Krishnamurti Subtitles home


OJ49T10 - Without self-knowledge there cannot be complete action
Ojai, California - 14 August 1949
Public Talk 10



0:00 This is J. Krishnamurti’s 10th public talk in Ojai, California, 1949.
0:09 For the last five weeks we have been discussing the importance of self-knowledge, for without knowing oneself fully, integrally, not partially, only then is it possible to think rightly and therefore act rightly.
0:37 Without self-knowledge there cannot be a complete, integrated action.
0:44 There can only be a partial action if there is no self-knowledge; and as partial action invariably leads to conflict and to misery, it is important for those who would really understand the problems of life completely, which is, the problem of relationship, not only with one or two but with the whole, which is society.
1:15 To understand this whole problem of relationship, we must understand ourselves; and to understand ourselves is action, it is not a withdrawal from action.
1:32 And there is action only when we understand relationship, relationship not only with people and ideas but with things, with nature.
1:47 So action is relationship with regard to things - property, nature, people and ideas.
2:04 Without the comprehension of all this process - which you will call life - life must be contradictory, painful, and constant conflict.
2:19 So to understand this process of life, which is ourselves, we have to understand the whole significance, the process of our own thoughts and feelings.
2:39 And so we have been discussing the importance of self-knowledge.
2:50 Perhaps some of us have read a few books on psychology, have some smattering knowledge of psycho-analytical phrases, but I’m afraid mere superficial knowledge is not sufficient.
3:11 Mere verbal expression of an understanding which does not come through mere knowledge, mere study, is not sufficient.
3:26 What is important is to understand ourselves in relationship; and that relationship is not static, it is constantly in motion, therefore to follow that relationship there must be no fixation of an idea.
3:49 Most of us are slaves to ideas; we are ideas, we’re a bundle of ideas.
4:01 Our actions are shaped by ideas, and our whole outlook is conditioned by ideas.
4:20 And ideas shape our action and therefore ideas shape our relationship.
4:28 And that shaping of relationship by an idea prevents the understanding of relationship.
4:45 To us, idea is very important, extraordinarily significant. You have your ideas, and others have other ideas, and we are in constant conflict with ideas: political, religious, dogmatic belief, and so on, each in opposition.
5:07 Ideas invariably create opposition because ideas are the outcome of sensation.
5:21 And as long as our relationship is conditioned by sensation, by idea, then there is no understanding of that relationship.
5:38 And hence ideas prevent action; ideas do not further action, they limit action, which we see in everyday life.
5:51 So is it possible for action to be without idea?
6:13 Can we act without ideation first? Because we see how ideas divide people, which are beliefs, prejudices, sensations, political, religious opinion - these are dividing people and tearing the world to pieces at the present time, which means the cultivation of the intellect has become the predominant factor.
6:47 And our intellect guides, shapes our action.
6:54 And is it possible to act without idea?
7:12 And we do act without idea when the problem is very intense, very profound, demands all your attention.
7:20 We may try to conform the act to an idea, but the more we go into the problem, the more we try to understand the problem itself, then we’ll begin to discard the idea, the prejudice, the particular point of view, and approach it afresh.
7:42 This is what we do when we have a problem, surely: we try to solve the problem according to a particular idea, or depending on a particular result and so on.
8:02 When the problem cannot be solved that way, then we push aside all ideas, then we give up our ideas and therefore approach the problem afresh, with a quiet mind.
8:19 We do this unconsciously. Surely this is what happens, does it not? When you have a problem, you worry over it. You want a particular result from that problem, or you translate that problem according to certain ideas.
8:41 You go through all that process, and yet the problem is not solved. So the mind becoming weary stops thinking about the problem.
8:58 Then it is quiet, then it is relaxed, then it’s not worried over the problem.
9:07 And presently, as it often happens, the solution of the problem is immediately perceived; there is a hint to that problem.
9:22 So the action lies, surely, in not conforming it to a particular idea.
9:32 Then it’s merely a continuation of thought, not action.
9:47 And can we not live without conforming action to an idea?
9:58 Because ideas continue, and if we conform action to an idea, then we give continuity to action, and therefore there is an identification to action as the me and the mine, therefore there is the strengthening through ideation of the me, which is the source of all conflict and misery.
10:46 And, surely, immortality is not an idea. It is surely something beyond ideation, beyond thought, beyond the bundle of memory which is all the me.
11:21 And one can… and there is the experience of that state only when the ideation stops, when the thinking process stops.
11:44 And that experience of that state which we call the immortal, that timeless state, is not the product of thought, because thought is merely the continuance of memory, a response to memory.
12:17 And that experiencing of that extraordinary state can only come into being with the understanding of the self, not trying to reach it, because then merely the projection of thought, which is no longer… which is merely trying to experience something which is self-projected, therefore unreal.
12:52 And for this reason it is important to understand the whole, total process of consciousness, which we call the me and the mine, which can be only understood in relationship, not in isolation.
13:08 And that’s why it is imperative for those who would really understand truth, or reality, or God, what you will, to fully grasp the significance of relationship.
13:31 That is the only action. And if that relationship is based on idea, then action is not.
13:49 If I try to conform, limit, circumscribe my relationship to an idea, which most of us do, then it’s not action, there is no understanding in relationship.
14:10 And if we see that as a false process, leading to illusion, to limitation, to conflict, to separateness - ideas always separate - then we’ll begin to understand relationship directly, and not impose upon relationship a prejudice, a condition.
14:41 Then we will see that love is not a thought process.
14:53 You cannot think about love, but most of us do.
15:03 Then it’s merely sensation.
15:10 And if we limit relationship to the idea based on sensation, then we discard love, then we fill our heart with the things of the mind, and we may feel the sensation and call it love, but it’s not love.
15:55 Love is, surely, something beyond the thought process, which can only be discovered in relationship, through understanding the thought process, not denying the thought process; being aware of the whole significance of the ways of our mind and our action in relationship.
16:18 Then if we can proceed wider and more deeply, then we will see that action is not related to idea.
16:33 Then action is from moment to moment. And in that experience is immortality, which is right meditation.
16:45 1ST QUESTIO

N: What place has criticism in relationship?
16:54 What is the difference between destructive and constructive criticism? What place has criticism in relationship? What is the difference between destructive and constructive criticism? First of all, why do we criticize?
17:21 Is it to understand or is it merely a nagging process?
17:31 If I criticize you, do I understand you?
17:48 Does understanding come through judgment?
18:00 If I want to comprehend, if I want to - deeply, not superficially - understand the whole significance of my relationship to you, do I begin to criticize you?
18:11 Or am I aware of this relationship between you and me, silently observing, not projecting my opinions, criticisms, judgments, identifications, or condemnations, but silently observing what is happening.
18:41 And if I do not criticize, what happens? One is apt to go to sleep, does one not, which doesn’t mean that we do not go to sleep if we are not nagging.
19:01 Perhaps that becomes a habit, and we put ourselves to sleep through habits.
19:16 Is there a deeper, wider understanding of relationship through criticism?
19:25 It doesn’t matter whether it’s constructive or destructive, that’s irrelevant, surely.
19:35 Therefore the question is: What is the necessary state of mind or of heart that will understand relationship?
19:53 What is the process of understanding?
20:01 How do we understand something? How do you understand your child, if you are interested in your child?
20:17 You observe, don’t you? You watch him at play, you study him in his different moods; you don’t project your opinion onto him.
20:31 You don’t say he should be this or that. You are alertly watchful, aren’t you, passively aware.
20:44 Then, perhaps, you begin to understand the child.
20:51 But if you are constantly criticizing, constantly injecting your own particular personality, your idiosyncrasies, your opinions, the way he should be, should not be, and all the rest of it, you obviously create a barrier in that relationship.
21:12 But, unfortunately, most of us criticize in order to shape, in order to interfere, and that gives us a certain amount of pleasure, a certain gratification, to shape something - your relationship with your husband, child, or whatever it be.
21:47 Then you feel a sense of power in it, you are the boss.
21:55 And in that there is a tremendous gratification. Surely through all that process there is no understanding of relationship.
22:10 There is merely imposition, a desire to conform to the particular pattern of your idiosyncrasy, your desire, your wish.
22:21 All these prevent, do they not, understanding of relationship.
22:49 And self-criticism, to be critical of oneself, in the sense, to be aware of oneself; to criticize, to condemn, to justify oneself - does that bring understanding of oneself?
23:16 When I begin to criticize myself, do I not limit the process of understanding, of exploring?
23:35 Is introspection a form of self-criticism - does that unfold?
23:53 What makes the unfoldment of the self possible?
24:01 Not constantly watching, fearful, critical; surely that does not help to unfold.
24:13 What brings about the unfoldment of the self so that you begin to understand it is the constant awareness of it without any condemnation, without any identification, which means there must be a certain spontaneity; not constantly watching it, disciplining it, shaping it.
24:54 This spontaneity is essential to understand.
25:06 If I merely limit, control, condemn, then I put a stop to the movement of thought and feeling, do I not?
25:23 It is only in the movement of thought and feeling I discover, not in mere control.
25:42 And when one discovers, then it is important to find out how to act about it.
25:52 Now, if I act according to an idea, according to a standard, according to an ideal, then I force it to a particular pattern.
26:17 Then in that there is no understanding, there is no transcending.
26:26 But if I can watch it without any condemnation, without any identification, then it’s possible to go beyond it.
26:37 And that’s why this whole process of approximating of oneself to an ideal is so utterly wrong.
26:52 Ideals are home-made gods, and to conform ourselves to a self-projected image surely is not a release.
27:04 So the question is: there can be understanding only when the mind is silently aware, observing, which is arduous because we take delight in being active, in being restless, critical, condemning, justifying.
27:45 That’s our whole structure of being. And through the screens of ideas, prejudices, points of view, experiences, memories, we try to understand.
28:00 And is it possible to be free of all these screens, and to directly understand?
28:18 Surely we do that when the problem is very intense.
28:26 We do not go through all these methods. We approach it directly.
28:42 So the understanding of relationship comes into being only when there is… when this process is understood and there is a quietness.
29:05 If you are listening to me, trying to understand what I’m trying to convey, with not too great an effort, then there is a possibility of understanding each other.
29:23 But if you’re all the time criticizing, throwing up your opinions, what you have learned from books, what somebody has told you, and so on and so on, then you and I are not related, because this screen is between us.
29:36 But if we are, both of us, trying to find out the issues of the problem, which lie in the problem itself, both of us are eager to go to the bottom of it, the truth of it, to discover what it is, then we are related.
30:03 Then your mind is equally alert and passive and watching, to see what is true in this.
30:15 Therefore your mind must be extraordinarily swift, not anchored to any idea or ideal, to any judgment, to an opinion that you have consolidated through your particular experiences.
30:35 So understanding comes, surely, when there is a swift pliability of the mind which is passively aware, and then it is capable of reception, then it is sensitive.
31:13 A mind is not sensitive when it’s crowded by ideas, prejudices, opinions, either for or against.
31:32 So to understand relationship there must be a passive awareness, which does not destroy relationship; on the contrary, it makes relationship much more vital, much more significant.
31:52 Then there is a possibility in that relationship of real affection, a warmth, a sense of nearness, which is not mere sentiment or sensation.
32:07 And if we can approach, or be in that relationship to everything, then our problems will be so easily solved: the problems of property, problems of possession.
32:27 Because that which we possess, that we are.
32:39 The man who possesses money, he is the money. The man who identifies himself with the property, he is the property, or the house, or the furniture; similarly with ideas or with people.
32:57 Then there is no relationship when there is possession.
33:11 But most of us possess because we are nothing else if we do not possess. We are empty shells if we do not possess, if we do not fill it with furniture, with music, with knowledge, with this or that.
33:31 And that shell makes a lot of noise, and that noise we call living, and with that we are satisfied.
33:47 And when there is a disruption, breaking away from that, then there is sorrow, because then you suddenly discover yourself as you are - that empty shell without much meaning.
34:06 So to be aware of this whole content in relationship is action.
34:24 And from that action there is a possibility of making relationship more true, a possibility of giving it greater depth and greater significance, and knowing what love is.
34:44 2ND QUESTIO

N: When you speak of timelessness, it seems you must mean something besides a sequence of events.
34:59 Time, to me, is necessary for action, and I cannot imagine existence without sequence of events.
35:08 Do you perhaps mean that by knowing what part of you is eternal, then time no longer becomes a means to an end, or a means to progress?
35:19 When you speak of timelessness, it seems you must mean something besides a sequence of events.
35:30 Time, to me, is necessary for action, and I cannot imagine existence without sequence of events. Do you perhaps mean that by knowing what part of you is eternal, then time no longer becomes a means to an end, or a means to progress?
35:51 First of all, we cannot discuss what the timeless is, we cannot… a mind that is the product of time cannot think of something which is timeless, because, after all, my mind, your mind, is the result of the past; it’s founded upon the past, its thought is the outcome of the past, which is time.
36:28 And with that instrument we try to think of something which is not of time, and that’s not possible, surely.
36:42 We can speculate upon it, we can write books, we can imagine, we can do all kinds of tricks with it, but it will not be the real.
36:51 So do not speculate upon it.
37:03 So let’s not talk even about it: What is the timeless state?
37:12 Because it’s utterly useless, it has no meaning.
37:19 But we can do something else, which is, to find out how to make the mind free from its own path, from its own self-projection, and what gives it continuity - a sequence of events as a means of progress or a means of understanding, or what else.
37:56 We can see that a thing that continues must decay.
38:18 That which has continuance cannot renew itself. Only that thing which comes to an end can renew.
38:36 A mind that’s merely caught in a habit, or a particular opinion, or held in the net of ideals, beliefs, dogmas, to such a mind there can be no renewal, surely.
39:01 It cannot look at life anew. It’s only when those things are put aside, and being free it can look.
39:11 Therefore there is a renewal, a re-creative urge, expression, only when the past has come to an end.
39:34 That means when there is no longer identification, which gives continuity as the me and the mine: my property, my home, my wife, my child, my ideal, my gods, my political opinions.
40:00 It is this constant identification that gives continuity, the sequence of events as I, becoming wider, bigger, nobler, more worthy, and so on and so on, cleverer.
40:22 And is life, existence, a matter of sequence of events?
40:46 What do we mean by ‘sequence of events’?
40:53 Do I know that I’m alive because I remember yesterday?
41:06 Do I know that I’m alive because I know the way to my house?
41:19 Or do I know that I’m alive because I’m going to be somebody?
41:35 How do I know that I’m alive? Only in the present, surely, when I know I’m conscious. Is consciousness merely the result of sequence of events?
41:52 With most of us, it is. I know I’m alive, I’m conscious, because of my past, of my identification.
42:10 And is it possible to know that one is conscious without this process of identification?
42:20 And why do we identify?
42:27 Why do we identify as my property, my name, my ambition, my progress?
42:45 Why? And what would happen if we do not identify? Would it deny all existence? Perhaps if we do not identify there might be a bigger… there might be a wider field for action, a greater depth to the feelings and to thought.
43:10 But we identify because it gives us the feeling of being alive as an entity, a separate entity.
43:23 So what is implied is the feeling that one is separate has become so important.
43:38 Because through separateness we enjoy the more; and when we deny separateness, we’re afraid that we shall not be capable of enjoying, having pleasures.
43:55 Surely that is the basis for the desire to have continuity, is it not?
44:03 Seeing all that, there is a collective process at work.
44:11 Seeing that separateness involves a great deal of destruction, and so on and so on - separateness - in opposition to that there is collectivity, destroying the individual separateness.
44:28 But the individual becomes the collective through another form of identification and yet retains his separateness, which is being shown.
44:50 So as long as we give, through identification, continuity, there can be no renewal.
45:09 It is only with the cessation of identification there is a possibility of renewal.
45:23 And most of us are frightened of coming to an end; most of us are frightened of death.
45:40 Innumerable books have been written about what is after death. We are more interested in death than in living because with death there seems to be an end, an end to identification.
46:15 And the thing that continues constantly, surely has no rebirth, no renewal.
46:27 It’s only in dying there is renewal, and therefore it’s important to die every minute, not till you’re old age and die, disease.
46:47 That means dying to all the accumulations and identifications, to the gathered experiences, and that is real simplicity, not the accumulated continuance of identification.
47:10 So when this process of identification which gives continuance to memory, which is revived in the present and giving life to memory, then there is a possibility of rebirth, renewal, re-creativeness.
47:46 And in that renewal there is no continuous… that which renews cannot continue. It must be from moment to moment.
48:00 And the questioner wants to know also, ‘Do you perhaps mean that by knowing what part of you is eternal?’ Is there a part of you eternal?
48:23 That which you can think about is still the product of thought (pause in recording) and therefore not the eternal, because thought is the result of the past, of time.
48:48 And if you posit as something eternal in you, you have already thought about it. I’m not cleverly arguing about this matter, because you can see very well that the eternal is not, when you can think about it.
49:10 You cannot progress to the eternal; you cannot evolve to it. If you do, then it’s merely a projection of thought, therefore within the net of time, therefore that way leads to illusion, misery, to all the ugliness of deception, which we all like because the mind only can function within the known, from safety to safety, from security to security.
50:00 And the eternal is not, if it is within the time, within the bondage of time; and the moment the mind thinks about it, it is in the bondage of time, therefore it’s not real.
50:15 So when you can perceive this whole process of identification, of how thought gives continuity to things in order to be secure, how the thinker separates himself from the thought and thereby makes himself secure, when you see all this process of time and understand it, not merely verbally, but deeply feel it, inwardly experience it, then you will see that you no longer think of the timeless.
50:59 Then the mind, not only superficially, but profoundly becomes quiet, becomes tranquil…
51:08 is tranquil. Then there is a direct experience of that which is measureless.
51:22 But to merely speculate upon what is the timeless is a waste of time.
51:33 You might just as well play poker.
51:45 And all this is brushed aside the moment you have a direct experience.
51:52 And that is what we are discussing: to have this direct experience without the intervention of the mind.
52:03 And when once there is an experiencing of it, the mind then… to have the sensations of it, and then wants a repetition of that experience.
52:23 Which means, really, the mind is interested in sensation, not in experiencing.
52:31 Therefore mind can never experience; it can only know its sensation.
52:40 The experiencing comes only when the mind is not the experiencer.
52:51 So the timeless cannot be imagined or known or experienced through the mind. And as that is the only instrument which we have cultivated, at the expense of everything else, we are lost when we look at the process of the mind.
53:18 We must be lost. We must come to an end - not despair, not fear - know the process of the mind and see what it is, and therefore, when you see that which it is, it comes to an end, without any enforcement.
53:41 Only then is there a possibility of that renewal which is eternal. QUESTIO

N: Is there a gulf, an interval of any duration, between my perceiving something, and being or realizing it?
54:03 Does not this interval imply an ideal at one end, and its realization at the other end, through practice and technique?
54:10 It is this ‘how’, or the method, that we want from you.
54:19 Is there a gulf, an interval of any duration, between my perceiving something, and being or realizing it?
54:31 Does not this interval imply an ideal at one end, and its realization at the other end, through practice and technique?
54:40 It is this ‘how’, or the method, that we want from you. Is there an interval between perception and action?
54:58 With most of us, we say so; we say there is an interval: ‘I see and later on I will act.
55:10 I understand intellectually, but how am I to put it into practice?
55:19 I see what you mean, but I don’t know how to carry it out.’ This gap, this gulf, this interval, is it necessary, Or we are only deceiving ourselves.
55:42 When I say, ‘I see,’ I really don’t see.
55:51 If I see, then there is no problem; then action follows, if I see something. If I see a poisonous snake, I don’t say, ‘I see, and how am I to act?’ I act.
56:09 But we don’t see; and we don’t see because we don’t want to see, because it’s too imminent, too dangerous, too vital.
56:23 It will upset our whole process of thinking, living. Therefore we say, ‘I see, and please tell me how to act.’ Therefore you are interested in the method, the how to do it, to practice.
56:41 So we say, ‘I see the idea, I comprehend, and how am I to act?’ Then we try to bridge the action, connect the action with the idea.
57:02 And we get lost. Then we search for methods. You go to the various teachers, psychologists, gurus, what you will, and join societies will help you to bridge the action with the idea.
57:17 That’s a very convenient way of living, a happy escape, a very respectable way of avoiding action.
57:35 And in that process we are all caught. I realize I must be virtuous, I must not be angry, mean, but please tell me how to do it.
57:52 And this process of how to do it becomes a religious investment, and exploitation and all the rest of it follows: vast properties - you know? - the whole game of it.
58:08 In other words, we don’t see and we don’t want to see.
58:18 We don’t say that honestly. The moment we say that, then we have to act, then we know we are deceiving ourselves, and it’s very unpleasant.
58:32 But we say, ‘Please, I am gradually learning, I am still weak, I’m not strong enough.
58:41 It is a matter of progress, evolution, growth, you know, eventually I’ll get there.’ So we should never say that I see, or I perceive, or I understand - that’s merely a verbalization; it has no significance.
59:05 Moment you see, you act, therefore there is no gap between seeing and acting.
59:17 You don’t do that when you’re driving a car.
59:29 If you do, there’ll be danger.
59:38 But we have invented so many ways of avoiding. We’ve become so clever, so cunning, not to radically change.
59:56 So there is no gap between action and perception.
1:00:11 If you see a poisonous snake, how quickly you respond.
1:00:19 The action is instantaneous.
1:00:29 And when there is a gap, it indicates sluggishness of the mind, a laziness, an avoidance.
1:00:38 And that avoidance, that laziness, becomes very respectable, because all of us are doing it.
1:00:58 So you look for a method in order to bridge the idea and the action, then you will live in illusion.
1:01:14 And perhaps you may like it. But a man who actually perceives, there is no problem, there is action. But we do not perceive because of our innumerable prejudices, our disinclination, our laziness, our hopes that something will alter it.
1:01:43 So to think in terms of idea separate from action is obviously ignorance.
1:01:52 To say, ‘I will be something: the Buddha, the Master’, what you will, is obviously a wrong process.
1:02:13 What is important is to understand what you are now, and that cannot be understood if you are postponing it, if you have an interval between the ideal and yourself.