Krishnamurti Subtitles

BR81DT3 - Is there a deep change taking place in us? home
Brockwood Park, UK - 12 June 1981
Discussion with Teachers 3


0:17 Krishnamurti: What shall we talk about, or shall we go on where we left off?
0:43 Harsh Tanka: Can we continue from where we left off?
0:48 K: Where did we leave off? I have forgotten.
0:54 HT: I think we had come to a point from where we saw that there was a centre that we were looking from, and that this centre was, in fact, the past.
1:20 K: Oh, yes. Do all these discussions that we have here, do they really help? Would you kindly be frank with me? Do they really help to clarify our minds more or do they get more confused?
1:54 HT: They certainly point to something, sir.
2:02 K: One may point to something, but are we getting a bit more or much more clear about all this, what Brockwood is, what should happen here, and with regard to the place of knowledge, thought and all that? Has it any place in our daily life? I am sorry you are next to me.
2:47 Brian Jenkins: Off again. You mean we go round and round in the same circle every time. We just touch on a point of significance and stop there each time, and go again.
2:56 K: Say for instance, you and I were discussing – suppose you and I were discussing – we would get to a certain point in ourselves. We would see clearly our daily life, what we are doing, whether we are slack, lack of discipline, the whole circle of confusion. And does that confusion get more and more – or rather, disappears or it continues, the confusion, so that we are never sure of anything? You know what I am saying?
3:36 BJ: Yes.
3:37 BJ: When we get to that point we don't usually stay there, and it goes off again.
3:43 K: Yes. Either we don't stay there or we wander off to something else.
3:50 BJ: We get to a certain point at a certain level but we don't stay at that level.
3:54 K: Or go beyond, higher. I am just asking you. How shall I reach the point? Which is, if I remember rightly, what we were talking about on Saturday, the last time when we met: that we are always looking at life with the past – past memories, past experience, remembrance, incidents, etc. And we said too, if I remember rightly, that thought itself is the past. Of course. And so thought is always operating from a centre which is essentially the storehouse of knowledge of the past. Right? Does that storehouse empty itself as we talk or we are adding to it – you follow? Won't you join us, please?
5:03 Stephen Smith: I think it empties it for the time being, or it begins to empty it for the time being.
5:08 K: Then it fills up again, like a spring.
5:12 SS: It tends to fill up again. And the dialogue is not sustained in your absence.
5:20 K: Why? This was a question that was raised by Rajesh and Mrs Thomas yesterday in our discussion about the school, the Rishi Valley School, that someone like K or X sustains it and then gradually it peters out, and it has to be kept pumping, pumping, pumping. Is that what is happening here, in all of us? That all of us have to be pushed, pushed, pushed – there is no comprehensive, vital energy in itself. Would you join us, please? Not the conversation between us two.
6:27 Scott Forbes: Well, Krishnaji, it seems that when we engage, even in these discussions – I say 'we', I suppose I am talking about myself – then I am not putting into it as much as say you are, and in a sense I am getting pulled along by your own clarity and your own energy, and that the clarity that one feels or one sees is somehow not quite enough to sustain itself.
7:00 K: All right. If that is so, what shall we do?
7:06 SF: Well, for instance, you talk about the amount that we talk – we have a discussion like this, does it add to our clarity or does it add to the confusion? I would say that it adds to the clarity, but not in a complete enough way. Somehow, the way we engage in discussion is not adequate to have a clarity that will last.
7:29 K: Is it clarity? I just want to introduce a word – vision.
7:36 SS: Vision.
7:38 K: Not visual, only vision, having a vision. Suppose I have a vision of what Brockwood or Rishi Valley should be – vision – and that vision itself gives me tremendous capacity and energy. Not artificial energy, not the energy that should be pumped up each time.
8:13 SF: Krishnaji, may I use another example? May I ask about another example of clarity which is perhaps more relevant to what we began talking about. For instance, last week we talked about the past, that we live through the past, that that creates conflict, etc. As we discuss it, as we listen and we look at these things, a certain clarity in something like that appears. But then over the week, that kind of clarity is the one that disappears. Not some clarity about what the ultimate aim of Brockwood is, but even clarity of something which is as small as that, is something that dissipates.
9:02 Questioner: Sir, isn't clarity the word we use to describe when we are seeing something as it is?
9:11 K: Yes.
9:13 Q: I see you are talking about a clarity, if you have a vision that you want to create something and you work towards it and so on. You have a vision or something, and that gives you a feeling of clarity, but I don't know if that is altogether useful.
9:28 K: Artificial, you mean?
9:30 Q: Yes. I think it is important to have a clarity to see what is actually going on.
9:35 K: Why don't we have it? That is all my point.
9:38 Q: Yes.
9:49 BJ: I think we are all involved in our own little worlds that we have created.
9:54 K: We say that, and keep on going in our little world. We don't break through it.
9:59 BJ: I think that is right.
10:03 K: Why?
10:07 Q: I wonder if we don't become very clever intellectually and be able to discuss these things intellectually...
10:19 K: You make a statement of that kind. Are you intellectually clever?
10:22 Q: Yes.
10:23 K: Just projecting intellectual concepts and ideas and so on?
10:30 Q: I feel that. I feel dull sometimes in terms of, I don't really feel these things as much as I say them.
10:39 SS: I think the need, Krishnaji, is that for most of us clarity is not a thing that one has definitively, once and forever. It needs rediscovery. And I think there seems to be some block about exploring matters of this kind, deeper matters, within a group, not a group of this size, but even just the staff meeting. There is a block or difficulty about exploring matters of significance within that group.
11:13 K: So what shall we do?
11:15 Shakuntala Narayan: But isn't the block really in oneself? It is not really in the group, the block is within oneself.
11:25 SN: It is that block that is projected in the group.
11:30 SS: Is it?
11:33 SN: Well, if I am clear then there is no problem.
11:39 SS: Yes, but there are problems, you see?
11:41 SN: Not really, no.
11:43 SS: Yes.
11:44 K: Are the problems blocking clarity, or when there is clarity you can solve problems? Not the other way round.
11:56 SS: But there isn't clarity. That is a theoretical position because there isn't clarity.
12:02 K: So what are talking about all the time then?
12:12 BJ: I think what Steve is saying – I rather back him up on this – that if, say a group of us say, now look, we want to get together and look into these things together, in a discussion group. Then some people will come along and say, look, how can you discuss together? None of you are clear. You are just going to get into deeper water, more confusion. You are all intellectual.
12:34 K: So what do we do then – so we stop?
12:41 BJ: Well, we do attempt to say, look, can't we begin? All right, we may be a little confused in that we look at things intellectually but can't we begin from that point and see if we can sort these things out?
12:53 K: Sir, suppose – I am not saying – suppose Mrs Simmons and we die, we don't exist tomorrow, what will you do? You follow what I am asking? Would you answer that question? Where is your spring from which you act? You understand? We are not there, then what will you all do? Don't let's talk about clarity and self, etc. – here is a definite, concrete problem which you have to face.
13:53 BJ: Well, as it stands today.
13:56 K: Not today, we are gone.
13:58 BJ: But Krishnaji, as it stands today we have our differences and our conflicts which we are not able to deal with. So tomorrow if you were not here then we would be in confusion.
14:09 K: So what will you do?
14:12 Ingrid Porter: But despite these differences and conflicts we do manage to work together, otherwise there wouldn't be any Brockwood.
14:19 K: So then what? That is what I want to get at – what is it we are talking about?
14:28 IP: You asked the question really just now: would we be able to continue if you were not here?
14:33 K: No, not continue but make it flower, grow, the whole implication of it. Not that you are not doing it now, I am not questioning it.
14:53 Q: We were talking about the ability to see things clearly and we were talking about how it was difficult in a group and there was a sort of criticism or objection to the idea of such a big number. But in my experience, one to one with another person is also extremely difficult, and I think it is also difficult to see clearly in oneself. So I don't think it is really a question of numbers. I think the question is just how to see clearly.
15:26 K: Yes.
15:33 Q: The trouble, I feel, is to observe oneself daily all the time in a very accurate way, a very honest way, to really observe what is going on in us is very difficult.
15:47 K: As he points out, it is oneself, it is not a group, it is oneself. Now, could we discuss that and really, as we go along, really understand?
16:15 SS: But surely the group is important in this, Krishnaji.
16:21 K: He doesn't deny the group.
16:24 SS: In some sense it is the group that acts. And if, in this hypothetical situation where you are not here, Dorothy is not here, it would be the group who were responsible for it.
16:34 K: Yes.
16:35 SS: Right? There is no K, it would be the group that would be responsible. So the clarity of the group is important.
16:45 K: But the clarity of the group is made of separate persons, separate people, each with his own peculiarity, idiosyncrasy – I am not insulting them – these prejudices and so on.
17:05 SN: Unless the individual is clear the group can never be clear. One has to begin with the individual, you can't begin with a group, really.
17:16 SS: Well, that raises the question of what an individual is. But apart from that, it is fairly clear that unless a group of people have worked together fairly seriously for a time they don't have this kind of clarity.
17:33 SN: Are you suggesting that the clarity could come through the group?
17:40 SS: I am saying the group is a necessary medium. Or it is not a necessary medium, it is a medium.
17:48 K: Could we drop the word 'clarity' for the moment and find out if there is a deep change in all of us taking place, a flowering. You understand? Could we discuss that? Would it be profitable? Please.
18:42 Q: This actually has to happen before we can go on anywhere.
18:45 K: Yes, sir. So I am just asking, shall we go into that? And as we go step by step into it, drop – you follow? – move, not hold on. Could we do that this afternoon? We have got an hour. Could we go into this step by step till we completely understand each step? Could we? Would it be worthwhile? Don't agree with me, it doesn't matter. What do you say? It is a silent group, this.
19:47 SS: Can you teach someone else to flower, sir?
19:52 K: No, but in exploring, in digging the well, the water comes out.
20:05 Q: One must not start it as – me coming along to be told by you how to flower. It is not like that.
20:14 K: No, I am saying, could we discuss – let me put it the other way – how to delve into ourselves. If that is preferable, that word 'delve', dig, penetrate this heavy confusion and get deep into it.
20:47 Q: Don't we just have to start rather than decide how to start or whether to start.
20:54 K: I am asking you, shall we do it together?
20:58 Many: Yes.
21:01 K: But that means all of us are taking part in it, not just silent and listen. Right? What am I to do?
21:19 Q: Sir, do you think there is a problem here? There are a lot of things which are very difficult to put verbally and that when you do say them you just immediately feel ridiculous. Not that you are ashamed, you haven't put into words what is going on inside.
21:38 K: Yes, sir. Look, I want to understand this whole problem of existence. I want to understand whether that existence can ever be changed, or it must always go on in the same pattern, repeated over and over again? That is a simple question. Can we discuss that? Won't you join? Please. Shall we discuss that?
22:22 Jane Hoare: I see myself being influenced by endless different things. It changes all the time and yet it is going in repeating patterns. Where to move from in this clarity. And yet when there is clarity, that is a whole different movement.
22:52 Mary Zimbalist: But what happens when we see that? If you see yourself, even if you inspire someone, what happens when you see that clearly? It is maybe a little bit of clarity. Doesn't that change that?
23:09 JH: Yes, there is a moment's space and then a new influence comes and maybe it is seen, maybe it isn't. And then there is another space...
23:21 MZ: But isn't there some relationship, or doesn't the clarity move – not just the isolated instances? Doesn't clarity, even in a small portion of it, make for greater clarity if it is allowed to, if it is not cut off?
23:41 K: I should have thought so. But you see, Maria, I would like to start this discussion as though I knew nothing, and I start learning from there. Could we start like that?
23:59 Many: Yes.
24:03 K: I know nothing about myself, but I watch the world. Let's do it together, please. I watch the world with all the horrors that are going on there, and I ask what is my relationship to it. Because I want to understand, I want to have a life that is real, not artificial. Right? I want a life that has depth, that has meaning, that is not just artificially intellectual, just mere knowledge operating. I want to find out. So I see the world and I see what is happening there. I see exactly that thought is operating at all levels. Could we go into that? Is that too much? Will you join me? Do it, sir. Do it with me, please. 25:17 Thought is in operation, and I see what thought has done in the world – scientific, marvellous surgeons, communication, architecture. I have seen all that is happening – division of races, classes, religions and so on. I ask myself, what is the cause of all this? Please, are you joining me? I am investigating myself and the world. Right? What is the cause of all this? The psychiatrists give one reason, the so-called religious people give one reason, original sin, etc., and the scientists – the origin of man, how you began and so on. So, I am lost among all these professionals. Right? Would you agree?
26:46 SS: Yes.
26:51 K: So, I can't rely on anybody. Do we go as far as that?
27:00 Many: Yes.
27:05 K: I can't rely on anybody – the professors, the saints, the scholars, the scientists, all that group. So, on what am I to rely on? On myself?
27:28 SS: I am implying that I am the same as that, aren't I?
27:32 K: I am just moving away. I don't want to enter in that for the moment.
27:36 SS: Otherwise there wouldn't be a correlation, otherwise I couldn't do it.
27:39 K: I am asking. I know. On whom am I to rely to have understanding of this monstrous life? Right?
27:57 SS: The evidence is everywhere, isn't it?
27:59 K: It is everywhere. In India, in America, in Japan, in Russia, everywhere it is the same. And whom am I to say, please, give me some understanding of all this?
28:13 Q: Then why should you ask somebody else?
28:17 K: I am asking and I find they are all caught in the same mess, like me. They may be professors, they may be sane, they may be scholars, psychiatrists, but they have a miserable life. You follow? So, I say, they are like me. So I can't stretch my hand out to them and say, please, give me something.
28:41 BJ: But then I can't rely on myself either.
28:45 K: Wait. You see, you have jumped already. So, on whom am I to rely to find out some clarity, some understanding, some depth to all this? Right?
29:06 Q: If one feels that there is no professor, there is no person that one could rely on, one should also naturally apply it to oneself. I have got to watch myself, as well.
29:17 K: Which means what – can I rely upon myself?
29:20 Q: I had better watch it because...
29:23 K: Wait, listen, question it first. Can I rely on myself?
29:28 Q: I think one cannot rely on oneself if one is not relying on somebody else.
29:34 K: Look, I can't rely on Professor Einstein. He may be very clever, good and all that, but his life is probably as confused as mine – private life, not public. So I say, all right, I can't rely on you, so can I rely on myself? Investigate it, don't jump to saying you can't, look at it.
30:06 Q: I think it is within oneself that one has to find out. No?
30:13 Wendy Agnew: Actually, I don't think you know whether you can rely on yourself or not. One doesn't know whether one can rely on oneself or not. That is something one has to find out, surely.
30:21 K: So, we are going to find out.
30:24 WA: But I think one doesn't know, actually. I think one doesn't know, to begin with.
30:29 K: Is that it?
30:31 SF: Well, Krishnaji, the way we use the word 'ourselves' is ambiguous.
30:34 K: No, I am saying myself, not ourselves.
30:38 SF: Well, I mean 'me', the past, the experience is that I can't rely on myself.
30:44 K: Scott, I am telling you, I am starting from the very beginning, as though I knew nothing about all this stuff, and I realise I cannot rely on another and I can't rely on my own understanding. I don't know if I am conveying what I want to, I am not sure. I am like them. Right?
31:15 Giselle Balleys: We have to question ourselves also.
31:18 K: No, I am like them, I realise. That is the first thing I realise. I am like them. They are married ten times, children, quarrels, divorce, etc. I am just like them. Right? So, what am I to do with what I have? Tell me. Tell me what am I to do with what I have, what I am?
32:00 Q: When you look at it, you see this thing in you that is taller than that tower up there.
32:05 K: Sir, I am not talking about the clouds, I am talking about myself. I am in confusion.
32:16 Q: Right, but when you look and you say, how do I go into this thing?
32:21 K: I am doing it now.
32:22 Q: So I am going into it but it seems that even if I dismiss the psychiatrists and the priests and all that, I am looking in my own head, everything I come up to is...
32:41 SS: I see the conflict in the world and conflict in myself.
32:47 K: That is all.
32:48 SS: And that is a unitary process.
32:50 K: Wait, I understand. That is a theory. I don't want theories.
32:57 SS: Well, it must be the same.
32:59 K: That is your conclusion, because somebody or you have thought it out. Is it a fact in my life when I say there is confusion there and there is confusion here?
33:13 Q: Could there be two confusions?
33:15 K: No. So, it may be one confusion. Right? It is confusion. I am confused, Mr Einstein, Mr Thingamabob, their private life, they are all confused. Could we start from there?
33:34 Q: Why do we bother to identify the others as confused?
33:38 K: No, I am not identifying anything with others. I am just saying people are confused, like me.
33:47 Q: But can we be positive? We can be positive, we're confused, I can be positive, I am confused.
33:54 K: What are you talking about, sir?
33:58 Q: I don't see the significance in... you began by saying we should look...
34:03 K: People are confused all over the world, like me. That is all. Right? Now, what am I to do with this confusion? My question is, I am asking myself: how am I to clear this confusion?
34:31 WA: It seems if one tries to clear it then one gets more confused. One starts trying to clear the confusion then you start adding to it.
34:39 K: No, I am going to find out.
34:43 SF: Krishnaji, the first question that comes to mind is that one asks: can there be anything other than this confusion?
34:50 K: What?
34:52 SF: Well, if we look at the world and everybody is confused and we are confused as well, then we ask: can there be anything other than this confusion?
35:01 K: We are going to find out. You can ask the question but nobody will answer it. But I can find out, I can dig, I can enquire, I can push. What is the problem? I don't quite understand.
35:20 Q: Are you implying there is only one answer to this?
35:22 K: I am going to find out, sir.
35:24 Q: Yes, we are trying to find out.
35:26 Q: And for myself, this state of confusion doesn't have one answer. You can't find out and snap, there is your answer, it has to be constant.
35:36 K: I am going to find out. I am not going to say, well, it is constant, it has to be permanent, it has to be continuous or instant, I am going to find out.
35:48 Q: And that is what we seem to be doing, constantly trying to find out.
35:54 K: Therefore, don't make any statement. Let's enquire. Right, sir? What do you say to this?
36:07 GB: So we look at it when we are confused.
36:14 Q: There is only one question now: the confusion. We don't have to ask any questions about the confusion. We have got one question.
36:20 K: I am confused and I say, I can't live with that. I am not going to live with it. Right? I want to be free of it. Are we in that position? Step by step I am going, not who is confused, who is not, etc. I say I am in confusion and the world is in confusion and I feel it is my life that I must clarify this confusion. I will give my life to that clarification. Right? Are we in that position?
37:11 Q: But, Krishnaji...
37:14 K: Wait, I am asking a question.
37:16 K: Are we in that position, or we want to tinker with it, play with it?
37:26 Q: Or is it perhaps that we want to get away from it?
37:28 K: It doesn't matter. I want to clear up that confusion, at any price. In spite of what my wife says, my husband, my father, I want this confusion destroyed or evaporated, somehow. I will give my life to clarify that. Are we in that position? Or we tolerate this confusion and we talk about clarity, we talk about all kinds of nonsense, superficial stuff, but I am asking this question: do you really, each one of us, intensely want to dispel this confusion?
38:36 Q: Sir, if I may say, if you already say that you want to dispel the confusion, you have some degree of clarity.
38:44 K: No. I want to dispel it. I don't know what to do. I am enquiring. Right? Are you doing it with me?
39:03 Q: Go on.
39:04 K: I will go on if you will all come with me. So, I am confused. My intent, my urge is to clarify, to be free of that confusion. Now, what makes for confusion? Why do I say I am confused? That is my question. Stick to that question. What makes me say I am confused? Is it by comparison?
39:49 Q: I have got used to other people living my life for me.
39:51 K: Is it, somebody says there is clarity and I compare myself with that clarity and therefore I am confused?
40:00 MZ: Isn't the first intimation conflict?
40:05 K: So, conflict is the essence of confusion. Right? Would you agree to that?
40:16 Many: Yes.
40:18 K: Please, we are moving. What am I to do? Are you agreeing to this? If I have no conflict, I am free, there is no confusion. Are you all getting bored with this?
40:42 Q: It seems there are two things: there is being in the present where you accept 'what is', and there is conflict.
40:51 K: Which is, I am accepting. I say I am confused. I ask myself, why am I confused? What makes me think I am confused?
41:01 JH: The confusion shows when there are different directions or different influences.
41:09 MZ: Then you are in a state of conflict.
41:12 JH: But the present moment, that doesn't appear.
41:18 MZ: The moment something hurts we pay attention. The moment we are in conflict it hurts, therefore we want to change it or do something about it.
41:28 K: Look, I am not trying to change. I am not trying to do anything. I say I have found out something. Found out. I am confused, because I feel conflict to be the nature of confusion. That is all I am saying. Would you agree to that?
41:52 Many: Yes.
41:54 K: Would you agree? No, not agree – act, see that.
42:03 Q: We are saying this is a general statement which covers very widespread...
42:07 K: I know it does, but I am beginning slowly. I say, I am confused because I am really in conflict with myself, with the world, and that may be the cause of it. I am not saying it is, I am investigating. Right? So, if that is one of the causes or factors, then I say: what is conflict? Are you with me there?
42:48 SS: Well, by definition, it is one side against another.
42:50 K: No, not definition, inside.
42:54 SS: Well, you are divided against yourself.
42:56 K: That is, what is conflict?
42:59 Q: Well, I think you have these competing desires. You want one thing and then you want another thing and you want them both and they deny each other.
43:10 K: Yes, so what does that mean, conflicts exist – what? You see, you don't even enquire. You make statements. You don't enquire. That is what I am objecting to.
43:24 Q: There seems to be a comparison and then there is a feedback to this comparison.
43:36 K: Why are you in conflict, Shakuntalaji? Shakuntalaji, why are you in conflict? You are in conflict, aren't you?
43:45 SN: Yes.
43:47 K: What?
43:49 SN: Yes.
43:49 K: Thank God, you speak. Why? What is the cause of it?
44:06 SN: I am being pulled in various directions.
44:11 K: So are you saying the cause of this confusion is – what? Investigate, please.
44:21 SN: Yes, I am saying that the cause of the confusion is because I am being pulled in various directions.
44:26 K: What are the directions?
44:28 SN: Contradictory directions.
44:31 K: Is that so, that you have learned, seen for yourself that where there is contradiction there must be conflict and conflict means confusion, right? No, don't agree with me, we are investigating, please. I am investigating into myself. I am in confusion. I want to see why do I live in this confusion? Is it a habit? Is it that my mind is so dull that I tolerate confusion? And so I begin to enquire why I accept it, or what is the cause of this thing?
45:36 SN: I don't think one tolerates confusion because it is not something that is very comfortable.
45:45 K: But you live in that. You have lived it for 40 years. So you tolerate it, however uncomfortable it is.
45:59 SN: Well, I don't quite tolerate it, I think I fight it. I think I fight it rather than tolerate it.
46:05 K: So, you have found out something – that when you fight something it still goes on. You see, you don't investigate, you make statements and stop there. So, I have seen one thing: I fight it. I say, I must not be confused, there must be no contradiction. So I fight, fight, fight. That may be the cause of conflict and confusion. Therefore I say I am going to learn, I am going to investigate, I am going to push, push, push. I am doing it, are you are doing this with me?
46:58 Q: Sir, I just don't see why, when we say things, you say we are just making statements. This is how, normally, people talk and they say – this is happening.
47:12 K: Look, I want to find out what is the cause of this confusion. I see in myself a life in contradiction. Right? In contradiction. Have we gone, so far, together? Then what is contradiction? Saying one thing, doing another? Right?
47:51 SN: Saying two different things.
47:53 K: Wanting this and not wanting that.
47:56 MZ: It is also wanting and not being able to have it. Most of us live in that position most of the time.
48:04 K: So, what is the meaning of contradiction? Would I be satisfied if I had everything I want? I wonder if you are following all this.
48:18 MZ: Well, is it the wanting itself that we never...
48:21 K: I want to go step by step, Maria. I am not going to move out of this.
48:30 Q: No, Krishnaji, I wouldn't be satisfied if I had everything I wanted.
48:36 K: So what is the cause of this contradiction in me? Is it desire? Is it the conditioning that my society, my culture, my parents have conditioned my mind to accept this conflict, tolerate it, and gradually keep dying with the conflict? Or is it that I am incapable of resolving it? You follow all this? So I say, I don't know a thing about this, but I am going to find out. I am going to move step by step so that there will be no deception at all. Right? Could we do that?
49:46 Q: A problem I see rises up in that. If I say I am going to resolve it somehow or I want to go into it, that I have a stake in it in a sense, because it is for me to resolve that conflict and I can't be objective about it...
50:01 K: I am going to be. I am going to learn. I can't say, I can't be objective. I am going to learn. I am going to learn whether I am objective or not. I am asking myself still. I found the cause is contradiction. Right? I have found also, I am trying to approximate what I am with what I should be. Is that it?
50:51 SN: I think that is a very big part of it, because when I see I am in confusion...
50:58 K: I am investigating. Investigate.
51:04 Q: That is part of it.
51:06 K: That is part of it. That I have ideals and I am trying to live up to it. Which is approximating myself with something greater than myself and so there is conflict. Is it my physical condition – physical condition – that makes for confusion? You understand? My ill-health, my lack of vitality, all that. Is that it? And is it desire? I am examining. I must find out the root of it. Right?
51:59 SS: Unless you are very ill, it is unlikely to be the body.
52:05 K: Therefore, I can eliminate that. But I have left certain things – approximation, contradiction, and is it desire for this opposed to that?
52:24 MZ: Sir, isn't desire back of the approximation?
52:28 K: Yes. I don't want too quickly to put it all in one basket.
52:38 K: Is approximation with what I should be, is it part of desire? I find out, yes. Are you doing this with me or you are just silent? Are you?
52:59 Q: I am wondering how I know what I should be. I have an idea of what I should be.
53:06 K: That is what I am saying. And you have an idea of what you should be and you are trying to approximate yourself, compare yourself with what you should be.
53:17 Q: But I am wondering where that comes from. How do I know what I should be?
53:21 K: What do you mean, how do you know?
53:23 MZ: If you have the approximation you wouldn't have it if you didn't want it, would you?
53:29 Q: Approximation?
53:31 MZ: Well, if you had an ideal of what you should be, you wouldn't have that ideal if you didn't want to get or become it. It wouldn't attract you.
53:40 Q: Right.
53:41 MZ: So, isn't that again desire?
53:44 Q: I wonder where it comes from that one has an idea of what they should be.
53:48 K: I will tell you. I am this – right? – but I never say, I am this, and stay there.
54:09 Q: So, it is not even that there is something specific I want to be, it is just I don't want to be this.
54:13 K: Sir, I am incapable of looking at the fact. The fact that I am angry, look at it. But I want to operate and I want to change it, I want to become something else. Could we go on from there? What do you say, sir?
54:48 SS: Well, it is obvious that we have learned to moderate some of these things like greed, like anger.
54:51 K: Don't moderate, let us investigate and change the damn thing. Not keep on repeating, we moderate, we are confused, we don't know, I do know, we are a little bit this, a little bit that – and keep on repeating this.
55:08 Q: When we actually start looking at it like this, it isn't there.
55:13 K: I am going to find out. You say that. Is that so? I want to see if that is a fact, not your illusion or my illusion.
55:26 Q: It is enough of a fact for it not to be able to answer any questions about it or say anything about it.
55:31 K: Look, I realise, I see the fact – the fact, not my imagination – that where there is contradiction there must be conflict. I am in contradiction. I want this and I want that – opposing elements. And I say, why? What is the cause of that? Is it desire? And then I begin to investigate what is desire. Because my whole concern is to be free of confusion. You understand? Are you with me? So, what is desire? I must be absolutely clear on that point, because that may be the root of this. Right? Would you agree?
56:47 Q: Do I have to put a word to it? I can feel something...
56:51 K: No, we are going to find out. What is desire? We are enquiring into the nature of desire.
57:07 Q: Sir, one might say that desire is quite straightforward. One desires to have something and one works towards to get something.
57:15 K: Yes, but when you work towards it, what happens?
57:19 Q: Well, it can be no problem.
57:21 K: No, wait. It is. You are married. Your wife wants something else.
57:29 Q: Well, that is where the problem begins.
57:31 K: So, that is a contradiction.
57:34 Q: When there is another desire involved as well, yes. When there is one desire, I think it is all right.
57:39 K: Oh no.
57:42 MZ: When you want the same thing, there is no conflict.
57:44 Q: Yes, when you want the same thing.
57:47 K: When we all want the same thing, there would be no problem.
57:50 Q: That is right, yes.
57:51 K: But I don't want it the same way as you do. I want it slightly modified. I think mine is better than yours, and you are unwilling to let go.
58:09 SF: Krishnaji, what you were saying before doesn't make a great deal of sense to me, that we if all had the same exact desire then there would be no conflict and no confusion.
58:17 K: I don't say that. He says that.
58:20 Q: Oh, I thought you said that.
58:23 Q: No.
58:25 Q: I was saying, if you have a simple idea that you would desire to get to the top of the tower, you can go and do it. But if you are stopped on the way...
58:34 K: Lots of people are going to stop in the way, you climbing the ladder. Let's go into it step by step. So I am asking, what is desire? Is that the root of this conflict?
58:52 MZ: Sir, isn't it the element of rejection of things as they are? I reject the way I am or the way the weather is, or whatever it is, and that makes me want something different.
59:08 K: You make a rule here: go to bed at 9:30, put out the lights at 9:30. And I am student or a teacher – I don't want to turn out the light at 9:30. So there is a conflict. What is the difficulty to understand this?
59:26 SF: Well, Krishnaji, the difficulty might be in the nature of desire, at least for my understanding. Let's say that I feel that it is much better for the student if the light is out at 9:30 and the student feels that for his own wellbeing, it is not desire, it is just that it is not the best thing. There is still conflict involved.
59:47 K: Yes, so let's find out what is the best thing.
59:49 SF: Yes, but there is still conflict without necessarily desire being involved.
59:53 K: Oh, yes.
59:59 SF: But it is not so much that I want. It is just that one looks, one says, well, the best thing for you is to have the light out.
1:00:04 K: I am sorry, don't bring it to that. Wait, let's understand. I am investigating into myself – not the student, not anybody – I am investigating to myself why there is conflict in me. I want it totally eliminated, I won't have it. I want to find out because it destroys the mind – I don't know if you have gone into it – it destroys the mind and so on. So, I say to myself, I must absolutely find out the causes of it and be free of this confusion.
1:00:45 SS: Do you say it destroys the mind because it is a waste of energy?
1:00:49 K: Yes. Conflict is a waste of energy.
1:00:59 SS: So there seems to be a gap between the situation one is in and the way one desires it to be.
1:01:05 K: That is a conflict.
1:01:08 Q: Well, it is much more than a wastage of energy, it is doing physical damage. One can feel the tensions...
1:01:15 K: Of course – heart failure and all the rest of it. So, I say now – I have come to the point – I say, am I approximating what I am, with what I should be? The 'should be' is the ideal, the belief, the faith, the pattern I should imitate, conform to. And that may be one of the causes of conflict. Am I caught in that? Am I caught in this cycle, that I am this, I should be that? Am I caught in that? I am. Now, wait a minute. Why am I caught in it? Go on, tell me. Why am I caught in it? Investigate it. Because I don't like what I see. I am putting it very simply – I don't like what I see. Right?
1:02:29 Q: In fact, isn't it also that I like what I see? I like that image, also.
1:02:33 K: You may. Then you have no problem. I like what I see, therefore I am satisfied with it, and they are not in conflict.
1:02:50 MZ: But isn't it that you see the ideal, the thing you want to be, but you are rooted in some way in pleasure in the way you are now? It is too difficult or too demanding to change to that ideal.
1:03:09 K: That is my point. Let's see. Is it I am incapable of looking at what I am? Which means I am dissatisfied with what I see in myself. Right? So, being dissatisfied I say, I must be satisfied by that. Right?
1:03:43 WA: Or I must get away from what I am.
1:03:47 K: Yes, that is it. So conflict begins. I am this, but I run away from it. But that thing pursues me all the time. Right? I may run away to God, I may run away to drink, I may run away to all kinds of escapes, but it is still there. No? So, I say to myself, For God's sake, don't escape. It is futile to escape, because I have got a cancer and I can't escape from it. Let me look at it. For God's sake, let me look at it. I won't escape. I won't suppress it. I won't try and transform it. I just see what I am. Have you come to that point?
1:04:52 WA: I find it quite difficult, because all the time one is trying to move from it.
1:04:57 K: But if you see escape doesn't solve the problem, I won't escape. Because my intention is to be free of confusion.
1:05:14 WA: The habit is very strong.
1:05:18 K: All right, it is a habit. Then break it. Let's find out if I can't break it. You see, you make a statement and you keep on repeating it. I am sorry, I am not being impatient or rude to you personally, but this is what is happening all the time.
1:05:39 SF: Krishnaji, this staying with it, can we talk about that?
1:05:44 K: I am doing it. I won't escape from what actually is going on with me, inside. Which is, am I approximating myself with what I should be? Am I? Are you? Right?
1:06:13 Q: Yes.
1:06:18 SN: I think there is a difficulty over here. You say, stay with it.
1:06:24 K: No, I said, first of all, am I approximating myself with what I should be? The 'should be' can be expanded – ideals, faith, all that. So, am I doing that?
1:06:48 WA: I think that is quite clear.
1:06:51 K: But am I doing it? The explanation may be clear, the words may be clear, but am I actually doing this, approximating myself all the time? You see, if that is not understood, broken, we will repeat it.
1:07:23 Raman Patel: So one has to actually feel that.
1:07:27 K: No, see it. I am violent, and I am saying to myself by Jove, I must not be violent. That is, measuring my violence with non-violence. Right? So that measurement is perhaps the cause of conflict. So I say, please, I won't measure. I am violent. Let me look at it. Right? Have you gone that far?
1:08:14 Q: Are you saying that to be dissatisfied with yourself...
1:08:17 K: I am not saying dissatisfied. Can I look at what I am? Which is, I am violent, I am approximating myself, I am contradicting myself, I say one thing and do something else, think one thing and act another way. Am I aware of this?
1:08:39 JH: But if I am what I am with and I am under endless influences and I change all the time and certain influences appear to, does one walk away from conflict in that sense?
1:08:54 K: Madame, I am talking of being in conflict in myself, and what is the cause of that conflict? I want to find out, because that conflict may be the cause of confusion.
1:09:14 JH: I understand that.
1:09:15 K: So, am I doing this, approximating, judging, measuring? I am this today, I am angry, but I will be less angry the day after tomorrow and so on, a measurement.
1:09:35 SN: Well, one does that but one always comes to a dead end.
1:09:39 K: What dead end?
1:09:41 SN: Well, when you try to escape or approximate and you realise you are not getting anywhere then you come back to the conflict.
1:09:51 K: So, what happens? That is not a dead end. Why do you call it a dead end?
1:09:55 SN: No, I am saying approximating is a dead end.
1:09:58 K: And so you come back.
1:09:58 SN: Yes.
1:09:59 K: Which means you have not escaped – please, stick to it and do it – you are not escaping, you are not suppressing – you are that. Right? Are you doing it? How can we go further if you don't do these things?
1:10:51 Q: Krishnaji, what do you mean there by saying we don't do these things?
1:10:54 K: It is a bus – Gordon Russell, furniture.
1:11:02 Dorothy Simmons: Some tables are just arriving. Two tables are just arriving.
1:11:07 K: Do you want to go?
1:11:10 IP: They are leaving, Dorothy. They have been here some time.
1:11:21 Q: Hasn't one, in the enquiry, already begun to get an inkling that one's psychological security is in danger by this enquiry and one backs away?
1:11:31 K: That is just what I am coming to. Gradually, I am discovering this.
1:11:35 Q: Yes.
1:11:37 K: Not only that, but see, step by step, you get into the depth of it, not just make statements. I realise I am approximating, so I am going to stop approximating. And I watch. If I escape, I say, come back, old boy.
1:12:10 Q: But my whole movement in life up to this moment has been to achieve psychological security.
1:12:16 K: Yes, but that may be because I am also lonely, I can't live without you, I must have you, you know, all of the problems. So, I am going step by step into it. Is my mind free completely from approximation? You follow? Not a little bit here and a little bit there – totally free of all approximation.
1:12:57 Q: Can we say that this enquiry has got to have more importance than my psychological security?
1:13:03 K: Yes, sir.
1:13:05 K: Then you can penetrate your psychological security, break through it. But if that is not clear, that is, conflict causes confusion. That is a law, like an engineer. It is a law. So if I say I accept confusion, I accept conflict, it is all right. But if I say to myself, conflict and confusion destroy the mind, destroy the brain activity, its fullest capacity. So, I say, I am not going to live like that. So I begin to enquire. I may end up in a lunatic asylum or somewhere, but I am not going to live like that. 1:14:15 So, I must go into this very, very carefully. Right? Or do we come back, when I come back next year: what is conflict? Let's discuss that. I don't mind discussing it, but we are not moving. So I say, is my desire the cause of this conflict? Perhaps it is. So I say, what is this tremendous urge in me for desire, wanting, wanting, wanting, wanting? How does that take place? Are you doing this with me?
1:15:28 SS: Am I clear that my enquiry is not another desire?
1:15:34 K: Maybe. I am going to find out. What do you say to this?
1:15:54 Q: Where does this desire, this wanting stem from?
1:15:58 K: Yes. Find out, sir. Take time to find out. Give yourself an hour to find out. What is this desire to achieve God, to become a saint, to own a car, to have a beautiful – desire, desire, what is it?
1:16:25 Q: What is behind it?
1:16:28 K: What is the root of it? The Christian Church says, and the Hindus also say, no desire to reach God. If you want to reach God, no desire. And so the monks shave their head and contemplate on God, so they don't look at a woman, they don't look at a tree. You follow? So I have to find out. I am not going to let go and say, well, I will find out some other day. I want to find out within this hour, or ten minutes or whatever time I give myself, what is the root of this? Are you in that state? Do you want that? Well, professor? No, please, do answer me. 1:17:44 Sir, would you give your life to find out? Your energy, your vitality to find out? Or you say, well, it doesn't matter. Desire, I must have it, this and that. Do you want to find out, Shakuntalaji? Would you kindly answer? I am asking you most respectfully, do you want to find out? Because you started out talking about confusion, clarity, and you have been talking about it for years. I am not browbeating you, I am not bullying you. And you keep on talking about it for the rest of your life. And I say what a waste.
1:19:05 SN: I feel that there is something missing in my enquiry.
1:19:09 K: Tell me, I am delighted.
1:19:11 SN: I just don't know what it is.
1:19:13 K: I am delighted if you tell me what is missing. I want to find out. Don't say, I don't know what it is.
1:19:24 SN: It seems one always comes to a certain point...
1:19:27 K: Where? What is your certain point?
1:19:37 SN: I come to the point where I see escaping from conflict doesn't get me anywhere.
1:19:42 K: All right. So you don't escape.
1:19:46 SN: Yes, but it still doesn't free me.
1:19:48 K: Which means what? You don't see the uselessness of escape. You still hanker after escape.
1:20:04 Q: When you start to escape and you see that you are escaping and you go back to it, it is still like sitting on a fence.
1:20:11 K: No, I don't go back to something which I think is utterly meaningless.
1:20:18 Q: No, I mean the thing you are escaping from. When you go back to it, it is incredibly painful, that is why you have left it, perhaps, and maybe you even hear yourself saying, this is painful.
1:20:33 K: I don't know whether it is painful, but I have never looked at the thing which I am. I am always running away. So, I say, don't let me run away. I say, I refuse to run. I know I want to escape, because that may be more pleasant, but it brings havoc in my life. Right? So, you have stopped escaping?
1:21:20 SF: Krishnaji, what do you think gives the escaping all of its tremendous force?
1:21:29 K: Because I don't like what I see. Or I like what I see, therefore I stick to something.
1:21:41 SF: Well, it seems more like the first one.
1:21:42 K: Wait, don't complicate it yet. See it as simple as possible, first. It gets very complex later but see it at the beginning, how simple it is. I see conflict must exist as long as I am approximating myself with something – with my neighbour who has got better, more, or with somebody, comparing, judging. You follow? So, as I am intent on stopping confusion, conflict, I say, this is one of the reasons, one of the factors. It is stopped. All right, sir? Are we together in this?
1:22:47 SS: That is a deliberate act.
1:22:49 K: All right, let it be a deliberate act. You see, you are all too damn clever. Let it be a deliberate act. What is wrong with it? It is a deliberate act when I say, I don't want to kill my neighbour. Whether he lives in Lebanon or Russia or here. I don't want to kill anybody. That is a deliberate act on my part. What is wrong? It is a deliberate act on my part to say, look, old boy, go to bed at 9:30. It is good for you, you need rest.
1:23:46 SS: That is sure to produce conflict.
1:23:54 Q: I don't think so. Not necessarily.
1:23:59 K: Have I come to that point in this discussion, that I refuse to escape? My intelligence says, don't escape, you fool, because it doesn't lead you anywhere. Have you come to that, please? Which means you have not escaped. Don't tell me. Don't say one thing and do something else.
1:24:39 RP: Unless we say that, we can't go any further.
1:24:45 K: Naturally. So I can go much further in myself. I say, yes, I see very clearly escape is utterly futile. It is such a deception, dishonest. So I won't escape – it is finished. However enticing the escapes are. So I stick to that. It is so with me. Then I say, now, what are the other factors? In that factor, approximation means imitation, conformity. All that is involved in that one word. Then I say, is it desire? I say probably it is, because everybody has fought against desire. Right? So I say, what is desire? Why is my life guided by desire? Defensive desire and offensive desire. Come on, lady.
1:26:40 SF: Could you explain what you mean by those two, Krishnaji? Could you explain exactly what you mean by offensive desire and defensive desire?
1:26:48 K: Oh yes, sir. Desire to defend oneself, desire to defend what one has built.
1:26:57 Q: Wouldn't offensive desire always be the same thing?
1:27:02 K: The same thing. The country says we are all building for defensive purposes, armaments. There is no defensive and offensive, it is just armaments to destroy people. It is so obvious, all this.
1:27:23 RP: So the immediate response is that of one being left out, because the whole society is based on that.
1:27:29 K: I don't mind being left out. My one total commitment is to dissolve this confusion. Nothing matters. But if you say, I can't commit myself totally like that, then you will live in conflict. It is all right, but don't talk about freeing from confusion, you know, all that kind of mess.
1:28:06 SF: Krishnaji, is there one or are there few principal desires? Not just one, you know, the desire for a car, etc. Are there a few very basic ones?
1:28:19 K: No, there is no basic desire.
1:28:26 SS: Do you mean nothing you desire is fundamental?
1:28:28 SF: A principal desire?
1:28:32 K: No, you see what you are all doing? You are not investigating into desire.
1:28:39 MZ: You wouldn't call survival desire? Self-preservation, survival, is that a desire?
1:28:47 K: No, that is a natural thing.
1:28:48 MZ: A natural thing.
1:28:49 SF: How about psychological security, is that a desire?
1:28:53 K: Yes.
1:28:55 SF: Well, that is what I mean by...
1:28:59 K: No, you are wandering away, pulling me away from one thing. I want to understand what is desire.
1:29:08 MZ: But the very thing you are saying, I want to... – when is it not desire?
1:29:13 K: Yes, I want to.
1:29:14 MZ: What is the difference between –
1:29:16 K: Please, I want to.
1:29:17 K: Wait, you have gone ahead of me. I want to understand desire.
1:29:24 MZ: That may be just a desire.
1:29:26 K: Maybe. So I say, what is desire? The very wanting to understand confusion may be desire. So I say, what is desire? Is it thought? What am I to do? I am going on, will you join me? In the chariot race around Ben Hur?
1:30:03 Q: Can we say that physical sensation is part of desire?
1:30:07 K: Yes, go into it further. Is it thought? Can thought – listen, sir – can thought be separate from desire?
1:30:33 SS: Desire can't work without thought.
1:30:39 K: Don't make a statement till you are absolutely sure, through your investigation.
1:30:51 SS: Well, there is obviously an element of projection in it.
1:30:54 K: Which means what? Does thought dominate, and through that domination desire arises? This is a little bit subtle. Take it slowly.
1:31:16 SN: It seems to begin when you see something, and then thought seems to come in and say, I want it or I like it.
1:31:25 K: So, you have discovered that?
1:31:30 SN: Well, that is how it seems to me to be happening.
1:31:32 K: What do you mean it seems to you, either it is so or it is not. You are all so hesitant.
1:31:40 MZ: Sir, if you are hungry your body and your mind want the food.
1:31:48 K: I see a marvellous shirt in the window, a lovely blue shirt. I don't want to go into all this.
1:31:58 MZ: No, not the blue shirt, but say hunger, physical hunger.
1:32:03 K: Yes, carry on – physical hunger.
1:32:06 MZ: And your body needs food.
1:32:08 K: Wait a minute. Physical hunger. But I say that hunger must be satisfied by eating yogurt, sweet things, this, that, and the other. So desire is born.
1:32:28 JH: You started earlier by talking about a vision of order at Brockwood.
1:32:33 K: Oh, I left it long ago.
1:32:36 JH: But when it is a blue shirt, when we are talking about desire in terms of a blue shirt in the window, I can follow what goes on, there doesn't seem to be confusion about how desire arises there.
1:32:55 K: I will show it to you.
1:32:58 JH: The confusion comes when...
1:33:00 K: There is no confusion. I will show you the movement of desire. Will you follow it? Not verbally, actually do it. Sir, please understand this. We have talked about confusion for the last four, five years – confused, confused. Right? Am I wrong?
1:33:42 SN: No, you are right.
1:33:43 K: Good. At last. And why are you not free of confusion after four years? What is wrong? So I say let's find out. We will go into it, but you don't... Go into it. I am pushing you. Right, sir? Poor chap. Sorry you are sitting next to me.
1:34:31 RP: Can we not explore the movement of desire?
1:34:33 K: Sir, I am asking you, why has desire become so strong in all of us? What is the relationship between desire and thought? Is that too much, too complicated?
1:35:01 SN: The beginning of it seems quite simple. The beginning of desire seems fairly simple.
1:35:06 K: What is the beginning of desire?
1:35:08 SN: Well, to me it seems that you look at something and thought comes and says, I want that.
1:35:15 K: Yes. Now, wait. Go slowly. What takes place when you say, I want that? Before you want that, what takes place?
1:35:27 SN: There seems to be a contact between the object and...
1:35:38 K: I am a dull person – could you make it simpler for me? What is desire? How does desire spring? What is the source of it?
1:35:58 BJ: Krishnaji, it seems to be a movement towards what one is looking at.
1:36:03 K: Yes. What is that movement? How does that movement take place?
1:36:08 Q: When you think about it.
1:36:15 K: When you think about it. Which means what? Does thought create desire? Go slowly. I am asking, investigating. Don't answer it yet.
1:36:29 Q: I can't see they are different.
1:36:31 K: So, you are saying desire is thought.
1:36:36 Q: I can't see they are different.
1:36:41 K: What do you mean?
1:36:46 Q: I can't distinguish them clearly in my mind.
1:36:48 K: We are going to distinguish it, presently.
1:36:53 RP: Sir, looking at something doesn't seem to be a problem, but the tendency is to identify oneself with it.
1:37:00 K: Which means what?
1:37:06 RP: I make pictures as to have what I see, what it will bring to me.
1:37:18 K: Sir, do you realise, I am asking – in yourself you are asking, I am not asking you – I asking myself, as you must be asking yourself: what is the cause of this awful conflict in human existence? Why can't we live together in this world without conflict? And I say one of the factors of this conflict is approximation. That is clear. And have I dropped all approximation? If I have not, I say look, I have dropped some, I have not dropped any completely. Therefore, I am partially confused, partially not confused. It is like that stupid statement we make. I am confused, not partial confusion. Right?
1:38:33 Q: It is all or nothing.
1:38:35 K: It is so, sir. Don't make that statement. That makes you say, my God, it is hopeless. But the fact is I see that I am approximating. That brings conflict, therefore my intent, my energy, my passion behind it all is to eliminate conflict and confusion. If this is the cause, I will do anything to get rid of it.
1:39:15 Q: But then one comes to a place where I think one feels one's own physical urge. I don't know if it is physical, but one's own self is threatened.
1:39:25 K: You are going to find out. Be threatened. You see, you don't go into it. I am threatened – perhaps that may be, by this approximation, I am strengthening myself.
1:39:46 Q: Desire as well strengthens yourself.
1:39:50 K: You see, just a minute, we have not moved from that one point. What is wrong with me psychologically, if I haven't moved from there? When I see, actually see logically, reasonably, sanely, that approximation does bring about conflict. That is so clear, verbally clear, and I will never say to myself: I am confused, I don't know what to do. I know what to do. Right, sir? You mean to say we haven't done this simple thing after all these years? A simple fact. 1:41:54 Is your intention, Shakuntalaji, to be free from conflict? Or a little bit of it. You see, if I am confused, what am I doing in my life? Please, I am not trying to depress you or elate you, but we started out discussing clarification of confusion, and we said conflict is the essence of confusion. So what is conflict? Conflict is approximation, with all its subtleties, with all its consequences. And is desire conflict? So, can desire be carefully looked at? 1:43:56 Have I the time, the energy to give to the understanding of desire, or are we all too occupied? We are never too occupied, you can give half an hour to look at desire, how it comes. So I begin to discover in my examination into confusion that thought and desire seem to go together. I am not clear on that point but I am looking at it. Is thought separate from desire? It looks as though they were separate, but is that so?
1:45:10 Q: What else could desire be?
1:45:12 K: What, sir?
1:45:13 Q: What else could desire be, other than a movement within oneself, of thought?
1:45:21 K: So you are saying thought is desire. Wait, wait, wait, don't escape. Stick to that, find out. What is the relationship between thought and desire? Is there a relationship, or are the two separate?
1:45:52 Q: When you ask, what is desire...
1:45:54 K: I am doing it now.
1:45:57 Q: And I say, what is this thing desire? What do I use this word to mean? It means this feeling of wanting.
1:46:05 K: Want. Wanting. Desire means wanting. Lacking. I lack something and I want. I am not noble but I want to be noble.
1:46:24 Q: And what is this, this wanting? I mean, it is not like somebody touching you.
1:46:29 K: No, we are going to find out. Give your mind to find out.
1:46:33 Q: Yes, I am.
1:46:38 K: How does desire arise? Leave thought alone for the moment. How does desire arise?
1:46:47 Q: Almost without one knowing it. One is suddenly...
1:46:52 K: I am asking you now.
1:46:53 Q: Yes.
1:46:54 K: How does desire arise? I am not going to let you go.
1:47:00 Q: No, I am trying to describe it.
1:47:02 K: No, don't describe it, tell me how desire arises. Not the effects of desire, for this desire, for that. Desire itself, how does it come? It makes you look, makes you think, makes you observe.
1:47:31 BJ: Krishnaji, is there somewhere, something, a physical movement, inward physical movement in the breast?
1:47:38 K: Yes, I need food, I need clothes.
1:47:41 BJ: No, I am not saying that. I am saying that the very first thing that arises is some physical sensation, inward sensations.
1:47:50 K: Yes. So, I am asking, is it sensation? Hunger, there is a sensation. I have to feel it.
1:48:00 Q: Yes, that is what makes me aware of desire. Well, that is what is desire, a sensation.
1:48:08 K: Go slowly, you are all too quick. So it is a sensation.
1:48:14 Q: Yes.
1:48:16 K: Now, what is sensation?
1:48:23 Q: It is in the nervous system, I would say.
1:48:25 K: I touch you, hold your arm, that is a sensation.
1:48:27 Q: Yes.
1:48:30 Q: And it feels like that but it is not identified with the finger,
1:48:33 Q: but it is still...
1:48:35 K: Sensation.
1:48:35 Q: It is feeling, yes.
1:48:37 K: Now, move from there. How does this sensation arise? I touch you. That is one sensation. Taste, seeing, hearing. Those are all sensations. Be clear on that. Touching, tasting, hearing, seeing. So those are sensations. Now, with those sensations active, you look. You look at that car – right? So what happens then? Slowly. Go slowly into it. You will get it. You look at that car with all your senses. The seeing, the smelling – wait, you are all too quick, go step by step – the seeing, the smelling of it, the new leather, new upholstery, the lines, hearing the machinery work. It is all sensation.
1:50:14 K: Right?
1:50:15 Q: Right.
1:50:16 K: Then where does desire come? Sensation is not desire.
1:50:29 Q: Yes.
1:50:29 K: No, be clear on this. Sensation is not desire. Seeing that beautiful lawn is not desire. So, where does desire come in?
1:50:41 Q: Yes.
1:50:42 BJ: But then, Krishnaji, we value some sensations more than others.
1:50:47 K: Ah, I am not talking values. I am just talking about sensation.
1:50:51 Q: Right. I mean, you are seeing it is a red colour.
1:50:54 K: Red colour, the touch of it, the smell of it, hearing the ticking over – there is sensation in all that. But where is desire in there?
1:51:06 Q: Well, in there, there isn't any.
1:51:09 K: No. So where does desire come in?
1:51:11 Q: You seem to imagine yourself related in that situation.
1:51:15 K: Which means what? Go on, be simple.
1:51:20 Q: The mind stops to think about it.
1:51:22 Q: Wouldn't it be nice if I had this car.
1:51:25 K: Which is what? You imagine you sitting in the car, driving it. Which is what?
1:51:35 Q: Well, you are thinking about it.
1:51:36 K: Which means what?
1:51:39 SF: Krishnaji, why does that step occur? If for instance, one has these sensations, is it that the brain wants more of that sensation and so it makes a picture of you driving the car?
1:51:53 K: Right. Go into it. That is, seeing that beautiful new Porsche 928 and there is only sensation there. Right? I am asking – go slowly – how does desire arise out of that sensation? You get it, sir?
1:52:29 Q: No, I was saying, you see sensation of the Porsche but if the rusty Morris Minor was standing next to it you would get a different sensation.
1:52:41 K: No, there is nobody in it. You are looking at it.
1:52:43 Q: Yes, I see two different cars side by side.
1:52:46 K: No, I am talking of the latest model. You see a good, beautiful car. It is sensation.
1:52:59 Q: What do you mean by sensation – sensational?
1:53:03 K: You see it, you touch it, you smell the leather, you hear of the tick of the car, that is all sensation.
1:53:12 Q: Yes.
1:53:13 K: Where does desire come in?
1:53:15 JH: When I relate it in the future to me. When I relate it to me, in any way.
1:53:21 K: Which means what?
1:53:23 JH: In the future.
1:53:24 K: You make statements.
1:53:26 MZ: It is pleasurable.
1:53:28 IP: Don't you identify with it?
1:53:30 IP: You identify with it. You want to make it part of you.
1:53:33 SF: Why does one want more of that sensation?
1:53:39 K: Look at it, sir. You are all making a lot of questions. Just look at it step by step, you will find out the answer. You see that car. You smell it, you touch it, you hear it. That is all sensation. Right? Then where does desire come into this?
1:54:08 SS: You think, how nice!
1:54:14 K: Which means what?
1:54:19 K: Exercise your bloody brain!
1:54:28 SS: I would like it to continue.
1:54:30 K: Which means if I put into words you will see it, but I don't want to put it – for you to see it.
1:54:37 Q: I see, as when my mind starts to think...
1:54:41 K: Look, there is only sensation, so far. And I am asking, that is all right, but where does desire come into this?
1:54:53 MZ: Because you want it to continue.
1:54:54 K: How does desire happen in this?
1:54:59 K: Shall I tell you?
1:55:00 SS: Thinking it out.
1:55:01 K: Me getting into the car and driving. Which means what? Thought says, how nice it will be. Right? No, see it, don't agree. See it. So, the moment thought enters into sensation you have desire. Right? Have you found this out? Not my telling you.
1:55:33 RP: Sir, which raises another question.
1:55:34 K: No, don't raise another question.
1:55:36 RP: No, if you follow through this.
1:55:38 K: I don't follow, even. I am stuck there.
1:55:41 Q: I question it. What would be wrong with me visualising myself sitting in the car?
1:55:49 K: Nothing, but I am understanding desire. There is nothing wrong if you can sit in a Rolls Royce or in a Ford.
1:55:59 Q: It seems to me that the real crux of thing occurs when I say, I will be all right, I will be okay if I have that.
1:56:07 K: Which is what? Thought.
1:56:10 Q: Well, it expresses itself as a sensation at that stage.
1:56:14 K: Sir, you are missing my whole point. If you had no thought, if thought doesn't come into this, then you merely have sensation. When thought comes into it, that begins the desire – I wish I had that car. Right?
1:56:45 RP: I can't just say – if I don't have thought – I have to understand what thought is.
1:56:52 K: Up to now, please go step by step. There is only sensation when I see a car. Sensation. But desire comes in when thought says, how nice for me to sit in that car and drive. The image thought has made – me sit in the car and drive.
1:57:16 K: Right?
1:57:17 Q: Yes.
1:57:17 K: No, not 'yes' – it is so. You may expand it, but the central factor is, thought associated with sensation creates desire. That is a law.
1:57:41 SS: Is desire then always in a sense of more?
1:57:44 K: More. Everything that comes out of it.
1:57:50 HT: Are you saying that any thought about the sensation is desire?
1:57:57 K: Obviously.
1:58:00 MZ: I don't know, I could go to a museum and look at a Cezanne...
1:58:04 K: Wait, I will answer your question.
1:58:11 K: You go to a museum, you see Picasso – I hope not – you see Michelangelo or somebody, what happens there? You don't say I want that picture. Of course, not. It is not yours, you can't have it, anyhow.
1:58:27 MZ: You can want it without getting it.
1:58:29 K: If you have money you say, I am going to buy that. But you go the picture and look. There is a sensation. That is all I am saying.
1:58:42 MZ: Well, Harsh asked if any thought about that sensation occurs. Be conscious, think about the picture, the beauty of it.
1:58:58 K: Maria, please give me two seconds. Follow me. I can look at that picture, see the beauty of it, see the colouring, the depth, the whole thing, how it is put together. All right, there is nothing wrong with it.
1:59:23 MZ: There is thought in that.
1:59:27 K: Yes. No. Now, this comes where? Is perception of that thing – why should there be thought in it? No, put it around the other way. Is beauty the act of thought?
1:59:50 MZ: No.
1:59:52 K: That is all.
1:59:53 K: That is all. No, if you see that.
1:59:56 K: I won't go into this for the moment. We must not go into this for the moment. I want to stick to confusion. A big jump!
2:00:07 HT: Is recognition desire then? If there is the sensation and I say, ah, that is a car...
2:00:19 K: If the brain sees the whole movement of desire: sensation, thought, image, you sitting in the car, driving. That is the whole movement of desire. Right? What is the trouble? Why are you all hesitant?
2:00:41 JH: There doesn't seem to be trouble about the car, but when it is something undefinable, say like order in this place or some quality that isn't definable like a car...
2:00:54 K: It brings in quite a different... What is order?
2:00:58 JH: Well, we all disagree and we all have this, what you started with, the vision of it.
2:01:03 K: What is order? You say this is order, he will say that is order, I will say this is order. We are back again in the same business. I may consider what you are doing is total disorder, or you may consider what I do is – what ridiculous nonsense!
2:01:31 Q: Isn't it that we have thought about the object of desire so often that we just have to have the visual reminder of that object and already the whole thing is in motion.
2:01:44 K: Go a little further.
2:01:50 K: You are not tired?
2:01:52 Q: No.
2:01:54 K: Can you see that when thought enters into sensation there is desire, and not let thought come into it? You understand what I am saying? You understood what I said? Even verbally, you understand, sir? I don't know if I made myself clear.
2:02:21 Q: Yes.
2:02:23 Q: Sometimes it seems so fast that thought hasn't made its presence felt.
2:02:29 K: Thought is so quick. Right?
2:02:33 Q: Yes.
2:02:36 K: Can thought make itself slow so that sensation, immediate precipitation of thought with its image... (Technical fault in recording)
2:02:54 K: Not only slow down thought, but thought itself not allow to enter into sensation. You follow what I am saying? That is real alertness of the mind. You follow?
2:03:23 Q: Yes.
2:03:25 K: It is ten past seven. I can go on.
2:03:34 MZ: Krishnaji, the students are waiting for dinner.
2:03:36 K: I don't know, it is up to you. I am not asking you to stay with me. It is up to you all. You say it is time to stop, I will stop. At least let's get one point clear. Right?
2:04:00 BJ: I think it is clear what you are saying. I don't know whether we really grasp it in ourselves. It is quite clear what you are saying but I don't know whether we are grasping it within ourselves. I don't know whether we ever will.
2:04:16 K: I don't quite follow what he is saying.
2:04:20 Q: He doesn't think we will ever understand.
2:04:23 BJ: No, I didn't say that.
2:04:27 SN: Not quite that.
2:04:31 K: Look, sir, we have talked about confusion, confusion, for years... (Technical fault in recording) my opinion against your opinion, etc. Can we stop comparing? Approximating? Can we stop that? Will you stop it? If you don't stop it what is the point of talking about confusion and clarity? Please, I am not keeping you waiting. The students are waiting. Please tell me to stop, I will stop.
2:05:42 Q: I don't think we should stop, Krishnaji.
2:05:45 K: Right?
🢁