ND66T2 - Time and will have not changed man

New Delhi - 18 December 1966
Public Talk 2
Audio without subtitles on YouTube. Instead, the transcript from kfoundation.org is used.
Text-only version
|
0:13
If
we may,
we will
continue
with
what
we were
talking
about
the other
day
when
we met
here.
We were
saying
how
urgently
it is
important
that
a total
revolution
in
consciousness
should
take
place.
And
we pointed
out
how
throughout
the world
there is
a general
decline,
a deterioration
-
a moral,
ethical,
religious
decline.
It is
observable;
this
is
not
a matter
of
personal
opinion,
because
we are
not
dealing
with
opinions
but
with
facts.
And
these
facts
cannot
possibly
be
understood
if
we approach
them
through
any
sense
of
personal
inclination
or
temperament
or
responding
immediately
to
environmental
influences.
|
|
1:51
We said
that
there
must
be
a radical
transformation,
a mutation
in
the mind,
because
man
has
tried
every
method,
both
outwardly
and
inwardly,
to
transform
himself.
He
has
gone
to
temples,
churches,
mosques;
he
has
tried
various
political
systems,
economic
order;
there is
great
prosperity
and
yet
there is
great
poverty.
Man
in
every
way
-
through
education,
through
science,
through
religion
has
tried
to
bring
about
a radical
mutation
in
himself.
He
has
gone
to
a monastery,
he
has
given
up
the world,
he
has
meditated
endlessly,
repeating
prayers,
sacrificing,
following
ideals,
pursuing
teachers,
belonging
to
various
sects.
3:17
He
has
tried,
if
one
observes
through
history,
everything
he
can
possibly
try
to
find
a way
out
of
this
confusion,
this
misery,
this
sorrow,
this
endless
conflict.
And
he
has
invented
a heaven.
And
in
order
to
avoid
hell,
which
is
punishment,
he
has
done
also
various
forms
of
mental
gymnastics,
various
forms
of
control;
he
has
tried
drugs,
sex,
innumerable
ways
that
a very
clever
mind
has
thought
out.
And
yet
man
throughout
the world
has
remained
as
he
was.
Man
has
inherited
animal
instincts;
and
most
of
us
have
still
the inherited
animal
instincts
of
greed,
proprietorial
rights,
sexual
rights,
and
so
on
and
on.
4:40
We are
the result
of
the animal.
And
we have
tried
to
escape
from
it,
consciously
or
unconsciously.
And
yet
we remain
what
we were,
slightly
modified
through
pressure
through
environmental
influences,
through
threats,
through
necessity;
we have
somewhat
changed
here
and
there,
but
essentially
we remain
what
we were.
|
|
5:22
Deep
down
we are
aggressive,
violent,
greedy,
envious,
brutal,
violent
-
which
is
being
shown
throughout
the world.
And
what
is
taking
place
in
this
country
after
years
of
preaching
the philosophy
of
non-violence?
Man
is
violent
and
the ideal
of
non-violence
is
only
an immature
approach
to
violence.
What
is
important
is
to
face
the violence,
understand
it and
go
beyond
it,
and
not
invent
an escape,
an ideal
called
non-violence
which
has
no
reality
whatsoever,
which
is
being
shown
in
this
country
and
elsewhere.
|
|
6:21
So
we see
objectively,
clearly,
the necessity
for
man's
total
change.
I think
everybody
intellectually
is
agreed
on
this
point.
Any
serious
man
with
deep
intentions
who
is
earnest,
honest,
not
deceiving
himself
by
theories
or
dogmas,
is
concerned
with
this:
is
it possible
for
a human
being,
whether
he
lives
in
Russia,
America,
here,
or
elsewhere,
to
bring
about
a total
mutation,
so
that
he
lives
differently,
not
like
an animal
everlastingly
struggling,
destroying
one
another,
in
conflict,
in
misery,
in
sorrow,
always
fearful,
uncertain,
always
waiting
for
death
with
all
the pain,
anxiety,
guilt
and
all
the rest
of
it?
7:57
And
people
have
invented
various
philosophies.
And
the psychologists
with
their
analysis
have
helped
a little
bit
here
and
there,
but
the problem
still
remains.
Is
it possible
to
uncondition
man
totally,
so
that
he
lives
in
joy,
in
clarity,
without
confusion,
without
conflict?
|
|
8:46
Now,
having
stated
the basic
problem,
which
I think
is
clear,
what
can
one
do
actually?
One
sees
the problem
of
man's
conflict,
his
brutality,
his
anxiety,
his
jealousies,
his
ambitions,
his
desire
to
hurt
others,
creating
enmity.
Is
it possible
to
change
this
consciousness
into
something
that
is
entirely
different,
that
is
not
an ideal,
that
cannot
be
foreseen,
that
is
not
a premeditated
result?
You understand?
Because
if
this
mind
which
is
confused,
which
is
brutal,
which
is
ugly
-
if
this
mind
can
project
an ideal,
a future,
it will
be
according
to
its
own
pattern,
only
modified;
and
therefore
the ideal,
the purpose,
the ultimate
change
in
terms
of
what
is,
is
still
what
is.
Is
it not?
|
|
10:34
You see
the problem:
if
I am
confused
and
out
of
that
confusion
I imagine
clarity
or
create
an ideal
of
clarity,
it is
still
the result
of
confusion
and
therefore
that
so-called
clarity,
the so-called
ideal,
the so-called
ultimate
purpose
will
be
the result
of
a confused
mind
and
therefore
will
still
be
confused.
Please
see
the importance
of
this.
Because
we are
caught
in
this
cage,
in
this
trap
of
so-called
civilization,
we are
always
projecting
an idea
of
`what
should
be',
a philosophy,
a doctrine
and
we are
pursuing
that,
each
of
us
according
to
his
conditioning,
according
to
his
belief,
according
to
his
religion,
according
to
the climate,
circumstances,
inclinations
and
so
on.
11:58
So,
out
of
this
he
creates
a future.
And
that
future
has
its
roots
in
the present,
the present
being
the past.
So,
as
long
as
the mind
is
capable
of
creating
a formula
for
itself
for
the future,
that
formula
is
the result
of
the past
-
past
experience,
past
knowledge,
past
information
-
and
therefore
the future,
the ideal,
is
still
the condition,
is
still
the result
of
what
has
been.
And
so
to
change
from
`what
is'
to
`what
should
be'
is
still
what
is,
though
modified.
|
|
13:06
Please
do
see
and
understand
this
extraordinarily
clearly,
not
only
verbally
but
actually.
And
that
is
where
listening
comes
in.
Because
one
can
communicate
verbally,
as
we do
just
now.
You all,
I hope,
understand
English,
and
we are
communicating
verbally.
You are
translating
what
I say
into
your
own
language,
or
you are
hearing
the words.
But
hearing
the words
is
not
actually
listening.
When
you actually
listen,
not
only
do
you listen
to
the words
but
your
whole
attention
is
there,
otherwise
you cannot
listen.
14:18
And
when
you give
your
whole
attention
to
any
problem,
there is
not
only
efficiency,
clarity,
a reasoned-out
outlook,
but
you go
beyond
it.
And
that
is
what
we are
doing
now.
We are
not
only
hearing,
not
only
communicating
verbally,
but
also
together
we are
listening
to
what
is
true,
not
according
to
anybody.
Truth
is
not
Christian,
Hindu,
yours
or
mine.
It is
the fact.
And
to
observe
that
fact
you have
not
only
to
listen
intently
to
that
fact,
but
to
prevent
all
translation
of
that
fact.
Because,
if
you translate,
you are
translating
it according
to
your
conditioning,
according
to
your
memories,
according
to
your
inclination,
to
your
tendency,
according
to
the pressure
of
circumstances.
15:43
Therefore
in
that
state
you are
not
listening.
And
I hope
this
evening
you are
listening
actually
to
facts,
not
to
opinions,
not
to
any
conclusions.
|
|
16:11
As
we were
saying,
there
must
be
a radical
revolution,
a mutation
of
the mind,
because
man
has
lived
two
million
years
and
more
according
to
the biologists
and
the archeologists
-
in
misery,
in
sorrow,
in
conflict,
killing
each
other,
destroying
each
other,
creating
enmity.
Religions
have
said
`don't
kill'.
Religions
have
said
`love
one
another',
'be
kind',
`be
generous'.
And
religions
have
cultivated
belief,
organized
propaganda
of
belief,
dogma,
ritual;
they
are
not
actually
concerned
with
man's
behaviour.
17:33
But
what
we are
concerned
with
is
man's
actual
behaviour
from
day
to
day,
because
man
must
live
in
peace,
otherwise
he
cannot
do
anything.
In
his
laboratory
he
is
at
peace,
and
therefore
he
can
invent,
he
can
look.
He
may
go
to
the moon,
but
he
is
not
at
peace
either
at
home
or
in
the office,
outwardly
or
inwardly,
and
therefore
he
is
confused,
he
is
frightened.
And
so
this
radical
change
is
essential,
as
we said,
not
according
to
a pattern,
not
according
to
some
future
ideal
or
some
utopia,
which
are
the inventions
of
a mind
that
is
being
conditioned
and,
wishing
to
free
itself
from
its
conditioning,
invents
a philosophy,
an ideal,
a purpose
-
which
are
the result
of
its
own
confusion
and
conditioning.
19:00
That
is
clear.
Also,
that
radical
change
must
take
place
immediately.
|
|
19:22
We have
divided
time
as
the immediate
and
the ultimate.
Please,
I am
not
going
to
go
into
details,
because
it is
too
complex
and
I have
not
the time.
But
one
can
see
what
we have
done.
We all
see
the immediate
necessity
of
change.
We see
that.
And
we say
it is
not
possible
to
change
immediately,
we need
to
have
time,
we need
days
to
bring
about
this
change.
Put
it round
the other
way.
There are
the immediate
problems
of
this
country:
starvation,
disorder,
inefficiency,
corruption
and
the immature
quarrels
over
a piece
of
land,
burning
each
other
or
burning
oneself
and
so
on.
20:43
And
to
the immediate
every
one
reacts.
We say,
"We must
do
something
about
the immediate.
It is
all
right
to
talk
about
the ultimate,
but
the ultimate
is
not
so
important
as
the immediate",
And
with
that
conception,
with
that
formula
that
the immediate
is
far
more
important
than
the ultimate,
we live.
Isn't
that
so.
You put
it in
different
ways,
but
that
is
what
is
happening.
The politician
is
concerned
with
the immediate,
and
so
also
the reformer
and
the so-called
social
worker.
Everybody
is
concerned
with
the immediate,
not
with
that
thing
which
he
calls
the ultimate;
for
him
the ultimate
may
be
all
right,
but
the immediate
matters.
21:51
So
he
has
divided
time
as
the immediate
and
the future.
But
the ultimate
contains
the immediate.
The immediate
does
not
contain
the ultimate.
So
a man
who
is
concerned
with
the immediate
-
he
is
the real
mischief
maker,
whether
he
be
a politician,
a religious
man,
or
a reformer.
But
if
we have
understood
the ultimate,
in
the ultimate
is
immediate
action.
|
|
22:47
So
as
long
as
we divide
time
as
yesterday,
today
and
tomorrow,
as
long
as
we think
in
terms
of
the immediate
which
is
the environment,
the circumstances
to
which
we must
answer
immediately
-
as
the politicians
and
all
the people
throughout
the world
are
doing
-
then
what
takes
place?
I hope
you are
following
all
this.
|
|
23:33
You know
one
is
not
used
to
giving
one's
attention
for
a long
periods.
You give
perhaps
your
attention
for
two
or
three
minutes,
and
the rest
of
the time
you just
casually
listen.
Therefore
you don't
take
it in.
And
we are
discussing
a very
serious
problem.
To
understand
it,
to
go
with
it,
to
flow
with
it you must
give
your
whole
attention
all
the time
that
you are
here
-
not
for
a period,
a minute
or
two,
and
then
wander
off.
What
we are
dealing
with
demands
a total
receptivity,
a total
attention.
|
|
24:44
When
you divide
time
as
the immediate
and
the ultimate,
you are
not
only
creating
conflict
between
'what
is'
and
'what
should
be'
but
also
creating,
an environment,
circumstances
which
will
be
in
contradiction
to
'what
should
be'.
Time
is
a movement,
which
man
has
divided
into
yesterday,
today
and
tomorrow.
It is
a movement,
and
as
long
as
you divide
it you must
be
in
conflict.
|
|
25:37
Please,
this
is
important
to
understand.
Because,
if
you do
not
follow
this,
I am
afraid,
you won't
be
able
to
follow
what
comes
after.
We are
concerned
with
change,
with
total
mutation
in
the whole
of
consciousness.
And
consciousness
is
conditioned
to
think
in
terms
of
yesterday,
today
and
tomorrow;
and
it thinks
in
terms
of
change
as
'what
is'
and
'what
should
be',
and
therefore
'what
should
be'
demands
further
time.
So
change
never
takes
place.
Do
you understand,
sirs?
When
we think
we are
changing
from
this
to
that,
that
movement
is
static,
it is
not
a movement
at
all.
27:16
'I want
to
change
from
this
to
that'
-
that
is
projected
by
a mind
that
is
caught
in
what
is,
and
that
has,
out
of
that
confusion,
out
of
that
misery,
out
of
that
pain,
created
the future.
So
the future
is
already
known.
And
therefore
when
the mind
moves
from
'what
is'
to
'what
should
be'
that
movement
is
static,
it is
not
a movement
at
all,
therefore
it is
not
a change
at
all.
|
|
28:09
Man
is
violent.
About
that
there is
no
question.
He
is
violent
in
so
many
different
ways,
and
that
is
a fact.
He
may
occasionally
be
non-violent;
but
his
whole
psychological
structure
is
based
on
violence,
ambition,
desire
for
power,
position,
domination,
assertion,
attachment
to
that
thing
he
calls
ownership,
sex
and
so
on.
His
whole
structure
is
based
on
violence,
and
that
is
a fact.
Then
he
invents
non-violence,
an idea,
a theory,
which
is
non-factual.
And
he
says,
"I am
violent
and
I will
move
to
non-violence.
29:27
I will
change
from
this
to
that".
That
change,
that
movement
towards
the ideal,
is
no
movement
at
all,
it is
just
static,
it is
merely
an idea.
What
is
actual
is
violence.
So
when
he
pursues
the ideal
he
is
avoiding
the actual.
And
what
he
calls
the ideal,
the pursuit
of
the ideal
the practice
and
the discipline
-
all
that
is
merely
the activity
of
a mind
that
has
become
static,
that
has
become
dull,
that
is
not
living.
What
is
living
is
violence
in
different
forms.
|
|
30:21
So
the ideal
has
no
importance
whatsoever.
And
this
is
a very
difficult
pill
to
swallow
for
most
people,
because
we have
lived
on
ideals,
we have
been
fed
on
ideals,
we are
conditioned
to
think
in
terms
of
ideals,
in
terms
of
purpose
and
significance
and
so
on.
So
there is
only
the fact,
and
non-violence
is
not
a fact.
And
when
he
says
he
will
ultimately
become
non-violent,
what
he
actually
doing
is
sowing
the seeds
of
violence,
thinking
that
ultimately
he
will
be
peaceful.
But
he
will
not.
That
is
fairly
clear,
fairly
obvious.
31:33
So
as
long
as
one
thinks
in
terms
of
the future,
of
bringing
about
a change
in
terms
of
an ideal,
in
terms
of
what
should
be,
he
is
merely
continuing
to
live
in
violence;
and
therefore
that
movement
has
no
value
whatsoever.
|
|
32:08
Therefore,
the problem
arises:
how
is
a mind
to
change
totally,
that
is
violent,
greedy,
or
whatever
it is?
Greed,
envy,
ambition,
competition,
aggressiveness
and
also
the so-called
discipline
which
is
imposed,
which
is
conformity
-
all
this
is
part
of
that
violence;
how
is
that
violence
to
be
totally
changed,
so
that
is
in
no
longer
violent,
not
in
terms
of
time"
not
in
terms
of
a future
ideal?
You understand
the question
now?
My
mind
is
no
longer
distracted
or
taken
away,
wasting
its
energy
on
ideals
-
what
should
be,
what
should
not
be.
33:21
It is
completely
attentive
to
that
one
problem
in
which
many
other
problems
are
involved.
So
there is
no
ultimate
or
immediate.
There is
only
that
problem
-
right?
Like
a man
having
cancer
he
has
to
decide
immediately,
and
the immediate
decision
does
not
depend
upon
his
fancy,
on
his
environment,
on
his
family,
on
what
people
say
or
do
not
say.
It is
an immediate
urgency;
and
therefore
when
it is
immediate,
there is
an immediate
decision,
not
decision
in
terms
of
a mind
wanting
to
act
upon
the fact.
|
|
34:46
So
time
as
the means
of
overcoming,
or
destroying,
or
going
beyond
the fact
has
come
to
an end.
You understand?
Time
as
a means
of
change
has
come
to
an end.
Therefore
time
as
will
comes
to
an end.
Will
is
time,
isn't
it?
'I will
do
this'
-
the will
is
the result
of
determination,
inclination,
desire;
all
that
is
involved
in
that
one
word.
And
when
I say,
"I will
become
peaceful",
the very
assertion
'I will'
implies
time.
And
when
I assert
'I will
become',
the movement
to
become
is
static,
it is
not
alive,
it is
something
dead.
36:19
So,
will
and
time
have
been
put
aside.
Please
see
the importance
of
this.
We are
used
to
assertions,
we are
used
to
saying,
"I will
do
this,
"I must
do
this",
"I should
do
this"
-
all
that
implies
time.
Doesn't
it?
Obviously,
the
'will
be',
the should
be',
the
'must
be'
is
the future
tense
of
the word
"to
be".
But
the word
"to
be"
is
always
the active
present.
And
therefore
when
a man
asserts
he
will
do
that,
what
is
taking
place
is
that
he
is
using
time
as
a means
of
achieving
it,
and
the means
and
the end
are
projected
by
the mind
that
is
conditioned,
and
therefore
the end
is
still
what
is.
37:41
Right?
Sorry
if
it gives
you a headache.
It is
really
quite
simple.
|
|
37:54
Man
has
lived
by
will
and
time,
and
we see
that
will
and
time
have
not
changed
man
at
all.
That
has
been
his
favourite
game
of
escape:
he
invents
the future
and
all
the rest
of
it and
so
remains
what
he
is.
You may
believe
in
reincarnation,
as
probably
most
of
you do.
And
if
you believe
in
reincarnation
what
matters
is
how
you live
now,
not
what
you are
going
to
do
tomorrow.
But
you don't
believe
in
it to
that
extent,
it is
just
a theory,
a convenient
hope,
a pleasant
idea
and
therefore
has
no
value
at
all.
38:47
So
when
you have
eliminated
time
as
will,
you have
only
this
problem.
Then
you are
full
of
energy
to
tackle
this
problem,
come
to
grips
with
this
problem
-
which
is
a total
revolution
in
the mind.
And
that
is
total
revolution
which
is
not
ultimate,
but
which
is
immediate.
And
when
there is
no
time
as
a means
of
achievement
and
no
will
as
a way
to
that
achievement,
then
you have
only
the central
issue:
how
can
the mind
which
is
so
conditioned
change,
bring
about
a complete
mutation?
That
means
a mind
that
is
no
longer
struggling
to
become
something.
40:31
It is
what
it is:
greedy,
envious,
ambitious,
full
of
hate
and
all
the animal
things
that
have
been
cultivated
and
prolonged
throughout
the centuries.
That
is
what
actually
is;
and
any
effort
to
bring
about
a change
in
that
structure
of
the human
mind
is
still
part
of
time
and
therefore
is
ineffective.
|
|
41:12
So
what
happens
to
your
mind
that
is
no
longer
thinking
in
terms
of
time,
of
the will
to
achieve?
The speaker
can
explain
what
takes
place,
but
it will
be
mere
words.
But
if
you do
it for
yourself,
you will
see
what
an extraordinary
action
takes
place
when
you have
abolished
time
-
that
means
no
longer
yielding
to
circumstances,
no
longer
concerned
with
personal
inclination
or
tendency,
no
longer
using
will
as
a means
of
operation.
If
you do
it,
not
theorize
about
it,
if
you actually
do
it as
you would
do
when
there is
an urgency
of
disease
or
of
a threat,
you act
immediately.
42:45
Then
there is
no
action
of
will,
no
time
operating.
Then
there
will
be
total
action,
not
the fragmentary
action
of
will
and
time;
and
a total
action
contains
the immediate
action
to
circumstances.
|
|
43:18
Look,
sir!
There is
starvation
in
this
country,
overpopulation,
total
inefficiency
of
the
Government.
And
that
starvation
each
politician,
each
group,
wants
to
solve
according
to
his
own
pet
theory.
The
Communist,
the
Socialist,
the
Congress,
etc
-
they
have
theories
on
how
to
solve
that
problem.
They
will
take
this
side
or
that
side,
they
will
go
to
America
or
to
Russia
according
to
their
theory;
but
in
the meantime
people
are
starving.
Right?
You may
not
be
starving,
but
there are
people
starving;
probably
we have
all
known
what
it is,
not
having
enough
food.
44:21
The problem
of
starvation
is
not
to
be
solved
by
politicians;
never
has
it been.
It is
a world
problem,
and
the world
is
divided
by
politicians,
by
the tribes
which
they
represent
-
the
American
tribe,
the
Hindu
tribe,
the
Muslim
tribe,
the
African
tribe.
We are
all
tribes,
we all
belong
to
tribes
-
which
is
again
a fact.
So
as
long
as
the mind
thinks
in
terms
of
tribes,
in
terms
of
formulas,
starvation
will
go
on.
Please
see
this
simple
fact,
sir.
As
long
as
you are
a Hindu
with
your
nationality,
with
your
separate
government
and
all
the rest
of
it,
you are
going
to
have
starvation,
because
each
group
wants
to
solve
it in
its
own
way
and
will
not
co-operate
with
another.
45:33
The
Communist
is
not
concerned
with
the starvation
of
the people,
nor
the
Congress,
nor
the
Democrat,
nor
the
Republican
-
they
are
not
concerned,
they
want
to
be
in
power,
in
position.
To
solve
the problem
of
starvation,
we must
be
concerned
only
with
how
to
feed
the people,
not
who
is
going
to
feed
the people,
what
is
the system
that
is
going
to
feed
the people
and
so
on.
But
nobody
is
concerned
with
solving
the problem.
|
|
46:19
So
when
you are
concerned
with
solving
the problem,
you are
not
concerned
with
the system
at
all.
In
the same
way
when
you are
concerned
with
the problem
of
a total
change,
you are
not
concerned
with
how
to
change
it.
You never
will
ask
how,
because
the how
is
the method,
and
the method
implies
time,
practice,
and
the end
result
is
already
known
towards
which
you are
practising
and
therefore
it is
not
a change
at
all.
So
all
that
one
can
do
is
to
be
totally
aware
of
the function
of
will
and
of
time,
and
be
totally
indifferent
to
it,
not
battle
against
it but
see
the falseness
of
it.
47:37
Then
one
will
be
only
concerned
with
the central
issue:
how
is
one
to
bring
about
a total
revolution?
And
when
you are
tremendously
concerned
with
it,
you will
find
that
it is
taking
place
without
your
wanting
it.
|
|
48:01
Perhaps,
if
there is
time,
you will
ask
questions.
You can
discuss
this.
And
if
you are
going
to
ask
questions,
please
be
brief,
because
I have
to
repeat
them.
Don't
make
long
speeches.
|
|
48:31
Questioner:
Sir,
is
that
state
possible?
|
|
48:37
Krishnamurti:
A
gentleman
asks:
is
that
state
possible?
The state
which
I have
been
talking
about
-
is
that
right,
sir?
When
you ask
that
question
`is
it possible?'
are
you asking
out
of
curiosity?
|
|
49:04
Questioner:
No.
|
|
49:05
Krishnamurti:
Please,
just
listen.
Are
you asking
out
of
curiosity,
or
are
you asking
it because
you doubt
it,
or
because
in
your
own
mind
there is
a feeling
that
it is
not
possible?
If
you say
it is
not
possible,
then
you are
blocking
yourself,
you are
preventing
investigation.
If
you say
it is
possible,
that
also
will
prevent
you from
investigation.
Naturally,
because
you are
already
biased.
So
to
find
out
if
it is
possible
or
not,
you have
to
work,
you have
to
investigate,
you have
to
examine;
and
to
examine
you must
be
free.
50:07
If
you are
biased,
if
you are
inclined,
if
you are
this
or
that,
you are
not
free
to
investigate,
to
go
into
it.
But
to
go
into
it is
not
a matter
of
time.
You must
give
to
it your
whole
mind
and
heart
and
your
nerves,
everything
you have.
But,
you see,
you are
not
so
eager,
intense.
To
go
into
it you need
tremendous
energy;
and
you can
only
have
energy
if
there are
no
distractions,
which
the mind
has
invented
in
order
not
to
face
the fact,
the fact
being
what
you actually
are.
Your
violence,
your
greed,
your
envy,
your
competition,
your
brutality,
your
wanting
to
achieve,
to
become
somebody,
and
all
the rest
of
it
-
that
is
the fact;
and
to
face
that
fact
demands
complete
energy.
51:28
And
to
face
that,
you have
to
put
aside
time
and
will
and
you have
to
look.
|
|
51:37
That
is
why,
sir,
it is
very
important
to
know
how
to
look,
how
to
observe.
Probably
you have
never
observed
a tree.
Probably
you have
never
observed
your
wife,
or
your
husband,
or
your
daughter.
You have
observed
through
the image
you have
built
of
your
wife,
and
the wife
looks
at
you through
the image
she
has
built
of
you,
the image
being
memory.
As
you look
at
each
other
through
the image
that
each
one
has
created
of
the other,
there is
no
observation
at
all.
When
you look
at
a tree,
you have
an idea,
an image,
a symbol,
a meaning
about
that
tree;
and
therefore
the meaning,
the symbol,
the idea
interferes
with
your
observation
of
that
tree.
52:53
To
look,
there
must
be
freedom
from
the image.
And
when
you are
free,
you look,
not
with
the intellect,
not
with
emotion,
but
with
love,
with
clarity,
with
something
totally
new.
When
you look
at
your
children,
your
wife
and
your
husband
without
the image,
you will
then
be
in
real
relation.
Real
relationship
is
affection,
love.
Without
that,
do
what
you will,
there
will
be
misery,
there
will
be
sorrow.
|
|
53:38
Questioner:
Sir,
what
is
the role
of
memory
and
the state
that
you are
talking
about?
|
|
53:47
Krishnamurti:
What
is
the role
of
memory
and
the state
we are
talking
about?
Again
this
is
a rather
complex
problem.
All
human
problems
are
complex,
they
are
not
mechanical;
therefore,
one
has
to
think
about
them
anew.
|
|
54:18
What
is
the function
of
memory?
And
how
does
memory
come
into
being?
Before
one
can
discuss
what
is
the function
of
memory,
one
must
find
out
how
memory
is
built
up.
Have
you ever
noticed
that
when
you respond
to
something
totally,
there is
very
little
memory?
Have
you?
When
you respond
with
your
heart,
with
your
mind,
with
all
your
being,
there is
very
little
memory.
Haven't
you noticed
it?
It is
only
when
you do
not
respond
to
a challenge
completely
that
there is
a conflict;
then
there is
a pain,
then
there is
a confusion.
then
there is
a struggle.
55:29
The struggle
the confusion,
the pain
or
the pleasure
builds
memory.
This
is
simple.
You can
observe
this
in
your
daily
life.
You develop
memory
through
a technique.
You go
to
college,
and
learn
a certain
technique,
because
that
technique
gives
you a job.
And
that
cultivates
a memory,
because
that
memory
is
necessary
to
function
efficiently
in
a particular
job.
That
memory
you must
have,
obviously;
otherwise
you cannot
function.
But
I have
psychological
memory,
what
you have
said
to
me,
how
you have
hurt
me,
you have
flattered
me,
you have
insulted
me.
56:30
And
you also
have
psychological
memory.
Therefore
there are
the images
which
I have
built
up
of
you and
you have
built
up
of
me.
Those
memories
remain.
And
those
memories
are
added
to,
all
the time.
And
it is
those
memories
that
will
respond.
Therefore,
thought
which
is
the result
of
memory,
is
always
old,
never
new,
and
therefore
never
free.
There is
no
such
thing
as
freedom
of
thought
-
which
is
sheer
nonsense.
|
|
57:25
Your
memory
has
a place
when
you are
functioning
efficiently,
and
efficiency
is
necessary.
Memory
is
necessary
at
a certain
level.
But
when
that
memory
becomes
a mere
mechanical
action
in
human
relationship,
then
it becomes
a danger,
then
it creates
mischief.
All
the tribal
instincts
are
part
of
that
memory.
You are
a Hindu,
you are
a Muslim,
you are
a Christian;
you know
the machinery
of
conditioning.
There
it is
deadly.
Because
life
is
a movement,
life
is
not
something
that
you carve
out
for
yourself
in
a little
backyard;
life
is
a total
movement,
an endless
movement,
not
an evolutionary
movement.
58:40
It is
one
of
your
pet
theories
that,
eventually,
man
is
going
to
become
perfect
and
that
in
the meantime
he
can
sow
hatred,
in
the meantime
he
can
create
havoc.
So
memory
has
a place
and,
when
you function
there
naturally,
it has
to
be
efficient,
reasoned,
impersonal,
clear
and
all
the rest
of
it.
But
there is
the state
of
mind
where
memory
has
very
little
place.
When
we are
talking
now,
we are
using
the
English
language.
The usage
of
English
language
is
memory,
obviously.
But
the state
of
mind
that
is
using
it is
silent,
it is
not
crippled
by
memory;
and
that
is
real
freedom.
|
|
1:00:00
Questioner:
Sir,
where
does
the soul
go
after
death?
|
|
1:00:02
Krishnamurti:
Wait,
sir.
|
|
1:00:08
Questioner:
You have
talked
about
the unconditioned
mind
and
simplicity
of
mind.
And
I doubt
if
there is
any
way
that
we could
get
simplicity
of
mind
and
an unconditioned
mind?
|
|
1:00:19
Krishnamurti:
The gentleman
asks:
you have
talked
about
the unconditioned
mind,
is
there
a way,
a method
to
achieve
that
unconditioned
mind?
|
|
1:00:27
Questioner:
Without
talking
about
it.
|
|
1:00:38
Krishnamurti:
Without
talking
about
it.
I don't
know
what
that
means.
Is
there
a way
to
uncondition
the mind?
|
|
1:00:50
Now
there are
two
states.
First
of
all
one
must
be
very
sensitive
to
words
-
sensitive,
alive
-
you must
feel
the words.
If
you are
not,
then
you use
any
word
and
it has
no
meaning.
When
you use
the words
"conditioned"
and
"a
way",
have
you understood
the word
"conditioned?"
.
Is
the understanding
merely
verbal
and
therefore
not
real?
Mere
intellectual
understanding
of
that
word
-
which
means
to
free
the mind
from
its
conditioning
-
is
the dictionary
meaning.
And
if
you use
that
word
in
a dictionary
meaning
there is
no
depth
to
that
word
at
all.
1:01:46
But
if
you say,
"Look,
I have
found
I am
conditioned,
I have
discovered
it,
I see
it.
I was
aware
this
morning,
for
a minute,
how
conditioned
I am.
I think
in
terms
of
a Hindu;
or
I think
in
terms
of
hate
or
jealousy".
Then,
when
you use
that
word
`conditioned',
it has
a vitality,
a depth,
a perfume,
a quality.
And
when
you use
the word
"way",
what
is
implied
in
that
word
`a
way'?
From
this
to
that;
a path,
a method,
a system,
by
practising
which
you will
be
able
to
uncondition
yourself,
to
arrive
at
a state
of
non-conditioning.
1:02:47
See
the question!
Is
a method
going
to
uncondition
you?
There is
no
method
to
uncondition
you.
We have
played
with
these
words,
we have
done
all
these
things
for
centuries
-
the gurus,
the monasteries,
Zen,
this
or
that
method
with
the result
you are
caught,
you are
a slave
to
the method,
aren't
you?,
and
therefore
you are
not
free.
The method
will
produce
the result;
but
the result
is
the outcome
of
your
confusion,
of
your
conditioning
and
therefore
it will
still
be
conditioned.
So,
when
you put
that
question
you have
already
answered
it.
|
|
1:03:54
That
is
why
I said
the other
day:
to
ask
a question
is
very
simple,
but
to
ask
the right
question
is
one
of
the most
difficult
things.
And
you must
ask
questions
all
your
life,
but
they
must
always
be
the right
questions.
And
if
you ask
a right
question,
you have
the right
answer;
you don't
have
to
ask
anybody.
|
|
1:04:33
Questioner:
One
question,
sir.
The non-violence
which
Gandhiji
tried
to
practise
by
himself,
is
that
also
to
be
denounced?
|
|
1:04:51
Krishnamurti:
Sir,
do
you remember
what
I said?
Any
practice
of
non-violence
is
violence.
|
|
1:05:03
Questioner:
That
is
a statement
which
has
to
be
proved.
|
|
1:05:08
Krishnamurti:
To
be
proved
by
whom?
|
|
1:05:22
Sir,
you have
asked
a question,
you must
have
the courtesy
also
to
listen
to
the answer.
|
|
1:05:29
Questioner:
I asked
a question.
|
|
1:05:31
Krishnamurti:
Yes,
we are
all
so
impatient.
|
|
1:05:41
Questioner:
The rest
of
the question
I am
not
asking.
|
|
1:05:43
Krishnamurti:
Yes,
sir,
I know.
Can
you practise
non-violence
when
you are
violent?
Violence
means
not
only
physical
violence
but
also
psychological
violence.
When
I discipline
myself
according
to
a pattern
which
I have
established
as
the ideal,
I am
violent.
You don't
take
all
that
into
account.
Discipline,
as
is
practised
by
most
people,
is
a suppression,
is
conformity,
is
a control
of
an idea,
a pattern;
that
is
violence,
distorting
the mind.
This
does
not
mean
that
there is
not
a discipline
which
has
nothing
whatsoever
to
do
with
control,
suppression,
conformity.
1:06:56
That
real
discipline
comes
when
you are
confronted
with
the problem,
and
you are
completely
concerned
with
the problem.
|
|
1:07:08
Sir,
look.
Discipline,
the right
discipline,
the real
discipline,
the only
discipline
that
matters
-
not
all
the others
that
comes
in
the very
action
of
learning.
When
you are
learning,
not
acquiring
-
when
you are
learning
about
anything,
that
very
act
of
learning
demands
discipline.
For
instance,
I am
learning
a language;
and
it is
tremendously
interesting
to
learn
a language,
and
that
very
interest
is
its
discipline.
Now
man
is
violent.
To
understand
the problem
of
violence,
really
to
understand
it,
to
go
with
it to
the very
end
of
it,
to
enquire
into
it very
deeply
-
that
very
enquiry
is
the beginning
of
discipline.
1:08:17
You don't
have
to
have
any
of
the so-called
discipline
which
man
has
practised
and
thereby
destroyed
himself
and
tortured
his
mind
by
imitating,
by
conforming
to
a form,
a pattern.
|
|
1:08:46
Questioner:
Where
does
the soul
go
after
death?
|
|
1:08:57
Krishnamurti:
Where
does
the soul
go
after
death?
Sir,
it is
a very
important
question.
Perhaps
we will
deal
with
that
question
the next
time
that
we meet,
because
it requires
a great
deal
of
going
into,
because
the word
'soul',
or
the atman,
or
whatever
word
you use,
is
still
part
of
your
tradition.
You repeat
that
word
endlessly.
You have
not
enquired
if
there is
such
a thing
as
the soul
-
which
means
there is
a permanent
entity
in
you which,
when
you die,
goes
somewhere.
Is
there
something
permanent
in
you?
1:10:01
Have
you found
out
anything
permanent
in
you?
|
|
1:10:08
Questioner:
Sir.
|
|
1:10:10
Krishnamurti:
Yes?
Sir,
do
be
clear.
Is
there
a permanent
thing
in
you?
You are
changing,
your
body
changes,
unless
you are
dead.
Everything
is
in
a movement,
but
you refuse
to
accept
that
movement.
And
to
say
there is
a soul,
an atman,
means
that
thought
has
thought
about
it,
and
has
invented
it.
If
thought
can
think
about
it,
it is
still
within
the field
of
thought
and
therefore
it is
part
of
the old,
it is
nothing
new.
As
I said,
thought
is
always
old.
Therefore,
'soul'
is
a word
that
you use
without
understanding,
or
going
into.
1:11:15
It is
the result
of
thought,
because
man
is
frightened
of
death.
As
he
is
frightened
of
life,
so
he
is
frightened
of
death.
Please,
sir,
leave
that
question,
you are
not
paying
attention.
|
|
1:11:41
Questioner:
Conditioning.....
|
|
1:11:47
Krishnamurti:
Wait
a minute,
sir.
Wait.
I think
that
is
enough,
sir,
for
this
evening.
|
|
1:12:00
Look,
sir.
You have
asked
questions;
each
person
is
concerned
with
his
question
and
he
will
not
listen
to
another
question.
In
answering
the one
question,
if
you have
listened
to
it,
your
questions
also
will
be
answered;
but
we are
so
impatient
-
which
means
what?
Each
one
is
concerned
with
his
own
little
problem,
and
the little
problem
does
not
contain
the big
problem.
When
you understand
the big
problem
-
ln
that
problem
is
the little
problem
the little
problem
will
be
answered,
and
it will
be
answered
rightly.
1:13:01
As
I said,
it is
very
easy
to
ask
questions.
And
one
must,
always
ask
questions,
one
must
always
have
a spot
of
scepticism
about
everything,
including
about
what
the speaker
is
saying.
But
to
ask
the right
question
demands
a great
deal
of
intelligence,
sensitivity
to
words,
and
awareness
of
one's
own
conditioning.
Then
out
of
that
when
you ask
a question,
it is
full
of
light
and
delight.
|