now can the mind observe without naming the feeling which is the present? Right?
Then what takes place? I have not named... the mind has not named jealousy, it sees the reason of it, the logic of it, the intelligence of it, and it says, 'I will not name' - not as a will, it is finished. Then what takes place?
Duality comes to an end. He says, duality comes to an end, therefore there is only the present. Right?
I have not named it, the mind has not named it, therefore what takes place? You haven't done it. If you had done it you would see it.
(Inaudible) Naming means - yes, sir - comparing, conforming to the past, strengthening the past and therefore creating a duality as the past and the present, which is jealousy - you follow? - all that is involved in naming. Now when the mind doesn't do all that, what takes place?
'What is'. Now you are guessing. Now I'll put the question differently.
What is the relationship between me and you, my wife, my husband, my daughter, my son, etc., if I have no image? What is my relationship with you if I have no image about you? (Inaudible) Sir, you have to find this out, you can't answer this.
Look, sir. I have lived with you and all the troubles, the travail, the anxiety, all that has built an image in my mind. Now I have no image and what is my relationship with you when I have no image about you?
You can't answer this question, can you? If you are really honest you can't answer this question. You can only answer it if you have really no image at all.
And that is one of the most radical things in life, not to have an image about the mountain, about you, about the person I live with and all the rest of it, not to have a single image, about the country, about nothing. Image means opinion, idea, conclusion, symbol, the thought that builds up all the images. Then what is the relationship between you, who have an image, and the person who has no image?
Don't answer me. This you have to find out. That is love.
The other thing is not love. Right? So is the observer different from the observed?
Outwardly yes. Inwardly the observer is the observed. Therefore there is no duality, and when there is no duality what is left?
Actually what is. Right? Actually what is.
Can the mind observe 'what is' without giving it a name - name means symbol, imitation, conformity, recognition - just observe 'what is'. (Inaudible) Why do we need memory. We need memory in order to ride a bicycle.
I need memory in order to talk English and so convey something to you, if you are interested in what I want to communicate. I need memory to function in a factory, in a business and so on. But that memory is the image in relationship.
Right, sir? Now that memory in relationship is the image. I have built an image about you, and you have built an image about me, therefore our relationship is between these two images.
And that is what is so important to us - the image I have about you and the image you have about me, and we live with these images. This relationship is called love, in this relationship there is attachment and all the rest of it, and we cling to that, the image. And we say the mind does it because it feels secure in having something, in having an image.
If it has no image it is empty, and we are afraid of being empty and therefore we say we must be something. So can the mind observe the present, the 'what is' without the memory, the image, the conclusion, the opinion, the judgement, the evaluation of the past? Just to observe 'what is'.
Sir, let me put it round the other way. Go much deeper, very much deeper. I love my brother, my son, my wife, my girl, my boy, and he dies.
The fact is he is dead. That is 'what is'. Right?
Can the mind observe 'what is' without any movement of thought which is the past? You understand? (Inaudible) Let's go on.
Look, my son is dead, that is a fact. Then what takes place? The image I have built about my son through the years makes the mind feel empty, lonely, sorrowful, self-pity, and the hope I will meet my son next life, go to a medium, a seance, get in touch with him, all that business.
Which is, the mind doesn't observe, live completely with 'what is'. Without the image. Then what takes place?
You understand? Come on sirs. I have no self-pity, I don't say, 'Oh, I wish my son had lived, he would have been such a marvellous human being because...' - you follow?
I have no movement of thought at all. The mind lives only with the fact that my son is dead. Then what takes place?
Have you ever done this? Yes, or no? My mind becomes quieter.
No, sir I am not talking of quietness. Look, sir, this happens to every human being, death is there - the birds, anything. What takes place in you when you look at the fact without a single image?
I can't tell you unless you come to it. You see what actually is. Yes, sir, I said that.
Living, being with actually what has taken place, not deviate, run away, let thought say this and that, nothing. It is quiet now. You will find out.
I hope nobody dies whom you love, or you think you love, I hope you will never suffer but when you come to that, which inevitably comes to everybody in the world, not only all those people living in Vietnam and Cambodia but every day it is happening around you, then you will find out what it means to live with 'what is' completely, without a single image. I insult you, I say terrible things about you, can you listen to me without the movement of thought that creates an image which hurts, can you listen? Try it.
Do it, and then you will see what an extraordinary change takes place. A change in which there is complete negation of every form of image, therefore the mind is never burdened with the past. It's like having a young mind, you understand.
All right, tomorrow we will continue. I am sorry you are having such bad weather! What shall we talk over together this morning?
(Inaudible) I'll repeat the question. You said the other day that will is a form of resistance, it is the outcome of choice between this and that, and how can we live in this world without choice and without will and resistance - right sir? - and not be influenced by the world around you?
Any other questions you want to discuss? My question do attention, understanding and love go together? Attention, action and love - are they all together.
(In Italian) What is the origin of emptiness in us? And how does comparison arise, does it arise out of a wound, out of a hurt. Do you call energy compassion?
You heard it so I don't have to repeat it. (Inaudible) What will make us see or act with regard to what you are talking about. (Inaudible) Sir, can't all these questions be answered - I think they will - if we take the first question, which how can we live in this world without choice, out of which comes the activity of will, and live in this world without being influenced by the environment, by the culture in which one lives?
Could we take that question, and I think all the other questions - including yours - probably will be included in that? May I? Is that all right?
Right. Why do we have to choose at all? That's the first thing.
Second, what is the substance and the structure of will? And what is action - right? - which is not influenced by the environment, the culture in which we live?
Right, sir? That is the question. Now why do we have to choose at all, what is choice - to choose?
It is a junction of ideas. No, the word 'to choose'. Why do we have to choose?
Is it part of our conditioning, is it part of our culture, which has been put into the mind, that life is a process of choice, that is, to discriminate between the real and the false, between the foolish and the wise, between right and wrong, between the good and the bad, between a good substance, material, and bad material - the whole structure of choice. Is it part of our culture that you must choose? And why must we choose?
And when does this demand to choose arise? You are following all this? Why do I, or you, have to choose at all - choice being between this and that, the good and the bad, the active and the inactive, you know, choose between the two - why?
Please if I may suggest, let us not indulge in theories, in ideologies, in speculative thinking, but actually observe in ourselves when does this process of choosing arise. Do you choose between that road and this road when you know exactly where you want to go and this particular road leads to that, then there is no choice is there? It is only when I do not know where I want to go, or when I am uncertain between this and that, then choice arises.
I have to ask, I have to find out which road to take; but when I am very clear in my direction, is there choice at all? Outwardly when I know where I live, where one lives, the house, the road, the path to it, there is no choice involved in it at all, you just go. It is a direct action without the confusion of choice.
Right? Unless the road is blocked. Oh, of course, if someone blocks the road you stop the car and go round it and go on, or go some other way.
But there is no choice there - the blocking the road, or the police putting a - all the rest of it - is just another form of not thinking directly about something. inwardly I don't know what to do. I don't know whether this is right or that is wrong.
I am confused. Right? So where there is confusion there must be choice.
No? When I am very clear then there is no choice. Either the path I take, or the act which I have to do comes very clearly when there is no confusion.
When the mind is confused I have to choose. I think that is fairly clear. So choice arises when there is confusion.
When you have to vote for somebody - between Mr Smith and Mr Brown - then the trouble arises. Then you enquire about Mr Smith and Mr Brown, and go into all that business, and then choose, that you will vote for somebody, not Mr Brown. But inwardly when one is confused, and one is confused - whether god exists or not, whether you should join a particular sect, whether you should belong to a particular political party, the economic system, the capitalist or the socialist, and so on.
When there is uncertainty, when there is no clarity, when there is confusion then choice arises. Right? I think that is fairly clear.
There is another form of choice when you choose between a pear or an apple. Yes. It comes to the same thing, sir.
Eating an apple or having beer, if you like beer you drink, if you don't like an apple, you don't, there is no choice about it. Your tongue or your tummy dictates what you should eat, or drink. So as far as one sees where there is confusion there must be choice and being uncertain the choice gives you the direction, and to follow it you must resist every other form of influence.
Right? Now why are we confused? Let's start from there.
What is the reason, why is the mind so extraordinarily confused, about everything - you understand? About whether I should smoke, or not smoke, drink or not drink, take LSD or not, whether I should do this or that, inwardly, outwardly, why is the mind so deeply confused? Are you - I am not talking to you personally, but asking generally - are you aware that you are confused - aware in the sense, know, be cognisant of, feel that you are very confused, both at the conscious level as well as the unconscious level?
Is one aware of that? Whether you should become a doctor or a scientist, whether you should follow that particular guru or that particular teacher, whether you should take up economics or philosophy - outwardly. And inwardly you have found you cannot rely on anybody, anything, on any idea, and so the mind is confused.
Right? Is one aware? Go on sirs, let's talk.

Now can you observe me, or your friend, your wife, your girlfriend, and so on, boyfriend, can you observe without the image that you have about her or him? A child can do this. But we are not children.

We are not babies. Please, don't let's go back to the babies. I am asking you, can you observe - please listen - can you observe the speaker, your neighbour, your wife, your husband, your girlfriend, your boy, without the image?

Normally we cannot. Normally we cannot. So, wait.

Normally we cannot. Generally we cannot. So we look at another, however intimate it be, through the image which we have built about the other.

Right? Now why does the mind so this? (In Italian) It is the same thing as before.

Why do I create an image about you, and why does the mind do this all the time? It is my security. It is my security.

Just listen. Don't deny, look at it. It is my security.

If I had no image of you, my relationship with you would be uncertain. Right? It wouldn't.

No, madam, you suppose that. No. You may, madam.

You may. You may. But most of us don't feel that.

So have a little patience with us. I have built an image about you because you have hurt me, you have given me pleasure, sexual or otherwise, you have been a companion, you have nagged me, you have bullied me, you have dominated me, I have built a picture about you. That's a reality.

And that image is the past. And I look at you through that image. Now why does the mind do this all the time?

You tell me, 'You are a fool', immediately an image - you follow? Why does the mind do this all the time? It's the way you defend yourself.

So, wait a minute, you are saying the image building is to defend oneself. What is the 'oneself'? Is that not also another image?

So you are defending one image by another image. Right? Now why does the mind do this all the time?

It doesn't all the time. Not all the time, most of the time. Because it is afraid.

So you are saying it does it because it is afraid. What is it afraid of? Of not being.

Wait a minute, sir. You say, 'of not being'. We are not discussing, having a dialogue verbally, actually we are experiencing, you know, going through this, not just words, words, words.

You say, 'the mind does this because it is afraid, it is afraid of not being'. Now, what is it that wants to be? I don't know, sir.

Wait, sir we are going to find out. The feeling is there. I know the feeling exists.

Sir, the feeling exists. Now what is this thing that is protecting itself by saying, 'I must be' - the being? I don't know.

We are going to find out, sir. I am not questioning. I am asking, sir.

The gentleman said, we are afraid of not being. And I asked, what is this fear based on? Wait, sir, wait, sir.

What is this fear of not being? What is it that wants to be? You understand, sir?

What is it that wants to be and not being it is afraid, therefore what is it that says, 'I must be'? (Inaudible) Does it mean life, daily living? Bread-and-butter, security, shelter, is that what it is afraid of not being, not getting food, clothes and shelter?

Surely not, that is part of it. So what is it afraid of not being? Don't say, mind, memory.

Please investigate it. Of having no identity. Of having no identity.

Now when you use the word 'identity' you say identity with, you must use the 'with'. Identity with what? Please, just listen.

I want to identify myself with my country - I see that is too absurd - with the flag - that's too absurd - with the church - that's too absurd. But now I want to identify myself. Now what is myself and what is it to be identified with myself?

Is there a myself, or is the myself a series of words, images, which thought has put together calling myself? And with that I want to identify. How silly I am!

(Inaudible) I know it is there. That is the illusion. Wait sir!

That is our culture, that is our verbal statement, that is the way we live. We say, 'I have identified myself with my country, with my god, with my flag, with my politics, and so on'. I have been identifying with all those and I say, 'How stupid of me, that has led to a lot of mischief, now I want to identify with myself'.

You see I have discarded all the identifications outside of me, now I want to identify myself with myself. What is myself? It is obviously a lot of images and words.

And so I say, look what I am doing. I am always trying to establish a fact which becomes a non-fact. Always trying to defend itself with an idea, with an image, with a conclusion, and those are all words.

That you discard. So the mind is afraid of being completely empty. Right?

Therefore it says, 'I must be'. Now the mind never finds out what takes place if it is really empty. You follow?

It is so afraid of being empty, therefore it must be occupied with the kitchen, with my sex, with god, with politics, with Mao, with a dozen things, because it is so afraid to be completely empty. Right? Now we must come back, sorry.

The observer is the past, and the observed is the present. Right? The mountain is the present.

The feeling of jealousy is the present, but I identify it with the past. Now can the observer observe without the past, only the present? Which means not naming jealousy, and if you do not name it does jealousy exist?

Wait. Look, sir, I am jealous because you have got a nicer car than I have, or more money, you look better, you look nice, you are smart, you are frightfully bright, intelligent, and all the rest of it. I am jealous of you.

That's a fact. The feeling is there. And I have given it a name, I have said, 'I am jealous', and I see by calling it jealousy I have strengthened the feeling.

And I say to myself, 'How silly', I realise this. Now can the mind observe without naming the feeling which is the present? Right?

Then what takes place? I have not named... the mind has not named jealousy, it sees the reason of it, the logic of it, the intelligence of it, and it says, 'I will not name' - not as a will, it is finished. Then what takes place?

Duality comes to an end. He says, duality comes to an end, therefore there is only the present. Right?

I have not named it, the mind has not named it, therefore what takes place? You haven't done it. If you had done it you would see it.

(Inaudible) Naming means - yes, sir - comparing, conforming to the past, strengthening the past and therefore creating a duality as the past and the present, which is jealousy - you follow? - all that is involved in naming. Now when the mind doesn't do all that, what takes place?

'What is'. Now you are guessing. Now I'll put the question differently.

What is the relationship between me and you, my wife, my husband, my daughter, my son, etc., if I have no image? What is my relationship with you if I have no image about you? (Inaudible) Sir, you have to find this out, you can't answer this.

Look, sir. I have lived with you and all the troubles, the travail, the anxiety, all that has built an image in my mind. Now I have no image and what is my relationship with you when I have no image about you?

You can't answer this question, can you? If you are really honest you can't answer this question. You can only answer it if you have really no image at all.

And that is one of the most radical things in life, not to have an image about the mountain, about you, about the person I live with and all the rest of it, not to have a single image, about the country, about nothing. Image means opinion, idea, conclusion, symbol, the thought that builds up all the images. Then what is the relationship between you, who have an image, and the person who has no image?

Don't answer me. This you have to find out. That is love.

The other thing is not love. Right? So is the observer different from the observed?

Outwardly yes. Inwardly the observer is the observed. Therefore there is no duality, and when there is no duality what is left?

Actually what is. Right? Actually what is.

Can the mind observe 'what is' without giving it a name - name means symbol, imitation, conformity, recognition - just observe 'what is'. (Inaudible) Why do we need memory. We need memory in order to ride a bicycle.

I need memory in order to talk English and so convey something to you, if you are interested in what I want to communicate. I need memory to function in a factory, in a business and so on. But that memory is the image in relationship.

Right, sir? Now that memory in relationship is the image. I have built an image about you, and you have built an image about me, therefore our relationship is between these two images.

And that is what is so important to us - the image I have about you and the image you have about me, and we live with these images. This relationship is called love, in this relationship there is attachment and all the rest of it, and we cling to that, the image. And we say the mind does it because it feels secure in having something, in having an image.

If it has no image it is empty, and we are afraid of being empty and therefore we say we must be something. So can the mind observe the present, the 'what is' without the memory, the image, the conclusion, the opinion, the judgement, the evaluation of the past? Just to observe 'what is'.

Sir, let me put it round the other way. Go much deeper, very much deeper. I love my brother, my son, my wife, my girl, my boy, and he dies.

The fact is he is dead. That is 'what is'. Right?

Can the mind observe 'what is' without any movement of thought which is the past? You understand? (Inaudible) Let's go on.

Look, my son is dead, that is a fact. Then what takes place? The image I have built about my son through the years makes the mind feel empty, lonely, sorrowful, self-pity, and the hope I will meet my son next life, go to a medium, a seance, get in touch with him, all that business.

Which is, the mind doesn't observe, live completely with 'what is'. Without the image. Then what takes place?

You understand? Come on sirs. I have no self-pity, I don't say, 'Oh, I wish my son had lived, he would have been such a marvellous human being because...' - you follow?

I have no movement of thought at all. The mind lives only with the fact that my son is dead. Then what takes place?

Have you ever done this? Yes, or no? My mind becomes quieter.

No, sir I am not talking of quietness. Look, sir, this happens to every human being, death is there - the birds, anything. What takes place in you when you look at the fact without a single image?

I can't tell you unless you come to it. You see what actually is. Yes, sir, I said that.

Living, being with actually what has taken place, not deviate, run away, let thought say this and that, nothing. It is quiet now. You will find out.

I hope nobody dies whom you love, or you think you love, I hope you will never suffer but when you come to that, which inevitably comes to everybody in the world, not only all those people living in Vietnam and Cambodia but every day it is happening around you, then you will find out what it means to live with 'what is' completely, without a single image. I insult you, I say terrible things about you, can you listen to me without the movement of thought that creates an image which hurts, can you listen? Try it.

Do it, and then you will see what an extraordinary change takes place. A change in which there is complete negation of every form of image, therefore the mind is never burdened with the past. It's like having a young mind, you understand.

All right, tomorrow we will continue. I am sorry you are having such bad weather! What shall we talk over together this morning?

(Inaudible) I'll repeat the question. You said the other day that will is a form of resistance, it is the outcome of choice between this and that, and how can we live in this world without choice and without will and resistance - right sir? - and not be influenced by the world around you?

Any other questions you want to discuss? My question do attention, understanding and love go together? Attention, action and love - are they all together.

(In Italian) What is the origin of emptiness in us? And how does comparison arise, does it arise out of a wound, out of a hurt. Do you call energy compassion?

You heard it so I don't have to repeat it. (Inaudible) What will make us see or act with regard to what you are talking about. (Inaudible) Sir, can't all these questions be answered - I think they will - if we take the first question, which how can we live in this world without choice, out of which comes the activity of will, and live in this world without being influenced by the environment, by the culture in which one lives?

Could we take that question, and I think all the other questions - including yours - probably will be included in that? May I? Is that all right?

Right. Why do we have to choose at all? That's the first thing.

Second, what is the substance and the structure of will? And what is action - right? - which is not influenced by the environment, the culture in which we live?

Right, sir? That is the question. Now why do we have to choose at all, what is choice - to choose?

It is a junction of ideas. No, the word 'to choose'. Why do we have to choose?

Is it part of our conditioning, is it part of our culture, which has been put into the mind, that life is a process of choice, that is, to discriminate between the real and the false, between the foolish and the wise, between right and wrong, between the good and the bad, between a good substance, material, and bad material - the whole structure of choice. Is it part of our culture that you must choose? And why must we choose?

And when does this demand to choose arise? You are following all this? Why do I, or you, have to choose at all - choice being between this and that, the good and the bad, the active and the inactive, you know, choose between the two - why?

Please if I may suggest, let us not indulge in theories, in ideologies, in speculative thinking, but actually observe in ourselves when does this process of choosing arise. Do you choose between that road and this road when you know exactly where you want to go and this particular road leads to that, then there is no choice is there? It is only when I do not know where I want to go, or when I am uncertain between this and that, then choice arises.

I have to ask, I have to find out which road to take; but when I am very clear in my direction, is there choice at all? Outwardly when I know where I live, where one lives, the house, the road, the path to it, there is no choice involved in it at all, you just go. It is a direct action without the confusion of choice.

Right? Unless the road is blocked. Oh, of course, if someone blocks the road you stop the car and go round it and go on, or go some other way.

But there is no choice there - the blocking the road, or the police putting a - all the rest of it - is just another form of not thinking directly about something. inwardly I don't know what to do. I don't know whether this is right or that is wrong.

I am confused. Right? So where there is confusion there must be choice.

No? When I am very clear then there is no choice. Either the path I take, or the act which I have to do comes very clearly when there is no confusion.

When the mind is confused I have to choose. I think that is fairly clear. So choice arises when there is confusion.

When you have to vote for somebody - between Mr Smith and Mr Brown - then the trouble arises. Then you enquire about Mr Smith and Mr Brown, and go into all that business, and then choose, that you will vote for somebody, not Mr Brown. But inwardly when one is confused, and one is confused - whether god exists or not, whether you should join a particular sect, whether you should belong to a particular political party, the economic system, the capitalist or the socialist, and so on.

When there is uncertainty, when there is no clarity, when there is confusion then choice arises. Right? I think that is fairly clear.

There is another form of choice when you choose between a pear or an apple. Yes. It comes to the same thing, sir.

Eating an apple or having beer, if you like beer you drink, if you don't like an apple, you don't, there is no choice about it. Your tongue or your tummy dictates what you should eat, or drink. So as far as one sees where there is confusion there must be choice and being uncertain the choice gives you the direction, and to follow it you must resist every other form of influence.

Right? Now why are we confused? Let's start from there.

What is the reason, why is the mind so extraordinarily confused, about everything - you understand? About whether I should smoke, or not smoke, drink or not drink, take LSD or not, whether I should do this or that, inwardly, outwardly, why is the mind so deeply confused? Are you - I am not talking to you personally, but asking generally - are you aware that you are confused - aware in the sense, know, be cognisant of, feel that you are very confused, both at the conscious level as well as the unconscious level?

Is one aware of that? Whether you should become a doctor or a scientist, whether you should follow that particular guru or that particular teacher, whether you should take up economics or philosophy - outwardly. And inwardly you have found you cannot rely on anybody, anything, on any idea, and so the mind is confused.

Right? Is one aware? Go on sirs, let's talk.