Krishnamurti Subtitles home


OJ72DSG1 - Conflict and choice
Ojai, California - 29 March 1972
Discussion with Small Group 1



0:00 This is the first small group discussion with J. Krishnamurti in Ojai, California, 1972.
0:15 Krishnamurti: We have got four days, four mornings to talk over things together, and I wonder what we should talk about and to what depth do we want to go into these things, or do we want just to superficially argue, verbalise and put into words what we want to discuss, casually; or do we during these four mornings, in talking over together – which I would personally like – go very, very deeply into things?
1:22 So what shall we talk over this morning together, bearing in mind what we said, what in the notice was said, which was: education and religious life.
1:44 So how do we discuss this? Questioner: I am interested in understanding the meaning of learning, very deeply.
2:14 K: Shall we discuss that – learning? Are we going to learn from each other? Learn – the verb meaning, to learn – learn a language; learn through action; learn through hearing; experience; learn through various forms of influences; and so there is an accumulation of knowledge from which to act.
2:56 That is generally what is implied in learning, isn’t it?
3:03 I learn a language and then able to speak, to communicate. Is that learning at all?
3:15 I am just... because if we could go into this a little bit, perhaps we could then get at a much more deeper issue: what place has knowledge, experience, memory, and freedom from the known, which is knowledge, experience, memory; and where is there a freedom from the known, and is that at all possible, and so on?
4:02 Can we discuss this? Do you want to discuss this thing or something totally different?
4:08 Q: I am interested in that but I also want to know, I am interested in my question myself: what is the purpose and function of a school?
4:19 K: Of a school?
4:21 Q: Yes.
4:23 K: Are we discussing a school? We haven’t come to that point yet, have we? We haven’t got even the right kind of teachers or...
4:38 Shall we come to that a little later?
4:43 Q: There is something that I’d be interested in: the steps towards learning a religious life.
4:52 (Inaudible) raised that question.
4:53 K: Learning to lead a religious life.
4:55 Q: Can that be learned?
4:57 K: Now that is just it. That is why I think we ought to be clear, if we may, what do we mean by learning?
5:06 Is it a matter of accumulation of ideas, according to which we shall act, which we call religious?
5:22 Conclusions which traditionally be handed down and therefore leading a life according to those traditions and call it a religious life; or is a religious life entirely different from all this learning, accumulation, knowledge?
5:58 So let’s discuss it.
6:00 Q: Also, what is the place of technology in supporting learning?
6:05 K: That is why we ought to go into this a little more. What place has knowledge, which is technology and so on and so on?
6:18 And if knowledge is a continuous thing then there is never a freedom from the past, because the past is knowledge.
6:33 Do you want to go into all this? Is this serious enough for you, or is that too serious? (Laughs) I don’t know. I think it would be good if we could discuss this really, to the very end of it; go into it very, very deeply this morning, this one thing – you understand, sir? – and capture it.
7:07 (Laughs) What do we mean by knowledge, the knowing?
7:17 Not only the person – knowing a trade, knowing literature, many languages, knowing another, knowing oneself, knowing ‘God’ – in quotes – what do we mean by that word knowing?
7:53 Q: Memory?
7:56 K: Discuss it with me, please. I am not just... (Laughs) Let’s go into this together, not just me. I don’t want to end up talking, please. You understand? I think this is an important question, because if you are going to function and operate and act from this constant knowledge, which is the past, then there is nothing new; there is only the past, modified, changed a little bit.
8:40 And the future is the past, modified. So if we could go into this. Please, come on, sir, I am…
8:46 Q: Well can you just say, instead of saying that the past is modified you could say that the present is ever changing?
8:55 K: The present is the past, isn’t it? Is there a present without the past?
8:58 Q: Well then why even talk about the past?
9:02 K: The past implies the present and the future. Those three are not separate. If I had no past would there be a present now?
9:17 And would there be a future?
9:18 Q: Well the thing that I was sort of insinuating, that there is no future, that there is no past, there is just a continuous motion.
9:31 K: Continuous motion of what?
9:32 Q: Of events.
9:35 K: Which leave a mark; which leave a scar; which leave a memory, which says don’t do this, do that.
9:47 Q: Yes, but that scar is operational in the present, it is not operational in a past.
10:02 If something...
10:03 K: Sir, look, I have done something in the past. Doesn’t that operate in the present?
10:07 Q: Yes, it operates in the present but why do you talk about it in the past?
10:16 K: No, the past modifies the present – right? – which modifies the future.
10:25 It is one movement.
10:30 Q: It seems like a process that just is occurring. You called it a scar. It’s a scar, the fact that we remember things or it leaves a mark. But it seems like that a process is something that just occurs. Need it be a scar?
10:45 K: I used the word scar as a memory, as a knowledge – whatever you like to call it.
10:53 Sir, look, what is actually the past, the present and the future? What is it? What is the past?
11:01 Q: Time.
11:03 K: Let’s go into it a little bit, sir.
11:10 What is the past?
11:12 Q: Accumulation of memories and facts.
11:21 K: What is your past, sir? I am not saying verbalise it – (laughs) not a confessional or anything of the kind. What is the past, what is my past? Born a Hindu, a Brahmin, educated and so on, so on, so on, so on, and building up, if you so desire, a reputation, a residual mounting action or residual non-action.
11:58 Sir, somebody is out there. Somebody is out there trying to get in.
12:00 Q: Excuse me. Can the past exist without the present?
12:10 K: Can the past exist without the present.
12:20 How can it? Can the past exist without the present?
12:34 Can I... Sir, take myself. My past is my conditioning – if you are not fed up with that word.
12:46 Is my conditioning, my experiences, the residual, inherited, conditioned behaviour – all my conditioning is the past which operates in the present.
13:12 Which is the present – let’s put it that way – consciously or unconsciously.
13:28 A Catholic, brought up in a Catholic family with all his dogmas, beliefs and so on – I mean, that is his past, and that past is the present.
13:44 Q: But it seems like the present and the past are on different dimensions, they are qualitatively different.
13:53 K: Are they?
13:54 Q: It seems like the past, as you are using it, is the component parts of the present.
13:59 K: What is the present, sir? All right, let us take that, let us look at that. What is the present?
14:05 Q: This room, my responses to you.
14:09 K: The present. What does that word mean, the present?
14:11 Q: It means some sort of movement, amorphous movement.
14:12 K: Amorphous movement, the present.
14:13 Q: The present is that which is present.
14:14 K: The present is that which is present.
14:15 Q: Or to put it another way, the moment of the present is the moment in which that which is present is present to consciousness.
14:33 K: Present.
14:36 Q: Amount of space between the past and the future.
14:42 K: The present, sir. Wait a minute, look at it. What is the present? What is the present? Let us look at it, sir. When you say the present, what does that mean?
14:51 Q: As soon as you say it, it’s passed.
14:54 K: Yes. The present.
14:56 Q: So it’s an instantaneous movement.
14:57 K: The second, this very second.
15:00 Q: As soon as you say it...
15:03 K: …it is already gone.
15:06 Q: As soon as you begin to reflect upon it, it becomes something of the mind.
15:18 K: Yes. So we are saying there is a state of... the present is not the product of thought, or rational...
15:28 It cannot be rationalised, it cannot be put into words.
15:33 Q: Or you could say that the present cannot intellectualise.
15:40 K: Yes, the present cannot be intellectualised. Then what is that state of mind – go into it a little more – which cannot be verbalised?
15:50 Q: Curiosity.
15:52 K: Oh, no, no, no.
15:57 Q: Sentience. The non-perceived experience, sentience experience?
16:05 Experience without interpretation from the symbols of the mind?
16:13 K: Then what is it that remembers the experience?
16:20 Or there is no such thing as experiencing at all, only a movement.
16:33 Q: Or the other of what we were talking about, as a past is a creation of our minds.
16:42 It is an interpretation of the present but it is artificial.
16:48 K: Sir, please, what do you mean by the present? It is a state of mind which cannot be verbalised, you are saying. Right?
16:57 Q: Or it cannot be perceived, it can only be experienced.
17:02 K: Then who is the experiencer?
17:14 And who says, ‘I recognise this is the present’?
17:15 Q: Well you can’t say that you’re recognising it as the present, because as soon as you do that you are slipping back into...
17:28 K: Therefore, that is just it. So then what is the past? Leave the present for the moment. Then what is the past?
17:38 Q: It’s merely a reflection upon present events, or it is a creation of symbols operative within one’s mind.
18:01 Or you could say it is a content and organisation of those symbols.
18:07 K: The content of the symbols is the past.
18:12 Q: And also the way it is organised.
18:15 K: Organised and so on, is the past, which affects your thinking in the present. Just take… non-thinking – we are not discussing the quality of mind that is non-thinking but the actual mind that thinks.
18:31 Q: That mind lives in the past but not...
18:35 K: That is all we are talking about, not some other quality. First let us understand that mind which functions with the past, lives in the past, and operates from the past.
18:48 Then perhaps we can come to something which is not the past or the future. Right, sir?
18:55 Q: Right.
18:56 K: Sorry. Because otherwise we will get lost in words.
19:00 Q: Could you say that the past is knowledge and the present is learning?
19:13 Because the word knowledge, it seems to me, implies a confidence of whatever area it might cover, but the present is an uncertain compilation or an assimilation of experiences, so that it is not confident.
19:41 The learning is never confident, it’s a new untried experimental kind of thing.
19:46 K: You are saying the past is confidence?
19:48 Q: Well, no, I’m saying that the past contains knowledge because it includes an area that we’re familiar with, whereas the present includes an area that you are perhaps both familiar but also unfamiliar.
20:03 K: But can I separate the past from the present?
20:08 Q: No, and yes.
20:12 K: No, please, let’s be…
20:17 Q: Aren’t these just arbitrary words that are semantically used for the convenience of communication, but in fact the moment you talk of the present you are talking of the past.
20:28 And the moment you talk of the present you are also talking of the future.
20:33 K: Yes.
20:34 Q: So they are semantical devices just for a convenience in communicating.
20:41 But if you define them they lose their meaning.
20:42 K: Sir, but...
20:43 Q: To me, you know, there’s a distinction of sort of an immediate point, you know, a past, present, future that all operate both scientifically and practically within the same instant, but when you start moving away, like a year ago or a year in the future, then the terms take on a certain amount of meaning.
20:59 K: Yes.
21:00 Q: Because, like, in the past, a year in the past, the events become interpretable to the mind and therefore can become knowledge.
21:08 Q: But you were saying something about confidence or at least belief in knowing what went before, just as when I speak what I say does not get to you until the future, so within a very close confine the words don’t have meaning, but when you open it up I think they start having more.
21:30 Q: I think the point that I was trying to make was that the present is not within the realm of language, while the past is part of the intellect.
21:41 K: Yes, but all my life I live in the past. I go to the village, I know how to get there.
21:56 I know my name. I know I have had a great many experiences which guide me, which shape me, which make me think this way or that way.
22:04 I am always operating with the known or within the field of the known.
22:14 That’s all. I mean, this is... So, how am I to change that past, which so conditions my thinking and action, so that there is a different kind of action which is not rooted in the past?
22:38 Q: It seems like there is a great deal of fear when one tries to do this, and this prevents people from letting go of the past and flowing with now.
22:54 K: Why am I frightened of the past? Why is one frightened of the past?
22:59 Q: She said one is frightened is losing the past.
23:02 K: Of losing. Why? You see… (inaudible) Q: Because it gives us a sense of security.
23:08 K: Sir, look, take yourself – sorry – are you frightened of the past?
23:14 Q: No.
23:15 K: Don’t let us discuss verbally or casually. Am I, or you, frightened of the past?
23:22 Q: No.
23:23 K: No, be careful, sir, go into it a little slowly. (Laughs) Don’t say right away, no.
23:28 Q: Yes, sometimes because your mind goes back to the past. And if it was painful you don’t want to have it happen again so you’re caught.
23:39 Q: I am afraid of the future K: No, wait, sir, first take... Are you frightened of the past? Frightened of letting go the known, letting go your experiences, your symbols, your ideas, your concepts, your images?
23:58 Are you afraid to let go?
24:00 Q: Well this is why death frightens us. This is why death is frightening. Because it means letting go of this.
24:06 K: What is frightening?
24:07 Q: Death.
24:08 K: Death. Are you frightened of death?
24:11 Q: Yes, I think so.
24:14 K: Why? Why are you frightened of death?
24:17 Q: Well I think perhaps the fear of letting go of...
24:27 K: So, what do you mean ‘letting go’?
24:34 Who is it that is letting go?
24:38 Q: The I.
24:40 K: Oh no, but don’t… look, don’t so quickly say... Go into it a little more, please. I am frightened of the past. What am I frightened of? The things which I have done which I don’t want repeated – the illnesses, the pain, the sorrow, the anxiety – all that is there and I don’t want to repeat it – my attachment to this house, my wife and so on, so on, so on – is that what I am frightened of?
25:13 Q: Well there is that and there is more too. There is the knowledge that I have that will get me home from here, for instance.
25:26 How to do things that I have learned.
25:28 Q: But that knowledge may be meaningless. It may not have any import to you.
25:34 K: Yes, sir, I mean, we are discussing, we are trying to find out why I am frightened of the past, one is frightened of the past.
25:41 Q: One of the reasons I would be frightened of the past is that I have been such a damn fool in the past, and unless I can break the path that leads me back to being a damn fool then I’ll be a damn fool in the future too.
26:01 K: So what do I do then? Why should I be frightened of it?
26:03 Q: Well we have to make it over again, I guess, break the icons that live in the past.
26:10 I think the past is more future than it is past. And it is not simply a semantic position, but that we live in the past which means that it’s always in a future for us.
26:20 K: Yes, I live in the past and I am afraid of what might happen tomorrow. So the tomorrow is much more important than the past.
26:36 Is that it?
26:40 Q: Yes.
26:43 K: The tomorrow being the death. (Pause) Q: A repetition of painful experiences from the past.
26:49 K: Yes, that’s what he’s saying – repetition of painful experiences, and the non-repetition of pleasurable experiences.
26:58 You must have both, you can’t just have...
26:59 Q: I think we are afraid of the past when we are dependent on it and we sense that it limits our freedom.
27:14 K: So you are saying any dependency breeds fear.
27:22 Q: I think so.
27:24 K: Not think – we must go into this, not, ‘I think so or believe so’, but actually.
27:31 Do you depend on anybody or any idea, any conclusion, of which you are afraid to let go?
27:45 Yes?
27:46 Q: Yes. At the same time realise it limits… (inaudible) K: Wait, wait, wait, madame, slowly, go slowly. One is frightened of letting go because I depend. What do you depend on? You don’t have to tell me. Deeply, what do you depend on? Your husband, your children, your house, your bank account, your ideas, your concepts, your conclusions?
28:21 Do you depend on those? And you are afraid to let those go? Right? You say yes. Now just a minute, go slowly. Then you are different from the thing upon which you depend.
28:46 Isn’t it?
28:50 Q: Yes, I see.
28:57 K: But are you different from the things you depend upon?
29:06 Aren’t you the things that you depend upon?
29:12 Q: Thank you. I see.
29:16 K: So… No, just look. The division between the things I depend upon and the me that depends upon, this division is the cause of fear.
29:30 Q: Yes.
29:31 K: No, please, not yes – just see.
29:32 Q: I see.
29:33 K: I mean see the truth of it, bite it. (Laughs) So I have learnt something – not learnt – I see something actually, that division breeds fear.
29:57 Q: Suppose they are in harmony. There are some people where the two, the garments or the things, and they are in some… (inaudible) K: I am harmonious with this piano?
30:12 Q: Some people could probably conjure...
30:16 K: Not some people – are you harmonious with this piano?
30:25 I may be harmonious with nature because in that there is no challenge.
30:32 I accept it is beautiful, it is lovely, it is nice, but are you harmonious with your friend?
30:43 Q: Yes.
30:44 K: No. And this disharmony does breed fear.
30:55 (Pause) So I am frightened of death – that is, of tomorrow or ten years later – because I like the present.
31:12 I like living in the field of the known and I don’t want to enter into the field of the unknown, which is death.
31:23 Q: It seems to me that what we are really afraid of is not being able to predict the continuance of events as they… (inaudible) K: You are not able to preserve the past.
31:35 Q: Or be able to make sure that it’s going… (inaudible) K: Yes, that is it, sir. Is that our problem?
31:46 Q: I think that my problem is not knowing whether I know enough to ever let it go and I… (inaudible) K: Must I know enough to let go?
31:59 Q: It seems like this is my problem.
32:01 K: No, sir, it is not... I think we are stating the problem wrongly, if I may suggest.
32:09 What is the problem, sir?
32:14 Q: I have an insatiable greed for knowledge.
32:21 K: What kind of knowledge?
32:24 Q: Every kind. Technology.
32:28 K: What, I have three score ten years, and I can’t learn about everything in that period, can I?
32:42 Be a philosopher, a guru – if you want it – a teacher, a scientist – you follow?
32:51 – impossible! Know all the languages on the earth, know all the birds of... (laughs) Q: At what point do I give up and say...
33:04 K: No, no, no; see what you are stating: I must know. I must have complete knowledge about everything.
33:11 Q: I realise that is an impossibility.
33:14 K: Therefore what do you mean then? Come a little nearer.
33:16 Q: What I mean is, where do I stop and say that I do know enough?
33:19 K: Why do you… What do you...
33:21 Q: Where are the limits of knowledge?
33:24 K: No, no. What do you mean by knowing? The world, external world? Which is so vast – the fishes and the moon. You follow?
33:38 Q: No, I think I must… (inaudible) K: Not must, just...
33:46 I mean, can I know myself completely?
33:51 Q: That’s the question.
33:53 K: That is all the question – not the universe and the cosmos and what lies on the moon.
34:03 Q: That seems to be curiosity.
34:11 K: No, no. Is that the question, sir? Can I know myself completely?
34:18 Q: Is that the same question as knowing enough?
34:19 K: No, no. When you say ‘I know enough’ it means you have accumulated. ‘Now I know enough, thank God.’ Q: Can knowing yourself completely mean removing the symbols and the constructs?
34:40 K: I don’t know what it means. We are going to go… If you want...
34:43 Q: May I ask a question?
34:46 K: Yes, sir.
34:48 Q: Yes. Why do some people place so much value on learning?
34:54 K: I don’t know, sir, what they mean by learning. Look, sir, I want – living in this world – I want to live and change, bring about a different – you follow? – in the world and in myself.
35:11 Q: What I mean by learning is acquiring knowledge. I don’t understand why people place such a high value on that.
35:19 K: After all, if I have to do a job properly I must learn about that job.
35:25 Q: Well, the reason I ask the question is that what interests me right now is, I guess, discovering what I am, who I am, and none of the information that I have acquired, that I call knowledge, has helped me at all.
35:46 K: No, so let’s begin.
35:47 Q: So I wonder why it is important.
35:49 K: Let us begin, sir. Can I know myself? Can I learn about myself? Can I have enough – not enough – can I have total knowledge of myself?
36:04 Q: Well the times when I’ve felt that I didn’t feel it was knowledge but something that I simply saw, not really learned.
36:12 Q: Yes.
36:13 Q: It was more direct than the feeling I have when I think of knowing something.
36:18 K: Yes, that’s right. Now can I explore into myself so completely that there is no dark corner in myself?
36:37 Because the dark corner may be the whole region that produces conflict.
36:45 You follow, sir? So can I expose myself to myself completely? Put it, any word you like to use.
36:55 Q: It seems to me, first of all…
36:59 Q: I’ve got a question as to, for me, it seems it is not possible to know oneself completely.
37:06 K. Wait, sir, I don’t… I don’t... Please, put that question first and let’s find out if you are sufficiently interested in it to go into it thoroughly.
37:15 Don’t say it is not possible, it is possible.
37:18 Q: For me.
37:19 K: How do you know?
37:21 Q: I have been experimenting for 45 years.
37:27 K: Oh, you may be experimenting wrongly.
37:35 (Laughter) I am not criticising.
37:41 Q: I understand. I am not taking it personally.
37:50 K: Yes, sir?
37:54 Q: It seems to me, first of all, you have to get rid of this static idea, this idea that our mind is a static entity that can be built up and torn down.
38:11 Because as long as we are looking at a life that: something to be built, something to be reached, then you’ll never, you know, we’ll just be looking at something, you know, extending it.
38:16 K: Yes, sir, but you see... Let’s begin. Do I want to learn, do I want to expose myself completely so that I understand? You follow? Do you want to? Yes, sir?
38:22 Q: Could you explain the question a little more clearly because I’m really not sure I understand the question: can I know myself?
38:24 K: He started, sir, by saying, ‘I want to learn about everything,’ and that is impossible. Perhaps I can ‘learn’ – quotes – about myself; partially, superficially, deeply or completely.
38:40 Q: But what is the myself that were are discussing? Is it my thoughts? I’m not sure.
38:45 K: We are going to find out. We are going to expose. Is that what you want to discuss?
38:50 Q: Yes.
38:51 K: Right? And do you want to go very, very deeply into it?
38:56 Q: Totally.
38:57 K: Good. Put your teeth into it. Right. I want to learn about myself. I want to expose myself. I want to see what I am. I want to see what ticks over. Now how do I find out? I want to see what I am, not only at the conscious level but deep down.
39:32 Now how do I set about it?
39:38 Q: Maybe a good way to start is to begin to divorce yourself from your past experiences.
39:50 K: Can I?
39:51 Q: Sure.
39:53 K: (Laughs) Can I?
39:55 Q: Why?
39:56 Q: What I think is just to observe yourself as you behave, what it is that you’re actually doing.
40:05 K: Just let’s go slowly into this, sir. Look, I want to find about myself. Right? Now how do I set about it? Tell me. I know nothing. Right? Don’t tell me I must divorce myself, I must do this, I must do that – I know nothing. Because I don’t want to repeat what other people have said – analysts, psychologists – out, all that.
40:34 I don’t know a thing about myself.
40:36 Q: That is very difficult to do.
40:39 K: But that is the first thing, isn’t it?
40:41 Q: Yes, but it is difficult to do.
40:42 K: No, no, it is not difficult. Because if I look at myself through the eyes of the analyst I am not looking at myself, I am looking through his eyes.
41:00 Right? So, that is the fact. Therefore that doesn’t touch me anymore. Right? It is not difficult. No. Ah, then we won’t go further. We will stop there and tackle this question, go into it.
41:15 Q: A thing which somebody might be able to do, he might be able to realise that the self in which he is operative, or what he is involved in, might be very different than maybe the nature out there.
41:30 He might ask the question: why is the self that he is acting in so different from that of nature?
41:38 K: Yes, sir, but I know nothing, I am just beginning. You are all stating things. I just begin. I say look, I know nothing about myself. Therefore I am not going to repeat or look through the eyes of anybody else.
41:57 Right? That is all my first step.
42:02 Q: It seems that as you are moving through and relating with things, that you not analyse or figure out what you are doing but just watch yourself as you’re behaving, watch what response is.
42:16 K: I am going to learn. I am going to find out. Watch. Now what do you mean, ‘I am going to watch myself’? Now, what do you mean by watching yourself? Please, go slowly, sir – I hate this speed because you miss so much!
42:33 Watch myself – what does that mean? Who is the watcher? I have to settle these things before I watch myself.
42:42 Q: There isn’t a watcher, there isn’t somebody that recognises what you did the last moment. There is an awareness as you are behaving what things are coming out.
42:54 K: I want to see what I am. Therefore I have no authority. Right? Are you sure of that? I have no authority – you understand? – because I haven’t read a book; I don’t want to read a book; I want to find out.
43:19 Q: What if you’ve read a book? (Laughter) K: Wait, wait. If I have read a book I know its place. I’d leave it there on the book shelf. It doesn’t touch me. Because I have to find out about myself, not...
43:32 Q: But if your present is made up of your past and you cannot…
43:35 K: No, wait, I am coming to that. (Laughs) First see what is implied in this thing. So can I be free to look at myself with eyes that are clear and not darkened or corrupted by others, past or the present?
44:00 Can I?
44:02 Q: No. Not at the first step, you can’t.
44:09 K: Wait, wait, go slowly, sir. Don’t assert anything, please. So can I put aside what other people have told me about myself?
44:23 If I can’t, that is the first problem. You follow, sir? How am I to know myself is the first problem – why is it that I cannot put aside what other people have said about myself?
44:41 Q: Well there’s the conditioning, the aspect of conditioning K: Wait. Slowly. So I see that to know about myself I mustn’t look through the eyes of others.
44:54 Which means I mustn’t look through the knowledge which others have given me, through the experiences of others.
45:06 Now wait a minute; slowly. Am I different from the others? There is a Doctor Skinner, or whatever the person’s name, a psychologist.
45:24 He says all life... there is no such thing in life as freedom and dignity, only we must be conditioned – right?
45:34 – forever and ever, amen. Better and better. Now, I’ll read it and I say ‘By Jove, how true this is’ – I accept it.
45:46 Right? I saw him on television in London and somebody asked him, ‘Sir, you are very authoritarian in asserting all this.’ He said, ‘I am.’ And somebody said, ‘Oh, well, that is very simple then.
46:01 If you are authoritarian we can’t enter into that field.’ (Laughs) You follow? And that was the end of that argument. So, I want... first thing is: I want to find out about myself, what I am.
46:18 And I say I must not look through the eyes of others. Right? Then what is the eyes that I have which is so different from the others?
46:30 Right? Are my eyes different from Doctor so-and-so, etc.?
46:42 Right? Go on, sir, work it out. Are my eyes different? Or I think they are different. Or do I say, ‘Yes, I am like the rest of them’ – right?
47:01 – ‘they are conditioned in one way and I am conditioned in another.’ No?
47:14 Q: But you left out one possibility: you may or may not be the same as others.
47:25 K: No, no, I am the result of all the... of the world. I am the world.
47:33 Q: You are so far as you are concerned.
47:41 K: I am the world. The world is sorrow, misery, misfortune, accident, unhappiness, strife, conceit, vanity – you follow?
47:52 Pour all that into me and I am that. And I won’t say... I say to myself I must understand myself through my own eyes. My eyes are the world’s eyes. No? So, what?
48:09 Q: It is the other way around.
48:12 K: Which is that?
48:14 Q: The world’s eyes are your eyes, because of the way you look at them.
48:20 K: The world’s eyes are my eyes?
48:22 Q: It is not your eyes are the world’s eyes, it’s the other way around.
48:25 K: Yes, that is what we are... My eyes are the same as the world’s eyes.
48:30 Q: No, the world’s eyes are the same as your eyes. It’s the other way around.
48:38 Q: It’s the same thing.
48:41 Q: No, it’s not.
48:45 K: Let’s understand her, sir. The world’s eyes are my eyes – is it?
48:53 Q: Because of the way you think of them. You make the world’s eyes your eyes.
48:55 K: The world’s eyes are my eyes. Aren’t we saying the same thing?
48:57 Q: No.
48:58 K: Now let’s find out why it is not. The world’s eyes are my eyes. And I am saying my eyes are the world’s eyes. What is the difference?
49:14 Q: She may be saying it depends on you, whether or not she will let the world’s eyes be yours.
49:26 K: Sir, I am the world. The world of the country in which I was born, the tradition in which I was raised, the knowledge which was transmitted to me through tradition, and so on and so on – which is you, which is the world.
49:45 Your eyes are my eyes.
49:46 Q: Then why do we have so much trouble understanding each other?
49:50 K: Wait. Because – we are coming to that (laughs) – because I think my eyes are different.
49:58 I have different symbols, different images, different hopes, which each person has that idea, of different hope, different eyes, different knowledge, different...
50:09 Q: Maybe I can only be a product of the world in so far as I have appropriated the world, and maybe I can only appropriate the world in so far as I appropriate it in my own way.
50:24 K: Yes, sir. But look, sir, I am concerned with understanding myself. (Laughs) I always come back to that. And I say I must look at myself. Is it possible to look at myself without the world’s judgement – right? – the world’s analytical eyes, the world’s saying this is good, this is bad, this is right, this is wrong, you must do this, you must not?
50:57 Q: Well it seems to me that if yourself is predicated upon your experience with the world, you have a... if your eyes are the world then you have an equivalent, so you have to discard both of them, either the world – and if you discard the world, you are going to discard the self.
51:24 K: That is all. That is just... up to now that’s just words. If I discard the world I am discarding myself. Therefore there is nothing to learn. Even I throw myself out the... (laughs) Q: No.
51:43 Q: But then there might be something under that.
51:45 K: We will come to… Before... You see, I can only come to the depth if I really put myself out. Not commit suicide – you understand what I mean (laughs).
52:00 Q: Are you saying, for example, that in order to attempt to know yourself, to begin the steps of knowing oneself, that it’s really tantamount to the conflict then of dependency?
52:16 If I am dependent on another person, on another object, or what have you, and that makes me different, therefore I am afraid… (inaudible) K: You see, you are coming to a conclusion.
52:28 You are coming to a conclusion. I am just... Please, madame, do…
52:31 Q: I just was asking a question.
52:40 K: I see how important it is that I must know myself.
52:49 Myself is the world, multiplied by millions, billions.
52:58 Now how am I to watch, learn, observe, without any judgement?
53:12 Right? Then I can only see. Right? Right, sir? Please proceed a little bit with me. We will find out what lies below when I discard everything. Can I look at myself? Is it possible to look at myself without any judgement?
53:32 Q: No.
53:33 K: Why do you say no? Be simple, sir. Slowly, go step by step. Why do you say no?
53:44 Q: I would say that the self at which you are looking at implies some sort of reflective process, and the elements within that reflective process are acquired by the world, and so you are looking at yourself through the elements that are acquired through the world.
54:19 So it seems as if these elements are part of the world, and I feel that the self is also acquired from the world.
54:34 So both the world and both the self are acquired through the same processes, or are of the same elements.
54:45 K: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Now, after stating that, I am asking you: where are you? When you say, ‘I want to see myself,’ where are you at the end of that statement?
54:58 Where are you in your understanding of yourself?
55:01 Q: You are in a tautology.
55:03 K: What is that?
55:04 Q: Well, you are into a... you have two things which are the same. You are in a circle.
55:11 K: That is what we said, sir. The world is me and me is the world. (Laughs) Be simple, my darling, sir. Now I want to find out: can I look without the eyes of the world?
55:30 Which means without my prejudice. Right, sir?
55:32 Q: You are saying, sir, that the eyes of the world are all there is, and if you look without that there is nothing left which can look.
55:43 K: We are going to find out Q: That is what he is saying, I think.
55:45 K: We are going to find out whether... I want to find out what lies below all this mess, which is part of me.
55:59 So I must first clear... there must be clearance of the mess. Right? Whether it is the world or me or the world, doesn’t matter. There is a mess, of which I am. Now can that mess be cleared? Put it in different ways, it doesn’t matter. Can that mess which is me, which is in me, be washed away?
56:22 Q: I think it can be non-operative for periods of time.
56:26 K: Ah, I don’t want periods (laughs). One day it works, next day, for weeks and weeks and weeks it doesn’t wash out. No, I want to wash it out. So is that... Let’s go into it, sir. Please, you are... If this interests you. If it’s something else, we’ll discuss that equally. I want to find out if this entity, with its form, name, etc., etc., can be washed clean so that there is no mess.
57:05 Right? That’s all. Put it ten different ways, it is the same thing. That mess is the world, and the world is this mess.
57:18 There is no division. Now, after stating that clearly, what do I do? I see the truth of it. You follow, sir? Not just verbal theory, I see the truth of it, that the mess is me and the mess is the world.
57:36 The two are one. I don’t say the world and me. It is one mess, of which I am part. Right? Right, sir?
57:47 Q: I don’t see how you got there, and if I do I am not sure I agree with it.
57:55 K: Good. How I got there? I will make it clear, for myself.
58:05 Good. I am born in a Catholic country, in Italy, in Rome, where the church is very strong, where Catholicism has been practised verbally as well as superficially for 2000 years.
58:29 And that world, that Catholic education, upbringing, has shaped my mind.
58:37 Right? I am a Catholic, with my belief in Jesus and – you know.
58:46 Now, I want… He hears that you must look at yourself. Right? He says, ‘Why should I look at myself? Because I don’t believe it. I am God, I am...’ You follow? So he is so totally conditioned, he won’t even consider looking at himself.
59:11 But a man who is already a little broken says, ‘What is this self? I want to inquire.’ Right? ‘Why should I look at myself? What is so important that I must know myself?’ I say it is important because if you know yourself you know the world.
59:37 If you know yourself you will be free or understand the conflict between you and the world and the conflict in yourself.
59:45 Right, sir?
59:46 Q: That’s a premise.
59:47 K: No, it is not at premise.
59:48 Q: It’s not a premise?
59:51 K: No.
59:52 Q: If you understand yourself you will understand the world.
59:56 K: No, I see the truth of it. I see the truth that in understanding what I am, I understand my relationship with others.
1:00:05 Q: Doesn’t that assume that you understand others as well?
1:00:09 K: Ah no, because others may have their own difficulties, their own – you follow? – slightly different.
1:00:16 Q: (Inaudible) …a relationship.
1:00:18 Q: But you said that you would understand… if you know yourself you will understand your relationship with others. That takes the others...
1:00:25 K: My relationship with others.
1:00:27 Q: Well, okay, I don’t want to quibble over terms.
1:00:30 K: No, no, I understand, sir, we don’t want to quibble, but I live in conflict with my neighbour, with my wife, with my children, with my world, and that’s part of this conflict.
1:00:40 I say: why does it exist? I want to understand that. That’s all.
1:00:47 Q: Is not part of the conflict due to the...
1:00:52 K: Wait, wait. I want to understand the conflict. Now I am going to find out why it exists. Right? Not start with a premise. (Laughs) Why does it exist? I see why it exists superficially. Right? Nations, politicians, religious divisions – superficially there is conflict because of division.
1:01:20 Right? Now I say, ‘By Jove, is there a division in me?’ Is there a contradiction in me?
1:01:36 I know it exists in the world. Is there in me a contradiction? Right? There is. I say, ‘All right, why does it exist?’ Now wait; go slowly, please. Why does it exist? Is it... No, you say it exists. How do you know it exists?
1:02:05 Q: Well...
1:02:07 K: Don’t… How do you know you exist in conflict?
1:02:12 Q: On one level I can feel the discordance. On another level I can intellectualise the discordance.
1:02:20 K: So what does that mean?
1:02:24 Q: Right there, there is a conflict. (Laughs) K: (Laughs) What does that mean? Go on, sir, what does it mean? Go into it a little more, don’t...
1:02:33 Q: Well, it seems as if you have a self which is a function of the world, which was acquired through your action with the world; and also it seems as if there is a self or, to use a term, a consciousness which is different from that which was created by your interaction with the world.
1:03:06 K. Yes. That is, sir, you are saying – I am not saying, you are saying – you exist in conflict. I say: how do you perceive that conflict? Be simple – how do you know, how are you aware that there is conflict? How do you know?
1:03:25 Q: Because I feel it.
1:03:29 K: Wait, wait. Go slowly. What do you mean by that? Be simple with me, sir, be very simple.
1:03:37 Q: I am able to feel that this consciousness or certain feelings within me seem to be very different than the self that has been created by my social situation, so I am able to see how different the two are, that one seems to be completely different than the other, so...
1:04:05 K: Is it? Is it? I am not sure. I am not at all... I am not saying it is or it is not – I am not sure.
1:04:13 Q: Sir, in myself I observe myself as lots of selves, fragmented selves that argue with each other.
1:04:20 K: Yes, the world is fragmented; am I also fragmented?
1:04:27 I am not comparing myself with the world. I see I am fragmented. Contradiction means fragmentation – conscious, unconscious is fragmentation – thinking one thing, doing another, saying another – contradiction.
1:04:38 So I live in contradiction, I am in conflict. That is conflict. Now, wait a minute, sir, my question is: how do I look at it?
1:04:48 How do I see this conflict? You understand what I mean?
1:04:57 Q: Yes, I do. How I look at it is: one voice arises and the other voice arises and they start arguing and then I become aware that they are arguing and something else happens.
1:05:19 K: Yes. He said just now, ‘I feel it.’ Q: I see it as desires.
1:05:29 K: Opposing desires Q: Desires, both of which can’t be satisfied. That’s how I experience it.
1:05:35 K: Wait. So, two contradictory desires create conflict. I am asking you: how are you aware that it is conflict?
1:05:59 Q: (Inaudible) Q: Well you can almost say that it might not even be a conflict.
1:06:09 It might be that the self that is created through your social interaction may not work for your… (inaudible) K: Look, sir, look, sir, I have two desires, opposing desires: wanting to go out and look the lovely sun, you know, day, and sitting here listening to you.
1:06:32 I have two opposing desires – what happens?
1:06:33 Q: (Inaudible) K: Wait, wait, look at it, take a little... What happens in me? These two opposing desires, contradictory desires – what takes place?
1:06:40 Q: Division.
1:06:41 Q: You make a choice.
1:06:41 K: No, before you make a choice, please, what takes place when you have these two opposing desires – wanting to go out and wanting to stay in.
1:06:42 Q: A division.
1:06:43 Q: (Inaudible) …of energy.
1:06:43 Q: Confusion.
1:06:44 Q: You have division, separation.
1:06:45 K: (Laughs) It shows you are not aware of it, that’s all. You are verbalising. I want... Look, sir, I really would like to go out, instead of sitting here. I say, ‘What...’ And I see what takes place.
1:06:59 Q: Thought.
1:07:00 K: What takes place?
1:07:02 Q: (Inaudible) Q: Why don’t you face both things at the same time? I mean, isn’t the conflict a part of enjoyment? The more conflict there is the more things we actually do inside our head. Maybe that more of those… (inaudible) K: Sir, you see, my point is, when I have these two opposing desires I have to choose, haven’t I?
1:07:26 Or do I say, ‘No, I don’t have any opposing desires’? Either I choose, say, ‘I prefer to stay here and I’ll go out later in the evening.
1:07:37 Besides it is too hot now (laughs) so I will go out later in the evening.’ So I choose.
1:07:42 Q: Don’t you? You are out there now too, aren’t you?
1:07:47 K: Ah! Actually. Opposing. Please, sir, don’t. Opposing desires – the desire to go out, the desire to stay in; and equally strong. You follow? In that state the mind says choose. I choose to stay. No?
1:08:03 Q: No, I don’t see that you have to.
1:08:09 K: Ah! I don’t have to.
1:08:12 Q: No, I mean I don’t see that you have made that choice, because you’re here and we’re here, but we’re also out there in another way, at the same time, aren’t we?
1:08:26 K: No.
1:08:28 Q: And also at home and in the past, in the future, all...
1:08:30 K: Sir, actually, sir. Actually, for this morning, I am saying I want to go out, and also I want to stay in. Of course, taken in the large context I am at my – you follow? – various places, because that is the past, that time exists now. Now here I am. I have to choose, and I’d say I’d better stay indoors and listen to this chap talking about all this.
1:08:53 Right? And I say to myself: why do I choose?
1:09:02 Why should I choose? Conflict is that, isn’t it?
1:09:14 When I have to choose between that and that, equally strong desires, choice then becomes conflict.
1:09:21 Q: Can it not also be a freedom?
1:09:25 K: How?
1:09:26 Q: Because once you have made a choice...
1:09:31 K: Ah! Wait. You have to make a choice. The moment I make a choice I have decided not to be in conflict.
1:09:45 Q: Yes.
1:09:46 K: Therefore conflict ended.
1:09:50 Q: Yes.
1:09:52 K: Through choice.
1:09:55 Q: Through choice.
1:09:59 K: Which means what?
1:10:03 Q: That you are free.
1:10:10 K: Ah! (Laughter) Q: I can resolve the conflict.
1:10:30 Q: It seems that to understand that you have got a choice when you can make a choice you’ve got to have the alternatives within your own mind.
1:10:55 K: Which means also, sir, doesn’t it, where there is choice there must be conflict.
1:10:56 Q: Conflict.
1:10:57 K: That’s all my point.
1:10:58 Q: Why would I have to have a desire to begin with?
1:10:59 K: Why? Because it is a lovely morning, beautifully clear day, and I have been living in a fog of Los Angeles and come up here and look at this marvellous sky and blue, I say, ‘Marvellous, I’d like to go out.’ That’s very simple. And also I would like to come and listen, go into this. I have got it, there it is. I’d like to be peaceful, quiet, but I am tearing, ambitious, you know, competitive and I am violent. This goes on. Doesn’t matter whether it is going out or coming in. This is very simple. So the question is: where there is choice there must be conflict.
1:11:12 Q: I don’t see why. I really don’t see why. I mean, it seems to me that...
1:11:16 K: Sir, look, look, just a minute. You know the road to Ojai. There is no choice.
1:11:19 Q: There are two different roads.
1:11:23 K: Wait, wait. But you know you will take the longer road or the shorter road, but there is no conflict.
1:11:32 Q: Right?
1:11:34 K: Conflict exists when there is contradiction, when there is a choice between this and that.
1:11:44 And we live that way – you follow? – there are the conscious desires and the unconscious desires, and there is a battle going on all the time.
1:11:58 Q: It seems it’s inherent in the nature of life, though.
1:12:08 K: Ah, wait! You say that is the nature of life. That is not the natural way of living. That is absurd.
1:12:13 Q: Well, take, for instance, your conflict of wanting to be outside and wanting to be here.
1:12:21 That is the nature of your life, right now.
1:12:31 K: No. (Laughs) I took that as an example. I am not in conflict, wanting to go out and wanting to stay in.
1:12:40 Q: Fine. Say one has responsibilities...
1:12:42 K: Sir, just go into this. We’ll go into that afterwards. Just see the truth of it, the fact of it – you understand? – that where there is opposing desires there is conflict. Then out of that conflict I choose, there is choice.
1:13:00 And therefore choice implies contradiction; choice implies conflict; choice forces me to say, ‘This I will choose.’ Sir, this is simple enough.
1:13:15 So my life is based on choice. I am always doing that. No? No?
1:13:25 Q: Sometimes.
1:13:26 Q: Sometimes.
1:13:28 K: When don’t you choose?
1:13:32 Q: When you don’t have desires. If you don’t have two desires.
1:13:37 K: Which means what?
1:13:39 Q: You don’t care.
1:13:42 K: Take those two roads – one goes shorter, one is longer.
1:13:50 You know very well you can take both, it doesn’t matter. You’ll take the shortest if you are in a hurry. You take the longest. There is no problem there.
1:14:04 And you say there is no problem because I see the two roads very clearly.
1:14:13 Right? The two paths are very clear. There is no choice. So you are saying: when there is clarity there is no choice.
1:14:23 Q: When you don’t care.
1:14:26 K: Ah, no, no. I don’t care whether I take that road or that road because there it’s not important.
1:14:36 But I get confused because I have to choose.
1:14:44 And choice exists because I don’t know. But if there is clarity, as these two roads, there is no choice.
1:14:56 There is only action. To me there was no choice, whether to stay in or go outside.
1:15:14 (Laughs) So to understand myself there must be clarity.
1:15:23 Right? Clarity cannot exist if I choose what I see – good, bad – if I choose according to my motive.
1:15:46 And I want to see myself totally, and what lies beyond that.
1:16:00 Q: It seems to me, though, that even though I see myself very clearly that does not necessarily mean that I won’t have to choose, because I still have…
1:16:13 K: I have to choose. Sir, just a minute. I have to choose between this pair of trousers and another pair of trousers – right? – between this cloth and that cloth. I have to choose whether I go to London tomorrow or not. You understand? There is a certain level of choice there, it must exist. Now, then where else do we exercise choice?
1:16:33 Q: Well for example, my parents may have wanted me to become something and my teacher may have wanted me to be something else.
1:16:41 K: All right, my parents want me to become an engineer and I want to be – what? I want just to do nothing. What am I to do?
1:16:51 Q: So there’s a conflict, even though I see it.
1:16:56 K: Ah, no, no. Wait a minute, sir, go... Why should there be conflict?
1:17:05 Q: To make a choice.
1:17:08 K: My parents want me to be an engineer or a scientist or a businessman and I don’t want to be.
1:17:15 Where is there a choice? While I am young, a baby, child, I either revolt and run away – as is happening – or I acquiesce because I am frightened to go out by myself – you follow? – and face the world and face the music and I don’t know how to do it; so I say, ‘All right, Papa,’ or Father, Dad, Mummy, ‘it’s all right, I’ll accept it.’ That builds up in me a tremendous resentment, doesn’t it?
1:17:38 Which I am going to let out later on, on my poor wife, or children, or throw a bomb.
1:17:53 Q: But still, at this point in my life...
1:18:02 K: Wait, sir, follow it right through. So, where does choice exist at all? Why have we made choice such an important thing?
1:18:14 Q: We are exposed to a variety of conditionings and they may conflict, they may be different, they may demand different things of us, and we don’t know their importance.
1:18:21 Someone has told us that one thing is important.
1:18:26 K: Sir, is there choice if you see something very clearly?
1:18:40 Q: I think, in order to have clarity, which would then breed action, you would have to be operating on some sort of model which is absolute.
1:18:53 K: Ah! You are starting with a theory. I know nothing. I am just asking. I see the truth that conflict exists because of contradiction. Where there is contradiction I must choose. And that makes me do all kinds of things. You follow? At the end of it I am worse off than before. So I say to myself: why should I choose at all? Is there an action which comes with clarity, not through choice?
1:19:25 Clarity. As those two roads.
1:19:29 Q: Sir…
1:19:30 K: Wait, wait. Go slowly, go slowly. Is there clarity?
1:19:38 Q: When I really care about something I seem clear.
1:19:41 K: Not when. Then we are discussing theoretically.
1:19:44 Q: You’re talking about intelligence, aren’t you?
1:19:48 K: Ah! I am not going to use words. I say clarity – good enough.
1:19:56 Q: Okay, clarity. I’ll use clarity too, but it seems to me you are saying we should look very clearly that there is an action in that seeing.
1:20:05 K: Therefore my concern now is: I want to understand myself. I am coming back. And to understand anything I must have clarity, to look clearly, without any choice.
1:20:21 Q: Does this clarity come from removing all that?
1:20:27 K: We are going to find out. (Laughs) Dolcemente. I see this truth, this fact, that where there is choice there must be conflict.
1:20:49 And that conflict has no clarity. Conflict cannot bring clarity, full stop. I see that as clearly as I see that record, that tape recorder.
1:21:04 Do you? That is the truth – you follow? – nobody can take that away. So now, with that clarity, which I have understood, which is the fact, I say: now, can I look at myself with that clarity, as clear as the tape recorder, without any distortion?
1:21:38 Distortion means choice. Right?
1:21:40 Q: I think if you were to look at yourself with that clarity you could not be operating within the self that has been…
1:21:54 K: Wait! You are... it is a premise. I don’t know anything. First, I only know I must look at myself with clarity. I have seen that. Then I say: now, how… clarity? Right? Then if the mind is clear, what is there to look at? I won’t go into it.
1:22:15 Q: Is that clarity something that is unique to you? In other words, can you say, ‘I am clear,’ and someone else says, ‘Well, you are just crazy.’ K: Ah, on that I can’t help.
1:22:33 (Laughter) Probably I am.
1:22:34 Q: This clarity that you are talking about depends on nobody else.
1:22:39 K: No, no.
1:22:41 Q: Nothing else.
1:22:42 K: No, it is not a personal experience. I don’t. A personal experience is a terrible thing – for me at least.
1:22:52 We are talking of the world and me. Me is the world and the world is me. And I want to understand the me which is the world. And to understand myself, and therefore you or anybody, one must be clear.
1:23:10 Right? That’s all. It is not... that clarity is not my personal clarity. Clarity – for you, for me, for anybody.
1:23:20 Q: Then it has to be agreed upon.
1:23:23 K: Oh no! It is not a question of agreement. It is a question of investigating together, looking together, sharing together, and seeing what it is.
1:23:38 If you refuse and I see clearly, I can’t help it, but we are both of us walking on the same road, with the same speed, with the same intensity, with the same intention to look.
1:23:51 If you are not, I can’t help it. It is not my personal look. You say, ‘No, sorry, I am tired, I want to stop.’ I say, ‘All right, stop.’ But I’ll also wait and let’s move together again.
1:24:08 Q: You see that where there is choice there is conflict, and you see that with clarity.
1:24:15 K: That is a fact, isn’t it?
1:24:17 Q: Yes, now…
1:24:18 K: Wait, sir. That is a fact, isn’t it?
1:24:22 Q: Yes.
1:24:23 K: That’s all. That’s a fact; as factual as the piano that is here.
1:24:28 Q: I know.
1:24:29 K: Then what?
1:24:31 Q: Then do you see – this may sound like a verbal question but I don’t mean it that way – do you see the clarity with clarity too?
1:24:42 K: Ah, there is only clarity. I don’t see clarity. There is only clarity. Because, sir, it is like looking through clear glass. There is no distortion and therefore no choice.
1:24:59 When you see clearly you act.
1:25:02 Q: Yes.
1:25:03 Q: Is it clear that there is no distortion?
1:25:05 K: Therefore I’ll have to find out – you follow? – I have to look into it, say: what is distortion? What makes the mind distort things? Yes, sir?
1:25:18 Q: It seems to me you’re saying that in order to have clarity the conflict must be ended but in order to end the conflict you must have clarity.
1:25:28 K. Ah, no, no, no. No, I don’t say that. I have gone into it step by step.
1:25:33 Q: I understand.
1:25:34 K: I don’t say you must have clarity – I say look, where there is contradiction there must be conflict.
1:25:41 That’s the truth, isn’t it? That’s a fact. And out of that conflict I choose, and that leads to further choice, further conflict.
1:25:56 Right? Do you see the truth of that, that conflict means choice, and therefore more conflict?
1:26:08 That’s all. Therefore the seeing of it is clarity. Sir, look, I saw very, very clearly – about 40, 50 years ago – that religious organisations of any kind – of which I was the head of one – is wrong.
1:26:31 You follow? – wrong. And I said it is wrong, finished. I didn’t argue, I didn’t say, ‘Well, how long shall we go on like this?’ until I get all the money I could – you follow? (laughs). I said, ‘No, the whole thing is wrong. Finished.’ That is, to see clearly. If I didn’t see clearly then there would be choice – you follow? – should I give it up, should I not; because I am the head, I am responsible for all these people; and how shall I earn my livelihood; what will happen to me; who is going to look after me?
1:27:14 Q: Then how does that clarity come about?
1:27:18 K: Ah, wait. How did that clarity come about? Right? Because I didn’t want a thing. I didn’t want to be the head or not the head.
1:27:31 You follow? I didn’t care. I really didn’t care what happened to me. To me. Right? Now, are you as clear as that?
1:27:51 Not at one level and darkness at the other level (laughs) – clear.
1:28:07 So with that clarity I am going to look at myself.
1:28:15 I am greedy – right? – greedy for knowledge, greedy for sex, greedy for position, greedy, envious for a dozen things.
1:28:37 I am envious. It is time to stop. Four minutes more, because at 12:30 we stop. Now, can I look at that greed, envy, clearly?
1:28:47 Both the expression of it outwardly – how this greed, envy arises in me – you follow?
1:28:56 – to look at this whole phenomenon of envy, clearly.
1:29:03 Not my envy – envy – you understand? – which is in you, which is in me, which is in – what’s that? – Nixon (laughs) – in everybody this exists. So it is a universal problem, a human problem, and being a human can I look at this thing completely clearly?
1:29:34 Without choice – I’ll keep greed, I like envy of a certain kind – you follow?
1:29:41 (Laughs) Q: Does this clarity that you are talking about...
1:30:03 K: Ah, not mine.
1:30:04 Q: Or just clarity, this clarity in general, do you think it assumes no longer any sort of involvement with the world?
1:30:13 K: We are going to find out, sir. I am involved with the world. This is the world. (Laughs) Q: Yes, but you are not using the assumptions of the world for this clarity.
1:30:27 K: Why should I? You follow? Say for instance, the world says you must belong to religious groups – right? – you must believe in God, or not believe in God, like the communists; or you must be Krishna conscious, or whatever it is – you follow? – you know, all that thing that goes on.
1:30:48 I say how silly all that is, absurd, it has no meaning. Which means I see clearly the whole of that, and therefore I am out. Not intellectually, emotionally.
1:31:02 Q: Isn’t that transparency, really? If I am transparent then the world is all right, everything is all right?
1:31:23 I am transparent; that’s clarity in itself, isn’t it?
1:31:26 K: Yes.
1:31:27 Q: If we could all be transparent...
1:31:30 K: Ah! (Laughs) Be. Be, not if. So, can I look at myself, my greed, my fear, clearly?
1:31:36 Q: Yes, because you are probably no longer in your greed or fear when you are transparent.
1:31:46 K: Sir, do it, sir! Otherwise why should you sit here all the morning for an hour and a half and talk theoretically?
1:31:55 There is no point. If I say, ‘Look, I am afraid. I am afraid of what people say’ – doesn’t matter, afraid of death, of losing this or that, dependent, and so on, ‘Am I frightened?
1:32:17 All right I am.’ Just look at it without any distortion. You follow? Distortion takes place when thought comes in. Right? Shall we go on tomorrow about this? Or something different?