Krishnamurti - Meditation is the beginning of understanding oneself

BR69T4 - Meditation is the beginning of understanding oneself
Brockwood Park, UK - 14 September 1969
Public Talk 4

0:00 This is J. Krishnamurti’s fourth public talk at Brockwood Park, 1969.

0:07 Krishnamurti: I think we ought to talk about and rather explore freely into this question of meditation. Would you like that? Shall we do that?

0:19 Audience: Yes.

0:25 K: But before we go into that, which is really quite a very important question, I think we must understand the relationship between the speaker and the audience. Here, we are investigating, exploring, freely, and there is no authority at all, whatsoever – the authority of achievement, reputation, or experience. For the man who says he knows really does not know. And to explore into this question which is very, very serious, demands great deal of thought, enquiry, freedom. One needs, above everything else, the freedom from authority – not the authority of the policeman, the law, but the authority which one brings about because in oneself one is uncertain, disturbed, and we want out of this disturbance, this uncertainty, this enormous disorder and confusion, we want somebody to tell us how to live, how to meditate, what to think, and thereby destroy any kind of freedom that one has. 2:53 And if you are going to enquire into this question there must be freedom, freedom from the whole sense of authority, then only can one begin to enquire and find out. Not only the authority of the speaker but also the authority of the books, tradition, what others say they have achieved, because all of them may be wrong, and probably are wrong. So to put one’s faith in another is detrimental to freedom, and one must be free to enquire about everything, not only politically, which is fairly, comparatively easy, but much more difficult inwardly, to be free to look, to enquire, to search out.

4:27 So if that is taken for granted – and I think every intelligent person is more or less at that point, that he no longer accepts any belief, whether they are young or old, intelligent – no authority about these matters – one has to find out for oneself, which doesn’t mean you reject others, but you don’t accept or deny what others say, but enquire, so you have a mind that is free to look. An aggressive mind, a mind tethered to a belief, is not free, and therefore incapable of enquiry. And this demands enormous enquiry, not acceptance. And the beauty of meditation lies in this freedom to enquire, not only outward things but also inwardly, inside the skin, psychologically. So we begin by not accepting authority whatsoever.

6:21 You know, that word which has crept into the English language, ‘guru’ – and now practically everybody uses it. Perhaps you have heard of that word. It is a Sanskrit word which means ‘the one who points, the one who sheds light, the one who alleviates or lightens the burden.’ That’s what that word means, the guru. And there are innumerable thousands of gurus all over the world, both brown, black, and white, or pink, who have systems, systems of meditation: ‘Do these things and you will achieve the most extraordinary experience or extraordinary states; you will have peace.’ Because most of us, being disturbed both outwardly and inwardly, with a mind that is everlastingly talking to itself, chattering, burdened with innumerable problems, guilt, anxiety, fear, despair, sorrow, such a mind wants peace. 8:14 It says, ‘For God’s sake, if I could only have a few days or a few minutes of absolute quiet, peace, then I will arrange my life so properly, so orderly, because I have touched that extraordinary peace that passes beyond all understanding.’ So they accept systems, methods, without understanding what is implied in the method, in the system. Can we go along there?

9:04 Surely system implies not only the authority of the one who has achieved – and he says, ‘I know,’ offers a system – system implies practise, day after day, day after day, with the hope of achieving a particular result which that system offers. Therefore that system and the one who practises it, specially, becomes mechanical. If I practise something over and over and over every day, my mind becomes more and more dull, more and more routine, more and more habitual, caught in a habit. So, one has to reject all systems because they are unintelligent. They make the mind mechanical and they introduce this whole problem of time – eventually you will be peaceful, but not now. 10:38 So do these things and you will have peace – which is obviously absurd. And yet most of us are caught in this. Somebody comes from the Zen or the Asiatic world with a lot of noise, and for a certain sum of money, initiations, and enlightenment. And we are so greedy, so thoughtless that we’ll accept practise in the hope that we shall eventually come upon that which we think is peaceful. And also we say to ourself that it helps, the system somewhat helps. Is that so? Or is it a waste of time altogether?

12:03 Like those systems, which, repeating certain words, especially Sanskrit words, produce a certain sound and that sound makes the mind more quiet and therefore more observant, not only of outward things but inwardly. I am sure some of you must have played with all that. And this form of repetition of a sound, whether it is ‘Ave Maria’ or some other word, does produce momentarily a quietness. But a mind that is very dull, unintelligent, insensitive, leading a disorderly life, can repeat a lot of words and have some experience of what it calls peace. 13:20 But it is still a dull mind, incapable of observing deeply all the processes of itself. So can we, observing this fact, not opinion – it isn’t my opinion against your opinion or your experience against my experience – but a dull mind, a mind that is not capable of looking at things directly, but devious, frightened, anxious, burdened with innumerable problems, how can such a mind basically be peaceful, though it repeats a thousand words, a thousand years? So can we, looking at that fact, not opinion, not judgment, put all systems aside? 14:52 Systems which make one practise habit, the cultivation of habit. And a mind that is caught in habit is not free to observe. And when one sees the truth of that, not an opinion, not evaluation, the fact of it, what it does actually, though it may temporarily give you some kind of pleasurable peace, which is an escape of the fact of everyday existence, which has to be transformed – instead of doing that, bringing about a mutation, a transformation within oneself. It merely offers an easy escape. 16:02 And of course a mind that escapes can have all kinds of experiences but it is of no validity. Can we drop this, completely drop it, the idea of following somebody who offers systems, promises, gives you hope? It seems to me that is absolutely necessary for a mind that is capable of meditation.

17:03 Then there is the question of how to bring about order, to live a life of righteousness. That is the major issue, not meditation only, but to lead a life that is highly intelligent, sensitive, not intellectual, not verbal, a life in which there is no conflict. For a mind that is in conflict is not a free mind; it is incapable of looking at itself, incapable of seeing ‘what is’. So our next point is: can the mind bring about an order within itself? Because without laying the right foundation you cannot build anything. And if one is to meditate, part of that meditation is to lay the foundation. This foundation is the freedom from opinion – because most of us have a thousand opinions about everything, from the prime minister down or up.

19:09 So can the mind be free altogether of opinions but only remain with ‘what is’ and nothing else? If the mind can remain with ‘what is’, it is free of this process of duality. And where there is duality there is contradiction and therefore there is conflict.

19:55 Please, we are observing ourselves. You are not merely listening to the speaker, but in the very act of listening, seeing the truth or the falseness of what is being said. You are using the speaker, as it were, as a mirror in which you are looking at yourself. Therefore you are discovering that there can be no perception without distortion as long as there is conflict of any kind in relationship. If one is jealous of another, what is the good of your meditating, or seeking God or whatever you seek? It is only when there is freedom from jealousy, anxiety, guilt, then the mind being free can look, observe, act.

21:24 So, no system, and therefore no authority, no following another. Then the ending of all conflict within oneself, and thereby bringing about a life of righteous behaviour. And this is part of meditation also, to see one’s mistake and to correct it immediately – because perception is action, the seeing is the doing, so that the mind is not carrying over the insults, the flattery, the anxiety, the hurts, so that it is free from moment to moment all the time.

22:53 So this discovery of oneself in relationship – and it is only in relationship with each other one begins to discover oneself, what one actually is. And the understanding of it is the ending of all the conflict. A mind that is in conflict obviously is a distorted mind, and a distorted mind, however much it may practise meditation, will see its own distortion, not something totally new.

24:17 And then there is the question how to observe, how to look, not only outwardly but inwardly. The outer and inner is one process; it is not a dual process. And how to observe? One can only observe when there is no image through which you are looking. Right? If I have an image about you I am not looking at you, I am looking through the image, or the image is looking at you. That’s fairly simple, isn’t it? To observe means freedom, without prejudice, without belief, without any form of distortion. 25:52 And there is distortion when there is a belief to which the mind is tethered. There is no freedom to observe, or if the mind is frightened, anxious, guilty, ambitious, striving to achieve a position of power, and so on, how can such a mind be free to look? So it is very important, it seems to me, to find out what it means to observe, to see. That is, what it means to be aware, attentive. Attention is not concentration; concentration implies the effort to exclude all thought, but concentrate on one particular issue. 27:32 And we think it is part of meditation to learn to concentrate, whether an image or an idea. Or this practising of a certain system involves concentration, and therefore where there is concentration there is exclusion, resistance. Where there is resistance there is conflict and the way of duality. I think that is fairly clear, isn’t it? We talked about it the other day.

28:10 Whereas attention is not exclusion – to be aware. And this awareness is distorted when there is the observation of prejudice, when the prejudice observes, a conclusion, when you have a certain conditioning as a Christian, as a believer in certain form of religious dogmas, tradition, which may be the conditioning of a particular Christian or a Hindu or a Buddhist, and so on. When the mind is conditioned, it is incapable of observation, and it will act, think and experience according to its conditioning – like a devoted Catholic practising his belief day after day, he will obviously experience, in his vision or in his dreams, whatever it is, a figure of the Christ, and so on, and that only strengthens his own conditioning. 29:44 Therefore such a person is not free to observe; he remains everlastingly a little bourgeois – sorry if I use that word derogatively, I don’t mean it – caught in his own particular belief, in his own particular dogma, and inviting the world to enter into his little cage.

30:16 So this is part of mediation, to understand the difference between concentration and attention. Concentration demands effort. Awareness, attention does not. It comes naturally when you understand this whole process of accepting dogma, tradition, belief, living in the past. Therefore attention is a state of mind in which there is no effort but complete… when the mind is completely attentive, when you give your whole body, mind and heart and thought, everything you have to observe, to listen. And this requires energy. I do not know if you have ever noticed that to listen to somebody very carefully, without your prejudice, your like and dislike interfering, when you are really attentively listening to somebody, in that state you are attentive. 32:21 Therefore there is no me or you, there is only the listening, the act of listening. And that, if you have done it, requires energy. If you are listening very attentively now to what is being said, therefore learning, you are not concentrating, you are completely attentive, therefore there is no division between the speaker and the one who listens. And in this there is involved a great deal more.

33:30 Is the observer different – inwardly, we are talking psychologically – is the observer different than the thing he observes? When I look at myself, is the observer different from the thing he looks at? If he is different then there is a division between the thing observed, the experienced and the experiencer, and the observer. And this difference brings about conflict and therefore distortion. So one must be very clear, and directly find out for oneself whether the observer is the observed, or not. 34:46 And this, again, is part of this whole thing called meditation. And when one goes into it very deeply you will see that the observer is the observed. When you are jealous, jealousy is not different from the entity that observes jealousy or is aware of jealousy; he is jealousy; he is the reaction which is called jealousy. And when there is no resistance to that thing which he has called jealousy as the observer, when there is no resistance but mere observation of that fact, then you will see that the word is not the thing, and therefore jealousy, which is not only awakened through the word, through memory, and thereby brings about the observer as different from the observed, and the understanding of all that frees the mind from jealousy, without effort.

36:32 And it is part of meditation – and I hope you are doing it as we are talking – if you don’t do it now you will never do it – it isn’t a thing that you go home and think about, you are doing it all the time as you are living, every minute of the day, as you walk, as you talk – and that’s the beauty of meditation, so that the mind becomes acutely aware of itself and therefore highly sensitive and intelligent and deeply honest, so that there is no distortion, no illusion.

37:32 And it is also part of meditation to find out for oneself, freely, what is the nature of thinking, what is the beginning of thought, and whether thought, whether the mind can be completely still. And to find out when the action of thought is necessary and when it is not – thought being the reaction of knowledge, memory, experience, which is the past. And when we are thinking, we are living in the past; we are the past. Though thought may project the future, or assert it, only the present matters. 39:01 It is still thought in operation. And thought is the past. And for most of us thought is so enormously important because we are living in the past, we are the past, and all our activities stem from the past. And it is part of that meditation to find out where the act of thinking is absolutely necessary, logical, healthy, clear, without any personal like and dislike interfering with thinking, and when thought must be absolutely quiet.

40:18 If you have not done all this, meditation has very little meaning. And one can meditate in the bus, washing dishes, wiping the floor, talking to another, but perhaps it may help sometimes to sit quietly by yourself, or when you walk by yourself in the wood or in the street, to observe yourself and your reactions, or to be completely quiet. You know, the whole idea of sitting in a certain posture, as they advocate it out of the East, is very simple. It is to sit straight so that the blood goes to your head properly. 41:59 But if you slop over, doubled up, naturally it is much more difficult for the blood to go the head. And if the head is rather petty and short and narrow, limited, the blood can go to it enormously; it will still remain petty, narrow and stupid. And one should, if one is really serious about meditation, not only observe this whole thing that has been said this morning but also to see if the body can remain completely quiet. I do not know if you have tried to sit very quietly, eyes completely quiet, still, and your breathing regular. 43:10 That’s another trick out of the East, that you must breathe very regularly – and there are various systems of breathing. You know, everything is reduced to a mechanical process, because obviously when you know how to breathe very deeply, the body becomes still and the mind becomes still. But the rest of it. So all this is part of meditation, the learning of all this in oneself. Then here comes the most difficult part of communication. To communicate one must use words and also there is communication which is non-verbal, but the nonverbal state of understanding between ourselves, between you and the speaker, requires that you also have been through all this, otherwise you cannot possibly communicate. 44:39 It is like leading somebody to the door; the rest of the process you will have to do yourself.

44:55 And the whole promise of meditation is that you will have eventually a still mind, a mind that is highly awake – the promise that it is still, that is capable of going into itself to depths that are impossible for a mind that is full of effort. That is generally what is promised in all these systems. But when one discards all the systems, one sees the importance of having a very quiet mind, not a dull mind, not a mechanical mind but a mind that is very quiet, very still, observing. And silence is necessary to observe, to listen. If I am talking to myself all the time, offering opinions, judgments, evaluations, aggressive attitude because I have certain beliefs, I am not listening to you. 46:46 I can only listen to you when the mind is completely quiet, listening, not resisting, agreeing or disagreeing, but actually listening with one’s whole being. For that there must be silence to listen. If you would see the beauty of a cloud or a tree you must look at it completely quietly. And in that quietness, if there is the observer different from the thing observed, it is not quiet.

47:36 So, they say take drugs in order to induce the mind chemically to observe so fantastically, so intensely, so intimately that the space between the observer and the thing observed disappears, or take drugs that will give you an insight to yourself. After all, a frightened mind taking a drug for the moment might free it from the fear, and therefore look, listen with that intensity, with that attention in which there is no observer. But that mind is still frightened after it has gone, gone over, has taken the trip, or whatever they take, do. There is still fear. So one depends more and more inwardly on something – drug, master, a guru, a belief – and therefore more and more dependence and more and more resistance and fear.

49:38 So meditation is the beginning of understanding of oneself – directly, not through some medium of drug or drink or excitement. It is there to be understood directly, simply – to understand oneself, to know oneself. The ending of sorrow is the beginning of self-knowing. And as most of us are burdened with a great many sorrows – and the ending of that sorrow is to understand oneself. And to understand oneself, one must observe without any distortion, without like and dislike, without saying, ‘This is good, I’ll keep; this is bad, I’ll put it away,’ but to observe so that the mind becomes completely alert, both at the conscious level as well as the deep levels, the hidden parts of the mind.

51:18 All this of course involves much more, really – I don’t know if we have time to go into it – the nature of the brain, whether the brain which is so conditioned for thousands and millions of years, whether that brain can be quiet, respond when it is absolutely necessary, but quiet. That is also part of meditation.

51:51 So when one has gone through all this, understood it, there comes a quietness, a silence, that is beyond all verbalisation. And it is necessary for the mind, if it would understand something beyond itself, beyond the projection of thought and time and bondage, which man has everlastingly sought – the immortal, the timeless. It is only then that perhaps the quiet mind can come upon it. Right. [Pause]

52:44 Do you want to ask any questions about this, or about anything else?

52:59 Q: You spoke just now of a mirror. Is there perhaps an analogy between the mind, in as much as we know it, and a photographic camera, in that the camera is a mirror with a memory? The mind, as we know it, is also a mirror with a memory. Should it perhaps be a mirror without a memory?

53:29 K: Sir, to observe, to listen, not only memory is necessary but also there must be freedom from the known, from the memory. Again, the question of memory is quite a complex problem. Where is memory to function completely, logically, sanely? And where the memory must be completely quiet to look, listen. One has to learn about this, not in terms of time, as you learn a language, which demands time, but to learn, to watch, to listen, to find out where memory, which is part of the brain, is the brain, where it must respond instantly, most logically and healthily, and where the past, which is memory, which is tradition, which is the conditioning, where that memory must be completely still so that you can observe the present, with all its immensity, without the past. 55:34 That is the problem. Can I look at myself as though I was looking at myself for the first time? Can I look at my wife, or the tree, or the husband, or the running waters, as though I was looking with eyes that have never seen them before? This is not a romantic statement or romantic question, because if I look with all the memories, the images, the hurts, the fears, the pleasures, the hopes, then I am incapable of looking with eyes that are fresh, young and innocent. And innocency, as we said yesterday – was it yesterday; doesn’t matter – is love. 56:53 And memory is not love, because memory is of the past, memory is attachment to pleasure and to pain. And love is not of time, has nothing to do with yesterday or tomorrow.

57:26 Q: Observation often brings thought into action – that is the difficulty. Observation itself brings thought into action, I find.

57:48 K: If I may ask, did you listen to what was said previously, before you asked the question?

57:59 Q: Yes.

58:01 K: You know, madame, you know, sir, it is one of the most difficult things to ask questions. We must ask questions, innumerable, always questioning, but also we must know when not to question but listen. It’s like one must have doubt, scepticism, but also to tether that scepticism, doubt, when necessary. Now you are asking a question, which is, the very act of thinking is action, so that brings the question: what is action? Do you want to go into all this? Or are you tired after all this morning?

59:22 A: No.

59:23 Q: No, no, wait a minute, wait. You know, if you have really worked for forty minutes or forty five minutes, what we have talked about, meditation, really worked, not just casually listened, your minds, your brains must obviously be rather tired, because you have been giving a great deal of attention, probably which you have never done, and probably it is probably rather difficult.

59:53 Q: But, sir, you said that attention didn’t use up energy.

1:00:00 K: Wait, madame. Did I say attention doesn’t use up the energy? I did?

1:00:07 Q: Yes.

1:00:09 K: Wait, wait, wait, go slowly. When attention is not effort it increases energy. And if you have listened attentively you have abundance of energy now, and therefore you are not tired. Is that so? I can’t answer for you. Which means, has one’s life – not now just for an hour – is one’s life, the life one leads every day, with all the conflicts, is there in that no effort at all, therefore completely attentive?

1:01:26 We are asking: what is action, the doing. Not having done or what you will do – the active present. Action means the active present. Please do semantically a little bit go into it. Action means the doing now – not having done or what you will do. If action is based on an ideal or on a hope or on a belief, it is no longer the active present, is it? I believe in something and am acting according to that belief or to that principle or to that conclusion. Therefore there is a division between the act and what should that act be. 1:02:59 Therefore that action is not action. Or I will act according to my past experience, according to yesterday, what I have learnt. Then it is not action. Therefore one has to find out, learn if there is an action without the future, without the past. And that is living, surely. If I love my wife or my husband or my neighbour according to a conclusion which has been my conditioning, as a Christian or whatever it is, then surely that act of love is not love. So to find out what action is, the active present, the verb to act, not the future or the past but the acting is the living. 1:04:45 And if that living is based on past memories then I am living in the past. And if that living is conditioned by the future because I have a formula or a conclusion or an ideal, then I am living according to the future, not in the present. Therefore, can the mind, including the brain, can the mind live in the present, which is to act? And there are those who have – need I go into… doesn’t matter, that is good enough. [Laughs]

1:05:45 Q: [Inaudible] …could you equate meditation with the healing process?

1:06:01 K: Have I understood the question rightly? Please correct me if I have not heard it correctly: does meditation include the process of healing because most people are so desperately ill. Is that it?

1:06:21 Q: I am thinking of people who are suffering with physical illnesses. Can meditation bring about…

1:06:37 K: Yes – for those who are physically suffering, can meditation bring about a healing process. Right? Wait, wait, wait. Most of us have had pain of some kind or another – intense, superficial, or pain that cannot be cured. What effect has that pain on the psyche, the psychosomatic states? What – pain, physical pain – effect has it on the brain or on the mind? Can the mind meditate, disassociating itself from pain? You are following all this? Can the mind look at the physical pain, not identifying itself with that pain, and observe? If it can observe without identifying itself with that pain, there is quite a different quality to that pain. 1:08:05 I do not know if you have not observed it; this is fairly simple. If one has a toothache, tummy ache, you can somewhat disassociate yourself and observe it. One hasn’t got to rush off, right off to the doctor, or take some pill that will help it; you observe it. There is a disassociation, a detachment, a feeling of looking at it as though you are outside of it. Surely this helps the pain doesn’t it? The more you get attached to the pain, the more intense it is. So that may help to bring about this healing.

1:08:55 Q: I would like to know how did you organise this conference without thinking about the future?

1:09:03 K: We’ll go into that in a minute, madame; let me finish this question.

1:09:09 Q: Sorry, I thought you had.

1:09:19 K: The question is: can meditation help another who is in pain? Obviously. And also you know – oh, I haven’t time to go into that, it doesn’t matter – the question of healing is also important. Healing can only take place when there is no ‘me’ – the ‘me’, the ‘ego’, the ‘self-centred’ activity. Some people have a gift for it, others come upon it because there is no ‘me’, the ego, functioning. The other question is: if you didn’t think about the future, how could you have possibly organised this meeting and this tent business.

1:10:42 We said thought is necessary. We have to think about tomorrow, what we are going to do, how we are going to organise these meetings in the tent, and all that. We have to think about the future. You are thinking about the future when you have got to go home. When you are thinking of your home, you are thinking about the future. You must, otherwise you will be in a state of amnesia, and you can’t possibly live that way. We have to think sanely, organise wisely for the future. But we are saying when action is wholly conditioned by the past or by the future, there is… conflict comes out of that action. 1:12:01 If some of us say we must organise for these meetings, for the school and so on, we use our thought very carefully, wisely, not bring in our personal idiosyncrasies and characteristics and all the rest of that nonsense, but observe, help to bring it about. But if I stick to my opinion that it should be this way or that way then there is no cooperation. Cooperation is only possible when there is no personal evaluation, personal idiosyncrasies interfering with the act.

1:12:56 Are you any wiser when you leave all this? Any more different? Not ‘more’, sorry – different, so that your whole mind and body is entirely awake and different, alert to learn to look at the beauty of a tree, the flight of a bird, to watch a young child playing. Or are we going to step back into our shoddy little lives, with our peculiar characteristics, opinions and hopes and fears?

1:13:51 Q: Please, may I ask, are we only the result of our past or can we be affected in some way by our future?

1:14:08 K: Are we only the result of the past or can we be affected by the future. Aren’t we the result of the past? When we are violent, angry, aren’t we a result of the past? Because that anger, that violence, is part of the animal; it is in us. We have evolved from the apes, higher species of ape. We have got that violence in us. Aren’t we the result of the past? Aren’t you the result of yesterday?

1:14:57 Q: Yes we are. What I want to know is if this is all we are. Are we only the result of our past?

1:15:02 K: We are going to go into that, madame. Have some patience. We are the result of the past. I call myself a Hindu – I am not – but I call myself, and that has conditioned me – the climate, the food, the belief, the temples, the scriptures, the everlasting tradition. And through that tradition, through that conditioning, through the past there is a hope, there is a glimmer, there is a thread that wants to find out, go beyond the past. And the past projects the tomorrow, the future, doesn’t it? Doesn’t the past create the future?

1:16:15 Q: No.

1:16:17 K: No?

1:16:19 Q: Yes.

1:16:21 K: So the past is incarnating always in the future – modified, changing a little bit here and there. It is not a question of whether one is entirely the past. Of course, one is not entirely the past; there is always modification going on. That is, the past meeting the present modifies itself, and therefore creates the future, but it is still the past, modified, somewhat changed. And that’s the whole cycle of reincarnation, the past everlastingly being reborn tomorrow. 1:17:27 And to change this process, this chain in which the mind is caught, is to understand and be free of this… the past and the future. Therefore, which is to understand one’s own conditioning, the conditioning in which one is born, the nationalism – you know, all the rest of it. And can one be free of it instantly, not take time? That is, not being reborn tomorrow again.

1:18:05 Q: Sir, is it so that we have been conditioned into believing that we have a spirit or soul, or is this…?

1:18:17 K: Yes. Are we conditioned, the questioner asks, that we have a soul… Right?

1:18:22 Q: Or spirit.

1:18:25 K: You know, there are those communists, a whole block of communists who don’t believe in spirits. They believe in vodka probably [laughter] but not in spirits, soul. The whole Asiatic world believes that there is a soul, there is the Atman. You can be conditioned to believe anything. The communist doesn’t believe in God; the others believe in God because they have been brought up. The Hindus believe in a thousand different gods, again conditioned by their own fears, by their own demands, by their own urges. Can one become aware of these conditionings, not only superficial conditioning but also deeply, and be free of them? If not, if one is not free, one is a slave, one is always living in this rat-race, and that we call living.

1:20:15 Q: [Inaudible]

1:20:32 K: I can’t quite hear sir, sorry.

1:20:35 Q: If you are alert, if you feel aware of things, if you have love for people, you know, not just love of things…

1:20:44 K: I understand, sir.

1:20:46 Q: And what do you think, or how is that you receive fear… [inaudible] …how can you keep your mind concentrated… [inaudible]

1:21:08 K: I haven’t heard the rest of the question. Could somebody who has heard it…

1:21:11 Q: Can you avoid being affected by other people’s fear when they react to you, when you have no fear towards them?

1:21:19 K: When you have no fear towards them, and other people are afraid, how is it possible not to be affected by them.

1:21:31 Q: Yes, to keep your mind still and not be affected by that fear.

1:21:37 K: Not to be affected by the other’s fear but keep your own mind quiet. Is that it?

1:21:43 Q: Yes.

1:21:46 K: Yes. How can I keep my mind quiet when you are afraid – you, with whom I am living or come into contact with. If I am not afraid, will you affect me? If I am not greedy, no amount of propaganda will affect me, will it? If I am not nationalistic, all the waving of flags has no meaning. So the question is much more – one can go into it very deeply, which is: can the mind, which is the result of time and influence, can that mind be free of time and influence? 1:23:00 Can I look at the newspaper and not be influenced at all? Can I live with my wife who wants to dominate me, or the husband, and not be dominated? Can education be not a process of influence at all but actually a freeing process from all influence, so that the mind can think clearly, unconfused? But children want to be like others – the whole youth movement of Hitler, Mussolini and all the rest of those people is this – making people… influence them to imitate each other, to conform to the pattern. 1:24:13 Can one live a life deeply? Of course I am influenced superficially – that’s a very small affair – but deeply, can the mind, can one live without really being influenced at all? And that can only take place when you see things very clearly. It is only the confused mind that chooses, not a mind that sees very clearly.

🢁