Krishnamurti Subtitles

What is a responsible human being?

San Diego - 19 February 1974

Conversation with A.W. Anderson 4



0:37 Krishnamurti in Dialogue
with Dr. Allan W. Anderson
  
0:42 J. Krishnamurti was
born in South India
  
0:45 and educated in England.
 
0:47 For the past 40 years
 
0:48 he has been speaking
in the United States,
  
0:51 Europe, India, Australia,
and other parts of the world.
  
0:55 From the outset of his life's work
 
0:56 he repudiated all connections
 
0:59 with organised
religions and ideologies
  
1:01 and said that his only concern was
 
1:03 to set man absolutely
unconditionally free.
  
1:07 He is the author of many books,
 
1:09 among them The Awakening
of Intelligence,
  
1:12 The Urgency of Change,
 
1:14 Freedom From the Known,
and The Flight of the Eagle.
  
1:19 This is one of a series of dialogues
 
1:21 between Krishnamurti and
Dr. Allan W. Anderson,
  
1:24 who is professor of
religious studies
  
1:26 at San Diego State University
 
1:28 where he teaches Indian
and Chinese scriptures
  
1:31 and the oracular tradition.
 
1:33 Dr. Anderson, a published poet,
 
1:35 received his degree
from Columbia University
  
1:38 and the Union Theological Seminary.
 
1:41 He has been honoured with
the distinguished Teaching Award
  
1:44 from the California
State University.
  
1:47 A: Mr. Krishnamurti,
just at the point
  
1:49 where we left last time
in our conversation
  
1:54 we had raised the question
of the distinction between
  
1:58 the notion that I must be
responsible for my action
  
2:02 and... just being responsible.
K: Right, sir.
  
2:07 A: I was sitting here
thinking to myself,
  
2:11 'oh why can't we go on',
 
2:13 so perhaps we could start
at that point.
  
2:16 Would that be agreeable?
K: I think, sir,
  
2:17 there is
a very definite distinction
  
2:20 between responsible for
and being responsible.
  
2:26 Being responsible for
implies a direction,
  
2:34 a directed will.
 
2:39 But the feeling of responsibility
implies
  
2:46 responsibility for everything,
not in a direction,
  
2:50 in any one particular direction.
 
2:54 Responsible for education,
responsible for politics,
  
3:00 responsible the way I live,
 
3:02 to be responsible
for my behaviour,
  
3:05 it's a total feeling
of complete responsibility
  
3:11 which is the ground in
which action takes place.
  
3:20 A: I think then
this takes us back
  
3:22 to this business of crisis
we were talking about.
  
3:25 If the crisis is continuous,
then it's misleading to say
  
3:33 I'm responsible for my action,
 
3:35 because I've put the
thing out there again
  
3:40 and it becomes an occasion
for my
  
3:43 confusing what is at hand,
 
3:45 that requires to be done,
 
3:46 and the concept of
this notion of my action,
  
3:50 because I am my action.
 
3:52 K: Yes, that's just it, that's it.
A: I am it.
  
3:54 K: That means,
the feeling of responsibility
  
4:01 expresses itself
 
4:04 politically, religiously,
educationally, in business,
  
4:08 in the whole of life, responsible
for the total behaviour,
  
4:18 not in a particular direction.
 
4:22 I think there is great deal
of difference when one says
  
4:26 'I am responsible
for my action.'
  
4:32 That means you are
responsible for your action
  
4:35 according to the idea
 
4:37 that you have preconceived
about action.
  
4:41 A: Exactly. Yes.
 
4:45 People sometimes will say that
 
4:51 the child is free
because it's not responsible.
  
4:55 K: Oh, child is...
You can't take a child into...
  
4:59 A: No, of course not.
 
5:00 But I think sometimes,
when we say this,
  
5:06 we have this nostalgia
for the past
  
5:09 as though our freedom
would be freedom from constraint,
  
5:14 whereas if one is his action,
 
5:17 genuinely, absolutely...
K: There is no restraint,
  
5:19 there is no restraint.
A: There isn't any restraint at all.
  
5:21 K: Not at all.
A: Right. Right.
  
5:23 K: Because, look.
 
5:26 If one has this total feeling
of responsibility,
  
5:32 then what is
your responsibility
  
5:35 with regard to your children?
 
5:40 It means education.
 
5:43 Are you educating them
to bring about a mind
  
5:48 that conforms to the pattern,
 
5:51 which the society
has established,
  
5:55 which means you accept
 
5:57 the immorality of the society
that is.
  
6:03 If you feel
totally responsible,
  
6:06 you are responsible
from the moment it's born
  
6:09 till the moment it dies.
 
6:14 The right kind of education,
 
6:17 not the education of
 
6:19 making the child conform,
 
6:23 the worship of success and
the division of nationalities
  
6:29 which brings about war
- you follow? -
  
6:31 all that
you are responsible for,
  
6:35 not just
in a particular direction.
  
6:38 Even if you are
in a particular direction
  
6:41 - I'm responsible for my act -
 
6:43 what is your action based on?
 
6:46 How can you be responsible
 
6:49 when you, when your action
is the result of a formula
  
6:55 that has been
handed down to you?
  
7:00 A: Yes, I quite follow what you mean.
K: Like communists,
  
7:04 they say
the state is responsible.
  
7:11 Worship the state,
the state is the god,
  
7:17 and you are responsible
to the state.
  
7:21 Which means they have conceived
what the state should be,
  
7:28 formulated ideationally,
and, according to that, you act.
  
7:35 That is not
a responsible action.
  
7:37 That's irresponsible action.
 
7:42 Whereas action means
the doing now.
  
7:46 The active present
of the verb 'to do'
  
7:50 which is to do now,
the acting now.
  
7:53 The acting now
must be free from the past.
  
7:59 Otherwise
you are just repeating,
  
8:03 repetition,
traditionally carrying on.
  
8:07 That's not...
 
8:08 A: I'm reminded of
something in the I Ching
  
8:14 that I think is a reflection
 
8:18 of this principle
that you pointed to
  
8:21 -I don't mean principle
in the abstract.
  
8:26 If I am quoting it correctly,
 
8:28 from one of
the standard translations,
  
8:30 it goes like this:
 
8:32 'The superior man...'
- by which it means the free man,
  
8:36 not hierarchically structured -
 
8:41 '...does not let his thoughts
go beyond his situation'.
  
8:46 Which would mean that he simply
would be present as he is,
  
8:57 not being responsible
to something out there
  
9:01 that is going to tell him
how to be responsible,
  
9:03 or what he should do,
 
9:07 but upon the instant that he is,
he is always...
  
9:12 K: Responsible.
A: ...responsible.
  
9:13 K: Always.
A: He simply does not
  
9:15 let his thoughts
go beyond his situation.
  
9:18 That goes back to
that word 'negation'.
  
9:19 Because if he won't
 
9:20 let his thoughts
go beyond his situation,
  
9:23 he has negated the possibility
 
9:24 for their doing so, hasn't he?
K: Yes.
  
9:26 Quite.
A: Oh yes, yes, yes, I see that.
  
9:31 The reason that I'm referring
to these other quotations
  
9:35 is because,
 
9:42 if what you are saying is true
 
9:47 and if what they say is true,
 
9:51 - quite without respect to
how they are understood
  
9:54 or not understood -
 
9:55 then there must be
something in common here,
  
9:59 and I realise that
your emphasis is practical,
  
10:04 eminently practical,
upon the act.
  
10:08 But it does seem to me to be
of great value, if one could
  
10:17 converse, commune with
the great literatures,
  
10:22 which have so many statements
- and the complaint
  
10:25 about the fact
that they are not understood.
  
10:28 I see that as a great gain.
K: Sir,
  
10:37 I have not read any books,
 
10:42 any literature in the sense...
 
10:45 A: Yes, I understand.
K: ...in that sense.
  
10:50 Suppose
there is no book in the world.
  
10:54 A: The problem is the same.
K: The problem is the same.
  
10:57 A: Of course, of course.
 
10:59 K: There is no leader,
no teacher,
  
11:02 nobody to tell you do this,
do that,
  
11:04 don't do this, don't do that.
 
11:05 You are there!
 
11:08 You feel totally,
completely responsible.
  
11:13 A: Right. Yes.
 
11:16 K: Then you have to have
an astonishingly
  
11:20 active clear brain,
 
11:25 not befuddled, not puzzled,
not bewildered.
  
11:29 You must have a mind
that thinks clearly!
  
11:33 And you cannot think clearly,
 
11:35 if you are rooted in the past.
 
11:39 You are merely continuing
- modified perhaps -
  
11:43 through the present to the future.
That's all.
  
11:47 So from that
arises the question:
  
11:52 what is the responsibility
in human relationship?
  
12:01 A: Yes. Now we are
back to relationships.
  
12:03 K: Because that is
the basic foundation of life:
  
12:14 relationship.
That is, to be related,
  
12:17 to be in contact with.
 
12:20 A: We are presently related.
K: Related.
  
12:23 A: This is what is.
K: Yes.
  
12:26 Now, what is
human relationship?
  
12:31 If I feel totally responsible,
 
12:38 how does that responsibility
express in relationship:
  
12:45 to my children,
if I have children,
  
12:48 to my family, to my neighbour,
 
12:51 whether the neighbour
is next door
  
12:54 or ten thousand miles away,
 
12:56 he is still my neighbour!
 
12:59 So what is my responsibility?
 
13:02 What is the responsibility
of a man who feels totally,
  
13:10 completely involved
in this feeling
  
13:15 of being a light to himself
and totally responsible?
  
13:23 I think
this is a question, sir,
  
13:25 that has to be investigated.
 
13:30 A: Yes,
you know what I'm thinking?
  
13:32 I'm thinking
 
13:36 that only a person responsible,
as you have said it,
  
13:42 can make what we call,
in our tongue, a clean decision.
  
13:46 K: Of course, of course.
 
13:48 A: So many decisions
are frayed.
  
13:56 K: Sir,
I would like to ask this:
  
14:00 is there decision at all?
 
14:06 Decision implies choice.
 
14:11 A: Yes.
 
14:12 K: Choice implies a mind that's
confused, between this and that.
  
14:17 A: It means, I think, radically
to make a cut, to cut off.
  
14:22 K: Yes, but a mind that
sees clearly has no choice.
  
14:28 It doesn't decide. It acts.
 
14:32 A: Yes. Doesn't this take us back
 
14:35 to this word 'negation' again?
 
14:36 K: Yes, of course.
 
14:38 A: Might it not be
that a clean decision
  
14:40 could be interpreted
in terms of what takes place
  
14:44 at this point of negation
 
14:46 from which flows
a different action.
  
14:49 K: But I don't like to use
that word 'decision'
  
14:53 because, deciding
between this and that.
  
14:59 A: You don't want to use it
 
15:01 because of the implications
in it of conflict?
  
15:04 K: Conflict, choice,
 
15:09 we think we are free
because we choose.
  
15:13 We can choose, right?
A: Yes.
  
15:16 K: Is free a mind
that is capable of choice?
  
15:22 Or is a mind that is not free,
that chooses?
  
15:29 The choice implies
between this and that.
  
15:34 Obviously.
 
15:36 Which means,
the mind doesn't see clearly
  
15:42 and therefore there is choice.
 
15:44 The choice exists
when there is confusion.
  
15:48 A: Yes, yes, yes.
 
15:49 K: A mind that sees clearly,
there is no choice. It is doing.
  
15:56 I think this is where
 
16:02 we have got into rather trouble,
 
16:03 when we say
we are free to choose,
  
16:06 choice implies freedom.
I say, on the contrary!
  
16:11 Choice implies
a mind that is confused
  
16:14 and therefore not free.
 
16:18 A: What occurs to me now is
 
16:21 the difference
between regarding freedom
  
16:28 as a property or quality of action
rather than a state.
  
16:33 Yes. But we have the notion
 
16:35 that freedom is a state,
a condition,
  
16:40 which is quite different
from the emphasis
  
16:43 that you are leading me into.
 
16:45 K: Yes, that's right.
A: Yes, yes, yes.
  
16:48 K: So let's come back to this,
sir, which is
  
16:51 what is the responsibility
of a human being
  
16:57 - who feels this sense -
in relationship?
  
17:05 Because relationship is life,
 
17:07 relationship is
the foundation of existence.
  
17:13 Relationship is absolutely
necessary,
  
17:17 otherwise you can't exist.
 
17:19 Relationship means
co-operation.
  
17:22 Everything is involved
in that one word.
  
17:26 Relation means love,
generosity,
  
17:29 and, you know,
all that's implied.
  
17:32 Now, what is a human responsibility
in relationship?
  
17:42 A: If we were genuinely
and completely sharing,
  
17:47 then responsibility would
be present fully, is it not?
  
17:53 K: Yes, but how does it
express itself in relationship?
  
18:01 Not only between you and me now,
but between man and woman,
  
18:05 between... my neighbour,
 
18:10 relationship, sir,
to everything, to nature.
  
18:13 What's my relationship
to nature?
  
18:18 Would I go and kill
the baby seals?
  
18:23 A: No, no.
 
18:28 K: Would I go and destroy
human beings
  
18:31 calling them enemies?
 
18:36 Would I destroy nature, everything,
- which man is doing now?
  
18:42 He is destroying the earth,
the air, the sea, everything!
  
18:46 Because he feels
totally irresponsible.
  
18:51 A: He sees what is out there
as something to operate on.
  
18:56 K: Yes. Which is,
he kills the baby seal,
  
19:00 which I saw the other day
on a film,
  
19:02 it's an appalling thing.
 
19:03 And they are Christians,
they call themselves Christians,
  
19:06 going and killing
a little thing
  
19:09 for some lady
to put on the fur.
  
19:16 And - you follow? - totally
immoral, the whole thing is.
  
19:21 So, to come back, I say,
how does this responsibility
  
19:27 show itself in my life?
 
19:32 I am married
- I am not,
  
19:35 but suppose I am married -
what is my responsibility?
  
19:40 Am I related to my wife?
 
19:45 A: The record
doesn't seem very good.
  
19:47 K: Not only record, actuality.
 
19:49 Am I related to my wife?
A: Right.
  
19:51 K: Or am I related to my wife
 
19:53 according to the image
I have built about her?
  
19:59 And I am responsible
 
20:00 for that image
- you follow, sir?
  
20:02 A: Yes, because my input
has been continuous
  
20:05 with respect to that image.
K: Yes.
  
20:06 So, I have no relationship
with my wife,
  
20:12 if I have an image about her.
 
20:15 Or if I have an image
about myself
  
20:18 when I want to be successful,
 
20:19 and
all the rest of that business.
  
20:22 A: Since we were talking
about 'now', being now,
  
20:29 there is a point of contact
 
20:33 between what you are saying
 
20:35 and the phrase that you used
 
20:37 in one
of our earlier conversations
  
20:40 'the betrayal of the present'.
K: Absolutely.
  
20:45 You see,
that is the whole point, sir.
  
20:48 If I am related to you,
 
20:53 I have no image about you,
or you have no image about me,
  
20:58 then we have relationship.
 
21:03 We have no relationship
 
21:04 if I have an image
about myself or about you.
  
21:09 Our images
have a relationship,
  
21:13 when in actuality
we have no relationship.
  
21:17 I might sleep
with my wife or some,
  
21:19 but it is not a relationship.
 
21:24 It is a physical contact,
 
21:26 sensory excitement,
nothing else.
  
21:33 My responsibility is
not to have an image!
  
21:40 A: This brings to mind,
 
21:47 I think one of the loveliest
 
21:50 statements
in the English language
  
21:52 which
I should like to understand
  
21:55 in terms of what
we have been sharing.
  
21:59 These lines from
Keats' poem 'Endymion',
  
22:05 there is something miraculous,
 
22:07 marvellous in this statement,
 
22:09 it seems to me,
 
22:10 that is immediately related
to what you have been saying:
  
22:15 'A thing of beauty
is a joy forever'.
  
22:20 And then he says,
- as though that's not enough -
  
22:24 he says,
'Its loveliness increases'!
  
22:29 And then as though that's
not enough, he says,
  
22:34 'It will never pass
into nothingness'.
  
22:39 Now, when the present
is not betrayed,
  
22:46 it's full with a fullness
that keeps on abounding.
  
22:54 K: Yes, quite, I understand.
 
22:55 A: Would I be correct in that?
K: Yes, I think so.
  
22:58 A: I think that's truly
what he must be saying,
  
23:01 and one of the things too
that passed my mind was
  
23:07 he calls it a thing of beauty.
 
23:09 He doesn't call it
a beautiful thing.
  
23:11 It's a thing of beauty as
though it's a child of beauty.
  
23:17 A marvellous continuity
between this.
  
23:20 Not: it's beautiful because
I think it's beautiful,
  
23:22 and therefore it's outside.
 
23:27 Yes, yes, yes.
 
23:29 K: We come back,
I must stick to this,
  
23:30 because this is
really quite important.
  
23:33 Because,
go where you will,
  
23:40 there is no relationship
between human beings,
  
23:46 and that is the tragedy,
 
23:49 and from that arises
all our conflict, violence,
  
23:54 the whole business.
 
23:56 So, if... - not if - ...when there is
this responsibility,
  
24:02 the feeling
of this responsibility,
  
24:04 it translates itself
in relationship.
  
24:08 It doesn't matter
with whom it is.
  
24:12 A freedom from the known,
which is the image.
  
24:21 And therefore in that freedom
goodness flowers.
  
24:27 A: Goodness flowers.
 
24:29 K: And that is the beauty.
And that is beauty.
  
24:33 Beauty is not an abstract thing,
 
24:36 but it goes with goodness.
 
24:39 Goodness in behaviour, goodness
in conduct, goodness in action.
  
24:45 A: Sometimes while
we have been talking
  
24:47 I have started a sentence
with 'if,'
  
24:49 and
I have looked into your eyes
  
24:52 and immediately I got it out,
 
24:54 I knew
I had said the wrong thing.
  
24:56 It's just like a minute
ago you said 'if',
  
24:57 and you said, 'no, when'.
 
25:01 We are always 'if-ing' it up.
K: I know. 'If-ing' it up!
  
25:04 A: It is awful.
K: I know, sir.
  
25:07 We are always dealing
with abstractions
  
25:10 rather than with reality.
 
25:12 A: Immediately we 'if',
 
25:15 a construction is out there,
 
25:16 which we endlessly talk about.
K: That's right.
  
25:20 A: And we get cleverer
and cleverer about it,
  
25:23 and it has nothing to do
with anything!
  
25:27 Yes, yes, yes.
 
25:29 K: So, how does this responsibility
translate itself
  
25:35 in human behaviour?
 
25:39 You follow, sir?
A: Yes.
  
25:44 There would be
an end to violence.
  
25:47 K: Absolutely.
A: Wouldn't taper off.
  
25:54 K: You see
what we have done, sir.
  
25:57 We are violent human beings,
 
26:00 sexually, morally,
in every way,
  
26:03 we are violent human beings,
 
26:05 and not being able to resolve it,
we have created an ideal
  
26:12 of not being violent,
 
26:15 which is: the fact,
an abstraction of the fact,
  
26:20 which is non-fact,
 
26:23 and try to live the non-fact.
 
26:28 A: Yes. Immediately
that produces conflict,
  
26:30 because it cannot be done.
K: That produces conflict,
  
26:32 misery, confusion,
all the rest of it.
  
26:35 Why does the mind do it?
 
26:40 The mind does it, because
it doesn't know what to do
  
26:43 with this fact of violence.
 
26:46 Therefore
in abstracting the idea
  
26:51 of not being violent,
postpones action.
  
26:57 I am trying not to be violent,
 
27:01 and in the mean time
I am jolly well violent.
  
27:05 A: Yes.
 
27:07 K: And it is
an escape from the fact.
  
27:12 All abstractions
are escape from the fact.
  
27:17 So the mind does it,
 
27:19 because it is incapable
of dealing with the fact,
  
27:25 or it doesn't want
to deal with the fact,
  
27:28 or it is lazy and says,
 
27:31 'Well, I will try and
do it some other day'.
  
27:35 All those are involved,
when it withdraws from the fact.
  
27:41 Now, in the same way,
 
27:44 the fact is:
our relationship is non-existent.
  
27:51 I may say to my wife,
I love you,
  
27:53 etc., etc.,
but it's non-existent.
  
27:57 Because I have an image
about her
  
27:59 and she has an image about me.
 
28:01 So,
on abstractions we have lived.
  
28:06 A: It just occurred to me
that the word 'fact' itself
  
28:11 - which there have been no
end of disquisitions about...
  
28:15 K: Of course. The fact: 'what is'.
Let's call it 'what is'.
  
28:18 A: But actually it means
something done.
  
28:22 K: Done, yes.
A: Not the record of something,
  
28:25 but actually something
done, performed, act, act.
  
28:31 And it's that sense of 'fact'
 
28:33 that with our use
of the word 'fact'.
  
28:37 'Give me facts and figures',
we'd say in English,
  
28:39 give me facts, we don't
mean that when we say it.
  
28:42 K: No.
A: No. No.
  
28:45 One probably wouldn't need
 
28:47 facts and figures
in that abstract sense.
  
28:52 K: You see, sir, this reveals
a tremendous lot.
  
28:55 A: I follow.
 
28:57 K: When you feel responsible,
 
28:59 you feel responsible
for education
  
29:02 of your children, not only
your children - children.
  
29:09 Are you educating them
 
29:13 to conform to a society,
 
29:16 are you educating them
to merely acquire a job?
  
29:21 Are you educating them
to the continuity of what has been?
  
29:30 Are you educating them
to live in abstractions
  
29:37 as we are doing now?
 
29:40 So what is your responsibility
as a father, mother
  
29:46 - it doesn't matter who you are -
responsible in education,
  
29:51 for the education
of a human being.
  
29:59 That's one problem.
What is your responsibility,
  
30:05 - if you feel responsible -
for human growth,
  
30:13 human culture, human goodness?
 
30:18 What's your responsibility
to the earth,
  
30:25 to nature, you follow?
 
30:26 It is a tremendous thing
to feel responsible.
  
30:35 A: This just came to mind,
which I must ask you about.
  
30:45 The word 'negation' in the book
that we looked at earlier,
  
30:49 - which is continuous
with what we are saying -
  
30:55 I think,
is itself rather endangered
  
31:02 by the usual notion
that we have of negation,
  
31:08 which is simply a prohibition,
which is not meant.
  
31:11 Which is not meant.
K: No, No. Of course not.
  
31:15 A: When we reviewed that
incident in the Gita between
  
31:19 the general and his charioteer,
the lord Krishna,
  
31:26 the lord's response
was a negation
  
31:32 without it being a prohibition...
 
31:35 K: Quite, quite.
A: ...wasn't it?
  
31:36 K: I don't know. I am...
 
31:38 A: No, No. I mean
in terms of what we just
  
31:40 got through to saying.
K: Yes, of course.
  
31:45 A: There is a difference then
between
  
31:50 rearing a child in terms of
 
31:56 relating to the child
radically in the present,
  
32:00 in which negation - as is
mentioned in the book here
  
32:04 that we went through -
 
32:06 is continuously and immediately
and actively present.
  
32:14 And simply walking around
saying to oneself,
  
32:18 'Now I am rearing a child,
 
32:19 therefore
I mustn't do these things,
  
32:20 and I mustn't do those things,
I must do that'.
  
32:22 Exactly.
An entirely different thing.
  
32:25 But one has to break the habit
 
32:29 of seeing negation as prohibition.
K: Of course.
  
32:31 And also, you see,
with responsibility
  
32:35 goes love, care, attention.
 
32:41 A: Yes. Earlier I was
going to ask you about
  
32:43 care in relation to responsibility.
 
32:48 Something that would
flow immediately,
  
32:51 naturally.
K: Naturally, sir.
  
32:53 A: Not that I have to project
 
32:54 that I need to care for later
and so I won't forget,
  
32:58 but I would be with it.
 
33:00 K: You see, that involves
a great deal too, because
  
33:05 the mother
depends on the child,
  
33:10 and the child
depends on the mother,
  
33:12 - or the father,
whatever it is.
  
33:14 So that dependence
is cultivated:
  
33:19 not only between the
father and the mother,
  
33:23 but depend on a teacher,
 
33:27 depend on somebody
to tell you what to do,
  
33:33 depend on your guru.
 
33:38 You follow?
A: Yes, yes, I follow.
  
33:40 K: Gradually the child, the man is
incapable of standing alone,
  
33:50 and therefore he says,
I must depend on my wife
  
33:53 for my comfort, for my sex,
 
33:55 for my this or that,
and the other thing,
  
33:57 I am lost without her.
 
34:00 And I am lost
without my guru,
  
34:03 without my teacher.
It becomes so ridiculous!
  
34:10 So when the feeling
of responsibility exists,
  
34:17 all this disappears.
 
34:22 You are responsible
 
34:26 for your behaviour,
 
34:27 for the way you bring up
your children,
  
34:29 for the way you treat a dog,
 
34:32 a neighbour, nature,
everything is in your hands.
  
34:38 Therefore you have to become
 
34:40 astonishingly careful
what you do.
  
34:43 Careful, not, 'I must not do this,
and I must do that'.
  
34:47 Care, that means affection,
 
34:49 that means
consideration, diligence.
  
34:57 All that
goes with responsibility,
  
35:02 which present society
totally denies.
  
35:09 When we begin to discuss
the various gurus
  
35:13 that are imported
in this country,
  
35:16 that's what they are doing,
 
35:17 creating such mischief,
 
35:21 making those people,
unfortunate, thoughtless people,
  
35:27 who want excitement,
join them,
  
35:28 do all kinds of ridiculous
nonsensical things.
  
35:35 So, we come back:
 
35:40 freedom implies responsibility.
 
35:45 And therefore freedom,
responsibility,
  
35:48 means care, diligence,
not negligence.
  
35:53 Not doing what you want to do,
 
35:57 which is what is happening
in America.
  
35:59 Do what you want to do,
 
36:04 this permissiveness is just
doing what you want to do,
  
36:07 which is not freedom,
 
36:11 which breeds irresponsibility.
 
36:20 I met the other day
 
36:22 in Delhi, New Delhi, a girl,
 
36:28 and she's become a Tibetan.
You follow, sir?
  
36:35 Born in America, being a
Christian, brought up in all that,
  
36:38 throws all that aside,
goes, becomes a Tibetan,
  
36:41 which is the same thing
in different words.
  
36:43 A: Yes. As a Tibetan coming
over here and doing it.
  
36:47 K: It's all ridiculous!
A: Yes.
  
36:49 K: And I've known her some years,
 
36:52 I said, 'Where is your child?'
 
36:54 who was six. "Oh,' she said,
 
36:56 'I've left him
with other liberated Tibetans'.
  
37:02 I said, 'At six?
You are the mother'.
  
37:05 She said, 'Yes,
he is in very good hands'.
  
37:10 I come back next year
and I ask, 'Where is your child?'
  
37:13 'Oh, he has become a
Tibetan monk,' who is seven.
  
37:16 He is seven years old and
has become a Tibetan monk!
  
37:21 You understand, sir?
A: Oh yes, I do.
  
37:25 K: The irresponsibility of it,
 
37:29 because the mother feels,
'They know better than I do,
  
37:35 I am Tibetan and the lamas
will help me to become..'.
  
37:40 A: It puts a rather sinister cast
 
37:42 on that Biblical statement:
 
37:44 train up a child in
the way he should go,
  
37:47 and when he is old
he will not depart from it.
  
37:50 There is a sinister note in there,
isn't there?
  
37:52 K: Absolutely.
 
37:53 So this is going on
in the world all the time.
  
37:58 And a man who is really serious
negates that,
  
38:06 because he understands
the implications,
  
38:09 the inwardness of all that.
 
38:13 So he has to deny it.
 
38:16 It isn't a question
of will or choice,
  
38:19 he says that's too silly,
too absurd.
  
38:27 So freedom means responsibility
and infinite care.
  
38:37 A: The phrase that you just
spoke, 'infinite care...'
  
38:40 K: Yes, sir.
 
38:43 A: ...it would be totally impossible
 
38:45 to what we mean
by a finite being
  
38:51 unless the finite being
did not betray the present.
  
38:56 K: I know, sir.
A: 'With not betraying the present'
  
38:58 is a negative again.
It is a negation again.
  
39:01 With not betraying the present.
 
39:04 Which is not to say what
will happen if it is not...
  
39:07 K: Sir, the word 'present',
the now, is rather difficult.
  
39:12 A: Oh yes.
 
39:13 Philosophers love to call it
the specious present.
  
39:16 K: I don't know
what philosophers say.
  
39:18 I don't want to enter into
all that speculative thinking.
  
39:21 But the fact, what is the 'now'?
 
39:26 What is the act of now,
the present?
  
39:34 To understand the present
I must understand the past,
  
39:38 not history, I don't mean that.
A: Oh no, no, no.
  
39:40 K: Understand myself as the past.
I am the past.
  
39:44 A: In terms of what we said
earlier about knowledge.
  
39:46 K: Yes. I am that.
A: Yes.
  
39:50 K: Therefore I must understand
the past, which is me,
  
39:56 the 'me' is the known
 
40:00 - the 'me' is not the unknown,
 
40:02 I can imagine
it is the unknown
  
40:04 but the fact is,
the 'what is' is the known.
  
40:08 That's me.
I must understand myself.
  
40:12 If I don't, the now is merely
 
40:14 a continuation,
in modified form, of the past.
  
40:20 Therefore it is not the now,
not the present.
  
40:27 Therefore the 'me' is the tradition,
the knowledge,
  
40:33 in all the complicated
manoeuvres,
  
40:38 cunning - you follow? -
all that,
  
40:39 the despairs, the anxieties,
the desire for success, fear,
  
40:45 pleasure, all that is me.
 
40:49 A: Since we are still
involved in a discussion
  
40:52 about relationship here,
 
40:55 might we return a moment
to where we were
  
40:58 with respect to education
and relationship.
  
41:03 I want to be sure that
I have understood you here.
  
41:09 Let us say that one were
fortunate enough to have a school
  
41:14 where what you are
pointing to was going on.
  
41:19 K: We are going to do,
we are doing it.
  
41:20 We have got seven schools.
A: Marvellous. Marvellous.
  
41:23 Well, we'll have a chance
to talk about that, won't we?
  
41:26 K: Yes.
A: Good, good.
  
41:32 If I'm current here,
it would seem that
  
41:40 if the teacher is totally
present to the child,
  
41:47 the child will feel this.
 
41:54 The child won't have
to be instructed
  
41:57 in what this means then.
 
42:01 Is that right?
K: Yes, but one has to find out
  
42:04 what is the relationship
of the teacher
  
42:06 to the student.
A: Yes, yes. I quite see that.
  
42:10 Of course.
K: What is the relationship?
  
42:12 Is he merely an informer
 
42:17 giving information to the child?
 
42:21 Any machine can do that.
 
42:22 A: Oh yes, the library
is filled with it.
  
42:23 K: Any machine can do that.
Or what is his relationship?
  
42:27 Does he put himself
on a pedestal up there
  
42:32 and his student down there?
 
42:35 Or is the relationship between
the teacher and the student,
  
42:41 is it a relationship,
in which there is learning
  
42:50 on the part of the teacher
as well as the student.
  
42:53 Learning.
A: Yes.
  
42:55 K: Not I have learnt
and I am going to teach you.
  
43:01 Therefore in that
there is a division
  
43:05 between the teacher
and the student.
  
43:06 But when there is learning
on the part of the teacher,
  
43:11 as well as on the part
of the student,
  
43:13 there is no division.
Both are learning.
  
43:17 A: Yes.
 
43:19 K: And therefore
that relationship
  
43:23 brings about a companionship.
 
43:26 A: A sharing.
K: A sharing.
  
43:27 A: A sharing. Yes.
K: Taking a journey together.
  
43:33 And therefore an infinite
care on both sides.
  
43:45 So it means,
how is the teacher
  
43:49 to teach mathematics,
or whatever it is, to the student,
  
43:54 and yet teach it in such a way
 
43:59 that you awaken the intelligence
in the child,
  
44:02 not about mathematics.
 
44:04 A: No, no, of course
not, no. Yes. Yes.
  
44:07 K: And how do you bring
this act of teaching,
  
44:17 in which there is order,
because mathematics means order,
  
44:23 the highest form of order
is mathematics.
  
44:29 Now, how will you convey
to the student,
  
44:33 in teaching mathematics,
 
44:35 that there should be
order in his life?
  
44:42 Not order according to a blueprint.
That's not order.
  
44:50 You follow?
A: Yes, yes.
  
44:52 K: Therefore it brings...
it's a creative teaching,
  
44:57 - not creative - it's an act
of learning all the time.
  
45:05 So it's a living thing.
 
45:11 Not something I have learnt
 
45:12 and I am going
to impart it to you.
  
45:16 A: This reminds me of a little essay
I read many years ago
  
45:20 by Simone Weil which she called
'On Academic Studies'
  
45:23 or some title like that,
and she said
  
45:28 that every one who teaches
a subject is responsible for
  
45:36 teaching the student
 
45:41 the relation between
what they are studying
  
45:44 and the students making
a pure act of attention.
  
45:47 K: I know, of course, of course.
 
45:49 A: And that,
if this doesn't take place,
  
45:51 this whole thing
doesn't mean a thing.
  
45:53 K: Sir, that's just it.
 
45:54 A: And when one stops to think
what would a teacher say,
  
45:58 if a student walked up
and looked at him and said,
  
46:00 'Fine, we're studying
calculus right now.
  
46:04 Now you tell me how I am to
see this that I am pursuing
  
46:10 in relation to my making
a pure act of attention'.
  
46:15 It would be likely
a little embarrassing
  
46:17 except
for the most unusual person,
  
46:19 who had this grasp of the present.
K: Quite.
  
46:24 So sir, that's just it.
 
46:26 What is the relationship
of the teacher
  
46:29 to the student in education?
 
46:34 Is he training him
merely to conform,
  
46:39 is he training him
to cultivate mere memory,
  
46:44 like a machine?
 
46:46 Is he training, or is he helping him
to learn about life,
  
46:54 not just about sex - the life,
 
46:58 the whole immensity of living,
 
47:01 the complexity of it?
 
47:05 Which we are not doing.
A: No.
  
47:09 No, even in our language,
 
47:10 we refer students
to subject matters.
  
47:16 They take this, they take that,
they take the other,
  
47:18 and in fact,
there are prerequisites
  
47:22 for taking these other things.
 
47:24 And this builds a notion
of education, which
  
47:29 has absolutely no
relationship to what...
  
47:31 K: None at all.
 
47:32 A: And yet, and yet amazingly,
in the catalogues
  
47:37 of colleges and universities
across the country
  
47:40 there is in the first page
or so a rather pious remark
  
47:48 about the relation between
their going to school
  
47:52 and the values of civilisation.
 
47:55 And that turns out to be
learning a series of ideas.
  
48:00 Well, I don't know if
they do it any more,
  
48:02 but they used to put the
word 'character' in there.
  
48:04 They probably decided
that's unpopular
  
48:06 and might very well have
dropped that out by now,
  
48:08 I'm not sure. Yes, yes. Yes,
 
48:10 I'm following what you are saying.
 
48:12 K: So, sir,
when you feel responsible,
  
48:20 there is a flowering
of real affection,
  
48:24 you understand, sir?
 
48:27 A flowering of care
for a child,
  
48:35 and you don't train him,
or condition him
  
48:40 to go and kill another for
the sake of your country.
  
48:45 You follow?
All that is involved in it.
  
48:55 So, we come to a point,
where a human being,
  
49:00 as he is now,
 
49:02 so conditioned
to be irresponsible,
  
49:11 what are the serious people
going to do
  
49:15 with the irresponsible people?
 
49:19 You understand?
 
49:23 Education, politics, religion,
 
49:26 everything is making
human beings irresponsible.
  
49:32 I am not exaggerating.
This is so.
  
49:36 A: Oh no, you are not
exaggerating. Yes.
  
49:39 K: Now, I see this,
as a human being,
  
49:42 I say, what am I to do?
 
49:45 You follow, sir?
 
49:47 What is my responsibility
in face of the irresponsible?
  
49:54 A: Well, if it's to start
anywhere, as we say in English,
  
49:56 it must start at home.
 
49:57 It would have to start with me.
K: Yes, at home.
  
49:59 So I say, that's the whole point.
 
50:01 I have to start with me.
A: Right.
  
50:04 K: Then from that
the question arises:
  
50:07 then you can't do anything
about the irresponsible.
  
50:12 A: No. Exactly.
K: Ah, no, sir.
  
50:15 Something strange
takes place.
  
50:18 A: Oh, I misunderstood you.
I'm sorry.
  
50:20 What I meant by replying there
 
50:22 is that I don't attack
the irresponsible.
  
50:25 K: No. No.
A: No, no. Yes, go ahead, yes.
  
50:27 K: Something strange
takes place, which is:
  
50:31 consciousness,
 
50:38 the irresponsible
consciousness is one thing,
  
50:43 and the consciousness of
responsibility is another.
  
50:47 Now, when the human being
is totally responsible,
  
50:55 that responsibility,
unconsciously,
  
50:58 enters
into the irresponsible mind.
  
51:03 I don't know if I'm
conveying anything.
  
51:05 A: Yes. No, no, go ahead.
 
51:09 K: Sir, look.
I'm irresponsible.
  
51:11 Suppose I'm irresponsible,
you are responsible.
  
51:16 You can't do anything
consciously with me.
  
51:22 Because the more you actively
 
51:25 operate on me, I resist.
 
51:29 A: That's right, that's right.
 
51:31 That's what I meant
by no attacking.
  
51:33 K: No attacking.
I react violently to you.
  
51:36 I build a wall against you.
 
51:37 I hurt you.
I do all kinds of things.
  
51:40 But you see that you cannot
do anything consciously,
  
51:46 actively,
let's put it that way.
  
51:48 A: Designedly.
K: Designedly, planned,
  
51:52 which is what they are all
trying to do.
  
51:56 But if you can talk to me,
to my unconscious,
  
52:06 because the unconscious
is much more active,
  
52:09 much more alert, much
more... sees the danger
  
52:12 much quicker
than the conscious.
  
52:15 So it is much more sensitive.
 
52:18 So if you can talk to me,
to the unconscious,
  
52:22 that operates.
 
52:26 So you don't actively, designedly
attack the irresponsible.
  
52:35 They have done it.
 
52:37 And they have made
a mess of it.
  
52:39 A: Oh yes, it compounds,
complicates the thing further.
  
52:41 K: Whereas if you talk to him,
you talk to me,
  
52:46 but your whole
inward intention is
  
52:50 to show
how irresponsible I am,
  
52:52 what responsibility means
 
52:54 - you follow? -
you care.
  
52:57 In other words, you care for me.
A: Yes, yes.
  
53:00 I was chuckling because
 
53:02 the complete and total opposite
crossed my mind,
  
53:04 and it just seemed
so absolutely absurd.
  
53:08 Yes.
 
53:11 K: You care for me,
because I am irresponsible.
  
53:15 You follow?
A: Exactly.
  
53:17 K: Therefore you care for me.
 
53:18 And therefore you are watching
 
53:20 not to hurt me,
not to... you follow?
  
53:24 In that way you
 
53:25 penetrate very, very
deeply into my unconscious.
  
53:32 And that operates unknowingly,
when suddenly I say,
  
53:37 'By Jove, how irresponsible
I am' - you follow? -
  
53:38 that operates.
 
53:44 I have seen this, sir,
 
53:49 in operation, because
I've talked for 50 years,
  
53:54 unfortunately or fortunately,
to large audiences,
  
53:58 tremendous resistance
to anything new.
  
54:04 Say, if I said, 'Don't
read sacred books',
  
54:08 which I say all the time,
 
54:10 because you are just
conforming, obeying.
  
54:14 You are not living. You are
living according to some book
  
54:17 that you have read.
 
54:18 Immediately there is resistance:
'Who are you to tell us?'
  
54:24 A: Not to do something.
K: Not to do this or to do that.
  
54:27 So I say, all right.
 
54:28 I go on pointing out,
pointing out.
  
54:32 I'm not trying to change them.
 
54:35 I'm not doing propaganda,
 
54:37 because I don't believe
in propaganda. It's a lie.
  
54:41 So I say, look,
 
54:43 look what you do when
you are irresponsible.
  
54:45 You are destroying
your children.
  
54:49 You send them to war
 
54:52 to be killed and to be maimed,
and to kill and to maim.
  
54:57 Is that an act of love,
is that affection, is that care?
  
55:00 Why do you do it?
And I go into it.
  
55:05 They get bewildered.
 
55:07 They don't know what to do!
 
55:08 You follow, sir?
So it begins to slowly seep in.
  
55:15 A: Well, at first
it's such a shock.
  
55:20 It sounds positively
subversive to some.
  
55:23 K: Oh, absolutely,
absolutely subversive.
  
55:25 A: Of, course, of course. Yes.
 
55:31 K: So we enter now
into something, which is:
  
55:35 my relationship to another,
 
55:39 when there is
total responsibility,
  
55:43 in which freedom
and care go together,
  
55:51 the mind has no image
in relationship at all.
  
56:00 Because the image
is the division.
  
56:05 Where there is care,
there is no image.
  
56:12 A: This would lead us into
 
56:15 what perhaps later
we could pursue:
  
56:21 love.
 
56:22 K: Ah, that's a tremendous thing.
A: Yes, yes.
  
56:26 K: We have to go into it.
A: Could we
  
56:28 lay a few words before that,
I don't know necessarily that
  
56:35 next time we would do that,
 
56:37 but it would come naturally.
 
56:40 I've been listening
to what you have been saying,
  
56:42 and it's occurred to me
that, if one is responsible
  
56:51 and care is continuous with that,
one would not fear.
  
56:58 One could not fear.
 
57:01 Not would not, could not,
K: Could not, you're not capable.
  
57:04 A: ...could not fear.
 
57:06 K: You see, that means really,
one must understand fear.
  
57:13 A: One must understand fear.
 
57:15 K: And also
the pursuit of pleasure.
  
57:19 Those two go together.
They are not two separate things.
  
57:24 A: What I have learned here
in our discussion is that
  
57:32 what it is, if I have
followed you correctly,
  
57:35 that we should turn ourselves
toward understanding,
  
57:39 is not what are called values.
K: Oh no!
  
57:43 A: We don't understand love.
 
57:46 We understand
all those things
  
57:48 which we catch ourselves into,
 
57:53 that militate against
any possibility whatsoever.
  
57:58 This is what's so hard to hear,
 
58:00 to be told that
there just is no possibility.
  
58:04 This produces immense terror.
 
58:09 Do you think next time
when we converse together
  
58:14 we could begin at that point
where we could discuss fear?
  
58:17 K: Oh yes.
A: Good.
  
58:18 K: But, sir, before we enter
fear, there is something
  
58:22 which we should
discuss very carefully:
  
58:28 what is order in freedom?
 
58:36 A: Fine, fine, yes, yes.