Krishnamurti Subtitles home


CL68TYP1 - A radical transformation in the psyche itself
Claremont, California - 8 November 1968
Students Talk 1



0:00 This is J. Krishnamurti first talk with students at Claremont Colleges, 1968.
0:08 Krishnamurti: I’m afraid I can’t see you, but I hope you can see me. It would be rather interesting to find out why most of you are here.
0:25 Probably out of curiosity or to find out, seriously, what a man coming out of the East talks about.
0:53 First of all, I think we must be clear that the speaker in no way represents India, Indian philosophy, Indian thought or any of those mysterious Oriental business.
1:22 It is important, I think, that we should establish first of all, a certain kind of communication between us; and nowadays they talk a great deal about it, make a lot of fuss about communication.
1:56 It seems to me it is fairly simple to communicate with each other.
2:04 The difficulty lies in that each one of us unfortunately translates or compares or judges what is being said.
2:26 We don’t listen; and if we listen fairly attentively and seriously, communication is quite simple.
2:41 Someone has to say something and if you are at all serious, wanting to find out, even though it be a curiosity, one must listen, listen with that care, with certain attention, with a certain quality of affection, not only intellectually critical, which is absolutely necessary, but also one must examine, explore what is being said.
3:34 And to explore, and to listen attentively, one must be free, free from the image, the tradition, the reputation that you have about the speaker, so that you’re capable of listening directly, immediately, so that we understand each other.
4:08 But if we try to follow a certain pattern of thought, certain tendencies in which we are caught, certain conclusions which we have and prejudices, then obviously all communication ceases.
4:39 So it seems to me, that it’s very important right from the beginning, during these three public talks, that we should find out, not only what the speaker has to say, but also find out how you listen, whether you are listening with a certain tendency to draw a conclusion from what is being said, comparing with what you already know, or trying to come to some conclusion, then what the speaker has to say merely becomes a matter of agreement or disagreement, intellectual amusement or intellectual examination, whereas if we could during these talks establish a right kind of relationship, a right kind of communication between yourselves and the speaker then there is a possibility of going very deeply and seriously into the whole complex problem of living.
6:30 And whether it is at all possible for human beings who are so heavily conditioned to change, to bring about an inward, psychological revolution.
6:51 And that’s what we are concerned about, not some Oriental philosophy or some intellectual, conceptual imagination and conclusions, or substituting old ideas for new.
7:16 So if I may suggest, and I hope you will not mind, I think it’s important that one must learn the art of listening.
7:42 We don’t listen, or if we do listen we listen through a screen of words, screen of conceptual thoughts, or our own particular form of experiences and conclusions, which prevents us, obviously, from listening.
8:19 So to listen, which is, as we said, a great art, which apparently we neglect so totally, to listen so intimately, so intensely, so completely, so that we can establish not only communication, but go beyond that, which is to commune with each other, which is entirely different.
9:04 To commune with each other as two friends would naturally do about something very serious.
9:18 To commune we must not only understand the meaning of words, knowing that the word is not the thing, the description is not the described, but also be in that state of mind whose quality is attention, care, a sense of intimate concern; and that can only take place if we, both of us, are serious.
10:17 And life demands great seriousness, not casual, occasional attention but constant alertness, watchfulness, because our problems are immense.
10:43 Our problems are so extraordinarily complex, and it’s only a very serious mind, a mind that is really earnest, capable of enquiry, and therefore free, that can find a solution for all our problems.
11:17 And that is what we are going to do: not only communicate with each other verbally but also establish at a different level, in which the minds can communicate, commune with each other, which seems to me much more important than mere verbal communication; and if we could, during these three talks, apart from the discussions, look with clear eyes, eyes that are fresh, free, young, innocent, at these extraordinary problems of life, then probably the problems will have a totally different meaning.
12:48 So, if I may suggest, we must not only listen to the word but also realise that the word is not ever the thing, nor the description ever the described; and that to listen there must be a quality of freedom, freedom from conclusions, freedom from prejudice, freedom from images, symbols, so that we can both look directly, intimately, intensely, at the problems of our daily life, at the problem of whole existence, and if it has any meaning at all.
14:21 We have, as one observes, right through the world, human beings, whatever their colour, nationality, their particular culture be, human beings have problems: problems of relationship, problems of living in a society that is so corrupt, in a society which man has built through centuries, a society which is the product of his own demands, of his own fears, of his own ambitions, his violence, his hopes and fears, and so on; he has built a structure of society, and in that structure human beings are caught.
15:50 So the structure is not different from the human being.
15:57 The society, whatever it be, whether in Asia or in Europe or in this country, that society is not different from each one of us; we are the society.
16:16 So we are the community, not only the individual, the human, but also the total.
16:28 So there is no division, separateness between the community, the society and ourselves.
16:39 We are the world and the world is us.
16:46 And to bring about a radical transformation, which is so essential in society, there must be radical transformation in ourselves.
17:13 And whether such a revolution – I’m using the word not in the communist or in the socialist or the bloody sense of that word but a revolution in the sense of complete, radical transformation in the psyche itself, in the whole structure of our mind and heart – whether it is at all possible.
17:55 That is the central issue – not what the philosophers think, not what the psychologists, the analysts say, not what the theologians or the believers or the non-believers assert – but there is only one issue confronting this whole complex society, with its corruption, with its ambitions, competition, war, struggle: whether human beings, as we are now, whether it is at all possible for us to bring about in ourselves a radical transformation.
19:03 Not gradually, that is, through time, through many days or years, but whether it is at all possible to change immediately, not accepting time at all.
19:31 Because apparently man has committed himself to war, to violence.
19:49 This violence exists throughout the world.
19:56 They talk a great deal in Asia, specially in India, where ideologies flourish as fungus flourish on a damp ground.
20:14 There is a great deal of violence throughout the world, and man, human beings are committed to that violence, committed to a way of life that is war, a life that is divided into religions, into beliefs, into dogmas, into rituals, into nationalities, into extraordinary prejudices.
21:05 Man is committed to it. Man says, this is my favourite war, and that I will not accept, but I’ll accept other kind of wars.
21:23 He in himself is violent, is brutal, aggressive; which the specialists say have been derived, inherited from the animal.
21:43 Whatever the specialists say has very little meaning, because we can find out for ourselves, if we examine ourselves, the nature of our violence, how brutal we are with each other, not only verbally but in thought.
22:14 And we have through thousands of years accepted a way of life that must inevitably lead to war, to slaughter, and we haven’t been able to change that.
22:37 No politician can ever do that. But we, as human beings, ordinary human beings, not specialists, not experts, but human beings living in this society, conditioned, accepting a way of life, a way of life which is corrupt, in which there is no love, not a word of compassion – observing this, is it possible for a human being to bring about a radical transformation in himself?
23:39 That’s one of our major issues.
23:49 And, is it at all possible to come upon that state which man has sought, which he calls God, or whatever name you like to give to it – names don’t matter at all – and whether human beings can ever find that, come upon it, or is it reserved only for the few?
24:48 And what place has the religious mind in this world?
25:02 And whether it is at all possible to come upon that which we call love.
25:19 That word is so laden, so heavy with ugliness.
25:30 Like God, that word, everybody uses – the theologian, the grocer, the politician, everybody uses that word.
25:48 The husband uses that word for his wife, and the boy to the girl, and so on.
25:55 But when you look at that word, go into that, there is so much misery, so much conflict, there is torture, jealousy, envy, fear, and whether the mind can ever be free of all that so that there is a quality of love which is not corrupt, which is not made ugly by the mind, by thought.
26:47 So those are some of the problems: the relationship between man and man; whether man can ever live at peace with himself and with the neighbour; and whether there is a reality that is not put together by thought; whether there is such a quality of love, affection, compassion that has never been touched by jealousy, anxiety, guilt, fear; and can the mind, which is so heavily conditioned, ever free itself and be completely, totally free to find out if there is an ultimate reality.
28:23 If we don’t find out, explore and discover for ourselves the truth of all this, we must inevitably make life into a mechanical affair, a life in which there is constant struggle, a life which is utterly meaningless.
28:57 I’m sure we are all aware of all this; at least those of us who are somewhat serious must have asked themselves these questions.
29:28 And if one has asked whether it is at all possible to uncondition the mind so that it looks at life in a totally different way, so that it is no longer a Christian mind or a Catholic mind or a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, all these absurd divisions – whether it is at all possible for a mind that is so conditioned, ever to be free, to be innocent, vulnerable.
30:27 So those are some of the problems. That is, man lives in fragments, not only within himself but outwardly – he is a scientist, a doctor, a military, a priest, a theologian, a specialist, a professional of some kind or other.
31:07 Inwardly he lives a broken up life, fragmentary, his mind, his intellect is more dominant, clever, cunning, brutal; and at the same time or a different time he is affectionate, kind, gentle.
31:36 He tries to be moral – the morality of society which is utterly immoral.
31:53 And he has many desires tearing one against the other, tearing at each other.
32:07 So there is this contradiction within oneself, and there is contradiction outwardly – fragmentation outwardly and inwardly.
32:23 And man is trying always to bring about an integration in this fragmentation, which of course is absurd.
32:41 There is no integration.
32:51 And if you examine that word and go behind that word, who is the entity that is going to integrate?
33:03 The entity who is going to integrate the many fragments is part of that fragment.
33:11 Therefore it cannot possibly bring about integration amongst these various conflicts and fragments.
33:26 So if one sees that very clearly, that living in fragments, living a divided life, and the various broken parts of desire can never be put together because the entity, the observer, the person that tries to put it together, is part of this fragmentation.
34:29 So there must be a different approach, that is, to see the fragments, the opposing contradictory demands, desires, urges, to observe them, and to find out whether it is possible to go beyond them.
35:11 And that ‘going beyond’ is the radical revolution, so that the mind is no longer torn, tortured, no longer in conflict with itself and therefore with its neighbour, whether that neighbour be next door to your house or in Vietnam or in Asia or in Russia, or what it be.
35:51 And, if one could observe this fact, because we are only dealing with facts, not with suppositions, not with ideals – ideals have no meaning whatsoever; ideals are idiotic because they are the invention of a clever, cunning mind; when it cannot possibly solve a problem like violence, it invents non-violence as an idea.
36:31 And because it is not able to solve this problem of violence, and having created the ideal of non-violence – to be gentle and a something in the distance – that very invention of an ideal brings about another conflict, another struggle, another state of contradiction.
37:00 So what is important to observe the fact, the fact that we human beings are extraordinarily violent, that we, through our culture, the society in which we live, the way of our life, the competition, the greed, the envy, the fear, breeds inevitably violence.
37:58 And to be aware of this fact, not what we should become, because what we should become is fiction, a myth.
38:11 What is important is ‘what is’, not ‘what should be’.
38:18 That’s a romantic, idiotic nonsense, which all religions, all idealists use and exploit.
38:31 What’s the good of an ideal when I’m violent?
38:38 Please, this is very important to understand. You may be great idealists, but do quietly listen, don’t reject what is being said.
38:54 You may be working for some ideal, you may have committed yourself to a certain formula, and when you hear a speaker say that’s all absurd, politely or emphatically, it behoves that one must listen, find out, not cling to one’s formulas, to words, to some mythology.
39:35 And one can see how ideals have divided man – the Christian ideal, the Hindu ideal, the communist ideal – and there are these innumerable beliefs with their sects – the Catholic sect, the Protestant.
40:05 So that man is held by ideals, slave to them, and therefore is incapable of observing what he is.
40:17 He is always thinking ‘what should be’. So to observe ‘what is’ is the first demand, the first challenge.
40:38 Which is to know yourself as you are, not as you should be – that is a childish game, an immature struggle that has no meaning – but to observe, to look at violence.
41:10 And can one look? And here comes an extraordinarily difficult problem, because there are certain factors which we must understand very clearly.
41:36 First, to observe without identification, to observe without the word, to observe without the space between the observer and the observed, to look without any image, to look without thought, so that you are seeing things as they actually are.
42:39 If we may, we will go into that because it’s very important.
42:50 Because if we do not know how to look, observe what we are, we will inevitably create conflict between what we see and the entity that sees.
43:19 That’s fairly clear isn’t it?
43:27 I observe I’m violent – in what I say, think, do, in my gestures, both sexually, in my daily activity in the office I am violent.
43:58 To observe it. And I can only observe it first if I do not escape from that, if I do not avoid it.
44:16 I will inevitably avoid it if I escape to an ideal, say, ‘I must not be violent.’ That is so utterly meaningless.
44:39 If you say, ‘I must not be violent,’ then there is the fact of violence and ‘what should be’, and hence another conflict between ‘what is’ and ‘what should be’.
44:56 That’s our life. So it’s important if we are at all serious – and life is only for those who are serious – it’s important to observe the nature and the structure of violence in ourselves, why we are aggressive.
45:35 Mere discovery – please, do listen – mere discovery of the cause of violence does not end violence.
45:47 Mere analysis of violence, however clever the analysis be, however detailed, does not end violence.
46:11 Nor is violence ended by thinking of non-violence.
46:26 So, violence is a word, and the description of that violence is not the fact.
46:44 Please follow this a little bit. You may not be used to this kind of observation or exploration, or you may leave it all to the experts and just blindly follow them, and thereby creating authority which becomes a terrible thing.
47:11 But if we would be free of this violence which is in us so deep down, we must learn about ourselves.
47:32 And you can only learn if you observe – not according to Freud or Jung or any specialist, then you are merely learning what they have already told you.
47:45 That’s not learning. And so if you could put away all authority, all the comforting authority of others, and observe.
48:03 And in that observation there is a whole complex difficulty.
48:11 First, is the observer different from the thing observed?
48:19 I observe I am violent, not only superficially, consciously, but deep down I am violent.
48:41 I observe it: the manner of my speech, the walk, the gesture, the ambitious drive to succeed.
48:56 And in this country that is praised to the heavens, success, in which there is a great deal of violence, aggression, and brutality.
49:15 I see I am violent, and is the entity who observes that violence different?
49:28 Please, do it as the speaker is explaining it.
49:35 Please do it. Don’t listen, if I may suggest, to the words, because words have no importance.
49:54 What has importance is to see whether the mind can ever be free of this terrible disease called violence.
50:10 And in seeing it, is the seer, the observer, different from the thing observed, the thing seen?
50:25 Or the observer is the observed.
50:32 You understand? The observer who says there is violence, is he different from that violence itself?
50:44 Obviously he is not.
50:55 Therefore what takes place? When the observer realises – do please follow this carefully for yourself, if you are interested – when the observer realises he himself is the observed, which is violence, he himself is violence, not the thing which he has observed, then what takes place?
51:20 Then what is he to do to be free of violence?
51:30 You understand the problem?
51:38 Is this rather complex? Are we communicating with each other? Are we? No? Audience: Yes.
51:53 K: [Laughs] All right. Please, I am not analysing you.
52:04 I do not believe in analysis at all – not ‘believe’, to me that’s not important at all – there’s a different approach altogether, which is what we’re going to go into.
52:29 When the observer is the observed, that is, he himself is violence and not something separate over which he can control, change, and all the rest of it, but he himself is violence, then at one stroke you remove the division between the observer and the observed and therefore remove the conflict, the contradiction.
53:14 Right? And then there is still the factor of violence.
53:24 I am violent; there is not... violence isn’t something apart from me. My nature, my very being is violent.
53:44 And if I say, ‘No, part of me is loving, another part is violent,’ which is sheer nonsense.
53:53 Violence means conflict, contradiction, division, separateness, a lack of love.
54:10 And when I have observed, I have learned the central fact, the central fact which is the observer is the observed, and therefore he is no longer in conflict with the observed.
54:37 I am the world and the world is me; the community is me.
54:50 And to bring about a radical transformation in the society and in me, the observer must undergo a tremendous change, which is, he is the observed, and therefore at one stroke he removes the conflict between himself and the thing he observes.
55:20 So can my mind, can this mind observe?
55:33 To observe the image of what I consider violence, what my vested interests are in that violence, the whole image I have about myself and the violence must disappear so the mind is free to observe.
56:13 And the fact remains after observing that there is violence.
56:29 I’m still violent, though I may say, ‘I am that which is violence,’ I am still violent.
56:41 Then what is one to do? You’re following? I hope. If you don’t, I’m sorry. What is one to do?
57:00 When one observes that one is violent, and the observer is part of that violence, is violence, he realises he cannot possibly do anything about it, because any action he takes, positive or negative action, is part of that violence.
57:32 You understand?
57:39 [Sighs] Look, sirs, let’s put it differently.
57:58 There is this whole problem of geocentricism.
58:07 That is, we are extraordinarily selfish people, extraordinarily self-centred.
58:24 We may go out to do some good to others, and so on, but the core, the root of it is essentially, deep down in us, is self-centred activity.
58:43 It’s like a tree with the main root, and it has a thousand roots.
58:59 And whatever the mind does, or does not, nourishes the root.
59:11 Am I making it more complex? Because we are dealing with a very complex problem, and please bear in mind what we said earlier, that the description is not the described.
59:42 And so, if the description is not the described, which it certainly is not, then you must be intimately in contact with that fact.
59:52 Which is, there is this egocentric operation that’s going on all the time in each one of us, which is the action of separation, isolation, division, fragmentation, and whatever we do is part of this fragmentation.
1:00:22 So one asks oneself whether there is any kind of action which is not of this.
1:00:31 And in the very asking that question, the very asking that question is part of that.
1:00:44 So, one looks at violence with complete silence.
1:00:53 Am I, is the speaker conveying anything at all?
1:01:02 A: Yes.
1:01:03 K: Don’t agree, sir, because this is not a matter of agreement, it’s a matter of perception on your part.
1:01:18 Because what we are concerned is not what the speaker, or what the speaker is – that’s the least important.
1:01:34 What is important is that you find out for yourself so that you are a free human being, not a second-hand human being.
1:01:52 And so you must look at it, whether it is at all possible for your mind to be completely and totally free of this arrogance, pride, violence, so that the mind comes upon a different quality.
1:02:23 And to find that out you must inevitably look and discover for yourself most intimately, so that it’s your own, not somebody else’s.
1:02:39 Because there is no teacher and no follower, no guru. And that’s the word that has come into this country recently, most unfortunately.
1:02:57 Because that word in Sanskrit means ‘the one who points’, like a post on the roadside.
1:03:11 And you don’t worship that post, you don’t put garlands round that post, you don’t worship it, you don’t follow it around and obey all the mysterious nonsense that guru is supposed to give you.
1:03:32 He is just that signpost on the roadside; you read and pass by.
1:03:42 So, you have to be your own teacher or your own disciple.
1:03:51 And there is no teacher outside, no saviour, no master; you yourself have to change, and therefore you have to learn to observe, to know yourself.
1:04:14 And that is an extraordinary, fascinating, joyous learning.
1:04:25 And to learn about oneself is to learn about violence, which is part of this structure of our life.
1:04:43 And to learn, the mind must be free to learn; it cannot learn if you have already accumulated knowledge about violence.
1:05:01 That’s one of the things that we have done with our learning.
1:05:12 Knowledge and learning are two different things.
1:05:22 You can have accumulated knowledge as a scientist, as an engineer or a doctor – he may add to it, and they do, and therefore knowledge becomes a tradition, an accumulating process.
1:05:44 But learning is not. Learning is possible only in the state of constant movement.
1:05:57 Learning as you are going along; not having learnt, and having learnt apply what you have learnt – that’s not learning.
1:06:10 Learning takes place only in the active present.
1:06:17 Learning is a movement, whether in a college or learning about yourself.
1:06:29 And in that learning there is great joy; there is no despair of what you see, because you don’t then compare with your ideal of what you should be, there’s only ‘what is’.
1:06:43 And in that, in observing ‘what is’ you learn infinitely.
1:06:50 Like the speaker, you don’t have to read a book.
1:06:57 Everything is in you, because man is as old as the hills, and more.
1:07:07 He is a living thing, and a living thing cannot be conditioned; and we have conditioned it.
1:07:22 And because we have conditioned it we have made life into such a torture, such a meaningless struggle.
1:07:40 Would you like to ask any questions, because now it is eight thirty-five?
1:07:52 Questioner: How about this silence you talked about?
1:07:59 K: May I repeat your question, sir?
1:08:09 Please.
1:08:10 Q: The silence that I am experiencing, it comes and goes.
1:08:17 K: I understand, sir. Yes, I’ve got... Before you ask questions, if I may suggest, make it brief. I have to repeat it, and if I repeat it wrongly, please correct.
1:08:32 But to ask questions – one must – one must be completely sceptical about everything, including what the speaker is saying.
1:08:45 The speaker has no authority whatsoever, and one must be sceptical.
1:09:04 But one must also know when to let the leash go so that you are not always sceptical.
1:09:20 And one must ask questions, and one must ask the right question.
1:09:29 And to ask the right question is one of the most difficult things to do. Which doesn’t mean, please, that I’m stopping you asking questions.
1:09:42 But to ask really an extraordinary question, a question which is true to you, not to the speaker or to anybody else, which touches you – that you must ask.
1:10:02 And never wait for an answer from another.
1:10:09 The other cannot possibly answer, because it is only the fools that advise.
1:10:23 So, when you ask, please do ask the most serious questions, not some kind of question that is irrelevant and that hasn’t depth and meaning.
1:10:40 The question is: you talked about silence.
1:10:47 Occasionally my mind is silent, and what is this silence that you speak of?
1:11:00 I can tell... the speaker can tell you what that silence is, but unless it’s yours it is of very little importance.
1:11:25 Because silence is absolutely necessary to look, to listen, to observe.
1:11:32 If you are chattering, as our minds are everlastingly chattering, how can you possibly listen?
1:11:43 How can you possibly look at a tree, a cloud, a bird?
1:11:53 If you want to look at a tree, or the light on a cloud, naturally your mind must become silent.
1:12:05 You don’t force it, because you want to see the beauty of a sunset.
1:12:16 If you want to see without the image of your wife, your husband, whatever your friend is, you must be silent.
1:12:30 But if you carry with you the image you have about your wife or your husband, you are no longer silent.
1:12:39 It’s only in silence you learn.
1:12:46 And love is completely silent.
1:12:56 And we don’t know such love because thought, which breeds pleasure and fear, is always casting shadow over everything.
1:13:18 And this silence is part of this meditation – which we are not going to go into now, because that involves a great deal, what meditation is.
1:13:35 And without understanding what meditation is, and the beauty of it and the ecstasy of it and the benediction of it, life has no meaning.
1:13:49 But to meditate is something not away from life in some monastery, or learning some trick, whether it’s Zen or some other trick, because meditation is the way of life.
1:14:15 And to meditate is part of this immense silence – which we’ll go into perhaps if we have time during these three public talks, we’ll discuss what meditation is, what love is, and what death is.
1:14:44 Q: [Inaudible] K: Could we discuss what the observed is without the observer.
1:15:14 Could we discuss observation without the observer. What is the observer? Please, find out. I’ll talk about it but go into it, let’s go together into it, not just you listen and then accept or reject, but let’s both of us journey together.
1:15:41 What is the observer?
1:15:48 The observer is the experience, whether it is the experience of yesterday or a thousand yesterdays.
1:16:05 The observer is the accumulated knowledge, memory.
1:16:15 The observer is essentially the tradition, the memory.
1:16:22 The observer is the past, the dead ashes of many thousand yesterdays.
1:16:34 The observer who says, ‘I am hurt, I am angry, I am insulted, this is my opinion,’ who thinks in formulas – he’s the observer.
1:16:54 So the observer is essentially the past.
1:17:03 And can you look, observe without the past? Can you observe the tree? Begin with that simple thing first – can you observe the tree without the past?
1:17:24 Can you observe a flower, a cloud, outwardly, without the past?
1:17:38 Which means without the word, without knowledge, without all the images you have about the tree, about the bird, about the cloud.
1:17:52 Can you look without the past? Which is comparatively easy, to look at something without yesterday.
1:18:08 But can you look at your wife, at your husband without the image of the past – at the hurts, the naggings, the brutality, the pleasures, the various forms of unexpressed, secret demands, hopes, fears – can you look without the past, without the past image, so that you look with fresh eyes?
1:18:55 And that is quite an arduous thing to do, because that demands attention, that demands the joy of learning.
1:19:11 Because we human beings have no relationship with another, however intimate it may be, however much you may sleep with another, with your wife, or husband, or somebody else.
1:19:28 We have images, and the relationship is between these images; not between human beings, because human beings are living things.
1:19:42 And to have a relationship between living things is a dangerous thing, uncertain, and we want to be certain in our relationship.
1:19:53 That’s why we say, ‘I know my wife,’ or husband or my neighbour or my governor, whatever that is.
1:20:07 But to look without the observer, which means without the past, without the memory, without all the accumulated fears, secret hopes and joys, pleasures and agony – to look that way is the beginning of love.
1:20:33 Sorry, sir.