Krishnamurti Subtitles

What is communication with others?

San Diego - 19 February 1974

Conversation with A.W. Anderson 3

0:36 Krishnamurti in Dialogue
with Dr. Allan W. Anderson
0:41 J. Krishnamurti was
born in South India
0:43 and educated in England.
0:45 For the past 40 years
0:47 he has been speaking
in the United States,
0:49 Europe, India, Australia,
and other parts of the world.
0:53 From the outset of his life's work
0:55 he repudiated all connections
0:57 with organised
religions and ideologies
1:00 and said that his only concern was
1:02 to set man absolutely
unconditionally free.
1:06 He is the author of
many books, among them
1:09 The Awakening of Intelligence,
The Urgency of Change,
1:13 Freedom From the Known,
and The Flight of the Eagle.
1:17 This is one of a
series of dialogues
1:20 between Krishnamurti and
Dr. Allan W. Anderson,
1:23 who is professor of
religious studies
1:25 at San Diego State University
1:27 where he teaches Indian
and Chinese scriptures
1:29 and the oracular tradition.
1:31 Dr. Anderson, a published
poet, received his degree
1:35 from Columbia University
1:37 and the Union
Theological Seminary.
1:39 He has been honoured with
the distinguished Teaching Award
1:42 from the California
State University.
1:46 A: Mr. Krishnamurti,
in this series of conversations
1:50 we have been exploring
the general question
1:52 of the transformation of man.
1:54 A transformation, which
- as you say -
1:56 is not dependent
on knowledge or time.
2:00 And, as I recall,
2:02 we arrived at a point
that was very crucial,
2:06 namely the one concerned with
2:08 relationship
and communication.
2:11 I remember one point
in our conversation together
2:16 that was extremely
instructive for me,
2:19 a point at which,
when you asked me a question
2:22 I began to answer it,
2:24 and you interrupted me
and reminded the viewers and me
2:29 that the important thing here
2:32 is not to finish out
a theoretical construction,
2:37 rather to attain to
the right beginning point,
2:41 so that we do not go beyond
where we haven't yet begun.
2:46 This, as I repeat,
was extremely instructive for me,
2:49 and I was thinking,
if it is agreeable with you,
2:53 it would be helpful today,
if we could begin at the point
2:57 of concern for communication
and relationship,
3:01 to go into that question
and begin to unravel it.
3:04 K: Unravel it, quite.
3:09 I wonder, sir, what that word
'communication' means.
3:17 To communicate implies
3:21 not only verbally,
but also a listening
3:32 in which there is a sharing,
3:36 a thinking together,
3:38 not accepting
something that you or I say,
3:42 but sharing together,
thinking together, creating together
3:48 - all that is involved
in that word 'communicate'.
3:55 And in that word is implied
also the art of listening.
4:05 The art of listening
4:09 demands a quality of attention,
4:15 in which there is real listening,
4:22 real sense of having an insight
as we go along,
4:31 each second, not at the end,
but at the beginning.
4:36 A: So that we are both...
K: Walking together all the time.
4:40 A: Yes, yes, right.
There is a concurrent activity.
4:45 Not one making a statement,
the other thinking about it
4:49 and then saying,
'I agree, I don't agree,
4:53 I accept, I don't accept,
4:55 these are the reasons
I don't accept,
4:56 these are the reasons I do',
4:58 but we are walking together.
K: Journeying, walking together,
5:01 on the same path...
A: Side by side. Yes.
5:04 K: ...on the same road,
5:06 with the same attention,
with the same intensity,
5:09 at the same time, otherwise
there is no communication.
5:14 A: Exactly. Exactly.
5:15 K: Communication implies
there must be at the same level,
5:22 at the same time,
with the same intensity,
5:26 we are walking together,
we are thinking together,
5:29 we are observing together,
sharing together.
5:33 A: Would you say that
this requires an activity
5:37 that underlies
the speaking together,
5:42 or does one
come to the activity
5:45 after one has started
to speak together?
5:48 K: No, sir.
We are saying,
5:51 what is the art of listening,
aren't we?
5:57 The art of listening implies,
doesn't it,
6:01 that there is not only
the verbal understanding
6:06 between you and me,
because we are both speaking English
6:10 and we know the meaning
of each word, more or less,
6:15 and at the same time we are
6:19 sharing the problem together,
6:23 sharing the issue together.
6:27 A: Because, as you said,
it's a matter of life and death.
6:30 K: If you and I are both serious,
we are sharing the thing.
6:37 So, in communication
6:44 there is not only
a verbal communication,
6:48 but there is
a non-verbal communication,
6:54 which really comes into being,
or which happens,
7:00 when one has the art of
really listening to somebody,
7:04 in which there is no acceptance,
no denial,
7:08 or comparison, or judgement,
just the act of listening.
7:14 A: I wonder whether I am
on the right track here,
7:18 if I suggest that there is
a relation
7:25 that is very deep here
between communication
7:27 and what we call in
English 'communion'.
7:30 K: Communion, yes.
7:32 A: So that
if we are in communion,
7:36 our chance of communicating
7:38 K: ...becomes simpler.
A: Right!
7:41 K: Now, to be in communion
with each other
7:49 both of us must be serious
about the same problem,
7:53 at the same time,
with the same passion.
7:56 Otherwise
there is no communication.
7:59 A: Exactly.
8:00 K: If you are not interested
in what is being said,
8:03 you will think of something else
and communication stops.
8:09 So there is
a verbal communication
8:12 and
a non-verbal communication.
8:15 They are both operating
at the same time.
8:19 A: One does not precede
the other.
8:22 Or follow upon the other.
8:24 Yes, they move together.
8:28 K: Which means that
each of us, being serious,
8:34 gives our attention
completely to the issue.
8:41 A: That act of seriousness
that takes place
8:47 then requires
the utmost devoted attention.
8:52 K: Sir, a man
who is really serious lives,
8:59 not the man who is flippant
9:01 or merely wanting
to be entertained
9:03 - he does not live.
9:07 A: The general notion of
being serious about something
9:11 generally suggests either
undergoing some pain,
9:19 or I'm serious about something
9:21 in order to get something else.
9:24 These two things,
9:28 as a rule, are what persons
imagine by seriousness.
9:32 As a matter of fact,
9:35 we often hear this expression,
'Don't look so serious',
9:38 don't we?
K: Yes.
9:40 A: It's as though we fear
something about the serious.
9:44 K: Sir, look!
9:47 As we said yesterday,
the world is in a mess,
9:53 and it's my responsibility,
living in this world
9:56 as a human being
who has created this mess,
10:00 it's my responsibility
to be serious
10:04 in the resolution
of this problem.
10:08 I am serious. It doesn't mean
I am long faced,
10:10 I am miserable, unhappy,
or I want something out of it.
10:14 It has got to be solved!
10:18 It's like if one has cancer,
one is serious about it,
10:24 you don't play around with it.
10:28 A: Action in relation
to this seriousness then
10:31 is instantaneous.
10:33 K: Obviously!
A: Yes.
10:35 This raises
- not an additional question,
10:39 I don't mean to go beyond
10:41 where we haven't begun -
10:44 but time assumes
for the serious person
10:54 something very different
for his undergoing
10:58 than it would seem to be
for the unserious person.
11:02 One would not have then
11:03 the feeling of something
being dragged out.
11:06 Or, as we say in English,
11:09 time that has to be put in.
K: Put in, quite.
11:12 A: As a matter of fact,
11:16 in this concurrent
11:21 in which communion
is abidingly present,
11:28 time as such
would not in any way oppress.
11:33 K: No, sir, no, sir.
11:35 Quite right. Like we see, sir,
11:39 I am trying to see
what it means to be serious.
11:48 The intent,
11:53 the urge,
11:56 the feeling of
total responsibility,
12:04 the feeling of action,
the doing, not 'I will do'.
12:11 All that is implied in
that word 'seriousness'.
12:16 At least I'll put all those things
into that word.
12:22 A: Could we look for a
moment at one of them that
12:26 you put into them: responsibility,
able to be responsive?
12:35 K: That's right.
To respond adequately.
12:40 A: Yes. To respond adequately.
K: To any challenge.
12:46 The challenge now is
12:49 that the world is
in a mess, confusion,
12:52 sorrow and everything,
violence, and all that.
12:55 I must, as a human being
who has created this thing,
13:00 I must respond adequately.
13:05 The adequacy depends on my
seriousness in that sense,
13:12 on my observation of the chaos,
13:21 and responding not
13:23 according to my
prejudices, my inclination
13:26 or tendencies, or pleasures,
or fears,
13:29 but responding to the problem,
13:32 not according to
my translation of the problem.
13:38 A: Yes. I am just thinking
as you are speaking
13:43 about how difficult it is
13:49 to communicate this
to the person
13:55 who is thinking that the way
13:57 adequately to respond
to this chaos
14:03 is to have a plan for it,
which one superimposes on it.
14:10 And that's exactly
what we assume,
14:14 and if the plan doesn't work out,
we blame ourselves.
14:17 K: Or change the plan.
A: Or we change the plan, yes.
14:20 K: But we don't respond
to the challenge.
14:23 We respond according to
our conclusion about the problem.
14:30 A: Exactly.
14:31 K: Therefore,
it means really, sir,
14:34 if we can explore
it a little more,
14:37 the observer is the observed.
14:44 A: Therefore the change,
if it comes, is total, not partial.
14:51 One is no longer outside
what he is operating upon.
14:54 K: That's right.
14:55 A: And what he is operating
upon is not outside himself.
14:59 K: Because,
as we said yesterday
15:01 - it's very interesting,
if we go into it rather deeply -
15:05 the world is me
and I am the world.
15:10 That is not intellectual
or emotional, but a fact.
15:15 Now, when I approach
the problem,
15:21 the chaos, the misery,
the suffering,
15:24 the violence
- all that,
15:26 I approach it
with my conclusions,
15:30 with my fears,
with my despairs.
15:34 I don't look at the problem.
15:38 A: Would you think it possible
to put it this way
15:46 that one doesn't make
room for the problem.
15:50 K: Yes. Yes, put it any way. Yes.
A: Would that be all right?
15:55 K: Sir, let's look at this.
16:03 As a human being, one has
created this, this misery,
16:08 which is called the society
in which we live,
16:12 an immoral society.
16:15 A: Oh yes!
K: Completely immoral!
16:19 As a human being,
one has created that.
16:22 But that human being
looking at it
16:25 separates himself and says,
16:28 'I must do something about it'.
16:33 The 'it' is me!
16:39 A: Some people respond
to that this way.
16:43 They say,
16:45 'Look, if I am truly serious,
I am truly responsible,
16:52 I make this act, and there
comes between me and the world
16:57 this confluent relationship,
which is total.
17:06 All the things that
are going on out there
17:08 that are atrocious,
17:10 - let's say, 2,500 miles away -
don't stop.
17:14 Therefore, how can I say
that the whole world
17:18 is me
and I am the whole world?'
17:21 This objection
comes up again and again.
17:26 I am interested to know
what your reply to that would be.
17:30 K: Sir, look.
17:34 We are human beings
irrespective of our labels:
17:39 English, French, German,
all the rest of it.
17:46 A human being living
in America or in India
17:49 has the problems of
relationship, of suffering,
17:55 of jealousy, envy, greed,
ambition, imitation, conformity,
18:00 and all that are our problems,
common to both of us.
18:08 And when I say,
18:09 the world is me and me is
the world and the world I am,
18:17 I see that as a reality,
not as a concept.
18:23 Now, my responsibility
18:28 to the challenge, to
be adequate, must be
18:35 not in terms of what I think,
but what the problem is.
18:45 A: Yes.
I follow you I'm sure here.
18:49 I was thinking,
while you were saying that,
18:55 that it might have been possible
18:56 to answer
the question that I posed,
18:58 and I am posing the question
simply because
19:02 I know some persons
who might very well view this
19:05 who would raise that
and who would want
19:07 to participate with us
in this conversation.
19:11 I wondered whether
you might have said
19:15 that as soon as
one puts it that way
19:19 one has already divorced himself
from the issue.
19:25 That, in the practical order,
19:27 that question is
an interposition
19:33 that simply does not have
a place in the activity
19:38 that you are talking about.
K: Yes, that's right.
19:41 A: Now this is very interesting,
because it means
19:44 that the person must
suspend his disbelief.
19:50 K: Or his belief.
A: Or his belief.
19:54 K: And observe the thing.
A: And observe the thing.
19:57 K: Which isn't possible
if the observer
20:00 is different from the observed.
20:06 A: Now,
20:10 would you explore
the practical aspect of this
20:13 with me for a moment?
20:20 People will say,
20:24 - who up to this point are
listening, it would seem -
20:32 people at this point will say,
20:35 'Yes,
but I can't stop it,
20:40 I think I have an intuition
of what you mean'
20:44 - they will say -
20:46 'but the minute
that I open myself,
20:52 or begin to open myself,
20:54 all these things
seem to rush in on me,
21:00 what I had hoped
doesn't seem to take place'.
21:05 If I understand you correctly,
21:07 they are really not doing
what they claim
21:09 that they are trying to do.
K: That's right.
21:14 Sir, can we put
this question differently?
21:20 What is a human being to do,
21:26 confronted with this problem
of suffering, chaos,
21:32 - all that is going on
all around us?
21:35 What is he to do?
21:41 He approaches it
generally with a conclusion,
21:48 what he should do about it.
21:52 A: And this conclusion
is interposed between him...
21:55 K: Yes, the conclusion is
the factor of separation.
22:01 A: Right.
22:02 K: Now, can he observe
the fact of this confusion
22:10 without any conclusions,
22:13 without any planning,
22:17 without any predetermined way
of getting out of this chaos?
22:27 Because his
predetermined conclusions,
22:33 ideas, and so on,
are all derived from the past,
22:42 and the past is trying
to resolve the problem,
22:51 and therefore he is
translating it and acting
22:54 according to his
previous conclusions,
22:58 whereas the fact demands
that you look at it;
23:03 the fact demands
that you observe it,
23:05 that you listen to it.
23:08 The fact itself
will have the answer,
23:12 you don't have
to bring the answer to it.
23:16 I wonder if I am making
myself clear?
23:17 A: Yes, I'm listening very,
very hard. I really am.
23:23 I'm afraid, if I am not going
beyond where I shouldn't,
23:30 haven't yet begun,
23:35 the next question
that would naturally arise here,
23:43 - perhaps you might feel
when I raise the question
23:45 that it is the wrong question -
23:51 can one communicate
in the sense
23:56 that we have been
unraveling this?
24:01 One says,
24:04 'I don't know'.
24:06 It doesn't seem to me
that I have done this.
24:09 One says,
'I haven't done this yet'.
24:13 I can recognise all the things
24:15 that have been described,
that are terrible.
24:19 I don't recognise all the
things that appear to be promised
24:25 - without suggesting
that I am imagining them
24:28 or projecting them out there.
24:29 Clearly, if there is
to be a change,
24:31 it has to be a change
that is altogether radical.
24:33 Now, I must start.
What do I do?
24:37 K: Sir, there are two things
involved, aren't there?
24:42 First, I must learn
from the problem,
24:51 which means I must have a mind
24:54 that has a quality of humility.
25:00 It does not come to it and say,
'I know all about it'.
25:05 What he knows
is merely explanations,
25:09 rational or irrational.
25:12 He comes to the problem
25:14 with rational or irrational
25:21 Therefore he is not
learning from the problem.
25:28 The problem will reveal
an infinite lot of things,
25:32 if I'm capable of looking at it
and learning about it.
25:35 And for that I must have
a sense of humility,
25:39 and I am saying, 'I don't know,
25:41 this is a tremendous problem,
25:43 let me look at it,
let me learn about it'.
25:47 Not I come to it
with my conclusions,
25:52 therefore I have stopped
learning about the problem.
25:57 A: Are you suggesting that
this act
26:02 is a waiting on the problem
26:05 to reveal itself?
K: To reveal. That's right!
26:08 Therefore, I must be
capable of looking at it.
26:15 I cannot look at it
if I've come to it with ideas,
26:19 with ideations, with mentations,
26:21 of every kind of conclusion.
26:24 I must come to it,
say, 'Look, what is it?'
26:30 I must learn from it,
not learn according to
26:34 some professor, some psychologist,
some philosopher.
26:45 A: That one has the capacity
for this, some persons would...
26:52 K: I think everybody has.
Sir, we are so vain.
26:56 A: But this doesn't mean
anything for the doing
27:00 of what must be done,
that there is a capacity.
27:03 K: No, the learning
is the doing!
27:08 A: Exactly. Yes, yes.
27:09 I wanted to make that clear,
because we comfort ourselves
27:12 with the curious notion
- if I have been following you -
27:16 that we possess a possibility,
27:22 and because
we possess the possibility
27:25 we think that someday
it will actualise itself perhaps.
27:29 K: Quite right.
27:30 A: But
if I'm correct both ways,
27:37 no possibility
can actualise itself,
27:40 and in the practical order
that never occurs,
27:44 but somehow
it is believed, isn't it?
27:47 K: I'm afraid it is.
A: It is believed.
27:50 K: Sir,
it is really quite simple.
27:55 There is this misery, confusion,
28:00 immense sorrow in the world,
28:03 violence, all that.
28:07 Human beings have created it.
28:11 Human beings have built
a structure of society
28:17 which sustains this chaos.
28:22 That's a fact.
28:24 Now, a human being
comes to it
28:27 trying to resolve it
according to his plan,
28:32 according to his prejudices,
28:34 his idiosyncrasies,
or knowledge
28:39 which means he has already
understood the problem,
28:47 whereas
the problem is always new.
28:52 So I must come to it afresh.
28:59 A: One of the things
that has concerned me
29:03 for many, many years
as a reader, as a student,
29:10 as one whose daily work
involves the study of scriptures,
29:21 is the recurrent statement
that one comes upon,
29:29 sometimes
in a very dramatic form.
29:32 For instance, take the
prophetic ministry of Jesus,
29:36 where he speaks
29:43 and he says
that they are hearing,
29:48 but they are not listening,
29:52 they are observing,
but they are not seeing.
29:55 K: And doing.
A: But then...
30:00 But then, it seems,
he does not say
30:10 'In order to attain to that,
do this'.
30:14 No. The closest he comes to it
30:16 is through the analogy
with the child,
30:21 to have faith as a little child.
30:24 I don't want
to talk about words here,
30:26 because
that would be disastrous,
30:29 - so what is meant by 'faith' here
is not something
30:33 that would be proper
to go into -
30:34 but the analogy
with the child suggests
30:37 that the child
is doing something
30:40 that is lost somewhere along the way
in some respect.
30:44 I'm sure he didn't mean that
there is a perfect continuity
30:47 between
the adult and the child.
30:48 But why is it,
over the centuries,
30:52 that men have said this
over and over again,
30:55 namely, you are not listening,
you are not seeing,
31:02 and then they don't
point to an operation,
31:06 they point to an analogy.
31:09 Some of them don't even
point to an analogy.
31:11 They just hold up a flower.
K: Sir, look!
31:16 We live on words.
31:19 Most people live on words.
31:21 They don't go beyond the word.
31:25 And what we are talking about
is not only the word,
31:31 the meaning of the word,
31:33 the communication
that exists in using words,
31:36 but
the non-verbal communication,
31:40 which is having an insight.
31:44 That is what we are talking
about all the time so far.
31:48 That is, the mind can
31:52 only have an insight
if it is capable of listening.
32:00 And you do listen
32:02 when the crisis
is right at your doorstep!
32:07 A: Now, I think I'm at a point here
that is solid.
32:19 Is it that we don't
32:24 allow ourselves
32:30 access to the crisis
32:34 that is there continuously,
32:37 it isn't a crisis
that is episodic?
32:39 K: No.
The crisis is always there.
32:42 A: Right.
32:43 We are doing something
32:45 to shut ourselves off from it,
aren't we?
32:48 K: Or we don't know
how to meet it.
32:55 Either we avoid it, or we
don't know how to meet it,
32:59 or we are indifferent.
We have become so callous.
33:10 All these things,
33:11 all these three are involved
in not facing the crisis,
33:19 because I am frightened.
One is frightened.
33:23 One says, 'My Lord!
I don't know how to deal with it'.
33:27 So one goes off to an analyst,
or to a priest,
33:32 or picks up a book to see
how it can be translated.
33:35 He becomes irresponsible.
33:41 A: Or sometimes
people will register
33:43 the disappointment
that things haven't worked out.
33:48 So why try something new?
K: Yes. Of course.
33:50 A: And this would be a buffer.
33:54 K: That's what I mean.
33:56 There are so many ways
to avoid,
33:59 clever, cunning,
superficial, and very subtle.
34:03 All that is involved
in avoiding an issue.
34:10 So, what we are trying to say,
sir, isn't it,
34:15 the observer is the past
- as we said yesterday.
34:21 The observer
is trying to translate
34:25 and act according to the past,
34:30 when the crisis arises.
The crisis is always new.
34:35 Otherwise it's not a crisis.
34:38 A challenge must be new,
is new, and always new.
34:44 But he translates it
according to the past.
34:50 Now, can he look at that
challenge, that crisis,
34:55 without
the response of the past?
35:00 A: May I read a sentence
out of your book?
35:03 I think that maybe this has
a very direct relationship
35:11 to what we are talking about.
35:12 It's a sentence which
arrested me when I read it.
35:26 'Through negation, that thing,
which alone is the positive,
35:36 comes into being'.
K: That's right.
35:39 A: May I read it again?
35:42 Through negation,
something is done, apparently.
35:47 K: Absolutely.
A: Right.
35:49 So we are not leaving
it at the point where
35:52 we are saying, simply,
35:58 words are of no consequence,
36:01 therefore I will do
something non-verbal,
36:04 or I will say something,
36:07 because I never communicate
with the non-verbal.
36:09 That has nothing to do with it.
Something must be done.
36:13 And there is an act.
K: Absolutely.
36:15 Life is action. It isn't just...
A: Exactly.
36:17 Now here- I suppose
I should say for
36:21 our listeners and viewers
36:22 that this is from
'The Awakening of Intelligence',
36:25 I think the most recent
publication of yours,
36:30 and it's on page 196 in
the chapter on Freedom.
36:36 'Through negation...
36:39 - I take it that's a word
for this act. K: Entirely.
36:44 A: ...that thing which
alone is the positive..'.
36:48 - the word 'alone'
came over to me
36:50 with the force of
something unique,
36:54 something that is not continuous
with anything else.
36:56 'That thing which
alone is the positive
37:02 comes into being'.
37:06 There is no
temporal hiatus here,
37:09 so we are back to that thing
we began with
37:12 in our earlier conversations about
37:14 not being dependent
on knowledge and time.
37:17 Could we look at this negation
together for a moment?
37:25 I have the feeling that,
37:27 if I have understood
this correctly,
37:31 that unless whatever
is that's called negation
37:34 is not an abiding activity,
37:39 then communion
and communication,
37:41 and the relationship
that we are talking about
37:45 just simply
can never be reached.
37:50 Is that correct?
37:52 K: Quite.
May I put it this way?
37:57 I must negate,
38:00 I mean, negate not
intellectually or verbally,
38:04 actually negate
the society in which I live.
38:12 The implication of immorality,
38:21 which exists in society,
on which society is built,
38:26 I must negate totally
that immorality.
38:31 That means I live morally.
38:34 In negating that,
the positive is the moral.
38:41 I don't know if I am...
A: Oh yes.
38:43 I am being quiet, because
I want to follow step by step.
38:49 I don't want to go beyond
where we haven't begun.
38:51 K: I negate totally
the idea of success.
38:58 A: Yes, I negate totally.
K: Totally.
39:02 Not only in the mundane world,
39:06 not only in the sense
of achievement,
39:11 in a world of money,
position, authority,
39:16 I negate that completely,
39:20 and I also negate success
in the so-called spiritual world.
39:25 A: Oh yes.
Quite the temptation.
39:29 K: Both are the same.
39:30 Only I call that spiritual
39:32 and I call that physical,
moral, mundane.
39:36 So in negating success,
39:44 there comes an energy.
39:48 Through negation
there is a tremendous energy
39:52 to act totally differently,
39:55 which is not
in the field of success,
40:01 in the field of imitation,
conformity, and all that.
40:05 So, through negation,
40:09 - I mean actual negation,
not just ideal negation -
40:14 through actual negation
of that which is immoral
40:21 morality comes into being.
40:25 A: Which is altogether different
from trying to be moral.
40:28 K: Of course, trying to be moral
is immoral.
40:31 A: Yes.
40:35 May I try to go into
this another step?
40:42 At least it would be a step
for me.
40:47 There is something
that I intuit here
40:50 as a double aspect
to this negation.
40:55 I'd like very much to see
whether this is concurrent
41:01 with your own feeling
about this.
41:07 I was going to say a statement
and I stopped myself.
41:17 My desire for success
41:21 in itself is a withholding
myself from the problem
41:29 that we talked about,
41:31 and that itself
is a form of negation.
41:37 I have negated access
to myself.
41:44 I've negated,
41:47 in other words, I have
done violence to what it is
41:49 that wishes to reveal itself.
41:52 So I am going to negate then
my negation as the observer.
42:02 This I wanted to make sure.
K: You are quite right, sir.
42:06 When we use the word 'negate',
42:08 as it is generally understood,
42:11 it is an act of violence.
A: Yes.
42:13 That's what I was hoping.
42:15 K: It's an act of violence.
I negate.
42:18 A: Yes.
K: I brush it aside.
42:24 We are using the word 'negate'
not in the violent sense,
42:28 but the understanding
of what success implies.
42:35 The understanding of
what success implies.
42:38 The 'me,'
who is separate from you,
42:44 wanting or desiring success,
42:48 which will put me
in a position of
42:51 authority, power, prestige.
42:56 So I am, in negating success,
43:01 I am negating
my desire to be powerful,
43:09 which I negate only
when I have understood
43:12 the whole process that's
involved in achieving success.
43:20 In achieving success
is employed ruthlessness,
43:25 lack of love,
43:28 lack of immense
consideration for others,
43:36 and a sense of conformity,
43:40 acceptance
of the social structure,
43:44 all that is involved,
43:47 and the understanding of all that,
when I negate success,
43:53 is not an act of violence.
43:55 On the contrary, it is an
act of tremendous attention.
44:01 A: I've negated
something in my person.
44:05 K: I've negated myself.
A: Right. I've negated myself.
44:10 K: The 'me',
which is separate from you.
44:14 A: Exactly.
44:15 K: And therefore
I have negated violence
44:19 which comes about
when there is separation.
44:24 A: Would you use
the term 'self-denial' here,
44:31 not in the sense of how it has
been received down the line,
44:35 but that if there is anything to
44:37 what has been stated
in the past,
44:42 could a person, who saw
that word 'self-denial',
44:46 read that word in this context
44:48 that you are using?
K: I'm afraid he wouldn't.
44:51 Self-denial means sacrifice,
pain, lack of understanding.
44:57 A: But if he heard
what you are saying.
45:00 K: Why use another word,
45:02 when you have
understood this thing?
45:08 A: Well, maybe he'd want to
communicate with someone.
45:14 K: But change the word,
so that we both understand
45:17 the meaning of self-denial.
45:21 I mean all religions
45:24 have based their action
on self-denial,
45:29 sacrifice, deny your desire,
45:33 deny your looking at a
woman, or deny riches,
45:40 take a vow to poverty.
You know all of them:
45:42 vow of poverty,
vow of celibacy, and so on.
45:46 All these are
a kind of punishment,
45:52 a distorting
of a clear perception.
45:59 If I see something clearly,
the action is immediate.
46:10 So to negate
46:14 implies diligence.
46:19 The word 'diligence'
means giving complete attention
46:25 to the fact of success
- we are taking that word.
46:31 Giving my whole attention
to success,
46:37 in that attention the whole
map of success is revealed.
46:47 A: With all its horrors.
46:48 K: With all the things
involved in it,
46:50 and it is only then
the seeing is the doing.
46:55 Then it is finished.
46:58 And the mind can
never revert to success
47:02 and therefore become bitter,
47:04 and all the things that follow.
47:07 A: What you are saying
is that once this happens
47:10 there is no reversion.
K: It is finished. Of course, not.
47:16 Say, for instance, sir...
47:18 A: It's not something
that one has to keep up.
47:20 K: Of course, not.
47:22 A: Well, fine. I'm delighted
we've established that.
47:25 K: Now take for instance
what happened.
47:28 In 1928,
47:32 I happened to be the head
of a tremendous organisation,
47:38 a religious organisation,
47:41 and I saw around me various
religious organisations,
47:47 sects, Catholic, Protestant,
47:49 and I saw all
trying to find truth.
47:54 So I said, 'No organisation
can lead man to truth'.
47:58 So I dissolved it.
48:02 Property,
an enormous business.
48:06 I can never go back to it.
48:09 When you see something as
poison you won't take it again.
48:17 It isn't that you say,
'By Jove, I've made a mistake.
48:19 I should go back and...',
48:23 it is, sir, like seeing danger.
48:28 When you see danger,
you never go near it again.
48:38 A: I hope I won't annoy you by
48:40 talking about words here again.
48:42 But you know,
48:45 so many of the things
that you say cast a light
48:51 on common terms which,
for me at least, illuminate them.
49:01 They sound altogether different
49:03 from the way
they used to be heard.
49:07 For instance, we say
in English, don't we,
49:09 practice makes perfect.
49:11 Now, obviously,
49:13 this can't be the case,
49:20 if we mean by practice
we are repeating something.
49:24 But if you mean by practice
49:29 the Greek 'praxis,' which is
concerned directly with act,
49:34 not repetition, but with act,
49:38 then to say
'it makes perfect'
49:40 doesn't refer to time at all.
49:45 It's that, upon the instant
the act is performed
49:50 perfection is.
49:52 Now I'm sorry I used
the word 'instant' again,
49:56 and I understand
why that's awkward,
50:00 but I think
in our communication
50:09 the concern for the word here
50:12 is one that surely
is productive,
50:19 because one can open himself
to the word,
50:23 and if one sees
the word that way,
50:25 then it appears there is
a whole host of phenomena
50:31 which suddenly acquire
very magical significance.
50:36 Not magical in the
sense of enchantment,
50:40 but they open a door
50:43 which, when walked into,
immediately situates him
50:49 in the crisis
in such a way that
50:54 he attains to this that you call
the one alone,
51:04 the unique
which comes into being.
51:08 Which comes into being.
51:10 K: So, sir, can we now go back,
or go forward,
51:16 to the question of freedom
51:20 and responsibility
in relationship?
51:23 That's where we left off
51:26 A: Yes. That was quoted
from the chapter on freedom.
51:33 K: First of all, can we
go into this question
51:37 of what it is
to be responsible?
51:43 A: I should like that.
51:45 K: Because I think that is what
we are missing in this world,
51:49 in what is happening now.
51:52 We don't feel responsible.
51:56 We don't feel
51:58 we are responsible because
52:02 the people in position,
in authority,
52:06 politically, religiously,
are responsible. We are not.
52:12 That is the general feeling
that is all over the world.
52:15 A: Because those over there
52:16 have been delegated
to do a job by me.
52:20 K: And scientists, politicians,
the educational people,
52:26 the religious people,
they are responsible,
52:30 but I know nothing about it,
I just follow.
52:34 That's the general attitude
right through the world.
52:38 A: Oh yes, oh yes.
52:41 K: So you follow
the whole thing.
52:45 A: One feels he gets
off scot-free that way
52:48 because
its the other one's fault.
52:50 K: So I make myself
52:55 By delegating
a responsibility to you
52:58 I become irresponsible.
53:01 Whereas now we are saying,
53:04 nobody is responsible
except you,
53:12 because you are the world
and the world is you.
53:16 You have created this mess.
53:18 You alone
can bring about clarity,
53:23 and therefore you are
53:24 totally, utterly,
completely responsible.
53:28 And nobody else.
53:33 Now, that means you have
to be a light to yourself,
53:42 not the light of a professor,
53:45 or an analyst,
or a psychologist,
53:48 or the light of Jesus,
or the light of the Buddha.
53:52 You have to be
a light to yourself
53:56 in a world that is utterly
becoming dark.
54:03 That means you have
to be responsible.
54:06 Now,
what does that word mean?
54:11 It means really,
54:13 to respond totally,
adequately, to every challenge.
54:24 You can't possibly
respond adequately,
54:28 if you are rooted in the past,
54:38 because the challenge is new,
54:41 otherwise it is not a challenge.
54:43 A crisis is new,
otherwise it is not a crisis.
54:49 So if I respond to a crisis
54:55 in terms of a preconceived plan,
54:58 which
the Communists are doing,
55:02 or the Catholics,
or the Protestants, and so on,
55:05 then they are not responding
55:07 totally and adequately
to the challenge.
55:13 A: This takes me back
to something
55:16 I think that is very germane
55:19 in the dramatic
situation of confrontation
55:23 between the soldier and the
Lord Krishna in the Gita.
55:34 Arjuna, the general of the army,
says to Krishna,
55:41 'Tell me definitely what to do
and I will do it'.
55:46 Now Krishna
does not turn around
55:48 and say to him,
in the next verse,
55:50 'I am not going to tell you
what to do' but of course
55:52 at that point he simply
doesn't tell him what to do,
55:56 and one of the great Sanskrit
scholars has pointed out that
56:02 that's an irresponsible
56:04 reaction
on the part of the teacher.
56:06 But, if I am understanding you
56:08 he couldn't have done
56:11 K: When that man
put the question,
56:14 he is putting the question
out of irresponsibility.
56:17 A: Of course, a refusal
to be responsible.
56:21 Exactly! A refusal to
be responsible.
56:23 K: That's why, sir, responsibility
means total commitment.
56:32 A: Total commitment.
56:34 K: Total commitment
to the challenge.
56:38 Responding adequately,
completely to a crisis.
56:46 That is, the word
'responsibility' means that:
56:52 to respond.
56:55 I cannot respond completely
if I am frightened.
57:02 Or I cannot respond completely,
if I am seeking pleasure.
57:10 I cannot respond totally,
57:13 if my action is routine,
is repetitive,
57:20 is traditional, is conditioned.
57:26 So to respond
57:28 adequately to a challenge
means that the 'me',
57:32 which is the past, must end.
57:38 A: And at this point Arjuna
just wants it continued
57:42 right down the line.
57:43 K: That's what everybody wants,
57:48 Politically, look at what
is happening in this country,
57:51 and elsewhere.
57:53 We don't feel responsible.
57:58 We don't feel responsible to...
58:01 how we bring our children up.
58:05 A: I understand.
I really do, I think.
58:09 In our next conversation
58:12 I'd really like to continue this
58:14 in terms of the phrase
we sometimes use
58:16 'being responsible
for my action'.
58:19 But that does not seem to be
58:20 saying exactly
what you are saying at all.
58:22 As a matter of fact, it seems
to be quite wide of the mark.
58:24 K: Quite.
A: Good. Let's do that.