Krishnamurti - Is there anything new at all?

Krishnamurti Subtitles

RO72DSG3 - Is there anything new at all?
Rome - 4 November 1972
Discussion with Small Group 3

0:01	This is the third small group discussion with J. Krishnamurti in Rome, 1972.
0:11	Krishnamurti: What shall we talk about this morning? Beauty? Questioner: That’s right. Can I ask a question?
0:21	K: Yes please, sir.
0:22	Q: I saw a film called Can You Live That Way? where you were questioning some youngsters, but what happened if they say yes to that question?
0:38	Then they will be like British and how can they live like British without somebody... (inaudible) K: I’m afraid I haven’t quite understood your question, sir.
0:53	Q: I will repeat it then. If they answer yes to the question - can you live that way? – from that film I saw...
1:06	K: I don’t know what film you saw, I’m sorry.
1:11	Q: The film on Brockwood, sir, Can You Live this Way?
1:18	Q: What happens then say if the answer is yes?
1:24	K: It’s for them to decide, won’t it? May we go on from where we left off yesterday or the day before?
1:33	Q: Yes, yes.
1:35	K: We were talking about, if I remember rightly, the nature of love, and what are the implications of a man who totally denies or puts away from him all those things that are not love?
2:02	That’s what we were discussing, weren’t we?
2:09	And we said love is not attachment, love is not envy, love is not pleasure, love is not desire, and if one denies or puts away really seriously, terribly seriously, the whole of that, then what place has thought in this field which is not that we have called love?
3:03	I don’t know if I have…
3:06	Q: The question isn’t quite clear. I don’t quite understand.
3:10	K: You don’t quite understand – all right. Remember we were talking, we were saying that pleasure and fear go together.
3:26	Right? Pleasure and the pursuit of it is cultivated by thought.
3:39	And thought also cultivates fear.
3:46	They are both the two sides of the same coin, fear and pleasure.
3:55	The pursuit of one and the denial of the other is the movement of thought, which denies love.
4:08	I don’t know… Right? So we must, I think, if we have to go more into it, understand the whole nature of thought.
4:20	Right? You want to discuss it? I am not imposing something on you, please. We are trying to talk over things together like two friends sitting in a nice little garden or a nice room, talking over the problems of our life.
4:45	Therefore there is no authority, no imposition, no propaganda, no assertion of this or that, but really talking these things over not only verbally but non-verbally also.
5:06	Q: May I ask something? At the end of the other talk you said that talking is necessary as long as the conscious mind is active.
5:15	I am personally very interested in what could be the communication without the talking.
5:21	K: This is a difficult question because I don’t know if you want to… have you understood the question?
5:28	Q: Yes.
5:31	K: He says we ended up last time we met here: conscious mind either resists or accepts.
5:48	I don’t know if you have noticed it. It’s its reaction, instantly. And a verbal or an ideological statement made by, it doesn’t matter who it is, there is either the tendency to reject or to accept.
6:11	The conscious mind does this all the time. And the usage of words, which is the means of verbal communication between you and another, that verbal communication creates certain images in the conscious mind - please follow all this - and those images meet the images you have formed about those words.
6:48	So there is a contradiction in images. Bene? And is it possible to leave the conscious mind alone with all its daily habits and daily worries and the mischief it is making all the time, and communicate with each other at a deeper level?
7:17	You understand this? I don’t know if you have thought about it.
7:25	That is nonverbal communication.
7:27	Q: Yes.
7:29	K: Just a minute, sir, it’s very difficult. Don’t say yes. It’s one of the most difficult things to do because to meet nonverbally we must both, you and another, must meet on the same level – right? - at the same time, with the same intensity, otherwise we’ll miss.
7:58	I don’t know if you’ve... Right, sir? The verbal communication does not demand this – you can either accept, reject, listen casually or play intellectually with what has been said and amuse yourself.
8:22	Whereas a nonverbal communication, which has its tremendous dangers, because they have used subliminal advertising which, put on the screen, the unconscious takes it in and then later on you go on to buy the toothpaste or the soap which…
8:50	You follow? So, the meeting, that is really communication, is possible nonverbally when both of us are interested in the same thing, serious, terribly serious about the same thing, at the same time, with the same intensity, otherwise we can’t communicate.
9:28	I don’t know if you see all this. So we’ll come to that little later. If we can go into this question of the whole process of thinking.
9:43	Right? Because we said the pursuit of pleasure is cultivated by thought.
9:53	Right? I enjoy a sunset, a mountain, look at a stream, or a bird on the wing.
10:05	At that moment there is total awareness of that beauty. Later on, thought comes in and says, ‘How lovely that was!
10:19	I must... I hope I will have it tomorrow,’ or I hope it will continue. The desire for its continuity is sustained by thought.
10:33	Right? One is afraid of what might happen tomorrow.
10:43	I might lose my job. An accident. Tomorrow, the unknown, and I am frightened of it. The fear is the product of thought, thought thinking what might happen.
11:00	Right? So thought is responsible for the pursuit of pleasure and the denial of fear.
11:15	Right? So we have to go into this question of thought.
11:26	Right? We said thought is measure. Right? Oh lord, come on, sir.
11:41	Right?
11:42	Q: (Inaudible) ...because one cannot stop thinking even when one is in doubt whether...
11:50	(inaudible) K: I am coming to that, sir. We’re coming to that question, we are coming to that question. Go slowly. You see, sir, thought for us is tremendously important.
12:35	Thinking is our only instrument – at least we think so.
12:43	We have cultivated thinking a great deal, and all our social, moral, religious, technological field, is the result of thought.
12:59	Right? All our religions, whether Hindu, Buddhist, is based on thinking. No?
13:09	Q: No.
13:10	K: No?
13:11	Q: Also... (inaudible) K: Wait. Go slowly.
13:15	Q: How about irrationality? Isn’t that an enormous element in those religions and… (inaudible) K: Yes, rationality.
13:26	Q: Irrationality.
13:27	K: Yes. Which is part, also, thinking. To be irrational is also thinking.
13:34	Q: What about experience?
13:37	K: Go slow. First of all let us get the picture, the whole picture not just one part of the picture.
13:51	The thought has created myths. Right? Myths. The Christian or Hindu religions, organised, are based on myths. Right?
14:07	Q: Not only the religions.
14:08	K: Wait, wait! I’m coming… I said, sir, religion, our relationships, our technological world, the whole existence of our daily life is based on thinking.
14:26	The whole of it.
14:37	If I did not think, would I have devotion?
14:41	Q: There would not be devotion. That would be foolish.
14:48	K: Yes, sir. Go step… I wish you would… Observe yourself, sir, not what I am talking about. Observe it around you. You see, all our actions, conscious or unconscious, is based on thought.
15:10	No?
15:11	Q: Well, thought might be a superstructure of what is...
15:20	K: Wait, sir. Without thinking you wouldn’t know where to go, you wouldn’t know what your house is, where your house is, you wouldn’t be able to recognise your friend, you wouldn’t have this conflict in yourself, if there was no thought.
15:43	So thought in all its form or in all its movement is our life.
15:53	Q: But thought knows what this house is or where it lies without thinking.
16:00	K: We are coming to that, sir.
16:14	We said thought is responsible, or cultivates the continuity of pleasure and thought is responsible for fear.
16:29	These are facts. It’s not your statement, my statement, it’s a fact. And to understand the full significance of a mind that is not caught in these two, but acts from a totally different dimension.
16:55	That’s what I want to get at. Right? So, I say to myself: what is thinking? I’m not against it. You understand? I don’t say: what will happen if I don’t think, how shall I live if I don’t think?
17:18	But I am asking: what is thinking?
17:23	Q: Rationalising.
17:25	K: Thinking, sir. No, no. What is thinking? Not rationalising? What is the source of thinking?
17:39	Q: Seeing. Myself.
17:42	K: What is the…
17:43	Q: Seeing.
17:44	Q: Myself, myself, myself.
17:45	K: No, don’t reduce everything, sir, don’t be caught in that little cage.
17:50	Q: No.
17:51	Q: But it is.
17:52	K: Wait, wait. We’re going into it. Approach it differently, sir, and you will see it much more clearly.
17:59	Q: Any response to that question is another thinking.
18:01	K: No, I am asking you - ask yourself: what is thinking? How does it happen?
18:08	Q: By seeing. You see with it. To see.
18:15	K: Sir, not quite. Look, I ask you a question. I ask you, ‘What’s your name?’ Q: (Inaudible) K: One momento, per favore.
18:30	I ask you what’s your name? You reply immediately, don’t you?
18:33	Q: If I know it.
18:36	K: (Laughs) I hope you know your name!
18:43	Now what has taken place there? I ask you, ‘What’s your name?’ and you reply. What has taken place there?
18:51	Q: Very little thought. I remember, arrives in thought, the name is there.
18:58	K: Be simple, sir, be simple.
19:00	Q: Communication.
19:01	Q: A reaction to the response.
19:03	K: You react to the response, instantly, immediately, if you know your name.
19:11	No?
19:12	Q: (Inaudible) K: No, come on, sir, please. Let’s be serious, don’t play with words. You respond immediately. That is, what has happened? You know your name very well, you have repeated it I don’t know how often, and therefore the response is instant.
19:35	There is no time lag between the question and the answer.
19:41	Q: (Inaudible) K: Sir, it is a fact. I ask you your name.
19:46	Q: It’s not a fact for me, I’m sorry.
19:48	K: What? I asked you your name, sir. I asked you, ‘What’s your name?’ Q: I needed time to think about it.
19:55	K: Why?
19:57	Q: I don’t know. Because I am not identified with it. (Many voices) Q: For instance, a neurotic.
20:05	K: Sir, we are not neurotic.
20:08	Q: (Inaudible) K: You’re missing my point.
20:10	Q: (Inaudible) …I could not find the answer.
20:14	K: Are you neurotic?
20:15	Q: No, but I know it has happened to me that I do forget about another name, not about my own name.
20:22	K: I am asking you, ‘What’s your name?’ I am not asking, ‘What is his name?’ I am asking you, ‘What’s your name?’ And because you are familiar with that name you reply instantly.
20:37	That is all. There is no…
20:39	Q: There are many reflexes before we reply.
20:41	K: I know that, sir. I can go into that. Verbal communication, the hearing and so on, so on, and you reply. My lord, what a simple thing we make… There is no time lag between question and answer – right? - in there. There is a time lag when I ask you something much more difficult, with which you are not quite familiar.
21:10	Isn’t there? I ask you, ‘What’s the distance from here to Florence?’ What takes place there?
21:22	Q: Thought.
21:23	K: You think, don’t you? You say, ‘Well, let me look.’ If you can’t find it, you look into a book or in a timetable – you follow? – you ask somebody.
21:33	So - listen to this case, it’s very interesting – there is a time lag between the question and the answer because you don’t know it.
21:44	In that interval, thought is in operation. No? Right? If you know it you say it instantly, if you don’t know it, it is still thinking about where it can find it.
22:01	Now, I ask a question which you don’t know at all, an answer.
22:08	What takes place? That is I ask you a question, a very complex or very, very erudite question – you follow?
22:21	– and you don’t know the answer. But you wait for the answer. You wait or expect for someone to tell you. Right? Then there is further a question, which when asked you say, ‘I really don’t know.
22:40	Nobody knows.’ You follow, sir? There are four categories. All that is thinking in the interval of time between the question and the answer.
22:55	No? So, thinking is the response of memory. No?
23:02	Q: Yes.
23:03	Q: Yes, sir.
23:04	Q: Why isn’t it rehearsal? Why isn’t it a form of rehearsal for the answer you are going to give or an action?
23:15	K: Yes, sir, that’s memory. If you had no memory at all, if you are in a state of amnesia, you wouldn’t answer.
23:24	Q: You wouldn’t think, you wouldn’t speak, you wouldn’t do anything, but one is not in a state of amnesia.
23:31	K: That’s why I’m… I am saying that thinking, all thinking is based, is the outcome or the response of memory.
23:44	It’s so obvious! Memory is knowledge – knowledge, experience, either through your own experience or the accumulated experience of mankind.
24:06	So the brain holds these memories and responds when a challenge is made.
24:19	This is so simple! Right? Now, so thought is always responding from the background of memory, knowledge, experience.
24:39	Q: This means that thought is a deliberate act and is something that you decide upon K: Not decidable – it happens.
24:50	Q: Sometimes it can be intuition, or something you cannot explain. It doesn’t respond to a precise question.
24:53	K: I don’t quite follow.
24:56	Q: Sometimes a thought can come to a mind, to my mind without thinking about it.
25:08	K: No, that’s a quite different matter, isn’t it? I may not be thinking about it, but it is there and it comes out.
25:21	You see we are making little issues when the big issues are concerned!
25:31	So knowledge and thought go together.
25:39	Thought is knowledge.
25:49	Right? And so thought is never new. I don’t know – you understand, sir?
26:04	When I have based all my life, all my structure of living on thought, it’s a shock to find out for oneself that there is nothing new, and thought is never free.
26:25	So I have discovered two things: thought is the response of the past – memory, knowledge – because knowledge is always is the past – and I’ve found that thought can never be free and therefore can never be new.
26:43	The new can take place only when thought is absent.
26:54	Right? No, this is…
27:04	I don’t know if you see.
27:15	Piano, piano. The culture in which one is born cultivates further this thought.
27:33	And this thought, one finds, is based on memory, and memory is knowledge, experience.
27:49	You can add more to it or take away, but there is always a reservoir of memory and therefore thought can never be new and never be free.
28:09	But yet how does it happen that new inventions take place?
28:16	You are following? A scientist discovers something totally new. Right? If he is really a good scientist, not a slave of a government. If he is really a top-notch scientist he finds something totally new. How does that happen?
28:42	Q: Insight.
28:44	K: No, to you it must happen, not to the scientist. I am only…
28:50	Q: For you to discover.
28:55	K: Sir, you heard the speaker just now say thought can never see anything new.
29:05	Right? Thought, not being free, thought being the result of the past, it can never see something totally different.
29:18	Doesn’t that strike you as most extraordinary?
29:33	And our life is that, therefore our life is mechanical.
29:37	Q: If our life was only that we would have already be dead.
29:49	K: But, sir, wait, sir.
29:50	Q: So as we are not dead, that means that there is something else.
29:52	K: I know nothing – ‘something else’ – don’t begin with something else. I begin with not knowing. I move from fact to fact. I see that one’s life based on thought can never be free.
30:18	I may talk about freedom, I may revolt against the dictatorship, I may deny authority - which are all the functions of thought – but thought is the response of the old, modified, changed, all that.
30:43	So… And thought divides - the ‘me’ and the ‘not me’, the ‘we’ and ‘they’ - right?
31:00	– Christian religion, Hindu religion, Buddhist, communist, socialist, ideologist. You follow? Thought is the very essence of division. I wish you would see this.
31:21	I am jealous, I must not be jealous. I am rich, I must have consideration for the poor. So thought divides. Why? Because it cannot meet the movement of change, the movement of revolution, psychological revolution.
31:55	You’re getting what I am…
32:02	So, then what does the mind do? Thought is necessary – you understand?
32:07	Q: It is necessary now – is this what your question is?
32:18	K: No, not now. No, no, I am not… Sir, look, I see thought is operating all the time, on the foundation which the past has built – past being also the projection of the future through the present, modified.
32:37	Right?
32:38	Q: Now we begin to observe only the thought, it seems to me, not the end result.
32:45	K: No, no.
32:46	Q: No?
32:47	K: So, what shall I do, what shall the mind do if thought divides?
32:56	Q: Begin to watch… (inaudible) K: Put yourself that question, sir, don’t answer me!
33:07	Put yourself that question. All your arts, your science, your relationship with another, is the expression of thought.
33:26	You may have had an insight into beauty for a split second, for a few minutes, and then you translate it through thought and put it down on canvas, paper, or a stone, whatever it is.
33:48	So what shall the mind do when it has been nurtured, cultivated to exercise thought? Come on, sir, it’s your problem.
33:54	Q: You are asking us to think about it.
34:01	You are asking us to think.
34:12	K: I don’t. If you think about it you are back again.
34:18	Q: No, but by concentration of thinking there will be a way of thinking and an artist and a scientist goes by that way of concentration in thinking, for a moment where something new comes.
34:36	K: No, sir.
34:39	Q: The conflict perhaps is that you were asking a question of which we cannot give you an answer.
34:46	K: I’m going to tell you.
34:47	Q: Ah, I don’t…
34:48	K: I’ll show it to you in a minute. Go slowly.
34:52	Q: Show it to me, not thought.
34:54	K: No, of course, I’m going to show it to you. I’ve come to the point when I see my life, one’s life - not mine - one’s life is based on thought, all existence is based on thought and there is the pursuit of constant pleasure, and the other side of pleasure, fear.
35:24	These two are going on all the time in a human being. Occasionally he may be free of fear or occasionally the pursuit of pleasure stops and there’s something, but thought is in constant movement, and mind says: yes, I see that it is never free, it is never new.
35:55	Realising that fact - it’s not a supposition - realising that, it says: is there anything new at all?
36:17	Or the new is the invention of thought? You are following all this? A new picture is an invention - you follow? – a new idea, new ideology, whether it’s Marx, Mao or somebody, it’s still in the field of cognition, mentation, thought.
36:40	Right? So is there anything new at all? Or is it only thought meeting thought - you follow?
36:54	– modifying, changing, but it is still the movement of thought, all the time, spirally or horizontally, vertically or horizontally?
37:04	You get it? Now, go into it. I am asking: is the mind asking itself, is there anything new or is it only the movement of thought modified, changing, adjusting, remembering, imagining, contriving.
37:24	You follow? Is that all? So – you follow?
37:39	– thought is measure, and if it is measurable it can never find the immeasurable.
37:51	I mean, I’ve been told - I don’t read, fortunately - I’ve been told by so-called people who know something about all this, that Greece exploded on Europe and measurement was necessary, and so on - we talked about it the other day.
38:13	So the mind says: as long as it lives in the field of time, fear, pleasure, thought, all that is measurable - I was more happy, I had greater pleasure yesterday than today, I am much more frightened today than yesterday, or I will be frightened tomorrow – all that is measurable, all that is thought, and any movement of thought towards reality, if there is a reality, is its own invention.
39:00	I don’t know if you see all this. All the Gods, the saviours, the masters – you follow, sir? – you wipe all that out.
39:14	Q: All images.
39:18	K: Of course. Of course, images. I said contriving, imagining, remembering. So is there anything new? How is the mind to find out? Or just always live in the field of thought, modifying, adjusting, contriving - you follow?
39:40	– changing, but it is always within that field. I don’t know if you follow all this – do you?
39:48	Q: Yes.
39:49	K: Then I am asking myself and you are asking: is there anything new? How is the mind to find anything new, if there is something new?
40:04	Q: The mind cannot find anything new.
40:10	K: Wait, wait. The mind, I mean, you must go in… I use the word ‘mind’ as a total movement, in which is included the intellect with all its rationalising and irrationalising process - right? – the mind with all its emotions, images - you follow? - the total: the body, the brain, the emotions, the perception, all that is the mind.
40:47	The mind is asking itself: is there anything new, or is it all image making, or is it all a verbal structure?
41:06	Image is verbal structure. Or is it all a symbol? We live in symbols, never real. You follow all this? And the whole world is concerned with thinking. And I or you want to reform the world, want to change the world.
41:40	Of course. Don’t you? Or you are frightened of that word ‘change’?
41:45	Q: No… (inaudible) K: So, when the politicians, the religious, etc., etc., etc., want to change the world, they are thinking in terms of thought.
42:05	And so society can never be ‘improved’ – quotes - it can be modified, a little added here, a little added there; it can never be free.
42:20	We won’t go into all that. So I am asking you, mind is asking, your own mind is asking: is there anything new at all or is it living everlastingly in images?
42:36	Right? Now how do you find out? How does the mind find out? How do you find out, sir?
42:46	Q: Sir, I should think that you begin to observe with the awareness of the limitations of the thought…
43:03	K: You have done that, you have done that.
43:05	Q: This is the only thing that you can do.
43:09	K: Wait, wait. I’m going further, sir. No, don’t limit.
43:12	Q: You asked the question.
43:14	K: Don’t limit yourself, that’s all. Don’t block yourself from further inquiry. I see… the brain cells hold the memory – this is a… – and memory is matter.
43:37	Thought is matter. Thought is time. And therefore any process of thinking, or thinking differently, is within that field, absolutely.
44:00	The exercise of will to think differently is - you follow? So, is there anything new? I am asking this question because – myself I am asking – because: can the mind be free?
44:19	Or must it always live in the past – you follow? – modified, changed - you know? Because otherwise we are just slaves to time. Right? Is there something new? How shall I find out? Come on, sir.
44:53	Can thought be completely silent and only operate when memory, with all its experiences, etc., needs an action.
45:20	You follow what I am saying? Can the mind operate when asked, in thought, logically, sanely, healthily, non-neurotically, and can thought be absent when it is not being challenged, thinking?
45:52	Go on, sir, you don’t pursue.
46:01	Can the mind be completely still?
46:13	And only when challenged it responds at its own level.
46:21	You understand? Otherwise it’s completely silent. If that silence doesn’t exist then the mind is everlastingly slave to its conditioning.
46:40	I don’t know if you see this.
46:50	So how is the… can the mind be still? Not always chattering – you follow?
47:03	- asking, demanding, pursuing, imagining, contriving - can it be absolutely still?
47:13	Q: If thought can be still.
47:18	K: I am asking.
47:19	Q: Yes, if thought can be still, or the mind is being still?
47:21	K: I am asking you that. I am asking you: can the thought be still? It’s the same.
47:29	Q: You are saying thought and mind in the same terms.
47:32	K: Yes, sir, I am using the whole content.
47:35	Q: I see. Because I thought at first that mind was something which embraced everything.
47:39	K: No, I said that. Sir, consciousness is its content.
47:51	Right?
47:54	Q: (Inaudible) K: It’s getting hot, isn’t it?
47:57	Q: Yes.
47:58	K: Can I open this window?
48:00	Q: Oh, yes, sure.
48:04	K: Be careful of those flowers.
48:37	What is consciousness?
48:46	Go on, sir.
48:49	Q: It’s what you said.
48:51	K: I know. (Laughter) Is its content, isn’t it? I’m an Indian, I am a socialist, communist, capitalist, or I like and dislike, this is my furniture, it’s my wife, it’s my house, this is my bank account, I must succeed, I must not succeed, I must be fashionable – the content is my consciousness.
49:21	The content may be expanded but it is still it’s content.
49:35	So as long as… and part of the whole content is thought.
49:43	Of course. And as long as that thought exists, active, moving, seeking, searching, asking - you follow?
49:54	- doubt, which are all its content, how can there be anything new?
50:05	If there is nothing new we are living constantly in the same field, which is mechanical.
50:14	Sir, this is deadly serious – you understand? - all this isn’t a plaything for children.
50:23	If you don’t want to go into it so deeply, don’t, forget it, get up and go.
50:35	But if you really are serious, I mean deadly serious, you have to find out whether the mind can be so completely still, and from that stillness act when thought is demanded.
50:54	You understand? So can the brain, the mind, the body be still?
51:11	You understand, sir, why? It’s only in that stillness you can see something new. Obviously. Or nothing. I was talking once to a great inventor, scientist. He has discovered many things. He said, ‘It’s most strange, I discover something when I am not thinking, when I am just looking.’ You understand, sir?
51:55	The discovery is translated into thought and then put into action, utilised - for benefit or not benefit, that’s irrelevant.
52:06	Q: That means vision is freedom of the mind, because…
52:13	K: That’s a conclusion which you have come it, which is not your experience.
52:19	Q: Well it has been the experience of so many artists and creators.
52:23	K: I am not interested. You, not the artist, not the scientist, not the inventors – you. We are talking, you and I are talking, not those people. They won’t even listen to you.
52:35	Q: Well I hope that we all have sometime a vision of something and then we feel completely free in our mind.
52:47	K: Vision sometimes is not good enough. It is like saying, ‘Sometimes I have food.’ Q: Vision is always the thing which has not been demonstrated in this world yet.
53:01	K: I don’t want to demonstrate.
53:03	Q: It seems to me that we become now involved with this business of stillness, of quietness, rather than observing how our thought works.
53:18	(Inaudible) …perhaps because I am not quite sure. It seems to me that you speak of this stillness…
53:24	K: No, no.
53:25	Q: …or whatever you speak of without thought.
53:27	K: No, sir.
53:28	Q: That’s not the essential.
53:29	K: No, wait, sir. I went into the whole movement of thought.
53:32	Q: All right. Yes, I understand that.
53:34	K: The whole structure and nature of thought. We can expand it, we can put much more in details and go on exploring it, but it is still - very briefly, you can say it is time, memory, imagination, remembrance and contrivance.
53:59	That is thought. On that, all our civilisation is based. Right?
54:04	Q: And on vision.
54:07	K: Ambition?
54:08	Q: On vision. Vision, which is something which cannot be expressed in words. Anything… (inaudible) K: No, sir. Who has this vision? You?
54:23	Q: Well the man who has it. (Inaudible) K: I’m not interested. The man who had a vision two thousand years ago, I am not interested.
54:32	Q: (Inaudible) K: I am not… Who?
54:35	Q: I mean we couldn’t all pretend to have vision.
54:37	K: I don’t want to. I am not interested, as I told you, in the artist who for two seconds or a minute or a day has this extraordinary sense of beauty, vision, translates it into paint or whatever it is and then the rest of the time he is fighting - you follow?
54:59	- wanting to have more vision. I am asking you, not the artist, not this – you sitting here listening to this.
55:08	If you think it is absurd listening to all this thing, if you see the reality of the movement of thought, what are its implications, and the next question is, for you to answer not for some - to answer: whether the mind can discover something totally new, enter into a different dimension altogether.
55:34	Or no dimension. You follow?
55:37	Q: This isn’t a question that we ask just here with you, is it? It is a question that we perhaps should ask at all times. Not to say that I am still, not that I am free from thought, I would think, I am not sure, if we can go perhaps just a little further with this, that in our every moment life, every second that we are posing this question, the two questions.
56:03	K: No, don’t pose it. I am asking you: do it now.
56:08	Q: Yes, but I am going to do it now, all the time.
56:12	K: No, don’t…
56:13	Q: No, I understand. No, I understand. All right.
56:16	K: You have no tomorrow.
56:19	Q: Exactly. But it doesn’t mean… All right.
56:24	K: Sir, I must… See the implications, sir. If the mind is constantly caught in the movement of thought, it is mechanical.
56:46	Right? More rapid, less rapid, more crude, less crude - you follow? it’s still the movement of thought. And therefore it is always slave to time.
57:01	From that there is the whole fear of death. I don’t know, I won’t go into it now. Because death means time. No? I might… I will die, I hope, not tomorrow, ten years later.
57:28	Thought thinking about something it doesn’t know, postpones it, and is frightened of it.
57:38	Or knows the inevitability of death and wants to have some kind of future, invents, believes, takes comfort in some idea, which are all within the field of time.
57:54	So immortality - you follow? – it follows from all this – mortality is death.
58:01	Right? Immortality is non-death, which is non-time.
58:05	Q: Can we come back to the question of how to keep the mind still?
58:12	K: I am coming to that. I am showing you, sir, the implications of thought. Unless you see the whole movement, the complex business of thinking, you won’t…
58:26	You follow? You may jump off but you will jump off nowhere. That’s not the point. So you have to understand this whole question of time.
58:41	And we function in time: I will be good, I will give up smoking.
58:50	You follow, sir? I don’t say, ‘Finished,’ it is always, ‘I will.’ If I am ambitious or crude, vulgar, ‘I will be less’ – you follow? – it is always within the field of time.
59:16	Oh, you don’t see this, sir.
59:20	Q: But may I ask you something? This idea of stilling the mind: also thought.
59:26	K: No. No, no, you are missing my point. I asked you - I ask myself and you - as long as this movement of thought exists, therefore time, therefore fear, therefore fear of death, all the fears involved, there is no ending to that, therefore mind is a slave, just a mechanical movement.
1:00:05	It can invent something non-mechanical, as heaven, God, spiritual - you follow? – but it is all the result of thought.
1:00:16	Right? So if that is all - I am not going to invent - you follow? – if thought produces all this, what am I doing, what are we all doing?
1:00:39	We are living in a prison, talking about freedom. I say, ‘What the devil is this?’ Q: Aren’t we doing that right now, the process of thinking?
1:00:52	K: Obviously, sir, because I am communicating verbally to you. Of course.
1:00:56	Q: (Inaudible) K: You don’t see it because you are not meeting the speaker at the same level, with the same intensity, with the same urgency.
1:01:05	Then you would get it.
1:01:06	Q: That is a belief.
1:01:08	K: I said belief is part of thinking.
1:01:16	Q: I know. (Laughs) K: So I am saying: this mind, which is a result of time, this mind sees the futility of talking about freedom, as long as it is operating there, the futility of saying, ‘I will be good.’ You are either good or not good.
1:01:52	You follow, sir? So, I say to myself, the mind says to itself: is there a way out of all this?
1:02:10	Not a system, not a method - you follow? – can the mind move away from it?
1:02:16	Q: But what is the entity who tries to move away from it?
1:02:22	K: I explained to you. Any movement of thought creates the thinker, then the thinker says, ‘I must move out.’ Q: So it is still thought.
1:02:36	K: That’s what I am… So you have to…
1:02:38	Q: Maybe we should observe without doing any conclusions.
1:02:41	K: That’s right, sir. So can the mind observe the whole movement of thought without any conclusion – how am I to live, what will happen, isn’t there insight - you follow? – just to observe consciousness with its content in operation, without any conclusion, any opinion, any judgment, any evaluation, good or – you follow? - just to observe?
1:03:23	So from that the question arises: is the observer different from the thing observed?
1:03:36	Are you interested in all this?
1:03:40	Q: Yes.
1:03:42	K: If there is an observer, the thing that he observes is different from the observer.
1:03:57	I will make it very simple.
1:04:05	If you smoke and you say, ‘I must give up smoking,’ the maker of the decision is different from the fact that he is smoking.
1:04:25	Right?
1:04:27	Q: (Inaudible) K: I will show you. When he says, ‘I must not be envious’ – right? - the entity that says he must not be envious is different from the thing which he calls envy.
1:04:51	So the observer separates himself from the observed and thereby creates a division and therefore brings conflict.
1:05:02	Can you – wait a minute, next step – can you observe without the observer? Which is the observer, which is the past - you follow? – all this. Observe that you smoke without any conclusion.
1:05:19	Q: If I observe that flower it is timeless, so it is always new.
1:05:36	K: Wait, sir. Wait. Can you observe that flower without naming?
1:05:39	Q: No, without any conclusion.
1:05:41	K: No, please go slowly, sir. Without naming it rose, lily, iris, you can observe it, can’t you? Then what takes place when you observe without a conclusion, without a verbal image which you have created about the flower?
1:06:01	Q: (Inaudible) K: Stick to the one thing: what takes place? What takes place between you who are the observer and the iris or the rose which you don’t name, therefore with no conclusion, what has taking place there?
1:06:19	Q: (Inaudible) Q: (Inaudible) Q: There is no more distance.
1:06:29	Q: Is there any difference between me and…
1:06:31	K: Of course, sir, of course.
1:06:33	Q: (Inaudible) K: Don’t you see much more clearly? Isn’t your relationship to it much closer?
1:06:44	Q: I am the flower.
1:06:47	K: No, you are not the flower. No.
1:06:50	Q: Yes, but I can say.
1:06:51	Q: That’s a conclusion, too.
1:06:54	K: You see clearly. There is no division. That’s all I am saying.
1:07:03	Q: That’s all.
1:07:04	K: That’s all. Can you do the same with your anger, with your greed, with your ambition, just to observe your envy without the observer?
1:07:17	The observer being the past - right? – the observer, the conclusion, the maker of decision, without that can you look at your envy?
1:07:32	Q: (Inaudible) K: This is easy, but that…
1:07:41	Q: May I ask, if I look at a snake, in this moment I have a disgust, no thinking, but feeling of disgust.
1:07:57	If I look at the flower I don’t feel obstacles because… (inaudible) K: But madame, we’ve been through that before.
1:08:13	So can you observe – listen - can you observe the whole movement of thought?
1:08:23	Is there an observation of the whole movement of thought without conclusion? Wait, sir, watch it, do it.
1:08:39	You hear that motorbike? Can you listen to it without annoyance, without saying, ‘I wish they would go away’ – non-verbally listen to it and therefore not to react to it?
1:09:01	So in the same way, can you look, can the mind observe the whole movement – or just keep it, not ‘the whole’ - one movement, the movement of thought without any conclusion, opinion, judgment?
1:09:23	Then there is no observer, is there? Then you are seeing. Right? Then you have tremendous insight into the whole movement of thought.
1:09:47	And you can only see the whole movement of thought - no conclusion, no opinions - only when the mind is fairly quiet.
1:09:57	It is the conclusions, opinions, judgments, evaluations that is making the noise, which prevents you from looking.
1:10:05	Got it? Can you do this? Not tomorrow.
1:10:18	I smoke. I don’t but suppose I do. I smoke. Can I observe this whole movement of picking up a cigarette, rolling it, putting in my mouth, lighting a cigarette, watch it without any condemnation, any judgment, any resistance, wanting it, ‘Oh my God, what will I do if I give it up?’ Q: You could never stop to smoke in this way.
1:11:02	Q: I think it’s the only way. (Laughter) K: Now watch it, watch it, watch it, watch it, watch it, watch it, watch it. He says no, and he says yes – two conclusions. (Laughter) Q: (Inaudible) K: No, no, sir, it’s terribly interesting. You are missing the whole point. Terribly interesting. You have a habit - just a minute, sir - you have a habit, doesn’t matter what habit it is, sex, any habit, which has become mechanical.
1:11:40	Can you observe it without any resistance or acceptance?
1:11:54	And therefore what takes place? You introduce a non-mechanical movement. I don’t know if you follow.
1:12:05	Q: Why should we be so serious, actually?
1:12:09	K: Life is serious. To me this is completely serious!
1:12:15	Q: That’s what I don’t understand, actually.
1:12:17	K: I can laugh. I laugh a great deal.
1:12:25	One has to be terribly serious about things that are serious.
1:12:36	Things that are not serious, we can talk, play – you follow? – laugh about.
1:12:40	Q: He was dividing them.
1:12:41	K: No, no, no. This demands your seriousness.
1:12:51	Perhaps this is what is the most sacred thing in life – not all the movement of thought but to find out whether there is anything not measurable.
1:13:21	If human beings cannot change, which is you and I, radically change, but are always functioning within the field of thought, then there is no hope.
1:13:36	Q: Why should we need hope?
1:13:38	K: No, not hope. Please don’t jump on words, for God’s sake. Then there is no beauty.
1:13:53	I can talk about beauty, living in the prison, I can talk about freedom living in prison, but that’s just words, occasional glimpse of a lovely blue sky.
1:14:10	But I don’t… but the mind says: I don’t want to live in a prison with an occasional look at the blue sky.
1:14:17	Q: There is no love, which we are all in search of.
1:14:21	K: That’s what I am saying, sir.
1:14:23	Q: That is what we want.
1:14:26	K: Therefore I have to reject the whole structure of…
1:14:31	Q: Then we come into… (inaudible) I can’t express it.
1:14:43	Q: It’s personal.
1:14:46	Q: Into sophistication.
1:14:50	K: Oh, no! Sir, would you talk like this if you are hungry?
1:14:57	Q: Not at all.
1:14:59	K: You would be deadly serious, wouldn’t you?
1:15:02	Q: Oh yes. That’s the only thing that matters.
1:15:07	K: Food.
1:15:08	Q: And shelter.
1:15:09	K: Yes, and clothes. You can put on something.
1:15:11	Q: Depends where.
1:15:12	K: Yes. But you have food, clothes and shelter, haven’t you? Because you are serious about it you say, ‘I must have that.’ But that isn’t the whole of life.
1:15:31	You can have your food, clothes and shelter and you may never have love. What’s the point of living then?
1:15:40	Q: Living is its own point.
1:15:47	K: Just have clothes and food?
1:15:49	Q: No, living is its own point.
1:15:52	K: I agree, but if you say food, clothes and shelter, that’s enough, then you disregard the rest of the field.
1:16:05	And that’s what is creating mischief in the world! They say God is enough, clothes are enough, this idea is enough – all fragmented.
1:16:17	So, sir, look, sir, look at it for yourself.
1:16:25	You are a human being and you live in a world where thought has operated for millennia and has created such mischief.
1:16:43	Right? We have no love. Ah! What is love? We went into it. I may say, ‘I love you darling, my wife,’ or my girl, but I am more important than anybody else in the world.
1:17:08	I separate myself from the rest of them. So, thought has created this appalling world. No?
1:17:19	Q: Is it so bad?
1:17:27	K: Ask the man who is dying in Vietnam. Ask the man who has no food. Ask the man who is tortured by his own conflicts. Ask the man who is ill, physically, desperately ill. A man who is always fighting, fighting inwardly and outwardly, he doesn’t say, ‘Is that all?
1:17:59	Is it so bad?’ I can sit on the river bank and say it isn’t so bad, because I’ve got everything I want.
1:18:13	So, I have come to the point.
1:18:20	For myself, I’m not telling you what to do, don’t do. I’m not doing any propaganda. I’m only doing… I’m only pointing out the facts. Facts, not opinions, judgments, conclusions. As long as the mind lives in the movement of thought there is no freedom.
1:18:45	As long as the mind is living within the field of time there must be death.
1:18:56	Right? And it has no love. Unless one understands the totality of this, one is living everlastingly in a world that is utterly confused, immoral, insane, neurotic.
1:19:18	And to me this is deadly serious.
1:19:27	Q: Perceiving, understanding the totality of this, then we go how?
1:19:43	Not ‘how’ - excuse me. What is the next act? Whilst I’m saying this, I’m getting myself in trouble. Once seeing this…
1:19:54	K: That’s enough.
1:19:55	Q: Is it enough?
1:19:57	K: What is taking place? Once you see this, your intelligence is in operation.
1:20:01	Q: Yes.
1:20:02	K: That intelligence will tell you what to do, not thought.
1:20:04	Q: Yes, all right.
1:20:06	K: Got it?
1:20:12	Q: That’s it.
1:20:18	K: To see the whole picture demands clear sight – nonverbal, non-image, conclusion, opinion – when you look, your intelligence – not yours or mine – intelligence is in operation.
1:20:36	And that is the greatest security. Nothing else, not food, clothes and shelter.
1:20:53	Bene? What time is it, sir?
1:20:57	Q: Half past twelve.
1:21:00	K: Is that enough?
1:21:03	Q: We like to listen to you.
1:21:08	K: You like to listen to me? Do you know, I’ll tell you a story, there was a preacher, a teacher who used to give his disciples every morning a sermon, on beauty, on goodness, on the way of life, and so on.
1:21:29	So one morning as he just gets onto the rostrum, onto the platform, a bird comes and sits on the windowsill and begin to chant, begins to sing, most beautifully.
1:21:43	It was a spring morning, lovely new leaves and green, and sky and flowers, and the bird is singing, singing, singing enchantingly, and then flies off.
1:21:59	So the teacher says, ‘The sermon for this morning is over.’ (Laughter)