AM68T2 - Is it possible to end thought?

Amsterdam - 12 May 1968
Public Talk 2
Audio without subtitles on YouTube. Instead, the transcript from kfoundation.org is used.
Text-only version
|
0:12
IF
WE
MAY,
we will
continue
with
what
we were
talking
about
yesterday.
When
you look
at
a field
stretching
out
to
the horizon
-
a field
of
tulips
-
words
come
into
your
mind:
how
beautiful
it is,
the colour,
the brilliancy,
the texture,
the depth
of
the colour.
This
whole
field
of
colour
with
its
beauty
is
put
into
words.
Or
you translate
it in
terms
of
some
symbol;
or
you want
to
write
about
it,
paint
it,
carry
some
of
those
flowers
back
to
your
house.
And
as
you observe,
thought
begins
to
discern,
to
judge,
to
evaluate.
2:11
And
as
you still
go
on
looking,
there is
a space
between
you and
the flower,
between
you and
that
field
of
brilliant
colour.
This
space,
this
division
between
the observer
and
the thing
observed,
the thinker
and
the thought,
means
there are
two
separate
things.
In
this
division
between
the observer
and
the thing
observed
is
the whole
issue
of
life,
the whole
problem
of
existence.
In
that
division
there is
conflict,
there is
choice,
there is
constant
struggle.
|
|
3:29
As
we said
yesterday
morning,
we have
many
problems
at
all
levels
of
our
existence.
And
we ask
ourselves
if
it is
not
possible
to
find
the root
of
all
these
innumerable,
complex,
subtle
problems,
instead
of
dealing
with
each
problem
by
itself;
whether
we could
not
by
observing
the very
core,
the very
root
of
our
problems,
go
beyond,
by
finding
that
one
root
from
which
all
our
problems
spring.
|
|
4:54
And
we also
asked
yesterday
whether
it is
possible
for
man,
living
in
modern
society,
with
its
tremendous
pressures,
with
its
competition,
with
its
corrupt
morality,
with
its
total
disorder,
whether
it is
at
all
possible
to
be
free
of
fear.
Not
only
the fear
of
something
we do
not
know
-
as
death
-
but
also
the fear
of
life,
this
daily,
monotonous
life
of
routine,
of
strife,
of
endless
competition;
this
constant
measuring
of
oneself
with
something
more,
the measurement
of
success,
of
achievement,
in
which
there is
frustration,
agony,
an incessant
struggle
within
and
without.
6:36
Can
man
-
that
is,
you and
I
-
ever
be
free
from
this
central
issue,
or
rather
one
of
the main
issues
of
life,
which
is
fear?
|
|
6:58
We also
said
yesterday
that
thought
is
the origin
of
fear;
thought
which
divides
the observer
from
that
beautiful
field
of
tulips.
And
we asked
whether
thought
-
which
interferes,
which
gives
shape,
a certain
contour
of
judgment
-
whether
that
thought
(which
breeds
pain
and
pleasure,
upon
which
we depend
so
much
to
solve
all
our
problems)
can
ever
resolve
any
problem.
Now
that
may
be
the central
issue,
that
may
be
the core
which,
if
we understand
it,
may
resolve
all
our
problems.
Because
man
has
relied
on
thought.
8:50
Everything
we do
or
don't
do
is
born
out
of
thought.
Organized
thought
is
idea
and
according
to
an idea,
an ideal,
we act.
Action,
if
you observe,
is
always
a living
thing:
to
do,
to
be,
to
act,
is
always
in
the living
present;
and
the idea,
the ideal,
is
in
the future,
unreal.
So
in
action,
when
there is
a division
between
the act
and
the doing,
there is
always
conflict
-
doing,
which
is
now,
and
comparing
the doing
with
the ideal;
then
in
that
there is
conflict.
And
so
there is
no
action
at
all.
10:32
Action
then
is
merely
an approximation
to
what
should
be.
|
|
10:46
So
one
asks
oneself
whether
it is
possible
to
act
-
please
just
listen
to
it first,
don't
say
'it
is',
or
'it
is
not'
-
whether
it is
possible
to
act
without
idea;
which
means
that
the seeing
is
the doing.
We do
this
when
there is
grave
danger,
when
we are
confronted
with
a tremendous
crisis.
In
great
danger
there is
instant
action,
there is
not
the idea
or
the ideal
according
to
which
you are
acting,
there is
instant
response
to
an immediate
challenge.
Then
thought
has
no
time
to
operate.
You must
have
noticed
this
yourselves,
in
your
own
lives.
|
|
12:12
That
when
there is
some
grave
danger
or
immediate
demand
for
action,
thought
has
no
time
to
come
and
interfere
with
the doing.
And
as
we said
yesterday,
fear,
with
which
we are
concerned
this
morning,
is
born
out
of
thought.
Thought
of
tomorrow,
of
what
was
a pleasure
or
a pain
yesterday,
the sustaining
of
that
pain
or
pleasure
through
thought,
gives
a continuity
to
pleasure
or
pain.
That's
fairly
clear,
I think,
isn't
it?
|
|
13:29
Take
any
problem
that
one
has,
national,
international,
the feeling
of
isolation,
the feeling
of
being
one
group
opposed
to
another
group
or
community,
white
against
black
and
so
on.
The problem
was
created
by
thought,
which
is
fairly
clear.
Thought,
which
has
sought
security
through
division,
through
nationality,
through
separatism,
has
created
the problem.
Then
thought
sets
about
to
resolve
that
problem.
And
thought
cannot
resolve
that
problem.
One
may
pass
laws,
but
legislation
does
not
destroy
separateness,
the sense
of
isolation,
exclusion
through
opposition
to
others.
15:06
And
yet
we employ
thought
all
the time
to
resolve
all
our
problems.
But
if
you observe,
thought
has
created
the problem.
|
|
15:26
Take
war.
Historically
for
5,000
years
men
has
had
12,000
wars;
that
means
two
and
a half
wars
every
year!
Thought
has
bred
war,
antagonism.
Thought
has
built
a way
of
life
which
must
inevitably
lead
to
war.
One
realizes
that;
then
thought
says,
'there
must
be
peace'.
So
it sets
about
inventing
various
plans,
ways,
methods,
by
strengthening
itself
on
the one
hand
as
a nationalist
army,
and
yet
on
the other
by
striving
for
international
peace
and
brotherhood
-
all
this
contradiction
is
brought
about
by
thought.
16:53
And
as
one
observes
in
all
human
relationship,
thought
by
seeking
comfort,
security,
pleasure
-
sexual
or
otherwise
-
creates
many
problems.
And
so
we resort
to
thought
to
resolve
these
very
problems
which
thought
has
created.
One
can
see
how
fear
comes
into
being.
There is
the physical
fear
of
pain,
of
disease,
of
old
age
and
death,
or
of
the pain
that
one
had
some
time
ago
and
which
may
come
back.
Thought
remembers
the past
experience
and
remembering
it,
reacting
to
that
remembrance,
thought
produces
fear.
18:27
One
can
see
this
clearly
in
one's
life.
One
has
a disease,
physical
pain,
cancer,
or
some
other
disease
and
thought,
which
remembers
a state
of
mind
when
there
was
no
pain,
no
disease,
gets
frightened
of
it.
Then
thought
says:
what
are
the ways
out
of
it,
physically?
When
one
has
a disease,
and
most
of
us
do
have
some
kind
of
physical
disorder
and
pain,
why
should
thought
interfere
at
all?
-
thought
as
a response
of
memory
of
when
one
had
no
pain
at
all.
Why
should
such
thought
interfere
-
which
only
breeds
further
anxiety?
|
|
19:56
And
psychologically,
inwardly,
inside
the skin,
we have
many
problems
of
fear,
from
the most
simple,
like
fear
of
darkness,
to
the most
complex
problem
of
human
relationship,
which
is
called
love.
And
there is
fear
of
death.
|
|
20:35
As
one
observes
within
oneself,
not
according
to
any
philosopher,
any
analyst
or
any
specialist
(for
when
you do
observe
according
to
another,
then
you are
not
observing
yourself,
you are
observing
yourself
according
to
some
specialist,
then
what
he
says
becomes
far
more
important
than
what
actually
you are),
but
if
you put
aside
all
the specialists
and
assertions,
you can
see
for
yourself
the innumerable
contradictory
states,
the anxiety,
the guilt,
the sense
of
loneliness,
despair,
routine,
the way
of
life
which
becomes
mechanical.
22:05
Thought
breeds
this.
So
one
asks
oneself
whether
thought
-
which
has
its
place,
thought
being
mechanical,
thought
being
old,
thought
which
is
the result
of
experience,
memory,
knowledge
that
must
operate
when
you do
mechanical
things,
like
remembering
one's
address,
like
remembering
a technological
activity,
otherwise
we couldn't
possibly
live
or
do
anything
-
whether
thought
has
any
place
other
than
that.
Because
as
we have
said,
thought
breeds
fear
-
fear
not
only
of
our
neighbour,
fear
of
life,
fear
of
ourselves,
fear
of
so
many
things!
23:46
And
as
one
observes
oneself,
within
oneself,
as
a human
being,
one
can
see
very
well
how
fear
has
come
into
existence.
Is
it possible
to
be
completely
free
of
fear?
Which
means
really
the whole
investigation
of
the structure
and
nature
of
thought.
|
|
24:37
As
one
observes,
man
has
lived
on
thought.
Life
is
something
that
is
constantly
new.
Life
is
challenging
us
all
the time
with
new
demands,
with
new
phases,
with
new
ways
of
living.
And
to
that
challenge
we always
respond
according
to
our
old
pattern,
which
is
thought.
And
so
there is
a contradiction.
So,
is
it possible
-
please
don't
think
I'm
crazy
-
is
it possible
to
end
thought?
Is
it possible
to
look
at
that
field
of
tulips
without
the interference
of
thought
or
of
the word?
I do
not
know
if
you have
ever
tried
(or
if
you have
ever
done
it)
to
look
at
a flower,
at
a cloud,
or
at
a tree,
without
the word,
without
the memory,
the knowledge
of
that
thing
which
you have
seen
before;
and
to
look
at
it as
though
you were
looking
at
it for
the very
first
time
-
to
look
at
it without
the thinker
and
therefore
without
thought.
27:05
So
that
space
between
you,
as
the observer,
and
the thing
observed,
ceases.
Not
that
you become
the flower,
or
identify
yourself
with
the flower
-
which
would
be
absurd,
you can't
be
a tulip.
People
try
to
identify
themselves
with
what
they
see;
that
is
too
infantile,
too
immature.
But
to
see
that
field
of
tulips
without
the centre,
without
the observer,
the thinker
-
if
you have
ever
done
it you will
see
that
space
disappears.
|
|
28:13
And
when
there is
no
space
between
the observer
and
the observed,
then
the observer
is
the observed.
That's
fairly
easy
to
do
outwardly,
with
a flower,
with
a cloud,
with
a bird
that
is
flying
across
the sky.
And
this
can
be
done
through
various
forms
of
drugs
with
which
they
have
been
experimenting;
because
a drug,
a chemical,
removes
that
space
instantly
and
there is
that
sense
of
complete,
total
observation
of
'what
is'.
Please
do
follow
this
because
we're
going
into
something
very
complex
presently.
29:22
Just
listen
to
it.
We are
not
advising
that
you should
take
drugs
in
order
to
destroy
the separateness.
It doesn't
actually
destroy
it at
all.
A
drug
brings
about
a chemical
change
in
the nerves,
in
the whole
system,
making
the system
highly
sensitive
and
this
sensitiveness
to
the flower
on
the table
destroys
that
space,
but
it is
artificial.
You have
to
take
the drug
again
in
order
to
have
that
experience.
We have
not
taken
it,
though
we have
talked
to
those
who
have
taken
it,
and
you can
see
what
actually
takes
place.
30:35
As
we said,
when
you observe
the tulip
sensuously,
with
your
eyes,
and
this
colour
stretching
right
to
the other
end,
without
word,
without
any
movement
of
mind
or
thought,
then
space
disappears
and
there is
quite
a different
state
of
mind
which
looks.
That's
fairly
easy
to
do
with
objective
things.
But
it becomes
much
more
complex,
much
more
subtle,
when
you have
to
do
with
inward
things,
such
as
fear,
such
as
anger,
aggression,
violence;
when
there is
violence
which
is
the inheritance
of
the animal
in
man,
because
we are
all
extraordinarily
violent,
aggressive
people.
|
|
32:01
One
has
to
recognise
first
of
all
inwardly
that
one
is
violent,
which
takes
so
many
different
forms
-
violence
of
opinion,
of
judgement,
in
assertion,
domination,
the violence
of
self-discipline,
the violence
of
conformity
to
a pattern,
the violence
of
acceptance
and
obedience,
the violence
that
exists
in
each
one
of
us,
the violence
to
dominate,
to
assert,
to
attain
power,
position,
prestige.
In
almost
all
human
beings
this
violence
exists,
sexually,
and
in
other
ways.
|
|
33:12
Now,
how
to
deal
with
violence
so
that
it is
completely,
totally
eradicated
from
the mind,
from
the whole
structure
of
thought?
When
you observe
that
violence
in
yourself
(if
you are
at
all
aware
of
that
violence)
as
you observe,
you see
that
there is
a thinker
and
the thing
called
violence,
aggression,
anger
and
so
on.
Please,
as
we are
talking,
do
it,
observe
it
(if
I may
suggest)
in
yourself.
At
this
present
moment
you may
not
be
angry,
violent.
But
as
you observe
you can
see
there are
times
when
you have
been
greatly
angry.
34:32
And
as
you observe
you will
see
that
there is
a division
between
the thing
called
anger
and
the observer.
The observer
says:
'I have
been
angry',
or,
'I must
not
be
angry
any
more'.
There is
violence
and
non-violence.
|
|
35:10
As
you observe,
naturally,
there is
a division
between
so-called
anger
and
the entity
that
says:
'I am
angry,
I have
been
angry'.
Right?
That's
fairly
simple.
Then
when
there is
this
division
between
the thought
and
the thinker,
who
says
'I have
been
angry',
there is
a separation.
Right?
In
that
time
interval,
in
that
space,
there is
a conflict
of
overcoming
anger,
trying
to
control
it,
trying
to
pass
beyond
it or
accepting
it as
being
natural,
inevitable.
So
in
that
interval
begins
all
the conflict.
Right?
36:22
Please
do
it as
we're
talking,
actually
do
it.
And
you'll
see
for
yourself
the fact
that
emerges
out
of
this.
|
|
36:36
We have
accepted
this
division
for
centuries,
for
thousands
of
years
that
has
become
part
of
our
tradition.
The way
to
deal
with
anger
-
I'm
only
taking
that
as
an example
-
is
to
overcome,
control,
suppress
it and
so
on.
The entity
who
suppresses
it,
controls
it,
is
something
separate,
we think.
Now,
is
it separate?
Or
is
the entity
who
thinks
he
is
angry,
is
he
anger
himself?
-
that
is
not
separate
at
all?
There is
only
a state
of
anger,
a state
of
violence.
When
we recognize
the fact
that
we are
violent,
then
we invent
the ideal
of
non-violence,
hoping
thereby
to
overcome
violence,
using
the idea
of
non-violence
as
a means,
or
as
a lever,
to
get
rid
of
violence.
38:17
This
is
our
traditional
way
of
dealing
with
anything.
|
|
38:27
Now
is
there
a different
way,
so
that
there is
no
conflict
at
all
when
one
meets
violence
in
oneself?
I hope
you're
following
my
question.
We know
that
the normal,
accepted,
traditional
way
of
dealing
with
any
problem,
is
violence.
All
that
involves
conflict,
struggle,
pain,
and
at
the end
of
it you are
not
rid
of
violence
-
it is
still
there.
So
one
asks,
is
there
a different
way
altogether
which
is
not
traditional
at
all?
Which
is,
to
observe
that
anger
without
the interference
of
thought
-
as
you observed
that
flower
in
the field;
and
as
you observed
that
flower
without
any
thought,
there
was
neither
the observer
nor
the observed,
there
was
only
a state
of
seeing.
40:08
In
the same
way,
is
it possible
to
look
at
violence
without
the interference
of
thought,
to
merely
observe
it?
This
becomes
quite
a complex
problem,
because
when
we say
we are
violent,
the very
process
of
recognition
of
violence
is
the product
of
thought.
Right?
That
is,
you have
been
angry
before,
yesterday,
and
there is
the remembrance
of
it today
and
when
you are
angry
a little
later,
the remembrance
of
that
experience
(which
you have
called
anger
yesterday),
that
memory
responds
to
the new
reaction,
which
is
called
anger.
41:18
So
thought
in
the process
of
recognizing
anger,
or
violence,
and
of
wanting
to
get
rid
of
it,
is
still
a way
to
conflict,
suppression,
or
imitation.
Right?
|
|
41:49
Are
you following
some
of
this
or
not
at
all?
(It doesn't
matter.
It's
up
to
you anyhow).
Because
one
must
be
totally
free
of
violence,
otherwise
we are
not
human
beings.
The mind
is
violent
in
any
form;
in
the expression
of
a word,
a look,
a gesture,
you destroy
love.
And
when
you have
no
love,
there
will
be
no
peace
in
the world.
You may
have
all
the
Leagues
of
Nations
and
'United
Nations'
and
every
thing
that's
happening
in
the world,
more
and
more,
but
you'll
never
have
peace.
And
without
peace
you cannot
see
clearly.
42:56
There is
no
love,
there is
only
this
ugly,
monstrous
civilization
of
the machine.
|
|
43:09
I do
not
know
if
you have
ever
talked
to
the specialists
who
are
concerned
with
the electronic
brain,
with
the computers
-
what
they
are
doing.
The computers
are
taking
over
all
the activities
of
man,
almost
all
the activities.
They
are
building
a society
where
the machine
is
going
to
rule.
This
obviously
is
coming.
Man
is
going
to
have
a great
deal
of
leisure
and
perhaps
only
the specialists
will
be
the masters
and
the rest
like
you and
I will
be
slaves.
Probably
a new
culture
is
being
built,
of
which
we are
not
at
all
aware.
44:28
Those
who
are
concerned
with
it,
involved
in
it,
are
greatly,
perturbed.
Unless
we human
beings
bring
about
a total
mutation
in
the way
of
our
living,
which
is
the way
of
life,
then
thought
-
which
is
merely
mechanical,
for
thought
is
not
new,
not
fresh,
the quality
of
freshness
isn't
in
it at
all
-
thought
is
going
to
control
our
life;
thought,
as
the computer,
is
going
to
guide
our
life.
That's
why
it is
enormously
important
-
please
do
look
at
it for
yourselves
-
to
find
out
a way
of
living
where
thought,
which
is
mechanical,
doesn't
intervene
except
when
it has
to
function
mechanically.
|
|
45:48
And
that's
why
it is
very
important
to
understand
the nature
and
the structure
of
thought.
What
is
thought?
What
is
thinking?
Don't
wait
for
me,
for
the speaker,
to
answer
it.
Here
is
a challenge
-
do
please
listen
to
it
-
what
is
thought?
What
is
thinking?
What
is
the origin
of
thought?
That's
a challenge
which
is
something
new;
and
how
do
you respond
to
it?
Do
you begin
to
search
for
an answer,
wait
for
someone
to
tell
you the answer,
or
do
you say,
I don't
know?
And
in
the very
saying
'I don't
know'
are
you waiting
to
find
out
and
say:
'I do
know
the answer
now'?
47:20
Or
when
you meet
such
an immense
challenge,
what
happens?
If
the challenge
is
really
vital,
important,
then
the mind
becomes
quiet,
doesn't
it?
Thought
is
in
abeyance,
because
it has
no
answer.
But
we,
wanting
an answer,
wanting
to
find
a way
out
of
this
mechanical
way
of
life,
we use
thought
to
find
out.
And
so
we reduce
the new
challenge
to
the old,
and
challenges
are
always
new
if
they're
vital
-
and
they
are
vital.
Our
houses
are
burning,
our
morality,
our
churches,
our
society
is
in
disintegration,
corrupt.
48:38
There is
an immense
challenge,
which
we have
to
meet
-
the challenge
of
the computer
and
the relation
of
man
to
it.
|
|
48:56
If
you wait
for
the specialist
to
answer
that
question,
then
you are
back
again,
caught.
So
the question
is,
how
to
bring
about
a complete
mutation,
a complete
change
in
our
life,
a change,
a mutation
that
will
solve
all
our
problems?
I think
the root
of
our
problems
-
of
fear,
violence,
the immense
sorrow
of
life,
the everlasting
search
for
pleasure
-
the root
cause,
the core
of
all
this
problem,
is
thought.
And
is
it possible
to
put
a stop
to
time,
time
which
is
thought.
You know,
we are
used
to
the idea,
to
the tradition,
that
eventually,
gradually,
slowly,
day
after
day,
we will
be
different,
there
will
be
a mutation
of
the mind
through
evolution,
so
that
we shall
have
human
beings
who
have
a totally
different
mind.
51:11
When
you admit
that
'eventually'
-
that
eventually
you will
have
a new
mind,
a totally
different
quality
in
the structure
and
nature
of
the mind
-
when
you admit
that,
you're
still
living
in
a world
of
mechanical
existence.
And
this
generation
will
be
responsible
for
the next,
through
education
and
all
the rest
of
it,
so
there is
no
'eventual'
change
at
all.
We are
becoming
more
and
more
mechanical,
not
less.
|
|
52:09
So
the fundamental
question
is
-
not
how
to
get
rid
of
fear,
violence,
the innumerable
problems
that
each
of
us
has
-
but
the fundamental
question
is,
whether
thought,
as
time,
can
come
to
an end.
So
that
there is
no
actual
tomorrow,
psychologically.
Do
you understand?
Please
do
be
concerned
with
it,
be
involved
in
it,
in
this
question.
You know,
we so
easily
commit
ourselves
to
a course
of
action.
I think
there is
a difference
between
being
committed
and
being
involved.
We are
involved
with
life,
we are
not
committed
to
life.
53:27
When
you are
committed
to
a course
of
action,
as
a Communist,
a Socialist,
a Catholic
or
what
you will,
that
commitment
is
a deliberate
process
of
the intellect
and
thought.
There's
nothing
new
in
that.
But
if
you are
involved,
as
we are,
in
daily
life,
involved
in
all
the problems,
then
there is
no
separation,
it's
not
the function
of
thought
which
says
'I'm
involved'.
You are
involved.
And
so
one
asks:
is
it possible
for
thought
as
time
and
fear
to
come
to
an end?
|
|
54:34
We have
explained
sufficiently
in
detail
the way
of
thought,
the way
of
time.
We'll
go
into
it differently
another
time.
But
the explanation,
the description
of
the cause,
will
never
put
an end
to
time.
Giving
a description
of
what
good
food
is,
to
a hungry
man,
has
no
value
-
he
wants
food.
So
if
you are
satisfied
merely
with
the description
of
the way
of
thought,
and
reconcile
yourself
with
the description,
then
there is
no
ending.
But
if
you are
involved
in
the question,
as
you must
be
involved
if
you are
at
all
serious
-
and
to
the very
serious
man
only
that
is
living,
(not
the man
who
is
committed
to
some
form
of
activity,
political,
social,
religious,
which
makes
him
serious
-
such
a person
is
not
serious)
-
but
only
a man
who
is
involved
and
is
concerned
with
the problems
of
the whole
of
life;
not
casually,
not
as
an observer
just
looking
on
from
the outside,
but
being
involved
in
it,
completely,
with
the heart
and
with
the mind.
|
|
56:37
Then
you have
to
answer
this
question
about
the mind,
which
is
the result
of
thought,
which
is
the result
of
time
-
time
as
evolution,
time
from
the animal
till
now,
millions
of
years
-
which
has
produced
this
brain.
And
now
that
brain
is
acting
mechanically,
it's
so
heavily
conditioned.
Can
there
be
a total
mutation,
so
that
we live
in
a different
dimension
altogether?
That
is
the real
problem.
How
do
you answer
this
question?
The traditional
way
to
answer
this
question
is
to
analyse,
to
analyse
the whole
process
of
our
living,
step
by
step
-
not
only
the conscious,
but
the unconscious
mind,
analysing
every
feeling,
every
thought,
every
movement
-
which
the analysts
and
the psychologists
are
doing.
58:59
That
involves
time.
And
in
that
process
there is
a great
danger.
Because
to
analyse,
you must
not
only
have
the capacity
to
analyse
extraordinarily
clearly,
without
any
bias,
without
any
misjudgement
-
and
you cannot
possibly
so
analyse
because
the analyser
himself
is
conditioned.
Also
the whole
analytical,
intellectual,
verbal
process
involves
time:
whilst
you are
analysing,
day
after
day,
the mechanical
process
of
society,
culture,
is
shaping
your
mind,
forcing
you,
directing
you,
driving
you.
|
|
1:00:22
So
analysis
is
not
the way.
You must
see
the truth
of
that.
Because
if
you see
the truth
of
that
and
the falseness
of
analysis,
then
you will
reject
it totally.
Then
when
you do
reject,
totally,
the way
of
analysis,
(as
we have
tried
to
point
out
today),
then
seeing
the falseness
of
it is
seeing
the truth
of
it.
Right?
When
you see
something
false
and
recognize
it as
being
false,
that
very
action
is
truth.
When
you do
that,
when
you completely
see
the falseness
of
analysis,
then
what
have
you?
You are
faced
with
the problem
of
looking
without
the drive
of
the analyser.
Right?
1:02:14
You're
looking
without
analysis
at
the fact.
Then
you are
looking
at
fear
as
though
with
fresh
eyes,
aren't
you?
There is
no
overcoming
it,
there is
no
analysing
it,
but
a looking
at
it as
you look
at
that
field
of
tulips.
When
you look
at
fear
without
the analyser,
without
the thinker,
without
the observer,
then
is
there
fear
at
all?
|
|
1:04:07
You can
only
look
when
the mind
is
completely
quiet.
When
you look
at
that
field
of
tulips
and
your
mind
is
chattering,
inattentive,
then
you're
not
really
looking
at
those
flowers.
But
when
you give
your
total,
complete
attention,
which
is
to
give
your
mind,
your
heart,
your
nerves,
your
ears,
your
eyes
to
look
totally,
then
you will
see
there is
no
division
at
all
and
therefore
there is
no
fear
at
all.
You can't
accept
this:
you have
to
do
it!
That
means
you have
to
be
involved
in
it;
and
you are
involved
in
it.
1:05:15
It's
your
life.
Therefore
to
look
is
the greatest
of
miracles.
You have
to
do
nothing
else
but
to
give
complete
attention
to
looking
at
that
field,
to
looking
at
your
wife
or
your
husband,
to
looking
at
your
belief,
to
looking
at
your
opinions,
judgments,
evaluations.
Then
you will
see
there is
no
state
of
fear
at
all.
The mind
has
undergone
a tremendous
change.
It's
only
a mind
that
is
inattentive
that
makes
mischief.
|