Datasets:
eliwill
/
krishnamurti_discussions

Dataset card Data Studio Files Community
text
stringlengths
12
1.33k
A tremendous urge to find out about life, which is thought. Your life is based on thought, all your activity is based on thought, your relationship is based on thought. (Inaudible) I am doing that, madam, we are doing that.
(Inaudible) The lady says we refuse to consider ourselves as a whole. We are coming back to the same question. How do you consider yourself as a whole when you are looking at life partially?
- my country, my god, my desires, my ambitions, all the rest of it - how can you see the whole? As that gentleman pointed out, the speaker has talked for fifty years, and as he says, 'Has the speech produced one single human being, apart from yourself, who is really free?' You understand?
I am not interested if after fifty years I have produced one single human being who is free. You understand? I am not interested.
If you are interested, take it; if you are not interested, don't take it. Right? This is not propaganda, this is not something to convince you.
If you are willing to listen, if you are willing to pay attention, if you say, look, I really want to understand what you are talking, I want to understand myself, I want to change totally myself, then give care, attention, affection. But if you are not, it doesn't matter. There are plenty of shrines, which are delusions, you can go to them.
I have a question about thought. When you have a new thought after... There is no new thought.
Is there a new thought? Or thought is always old? Thought can never be free.
It may come up as new but it is still thought. So I am left with thought is my life, thought is my action, thought is my relationship, thought is my god, thought is the thing that man has put together for thousands of years, as devotion, as guru, as this, ten different things. And I see thought divides.
Right? My country, your country, my belief and your belief, my god and your god, my ideals and your ideals, and so on and so on, so on. Thought divides.
Right? Are you following all this? True is it, or real to you?
Thought divides. So thought is not love. So how can the mind, which has been put together through centuries, in the structure of thought - follow this, please - how can that mind which is the result of thought, whose essence is thought, how can that mind change radically?
Right? To change radically thought must be understood, otherwise there is no escape. Can you understand your thought - your thought, not my thought?
If you understand your thought then it is the thought of everybody. Right? (Inaudible) Sir, look, I know what you are saying is so, but to answer that question you also have - which is what we are trying to do - to see why this constant chain goes on, movement.
Right? You have got to find the basis for all this, sir, haven't you? Not intellectually but actually in your life?
You see, sir, our difficulty is to sustain a continuous, sane, logical investigation. We haven't got the vitality or the energy, or the urgency of it, we are playing. Now thought is the basis of our action and our life.
Thought has produced such mischief, and also it has produced great architecture, great painting, but it is still thought. Right? And thought also brought wars, thought has destroyed millions of people.
Right? Christianity probably has destroyed more human beings than any other religion in the world. Right?
Swallow that pill! So thought has done all this, and so thought cannot bring change. It can go from one corner of the field to another corner, but it is still within the same field.
Right? Communism, socialism - you understand? The change within that area of thought is the same, with modifications.
Right? That is so, sir, there is no point in hesitating about this. Right?
So thought is not the instrument of change. If I realise that, I have got to find another instrument. It is my responsibility, it is my duty, it is my tremendous necessity to find another instrument, because I am concerned with the world, which is myself.
To bring a change in the world I must find out something which is not based on thought because thought will not solve it, all our misery. Right sir? Don't accept this, you can look at it.
(Inaudible) Sir, look sir, you haven't even accepted, you haven't even seen that thought is destructive, thought cannot bring about change. You put another question. Look sir, please look.
Look what has in your Christian world, how many divisions of Christians there are. In your Christian world how many wars you have had. In your Christian world the division amongst people, class, quarrel, quarrel, quarrel, divisions, fight, fight, fight, that's what your life is.
And that is all the result of your thought; and you are using thought to bring a change. And I say, that is impossible, don't do it. So you have to find a way which is not the way of thought.
Right? But to find a way which is not the way of thought, you have to understand the whole business of thought, not say, 'Well, I must look in other direction'. Because if you are still caught in the field of thought then you can't look in the other direction.
So you must understand what thought is. Right? So if I understand how to run a car, there is no problem.
But because we don't understand the nature of thought we go on employing it. Right? So we are going to find out.
There are two questions involved in What is thought, what is thinking? And the necessity of thinking. Right?
The necessity, because the very words you use and the expression is thought. So thought has its place, which is in the operational field, in the functional field. That is, speaking a language, driving a car, the business world, the technological world, which is all based on knowledge, experience, memory, thought - there thought must live, must operate.
And I am asking, has it any other place except in that area only? Right? You are following this?
Follow it in yourself, don't follow the description, follow the described. That is, I see thought is necessary, to write, to speak, to communicate - there are other forms of communication - but thought is necessary, thought being knowledge, experience, accumulated memory, that is necessary; otherwise you can't go to your home, otherwise you can't travel, otherwise you can't speak and so on. And when there is observation why does thought move into that field?
You understand? You have understood? I want to observe the beauty of those hills, and the beauty of light and shade, and the depth of shadows, and the movement of leaves, but thought comes in and says, 'That is a lovely hill', or 'I don't like this, I like that', 'That is a bird'.
You follow? Why does thought do all this? Now is my mind concerned with the cause - please listen to this - is my mind concerned to discover the cause of thought and its activity?
You understand my question? When I say, why does thought do this, keep interfering, I have put that question to find a cause, haven't I? Right, sir?
So cause and effect. Right? Are you following this, it is fairly simple, isn't it?
Cause - all right, I'll show it to you. I have said, why does thought do all this, interfere, push itself in? When I put that question I am looking for the cause, am I not?
So there is a motive in looking for the cause. Right? You follow this?
So what have I done? When I look to the cause, a motive, it is still the operation of thought, so I am not looking, I am only investigating the cause. So the cause becomes the time.
I see that, therefore I won't ask that question. You understand, sir? Are you following this?
I won't ask the question why does thought do this, because the moment I have put that question I am investigating the cause which is within the field of time. I wonder if you understand this. Look, if I say, I love you, and I say to myself, why do I love you?
What have I done? I don't love you, do I? You understand, sir?
When I say, why do I love you, I have brought in an intellectual process which says there must be a cause. And where there is a cause there is no love, is there? What's the matter with you?
So when I put the question, 'Why does thought interfere, weave itself into observation? ', I am really putting a wrong question. I want the cause, and I want to destroy the cause.
You follow? And therefore I am caught again in the process of thought. So, see what I have done.
I want to observe the map of fear, and thought interferes with it and I say, 'I must find the cause', I am still within the same area, I haven't moved away from it. Right? So I play this game with myself all the time, and I am thinking I am changing.
Whereas put the question and don't seek a cause. Just put it, and don't look for it. Then you will see the whole thing unfolds itself without your asking, why.
You understand? When you put the 'why' and you find a cause, that is a direction. Right?
Where there is direction there is time, there is will, and therefore you are back again in the movement of thought. But if you say, 'Yes, why is thought doing this? ', just observe it, not saying, what is the reason for all this.
Just observe. Sir, don't you ever do this when you love, do you say, 'Why am I loving you?'. Why am I talking for fifty years, when I say, 'My god, why am I doing this?'
Then I'll find a cause but it is not the real thing. Now look at what we have done - I must stop because it's time - see what we have done, we have said all our culture, past and present, is based on thought. And thought has divided the world, thought is the principal activity in life, as we know it - life being you and me.
In that life it has created fragments - I am a Hindu, you are a Christian, and all the rest of it. And can I observe this whole - can the mind observe this whole phenomenon of thought without another thought? You understand?
You have understood, sir? A cause without another cause, another thought, because if you have another thought it is still the same thing. You understand what we have done this morning?
Do look at the structure of it, sir, the beauty of this thing, how it works itself out. We have put several questions this wanting to see the whole, war, education, thought, feeling, all that, what we have talked about. We said we'll take one question, which is, seeing the whole.
To see the whole there must be no parts. And there is a part as long as thought interferes. Right?
Seeing the whole means there must be no attachment, no root. Right? No cause.
If there is a cause you can't see anything. If I say, 'I love you' because I have a cause which is because I want your money, or your body, it is not love. Right?
So we see that thought divides, thought brings conflict, and all our work is that. Don't do anything but just look. Don't say, it's partial look, it's whole look, just look at this whole phenomenon of war, education, not seeing the whole, fear, security, and always the mind searching for the cause, as though finding the cause you think you will be out of it.
Look sir, you have had, man has had, in written history, five thousand wars within the last I don't know how many years. That means two and a half wars every year, in history. We know the cause - man's greed, man's desire for power, man's desire for economic position, man's desire to dominate the world and so on.
We know the cause but yet we are still going on with it. Right? So the discovery of the cause doesn't eradicate.
What brings eradication is to observe this extraordinary phenomenon, just to observe. And if you can do that, then you are completely beyond it. And the speaker has shown how to observe, all this morning.
So we meet again tomorrow morning. What shall we talk over this morning together? (Inaudible) (Repeating) Would you talk about celibacy with regard to the mind.
(Inaudible) (Repeating) What is the quality of the mind that is able to look. (Inaudible) (Repeating) The relationship between thought and feeling. (Inaudible) (Repeating) If there is no marriage as legally accepted, would there be attachment between the two, and what is the relationship of the parents to the children.
My god! Shall we go into all this? Or do you have some other questions?
(Inaudible) (Repeating) If thought is matter, as we have said, is intelligence different from thought. (Inaudible) (Repeating) How can the mind observe itself without the desire for security. Now that's enough questions.
Why is it so difficult to be free of attachment? And what is the relationship between celibacy and mind? What is it that observes apart from the mind?
And is intelligence different from thought? Shall we take up some of those questions? (Inaudible) I don't quite understand your question, sir.
The question is whether or not celibacy is necessary on a purely psychological level. Is celibacy necessary psychologically. Right.
So which do you want to discuss, or can we include in one question all these other questions? (Inaudible) Madame, I didn't understand - sorry. (Inaudible) (Repeating) How is it possible to observe without fear all the things that one has built throughout life, and face annihilation.
(Inaudible) (Repeating) You have said that in observing there is a pleasure. I didn't say that. Sorry.
Now wait a minute, that's enough questions if you don't mind. Now which question will include all the others? Is psychological celibacy, or physical celibacy, necessary for psychological health, wellbeing, freedom and so on?
Why is it so difficult to be free from attachment? Can we take that question of attachment and work through that answer the other questions? Can we?
May we? I think that would be... Shall we do it? Why is the mind so attached to things, to ideas, to ideals, symbols, family, name and so on?
What is attachment, what is the meaning of that word, to be attached? Please, as we said yesterday, this is not a talk by the speaker. We are together, as friends who are serious, considering human problems.
And it is not an intellectual entertainment, a discussion, an argument of opinions. We are trying to find out the truth of the matter, and to find that out you have to share in it, you can't just listen to the speaker. So we are together taking a journey in understanding these problems.
When we use the word 'understanding' we mean not intellectual or verbal, but an understanding that takes place when we are serious and examining and from that, action. This whole process is understanding. Right?
Now we are asking, why is the mind so attached - to ideas, opinions, values, people, houses, furniture? I used to know a friend in the old days who was very fond of a particular table. It was a very, very old table, he used to polish it every day.
And you could only touch it with kid gloves. And all his activity and (laughs) his thing was round that table - he was that table! And aren't we also like that, it may not be a table, it may be a house, it may be an idea, a symbol, an experience, a person, why is the mind attached?
The meaning of that word, 'attached' is to hold on, to cling to, to totally rely on somebody. Why? (Inaudible) I understand.
Now please, when... we are examining, don't immediately, if I may suggest most respectfully, answer. We have got to look into this problem, we have got to look into ourselves if you are attached. Aren't you attached to your symbol, to an experience, to a particular desire, what you think, and be attached to your ideas, ideals, aren't you?
To your nation, to your background, you know, all the rest of it, tradition. Now we are asking, how does it happen that the mind is so caught up in this? You see this is a very difficult problem, very complex, so don't just say, 'Yes, it is this'.
Man has tried not to be attached, and therefore he has cultivated detachment. That is one of the demands of any orthodox religion - be detached from the world, from sex, from women, from drink, detached so that you can give your energy to the service of god, or whoever it is. You understand?
This is a very complex problem. And if you are serious, if you really are interested in it, one has to go very deeply to find out why the human mind throughout the ages has maintained these two principles, has lived these two attachment and the cultivation of detachment. All the monks throughout the world try to be detached, they have taken vows of poverty, vows of celibacy.
Why this extraordinary phenomenon of attachment and detachment has not been solved by people? You understand? We are still talking about it after ten thousand millions years.
Why is the mind so incapable of freedom from either? That's what our enquiry is. When we ask, 'why', we are not, as we explained yesterday, trying to find out the cause.
Please let's understand this carefully. May I go into it? The analytical process is to find the cause and eradicate the cause.
And in the process of trying to find out the cause of attachment the mind is still caught in another motive. Isn't it? I want to find out what is the cause of attachment, the motive of that examination is to be detached in order not to have pain.
I am attached to you, and you turn to somebody else, and I feel hurt, angry, jealous, hatred, bitter, and I try to find the cause of that, and in trying to find the cause I still have a motive. So the motive is much more important than the cause. You have understood?
Not the cause, but the motive that seeks the cause. All right? Is this clear?
So when we ask, why it seems so difficult for the mind to be free of attachment - now in examining, have we a motive? You understand? The motive being, we want to be free of it, we want to go beyond it, because we have suffered a great deal through attachment.
We know all the pains of attachment, the loneliness of attachment. So in enquiring into it my motive is to go beyond it. So a mind that has a motive has a direction.
Right? And that direction distorts examination. Right?
Ben'e? Have you understood, sir? No?
If not, please, I will go at it ten different ways because I feel responsible to put this clearly. So in enquiring, any motive is a distorting factor and therefore one never sees the truth of attachment, and therefore freedom from it. Is this clear?
Avanti. (Inaudible) (Repeating) What is one to do if there is a motive there. If the motive exists, what am I to do with it?
You can't do anything about it, but if you are really seeking to understand this whole business of attachment, the imperative necessity to understand attachment pushes away motive. I want to understand completely what is the structure and nature and the drive of attachment, and if a motive prevents that understanding I put it away naturally, because my intention, my responsibility, my drive is to understand attachment, and if anything comes in the way of that understanding and action, I naturally put it aside. (Inaudible) (Repeating) Where does the drive come, to understand.
Do you want me to answer that question? One moment, wait, sir. Let's see.
Are you answering that question? (Inaudible) Sir, look, don't you want to understand attachment? No.
Why? I want to get rid of fear. So your motive is to do away with fear, not the understanding of attachment.