Datasets:
eliwill
/
krishnamurti_discussions

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
text
stringlengths
12
1.33k
Are you interested in all this? Or merely as a curiosity listening to somebody talking about something about which you know nothing? We are very serious to learn.
Learn from me? You are not learning anything from me. You are learning by observing yourself, and yourself is far more important than me because yourself is the life that you are living.
So you can learn by observing. Sir, look, I'll show it to you. Listen to it, please do listen to it.
I observe myself. The observer is the knower - right? - is the entity who is the past, the knowledge, the experience, the tradition, the entity that said, this is right, this wrong, this is good, this is bad - which is all conditioning of the past.
I observe... when there is observation by the observer then he is observing through a screen of the past. Right? You understand, sir?
Now, can he observe without that screen? Which means, can he observe without the observer? An observation in which the observer doesn't enter at all.
Try it, do this and you will find how extraordinary things take place. Where there is a division between the observer and the observed, there is conflict. Right?
The past and the present. The observed is the present, and when the observer is different from the observed then there is division. That division brings about conflict.
Right? Between Muslim and Hindu. So similarly, when there is an observer watching the observed as though he was separate then there is conflict.
But the observer is the observed. Right? You understand this?
No. Anger, at the moment of anger there is no observer, is there? Later on, the observer comes in and says, 'I mustn't be angry', 'I was right to be angry', 'It was good to be angry', 'It was rational to be - righteous anger'.
So, the observer then is different from anger. Right, sir? Are you getting tired?
No, sir. So where there is an observer different from the observed there is conflict. When you say, 'I am different from the world', you are in conflict with the world.
But when you realize that you are the world and the world is you, this conflict of division comes to an end, therefore there is action. I wonder if you see it. Sir, we are endowed with brains.
You have expanded that brain capacity in memorizing, in accepting authority, tradition, and therefore you find it terribly difficult to see something new. But when you see something new, the habit comes over and takes it all to the old, and it becomes a habit, repeat. But when you look at it, then there is no repetition.
It is something new taking place all the time. So, do you realize in your heart, in your totality of your mind, that you are the world and the world is you? When you cheat another you are cheating yourself.
When you are jealous the world is jealous, and therefore your jealousy is sustained. And when you are envious you are part of that world. And then you ask, how am I to live in that world without envy, which is an abstraction because you are envious.
So, when you realize that you are the world, and it is really an extraordinary thing to realize that, not verbally, not as an ideation, idea or a mental concept but as an actuality, it is a tremendous thing. It breaks all limits of thought. You understand, sir?
Come, sir. It breaks down all barriers. It breaks down the very centre of your being, which is the 'me'.
When you say, I am the world and the world is me, there is no me. You understand? So it is a tremendous thing to realize that.
Then you will know what compassion is. We meet on Tuesday afternoon for a talk. I hope it won't rain.
This is not a talk by me. I have done seven talks, so that's enough. But this is supposed to be a discussion - the word 'discussion' means, I have just looked it up in the dictionary, 'through argument find what is true'; and a dialogue is a conversation between people who are seriously interested in understanding certain problems; and dialecticism is the discovery or the examination through opinion of what is true.
And opinion means, judgement based on a belief, a prejudice, or on a preconceived idea. So it is none of these - what we are going to do; neither discussion - the root meaning of that is 'to shake' - nor a dialogue, nor an opinion, or offering opinions and investigating those opinions to find out if they have any value. But what we are trying to do in these - I don't know what it is called, dialogues, or discussions, all that - what we are trying to do is to expose certain problems which one may have, and understand those problems by looking at them, not offering an opinion, a judgement and your criticism, but exposing them.
In the very exposure one discovers what is the truth, what is the meaning. That is, we may have many problems, human problems, not technological problems, the speaker couldn't possibly deal with those - human problems, such as violence, sorrow, relationship and so on. And it is like talking over together with friends who are serious, not casual friends, who want to find an answer, who want to discover an approach through which the thing is resolved, not carry on day after day, day after day.
That is the meaning of our gathering here for the next five mornings - which is, to converse together amicably, with care, with a sense of real affection, so that we understand the problem, our many problems and go beyond them - not carry them for next year, or for the next day. So what shall we together talk over this morning? (Inaudible) I understand.
One of the questions there must be total understanding to go beyond anything and our understanding is only partial. How is a mind that is always looking, or thinking partially, to understand totally? That is one question.
Any others? (Inaudible) (Repeating) Would you talk about, or talk over together the question of education. (Inaudible) (Repeating) How is thought to end completely, without conflict?
(Inaudible) The questioner says, please talk over relationship. (Inaudible) Thought and feeling. The great power of the state action, indirect or direct factors goes for the machinery of war.
May we look at this? Look at the fact that everyone contributes to the machinery of war. Everyone contributes to the horror of war.
(Inaudible) Talk about fear. Now wait a minute. You have partial understanding, and how is one without conflict, without effort to come to total understanding?
And would you talk about education, fear, and the ending of thought totally without conflict, and feeling and thought and their place in the mind. These are all the questions that have been put so far. Now can we discuss, or rather talk over together a question that will include all these?
Can we put a question that will cover most of the questions that have been put this morning, can we do that? Including how is a mind that only sees the part and not the whole, a mind that is educated to war, a mind that sees the necessity of thought and its activities and movements coming to an end without effort, and a mind that has been so utterly wrongly educated, is there a different kind of education, and, thought and feeling. Right?
Now, which question, which one of these questions could we ask so that it will give us a comprehensive understanding of all that, of all the questions that have been put so far? Our understanding of the word 'understanding'. That is one of the questions, I am wondering.
Would that also include fear, war, and the ending of thought, and its recognisable feelings would all that be included in the understanding, or investigation, or examination of total understanding? I think it would, wouldn't it? Right?
No? Would that include how to observe, what is the process of observation, both inwardly and outwardly? I think it would, that one question.
I am going to include into it. Right, will you accept that? Why does a mind accept war, with all its horrors and violence, and brutality, and at the same time talks about peace?
Why is a mind afraid and so on? Now these are the various education, fear, observation, the ending of thought, feeling and thought, all these are factors of the mind. Right?
Mind, heart, the brain and so on, which is the mind. Why is the mind so fragmented? You understand, sir?
Why is an artist, who is sensitive - supposed to be - concerned with beauty, perception, sensitivity, and seeing something other than the mere object, why does such a mind live a shoddy life, which is fragmentation. Which is, seeing perhaps the whole and incapable of seeing total action in life. (Inaudible) No madam, we are just examining.
The lady says it is always in relation to oneself. Look, I have all these problems as a human being - violence, war, partial understanding, education which is really no education at all; I have never been able to observe very clearly, and I also see the necessity of ending thought, because I understand thought is the past and so on, and I understand sometimes, a partial understanding, and it is never complete, so it is all fragmented, isn't it? Right, sir?
Now why is the mind fragmented, broken up? Examine your own mind, your own life. Why is it that in your daily life there is this conflict of the opposites?
Right? Conflict of duality, conflict which comes about through contradiction - I understand one minute, and the next minute I don't understand it at all; I see something very clearly for ten minutes and the rest of the day I don't see anything at all. Why is the mind - I am just asking - why is your mind broken up?
(Inaudible) (Repeating) It all depends on our laziness, because we are indolent. Is that so? I may be very active, full of energy, not lazy, but yet I am fragmented.
(Inaudible) (Repeating) Mind is the energy of god. If one could look up to that god, we'll be whole. Is that it?
God is one. God is one, whole, complete and if I could invite that whole and complete in me I will lose my fragmentation. Is that it?
(Inaudible) Merge into it, be swallowed up by it, be covered by it, and all the rest of it. How do you know god is whole? (Inaudible) No, that is not serious.
You are not talking seriously when you say, 'I know'. I have experience. Oh, no, your experience has no validity.
No, madam, you don't listen. Your experience may be a wish fulfilment and therefore it has no validity. Any man who says, 'I have experienced god, who is whole', must be distrusted, because he has been educated, or believes in god, or he is frightened of living and invents a god, and according to that invention he experiences.
That has no validity. (Inaudible) Are there not serious people who have said this, that god is whole and they have experienced god. Is that it?
More or less. More or less. I wonder what you call being serious.
Look sir, an insane person can be very serious, a neurotic person can be very, very, very serious, a man who is convinced about his experience according to his background can be very, very serious. But a man who is free of all belief, who is free of his conditioning, has dropped his belief in all forms of gods and all the rest of it, such a man is really a free man and therefore a serious man. Now sir, let's come back to it.
Why is our mind so broken up, contradictory, dividing itself against itself, why, what is the cause of it - not what to do about it. If I know why my mind is broken up, fragmented, contradictory, saying one thing, doing another, thinking something else, acting in another direction, why is your mind like that? It is the result of our culture, the culture in which we live, whether that culture is in India, Russia, or in Europe and so on, our education, our culture, our thinking divides - why?
The culture is what we have created. Right? My grandfather, the past generation, and the present generation, have created this culture, this culture which divides, breaks up life into fragments - business, artist, scientist, the religious, the quack, the insane - you follow?
- all that. I am asking you, what is the cause of it, behind it, behind the culture? Do examine it, go into yourself, please.
Please bear in mind that we are not offering opinions. (Sound of aeroplane) I don't know why there is so much noise this morning. Look, I seriously want to find out this, because where there is division there is conflict.
Right? The Arab, the Jew, the Russians, the Communists and the socialists, the capitalists, the Mao and so on and so on, where there is division, in oneself or externally, there is inevitably, logically, it is a law that there must be conflict. Now, the culture has created this and we are asking, why is the culture which we have created as human beings, what is the reason of it, what is behind it?
This division comes about, the cause of it is because man is seeking security... fear of losing it. You are saying this division comes about because, the cause, the cause of it is that man is seeking security. I am not saying it is not so, is that so?
Security in religion, security in belief, security in experience, security in knowledge, security in relationship, and the desire to be secure brings about this fragmentation. Is that so? Examine yourself please.
Yes sir? (Inaudible) We will go into that. Please, let's take it slowly, we have got the whole morning.
The mind is seeking security and therefore, it is suggested that the desire, the demand, for security brings about this division. And from that the question is who is it that is seeking security? You understand?
First of all, let's take security in a belief. Right? Shall we go on with that?
You are saying that the fragmentation of the mind is brought about through the demand of the mind to be secure, and it finds security in a belief - right? - in god, or in something it calls god. Now is that belief, is that god, real, or an invention of thought?
(Inaudible) The lady, the questioner says, is it that we are fundamentally, deeply frightened and therefore we are trying to find security in every direction. Right, madame? Now, first you say security, security in a belief, and there are other forms of security, is that demand for security born out of fear of - what?
Of not knowing myself, of the unknown, of the uncertainty of life, of the future, this impermanency, and therefore the mind seeks permanency in a belief, you understand? (Inaudible) Is every religious man insane. I think I am dreadfully religious, am I insane?
I don't think so. But a man, a religious man who believes in god, is somewhat neurotic. Please, sir, you are not following this at all, if I may suggest.
We are talking about the demand for security, and that security brings about fragmentation of our mind and life. And it is suggested by the questioner that fear is the basis, or the root of this desire to be secure. (Sound of aeroplane) I don't know what's happened today.
(Inaudible) I know. We must send a petition to the government. (Laughter) Please, sir, this is a serious thing - do take it seriously.
Then the problem is, if fear is the cause of this fragmentation, can that fear be completely wiped out? You follow? Completely wiped out, finished with, gone beyond?
Please listen. That being afraid of uncertainty, being afraid to suffer, being afraid of this impermanency of life, being afraid of doing wrong things, that brings about the desire to find something secure, and I am attached to that security, and being attached to that security brings about division, which is fragmentation. Right, so far it is fairly clear.
Then the next question can the mind be free of fear altogether, not partially, not for a few days and then come back to it again, but completely be free of fear? (Inaudible) (Repeating) How can one free oneself from the fear which paralyses the physical body, the mind, everything. We are discussing now, going into, this question of fear which someone raised earlier.
Please, give your attention because this is very serious, if you want to go into it. Since you have taken the trouble to come this morning, sit there, do give your serious attention to this. Now can the mind be free of fear which brings about fragmentation?
(Inaudible) (Repeating) Is not fear necessary for survival, as animals have that fear which makes them aggressive and therefore survive. Let's put it this fear of self-survival, fear of not being able to survive brings about division. If I am living in the Arab world and I am not an Arab obviously physical survival becomes rather difficult.
If I am living in a Catholic country and I am not a Catholic, that becomes rather difficult. If I am living in a Muslim - and so on and so on, in a communist world and so on. So we have adjusted ourselves to the communist world, to the Maoist world, to any world as long as we can be secure.
And that desire for security is based, we have said, on fear. Now can we survive without fear and yet be secure? You understand sir?
Be free of fear, which means no fragmentation, and out of that ending of that fear another factor comes in, which in itself becomes security. I don't know if you follow this? Right?
Now can the mind be free of fear? (Inaudible) (Repeating) Maybe the mind itself is fear. We are going to find out.
If the mind itself is fear, then who is it that says that he is afraid? You see we are going to block ourselves all the time, we are not proceeding further. I am asking a very simple, but very complex question, whether the mind, your mind, your whole being, can be free of fear.
Total understanding of this fear is necessary for ending it. That's right. But then we don't...
Wait! We'll come to that in a minute, sir. To end fear we must have total understanding of it.
But we haven't got that total understanding. So we are examining, sir, to find out if there is a total understanding of fear, not a partial understanding. We are answering your first question, that can this fear be observed totally and not partially?
Right? What sir? Fear has so many facets.
Of course. How is it possible to examine fear totally when it has so many facets - fear of death, fear of losing money, fear of public opinion, fear of not... - so many ways of fear. Now is there a central root of fear?
And these are all facets, manifestations of that central root - you understand? - because it is like a tree, having many branches but it is only the trunk that makes all the branches. So can we find out the central root of fear?
And then in the discovery of it I see the totality of fear. You understand, sir? Now can we look and find out for ourselves, not because somebody else says so, find out for ourselves what is the root of fear.
We are hampered by our personal reactions. No. I am asking, please, I am asking myself and therefore you are asking yourself, what is the central factor of fear?
(Inaudible) Wait, sir. You are saying it is thought, it can be unconscious. Please, find out.
Don't merely express an opinion. I am explaining something. Do listen.
Don't explain, don't put an opinion, a judgement, but find out for yourself deeply inside, what is the main root, or main substance, main cause, main drive of fear, conscious or unconscious? Give it a little minute, madam, don't be so impatient. Look, I want to find out what it is, I must look, I can't just throw out words, I must look, I must say, wait, let me look, let me be silent for a minute, let me look inside to find out what in me is the root of this fear.
(Inaudible) (Repeating) Is it not the separation of me from total life. When you say, 'is it not', that is an opinion, that is a judgement. I am asking something else.
Fear is the denial of 'what is'. Fear is the denial of 'what is'. That again is an opinion.
You haven't found for yourself the root of fear. But perhaps we shouldn't find out... He says we are frightened to find out.
We are frightened that we shouldn't find out. Yes. We are frightened that we shouldn't...
Same thing, sir. What is this fear? Have you ever asked this question?
(Inaudible) Have you found out for yourself, madame, what is the cause of your fear? (Inaudible) Is that the root of fear? (Inaudible) (Repeating) It is me separating itself, and the separation causes fear.
It is the ego. Ego is the cause of fear. (Inaudible) You haven't...
Please, would you mind for two minutes... (Inaudible) (Repeating) Because we think we are afraid. Would you mind, for two minutes, by the watch, or more, just without offering words, putting into words, find out for yourself, go into yourself, if you can, and find out without verbalising what it is your are frightened of, and what is the root of that fear. (Inaudible) Madame, listen, I just said two minutes, madame.
(Pause) Have you found out? Yes? (Inaudible) You are afraid of death.
Is that the root of fear? (Inaudible) For god's sake. It is a lovely morning, isn't it?
(Inaudible) So you haven't found out, therefore sir, you don't know what the root of fear is. Attachment to myself. Wait, wait.
Attachment to yourself. Awareness of oneself. Awareness of oneself.