Krishnamurti Subtitles home


BR80DSS2.2 - Why don't we flower?
Brockwood Park, UK - 5 October 1980
Discussion with Staff and Students 2.2



0:20 Krishnamurti: I hope I may, if you will permit it, I will talk for a while and then you can ask questions and we can have a discussion, a dialogue. Will that be all right?
0:52 I think it is important to find out for ourselves why human beings, each one of us, do not flower. That is, why most of us remain in a narrow groove, in a very enclosed space in the mind, why we never seem to be able to go beyond our own little selves, our own troubles and anxieties and so on. Why technologically, in the field of science, mathematics, physics and so on, why – though they have evolved so much in that field – why we remain such mediocre people, why we do not, each one of us, become – if I may use the word 'genius', which is really to flower, not the capacity to paint or to play piano, compose and so on, but psychologically, inwardly – be extraordinary human beings. Is it the fault of education, that conditions us? We are educated to conform to the pattern of society. You have to earn a livelihood so you become an engineer, a professor, psychologist, whatever you will. That is, the society demands all that. Society means your fathers, your neighbours, the economic condition, all that demands that you conform to their pattern, to their way of life. And the society is created by each one of us, not by young people, but by the fathers, grandfathers, great grandfathers, the thousand past generations. Society is the product of all their work, of all their anxieties, of all their greed and quarrels and violence and wars. So, human beings have created the society in which we live, and that society conforms us, conditions us, through their education, through their religion, through their nationalities, and so on. So it becomes a vicious circle.
5:11 You understand what I am talking about, I hope. And we, we are being educated. Shall we conform to the pattern of this society? If we don't, we won't be able to earn a proper livelihood, have little comfort, food, and so on. So you see the problem. The problem is, we are educated and that education must conform to the demands of society. Demands may be to be an architect, an engineer, a lawyer, an economic expert or a politician, and so on. So education may conform us, condition us, make our minds rather narrow, specialised, and that helps us to have security, money, a sense of wellbeing. And that society is created by all the human beings in the world. So you see, we are caught in this circle. And realising the nature of this circle, the nature of this conditioning, is it possible to break through this vicious circle? We must be educated. Yes? We must be educated, but need that education condition us? You understand my question? Need that education make our minds, or a part of our mind, function well, but the other parts be neglected? I may be good at mathematics or have a good job, but I neglect the whole existence of my life – all the troubles, all the anxieties, the fears, the insecurity, the uncertainty. We never seem to be free of all that. You understand my question? So, does Brockwood, your being here – some of you for the first time and the others for some years here – does it help you to flower, to grow, to have a mind that is not just in a narrow, little groove that always does the same things over and over and over again? If I had a son – fortunately, I haven't got one – if I had one, if I sent him here, what would I want him to be? What would I want him to grow into as a human being? You are in that position. What would I, as a parent, being affectionate, perhaps I love my son or my daughter, and I send them to Brockwood, and I say to the people here who are educators – what would I demand of them? What would I ask them? What would I say to them? How will you help my son and daughter not to be mediocre, not to be merely mathematicians or get a job and get lost in the world? How will you help them to have extraordinarily good minds? I mean by a good mind, a mind that is not only concerned with a job, with a family, but also a mind that goes beyond the limitations of oneself, a mind that is vast, that is capable of a great deal of courage, delight and affection, love and compassion and care for human beings. I would ask them that: how will you help my children to have such a mind, a very good mind and a very good heart? So that, though they have to live in this world, they don't get lost in the world, they don't become like everybody else, like the millions and millions of people – get married, children, the quarrels, the everlasting job, going nine hours or eight hours of the day, and the rare holidays, and so gradually closing in, closing in. You understand what I am saying?
14:28 I would ask the educators here: what will you do to help them, my children, my two, whom I love? Will they be free of fear when they leave this place? Will they be able to think clearly so that they will never be caught in any illusion, not be confused, uncertain? Though they must have security physically, can they be free of this everlasting desire to be secure inwardly and which creates confusion in one's mind? And will they have a sense of deep integrity? I would ask them this, and I would say: how will you help them?
16:07 One of the problems is, if I am a teacher here or elsewhere, I am also conditioned, I am also a narrow-minded human being, I am also frightened. And how can I, being frightened, help you not to be frightened? You understand my question? I am frightened. I am your educator. How can I help you not to be frightened? Being frightened myself, is it possible to help you not to be frightened, or must I be free of all fear myself before I can help you to be free of fear? You understand my question? So you see, if I wait till I am free of fear, it may take me years. By then I may be dead. So I shall not be able to help you. Whereas, if I was your teacher wouldn't I say, I am frightened, so are you. Let's talk about it. Let's go into it together. I will tell you what my fears are and you tell me what your fears are, so that we both understand together the nature of fear, why we are frightened, of what are we frightened, myself and you. Am I frightened of public opinion, frightened of what other people might say? Perhaps we are. What your fathers, your mothers, your neighbours might say. I also might be frightened of my neighbour, whatever it is. I am also frightened. So we talk about it together, we investigate it together. It doesn't mean I investigate and you keep quiet, but together you and I, as your educator, go into this very, very carefully, step by step, having great patience. So, you and I together unroll the whole structure of fear. I think we can do that, so that after some time you understand and I understand the nature of fear. Not merely intellectually, verbally saying, yes, I know about it – but deeply, so that when you leave here you and I are free of fear. I think it can be done, and I feel it should be done in a place like this. So that when the mind is free of fear it really blossoms, it becomes an extraordinary thing. Because human beings right through the world are terribly frightened and they have never been able to be free of it. And perhaps at Brockwood we can help each other to be so completely free of fear. And to have a mind that thinks very clearly. You cannot think clearly if you are not objective. If you are personal you can't think clearly. If you are only concerned with yourself, with your worries, with your looks, with your beauty, with your like and dislike, with your opinions, etc., you can't think clearly. Because to think clearly, first, and to know how it creates most of our troubles in life, so when you think clearly then perhaps you can go beyond all thinking, which is much more difficult. So can we do all this at Brockwood?
23:25 I think it is the responsibility of the educators to make or to bring about a place where human beings – you, I and all of us – can grow into capable human beings, but also immensely intelligent human beings who have love, who have compassion, who care for others. Now you ask me questions. Let's have a dialogue, shall we? You know what a dialogue is? A conversation between two people. You can ask me anything you like. I will be as frank as I can. You can tell me: I am not interested in what you are talking about. I am only interested in mathematics. I am not interested in what you say about religion but I am holding on to my religion. You can ask anything you want. We are free here, which is nice. So there is complete silence.
25:46 Questioner: How could we use perception in a constructive way? How could we use the daily perception of things in a constructive way, in such a way it wouldn't remind of them, as to say?
26:01 K: I don't quite understand – perceptions?

Q: Yes.
26:06 K: What do you mean by that?
26:09 Q: If I perceive something, if I see, let's say a woman, many things come to my mind at that moment. And that I have got prejudice, I don't see the actual thing because of the images and memories which I have.
26:34 K: Are you – I am trying to understand you – are you trying to say, when I see somebody, I react?
26:44 Q: Yes.
26:48 K: And that reaction brings various other reactions.
26:56 Q: And I never see the thing and I will never go the root of anything and I will always be playing that game the whole time.
27:02 K: Yes. So, you are always living in reactions, one after the other, one after the other.
27:08 Q: Yes. Right.
27:10 K: Now, let's go into it carefully, shall we? Which is, with most of us it is like that. It is not only with you, most of us live in reactions. What is a reaction? To re-act, what is reaction? You see that yellow coat and you may like it and say, how nice, or you may say, no, I don't like it. That is a reaction. Visual. That is, you see that colour, either you like it or don't like it. Now, go step by step. You have pain, physical pain. You react to it, which is normal, which is healthy. If you don't react it means you are paralysed. So, from the physical we react inwardly. You understand? That is, I see you and you are nice to me, therefore I like you. You say something to me which is not nice, I don't like you. You flatter me and I say, we are good friends. You insult me and I immediately want to insult you back. All that is a reaction. You say something – go into it carefully – you say something that will hurt me and I get hurt, and I keep that hurt for years and years and years. That is a reaction.

Q: Yes.
29:49 K: Now, one must react physically. Right? If you see a danger you must leave it. That is a natural, healthy thing to do. Now, why should one – go into it carefully – why should one react to something you say which I don't like? You understand my question?

Q: No.
30:27 K: You say to me I am an idiot. You say: you are an idiot – to me. Why should I react to that?
30:40 Q: Well, that is the way the brain works.
30:43 K: Don't merely say 'brain works' – let's find out. You understand my question? You called me an idiot and I react to that. If I say to myself, oh, that is the way my brain works, you stop there. But if you say, now, I want to find out why I react when you call me an idiot.
31:19 Q: I think it is part of your program or consciousness or whatever. It is just part of the not getting hurt. To get hurt is part of the not getting hurt process. I mean, if you come and call me an idiot, I shouldn't get hurt. So, I will get hurt eventually and say the same to you so I won't be hurt anymore. So that is part of the same process.
31:48 K: Yes. Why?
31:52 Q: That is the way it is.

K: Don't say 'the way it is' and just stop.
32:00 K: Why? Think it out. Let's think it out carefully.
32:10 Q: Well, as far as I can see that is what we were taught to be.
32:16 K: All right. Can you be untaught?
32:21 Q: Yes, I can.
32:24 K: So, let's now be untaught. Let's go into it and say, let me see if I can be free of this. Right? First, we see it is necessary, sane, to run away from danger, physical danger. That is a natural, healthy response. Right? The other is: why do we react in anger when you call me some ugly name? Why do I get angry? Go into it carefully, why. All of us – you call me some name. Why do I get angry? I am not going to tell you, you tell me. Go on, all of you think it out.
34:02 Q: It creates an opposition to what we already know about ourselves.
34:07 K: You are saying – what do you mean opposition?
34:14 Q: Well, if you call me an ugly name, of course I am not that ugly name, as far as I see it. So it is just like more or less the mirror reflection. Is that so?
34:30 K: You call me an ugly name and I get angry. And you are saying, are you, I get angry because I may be an idiot and I don't want to be shown up as an idiot? Is that it?
34:55 Q: Not quite, but what you said is not untruthful. What you said is not untruthful but that is not exactly what I mean.
35:01 Q: He says that it is part of it.

K: That is a part of it.
35:03 K: Now go a little further. What is the next? Go on, move.
35:13 Q: The other part is I think I am not an idiot and...
35:18 K: I think I am not an idiot but when you call me an idiot, why should I get angry? Or irritated, whatever reaction. Either it is so or it is not so.
35:37 Q: Well, you are not sure that you are not an idiot.
35:40 K: Yes. I am not quite sure. When you call me an idiot, I am not quite sure I am an idiot. Then why should I get angry?
35:59 Q: Don't you get angry because you feel quite sure that you are not an idiot? You feel you are not what the person is calling you, so you get angry.

K: All right.
36:13 K: Wait a minute. Either I am an idiot, and say, quite right, my friend, I am glad you pointed it out to me. And if I am not an idiot, I say, all right. You think so. I am sorry, I am not.
36:35 Q: We don't seem to be that objective at the moment when...
36:38 K: I want to find out why. Go into it carefully. Go into it, why I am not objective at the moment you call me an idiot. You understand my question? Right? You understand my question?
36:58 Q: Well, perhaps you feel comfortable with a certain conception of yourself...
37:05 K: Are you saying I feel comfortable to be called an idiot?
37:09 Q: No, with the way you are and then somebody challenges you.
37:12 K: Yes. I am an idiot and you call me that. All right, I am an idiot.
37:17 Q: But you may not think you are an idiot.
37:19 K: Ah, that is the whole point, isn't it? You call me an idiot. I get angry because I think I am not an idiot.
37:28 Q: Right.

K: Now wait a minute.
37:30 K: What makes me think I am not an idiot?
37:33 Q: Because I have a picture of myself.

K: Wait!
37:40 Q: Perhaps it is very disturbing to know that you are an idiot. It is more pleasant to think you are not an idiot.
37:54 K: Look, I am going to call – no, you call me, much better – you call me stupid. Am I stupid? What makes you call me stupid? Because I am not as clever as you are. Is that it? Right?
38:24 Q: Yes, but you are not talking about the way we think.
38:26 K: I am doing it, sir. You are not following it. You call me stupid. Why do you use that word?
38:41 Q: It is not because the other one is more stupid than you are, it is because you think he is more stupid. It is quite a difference.
38:51 K: Is it in comparison with somebody else I am stupid? You have understood? You compare me with somebody else who is cleverer than me, more intelligent, bright, nicer, and you say, you are stupid compared to him. So is stupidity comparative? You understand my question? Do you understand?

Q: Yes, I do.
39:32 K: The next step: why do you compare? If I don't compare myself, am I stupid?
39:49 Q: No.

K: Don't say no.
40:02 Q: Well, it is not a matter of whether you are stupid or not, you are just the way you are.

K: So what does that mean? Look, I look at you, you are nicer looking, you are bright, your eyes are clear and you talk well, you think well, you are clever, intelligent, and I say to myself, by Jove, how clever he is. I am not as clever as him. So what happens in that saying to myself that I am not as clever as him, what happens to me? Go on, sir, investigate it, don't sit still. What happens to me?
41:03 Q: It seems like if you don't compare, or if I don't compare I am not going to feed my mind, it is going to starve.
41:11 K: You do compare.
41:13 Q: Yes, but if I don't compare...

K: Wait, wait.
41:18 K: First, you do compare. I compare you with him. What happens to you when I compare you with him?
41:34 Q: I am being the model. I am serving as a model.
41:42 Q: He says he becomes sort of a standard.
41:45 K: No. You are not thinking with this. I compare you with him. He becomes the important person, not you.
42:09 Q: Isn't that only with a certain kind of comparison? Some kinds of comparison might just be statements of fact – that person is taller than I am.
42:22 K: Of course, it is a fact.

SF: And it is no problem.
42:24 K: That is what I want to come to slowly. Wait, don't jump. When you compare B with A, what happens to B?
42:44 Q: Well, it becomes less important than A.
42:46 K: Yes, sir. I compare you with him and he is cleverer, he is brighter, etc. So what has happened, what has taken place with you? You are not important, but he is. So what happens? You see what I have done? By comparing you with him, you are not important, only him, he is important. Right? So that is the way we think. That you are not important but the other is important. That is how the whole social structure is built. So, the man who is a carpenter is not as good as the professor, the surgeon, the prime minister, the bishop. So gradually we build this idea into ourselves that through comparison I become less. Are you following all this? So I am always striving to be like you. So you become the example and I am trying to imitate you. So – watch it, watch it, I haven't finished yet – what happens? In that, I am afraid, am I not? I may not become like you. Sorry. I may lose all the benefits that I might derive if I am like you. So I am always anxious where I am thinking comparatively. Right? You get it?

Q: Yes.
45:42 Q: But how can you stop that?

K: Wait! First see the fact.
45:55 Q: But it becomes so automatic you hardly notice it.
46:00 K: What do you mean automatic?
46:01 Q: You do that without thinking.

K: Yes. So, which is what?
46:08 Q: Reaction?

K: No. Which is what? Just think. Look, that is how you create confusion. I must go into this very slowly with you. You see, we are always trying to be better. Right? Better in exams. Exams is the highest – what do you call it – comparative value, and so there is always fear not to be... Now, next question: can you live without comparing?
47:13 Q: It seems like anxiety doesn't yield to perception, so every time that I am anxious I won't be able to see the thing as it really is.
47:24 K: Of course, at the moment of anxiety, if somebody hits you on the head, at that moment you are out, you can't see anything. But before you are hit on the head let's think about it.
47:38 Q: And suppress anxiety.
47:41 K: Are you getting tired?
47:44 Q: You can live without comparison if you get rid of your image of yourself and opinions.
47:49 K: What?
47:52 Q: She said you can get rid of your comparison if you get rid of your image of yourself.
48:00 K: Yes, of course. Now, did you say that because you have observed it in yourself that you have an image and as long as you have an image you must be in comparison?
48:17 Q: Yes.
48:19 K: If you have thought it out, why do you then have the image? Or you like the image that you have about yourself and so you don't mind making comparisons. So from that, you see, you learn something. Which is, don't say anything that you yourself have not seen, observed and gone into it. Don't say, I have got an image and therefore comparison exists – those are just words, aren't they? You understand what I am saying?
49:17 Q: So you are saying there is a difference between an intellectual understanding and a real understanding. You are saying there is a difference between an intellectual understanding and a real understanding.
49:27 K: Of course.
49:29 Q: Because many people can explain in words what they see but they don't necessarily understand it, and there seems to be a difference.
49:44 K: Have we so far understood? Not verbally, not intellectually, not just explanation, but actually. Which means, will you stop comparing altogether?
50:06 Q: It is really difficult because we understand what you are saying but comparing has become something so natural, either to feel confident or to look up to something that we just live with it all the time.
50:18 K: Are you saying we have got used to the unnatural? So can you be free of the unnatural? Don't accept it.
50:40 Q: It doesn't seem, in ourselves, it is not necessarily that clear cut because there is pleasure, it is pleasurable to compare and if it only hurt you to compare you probably wouldn't compare. If it only hurt to compare you might not compare.
50:56 K: No, but I am asking, you see what the result of comparison is. If I am comparing always with somebody who is better, nobler, wiser, more intellectual, nicer looking, etc., I must always be anxious, I must always have this fear of not living up to that. So, do I see that as a description or a reality? And if it is real, I say I won't compare, I will see what happens in life, every day, if I don't compare at all. When I go to the tailor, I compare between this cloth and that cloth, between this dress and that dress, which is quite right, but when I compare myself inwardly with you then the whole problem of fear, anxiety and struggle, all that comes. Now, you have heard this but will you actually stop comparing?
52:42 Q: If I heard it, would that stop the inner mechanism that makes this?
52:45 K: I am asking you that. I am asking you, having heard what comparison does, will you stop it?
53:04 Q: This means that I only see the facts, that is all.
53:08 K: Yes, we have been through all that. Will you stop comparing?
53:25 Q: I think of comparing as part of seeing, more or less, even between my qualities or my lack of them and the other people. But I don't want to do it with fear.
53:36 K: When you compare one picture with another painting, what are you doing? Go on, please, go into it. I compare – who? – Picasso with Rembrandt. Lovely comparison. You know who Rembrandt is?
54:21 Q: Instead of looking at the pictures themselves you are looking more at their differences.
54:25 K: That is right. Instead of looking at one picture by itself and going into it – the proportions, the light, the shape, the colour – but I am also saying, is that as good as the other? Which means I am not looking at that picture. You understand what I am saying? So, if I want to look at myself, why should I compare what I am seeing with somebody else? You understand what I am saying? You see, all examinations are comparison. Right? So what will you do? You understand my question?
55:39 Q: Examinations we all think that we all have to take, but there are more important things.
55:44 K: No, just listen. You haven't listened. At the end of two years or five years you have examinations of A Level and O Level – right? Which means what?
56:09 Q: You are compared to everybody else in the country.
56:11 K: Which means they see, through examination and comparing you, whether you are as good as that standard. Now, without examinations will you be able to study?
56:38 Q: Yes.

K: So what does that mean?
56:53 Q: I wouldn't have a diploma, though.
56:57 K: What?

Q: He says he won't have a diploma.
57:00 K: That is it. You see what we have done, what society has done to us? So education is to help us to conform. Society says, if you don't, you won't get a job. So you have to get that to get a job, and you get frightened by that. My God, will I pass, will I not pass, I must study, I must work. Now, is there a different way of learning without this great pressure of examinations? You are going to face all this. Don't look at him. You are going to face all this. So is there a different way of studying, so that you might take examinations or no examinations, but you are free of that. You follow what I mean? You are so alive, intelligent, so capable of learning. If you are learning, examination may be or not be. You follow what I am saying?

Q: Yes.
58:52 K: So the next question is: does learning mean anything to you? Absolute silence. Have you ever thought about learning, what it means? What does learning mean to you? Come on, Daphne. What does it mean to you, to learn? Don't look at her. Answer me, somebody else. You two answer me: what does it mean to you to learn? To learn.
59:54 Q: Usually the first thing we do is divide it into different kinds of learning.
59:58 K: No – learning, I said. not learning mathematics, learning biology, there you are learning about a subject. But I am asking, what is learning? Not about something. Do you see the difference? Do you? Do you see the difference? Oh no, come on, this is fairly simple.
1:00:27 Q: Taking things in.

K: I am learning about electronics.
1:00:33 K: That is, I am learning about something. But I am asking, what is learning in itself? Not about something. This is too difficult, probably.
1:00:58 Q: It is finding out, isn't it?
1:01:01 Q: Listening first and then understanding?
1:01:07 K: No, you tell me what it means to you to learn, the act of learning.
1:01:18 Q: Things coming into your mind.
1:01:24 K: What things? Mathematics, geography, painting, piano, the wind, the colour of the birds – what do you say when things come into your mind?
1:01:44 Q: Doesn't it mean not to accumulate?
1:01:50 K: You haven't thought about this. Just think about it before you answer me. Look at it. First you learn about something. You learn how to ride a bike, you learn how to drive a car, you learn how to play tennis, football.
1:02:20 Q: And how to think, too.
1:02:21 K: Yes, how to paint, how to speak, how to learn a language. Which means what?
1:02:34 Q: That there is an entity which is...
1:02:37 K: No, not an entity – be simple.
1:02:40 Q: You require knowledge of...
1:02:43 Q: Understand how something works.
1:02:47 K: I learn to ride a bike. Somebody has to hold me, on the top, guide me, to learn a balance. Which means what? Come on, sirs, what is the matter with all of you?
1:03:03 Q: With a bicycle, you can feel it, you can use it, you can ride it.
1:03:10 Q: That is the 'me' and there is information.
1:03:18 K: I am talking about riding a bike.
1:03:22 Q: I was thinking about tennis, you know, the teachers...
1:03:24 K: I am talking about a bike. All right. You know how to ride a bicycle?
1:03:39 Q: Yes.

K: Of course.
1:03:43 K: Now, what happened before you learned it? Go on, tell me, sir. You see, don't just wave your hand, tell me what happened precisely.
1:03:54 Q: Oh, I just fell down.
1:03:59 K: You fell. Then somebody helped you to hold the bike. You got on to it and somebody walked with you – go into it, don't stop, go into it – till you learned how to balance. It may be two days, three days, a week, but you learned how to balance on two wheels. What does that mean to learn there? Go into it carefully. What does it mean to learn there?
1:04:36 Q: You have to work it out by yourself, too.

K: No.
1:04:40 K: You can.

Q: No, you have to.
1:04:46 K: You have not answered my question, old boy. You learned to ride a bike. That is, you learned how to balance on two wheels and guide it and so on. That is what? What has happened in that? From the moment you fell down to the moment you were able to balance and go off by yourself, what happened?
1:05:17 Q: You pay attention.
1:05:20 K: No, what happened?

Q: You kind of sorted things out.
1:05:23 K: Oh, why can't you all be simple?
1:05:26 Q: Well, you learned it.
1:05:29 Q: Sir, you acquired knowledge about it.
1:05:32 Q: Also your body.
1:05:35 Q: You figured out what worked and what didn't work.
1:05:37 K: I give it up!
1:05:45 Q: Also, you don't have the fear of it anymore after you have learned.
1:05:53 K: You learned a habit of balance. You learned. You learn of driving a car. Right? That means a man is beside you, you hold the wheel, he tells you: drive slowly, move the gear, this and that, and you begin to learn bit by bit till it becomes almost natural, then you drive off. Now, see what has happened to your mind.
1:06:42 Q: It understands and remembers.

K: Yes, and what? Be simple, Daphne. Simple, be simple. Don't be extraordinarily professional.
1:06:57 Q: The first time you do it you have to figure it out, but after that you keep using what you found out before, and keep on doing it.

K: Which means what?
1:07:06 Q: You become used to it.

K: You become used to it. It becomes a habit. It becomes natural. You don't think about it. When you say, I don't think about driving, I am watching, you change gears. Now, what has taken place when you don't think about it?
1:07:34 Q: It is become mechanical.

K: Which means what?
1:07:42 Q: No more thought into it. You stop thinking about it.
1:07:46 Q: You are not paying attention to it anymore.
1:07:48 K: That is an action.
1:07:56 Q: You have acquired a skill.
1:08:00 K: You have acquired a skill. How do I acquire a skill?
1:08:06 Q: You are not afraid to fall down anymore.
1:08:10 Q: You don't have to think.
1:08:13 Q: When it is through practice you just learn.
1:08:15 K: That means what?

Q: By doing it over and over again.
1:08:20 K: Look, I apprentice myself to a carpenter. I watch him, how he handles the instruments, and by watching, he is telling me, I am accumulating knowledge about carpentry. And after five years of a great deal of accumulation, practice, I become a carpenter. Either a good carpenter or a bad carpenter. Which means that I have learned a great deal, accumulated knowledge about the wood, the instruments – and this after practicing the skill. Right? That is the process, isn't it? I have watched, listened, learned. Wait. You are not doing it. I have listened to my boss, observed, learned. The learning there is accumulating knowledge, which I am going to use skilfully. Exactly the same thing has happened when I drive a car, ride a bicycle, learn a language. You are following this? So, for us learning means accumulating knowledge. Right?
1:10:15 Q: You say learning means having learned, in point of fact. Learning means having learned.
1:10:22 Q: Having learned, in point of fact.
1:10:23 K: Yes. Learning means having learned. Right? See what he has said. Listen carefully to what he has said. Learning means having learned. I am saying something quite different. I am not saying he is right or wrong. That is the natural process. But I am saying, telling you something different. That is, having accumulated knowledge, I act. Right? Be clear on this.
1:11:22 Q: (In French)
1:11:53 K: Bien. But please just go with me a little bit, please. I learn. First I hear, see, and then accumulate, called knowledge, information, and then from that information, knowledge, I act. Right? Now, there is also the other way, which is, I act and from that action, learn. You are following? Are you following this?

Q: Yes.
1:12:44 Q: Are you saying that in the normal course of learning, at some point we stop looking and we stop listening?
1:12:51 K: I am not saying anything. I have not gone as far as that. I want to understand something. Which is, first accumulate knowledge and act, or act and through action, learn. Right? Through experience, learn. The other is: not knowing, listen, see, learn, accumulate, and act. You see the two, different? My golly. I act and from that action, which may cause me pain or pleasure, I say, yes, I have learned that. The other says: listen, learn, accumulate, and act. So both are based on knowledge. Are you following this?
1:14:16 Q: Yes. I think so.
1:14:19 K: So, you are always acting from knowledge. Driving your car, riding your bicycle, learning a language, learning mathematics, knowing about it, and using mathematics to build a bridge, anything, the whole of that. You got this? So, what happens when you are acting from knowledge? So, is that knowledge ever complete? You understand? That is my next question. I wonder if this is too difficult for you.
1:15:11 Q: No, it can't be.

K: Delighted.
1:15:17 K: Knowledge is limited, isn't it? Always. Agree? There is no complete knowledge. Right. So your knowledge being incomplete, your actions must be incomplete. There can never be a perfect carpenter, perfect scientist, perfect mathematician. Right? I am looking at Dr Bohm. So, thought is the outcome of knowledge. Right?
1:16:30 Q: Is it completely so? Is it completely the outcome of knowledge?
1:16:38 K: I don't follow.
1:16:40 Q: Is thought only the outcome of knowledge?
1:16:43 Q: Is it completely, only the outcome of knowledge?
1:16:46 Q: Is thought only the outcome of knowledge? Is that all it is?
1:16:51 K: Isn't it?
1:16:56 Q: You mean only the outcome of knowledge – is that what you mean?
1:17:03 K: Go on, sir, ask.
1:17:06 Q: I think he is really asking: if there was no knowledge would there be no thought? Probably. Is that what you are asking?
1:17:15 K: If there is no knowledge would there be any thought? No.
1:17:24 Q: Well, you could learn. You could learn.
1:17:42 K: So, you are learning to think. Not to react, but to think. Thinking is also a reaction. If you had no memory, no knowledge, you can't think. So thinking is the reaction of memory. You get it? So we are living all the time in reactions. Our thinking is a reaction. When you call me an idiot, I react. When I am comparing myself with you I react. I react when I see a man in a Rolls Royce and I want that – if I am silly enough – and so on and so on. So my whole life is a movement of reaction. That is, challenge and response. So if there was no challenge, I would gradually go to sleep. You are following? That is what you are all doing. So can you live and be tremendously alive without any challenge? That is what we were discussing with the staff yesterday – part of it. Find out all these things. Don't just stick at one point and live there, keep moving. You understand what I am saying? So don't say, well, that that is my nature, life is like that, I must react. When somebody calls me an idiot, I must get angry. But if you keep on looking, observing, going into it.
1:21:01 Q: But I don't really see what is wrong with challenging ourselves. I don't really see what is wrong with a challenge, except that there is comparison.
1:21:13 K: You don't see anything wrong with challenging yourself. Right? I don't say it is right or wrong. Why do you challenge yourself?
1:21:29 Q: I mean, it does drive me to do things.
1:21:33 K: Oh, by challenging yourself you do things.
1:21:39 Q: Yes, sometimes.

K: Which means what?
1:21:41 K: Tell me please, what do you mean by challenging yourself? You are lazy, suppose you are lazy, and what is your challenge? I must get up – is that it?
1:22:01 Q: It is more like I want to manage to do something.
1:22:04 K: I am talking simply, begin simply. I am lazy and you say, I challenge myself by saying I must not be lazy. Why? Please, just a minute. Daphne, just listen. What is wrong with being lazy? Go into it. I am not saying you must be lazy. I am saying: why do you consider that laziness is wrong?
1:22:47 Q: Well, we have been told by other people and it is our image of laziness that it is not a good thing to be. So we don't want to be lazy.

K: Is that it?
1:22:57 Q: I think lazy is hurtful.
1:23:00 Q: It is difficult to run a place like this if everybody is lazy.
1:23:05 K: Look, I talked yesterday all day long until nine. When I woke up this morning my body said, for God's sake, don't get out, stay in bed. Would you call that laziness? Wait! Would you call that laziness?
1:23:36 Q: No.

Q: I don't think I would, no.
1:23:38 K: You might call it laziness but I say, look, I talked all day yesterday and I was at the end tired, next morning tired, so I said, all right, I am tired – listen carefully – I said, I am tired, but I have got to talk this morning, so I said, all right, be tired. You follow? Oh, you are missing the point. The moment you say you are tired, be tired. I wonder if you are getting what I am saying.
1:24:23 Q: Instead of saying I mustn't.
1:24:25 K: No, no. You see, you are not following. I was tired this morning and I said, all right, I am tired. Then what happens? Then you are not tired. I am tired, but when you see the whole cause of that tiredness, it is not laziness. So what is laziness? Come on. You used the word. Why are you lazy? What is wrong with laziness? Don't look at her, tell me. We had better stop, it is nearly one o'clock.
1:25:52 Q: Is it not understanding why you are tired?
1:25:56 K: No, I am asking, why do we condemn laziness? Is it laziness to sit on the steps and look at that tree? Is that laziness?
1:26:16 Q: Not necessarily.

K: All right, it is not laziness. I walk very slowly, looking all around, is that laziness? What do you mean by laziness? I don't know what it means. Personally, I don't know.
1:26:40 Q: Not being aware of the images. Is it an image you have been given by religion?
1:26:52 K: Yes, that word 'laziness' in itself is a condemnatory word. Daphne, is that right? By using the word I have condemned myself. I won't use that word. If I am tired, I am tired. If I want to sit quietly, if I don't want to move, don't call me lazy. Which means – watch – when I am tired I see why I am tired, and seeing why I am tired, I am attentive. You understand what I am saying? Attention may appear as laziness to an outsider. If you are looking at me and I am sitting quietly looking at something, you say, what a lazy man he is. I say, no, sorry, I am not lazy, I am just watching, attentive, listening, looking. So when you become attentive at the moment you are tired, it is right. I wonder if you see all this. It is only when you say, I am tired but I am lazy, I must get up, push my body – then the body is going to rebel, there will be a headache or God knows what else. So those people who put strain on themselves are the laziest people in the world. But those who say, look, I am tired, I know I am tired, during that tiredness I am attentive and I must be watchful that I don't do things when I am tired. I may do things wrongly, think wrongly, therefore, let me be quiet till I gather strength, energy in that attention. And tiredness may exist, but that attention is moving. Do you understand all this? Right, you got it? So what matters is to be attentive. Even when you are tired, you say, I am tired.
1:30:06 K: To know that you are angry. Attentive to anger. But you say, I mustn't be angry, you are inattentive. You get the point? I wonder. Do you?
1:30:28 Q: Is being angry the same as expressing it, or is it being angry? If you are angry, it is not like being tired because you could affect other people.
1:30:36 K: Yes. Sir, I said – you are not listening, please forgive me for pointing out – be attentive when you are angry. You call me a fool, I get angry. Be attentive of that anger. But when you call me a fool and I get angry, and be inattentive, then that is a reaction which produces another reaction. No, this is too much for you.
1:31:26 Q: Surely when you call it anger that is the beginning of inattention, isn't it? When you call it anger then that is already a reaction.
1:31:37 K: Yes, sir. I didn't want to go too much into it, because by naming anger, the word, you have already given it strength. I won't go into it, that is too complex for the time being.
1:31:58 It is lunchtime, and Whisper is waiting.