Krishnamurti_EN

Krishnamurti Subtitles

What is a healthy mind?

Ojai - 18 April 1982

Discussion with Scientists 4

0:10	The Nature of the Mind

0:23	Part Four

0:25	What is a Healthy Mind?

0:37	This is one of a series of
	dialogues between J Krishnamurti,

0:41	David Bohm, Rupert
	Sheldrake, and John Hidley.

0:45	The purpose of these discussions
	is to explore essential questions

0:48	about the mind, what is
	psychological disorder,

0:52	and what is required for
	fundamental psychological change.

0:57	J Krishnamurti is a religious
	philosopher, author, and educator,

1:01	who has written and given lectures
	on these subjects for many years.

1:05	He has founded elementary
	and secondary schools

1:07	in the United States,
	England, and India.

1:11	David Bohm is professor
	of theoretical physics

1:14	at Birkbeck College,
	London University in England.

1:17	He has written numerous books
	concerning theoretical physics

1:20	and the nature
	of consciousness.

1:22	Professor Bohm and
	Mr. Krishnamurti

1:24	have held previous dialogues
	on many subjects.

1:28	Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist,
	whose recently published book

1:32	proposes that learning in
	some members of a species

1:35	affects the species
	as a whole.

1:38	Dr. Sheldrake is presently
	consulting plant physiologist

1:42	to the International
	Crops Research Institute

1:44	in Hyderabad, India.

1:46	John Hidley is a psychiatrist
	in private practice,

1:50	who has been associated
	with the Krishnamurti school

1:52	in Ojai, California
	for the past six years.

1:57	The first three dialogues have
	focused on various processes

2:01	of self-identification
	and their effects.

2:04	The need for psychological security
	has been discussed as growing out

2:09	of a basic division, in which
	the contents of consciousness

2:13	appear to be separate
	from consciousness itself.

2:16	Today's discussion begins
	with the importance of attention.

2:21	K: What is analysis?

2:26	And what is observation?

2:31	In analysis there is the analyser
	and the analysed.

2:37	And so there is always
	that difference maintained.

2:41	Where there is difference
	there must be conflict,

2:46	division,

2:50	and that's one of the factors
	that really is very destructive

2:56	to the whole psychological
	freedom,

3:04	this conflict,
	this division.

3:07	And analysis maintains
	this division.

3:14	Whereas if one
	observes closely

3:17	- I'm not correcting you,
	sir, I'm just enquiring -

3:22	the analyser
	is the analysed.

3:24	Again the same problem:

3:26	thought has divided the analyser
	and the analysed.

3:32	The analyser is the past, who has
	acquired a lot of knowledge,

3:35	information,
	separated himself,

3:39	and is either correcting
	the observed, the analysed,

3:45	make him conform
	- he is acting upon it.

3:49	Whereas the analyser
	is the analysed.

3:54	I think if that is really
	understood very deeply,

3:59	the conflict,
	psychological conflict ends,

4:03	because in that
	there is no division between

4:09	the analyser
	and the analysed,

4:12	there is only
	observation.

4:14	Which Dr. Bohm and we discussed
	at considerable length last year.

4:25	So, if that is clearly
	understood

4:28	- I am not laying
	down the law,

4:30	but I am just…
	as I have observed,

4:33	as one has observed
	this whole business of conflict,

4:39	whether one can live the whole
	of one's life without conflict.

4:48	That means the controller
	is absent,

4:50	which is a very
	dangerous question.

4:56	I feel where there is inattention,
	lack of attention,

5:00	is really the whole
	process of conflict.

5:09	S: Yes, I can see that if both sides
	saw this with the utmost clarity...

5:15	K: Yes. That means they are giving
	intelligence to the whole problem.

5:20	S: What happens if only
	one party in a conflict

5:22	sees it with that utmost clarity?
	K: What happens?

5:27	One gives complete attention
	in one's relationship between

5:31	man and woman;
	let's begin with that.

5:36	You have given
	complete attention.

5:41	When she insults you,
	when she flatters you,

5:44	when she bullies you,

5:46	or when she is
	attached to you,

5:48	all that is the lack
	of attention.

5:52	If you give complete attention,
	and the wife doesn't,

5:57	then what happens?
	That is the same problem.

6:04	Either you try to explain,
	day after day,

6:09	go into it with her
	patiently.

6:15	After all, attention implies also
	great deal of care, affection, love.

6:20	It's not just
	mental attention.

6:24	It's attention
	with all your being.

6:30	Then either she moves
	along with you,

6:36	comes over to your side,
	as it were,

6:39	or she holds on to her

6:45	separative
	contradictory state.

6:52	Then what happens?

6:55	One is stupid,
	the other is intelligent.

6:58	S: But the conflict...
	K: So there is always the battle

7:01	between the stupid
	and the ignorant.

7:04	I mean between the ignorant,
	the stupid, and the intelligent.

7:09	H: A thing that seems to happen
	in that situation is that

7:15	the one's intelligence makes room,
	in which the other person,

7:20	who is caught in some attachment,
	may have freedom to look at it.

7:24	K: But if the other
	refuses to look at it,

7:29	then what is the relationship
	between the two people?

7:31	H: There is none.
	K: That's all.

7:37	You see tribalism is deadly,
	destructive.

7:44	You see it basically,
	fundamentally, and I don't.

7:53	You have seen it probably
	immediately,

7:59	and I'll take many years,
	a long time to come to that.

8:04	Will you have the...

8:07	- I won't use
	the word patience -

8:09	will you have the care,
	affection, love,

8:13	so that you understand
	my stupidity?

8:19	I may rebel against you.

8:23	I may divorce you.

8:26	I may run away
	from you.

8:29	But you have sown the seed
	somewhere in me.

8:38	But that does happen,
	doesn't it, really, in life?

8:43	S: Yes.

8:45	H: You said something
	that interests me here,

8:48	you said that if you
	have seen it immediately

8:50	and the other person may take
	a long time to come to seeing it.

8:53	And it seems like in this attention
	that you're talking about

8:57	perception is immediate.
	K: Of course.

8:59	H: It isn't built up out of...
	K: Oh, no, then it's not perception.

9:04	H: That may be part of the reason
	the other person is having

9:06	difficulty seeing it, is that
	they want it to be proved to them.

9:09	K: You see conditioning is
	destructive,

9:14	and I don't.
	H: Yes.

9:16	K: What is our relationship
	between us two?

9:20	It's very difficult to communicate
	with each other...

9:23	H: Yes.

9:25	K: ...verbally or with care,
	it's very difficult, because...

9:29	H: You won't know
	what I'm talking about.

9:31	K: No, and also I'm resisting you
	all the time. I'm defending myself.

9:36	H: You're defending
	what you think you see.

9:38	K: What I think is right. I have
	been brought up as a Hindu,

9:42	or a British, or a German,
	or a Russian, whatever it is,

9:48	and I see the danger of letting
	that go. I might lose my job.

9:53	People will say
	I'm little-minded.

9:58	People might say
	I depend on public opinion,

10:02	so I'm frightened
	to let go.

10:06	So, I stick to it.

10:08	Then what is your
	relationship with me?

10:14	Have you any relationship?
	H: No.

10:17	K: No, I question whether
	you have no relationship.

10:20	H: I can tell you
	what I see.

10:22	K: Yes. But if you have love for
	me, real, not just attachment,

10:27	and sex, and all that business,
	if you really care for me,

10:33	you cannot lose
	that relationship.

10:37	I may run away,

10:39	but you have the feeling
	of relationship.

10:43	I don't know if I am conveying
	what I mean.

10:45	H: In other words, I don't just
	say, well, I see it and you don't,

10:48	and if you're not going
	to listen, the heck with you.

10:50	K: No. But, sir,

10:54	you have established
	a kind of relationship,

10:59	perhaps very profound,
	when there is love.

11:03	I may reject you, but you have
	that responsibility of love.

11:14	Not only to the particular
	person,

11:17	but to the whole
	of humanity.

11:22	What do you say, sir,
	about all this?

11:25	B: Well, I can't say
	a great deal more.

11:29	I think that this care and attention
	are the essential points.

11:33	And, for example, in the question
	of the observer and the observed,

11:37	or the analyser
	and the analysed,

11:40	the reason why that
	separation occurs

11:42	is because there has
	not been enough attention.

11:44	K: Attention, that's what
	I'm saying.

11:46	B: So that one has to have
	that same attitude even in looking

11:50	at one's own
	psychological problems.

11:56	H: An attitude of care?

11:58	B: Care and attention
	to what's going on.

12:02	One starts to analyse
	by habit,

12:06	and one might condemn
	that, for example,

12:08	that would not be
	the right attitude.

12:11	But one has to give care
	and attention to exactly

12:15	what is happening in that,
	just as in relationship with people.

12:22	And it's because that
	there was no attention

12:24	or not the right kind
	of attention,

12:27	that that division
	arose in the first place,

12:31	and was sustained,
	right?

12:35	S: But it's possible to have
	perhaps this kind of attention

12:38	towards people that we know:
	wives, children, friends, etc.,

12:43	but what about people we don't know?
	I mean, most of us

12:46	have never met any Russians,
	for example, and we feel, many of us,

12:51	there's this terrible fear of Russia,
	and Russian nuclear weapons,

12:55	and the Russian threat,
	and all the rest of it.

12:58	And so it's very easy to think,
	'We've got to have all these bombs,

13:01	and so on, because the Russians
	are so terrible'.

13:05	We can think all these things about
	Russians; we've never met them.

13:09	So, how do we have attention
	to enemies, or imagined enemies,

13:13	that we don't know?
	K: What is an enemy?

13:18	Is there such thing
	as an enemy?

13:24	S: Well, there are enemies in the
	sense that there are people who...

13:27	K: ...who disagree
	with you.

13:29	S: Not only disagree…
	K: Who have definite idealistic,

13:33	ideological differences.

13:36	S: Well, they're usually people
	who are afraid of us, I mean,

13:39	the Russians are afraid of us,
	and we're afraid of them,

13:42	and because they're
	afraid of us,

13:44	they're in a position
	of being our enemies.

13:46	K: Because we are still
	thinking in terms of tribalism.

13:50	S: Yes, certainly.

13:53	K: Supposing you and I
	move out of that.

13:55	I'm Russian, you are English,
	or British, or German, or French.

14:01	I move, I despise
	this sense of tribalism.

14:07	What's my relationship
	then with you?

14:12	H: Well, we...
	K: I'm not Russian then.

14:14	S: No.
	K: I'm a human being

14:18	with all my psychological
	problems,

14:22	and you are another
	human being

14:24	with all your
	psychological problems.

14:27	We are human
	beings, not labels.

14:31	B: Of course, the Russians
	may reject this, you see.

14:34	Suppose, we're in this situation...
	K: We are in that.

14:37	B: ...and the Russians will
	reject us, right? Then we have to…

14:40	then what's the next step,
	right?

14:43	K: So what shall we do?

14:48	You see,

14:54	I represent
	all humanity.

14:58	I am all humanity.

15:04	I feel that way.
	To me it's an actuality, not just

15:09	an emotional explosion,
	emotional, romantic idea.

15:14	I feel I am the rest of mankind;
	I am mankind.

15:19	Because I suffer, or I enjoy,
	I go through all the tortures,

15:24	and so do you,
	so do you.

15:26	So, you are the rest
	of mankind.

15:34	And therefore you have terrible
	responsibility for that, in that.

15:39	So when you meet a Russian, or a
	German, or a British, or Argentine,

15:46	you treat them as human beings,
	not labels.

15:49	S: Then does this simply mean
	that in this largely tribal society,

15:54	with governments, and bombs,
	and weapons of war,

15:57	there'll just be a few individual
	scattered here and there,

16:00	who've dissolved
	tribalism in themselves?

16:03	K: Yes. If a hundred of us
	all over the world really had

16:08	a non-tribalistic attitude
	towards life,

16:13	we would be
	acting like a...

16:17	I don't know - like a light
	in the midst of darkness.

16:23	But we don't.

16:25	This just becomes
	an idealistic romantic idea,

16:29	and you drop it, because
	each pursues his own way.

16:35	S: Yes.

16:37	K: Sir, I think we ought
	to differentiate

16:40	between attention
	and concentration.

16:49	Concentration is focusing
	your energy on a certain point.

17:01	And attention -

17:05	there is no focusing
	on a certain point.

17:09	It's attention.

17:12	H: Concentration seems
	to have a goal in mind.

17:15	K: A goal, motive.
	It's a restrictive process.

17:20	I concentrate on a page,
	but my thoughts...

17:24	I am looking out of the window,
	and I'll pull it back,

17:27	and keep on
	this business.

17:30	Whereas if I gave
	complete attention to

17:33	what I am looking
	out of the window

17:37	- that lizard which is going
	along the wall -

17:41	and with that same attention
	I can look at my book,

17:45	look what I am doing.

17:47	H: Concentration presupposes
	that there's a controller

17:50	in there pulling it back.
	K: That's just it.

17:58	S: But then, if there's
	no controller of the attention,

18:00	the attention is
	simply a response

18:03	to whatever the present
	circumstances are.

18:06	K: You insult me
	- I'm attentive.

18:11	There is no recording
	that insult.

18:20	B: Yes, I said.

18:23	K: You flatter me - a marvellous talk
	you gave the other day.

18:27	I've heard this so often repeated.
	And I'm bored with it, so

18:31	- I'm not only bored -
	I see, what?

18:38	You follow, sir?

18:40	Is it possible - really, that's
	the much more difficult question -

18:44	is it possible
	not to record

18:48	except where
	it is necessary?

18:50	It's necessary to record
	when you are driving.

18:54	To learn how to drive.

18:56	Record when you do your business,
	and all the rest of it.

19:00	But psychologically,
	what is the need to record?

19:07	S: Isn't it inevitable? Doesn't
	our memory work automatically?

19:11	K: Memory is
	rather selective.

19:15	H: We seem to remember things
	that are important to us...

19:18	S: Yes.
	H: ...have some...

19:19	connect in with who we think
	we are and what our goals are.

19:24	B: But it seems to me that when
	there is paying attention

19:29	then in general attention
	determines what is to be recorded

19:33	and what is not, that is,
	it is not automatic anymore.

19:35	K: It's not automatic
	any more. Quite right.

19:37	B: If it comes from the past,
	from the concentration,

19:41	or from the analysis,
	then it will be automatic.

19:46	K: Another problem
	which we ought to discuss

19:50	- we said yesterday we would -
	religion, meditation,

19:56	and if there is
	something sacred.

19:58	We said we would
	talk about that.

20:06	Is there anything
	sacred in life?

20:13	Not thought creating
	something sacred

20:19	and then worshipping that sacred,
	which is absurd.

20:28	The symbols in all the Indian
	temples, they're images,

20:33	like in the Christian
	church,

20:37	or the Muslim
	in the mosque,

20:39	there is this marvellous writing,
	it's the same.

20:46	And we worship that.

20:48	H: That's idolatry.
	K: No. Thought has created this.

20:55	The thought has created
	the image

21:00	and then it worships it.

21:03	I don't know if you see
	the absurdity of it.

21:06	H: Yes.

21:07	S: Well, that's manifestly
	absurd,

21:10	but the more sophisticated
	members of different religions

21:13	would say that
	it's not the thought,

21:15	the image that's created by thought
	that's being worshipped,

21:17	but the image points to something
	beyond thought

21:20	which is being worshipped.
	K: Wait a minute, let's look at it.

21:22	That is, the symbol,

21:25	we know symbol
	is not the real,

21:30	but why do we create
	the symbol?

21:38	Please answer it.

21:40	If there is something beyond,
	why do we create the intermediary?

21:47	S: Well, I think that
	this is a question

21:51	which in certain religions
	has been central to them.

21:53	The Jews who were against all
	idolatry for exactly this reason,

21:57	and the Muslims, who don't
	have images in the mosques.

22:00	K: No, but they have these scripts.
	S: They have writing.

22:03	K: Of course.

22:05	S: Well, they think writing
	is what tells them about

22:08	what lies beyond all symbols.
	K: Yes.

22:11	S: Now, you could say
	the writing simply becomes a symbol,

22:14	but I mean, these are words,
	and words can help us.

22:18	We're having a discussion,
	and these words that we're having,

22:20	your words may help me, for example,
	if they're written down,

22:24	then they're written words
	like Muslim words.

22:27	K: So, why do I have to have
	an intermediary at all?

22:38	H: Because I think I'm here, and
	it's over there, and I don't have it.

22:41	I need some way
	to get there.

22:44	K: No, you're not answering
	my question.

22:49	Is it that you, the intermediary,
	understand, or realised, or

22:55	follow truth,
	or whatever it is,

22:58	and therefore you are
	telling me about it?

23:03	H: Maybe I've seen something
	and I want to tell you about it.

23:06	K: Yes, tell me about it, but why
	do you make yourself interpreter?

23:11	Why do you become the intermediary
	between that

23:14	- I don't know
	what that is -

23:18	and me, who is ignorant,
	who is suffering?

23:21	Why don't you deal with my
	suffering rather than with that?

23:26	H: I think that that will deal
	with your suffering.

23:29	If I can get you to...

23:31	K: That has been, sir,
	that has been the old trick

23:35	of all the priests
	in the world.

23:43	We have had priests
	from time immemorial,

23:46	right?
	H: Yes.

23:48	K: But you haven't
	released my sorrow.

23:53	I am still suffering
	after a million years.

23:57	What for?

23:59	Help me to get rid
	of that.

24:03	Help me to be free, without fear,
	then I'll find out.

24:12	Is it that you want
	position, power, status,

24:19	like the rest
	of the world.

24:23	Now, this is really
	quite serious.

24:27	B: I think, if we try
	to give the priests

24:30	the most favourable
	interpretation,

24:32	that they may
	have considered,

24:35	at least the best among them,
	that there's a kind of poetic imagery

24:39	that people may use to point
	to something beyond that - right? -

24:43	in a communication,
	they are trying to point

24:46	to this sacred which
	we were talking about.

24:50	That's perhaps the way
	they would look at it.

24:52	Now, would you say that
	that would make no sense,

24:54	you know, to have a poetic image
	to point to the sacred.

24:57	K: But, sir, why don't you help me
	to see what is happening to me?

25:04	B: Yes, that's your point,
	don't point to the sacred right away,

25:06	but look at this first.

25:08	K: Help me to be free of it,
	then I'll walk.

25:10	B: Yes, I understand that.

25:14	K: We have never talked -
	nobody has gone into this like that.

25:18	Always God, some saviour,
	some Brahma, and so on, so on.

25:29	And this is what
	we call religion.

25:34	All the rituals are invented
	by thought,

25:39	marvellous architecture
	- by thought,

25:44	all the things
	inside the churches,

25:47	temples, mosques,
	created by thought.

25:51	And having thought create it,
	then thought worships it.

25:57	But thought is not sacred.

25:59	H: Yes, I see that.
	So you are saying,

26:01	is it possible to put a stop
	to thought?

26:03	K: Thought.
	Is it possible?

26:05	H: And thought is the thing
	that gets in the way

26:07	by creating the images...
	K: Of course.

26:09	H: ...which we take
	for something really valuable.

26:11	K: I start out looking
	for something sacred.

26:15	You come along and say,

26:18	'I'll tell you all about it'.
	Then you begin to organise it.

26:24	It's all gone by then,
	it's finished.

26:28	H: Then I just stay within thought,
	that's all I have.

26:30	K: So, if we reject, or understand,
	that thought is not sacred,

26:39	there's nothing holy
	about thought,

26:43	but thought thinks that
	what it has created is holy.

26:48	Right, sir?
	B: Right.

26:50	Would you also add that,
	just for the sake of…

26:53	that time is not sacred?
	K: Time, of course, not.

26:55	B: Nothing in time,
	people would say that.

26:57	K: Tomorrow is not sacred!

26:58	B: They always say,
	only the eternal is sacred.

27:01	K: But to find out what is eternity,
	time must stop.

27:07	H: But we get into a real subtle
	place here, because you have said

27:10	things like absolute attention
	dissolves the self.

27:14	Then absolute attention
	can become a thought.

27:17	K: Idea of it, yes.
	H: Yes, the idea of it.

27:20	So we may go the route
	of creating the idea.

27:24	That seems to always be the danger.
	K: Sir, you make a statement...

27:27	H: Yes.

27:29	K: ...'absolute attention'.

27:33	I don't capture the depth
	of your meaning, what is implied.

27:39	You have gone into it, and you
	can say that - absolute attention.

27:44	I hear it and make it
	into an idea.

27:47	And then I pursue
	the idea.

27:50	H: That seems to be the process.
	K: That's what we do all the time.

27:53	S: Yes.

27:54	K: So - gone.
	Idea is not what you've said.

28:00	What you said
	had depth in it, had some...

28:02	H: But we don't know
	that we're pursuing an idea.

28:05	We don't realise at the time
	that we're pursuing an idea.

28:08	K: Of course not, because I am
	used to this reducing everything

28:15	to abstract ideas.

28:23	So, could we try
	to find out,

28:28	or realise, that anything
	thought does is not sacred?

28:40	S: That seems
	self-evident to me.

28:43	K: All right.
	That's self-evident.

28:45	In all the religions as they are now
	- there is nothing sacred.

28:52	Right?

28:54	S: No, there's nothing sacred
	in itself in the words,

28:57	or the buildings, or the…
	and so on. But in a sense

29:02	all these religions are supposed
	to point beyond themselves.

29:06	K: Yes.

29:09	And to help me to go beyond
	all this, I must start

29:15	with my being free
	from my agony,

29:21	understand my relationship
	with people.

29:25	If there is confusion here,
	in my heart and my mind,

29:30	what's the good
	of the other?

29:36	I am not materialistic.

29:39	I am not anti…
	the other.

29:45	But I say, 'Look,
	I must start where I am'.

29:49	To go very far,
	I must start very near.

29:54	I am very near.

29:58	So I must
	understand myself.

30:04	I'm the rest
	of humanity.

30:07	I am not an individual.

30:11	So, there is the book
	of humanity in me.

30:14	I am that book.

30:16	If I know how to read it,
	from the beginning to the end,

30:19	then I can go...

30:22	then I will find
	if there is a possibility...

30:26	if there is really something
	that is immense, sacred.

30:33	But if you are all the time saying,
	'Look, there is that,

30:38	that will help you',
	I say, 'It hasn't helped me'.

30:42	We have had these religions
	for millions of years.

30:48	That hasn't
	- on the contrary,

30:50	you have distracted
	from 'what is'.

31:01	So, if I want to find out
	if there is anything sacred,

31:07	I must start very near.

31:11	The very near is me.

31:15	And can I free
	myself from fear,

31:20	agony, sorrow, despair
	- all that?

31:27	When there is freedom I can move,
	I can climb mountains.

31:36	S: Sir, are you saying that
	the sacred would become apparent

31:39	if we dissolved fear
	and all these other things.

31:42	K: Obviously, sir.
	That's real meditation, you see.

31:51	S: Through attention
	to what is really happening in us.

31:54	K: Happening, yes,
	that's it.

31:56	S: And what is really happening
	between us and other people,

31:59	and all the rest of it.
	K: Between our relationships.

32:01	S: Yes. Through attention to this,
	this action...

32:05	K: Attention, and we have discussed,
	too, with Dr. Bohm, some time ago,

32:12	having an insight into the whole
	movement of the self,

32:21	which is not
	a remembrance.

32:25	Insight is total perception
	of what you are,

32:32	without analysis,
	without investigation - all that.

32:38	Total immediate perception
	of the whole content

32:43	of your consciousness,

32:48	not take bit, by bit, by bit
	- that's endless.

32:54	H: Oh, we're broken up,
	so we look at each little piece.

32:56	K: Yes. And because we are broken up,
	we can never see the whole.

33:03	Obviously, that seems so logical!
	H: Okay.

33:06	K: So, is it possible
	not to be broken up?

33:11	What is to be broken up?

33:14	This confusion,
	this mess in consciousness,

33:17	which we talked about
	yesterday.

33:25	You see, nobody wants to go
	so deeply into all this. Right, sir?

33:32	First of all, one hasn't the time,
	one is committed to one's job,

33:38	to one's profession,
	or to one's science,

33:40	to one's whatever
	one is doing.

33:44	And you say, 'Please, this is
	too difficult, or too abstract,

33:49	not practical' -
	that's the word they all use.

33:54	As though all this, what you are
	doing and all is terribly practical.

34:05	Armaments - is it practical?
	Tribalism, is...

34:10	oh, well, you know
	all about it.

34:13	So, sir, let's move
	from there.

34:18	Is silence of the mind
	a state of attention?

34:33	Or is it beyond attention?
	I don't know if I'm…

34:38	B: What would you mean
	by 'beyond attention'?

34:41	Let's try to get
	into that.

34:48	K: In attention is there…

34:52	Is attention
	an act of will?

34:56	I will attend.

34:58	H: No, we said
	that's concentration.

35:01	K: Sir, I am asking you,
	where there is attention,

35:07	is there any kind
	of effort?

35:15	Struggle?
	'I must attend'.

35:24	What is attention?
	Let's go into it a little bit.

35:29	What is attention?

35:35	The word 'diligent'
	is implied in attention.

35:40	To be diligent.
	Not negligent.

35:48	S: What does diligent mean?
	Careful? You mean careful?

35:52	K: Yes. Care.
	To be very precise. Diligent.

35:58	B: The literal meaning
	is 'taking pains'.

36:00	K: Pains, that's right.
	Taking pain. Which is to care,

36:06	to have affection, to do everything
	correctly, orderly.

36:15	Not repetitive.

36:22	Does attention demand
	the action of thought?

36:33	S: Well, it doesn't demand
	the action of analysis,

36:35	in the way you've explained it.
	K: No, certainly.

36:37	S: And insofar as thought is
	analytical, it doesn't demand that.

36:41	And it doesn't demand the action
	of will, insofar as will involves

36:46	a separation, an attempt to,
	by one part of the mind,

36:50	force another part
	to do something else.

36:53	And it doesn't imply
	any sense of

36:58	going anywhere or
	becoming anything,

37:00	because becoming leads
	one out of the present.

37:03	K: That's right.
	You can't become attentive.

37:07	S: But in the act of attention...
	K: Just see what is implied in it.

37:11	You can't become
	attentive.

37:13	That means in attention
	there is no time.

37:20	Becoming implies time.
	S: Yes.

37:22	K: In attention
	there is no time.

37:25	Therefore it is not
	the result of thought.

37:29	S: Yes.

37:39	K: Now, is that attention
	silence of the mind?

37:45	Which is a healthy,
	sane mind,

37:53	uncluttered,
	unattached

37:56	unanchored, free mind,
	which is the healthiest mind.

38:08	Therefore I am asking,
	out of that…

38:12	in that attention,
	is the mind silent?

38:20	There is no movement
	of thought.

38:30	S: Well, it sounds
	like it, yes.

38:36	It sounds like
	a state of being

38:38	rather than a state of becoming,
	because it's not going anywhere

38:41	or coming from anywhere.
	K: Again, when you say 'being'

38:44	what does that mean?
	Being what?

38:50	S: Well, being what it is.
	It's not being something else.

38:53	K: No, what does
	that mean, 'being'?

38:59	Are you putting 'being'
	as an opposite to becoming?

39:02	S: Yes.
	K: Ah, then...

39:05	the opposite has
	its own opposite.

39:09	S: Well, by 'being' I simply mean
	a state which is not in a process

39:17	of going somewhere else
	in time.

39:19	K: Which means
	non-movement.

39:26	S: I suppose so.
	B: You could say that, yes.

39:30	K: Non-movement.

39:31	B: If you say what you mean
	by movement,

39:33	that it doesn't mean it's static,
	to say it's non-movement.

39:35	K: No, it's dynamic,
	of course.

39:37	B: Dynamic, but it's
	a little difficult.

39:39	K: There is no moving
	from here to there.

39:42	B: But there is another kind
	of movement, perhaps.

39:45	K: That's what I want
	to go into.

39:49	If we use the word
	'being',

39:54	without movement,
	it is without thought,

40:00	without time,

40:04	which is the movement
	which we know.

40:09	But the other

40:13	has its own dynamism,

40:17	its own movement,
	but not this movement,

40:21	the time movement,
	the thought movement.

40:24	Is that what you call
	'being'?

40:31	S: I suppose it is.

40:39	K: Is that 'being'
	silent?

40:45	You follow, sir?

40:47	We have various
	forms of silence.

40:51	Right?
	S: Yes.

40:55	It may not be silent
	in the sense of soundless.

41:01	K: I am using the word
	'silence' in the sense,

41:04	without a single
	movement of thought.

41:09	S: Well, in that sense it must be
	silent, almost by definition.

41:12	K: Yes. So, has my mind, the mind,
	has it stopped thinking?

41:22	Has - not stopped thinking -
	has thought found its own place

41:27	and therefore

41:31	it's no longer moving,
	chattering, pushing around?

41:39	Because there is no controller.
	You follow?

41:51	Because when there is
	a great silence

41:57	then that which
	is eternal is.

42:00	You don't have to enquire
	about it.

42:06	It's not a process.

42:09	It isn't something
	you achieve, my god!

42:15	By fasting, by rituals,
	by all these absurdities.

42:26	Sir, you hear that.
	H: Yes.

42:29	K: You hear
	X saying that.

42:32	What value has it?

42:37	Value in the sense -
	what do you do with it?

42:45	Has it any importance
	or none at all?

42:50	Because you are going
	your way.

42:53	You are a psychologist,
	you'll go your way, I'll go my way,

42:58	because I have said what I have
	to say, and there it ends.

43:03	Then what?

43:05	Somebody comes along and says,
	'I'll tell you what he means'.

43:12	You haven't the time.
	He has a little time, he says,

43:16	'I'll tell you
	all about it'.

43:18	And you are caught.

43:22	This is what is
	happening.

43:28	From the ancient of times,
	the Sumerians,

43:32	the Egyptians, the Babylonians
	- they have played this.

43:35	And we are doing still
	the same kind of nonsense.

43:41	And I say, what has
	religion done to man?

43:45	It hasn't helped him.

43:51	It has given him
	romantic illusory comfort.

43:57	Actually look what - we're killing
	each other - I won't go into that.

44:14	So, sir, let's begin.

44:17	What is a healthy mind?

44:28	H: It's a mind that's
	not caught so in this...

44:31	K: A mind that's
	whole, healthy,

44:34	sane, holy
	- H-O-L-Y - holy.

44:38	All that means
	a healthy mind.

44:46	That's what we started
	discussing.

44:48	What is a healthy
	mind?

44:53	The world is
	so neurotic.

44:58	How are we going to tell you,
	as an analyst, as a psychologist,

45:03	how are you going to tell people
	what is a healthy mind,

45:05	nobody's going
	to pay attention to it.

45:10	They'll listen to the tape,
	to television,

45:13	they'll agree, but they'll go on
	their own way.

45:19	So what do we do?
	How do we…

45:22	First of all, do I have
	a healthy mind?

45:31	Or is it just a lot of
	pictures, words, images?

45:41	A mind that's
	totally unattached

45:45	to my country,
	to my ideas,

45:48	all totally dispassionately
	unattached.

45:58	H: Are you suggesting that
	only then am I in a position

46:01	to talk to anybody?
	K: Obviously.

46:03	Obviously.

46:06	I may be married,
	I may,

46:09	but why should I be
	attached to my wife?

46:14	H: Then it's an idea of marriage,
	it's not a marriage.

46:17	K: But love is
	not attachment.

46:23	So, have I realised
	that in my life?

46:25	A healthy mind that says, 'I love,
	therefore there is no attachment'.

46:31	Is that possible?

46:35	S: Sir, you make it sound so easy
	and so difficult at the same time,

46:41	because...
	K: I don't see why it's difficult.

46:43	S: Because, you see,
	I hear what you say,

46:46	I think this is absolutely
	wonderful stuff.

46:49	I want to have a healthy mind,
	I want to be in a state of being,

46:52	and then I realise
	that it's back into this,

46:55	that I can't become
	in a state of having a healthy mind,

46:58	and I can't move by an act of will
	or desire into this state.

47:04	It has to happen. And it can't
	happen through any act of my will.

47:08	K: No. So…

47:10	S: So I have to let it happen
	in some sense.

47:12	K: So we begin
	to enquire.

47:15	You begin to say,
	now, why?

47:17	Why am I not healthy?
	Am I attached to my house?

47:21	I need a house,
	why should I be attached to it?

47:25	A wife, relationship,
	I can't exist without relationship,

47:32	life is relationship.

47:35	But why should I be
	attached to a person?

47:38	Or to an idea, to a faith,
	to a symbol - you follow? -

47:42	the whole cycle of it:

47:46	to a nation, to my guru,
	to my god. You follow?

47:50	Attached means attached
	right through.

47:52	A mind can be free of all that.
	Of course it can.

47:58	S: But not just by wanting
	to be free of it.

48:00	K: No. But seeing
	the consequences of it,

48:04	seeing what is
	involved in it,

48:09	the pain, the pleasure, the agony,
	the fear - you follow? -

48:12	all of that is involved in it.

48:17	Such a mind is
	an unhealthy mind.

48:26	S: Yes, but one can even agree
	with that, one can even see it,

48:29	one can even see the movements
	of one's attachments,

48:32	one can even see the destructive
	consequences of all this.

48:36	But that doesn't in itself seem
	automatically to dissolve it.

48:39	K: Of course not. So, it brings in
	quite a different question.

48:46	Which is, sir, do you hear it
	merely with your sensory ears,

48:52	or do you really hear it?

48:57	You understand my question?
	S: Yes.

48:59	K: Is it just casual, verbal, sensory
	hearing, or hearing at depth?

49:15	If you hear it at the greatest depth,
	then it's part of you.

49:21	I don't know if...

49:23	B: I think that generally one
	doesn't hear at the greatest depth,

49:27	and something is stopping it,
	you see. All the conditioning.

49:31	K: And also, probably
	we don't want to hear it.

49:34	B: But the conditioning
	makes us not want to hear it.

49:36	K: Of course, of course.

49:38	B: We're unwilling
	to do so.

49:40	K: How can I say to my wife,
	'I love you but I am not attached'?

49:44	She'll say, 'What the hell
	are you talking about?'

49:57	But if one sees the absolute
	necessity

50:05	to have a healthy mind,

50:14	and the demand for it,
	not only in myself,

50:18	but in my children,
	my society.

50:23	H: But you don't mean by that
	going around demanding of myself

50:25	and other people
	that they become healthy.

50:27	K: No, no.
	I demand in myself.

50:30	I ask why is not
	my mind healthy?

50:34	Why is it neurotic?

50:41	Then I begin
	to enquire.

50:45	I watch, I attend,
	I am diligent in what I am doing.

50:53	B: It seems to me that you said
	that we must have to see

50:56	the absolute necessity
	of a healthy mind, but I think,

50:58	we've been conditioned
	to the absolute necessity

51:01	of maintaining attachment.

51:03	And that's what we hear,
	right?

51:10	S: Well, we haven't necessarily,
	there are many people,

51:13	who've seen that
	there's all these problems,

51:15	there's something wrong
	with the mind,

51:17	they feel that something to be done
	about it, and all that,

51:20	and then take up some kind
	of spiritual practice,

51:23	meditation, whatnot.

51:25	Now, you're saying that
	all these kinds of meditation,

51:27	concentrating on chakras,
	and whatnot,

51:30	are all just the same
	kind of thing.

51:34	K: I have played
	that trick long ago.

51:37	S: Yes.

51:40	K: And I see the absurdity
	of all that.

51:43	That is not going
	to stop thought.

51:48	S: Well, some of these methods
	are supposed to.

51:52	I don't know if they do or not.
	They've never done it for me, or...

51:57	but I don't know if that's because
	I haven't done them enough.

52:00	K: So, instead of going
	through all that business

52:02	why don't you find out,
	let's find out what is thought,

52:06	whether it can end,
	what is implied.

52:09	You follow? Dig!

52:22	Sir, at the end of these
	four discussions

52:28	have you got
	healthy minds?

52:35	Have you got a mind
	that is not confused,

52:40	groping, floundering,

52:44	demanding, asking?

52:47	You follow, sir?

52:49	What a business!

52:56	It's like seeing
	a rattler and say,

52:58	'Yes, that's a rattler,
	I won't go near it'. Finished!

53:01	H: It looks from the inside like
	this is a tremendous deep problem,

53:05	that's very difficult
	to solve,

53:07	and you're saying
	from the outside,

53:09	that it's just like seeing a rattler,
	and you don't go near it,

53:11	there's nothing to it.

53:13	K: It is like that with me.
	H: Yes.

53:16	K: Because I don't want to achieve
	nirvana, or heaven, or anything.

53:20	I say, 'Look'
	- you follow?

53:23	H: Well, I think it's interesting,
	why it looks so deep

53:26	when in fact it isn't.

53:30	K: No, sir, we are all
	so very superficial.

53:35	Right?

53:37	And that seems
	to satisfy us.

53:41	That's our...
	good house, good wife,

53:44	good job, good relationship -
	don't disturb anything.

53:51	I'll go to church,
	you go to the mosque,

53:53	I'll go to the temple
	- keep things as they are.

53:59	H: Then you're saying,
	we don't even want to look at it.

54:01	K: Of course not.
	H: But say, we come with a problem...

54:04	K: If Mrs. Thatcher and the gentleman
	in Argentina looked at it,

54:08	how tribalistic they are
	- they would stop it.

54:17	But they don't, because
	the public doesn't want it.

54:20	British - you follow?

54:23	We are educated to be cruel
	to each other.

54:30	I won't go
	into all that.

54:37	So, a healthy mind
	is that, sir.

54:41	A healthy mind is
	without any conflict.

54:52	Then it is
	a holistic mind.

54:58	And then there's a possibility
	of that which is sacred to be.

55:03	Otherwise all this
	is so childish.