Krishnamurti Subtitles

Cosmic order

Brockwood Park - 7 June 1980

The Ending of Time 10

0:19 Krishnamurti: Let’s
forget the audience.
0:25 We are not performing
for your amusement.
0:33 I think we left off the other day,
if I remember rightly,
0:39 when the mind is totally
empty of all the things
0:42 that thought has put there,
then begins real meditation.
0:49 But before we go further
in that matter
0:54 I would like to go back a bit
0:59 and find out if the brain
can ever be free
1:10 not only from all illusion,
any form of deception
1:20 and
whether it can have its own order,
1:26 the order
not introduced by thought,
1:31 or make an effort, an endeavour
to put things in their proper place.
1:42 And also whether the brain,
however much damaged it is
1:50 – and most brains are damaged,
1:53 by schock,
by all kinds of stimulations –
2:00 whether that brain
can heal itself completely.
2:15 That's what
I would like to go into.
2:25 So first let’s begin by asking,
if I may,
2:34 is there an order
2:39 which is not man-made,
2:44 which is not the result of
calculated order out of disturbance
2:55 – an order that is probably
very satisfying
3:03 and so it is still part
of the old conditioning –
3:08 is there an order which is not
man-made, thought-made?
3:18 David Bohm:
Are you referring to the mind?
3:21 You can say the order of nature
exists on its own.
3:26 K: The order of nature is order.
B: Yes, but not made by man.
3:39 I am not sure
that it is that kind of order.
3:45 Is there cosmic order?
3:49 B: But that is still
the same thing you expand.
3:54 The word ‘cosmic’
would ordinarily mean...
3:56 K: ‘Cosmic’ means order.
3:58 B: Well it means order,
but the whole order.
4:01 K: The whole order, I mean that.
4:03 B: Which includes the order of the
universe and the order of the mind.
4:13 K: What I am trying to find out is:
4:16 is there order
4:26 which man can never possibly conceive?
You follow what...?
4:31 Because any concept is still
within the pattern of thought.
4:37 So is there order which is not...
4:43 B: Well, how are we
going to discuss it?
4:46 K: That's what I want to discuss.
I think we can.
4:53 What is order?
4:58 Narayan: We were just discussing it.
5:02 K: We were discussing what?
N: At the table.
5:04 K: At lunch time?
5:06 N: There is mathematical order.
And generally
5:10 mathematical order is
the order of subtler orders,
5:16 science, order behind
any particular order.
5:21 That is the highest kind of
order known to any discipline.
5:27 K: Would the mathematicians agree
5:33 that mathematics is complete order?
5:37 N: Yes, mathematics itself is part of
the co-ordination of order.
5:42 K: Would they agree to that?
5:44 B: Depends on the mathematician.
5:46 But there is a well-known
mathematician called von Neumann
5:49 who defined mathematics as
the relationship of relationships
5:53 – by relationship,
he really meant order –
5:56 order working within the field of
order itself, not on something else.
6:03 K: Order working
in the field of order.
6:09 B: Rather than
working on some object.
6:11 K: Yes, yes, that is
what I am trying to get at.
6:19 B: So, the most creative
mathematicians are having
6:22 a perception of this,
which may be called pure order,
6:31 still limited because it has to be
expressed mathematically
6:35 in terms of formulae
or equations.
6:47 K: Is order part of disorder
as we know it?
6:55 B: That's not a question
what we mean by disorder.
7:00 It is not possible to give
a coherent definition of disorder
7:05 because disorder is inherently...
7:09 You can't give a coherent account
K: Why not?
7:12 B: Because disorder
is what violates order.
7:15 Anything that actually happens
has an order.
7:18 Now, you can call a certain
thing disorder if you like.
7:21 K: Are you saying that
anything that happens is order?
7:25 B: Some order. If the body
is not functioning rightly
7:27 – a cancer is growing – that is a
certain order in the cancer cell,
7:32 it is just growing
in a certain way, too fast.
7:36 It has a different pattern which
tends to break down the body,
7:40 but the whole thing
is a certain kind of order.
7:43 It has not
violated the laws of nature.
7:48 But relative to some context
you could say it is disorder
7:51 because, if we are talking
of the health of the body
7:54 then the cancer is called disorder.
But in itself...
8:02 K: Cancer has its own order.
8:07 B: But it isn't compatible with the
order of the growth of the body.
8:13 K: So what do we mean by order?
Is there such a thing as order?
8:20 B: Order is a perception,
we were saying.
8:24 We can’t get hold of order.
K: No, of course.
8:28 N: Generally when we say order,
it is in relation
8:31 to a framework or in
relation to a certain field.
8:37 Order always
has that connotation.
8:41 And when you say order of order,
8:46 as the study of mathematics,
some aspects of mathematics,
8:50 you are going away from the
limited approach to order.
8:55 B: We are not ordering things
any more.
8:59 Most mathematics starts
with the order of the numbers,
9:02 like 1, 2, 3, 4, and builds on that
a very elaborate hierarchy.
9:08 You can see what is meant
by the order of the numbers,
9:13 there is a series of relationships
which are constant, for example.
9:22 In the order of the numbers you have
the simplest example of order.
9:27 N: A new order was created
with the discovery of zero,
9:31 a new set of orders
came into being.
9:43 And is mathematical order
and the order in nature
9:49 a part of a bigger field?
9:59 Or is it a localised form?
10:06 K: The brain, the mind
is so contradictory,
10:14 so bruised,
10:25 it can’t find order.
10:28 B: Yes, but what kind of order
does it want?
10:32 K: It wants an order
in which it will be safe.
10:37 It won’t be bruised,
it won’t be shocked,
10:39 it won’t feel the pain of
physical or psychological pain.
10:46 B: The whole point of order
is not to have contradiction.
10:50 That is the whole
purpose of mathematics.
10:52 K: Yes. But the brain
is in contradiction.
10:56 B: Yes, and in some way
something has gone wrong,
11:01 we said it took a wrong turn.
11:07 You could say that if
the body is growing wrongly
11:11 we have a cancer cell, which
is two contradictory orders:
11:15 one is the growing of the
cancer and the other is
11:18 the normal order of the body.
They cannot stay side by side.
11:23 K: I want to go into something
which is:
11:28 can the mind, the brain, be totally
free of all organised order?
11:43 B: We have to ask why you want it
to be free of organised order
11:46 and what you mean by
organised order.
11:49 K: Then it becomes a pattern.
11:52 B: You mean a fixed order,
an imposed order.
11:55 K: Yes, a fixed order,
or fixed pattern.
11:59 Imposed or self-imposed.
12:11 Because
we are trying to investigate,
12:14 at least I am trying to find out
12:22 whether the brain can ever be
free from all the impositions,
12:30 pressures, wounds, bruises,
all the trivialities of existence
12:40 pushing it
in different directions,
12:43 whether it can be
completely free of all that.
12:53 If it cannot,
meditation has no meaning.
13:03 B: You could go further and say,
probably life has no meaning
13:08 if you
cannot free it of all that.
13:10 K: No, I wouldn’t say
life has no meaning.
13:12 B: If it goes on indefinitely?
13:14 K: Indefinitely like that, yes.
If it goes on as it has done
13:18 indefinitely, for millennia,
life has no meaning.
13:24 But to find out
if it has a meaning at all
13:31 – I think there is a meaning –
13:34 mustn't the brain
be totally free of all this?
13:41 B: What you call disorder...
13:47 What is the source
of what we call disorder?
13:50 We could say it is
like a cancer, almost,
13:54 going on inside the brain.
13:56 It is moving in a way
which is not compatible
13:59 with the health of the brain.
It grows as time goes on,
14:06 accretion
from one generation to another.
14:11 K: But one generation after another,
the same pattern being repeated!
14:16 B: It tends to even accumulate
from one generation to another
14:20 through tradition.
14:22 It is almost the same question
as to ask somebody
14:28 how are we going to stop these
cancer cells from taking over.
14:33 K: That is what I want to get at.
14:35 How is this pattern,
which has been set,
14:39 and which has, generation
after generation, accumulated,
14:44 how is that to end,
be broken through?
14:50 That is the real question
at the back of my mind.
14:57 B: Another question:
why does the brain
15:00 provide the soil for this
stuff to go on, to grow?
15:04 K: That may be merely
tradition, habit.
15:09 B: Why does it stay in that?
15:12 K: It may be that it is so afraid
of something new taking place,
15:18 because in the old tradition
15:22 it takes refuge. It feels safe.
15:30 B: Then we question why does
the brain deceive itself?
15:35 It seems that this pattern
of disorder involves the fact
15:40 that the brain deceives itself
about this disorder.
15:43 It doesn’t seem
to be able to see it clearly.
15:54 N: Also when you say order,
in my mind,
15:58 there is an intelligence
behind an order
16:01 which makes use of it.
16:04 I have a certain purpose,
I create an order
16:07 and when the purpose is over
I set aside that order.
16:11 So, order has an intelligence
which works it out.
16:18 In usual parlance
that is the connotation.
16:22 But you are referring
to something else.
16:25 K: I am asking, I and he, whether
this pattern of generations
16:31 can be broken and why the brain
has accepted that pattern
16:38 in spite of all the conflicts, misery,
and goes on in the same way,
16:46 and is it possible
to break that pattern?
16:49 That is all I am really asking.
16:51 N: I am saying the same thing
in a different way.
16:54 If an order has served its
purpose can it be put aside
16:58 because it is no longer
useful or adequate.
17:03 K: But apparently it can’t!
17:07 Psychologically, he can’t,
he doesn’t.
17:13 Take an ordinary human being
like any of us,
17:17 it goes on, repeating
fears, sorrow, misery,
17:24 all that is part
of its daily meal.
17:32 Dr Bohm asks,
why does it go on,
17:38 why doesn’t it break through?
17:41 And we say,
is it so heavily conditioned
17:47 that it cannot see its way
out of it?
17:52 Or it may be merely
the constant repetition,
17:59 so the brain has become dull.
18:04 N: So the momentum of repetition
is there. And you can’t get out of it.
18:10 K: That momentum of repetition
makes the mind sluggish, mechanical.
18:15 And in that mechanical
sluggishness it takes refuge
18:20 and says, ‘Leave,
it’s all right, I can go on.'
18:25 That’s what
most human beings do.
18:36 B: That is part of the disorder,
18:38 to think that way
is a manifestation of disorder.
18:41 K: Of course.
18:48 N: Do you connect
order with intelligence?
18:51 Or is order something
that exists on its own?
18:55 Any kind of intelligence.
18:58 B: In which case? Certainly,
intelligence involves order,
19:06 intelligence requires
the perception of order
19:09 in an orderly way,
without contradiction.
19:15 But, in the terms
that we were discussing before,
19:20 we ourselves don’t create this,
19:23 we don’t impose this order
but rather it is natural.
19:33 K: So, let’s come back.
I am the ordinary man.
19:39 I see that I am caught,
that my whole way of living
19:45 and my thinking
and my attitudes, beliefs,
19:50 is the result of enormous
length of time.
19:56 Time is, as we went into it,
my whole existence.
20:03 In the past, which cannot
be changed, I take refuge.
20:11 B: If we were to talk
to the ordinary man,
20:13 the first thing he would feel is
he doesn’t really understand time.
20:18 That time is something
that happens to him.
20:21 K: Yes, but we went into that.
20:23 I am saying I am an
ordinary man and I see,
20:25 after talking over with you,
20:27 I see that my whole existence
is based on time.
20:35 Time is the past, and in that
the brain takes refuge.
20:43 B: How does it take refuge?
20:46 K: Because
the past cannot be changed.
20:50 B: But then people also think
that the future can change,
20:54 so the Communists have said,
give up the past,
20:57 we are going to change.
20:58 K: But I can’t give up the past.
We think we can give up the past.
21:03 B: That's the second point: even those
who try to give up the past,
21:06 those who don’t want to take refuge
in the past, still can’t give it up.
21:11 K: That is just my point.
21:13 B: So it seems, whichever way
you do it, you are stuck.
21:20 K: So, the next step is,
why does the brain
21:25 accept this way of living,
and why doesn’t it break it down?
21:35 Is it laziness? Is it, in breaking
it down, it has no hope?
21:47 B: That is still the same question.
21:49 K: Of course
it is the same question.
21:51 B: Going from past to future.
21:54 K: So what is it to do?
21:58 I think this is applicable
to most people, isn’t it?
22:03 So what is there to be done?
22:07 B: We haven’t understood
why it does this,
22:10 so it is not clear
what to say.
22:14 Say this behaviour is disorderly,
irrational and so on,
22:18 and people have said, ‘let’s give up
the past' but we find we can’t.
22:23 K: We can’t.
B: Why can’t we?
22:30 K: Why can’t we give up the past.
Wait, sir.
22:38 If I give up the past
I have no existence.
22:47 B: You have to clarify that
because some people would say...
22:52 K: It is simple: if I give up
all my remembrances, etc.,
22:57 I have nothing,
I am nothing.
23:02 B: Some people would look at it
differently, like the Marxists.
23:06 Marx himself said that it
is necessary to transform
23:14 the conditions of human existence
and that will remove this past.
23:19 K: But it has not done.
It cannot be done.
23:24 B: When he tries to transform it
he still works from the past.
23:29 K: Yes, that's what I am saying.
23:34 B: If you say, don’t
depend on the past at all,
23:37 then what are we going to do?
23:39 K: Yes, I am nothing!
23:42 Is that the reason why we
cannot possibly give up the past?
23:48 Because my existence,
my way of thinking, my life,
23:54 everything is from the past.
24:02 And if you say, wipe that out,
what have I left?
24:08 B: We obviously have to keep
certain things from the past
24:12 like useful knowledge
and technology.
24:16 Now suppose we keep
that part of the past
24:19 and wipe out all the parts of the past
which are contradictory.
24:23 K: Which are all psychological,
contradictory, etc. What?
24:28 What is left?
Just going to the office?
24:34 There is nothing left!
24:37 Is that the reason
why we cannot give it up?
24:41 B: There is still a contradiction
in that,
24:42 if you say what is left,
you are still asking for the past.
24:47 K: Of course.
24:51 B: Are you saying simply
that when people say
24:54 they are giving up the past,
they just simply are not doing it?
24:58 They merely turn it into another
question which avoids the issue.
25:03 K: Because my whole being
is the past,
25:11 modified, changed, but
it has its roots in the past.
25:17 B: If you said ‘Give all that up
and in the future you will have
25:20 something different, a lot better’
people would be attracted.
25:25 K: But the ‘better’
is still from the past.
25:29 B: Perhaps it could even
be open and creative.
25:35 People want to be assured
of at least something
25:40 that is going to be there.
25:41 K: That is just it, sir!
There is nothing!
25:45 I want to be assured,
as a human being,
25:51 of something to which I can cling to,
can hold on to.
25:56 B: Yes, look forward to, reach for.
K: Reach.
25:59 B: They feel,
not clinging to the past
26:01 but reaching for something,
that’s the common feeling.
26:05 K: If I reach something
it is still the past.
26:10 B: Though that is
not often obvious because
26:12 people say it is a big,
new revolutionary situation.
26:16 But it has its roots in the past.
And the past is disorderly.
26:22 K: As long as I have my roots in
the past there cannot be order.
26:28 B: Because the past is pervaded
with disorder? K: Yes, disorder.
26:36 And is my mind, my brain,
willing to see
26:45 that there is absolutely nothing
26:54 if I give up the past,
you follow, sir?
26:57 B: You say
there is nothing to reach for.
27:00 K: Nothing,
I mean there is no movement.
27:05 Therefore I cannot
possibly give up the past.
27:11 So, people dangle
in front of me a carrot
27:17 and I, like a silly person,
I follow it.
27:21 So if I have no carrots, nothing
as a reward or punishment,
27:29 how is this past
to be dissolved?
27:41 Because otherwise I am still
living in the field of time.
27:49 And therefore,
it is still man-made.
28:02 So what shall I do?
28:09 Am I willing to face
absolute emptiness? Right, sir?
28:20 B: What will you tell somebody
not willing, who feels unable to.
28:24 K: I am not bothered.
If somebody says, ‘Sorry,
28:26 I can’t do all this nonsense’
you say, ‘Well, carry on’.
28:30 But I am willing
to let my past go completely,
28:37 which means there is no effort,
no reward, no punishment,
28:42 no carrot – nothing.
28:47 And the brain is willing to face
28:50 this extraordinary state,
totally new to it,
28:56 of being, of existing
in a state of nothingness.
29:03 That is appallingly frightening.
29:14 B: Even these words will have
their meaning rooted in the past
29:17 and that’s where fear comes in.
29:20 K: We have understood that,
the word is not the thing.
29:22 B: But then that is
the cause of the fear,
29:24 from the roots in the past this notion
of nothingness is frightening.
29:30 K: My brain says,
‘I am willing to do that,
29:32 I am willing to face this
absolute nothingness, emptiness'
29:45 because it has seen for itself
all the refuges,
29:51 the various places where it
has taken refuge are illusions,
29:58 so it has
finished with all that.
30:04 B: But this leaves out
30:07 you also brought up,
the question of the damage
30:11 or the scars to the brain.
30:13 That the brain, if it were undamaged
possibly could do that fairly readily.
30:21 K: Now, can I discover what
has caused damage to the brain?
30:29 One of the factors is
strong emotions.
30:34 B: Yes.
Strong sustained emotions.
30:36 K: Strong sustained emotions,
like hatred.
30:39 B: Probably a flash of emotion
doesn’t do it but people keep it up.
30:44 K: Yes, of course. Hatred,
anger, a sense of violence,
30:53 those are obviously,
not only a shock,
30:59 they wound the brain. Right?
31:02 B: Well, excessive excitation too.
31:05 Getting excessively excited
by other means such as pleasure...
31:08 K: Drugs, etc.
Excessive excitement,
31:17 excessive anger,
violence, hatred, all that.
31:27 The natural responses
dont damage the brain.
31:35 Now my brain is damaged
– suppose –
31:41 it has been damaged
through anger.
31:43 B: You could say that
probably nerves are connected
31:47 in the wrong way and
the connections are too fixed.
31:51 There is evidence that these things
will actually change the structure.
31:56 K: Structure, yes. That is,
32:02 can I have an insight into the
whole nature of disturbance –
32:13 anger, violence,
they are all part of the same –
32:17 can I have an insight into that?
32:21 And so, that insight
32:23 changes the cells of the brain
which have been wounded.
32:29 B: Possibly it would start
them healing.
32:32 K: All right.
Start them healing.
32:36 That healing must be immediate.
32:39 B: In some way it may take
time in the sense that
32:42 if wrong connections
have been made
32:44 it is going to take time to
redistribute the material,
32:47 but the beginning of it,
it seems to me, is immediate.
32:51 K: All right, take it that way.
Can I do this?
32:55 I have listened to you,
I have carefully read,
33:00 I have thought about all this
and I see that anger,
33:05 violence, hatred,
all those excessive...
33:10 or any form of excitement
does bruise the brain.
33:22 And the insight into this whole
business does bring about
33:31 a mutation in the cells.
It is so!
33:39 And the nerves
and all their adjustments
33:43 will be as rapid as possible.
33:48 B: Same thing happens
with cancer cells.
33:51 Sometimes the cancer
suddenly stops growing
33:53 and it goes the other way,
for some reason that's unknown
33:56 but a change must have
taken place in those cells.
34:03 K: Would it be, sir, if I may ask –
I may be on the wrong track –
34:08 – when the brain cells... there is
a fundamental change there,
34:14 the cancer process stops?
34:18 B: Yes, fundamentally it stops
and it starts to dismantle.
34:21 K: Dismantle, yes, that's it.
34:27 N: You are saying
it sets into movement
34:30 the right kind of connections.
B: Yes.
34:32 N: And stops
the wrong connections?
34:34 B: Or even starts to dismantle
the wrong connections.
34:37 N: So, the beginning is made
and it is made now.
34:41 B: At one moment, yes.
K: That is the insight.
34:44 N: That is the insight. But
there is no question of time
34:48 involved because the
right movement has started.
34:53 K: What? What? What?
34:56 N: What David is saying is,
there is no time involved
34:59 because the right
movement has started now.
35:02 K: Yes, of course.
35:04 N: There is another thing which
I want to ask about the past.
35:08 For most people
past means pleasure.
35:12 K: Not only the pleasure,
the remembrance of all the things.
35:16 N: One starts disliking pleasure
only when it becomes stale,
35:21 or it leads to difficulties, but
one wants pleasure all the time.
35:27 Now, it is very difficult
to distinguish between pleasure
35:31 and the staleness
or the difficulties it brings in
35:33 because one wants
to keep the pleasure afresh
35:36 and not have the staleness
or the problems it brings.
35:40 I mean the normal human being.
35:45 I am asking you:
what is your attitude to pleasure?
35:51 K: What do you mean, my attitude.
35:53 N: How does one deal with this
immense problem of pleasure
35:56 in which most people are caught
because that is the past.
36:01 K: Pleasure is always the past,
there is no – wait a minute.
36:09 There is no pleasure
at the moment it is happening.
36:16 It comes in later
when it is remembered.
36:20 So, the remembrance is the past.
And I said,
36:26 I, as a human being, am
willing to face nothingness,
36:32 which means wipe out all that!
36:37 N: How does one wipe out
this tremendous instinctfor pleasure?
36:44 It almost seems
to be an instinct.
36:50 K: No, we went into that.
36:53 What is the nature of pleasure?
What is pleasure?
36:59 It's a constant remembrance of
things past which have happened.
37:07 B: And also the expectation
of things that will happen.
37:11 K: Of course,
always from the past.
37:14 B: You usually made the distinction
of pleasure and enjoyment.
37:18 N: Of course, but I am saying,
37:21 still the human being,
even though he understands
37:24 what you are saying, he is
sort of held back in this field.
37:29 K: No, Narayan,
because he is not willing
37:33 to face this emptiness.
37:42 Pleasure is not compassion.
Pleasure is not love.
37:49 But perhaps,
if there is this mutation,
37:54 compassion
is stronger than pleasure.
38:00 So, pleasure has no
place in the compassion.
38:11 ...the perception of order
may be stronger than pleasure.
38:14 People really concerned about
something they are doing with order
38:17 – the artist or the scientist –
38:19 the pleasure plays no role
at that moment.
38:24 N: That is what I am trying
to imply,
38:27 it has a certain strength
which can keep that in its place.
38:30 K: Compassion has got
tremendous strength,
38:34 an incalculable strength,
pleasure is nowhere in it.
38:40 N: But what happens to a man
in whom pleasure is dominant?
38:45 K: We said that. As long as
he is unwilling to face this
38:50 extraordinary emptiness
he'll keep on with the old pattern.
38:57 B: We have to say
this man had a damaged brain too,
39:00 certain brain damage which causes
this emphasis on sustained pleasure,
39:06 as well as
the fear, the anger and the hate.
39:10 K: The damaged brain is healed
when there is insight.
39:21 B: But many people would say,
39:22 ‘I understand that hate and anger
are products of the damaged brain’
39:27 but
they would find it hard to say
39:29 pleasure is the product
of the damaged brain.
39:32 K: Oh yes, of course it is.
39:34 B: Whereas you say
there is true enjoyment,
39:37 which is not the product
of the damaged brain,
39:39 which is confused
with pleasure...
39:44 N: That is the difficulty,
because if pleasure gives rise
39:48 to anger, anger is part
of the damaged brain.
39:53 K: And also,
the demand for pleasure.
39:57 B: Which may give rise to anger,
hatred and frustration, fear.
40:02 K: If I can’t have the pleasure I want
I begin to get annoyed.
40:09 I feel frustrated
and all the rest of it follows.
40:15 So do you, as a human being,
40:21 have an insight into the past,
40:28 how very destructive it is
to the brain,
40:36 and the brain itself sees it,
and has an insight into it
40:41 and moves out of that?
40:46 N: You are saying the beginning
of order comes from insight.
40:50 K: Obviously.
41:02 Let’s move from there.
41:04 N: May I put it
in a different way?
41:06 Is it possible to gather
a certain amount of order...
41:10 K: Artificially? N: In a
pattern-sense, not artificially,
41:16 so that it gives rise to a
certain amount of insight?
41:23 K: Ah, ah, you cannot,
through the false, find truth.
41:31 N: I am saying it on purpose
because for many people
41:36 the energy required for insight,
or the keenness, is lacking.
41:43 K: You are tremendously keen
to earn a livelihood,
41:47 to earn money, to do something,
if you are interested in something.
41:53 If you are interested vitally
in this transformation
42:00 you'll have the energy.
42:11 May we go on, sir?
As a human being,
42:18 this insight has wiped away
really the past,
42:25 and the brain is willing
to live in nothingness.
42:40 We have come to this point several
times from different directions.
42:47 From there, I want to go on
– may we?
42:54 Which means there isn’t a thing
which thought has put there.
43:00 There is no movement of thought.
43:05 Except, knowledge, technical
thought has its own place.
43:12 But we are talking of the
psychological state of mind
43:15 where there is no
movement of thought,
43:18 therefore there is
absolutely nothing.
43:31 B: You mean no feeling – the movement
of thought and feeling are together –
43:36 is that what you mean?
43:38 K: No. What do you mean
by feeling there?
43:41 B: Usually people might say,
OK, there is no thought,
43:44 but I may have
various feelings of all sorts.
43:49 K: Of course, I have feelings.
The moment you put a pin...
43:52 B: These are sensations but
there are also the inner feelings.
43:58 K: Inner feelings of what?
44:00 B: It is hard to describe them.
44:01 Those that can be easily described
are obviously the wrong kind
44:06 such as anger and fear.
44:08 K: Is compassion a feeling?
No, it is not a feeling.
44:13 B: Though people may say
they feel compassionate.
44:17 But even the very word suggests
it is a form of feeling.
44:22 K: I 'feel' compassionate.
44:24 B: Compassion has ‘passion’ in it
which is a feeling.
44:29 Or it can be taken
with that meaning.
44:35 So it is a difficult question.
44:37 What are usually called
feelings anyway,
44:39 those things that could
be recognised
44:44 as feelings
of a describable character...
44:48 K: Let’s go into that
a little bit.
44:50 What do we mean by feeling?
44:54 B: People don’t
usually mean that.
44:55 Sensation is connected with,
say, the body.
44:59 K: Body, senses.
B: Or the inner organs of the body.
45:03 K: So, you are saying feelings
which are not of the body.
45:06 B: Or which are said to belong...
– in the old days
45:10 they would have said
they are of the soul.
45:13 K: That is an easy escape
but that means nothing.
45:19 What are the inner feelings?
45:25 B: In so far as
you can label it that way
45:28 it is clear
that it is not valid.
45:33 K: So what is valid?
The non-verbal state?
45:39 B: A non-verbal state
which includes something that...
45:45 Would it have something
45:48 to a feeling which wasn’t fixed?
That you couldn’t name?
45:55 N: You are saying
it is not feeling,
45:58 it is similar to feeling
but it is not fixed.
46:02 B: Yes. I am just considering
whether that could exist.
46:04 N: Compassion.
46:06 B: Not compassion, but if you
say that there is no thought
46:10 – to clarify it.
Somebody could say,
46:12 'I understand, I am not thinking,
I am not talking,
46:16 I am not figuring out what to do’.
K: Ah, no, no, no.
46:20 B: So, we have to go further.
What does it really mean?
46:28 K: All right. What it really means is,
thought is movement,
46:32 thought is time, right ?
There is no time and thought.
46:39 B: Perhaps, no sense of the
existence of an entity inside,
46:43 That might be called feeling.
46:45 K: Absolutely, of course.
The existence of the entity
46:48 is the bundle of memories,
46:52 B: But that existence is not only
thought thinking about it
46:55 but also the feeling
that it is there, inside,
46:57 you get a sort of feeling.
46:59 K: That is, there is no being.
47:04 You’re not... the mind...
There is nothing.
47:10 If there is a feeling
of the being continuing...
47:14 B: Even though
it doesn’t seem verbalisable...
47:18 K: Of course.
47:20 I wonder if we are
caught in an illusion
47:26 that there is such a state.
47:28 B: It may be. You say
it would be a state
47:32 without will, without desire...
47:35 K: Of course.
All those are gone.
47:37 B: How do we know that
this state is real, is genuine?
47:41 K: That is what I am asking.
How do I know,
47:45 or realise, or state,
that it is so?
47:53 In other words
you want proof of it.
48:01 N: No, not proof,
communication of that state.
48:05 K: Now wait a minute.
How can you communicate with me,
48:10 suppose you have
this peculiar compassion,
48:15 how can you communicate to me
who am living in pleasure
48:20 and all that? You can’t!
48:23 N: No, but I am prepared
to listen to you.
48:26 K: Prepared to listen
– how far, how deeply?
48:32 N: To the extent
my listening takes me to.
48:34 K: Which means what?
48:39 N: That is all I could say.
48:41 K: No, it is very simple.
48:43 You will go as long
as it is safe, secure.
48:50 N: No, not necessarily.
48:54 K: The man says,
there is no being.
49:04 And one’s whole life has been
this becoming, being and so on.
49:11 And in that state – he says –
there is no being at all.
49:17 In other words,
there is no 'me'. Right, sir?
49:25 Now, you say, ‘Show it to me’.
49:32 It can be shown only through
certain qualities it has,
49:39 certain actions.
49:45 What are the actions
of a mind
49:55 that is totally empty of being?
That's a good...
50:03 What are the actions?
Oh, wait a minute.
50:09 Actions at what level?
Actions in the physical world?
50:20 N: Partly. K: Mostly that.
N: Not mostly, partly.
50:26 K: No, I am asking, is that partial ?
50:33 This man has got this sense of
emptiness and there is no being
50:41 so he is not acting
from self-centred interest.
50:45 So his actions are
in the world of daily living.
50:54 That’s all,
you can judge only there,
50:59 whether he is a hypocrite,
whether he says one thing
51:03 and contradicts it
the next moment,
51:05 whether he is
actually living this compassion –
51:11 not ‘I feel compassionate'.
51:13 B: If you are not doing the same,
you can’t tell.
51:16 K: That’s just it.
That’s what I am saying!
51:19 N: I can’t judge you there.
51:21 K: You can’t. So, how can
you convey to me, in words,
51:30 that peculiar quality of
a mind? You can describe,
51:35 go round it, but you can’t give
the essence of it.
51:45 I mean David, for example,
he can discuss with Einstein,
51:49 they are on the same level.
51:53 And he and I can discuss
up to a certain point.
51:58 And if he has this sense
of not being, empty,
52:03 I can go very close to it,
but I can never enter
52:13 or come upon that mind
unless I have it.
52:17 N: Is there any way of communicating
without words, for one who is open?
52:23 K: We said compassion.
52:32 It is not,
as David put it just now,
52:35 it is not ‘I feel compassionate’,
then that's altogether wrong.
52:51 After all, in daily life,
such a mind
53:01 acts without the ‘me’,
without the ego,
53:07 and therefore it might make a mistake
but corrects it immediately,
53:11 it is not carrying that mistake.
53:14 N: It is not stuck.
53:22 K: We must be very careful here
not to find an excuse for wrong!
53:35 So sir, we come to that point,
as we said the other day,
53:38 what is then meditation?
53:46 The becoming man, or the
being man, who meditates,
53:50 it has no meaning whatsoever.
53:54 That is a tremendous statement.
53:58 When there is
this not becoming, not being,
54:03 then what is mediation?
54:10 It must be totally unconscious.
Right, sir? Hang on!
54:18 Totally... uninvited.
54:27 B: Without conscious intention,
is what you mean.
54:31 K: Yes, without
conscious intention.
54:41 Yes, I think this is right.
54:45 Would you say
– sounds silly but –
54:51 the universe, cosmic order,
is in meditation?
54:58 B: Well, if it is alive then
55:01 you would have
to look at it that way.
55:02 K: No. It is
in a state of meditation. B: Yes.
55:10 K: I think that is right.
I stick... I go with that.
55:16 B: We should try to go over
what is meditation,
55:19 what is it doing?
55:36 N: If you say the
universe is in meditation,
55:39 is the expression of it an order?
55:45 What order can we discern,
55:48 which would indicate
cosmic meditation
55:55 or universal meditation?
55:57 K: The sunrise and sunset
is order, all the stars,
56:07 the planets, the whole thing
is in perfect order.
56:12 B: We have to connect this
with meditation.
56:17 K: He is bringing the word
56:20 B: According to the dictionary
the meaning of meditation
56:23 is to reflect, to turn something
over in your mind
56:27 and to pay close attention.
K: And also to measure.
56:30 B: That's a further meaning
but it is to weigh and to ponder
56:34 it means measure in the sense
of weighing and pondering.
56:37 K: Ponder, think over and so on.
56:40 B: To weigh the significance
of something.
56:43 Is that what you mean?
K: No.
56:45 B: Then why do you use the word?
56:49 N: I am told that, in English,
contemplation has
56:52 a different connotation
from meditation.
56:55 Contemplation implies
a deeper state of mind,
56:59 whereas meditation is...
57:01 K: To contemplate.
N: That’s what I was told.
57:04 B: It is hard to know.
The word ‘contemplate’
57:06 comes from the word
‘temple’ really.
57:09 To make an open space,
is its basic meaning.
57:13 To sort of create an open space
so you can look at it.
57:23 B: That is the way
the word arose.
57:27 N: From temple, space.
B: Temple means an open space.
57:34 N: The Sanskrit word
‘dhyana’ doesn’t have
57:36 the same connotation as meditation.
K: Dhyana, no.
57:40 N: Because meditation has
the overtones of measurement
57:44 and probably in an oblique
way that measurement is order.
57:49 K: No, I don’t want
to bring in order,
57:51 leave the word ‘order’ out,
we have been through that,
57:54 we have beaten that to death.
57:57 B: I just asked why you
used the word meditation.
57:59 K: Don’t let’s use
the word ‘meditation’.
58:02 B: Let’s find out
what you really mean here.
58:23 K: Would you say, sir,
a state of infinity,
58:32 a measureless state? B: Yes.
58:42 K: There is no division
of any kind in it.
58:49 We are giving lots of descriptions,
but it is not that!
58:56 B: Yes, but is there
any sense of the mind
59:02 being in some way
aware of itself,
59:06 is that
what you are trying to say?
59:11 At other times,
you have said the mind
59:14 is emptying itself of content.
59:16 K: Yes.
What are you trying to get at?
59:23 B: I am trying to get at
that it is not merely infinite
59:31 K: Oh, much more.
59:43 B: But in this emptying of content,
we said that
59:46 this content is the past
which has become disorder.
59:50 Then you could say,
in some sense,
59:52 it is constantly cleaning up
the past. Would you agree to that?
59:59 K: It is constantly cleaning
up the past? No, I wouldn’t.
1:00:02 B: Then, when you say the mind
is emptying itself of content...
1:00:08 K: Has emptied itself!
1:00:11 B: All right, then we say,
when the past is cleaned up,
1:00:15 then you say
that is meditation.
1:00:17 K: That is medit... oh, no.
Contemplation of what?
1:00:23 N: Just a beginning.
It is at the beginning.
1:00:26 K: Beginning of what?
N: The emptying of the past.
1:00:30 K: That must be done.
Emptying the content
1:00:35 which is anger, jealousy,
beliefs, dogmas, attachments,
1:00:40 all that is the content.
If any part of that exists
1:00:48 it will inevitably
lead to illusion.
1:00:55 So, we said that. The brain or
the mind must be totally
1:01:01 free of all illusion,
1:01:04 illusion brought by desire,
by hope,
1:01:09 by wanting security
and all that.
1:01:16 B: When that is done,
this opens the door
1:01:20 to something broader, deeper.
1:01:24 K: Yes.
1:01:26 Otherwise life has no meaning,
just repeating this pattern.
1:01:36 Now I want to go into this.
1:01:37 B: All right.
K: It is five o’clock.
1:01:40 N: What exactly did you mean when you
said the universe is in meditation?
1:01:44 You are
trying to convey something
1:01:46 when you say that
the universe is in meditation.
1:01:50 K: Yes. I feel that way.
1:01:51 Meditation is a state of...
1:02:00 ‘non-movement movement’.
1:02:07 B: Could we say first of all
the universe is not actually
1:02:10 governed by its past.
That is the first point.
1:02:16 It is free and creative.
K: It is creative, moving.
1:02:22 B: And then
this movement is an order.
1:02:27 K: Would you, as a scientist,
accept such a thing?
1:02:31 B: Well, as a matter of fact,
I would!
1:03:07 The universe creates certain forms
which are relatively constant,
1:03:13 so if the people look at it
superficially and only see that,
1:03:17 it seems to be then
determined from the past.
1:03:24 K: Sir, put the question
the other way:
1:03:27 is it really possible
for time to end?
1:03:35 Time being the past
– time, the whole idea of time.
1:03:41 To have no tomorrow at all?
1:03:49 Of course, there is tomorrow:
1:03:52 you have to go to a talk and
I have too, there is tomorrow.
1:03:56 But the feeling,
1:04:01 the actual reality
of having no tomorrow.
1:04:14 Yes sir – I think that's the
healthiest way of living.
1:04:43 Which doesn’t mean
I become irresponsible,
1:04:46 that is all too childish.
1:04:47 B: No, it is merely the question
of physical time,
1:04:51 it is a certain part
of natural order.
1:04:55 which we still have in mind,
but the question is whether
1:05:00 we have a sense of
experiencing past and future
1:05:04 or whether
we are free of that sense.
1:05:07 K: As a scientist I am asking you,
is the universe based on time?
1:05:13 B: I would say no, but the general
way it has been formulated...
1:05:17 K: That is all I want,
you say no.
1:05:21 And can the brain
which has evolved in time...
1:05:29 B: Has it evolved in time?
That's a way of talking but,
1:05:34 it has become entangled in time.
1:05:37 Entangled in time in some way
because if you say
1:05:40 the universe is not based on time,
the brain is part of the universe.
1:05:45 It can’t be based merely on time.
1:05:48 K: No. The brain
in the sense, thought.
1:05:53 B: Thought
has entangled the brain in time.
1:05:57 K: All right. Can that
entanglement be unravelled,
1:06:03 freed, so that the universe
is the mind? You follow?
1:06:11 If the universe is not of time,
1:06:15 can the mind, which has been
entangled in time,
1:06:21 unravel itself and so,
be the universe? You follow?
1:06:32 And that is order!
1:06:34 B: That is order. Now would
you say that is meditation?
1:06:37 K: That is it.
Now I would call that meditation.
1:06:43 Not in the ordinary dictionary
sense of pondering over
1:06:46 weigh and all that,
that is a state of meditation
1:06:50 in which there is no...
element of the past.
1:06:59 B: You say the mind is
disentangling itself from time
1:07:04 and also really disentangling
the brain from time.
1:07:09 K: Would you accept that?
B: Well, I can see that.
1:07:13 K: As a theory.
B: Yes, as a proposal.
1:07:15 K: No, I don’t want it
as a proposal!
1:07:18 B: What do you mean by theory?
1:07:20 K: Theory as...
Somebody comes along
1:07:24 and says,
'this is real meditation'.
1:07:26 Wait. Somebody says,
one can live this way
1:07:32 and life has an extraordinary
meaning in it, full of...
1:07:37 compassion and so on,
and every act
1:07:43 in the physical world,
can be corrected immediately
1:07:45 and so on.
Would you, as a scientist,
1:07:49 accept such a state,
or say this man is cuckoo?
1:07:53 B: No, I wouldn’t say that.
1:07:55 I feel it is perfectly possible.
It is quite compatible
1:07:59 with anything that I know
about nature.
1:08:05 K: Oh, that’s all right. One is not
an unbalanced cuckoo!
1:08:12 B: No. Part of the entanglement
is that science itself
1:08:16 has put time
into a fundamental position
1:08:19 which helps to entangle it
still further.
1:08:50 K: Better stop.
Shall we continue some more?
1:08:53 B: When do you want to
continue? K: Next Sunday.
1:08:56 B: I am going to be
in America next Sunday.
1:08:59 K: Oh, when do you go
to America? B: Thursday.
1:09:02 K: Well, we can’t continue.
B: Except by television.
1:09:06 K: That's very simple.
1:09:10 B: In the autumn, in September?
1:09:12 K: Yes. September we will.
1:09:17 Of course, putting into words
is not the thing.
1:09:21 That is understood. But can
it be communicated to another?
1:09:29 B: I think that... The point
about communication of this
1:09:37 is to bring it about.
1:09:40 K: Of course.
Now can some of us get to this?
1:09:47 So that we can communicate
actually, you know.
1:09:59 Well, sir, we better stop.