Krishnamurti - Is there such thing as right action?

Krishnamurti Subtitles

BR80DSS1.4 - Is there such thing as right action?
Brockwood Park, UK - 22 June 1980
Discussion with Staff and Students 1.4

0:00	This is J. Krishnamurti’s fourth discussion with teachers and students at Brockwood Park, 1980.
0:24	Krishnamurti: What is your interest in life? Do you know it? What are you interested in? Could we talk about that? Would that be worthwhile? Ah? All right. What interests you most? If you had your way and you could carry it out, what would be your calling, your demand, your way of life? Are you artists? Do you want to paint for the rest of your life? Do you want to be a chemist for the rest of your life? Biological teacher, professor, studying, gathering tremendous lot of information along any of these lines, and teaching in colleges, universities - does that interest you? Or you are going to marry, have children and settle down - does that interest you? Or are you trying - perhaps it’s rather serious question while you are too... while you are young - what is the meaning of all this? What is the meaning of life? Have you asked any of these questions? Where is humanity going? Humanity being ourselves you and I - where is it all going? Are you interested in this, to find out where human beings, who have probably lived on this earth five or ten millions years and we reach this present civilization, and where this culture is leading us? It’s like a vast current, vast river, with tremendous volume of water carrying us relentlessly. Have we any choice in the matter? Have we any direction in this vast stream or are we just being merely carried along, whether we like or not? Are you interested in that? No, serious, not just casually, because Sunday morning like going to church, it doesn’t mean very much. Put on your best dress, your best hat and show off in the church. I don’t think that’s what we are doing here. So would you be interested, or do you want to find out what’s your part in all this? Hm? Digmar, tell me.
5:27	Q: Yes.
5:32	K: Yes? You know, there is starvation; millions and millions in Africa are dying because of drought, lack of water. There is tremendous violence. The communist world or the totalitarian world is gathering instruments of war, more and more powerful. On the other side too. The boat people are being killed relentlessly. Every country is opposed to the other country. One set of ideological world, whether it’s the Catholic world or the communist world, each calling the other atheists and so on; they are also in battle. And we human beings apparently have very little voice in the matter. You know all this. And what part do we as human beings play in all this; what role, what responsibility; what is one to do? You understand the question? Or you say: I can’t do anything, it’s too tremendous, too... a global problem, as a human being, very small entity in this vast conglomeration of human violence and terror, what can I as a human being do? Does this problem interest you? Is it a serious question to you? When you leave here, probably in a few days when the term comes to end, you will be caught in all this. Either you take a stand somewhere in the middle of all this or be swept along. So one has to ask oneself: where is humanity going? Humanity is you, you understand? It isn’t something out there far away with which you have nothing to do. On the contrary, we are human beings; our brains have been evolving, growing through millennia upon millennia, so our brains are not your brain, your particular little brain. It’s the human mind, human brain. So as a human being, what is your position? What’s your responsibility? What is one to do amid this chaos? Shall we discuss this, have a dialogue, a conversation about it? What am I, what are you to do, confronted with this horror that’s going on? Whole Eastern block of tyranny prevents any freedom of thought, freedom of speech. The Catholic world has done that too in the past. They called them heretics, tortured them, burnt them, excommunicated them. So there is this tremendous wall of tyranny, either of the priest or of the ideological communist world, and facing all this, what are you, as a human being, living fairly... in a society somewhat secure, not immediately threatened, not immediately asked to respond because nobody is challenging you, you are too young; nobody is asking you to take sides; nobody is forcing you or putting you under pressure to act; but we are faced with this problem: where is humanity going; that means, where are you going? Quo vadis. You understand all this?
13:22	Brian Jenkins: Krishnaji you said earlier, you referred to taking a stand. What do you mean by that?
13:37	K: I’ll come to that, sir; I’ll come to that presently. When you leave here, as you will, where are you going? Of course, you’re going home; going back to your family or your guardians or your aunts and so on, but where after that? Perhaps some of you will go to college, university, take a degree, and then what? Do you understand? This whole position, this whole world is moving, and you, what are you going to do? What is your active part in this? After all, education is the culture of intelligence, not merely book knowledge, cultivation of intelligence that will meet this. Right? Right? Are you intelligent? Have we become, after... million years, intelligent; or merely cunning, argumentative, analytical, never solving our human problems? So, if I may ask most politely, has your being here for so many years studying, perhaps discussing, having dialogues, listening to some tapes, books and so on and so on, has that made your minds aware of the present situation, and being aware of that, of this, becoming intelligent; or you are not really concerned about all this; or only concerned with getting A level and O level and getting on in the world? Getting on in the world means being swept along in this vast stream of cruelty, brutality, violence, thoughtlessness, irresponsibility. Do you understand my question? Hm? Don’t be silent, please. You understand my question?
18:02	Q: Yes.
18:05	K: Yes? So, have you become intelligent or merely repeating what you have heard? Repeating, ‘Oh, we must do this, we must not do that and so on,’ but actually never acting. So where are you? You understand? Of course, you are at Brockwood now, but where are you in spirit, in your mind, in your being - where are you? Is this too serious a question? You have to take a stand sometime. Stand in the... I mean by that: what you are going to do; what’s your life going to be? If you are concerned with a career, job and livelihood - which is perhaps necessary - is that all? You understand what I’m saying? Success is worshiped here, all over the world; success religiously, success financially, success in power. If you can achieve all that, you are a great man, you’re a successful man and the world worships success. Is that what you’re going to happen? Or perhaps you may not want success and so make a small corner for yourself and live there, tight, enclosed, frightened, hurt, feeling frustrated. Is this what’s going to happen? I’m not painting a black picture; I’m not saying this is doomsday, but you have to face all this. So are we... I’m asking, if I may, are we capable of meeting this? Have we the capacity, the energy, the rigor, the seriousness to meet all this; or you’re going to have some pet theory and keep to that theory and get lost in that verbal, intellectual world of imagination, romanticism, sentimentality, which have... ultimately leads to ruthlessness? You know, the older generation is caught in it, from the highly political world of power and so on; the older generation with their carpenters, priests, politicians or theologians or theorists, they are caught in this, caught in this tremendous volume of water, of bestiality, ruthlessness; each one concerned with himself. So what? There is no love; love has become sex, pleasure. There is no charity, except... - there are exceptions, of course... cut out the exceptions - no charity, no honesty, no integrity. You understand? So what are you going to do? I’ve talked for twenty five minutes; now, let’s discuss, let us exchange, talk.
26:01	Scott Forbes: Sir, in general, we take a stand and we make an action on the basis of some values but values seem hopelessly inadequate, whether it’s a value of success or helping others, so if we don’t act according to values or take a stand according to values, what can we use as a basis?
26:33	K: What do you mean by ‘value’?
26:36	SF: Things that we think are important.
26:44	K: Why should you have value? I’m not saying you shouldn’t, please; I’m just asking. Is value synonymous with intelligence, or value and intelligence are totally different things? Come on, sirs, discuss...
27:18	Stephen Smith: Value is probably some kind of yardstick.
27:27	K: Yes, sir; yardstick, measure and has measurement any relationship with intelligence? Intelligence implies right action, doesn’t it? No?
27:56	SF: But we have to be careful, sir, that we don’t begin to value intelligence or…
28:02	K: Ah, no, no; I’m going into that presently. As he pointed out, value is a yardstick. Either that yardstick is carved out by a society, by a religion, by a sect, by the power of the state, or your own... you have your own yardstick. Right? And I am asking: is that yardstick, the measure, has that any relationship to intelligence; or intelligence is free from all measurement? Am I making...?
29:03	BJ: I think this is a difficult one because we tend to start out in life with likes and dislikes - I like that person, I don’t like that person - and then we reach a point where we feel, well, that’s rather a silly way to go about things so we say, well, I like what he is doing because it’s a good thing…
29:29	K: So are you saying, sir, that the yardstick is based on our pleasure, on our education?
29:38	BJ: I think what I’m saying is it’s not clear what is wrong with the yardstick. We think…
29:43	K: Ah, all right; what is wrong or right with the yardstick?
29:47	Mary Zimbalist: Sir, before we stick on into yardsticks, isn’t something else going on in all this, that we don’t react to the things you’ve described: the suffering and the horrible acts that are in the world because of a yardstick or a theory; don’t we react to the human... - I don’t like to overuse the word compassion - but surely there is a human reaction which is not based on yardsticks or theories or values that have been implanted in us. Isn’t there a spontaneous human feeling about such situations, and what is that?
30:27	K: Spontaneity is one of the most difficult things. Isn’t it?
30:36	MZ: Well, one doesn’t just say, oh, that doesn’t (inaudible) my yardstick. It’s terrible that people are starving to death in Somalia; one reacts with one’s feelings.
30:47	K: Could we...
30:48	MZ: Is that a yardstick? Is that a value?
30:52	K: Could we, for the moment, stick to the point which he raised, which is: we all have some kind of yardstick by which to measure our action, our feelings, our thoughts. Is that yardstick based on our pleasure, on our like or dislike, or is it established by a society, by a religious group and so on? If you deny all that, put all that aside, then have you a yardstick of your own; and if you have, what is the relationship of that to intelligence? Because intelligence implies love, compassion, right action.
32:08	Q: But what if we value honesty and integrity and all that? I mean, what’s wrong with having that kind of value?
32:20	K: If you value honesty, integrity - hm? - what’s wrong with that or what’s right with that? Now, how do you evaluate honesty? I might be honest in my illusions. I’m very honest in my belief. I’m very honest in being very patriotic. You understand?
32:50	BJ: Well, supposing, Krishnaji you are just honest with money, for example...
32:57	K: No, no, no; not money, sir; go, penetrate a little further in that. So you say, ‘I’m honest; I’m honest with regard to money; I’m honest with regard to my speech; I’m honest to my principle, to my ideals, to my God, to my country.’ You follow? So value, yardstick may also be like... similar. You follow? Are you following all this? So I’m asking... I would not ask what is right value; I would ask what is right action? May I? Ah? Not values that are correct, that are precise, that are standard, but rather, facing all this, what is right action with regard to all this? Not along... for a particular action, not for a particular activity and so on. So I want to find out what is right action because, after all, if you have a value, from that value you act. Right? If I believe that... - I don’t know what - if I believe that the English are the best people in the world, highly cultured, honest and have integrity, and that belief make me act in a certain way - right? - and that action may be not right, correct, actual. You understand what...? So I’m asking something different. Personally, I have no values about anything; but what is right action, what... if that can be found, it’s… then it’s right at all times, irrespective of circumstances, irrespective of present, past, future. You understand? So I would like to find out what is right action that is always true. Would you like to go into that? Does it... Ah? Which means what? Have you values? Right? So if you have values, you can’t go to the other.
37:10	Q: I mean, values are much more subtle. I mean, like the way you dress is values, what you eat is values...
37:22	K: Ah, no, no, no, no. Don’t let’s confuse good taste with value.
37:25	Q: Well, it is (inaudible).
37:29	K: Aesthetic activity is different from… don’t... keep... All right, let’s go into it if you want to. How you dress - is that based on value?
37:44	Q: (Inaudible)
37:45	K: Ah? Go... don’t stop...
37:48	Q: For some people, yes.
37:52	K: Not to... I’m not asking some people. To you; pour vous.
37:55	Q: You definitely wear one clothes and not another because you think that there’s something better (inaudible) wool sweater than in a (inaudible) I don’t know.
38:16	K: No; is that based on value? Ah?
38:22	Q: Yes.
38:24	K: I don’t… then we don’t... we’re not… tell me; explain to me.
38:28	Q: Well, what makes the person buy a certain kind of clothes, because he thinks those clothes fit him or that they are good, comfortable…
38:36	K: He might think it suits him, comfortable, it is neat, looks nice. Hm?
38:44	Q: Therefore those clothes gain a certain kind of value for him.
38:48	K: I see. You are reducing value to what is suitable.
38:52	Q: Yes, and on a very basic level.
38:54	K: Ah? What is suitable. Be careful, be careful.
38:57	MZ: Or what you prefer, or what is aesthetic; there are many...
38:59	K: Ah?
39:00	MZ: I mean, many motives in values.
39:01	K: I know; I know (inaudible).
39:02	MZ: It may be an aesthetic one. It may be...
39:08	K: I know that. I didn’t want...
39:12	MZ: (Inaudible).
39:13	K: I didn’t want to enter into the whole value world.
39:18	SF: Sir, there seems to be a difference between you saying that that shirt and those pants, looking at them together, they go well together and also the difference between saying...
39:39	K: That’s not value.
39:40	SF: No, it’s not a value but that’s what being suggested as a value; but there’s a difference in saying: look, all red shirts go well with blue pants. You see, that kind of thing might be a value, so that... but there’s an essential difference between those two activities.
40:01	MZ: And in your own statement that you have no values, one could say, but you value - in our terminology, perhaps - seriousness…
40:08	K: Beg your pardon?
40:10	MZ: One could say in observing you, sir, that you value certain human qualities above others…
40:15	K: No, no.
40:16	MZ: You may not think so but it certainly appears that way to most of us.
40:22	K: I... please, as I said to you, as I said, if I’m... I’ll change if you show it to me - I’m not dogmatic or aggressively holding on to a certain point of view -but I’m saying: if I could find out what is right action, then all these problems will be solved. But if we enter into the world of values, each person has his own value, his own attitudes, his own taste, his own aesthetic perceptions, and sensitivity and so on and so on and so on; so you can choose which you like to discuss, to find out; but I’m just merely pointing out that if there is right action, which is not the result of convenience, taste, pleasure and so on, if we want to go into it, we... have we... but if you don’t, it’s all right; we can discuss values endlessly. Right? You have your value and I may have my value and we say my value is to be very well dressed, to have great honesty in my speech, in my thought; but my value, my honesty with regard to speech may be conditioned according to my society, culture and so on and so on.
42:19	Sunanda Patwardan: Sir, there is some confusion (inaudible) we are not talking of relative values, we are not talking of (inaudible); when you talk of goodness, when you talk of seriousness (inaudible) it is not an action of becoming.
43:04	K: No.
43:05	SP: Sir (inaudible) therefore when you use those words and you say it is not a value, what does it mean?
43:09	K: I’ll tell you presently, if you will kindly... I am not doing... I’m not trying to persuade you to my point of view or putting you pressure any kind because I’m sitting on a platform, but can we find out what is right action, with regard to my dress, with regard to my relationship, with regard to everything, life itself? Right? Then, if we can find right action - I mean by right: precise, actual, factual and so on. That’s what I mean, we mean, by right.
44:08	Wendy Agnew: Sir, are you saying that value is essentially personal whereas right action (inaudible)
44:15	K: Yes, may not... Right action is not my right action or your right action; it’s right action; but value may be my value; yours may differ from mine and therefore we are at each other’s throats. So is there such thing as right action?
44:52	Q: Sir, the difficulty I have with the whole idea of right action is that it’s so wide. Sometimes right action seems spontaneous; sometimes it needs a carefully considered compromise; sometimes it’s no action.
45:08	K: Yes, sir, but we’re going to find out what is right action under all circumstances. What is right action, whether I live in America, here, or in Russia; whether I’m a Hindu or a Muslim or whatever it is. Can there be such action, first of all, which is not motivated or... - to use an ugly word like that - by value? So let’s go into it, shall we? This is serious; don’t play with me. First of all, let’s find out what we mean by action.
46:14	SF: Sir, when you ask a question: is there a right action which is always right, you must surely be talking about a source of action.
46:35	K: I’m doing, sir; I’m gradually coming to it. I’m asking you what do you mean by action, to act?
46:44	Q: Either response or initiation.
46:53	K: If you respond according to your belief, according to some experience, according to some established value - right? - according to the past - past memory, past experience, past knowledge; or acting according to a principle, which is also the past; or acting according to an ideal, to a belief, to a concept - right? - all those are what we call action - right? - springing from the past or from the future, we say that is action. Right? Would you... go on, shall we? Do we meet each other there? Ah? Do we? I act because I believe in the communist principle, or Catholic dogma, church... sanctions and so on. That is, I act according to a pattern laid down - right? Are you following this? - pattern laid down in the past or in the future; or the present action is dominated by the past or by the future. Right? Right, sirs? Come on, sir.
49:07	SS: So I’m in conflict (inaudible).
49:11	K: Yes, sir, of course; that follows that. So I’m just asking: what do we mean by action? An action born from... with the persuasion of… according to patterns; (inaudible). I am conditioned as a Buddhist and I act according to that; and I also act according to my pleasure - right? You are following this? - sexual, financial or other kind of enticements, I act; act according to a pattern established by the past or the pattern established through my pleasure, through my want, through my greed, through my desire for success and so on and so on. Now I say is that action? You understand my question? Are you following my question? If I act according to a pattern - noble, wise, holy (laughs) - is that action or it’s merely conformity? You understand what I’m (inaudible)? So is there an action which is not born out of conformity, pattern, future, past, or present? See, you’re not… come on, sirs.
51:21	Q: (Inaudible) for most of us anyway.
51:29	K: That’s why one has to find out whether our actions are based on some past knowledge, experience, memory, or patterns established as an enticement in the future. The communist world... you know, all the rest of it, so I don’t have to go into all that. So if I act according to a pattern, the pattern is the value - you see how I’m coming... we’re coming back to it. If I act according to a pattern, which is an established value, whether by the church, by the government, by your own reading and knowledge and experience, that action is based on evaluation, on values; and if you are acting according to values, can values be ever right? You understand my question? Or values change from time to time, from... according to personal like and dislike, according to present enticement, temptation and so on and so on and so on. So right action cannot come into being as long as the mind is operating, functioning in this way; and if you want to find out what is right action, then one must break this well-established pattern of million years. The pattern, say, for instance, you hate me and I immediately react: I hate you. Right? That’s the pattern established millennia, during thousands of years. That pattern has its subtleties, it changes from time to time but it is the same pattern repeated. We say, ‘I hate you but I love God, therefore I mustn’t hate you. I must be compassionate, therefore I mustn’t react.’ You follow? It’s the same pattern. I wonder if you see that? Right? (Inaudible)? So can you, being aware that you are acting according to patterns, according to rules, according to standardized values, though you may think, ‘I’m free, I’m not... I have no values or I’m free from all this’, but actually if you observe very seriously, deeply you are acting according to past or to future or to the immediate demand of pleasure, of fear and so on. Are you aware of this? Aware in the sense, you know this is happening to you and if you want to find out what is right action, if you are serious, if you really want to find out, you break the patterns.
56:24	Q: Krishnaji, some of these values seem to be so deep.
56:33	K: Yes, sir; (inaudible) I’m saying so... Now, just a minute; listen carefully; if I may ask you. You see this - right? Right? - you see our... the human mind functions this way and the human mind is your mind. Right? You function that way. Right? After explaining it, do you see it as an idea or as a fact? You understand? Are you getting tired? I see somebody yawning (laughs). It’s all right; you can yawn. It’s not quite fair, after you have worked and the exams and all the rest of it, to be bombarded by the speaker (laughs); but you are not captive audience, you can get up and go and I won’t feel hurt or anything. So if you are serious, if you really want to find out a way of living, which is, to have right action because you can’t live without action - talking is action; thinking is action; being with you is action; walking by myself is action; life is action in relationship. Right? I may not be married; I may become a monk but that’s part of action and when I’m in the monastery reading the bible or the catechism or praying, singing, chanting, I’m still acting; and that action, that acting takes place in relationship with another, whether it is physical another or an image which I’ve created and have a relationship with that image - the image of Jesus, image of Krishna, Buddha, whatever it is. You follow? All this is action in relationship to an image or to an actuality. So what is right action then? If there is right action, there is no value. I explained this carefully; don’t dodge it. If I act according to a pattern, whether established by myself or by my parents, by society, by church, by gurus, priests and so on, I’m acting according to well-established pattern and therefore that pattern has value. So acting according to a pattern is acting according to certain standards, values, established concepts. Right? Right? Are you doing that? Ah? Of course you are doing it. Therefore you don’t want to find out right action; it’s simple as that. If you want to find out, you break the pattern.
1:01:36	SS: But everything I am is the pattern, sir.
1:01:42	K: Ah?
1:01:43	SS: Everything I am is the pattern (inaudible).
1:01:45	K: Agreed; agreed.
1:01:46	SS: (Inaudible).
1:01:47	K: You break that.
1:01:48	SS: Well, who is it breaks it?
1:01:50	K: That is…
1:01:51	SS: Who is (inaudible)?
1:01:52	K: The pattern is… the pattern... - no sir, just... - the pattern is to become. Right?
1:01:58	SS: That’s the totality of the pattern (inaudible).
1:02:01	K: That’s what I’m saying. The totality of the pattern is to become; so don’t become (laughs). See, either we become something or we stagnate.
1:02:25	Q: (Inaudible).
1:02:28	K: We just go to pieces.
1:02:37	Q: But when you say, Krishnaji, break the pattern, I mean, who’s going to break the background?
1:02:45	K: I didn’t say we break the background. As he pointed out, sir, that the pattern is me - right? - is the ego, is the self. Do I, does my mind grasp the significance of that, understand it, grasp it, see the truth of it; or I make, from that statement, an idea - you follow? - a concept and work along that concept; which is, I have made an abstraction of that statement into an idea, which is the value, and act again according to that value? I don’t know if you follow all this. Which means I have broken one type of pattern and I’ve established another kind of pattern. So is... do we... do I or you, each one of us see that the whole me in becoming is continuing in patterns?
1:04:36	Q: Sir, I see that I do not know what right action is and I may also see logically or rationally the movement of these patterns but the question is: do I have the capacity to break these patterns?
1:05:00	K: You will... Don’t... Sir, how does... What do you mean by capacity? You see what... you look... careful, careful; think it out. When you use the word capacity, think it out what it means. A carpenter apprenticed to a master carpenter takes five, six, whatever time he takes; then he says, ‘I am efficient, I am capable.’ Which is what? The pattern. I don’t know if you follow that. Moment you use the word capacity, it means that. Capacity comes naturally from right action. You don’t have to cultivate capacity. Capacity is based on experience. Right? Right? Experience, knowledge, memory, skill, which is again... Follow it. Right? See how our mind is always clever in its deception. You tell me, he points out to me the actual fact, the whole pattern of existence - past, present, future - is me. The me becoming, glorifying, expanding, contracting, denying, sacrificing, identifying itself with the greater, with Buddha, with Jesus, with whatever it is, it is still the me. So he tells me this and I carefully listen to it because I’m a serious man and I see the result of this pattern has brought about a monstrous, insane world. Right, sir? I see it. I see it, not as an idea but actually what is happening in me. I’m not conforming to your idea, to your words but I see the significance, the reality of those words, flowering in me. You are following this, sir? I am that; so... and if I act, I’m still acting to become. You’re following this? Oh, no, you’re too tired (inaudible).
1:09:00	SS: Are you suggesting that the act of listening in itself brings about a different state?
1:09:14	K: Yes, sir, that’s what I’m saying. I see what you have said is the truth, irrevocable truth and then I say I must do something about it. The person who says, ‘I must do something about it,’ is still the me. I don’t see that, because that’s the well-established pattern. If I’m afraid, I must do something about it. So you have pointed this out to me; I see the full meaning of it. I don’t argue; I don’t doubt because it is so; there are no need for analysis, investigation; it is so, and any action on my part to do something about it is still the me; so the mind then - what happens? The mind, which has always been acting, which is always saying, ‘I must do something about it,’ has realized it cannot do anything. Right? I wonder if you see that. Therefore, that’s why, sir, as I said, it’s very important right from the beginning to listen. The art of listening; to listen to Mr. Smith’s statement so completely that I’m not translating arguing, analyzing; I’m just in a state of acute attention and listening. That very act of listening breaks the pattern. Remember we talked about the other day – we’ll have to stop now, soon - that we are helping each other to think clearly. Remember? We discussed it. Right? This is what we are doing now, to think clearly or to listen clearly. Think clearly involves argument, analysis - right? - opposing your opinion against my opinion, your value against my value and so on and so on and so on; but whereas I listen to what he said without any reaction, without any movement of thought, therefore that... those words have immense meaning to me.
1:14:01	We’d better stop, don’t you? Ah? The sermon is over (laughs).