Krishnamurti - What place has knowledge in life?

Krishnamurti Subtitles

BR81DT1 - What place has knowledge in life?
Brockwood Park, UK - 5 June 1981
Discussion with Teachers 1

0:20	Giselle Balleys: I would like to ask you how we could be creating a revolution in education, because it seems to me that we are doing a lot of work here but maybe we don't go deeply enough, and we still have sensitive and intelligent students who leave for other schools – and that is the question.
0:58	Krishnamurti: I don't know if I understand your question. I am not clear. Are you asking, we give a lot of information, knowledge and we don't seem to go any deeper than that?
1:23	GB: We give more than information. The relationship is different here than in other schools, between the staff and the students, and the way of life also, but all that does not seem to be really enough.
1:48	Dorothy Simmons: We could take it further, Krishnaji. We were saying that knowledge is a limited thing, and we have said we were going to try and attempt a total education here, and yet you are saying students leave because they feel that they get a better academic education elsewhere, and staff are saying that and you are saying that.
2:13	K: Am I saying that?
2:15	DS: I think somewhere along the line you have suggested it.
2:20	K: Only with regard to one person, I said.
2:25	DS: What I would like to ask is, if we really see the point of a total education, why are we subscribing to students returning to the world's education, society's education, when we are saying we are trying to deepen the whole thing? And then at the last resort we say, no, that is fine, go ahead, get a good degree and get it elsewhere. To me it seems as though we are denying the very thing we put forward.
3:10	Scott Forbes: I think also, part of the original question was, when Dorothy refers to the original thing that we put forward, how can we carry that through much better than we are doing it? How can we follow through with that? And perhaps if we did more on that level people wouldn't be going elsewhere for a better academic education.
3:44	K: Are you saying, asking rather, what place has knowledge in life? Is that what you are asking?
4:00	SF: Partly, yes. And then also, given whatever the answer is to that, what do we do that here to make that total education much more vibrant?
4:13	K: I understand. But if we don't understand what place has knowledge in life, and if knowledge is going to transform man – those are the two things you are trying to say, aren't you?
4:32	DS: I think we are ambivalent, some of us, in really seeing the limitation of knowledge, and we lose heart, we don't follow it through in our actual living here. We are divided.
4:51	Shakuntala Narayan: I don't think that is true, Dorothy.
4:53	DS: Well, I feel it is true from this point of view, that I hear staff saying sometimes that they feel that a person should go to a good academic school to finish their education completely. And I question that. That really refutes the whole thing that we have undertaken.
5:15	SN: I am not sure I have heard any staff members say that they need to leave here to finish their academic education or whatever. I think it depends on the student. There are some students who feel, not that they are leaving here, but they feel they want to study a subject in depth.
5:39	DS: Why can't they here?
5:43	SN: Because if a student wants to study physics at an advanced level, obviously he is not going to be able to study it here. We don't have the facilities.
5:54	DS: I don't know that that is even true. I will ask Brian. I don't know that that is even true, but there hasn't been a physics student who wanted to do that.
6:06	SN: Well, say a subject like literature. I know that some students started on their A Level, Open University literature courses. They looked at the course and I think perhaps some people feel that I have encouraged Frode and Srinivas to go on to university elsewhere, but that is not so. They came to me and they said, look, this is what is in the course, and they themselves felt rather dissatisfied with the course. And Frode came first and he said, I want to study literature much more deeply and widely, and the Open University doesn't offer it. And he said he wanted to go to Norway and finish off, and then we said, why don't you try England? And I did encourage him to explore the possibilities of Oxford, Cambridge and so on. But it seemed impossible, so he decided to leave. I mean, if somebody wants to study a subject he has got to find the right place to go to.
7:09	DS: Yes, but if you are saying, look, knowledge is only a part of what we are doing, I feel it is a failure of integrity to not pursue it. You can learn, you can get your qualification and you can create the Open University also, up to a point as well, while still being educated in a total way. That is what we said we are attempting to do, not to go back and say – I rely on the established education – to do it.
7:47	Stephen Smith: You have to bear in mind the world as it is. These people who leave here, probably, they have to deal with the world as it is. They are not going to be able to live in Brockwood for the rest of their lives so they do have to meet that in some way.
8:04	DS: But the world as it is, is that we are saying we think there is a different way to educate.
8:09	SS: Yes, but we are not educating people just to be here. We are educating them in order to be in that world, which is the world as it is.
8:17	DS: No, we are not educating for them to be in that world, I would say.
8:21	SS: Well, what world are they going to live in?
8:23	K: Are you denying knowledge? DS: I am not denying knowledge. I am saying that it can be got en route a different way.
8:31	K: Wait a minute, let's find out.
8:33	K: Are you denying knowledge? DS: I am not denying knowledge.
8:37	K: So now you admit knowledge has a place. DS: Yes.
8:41	K: Academic knowledge. DS: Yes.
8:47	K: And would you say that here at Brockwood we are giving them sufficient academic knowledge?
8:55	DS: In most departments, some stronger than others, yes.
8:59	K: Then what else? Leave that – then what?
9:01	DS: So, in our attempt to truly educate we must take a different point of view. We need not go along with the status quo as it is.
9:13	K: What is the other point of view?
9:14	DS: The other point of view is that you need to get a good degree from a recognised university in order that you can hold your own in the world, and then go back to a school. I mean, what are we educating here for? Not to go and subscribe to the education that we have already questioned.
9:34	K: I am being educated here, and you are academically training me. And also you are trying to help me to live a different kind of life. But I have to earn a livelihood, I have to have a job, go through all that mill.
9:59	DS: Well, it need not be a mill.
10:01	K: No, but as things are.
10:04	DS: But if we go on saying 'as things are' it will always be as things are.
10:08	K: Therefore, what shall we do?
10:11	DS: What we are attempting to do. We are saying there is a different way to educate.
10:15	K: Which is what?
10:16	DS: Do we really think this is true and able to be done? Can you learn and also get a qualification, which the world needs, at not necessarily the top university, because you have had a total education en route? They have listened to you. They have found out about themselves. They have really questioned themselves as human beings.
10:44	K: I don't quite follow the argument in this.
10:47	IP: Are you saying, Dorothy, that it is quite possible – just to take an example, for Frode – to remain here, to study here, to get a degree at the Open University which he can use, but if he wants to go much deeper than the Open University allows him to, do it here?
11:08	DS: Yes, he can.
11:11	SN: The problem is he feels he can't. He feels that he really needs the top professors and he needs students also studying it. He needs exchange with other students who are also studying literature at an intense level. He has studied up to the A Level and he wants to go further. I can't do more than A Level literature with him, and there aren't other students who can do...
11:36	DS: But you have got to start somewhere. We had to start with two students here. We have had to jump off the deep end and make the attempt. And I feel it is to go the middle road and half do the job.
11:53	SN: But Dorothy, I feel the Open University is less than good enough.
11:59	DS: It is what you make it. It is a means of qualification. It is a London University degree which holds standing and it has grown in its standing in the eight years it has been going, and we could create it.
12:13	Mary Zimbalist: But are we discussing the shortcomings of the Open University?
12:17	Brian Jenkins: There is more than just that, I think. What we are also discussing is whether a student can stay here and use all the resources that are available including the Open University. There is the Open University, there are the teachers who are here, there is television, there is radio, he can go out from this place, meet people and so on. That is one point of view. And the other point of view is, no, it can't be good enough. It can't ever be good enough. You have to go to Oxford or Cambridge or somewhere such as that.
12:46	SS: I don't think one has to be so specific. There are at least two students who are doing Open University now.
12:52	DS: There are two at the moment but because of the fall away they are discouraged and so they haven't the companionship and the backup of other students.
13:10	SN: But we can't keep them by force, Dorothy.
13:12	DS: I am not saying that. I am just questioning what we are doing. And do we mean what we say when we say knowledge has a limited value? Or do we really mean we would like a first-class degree from a known and recognised university because that tells us we are good?
13:35	MZ: Dorothy, I think it is not fair to anybody to say, I want a degree from a first-class university to prove that I am something marvellous.
13:43	DS: Well, why do we go there then?
13:44	MZ: Because one may wish, for whatever reasons people seek out education, to go further. Now, is Brockwood supposed to answer that educational need beyond a certain point?
13:55	DS: Well, that is what last year we said we were going to attempt.
13:58	MZ: Yes, but if a student feels that he must go further than what we can supply, is that a lack in Brockwood? I mean, we say we take students up to a certain degree, O Level, A Level, and then create something else.
14:14	DS: Couldn't they create it, Mary? S N: It is very difficult.
14:17	K: Would you tell me, please, what does Brockwood stand for?
14:22	DS: I can't tell you that, Krishnaji, really, except that we are a total education. Not just an information of knowledge.
14:33	K: Yes, a total education. But in that total education you are including academic knowledge.
14:40	DS: Yes. K: Right. Now, let's start from there.
14:46	DS: You have said the computer, the silicon chip, robots...
14:50	K: I know all that. Now, wait a minute. You say you are not only giving here an academic training but also helping them to see the immensity of life.
15:06	K: Right? DS: Yes.
15:10	K: Are we doing it?
15:14	DS: I am saying we are attempting to do it. We are feeling our way towards it. And I feel that we are a little half-hearted about it.
15:25	K: Ah, I understand your point.
15:32	Questioner: There must be a way of getting knowledge and also to travel deeply outside Brockwood. A person in the world somewhere, wherever you are, I think there must be a way of learning at all places.
15:50	DS: Yes, I agree. But we are here and we have said we want to see if it is possible to create a total education. So you have got to start somewhere.
16:00	K: How do you give total education?
16:05	DS: By living in your life and your relationships and acquiring some skill in something that somebody is prepared to give you a job, or you are a dedicated person who wants to communicate that to the world.
16:20	K: Now, just a minute, I would like to be clear on this point. Forgive me if I insist. You are giving academic knowledge and also you are helping me as a student, that I am here, to comprehend and live my relationship – not only here, if I go out – my responsibility to the world, and my getting rid of fear, and so on. That is what this place stands for.
17:05	DS: All of that.
17:06	K: I mean that. I mean knowledge and all that. Not only academic knowledge but psychological investigation into oneself and therefore into the world and society, me, etc.
17:23	K: And that is what Brockwood stands for. DS: Yes.
17:30	K: Are we doing it?
17:34	DS: We are half doing it.
17:36	K: No, you can't do half way.
17:39	DS: Well, we are feeling our way towards it, Krishnaji.
17:41	K: What do you mean seeing your way? DS: Feeling our way towards it.
17:46	K: I don't understand 'seeing your way'.
17:48	DS: Feeling your way towards how it can be done. There are many factors that have to be taken into consideration. We have raised the age level and so we have less students. And that is part of what has to be included too. We have got to earn our livelihood, if you like. But at the same time can we really investigate and actually do provide for, explore a total education and have the courage to do it?
18:22	K: I understand. But how do we do that? Are we prepared as a group or as a small community to do that? Would you agree to this? That we are trying here academic business, and also investigate together as a group into the whole complex psychological structure of human beings. Would you agree to that? That we are trying to do it. We are not saying we are doing it, but do you say that is what our urge is, that is what our purpose is, our intention is?
19:18	SN: Yes, I would say that is the intention.
19:22	K: Now, is that intention passionate or just intellectual, verbal, and rather superficial? I am not saying it is or it is not. I am not condemning or anything, I am just asking. Well, sir?
19:57	SS: Well, generally, it is as good as we are, really. It is as good as we are. What we have, what we have realised in ourselves, we can then offer to the students. We can offer a certain amount of affection, we can offer a certain amount of guidance possibly, some clarity, but if one asked the question sort of very brutally, very sheerly,
20:22	SS: very... K: Deeply. SS: definitively, one would have to say no.
20:27	K: Then what?
20:30	DS: Haven't you said, Krishnaji, that there is a different way of learning?
20:35	K: Yes.
20:36	DS: And aren't we trying to learn in a different way?
20:39	K: I don't know. I am asking.
20:42	DS: Well, I would have said yes, we are.
20:46	SS: To refer to one of the students who have been talked about who are leaving...
20:52	K: Srinivas.
20:53	SS: Not just Srinivas, others who are younger.
20:55	K: X, Y.
20:58	DS: There is a whole contingent from Sweden, yes?
21:01	SS: Not them particularly.
21:03	DS: Well, them too, they come into it, who feel that, yes, they have had a different approach.
21:12	K: A smattering of it.
21:14	DS: And now they will go and get their education.
21:19	SN: I don't think that is the case with Srinivas and Frode.
21:22	DS: I am not saying it is.
21:25	GB: Many others, a general feeling.
21:28	SS: It probably varies a little bit from case to case but one has to accept that there might be a certain disappointment on the part of these people that more wasn't done. I know that in one case it is a fact, but there may be others where it is also a fact. There is disappointment that there wasn't a deeper realisation of what is being talked about. So I think we have to face that, really.
21:55	MZ: The lack is on the academic side?
21:58	SS: Not on the academic side, on the other side.
22:01	DS: The self side.
22:02	Harsh Tanka: I think if we did have the total education we are talking about, these people wouldn't feel the need to leave, and it is only that they feel caught between two schools. They feel that there isn't really a total education here and they are missing out on their usual kind of education that the world has to give.
22:22	K: So what shall we do?
22:23	SN: I feel it is not quite that, even in the case of Frode, because he has talked about coming back to teach in the schools, one of the schools. He has talked about going to India or coming to Brockwood. But he says that he is very, very interested in literature and he says he wants to study it as deeply and as fully as he can. And he says he can't do it with the Open University. I feel he is old enough and mature enough to see that.
22:55	HT: Why a conflict?
22:57	SN: There is no conflict. He says he will go and he will come back.
23:00	HT: Well, I would say that if I was a student and I was very interested in physics, say, and I had to choose between pursing just a subject and pursuing a total education then I would really have to look very hard to see whether I wanted the total education or I just wanted to know a little bit more physics.
23:21	SS: Yes, but you have learnt a lot of physics, you see. You are in a different position, really, because we have all learned. If we were interested in something, we have learnt about it and then we have come here. The students are in a different position, really. They have never explored anything very fully.
23:37	Q: Well, are we really awaking their own interest in looking and finding for themselves? Because I feel that we are not. I feel it is rather like running a kindergarten, in various ways, and I feel that their own initiative, interest, and passion for something – we are not touching any of that.
23:58	DS: That is what I would say to Frode, to Srinivas, that if you go to Oxford or Cambridge or anywhere else, you will have teachers who will point a direction, draw a map for you, but you have got to have the passion to find out for yourself, and that can be done here as well as anywhere else.
24:19	SN: I am not sure that at the university level they can really... because, Dorothy, it is not just sitting with papers...
24:31	DS: They can get the degree. They can also go on further with their education according to their capacity and passion to do so. I mean, that is what any artist does. He doesn't wait to be told and taught and get a first-class teacher to show him the way, he finds out for himself. And I feel that is where we are falling down.
24:55	SF: I don't feel, Krishnaji, that what we are pointing to is a shortcoming in the academic side of Brockwood. I think that there are some things here which we can't teach. At the moment, if someone would like to come here and study aeroplane design, there is no one here that could teach them that and so they would have to do it on their own or we would have to bring someone in to teach it. But the whole thing that brought someone here to begin with, has nothing to do with aeroplane design and it has nothing to do with a pure academic education. And I think that some people are saying that, all that brought a person here and all that brought us here is perhaps not being realised as fully as it could in order to keep people like Frode and Srinivas and other people here, – we are not doing it as fully or as completely as it should be done.
25:52	K: I understand. So what shall we do?
25:55	DS: In your words, they don't burn with it.
25:58	K: They don't.
26:00	SF: And I don't know if we do.
26:01	Q: Yet we are asking them more than we are asking ourselves, it seems.
26:08	DS: Well, are we?
26:11	DS: Why are we here?
26:13	Q: Why are we concentrating on the students, whether they are going or not?
26:17	DS: Because I think it is an issue. It has come to be an issue because we had got a little group together to try and do this and now it is just falling apart.
26:34	SS: It may build itself up again. DS: It may do.
26:38	IP: Aren't we really coming back to what we were starting to talk about last autumn before Krishnaji went away? That we weren't able to do this that we are pointing to now, because of all the other things we have to do, and for that reason we were going to a higher age level. But now it seems that we are trying to do this with a small group of students while still dealing with the other level, which may not be possible. I don't know.
27:08	DS: I don't quite follow that.
27:09	IP: Well, all the things that we said when we talked about a new emphasis – or whatever else we have called it since then – all the things that were holding us back from going more deeply ourselves and with the students who wanted to, which really means older students, all the things that were holding us back and stopping us in some way or other were the problems in the younger age group. Now we are saying the older students are wanting to leave because they are not going deep enough, we are not going deep enough with them, they are not getting what they want here.
27:47	DS: They are boggling at the prospect of having to discover it for themselves.
27:53	IP: Right. That is part of it, and also Jane was saying it is like kindergarten.
27:59	Q: But I don't think it is to do with age.
28:01	IP: But we are trying to do this with a small group while still having the other group.
28:06	Q: But the intensity of interest isn't to do with age group, it is to do with some deadening thing, or wanting to be given it rather than looking for it.
28:18	IP: But there is a whole strata of students who don't really want that, who are really just here because of being at a school which is quite a nice school to be at.
28:25	DS: Yes, but one year is one group of students who feel like that and the next year they are in the other section of the school. And so non-verbally, in the course of living, a certain something is rubbing off on them, if you like, or they are beginning to see something. So you have to quietly go along with them, patiently almost, go along with them.
28:48	IP: Which is what we are doing. But does that leave us enough time and energy to go further, for those that want to?
28:55	DS: Why not?
28:56	IP: That is why we started talking about this in the first place, because we weren't doing it, we felt unable to do it.
29:10	K: Are you saying the students that come here really want academic training and not the other?
29:23	DS: They want both, Krishnaji.
29:24	K: I know, but wait, just a minute, let me finish. They say that, but deeply, they are concerned about their security, job, sexuality. That is their deep demand. And are we thwarting them about that?
29:49	DS: Are we?
29:51	K: Stopping them from that?
29:54	DS: Well, it has been gone into with them and opened up, so to speak – it is looked at. All that is part of growing up and being adolescent.
30:08	K: That sounds excellent, but they won't accept all this.
30:12	DS: But I don't think that is necessarily correct. I think they do listen quite considerably.
30:17	K: But who are the people actually, who are the students who say, look, I want both and I am going to spend my life in getting both. Is there anybody like that?
30:30	BJ: Both what and what, Krishnaji? I am not clear – both what and what?
30:35	K: Academic and the other.
30:38	SF: I think that what we are saying is that somehow the hunger for the academic has been allowed to outgrow the hunger for the other.
30:46	DS: Yes. K: All right. Because, why? That is what they want.
30:53	DS: Yes, but it is up to us to educate them to see the limitation of that.
30:57	K: I know. But have we succeeded? SF: No.
31:01	DS: It is not no or yes, Krishnaji. It is in the course of being attempted. It has to be worked on.
31:07	K: Look, Mrs D, after all, we have existed for ten years or eleven years or twelve years. Have we any student here who has gone out of here and said, look...
31:23	DS: Quite a number, I would say.
31:27	K: Wait a minute, I haven't finished. Who really say, look, I want both, and I want much more the other than the other.
31:36	DS: Yes, I would say that happens.
31:38	K: Are there any?
31:39	DS: And there are some here now at this moment like that.
31:42	K: There are some? DS: Yes.
31:44	K: So what are we talking about then?
31:47	DS: That we don't lose heart and join the bandwagon.
31:52	K: I am not losing heart. I am asking. Now, what shall we do? We have described the present condition. Let's move from there.
32:12	SF: I think, Krishnaji, that we can say that some students have been deeply touched, and do want the other more than the other, but somehow that is not enough.
32:23	K: Certainly not.
32:27	DS: I don't follow that.
32:30	K: I said, that is not good enough.
32:32	DS: What, not to be deeply touched?
32:35	SF: Not the few, or not the numbers that we have touched. Don't even say 'few'.
32:40	DS: I say thank you for anything. I say thank you for anybody that is touched.
32:46	K: No. Do they show it? You see, we are going off. So what shall we do? You have described this. You have described what is demanded, etc. From there let's move. What shall we do?
33:07	DS: Well, I suppose really why one is talking about it is one is saying, look, let's follow this through, let's go to the end.
33:16	K: But suppose I am one of the students. I say, yes, I agree with you, but I want also the other, academic.
33:25	DS: Then I think it is up to us to discuss it as we are now and say, do you really think these things?
33:31	K: Yes, the Open University is not good enough.
33:36	DS: But I am questioning whether to send them from here, where we say we are attempting a whole education, to go to any other university to get a good education is a fallacy.
33:52	K: Because if I get a good education academically, I will have a degree, I will come back and work here.
33:59	DS: You will have a degree if you stay here and work sufficiently, and you will also be educated in a like-minded place.
34:07	K: No, but I won't lose the other. You are not answering. DS: Why do you go there then?
34:15	K: Now, what shall we do, from now?
34:20	BJ: Krishnaji, if you won't lose the other, as you put it – presumably you mean what you have learnt and what you have gathered in Brockwood having been here for some years – then why can't you stay here and contribute to what we are trying to build here? I mean, we are changing our direction.
34:39	K: Sir, aren't you asking too much of these kids?
34:43	Q: Yes. It is too early.
34:45	DS: No, I don't think so. I think we have said and we are saying, you are more or less adult, and we are treating them as more or less adult. We are only more or less adult. And we are seeing if it is possible to educate in a totally different way. But we are saying now, that may be rather good. Yes, I would better not go too far from the path, and play safe.
35:16	Wendy Agnew: But surely, Dorothy, this isn't the only place. What worries me is we are saying that the only place you can explore something different is Brockwood.
35:26	DS: I am not saying that at all.
35:28	WA: I think some of the students feel that they would like to try and see whether you can learn at an academic level, a high academic level, and also keep with the other that they have learnt from Brockwood. I think that also comes with it. They don't necessarily have to stay here.
35:47	DS: I think that is possible and people can think that, but also we here are saying: is it possible to do it here? That is what we came together to do, I thought.
35:56	SS: Then we should be addressing that question more to ourselves than to the students, really. That question is more appropriate here.
36:03	DS: We are. SS: I think we are now, yes.
36:07	SN: Dorothy, I don't see what is wrong. If I wanted to learn the violin and I sought out the best teacher in the world because I really wanted to learn it to the best of my capacity – not that I want to compete, but I really want to learn how to play it.
36:28	DS: That is fine. That is a technique that can be learnt. But the sort of thing that we are suggesting is not that sort of thing. It is not a memorised thing. As Krishnaji has said, the computer will do that beautifully. You can get it all from there.
36:42	Many: No.
36:44	SS: Not the violin, surely. K: No.
36:46	DS: It is a skill. SS: No, it is more.
36:49	Q: No, it is passionate. DS: Not necessarily. It is a skill.
36:52	SF: I have a feeling, Krishnaji – perhaps wrong, Dorothy – but if we were doing as much of the other as was possible with this group, I don't think this debate would even be going on. Because if someone has to go away to learn violin or something else, it doesn't make any difference, but there would not be an incorrect emphasis. There would not be someone who was forgetting the other in order to go and study something academic. And we would be doing all that we say we are doing, and people would be staying here when they had both things here to do.
37:29	Q: But are they separate? Surely if you learn a musical instrument that incorporates everything that Krishnaji is speaking about.
37:38	SF: Not necessarily at all. There are a lot of musical experts who are really awful.
37:43	Q: But at one level, but it can incorporate everything.
37:47	HT: But only if you start with the other, not if you start with the playing of the instrument.
37:59	BJ: I feel that what Harsh has just said is the crux of this thing. I feel that in a sense you have got to start with the other. If we were all here really grounded in the other and the serious students that we are thinking about now were also grounded in the other then they would be in a strong position to go out of this place. But I don't think we feel we have got to that point yet. Therefore we need to stay and work together.
38:26	K: What shall we do from now? That is what I am asking. You haven't answered my question. To give both – academic, etc. What shall we do? Students – I don't know, I talked to them the other day – some of them seem very keen. It may be momentary. You follow? You know? The world is much too strong. Unless you have got great inward stability, they suck you in. They destroy you. That is what we are talking about, aren't we? How do we give them enough vitality, strength and all that, to withstand all that?
39:29	DS: We have said that living here is...
39:32	K: It doesn't happen.
39:34	DS: I don't think that is quite correct, Krishnaji. I think it has happened with a few and I think it will always be a few.
39:41	K: So, come down to that: it is only a few. Then what are we doing with so many? Let's be logical.
39:52	DS: Well, because you need a certain number to create the feeling of a school. You need a certain number. You need the companionship.
40:02	K: You see, we are going back again.
40:05	DS: No, I don't think so, Krishnaji.
40:10	BJ: And also, Krishnaji, how can you say whether this one is going to get it and this one is not going to get it?
40:15	K: I don't know. I am not saying anything. I am just asking. Mrs D, would you say we are concerned with the transformation of man? Right? DS: Yes.
40:45	K: And knowledge is not going to do it. DS: No. Exactly.
40:52	K: Let's be clear on that subject. That we are concerned with the total transformation in the psychic field of a human being. And we see knowledge has never done it.
41:10	DS: It has created the trouble.
41:12	K: Wait. But knowledge has a place, and what we are trying to do is to show to the students, to ourselves, the limitation of knowledge. And the psychological world is so complex, much more complex than the academic world. And to understand that complexity you need a certain quality of mind, a quality of endeavour. Are these students capable of that? I am not saying they are.
42:01	DS: You can't really know, Krishnaji.
42:04	K: No. So, what shall we do? You saw the other day, those Buddhist monks. What? That is just it. DS: Yes.
42:27	DS: So we are saying here that we must discover a different way of learning.
42:33	K: No, wait a minute, before you come to that, are we clear on this point? Knowledge is not going to transform man. Do you know what that means when we say yes, what is implied in that?
42:53	DS: I think I do.
42:55	K: Do we all? I question it.
43:17	DS: Even if you question it, Krishnaji...
43:21	K: Wait. I am asking something very, very serious. Knowledge is not going to transform man. And knowledge is necessary at a certain level. Do I comprehend the complexity of this thing, what is involved in it? Do we all understand it? Is that the division amongst us? Perhaps you understand or she understands – I don't, and so I lay emphasis on the academic side, etc. Do I understand what it means that knowledge doesn't transform man? When all my life, all my past generations and everything around me is saying knowledge is important. Books and books are written on it. Dr Bohm spends his life on knowledge. All the scientists are doing it. Are we saying – forgive me if I bring Dr Bohm, it doesn't mean I am belittling him or anything – so are we clear on this point?
45:01	Q: It seems very important for us to get this clear. I think it is very important for us to get this clear.
45:07	K: I know. I am asking.
45:09	Q: Because we are a school and schools traditionally have been thought of as places for imparting knowledge. So I think it is very important that we understand what we are talking about when we are saying: what is the place of knowledge? I think we all have to be very clear on this.
45:33	K: Do you realise that it means that we go totally against the whole structure of society, culture, everything?
45:52	DS: Krishnaji, this place wasn't started idly. People did think something along that way. It has become clearer as we have actually done it.
46:02	K: Yes, but perhaps we don't see the tremendous implications of it. We only are scratching the surface of it – perhaps. I mean, my brain, our brain, is conditioned to knowledge. It has lived on knowledge. You follow? And you come along and say, look, knowledge is not going to transform man. And so I ask, what will transform man? Which is what we want. Right? DS: Yes.
46:55	K: To transform man so that he creates a new society. Right? We agree to that. So, how will I end knowledge but keep knowledge where it is necessary? Tell me. We want that, but we say we don't know what to do. Is that the problem?
47:30	DS: Yes and no.
47:32	K: Shakuntala, is that the problem?
47:37	SN: Yes, I suppose we really don't know how to do it.
47:40	K: No, not how to do it. Are we clear on this issue?
47:49	GB: We are verbally but maybe not completely.
47:51	K: No, not completely or partially – that is impossible. Do we see actually, have a deep perception into this impossible position we have been educated to? We have worshipped knowledge both outwardly and inwardly.
48:24	Q: Yes. I think so.
48:27	K: So tell me, if that is so, my brain, my whole life is based on knowledge.
48:38	Q: And the whole attempt to transform oneself is based on knowledge too.
48:42	K: Yes, and you say, knowledge is not going to transform man. Either you understand it so profoundly, with the implications of it, and when you make a statement like that it is true – you follow what I mean? – it has a sense of integrity behind it, or we are just saying, knowledge may not change man, and play around with it. Q: Exactly.
49:11	DS: And have a foot in both camps.
49:14	K: That doesn't matter, I am not concerned with both camps – we play around with it. Is that our position?
49:23	DS: I think that is the position we are trying to extricate ourselves from.
49:27	K: No. First see the position – not extricating. If you extricate from that, it is part of your knowledge you are extricating.
49:35	DS: Well, not necessarily.
49:37	K: Then I am not using the right word. If I know I am extricating from knowledge, I am still part of that knowledge. I don't know if you see that. So, I want to be clear on this one point. Forgive me if I keep on repeating it. Are we clear on this point? That knowledge, fundamentally, deeply, immovably, irrevocably cannot change man. If we are absolutely clear, we can start. But we are not, I am afraid – that is the point.
50:36	SN: I think we don't see the implications. It has implications at every level. I think we don't see the implications.
50:43	K: I want you to see it. Not at every level and examine it. If you examine it you are examining with a mind that has been educated on knowledge. You know what the implication of it is? Total denial of the whole process of accumulation as the 'me'. I won't go into that.
51:27	HT: I don't think we have seen the complete operation of knowledge. We may see parts of it.
51:37	K: No, Harsha, if I may ask you, do you really have a quick comprehension of this?
51:49	HT: Not really, no. K: Why not?
51:56	HT: I can't see exactly how one is...
52:00	K: No, it will work out. Do you comprehend it? Do you see the reality of the truth of it?
52:08	HT: I have a sense of it, yes.
52:10	K: No, come on, move, don't stick. Do you see the truth of it?
52:19	HT: I see that knowledge hasn't changed man. K: No.
52:25	Q: Why are we so afraid ourselves just to be simple? Almost every set of words we use is an escape...
52:32	K: Yes, that is what I am asking. That is what I am saying. Why don't you see a simple truth, that man, though he has worshipped knowledge, written, etc., that has not fundamentally changed man? That is a tremendous... You see it. What is the difficulty?
52:54	HT: I suppose the lingering hope that it might still someday somehow change man.
52:59	K: What, after a million years? Come on, you are just arguing. I don't want to argue. I can quote history, you can quote somebody else and we can keep that game going. But then we are playing with knowledge. You follow?
53:14	SS: I think, if you make a statement 'the history of the world is knowledge' or something of an objective kind like that, I think that is fairly easy to see, in a way. But I am knowledge also. Everything I am is knowledge.
53:28	K: That is right.
53:32	DS: Well, is that so, Krishnaji? K: What?
53:34	DS: That everything you have is knowledge.
53:37	SS: Everything one is, is knowledge.
53:39	DS: Not necessarily.
53:40	K: Ah, careful, Mrs D.
53:43	DS: Well, is it? I am asking.
53:47	K: You have to go into this carefully. That is what I am saying. You see, I don't want to work out the details of it. It is like an engineer who has a perception of a beautiful bridge, immediately. Then he works out the details. Right, sir? You are an engineer. Tell me, help me out, for God's sake. Then he works out the details and the complexity of strain, etc.
54:21	DS: But that as differing from the actual vision of seeing the bridge is a very different approach.
54:28	K: No, my lady. Do we here in this group see, feel, comprehend – any word you like – the truth that knowledge is not going to change man?
54:48	Q: No.
54:50	Q: It seems like even though we see it intellectually...
54:54	K: Do you see it? That is all I am asking.
54:56	Q: Yes, we see it. K: No, un momento – do you see it as truth, as something immovable?
55:16	SN: I don't think we see it as a truth. K: Do you?
55:20	SN: I don't think I see it. K: Why?
55:25	SN: Because I think, as Steve pointed out...
55:27	K: Ah! Don't say 'as he pointed out' – I am asking you.
55:32	SN: Well, I think it is very clear, but...
55:39	K: You see what you are saying? Explain to me very, very carefully all the details, all the arguments, why knowledge cannot change man, then I will see it. And suppose I refuse to say, explain, and there is nobody who can explain – what then is your action? You see, you are not facing this thing.
56:18	RP: Sir, you can't quite say what your action will be, but I suppose what we can say is...
56:23	K: I am not talking of action. I don't know what action will be when I see the tremendous truth of this.
56:31	RP: This is what I am trying to say. But what I feel sure of is that my action is not out of knowledge anymore.
56:39	K: That may come later.
56:47	Q: That vision or that sense of making something, making something new, happens immediately, and then one chases the knowledge to carry something through.
57:00	K: Madame, do you see the truth of this?
57:06	Q: Yes, in that sense, I do. In the sense of carrying anything out.
57:12	K: Not carrying – please, I am not talking about action, carrying anything out, how to instruct people – nothing.
57:19	Q: No, but change happens that way.
57:22	K: I am asking, if I may – I am not being impudent or disrespectful, I am just asking – do you see the truth of this? That no amount of knowledge is going to change man. Because knowledge is limited and as long as you remain in that realm of knowledge you will remain always within a certain limitation. I can explain a dozen ways. If we are not clear on that point then all the things you have talked about for half an hour or 45 minutes will go on.
58:22	DW: Sir, can I say that surely we are not clear on that point because the greater part of our daily life is occupied with... K: Knowledge.
58:33	DW: Yes, and the feeling of unlimited, of the feeling of awe which seems to spring from thoughts of knowledge.
58:41	K: Yes, sir. So, I am asking you, do you see this? Not your daily life. We will come to daily life. We will come to all that. Do you see this absolute, irrevocable truth?
59:20	Q: Sir, it seems like one hesitates when looking at this because there is a feeling that with knowledge one knows that one can change one's own life.
59:35	K: Yes, sir. So you are all uncertain on this fact. And that is why this confusion arises.
59:53	SF: Krishnaji, does a clarity on this fact then tell us what will transform man?
1:00:00	K: You will find out. Scott, that is not a question you put to me. Then you are just asking, what shall I do?
1:00:08	SF: No. You ask that question and I look and I say, yes, I feel that I do see that knowledge will not.
1:00:20	K: No, Scott, go into it deeper than that, for God's sake!
1:00:24	SF: Yes. So then I look and I say, well, I don't see what will, so obviously I don't see it.
1:00:28	K: No, you are not holding the fact in your mind. You are arguing for it or against it, wanting detailed explanation, you are not saying, by Jove, it is an extraordinary statement to make, and hold it, let it flower. You follow what I am saying? Let it flower. But you are not doing that. Personally, I am absolutely, irrevocably, for the rest of my days, I know knowledge will not transform man. See what has happened to my mind when I actually realise that. Intellectually, emotionally, in my being I understand this. Without any argument there has been a radical change in my outlook on life. I don't have to make an effort.
1:02:06	Q: So we stop looking for answers anywhere and listen.
1:02:09	K: No, I am not trying to find an answer.
1:02:15	Q: No, but knowledge implies that I am looking, that somebody else knows all the time.
1:02:19	K: No. Knowledge. Not somebody else's knowledge, my knowledge.
1:02:25	Q: That is what I am saying. I am listening then and awake, if I don't believe that knowledge can help.
1:02:33	K: I am the result of knowledge. I am knowledge.
1:02:40	Q: So I drop it. K: You don't see all this. What do you say? My question is, why don't we see something as absolute truth? Why aren't we sensitive enough to see this? I know why – because you are full of knowledge, argument back and forth. You follow what I am saying? Sorry if I am rather emphatic. Forgive me. We discussed this subject – whether knowledge is going to transform man – about ten years ago or eight years ago with all the scientists and all those clever people. And they are pursuing their knowledge. They haven't said, look, let me look at this thing. Right? And we are doing that, aren't we?
1:04:30	DS: I would have said the mere fact that there was that meeting here...
1:04:38	K: Have I really understood the depth of this thing so that I can transmit to those kids?
1:05:02	DS: I think last year when we talked about it, talking with you, something of that came over and people had a sense that something very different had to come about. And you left us with the statement that you would challenge us as to how this was going to be done, that we felt that we didn't want to go on doing things as we had been.
1:05:29	K: Now I am asking. Let us see if we can do this now. Well? Shakuntala, come on, move. You moved the other direction. What is the difficulty? What is the difficulty in seeing something that seems so absolutely true?
1:06:18	WA: For some reason there seems to be something in one that doesn't want to see it. There seems to be something in oneself that actually doesn't want to see it.
1:06:28	K: Then why? Afraid? Fear? Lack of sense of stability?
1:06:40	WA: I think stability comes into it, security.
1:06:43	K: Yes, so I am asking. Is that what is preventing me seeing something extraordinarily simple? Because I have lived with knowledge. Knowledge has become part of my life, my daily routine, my remembrance, my experiences, all the attachments, all that. Therefore it is very simple – I don't see it. I don't want to see it. That is very clear. So, then the problem arises, as the problem has arisen this afternoon. Please, I am not condemning or justifying, I am just pointing out something. Please, I am not making this place silent.
1:08:26	Q: Sir, it seems like you want to see perhaps this seeing as knowledge also, because we are so used to seeing new things as knowledge.
1:08:39	K: If you saw deeply that knowledge is not going to transform man, see what happens. All the meditations, all that – you have wiped the slate clean. And so you act – oh God, I don't want to act.
1:09:15	HT: Then I feel that I don't have to gather anything.
1:09:17	K: No. If all of us see that, good God, do you know what would happen to a place like this?
1:09:34	SS: Most of man's endeavour has been some kind of attempt to do that, talking of religious man.
1:09:41	K: Religions, of course, but they are anchored in belief.
1:09:48	SS: Everyone is anchored. It seems to me that everyone is anchored in one way or another. I am also anchored in my image – we are all anchored.
1:09:59	K: That is the whole thing. Which is essentially, to knowledge.
1:10:08	DS: But we are anchored by that very thing. We are anchored by all the endeavours of the past. We are anchored by that very thing: knowledge. It becomes knowledge then. And we are saying we have got to discover it for now, which has never happened before.
1:10:24	K: But Mrs D – forgive me asking this question – do you see the simple truth of this? Don't say partially, a little.
1:10:35	DS: I am not saying that. I do.
1:10:39	K: Don't be so emphatic.
1:10:55	K: You know, all the saints in the world have been trying to do this, but they have all failed because they are anchored to some nonsense. And can we in ourselves say, look, that is truth, and let that truth operate? If we see this, how shall we then transmit to the students who come here to be trained academically? Right?
1:12:08	DS: To learn.
1:12:12	K: Yes, learn academic subjects.
1:12:15	DS: No, to learn about the whole thing.
1:12:20	K: The whole thing is this.
1:12:22	DS: The whole thing is that including the academic.
1:12:25	K: No, the whole thing is this.
1:12:27	DS: Yes, the whole thing is that. But we have to learn a language, we have to use symbols.
1:12:32	K: Therefore – that is just the point – the whole thing is this.
1:12:39	DS: Agreed.
1:12:42	K: But they have to earn a livelihood.
1:12:46	DS: You have got to create a school...
1:12:48	K: Wait, take a little time, look at it. Forgive me. Don't be on the defensive or anything, just look at it. If I see this truth to be irrevocable, then I have students under me or with me – their parents have sent them here or they have come here voluntarily to learn. To learn what? Learn about – knowledge won't transform man? Or they want to learn the academic things as well as this? Right? This cannot be learnt.
1:13:55	DS: Can it be discovered?
1:14:01	K: This cannot be learnt.
1:14:04	DS: I understand that, I think.
1:14:07	GB: I don't.
1:14:10	IP: Well, if it could be learnt it would again be knowledge.
1:14:20	GB: But what are we doing now?
1:14:22	K: Not what are we doing now. I say, this cannot be learnt. You don't discuss with me.
1:14:37	GB: But now, are we not learning about it just now?
1:14:40	K: No, madame, this cannot be taught.
1:14:50	SS: By that you mean acquired, really. K: Yes.
1:14:53	SS: Acquired. K: Yes. It cannot be acquired. Then it would be cheap stuff I can teach you.
1:15:10	Q: The only thing we can do is to create an atmosphere?
1:15:12	K: No, first see the truth of this, that is all, that it cannot be taught, that you yourself cannot learn about it, that you yourself have to see the truth of it. And that truth will operate if you let it, if you once see the depth of it. Well, I have said it. So, if I see the truth of it, I see the truth of it and to me that is absolutely so. And I am a teacher here with all those students. So what shall I do? Come on, discuss with me.
1:16:17	IP: Krishnaji, you said, if I see the truth of it.
1:16:20	K: I do. I P: I don't though.
1:16:23	K: Why don't you? What is wrong with us? A simple thing like this.
1:16:40	RP: One of the difficulties is we always try to do something about it.
1:16:45	K: No, I say you can't do anything about it. Either you see it or don't see it. You can't say, I will learn about it, which becomes – you know.
1:17:16	HT: Are we trying to transmit something to the students that cannot be transmitted?
1:17:20	K: No. You see what you have said? Just a minute. You see what he has said? You cannot transmit to the students. Right?
1:17:35	HT: But we are trying to do it, all the same.
1:17:39	K: Look, have I transmitted it to you?
1:17:42	HT: No. But somehow the fact that we are talking about it has made it clearer.
1:17:51	K: No, not clearer.
1:17:54	HT: Has placed it there to be seen.
1:17:59	K: So I would talk to the students. If you talk to the student with absolute certainty of it, irrevocable, under no circumstances – whether you are in India, America or wherever you are – knowledge is not going to transform man. Because we are uncertain, that is why all this.
1:19:00	HT: Then what are we doing in the classroom then?
1:19:03	K: I will do it, I will talk to them about it, but I must be absolutely irrevocable – you follow what I mean? That is total certainty that will make the other fellow feel, by Jove, I am meeting something which is... – you follow? If I am wobbly about it then they will become wobbly.
1:19:33	DW: But you asked us to doubt. You asked us to doubt, the other day.
1:19:37	K: I do, still do. DW: Yes, I hope so.
1:19:39	K: Doubt your knowledge.
1:19:42	DW: Yes, but just listening to you, somebody may get fired up with the idea and go out as an evangelist.
1:19:53	K: I have listened to a lot of evangelists. They are monsters – don't let's go into that. Look, I am – not I – it is irrevocable, the surety of it, for me. I know how to drive a car, how to speak a language, write letters, talk, etc. That is all knowledge. If I am a carpenter, I can be a good carpenter. Right? But I know inwardly that none of that is going to change me. So I will talk to the students.
1:21:11	WA: If I am a student I might say, well, if none of that is going to change me then I won't bother, I won't learn history.
1:21:19	K: Then you are being stupid.
1:21:23	WA: But some of the students do feel that.
1:21:25	K: No, I say, look, you can't do that. You see, you are not convinced of the other. Not 'convinced', it is not in your blood.
1:21:38	SN: You are saying that there is no contradiction between the two.
1:21:43	WA: And therefore because we are unclear, we are making the contradiction.
1:21:51	K: When something is so absolutely certain, it has no shadow. I would go with the student in all the details. I would point out the whole of religion is based on knowledge. All what they call revelation is part of knowledge. I would point out. They would begin to see it because I am absolutely clear. This is real freedom. They would understand, all right. I have got six months, a whole term – do you mean to say I can't make them understand this? You are playing the violin, you are not going to change man. But if you want to play the violin as fun, play it, but you are not going to change anything, yourself or your society. They would understand. I have got a whole term to make them understand it simply – of course. But you are not burning with it, that is why. Right? You know that Bhikkhu that came yesterday, Ananda Maitreya, Bhikku, the Buddhist monk? He said he met me, saw me in 1925 or 1928. He is a great Pali scholar, which is part of Sanskrit, a great scholar. That is all – you follow? And he goes to America to talk about all that. It is all in the field of knowledge. Right? So, are we clear on this simple point? Mrs D, all of us?
1:25:39	DS: We seem to be clear that we don't know. We seem to be clear that we don't see it. As a group, we don't see it.
1:25:52	K: As a group you are not clear.
1:25:54	DS: I would say that is what comes across.
1:25:56	IP: Yes, as Mrs Simmons says, we are clear that we don't see it.
1:26:00	K: What do you mean?
1:26:01	IP: Well, we don't. I am sorry, I don't.
1:26:05	K: How can you be clear if you don't see it? I P: No.
1:26:11	IP: You said, are we clear, and Mrs Simmons said we are clear that we don't see it.
1:26:19	K: You are saying you don't see it?
1:26:21	IP: I am sorry, Krishnaji, but in the last five minutes all that has happened to me is that I am getting more and more confused.
1:26:27	K: More and more? I P: Confused.
1:26:31	K: No – let's be clear – why are we confused?
1:26:37	IP: You said just now, you don't make it clear to the students because you are not burning with it. Yes? It is obvious we are not.
1:26:47	K: No, you don't see, if I may point out, that knowledge is not going to change man. He will build bridges, he will build everything, but it is not going to change man. Right? I P: Yes.
1:27:08	K: Now I am your student. Tell me about it. You have got nine months. And also you want to help him to learn mathematics. Right? I P: Yes.
1:27:26	K: That is part of training the brain.
1:27:37	IP: You said that you don't make any impression on the student if you are wobbly. Well, we are more than wobbly. But nobody could call you wobbly. But you are not making any impression on us. I am sorry, it is not making any impression on me at all.
1:27:52	K: I agree. So – wait a minute – will you be my student for six months?
1:28:01	IP: Gladly.
1:28:06	K: No. You have to pay a great price.
1:28:14	IP: Yes. I think I even know which price it is, but I only know it intellectually.
1:28:23	K: No, you have to pay a great price. This is a precious jewel which is not being sold cheaply.
1:28:33	DS: It is not being sold.
1:28:40	K: But you have to do something to show your seriousness. As those monks showed their seriousness by shaving their head, one meal a day, putting all that, you have to say, look – Right? Will you pay the price? Don't worry, I am not asking a price – abandon your husband, your children, etc.
1:29:39	SN: Even that doesn't really help. Look at the monks.
1:29:42	K: Yes. But you have to pay a price.
1:30:04	SS: Traditionally in India, people who wanted to pay this price went to the forest, but it is difficult to know in these circumstances how to pay, so to speak. K: I will tell you. He says, in India they went into the forest, abandoned their family. It was the Brahmanical tradition, imprinted on the Indian mind, that a man who has given up the world, seeking this, must be supported by society. So he was fed, he was clothed, etc. Right? And was he seeking this?
1:31:02	SS: Possibly. K: No. He wanted heaven.
1:31:09	SS: Well, it is difficult to say what he wanted.
1:31:10	K: Wait sir, understand this.
1:31:15	DS: He wanted heaven. K: Yes. No, he didn't want heaven, he wanted illumination, self-realisation, or whatever word it is.
1:31:28	DS: It is the want. MZ: It is still wanting.
1:31:31	K: Yes, of course. I am asking, will you pay the price? You are all so frightened.
1:31:41	SF: Well, Krishnaji, you were about to say what the price was.
1:31:44	K: I will. I will tell you in a minute.
1:31:54	DS: The price is doing it.
1:31:58	K: No. DS: No?
1:32:00	K: You can't do it. DS: Well, receiving it.
1:32:07	K: The price is: do nothing about this, but listen. Right?
1:32:27	SN: When you say do nothing, what do you mean by do nothing?
1:32:35	K: You are doing something all the time.
1:32:39	IP: Are you saying, put aside your knowledge?
1:32:41	K: No. With regard to this, do nothing.
1:32:52	WA: You mean don't try and get it.
1:32:58	K: Not try to get it. If a great diamond is put in front of you, what do you do? What do you do?
1:33:17	WA: Admire it.
1:33:19	K: That is all. Which is what? Look. Look at the colours, the shape, the light in it, the brightness of it. But you don't even do that.
1:33:47	SN: Do you think that is the difficulty with us?
1:33:50	K: You are too intellectual, too terribly educated. You don't see a simple thing like this. If you do it now, you will see what will happen to those children, to those students. You will have totally abandoned security in knowledge. That is the difficulty. So, staff meeting.
1:35:29	Q: It seems like we are only able to look at our own thoughts. That is the only process which goes on.
1:35:40	K: You see, thought is based on knowledge. Right? See what you are asking. I know, it is twenty to seven. My lord, they will go on eating, won't they? All right. You don't mind starving a little more? You aren't tired? You see, when you say knowledge will not transform man, you are denying totally all thought – except in the other world, in the world of technology. Right, sir? I won't go into all this, because then you will get more and more confused. No, it is not. If you see this truth then everything becomes simple. Is that enough? Is that enough for this evening?
1:37:43	DS: I think so, Krishnaji.
1:37:48	K: Do we meet again to discuss this?
1:37:53	DS: Could we say when, now?
1:37:57	K: When you like. You decide it between you two. Tomorrow, Bohm is coming to have a discussion with me. Sunday, Mrs Pupul Jayakar, perhaps in the morning.
1:38:18	DS: And that we can all come to?
1:38:19	K: Oh, yes. Dr Bohm wants only a few people, tomorrow afternoon. He wants it that way. Pupul Jayakar won't mind.
1:38:43	DS: We have to start meeting tomorrow, if David's coming.
1:38:46	K: So do you want discussion on Sunday afternoon?
1:38:53	DS: You have a talk in the morning.
1:38:56	K: Oh, that is nothing. Please, don't look at me as though...
1:39:02	MZ: You are supposed to be resting before Saanen.
1:39:08	K: Oh yes, I am. I am going to have a week in Paris. Go to Folies Bergère! You decide, Monday afternoon?
1:39:24	DS: Is that possible? K: For me, yes. I don't know for all of you.
1:39:31	SN: Isn't there a school meeting?
1:39:35	Q: We can change the time of the school meeting, have it earlier in the afternoon.
1:39:38	SS: What about Thursday?
1:39:40	K: What is Monday afternoon?
1:39:42	Q: Games.
1:39:45	SF: We can put that at two thirty or something like that.
1:39:46	SF: We can change that around.
1:39:49	K: Postpone games? You can't, darn it!
1:39:58	DS: So, Monday afternoon. What time, Krishnaji?
1:40:02	DS: Five o'clock? K: Four o'clock. We can carry on till midnight. The cupboard is still full.