Krishnamurti Subtitles home


SM72T3 - In freedom there is order
Santa Monica, California - 25 March 1972
Public Talk 3



0:38 Krishnamurti: We were talking at the last two meetings that we have had here, that one must be a light to oneself, and not depend on anybody for guidance, for understanding psychologically, and to find out for oneself a way of living in which every form of conflict, within and without, comes to an end.
1:20 Most of us have accepted life as a conflict, a way of life in which there is constant battle, struggle, suffering, pain, disorder. That has been the norm of our life. And the more one lives and observes what is happening in the world and also within ourselves, one sees that freedom has been so totally misunderstood, and what that freedom has brought about in this world – you are free to destroy other human beings, in the name of patriotism, for your country, for your God. In the name of freedom you have destroyed the country, nature, you have polluted the air. And there are those scientists who are saying we have very little chance to survive. The expanding technology, production, overpopulation, and the economic division of the world is going to destroy human beings. And this is what freedom has brought, freedom in our particular individual lives to do what we like, to pursue our own particular form of pleasure, in the name of God, in the name of religion, in the name of truth, in the name of country, economically and socially. And we have created values in this freedom that are so appalling, that have no meaning whatsoever, that are totally immoral: to destroy another human being, to kill the animals for our food, to pollute the air, nature. This has been brought about because we think we are free to do what we like, individually, collectively. And when one observes this, not only in this country but in India and in Europe, and where freedom is denied, like in Russia or in China, where tyranny in the name of social reform and social unity, and the unity of a nation, what does freedom mean?
5:15 And yet human beings cannot live without freedom, they demand it, it is necessary. But the freedom that one wants and the freedom that one pursues is totally egotistic, selfish, and that has produced a totally unbalanced world, an insane world. And so it is important to find out for ourselves what is freedom.
6:10 Freedom surely, in freedom there is order, otherwise it is not freedom – whether that order is within and without. And it means also, doesn't it, where there is freedom there must be discipline. Order and discipline have specific meaning, not only according to the dictionary but also what we, in our conditioned responses, think what freedom is, and order is, and what discipline is. I think one has to give new significance to freedom, to order, to discipline. And that is what we are going to talk over together this morning.
7:24 It is a lovely morning. I don't know if you were on the beach, if you looked out this morning and saw the sun on the sea, what a lovely thing it is in a beautiful country like this to look at the mountains, the hills and the rippling waters, and to enjoy the beauty of life, the quietness of a still morning, to hear the birds. And to be totally good, totally one with nature. And that is also freedom, to observe, not from any centre, not from any particular desire, but to observe. So we have to give a different meaning, significance, to freedom, order and discipline. Because order has its own law and its own way of living, without any enforcement, without any struggle, without any conflict. So we are going together, if we may this morning, find out for ourselves, because we have to be a light to ourselves, what this order means, how does this order come about in our life? Is it the result of thought, thought being remembrance, imagination, contriving. Can we contrive together, remembering our past, and bring about through mentation, order? You understand my question? Thought has made this world, the world in which we live, however utterly chaotic, miserable, insane it is, it is the product of calculated thinking. And it has brought about a certain superficial order, with disorder. So, we are asking whether thought can bring about order.
10:54 Thought being the response of accumulated memory, whether that memory is collective, individual, or the result of various forms of environmental influence. We have accumulated sufficient knowledge, which is memory through experience, which is the past, and according to that response which is thought, can order be brought about? That is, order, which is essentially disorder in this world, has been put together by thought. The division amongst people is a deliberate pursuit of individual and selective groups and their security. Thought has contrived to bring this about. Nations, governments, religious divisions, are the result of calculated thought. I don't think anybody can deny that, it is a fact, both psychologically as well as outwardly. And that thought has brought about great suffering, great disorder. And we want to produce order, to bring about order through the same process, which is using thought. We say we must have order, we must have law. The more and more there is disorder, both politically, socially, economically, the demand is for order. The disorder that exists in the world is the result of thought. Right? Are we meeting each other? Shall I go on? We are sharing this problem together? Now, can thought bring about order?
14:02 And what do we mean by order, outwardly as well as inwardly? Can – knowing there is disorder, confusion, conflict in oneself – can that conflict, that struggle, which is disorder, confusion, can that end by thought? Or is there a different approach to this problem? I see human beings in themselves, when one observes fairly objectively, one sees human beings live in disorder in themselves, and therefore, that disorder projected outwardly.
15:24 And that disorder in oneself has been brought about by thought seeking its own individual security, amusement, pleasure, its own determined pursuit of a particular action, and so on. Now, can that very thought which has brought about disorder in ourselves, can that thought be used to bring about order? Order being, not a conformity to a pattern, order is not an imitation to a particular morality, order is not acceptance of authority, order is not imitation, conformity. If there is conformity, imitation, comparison, it must produce disorder. Are we all moving together or is this too much? Never mind, I'll go on.
17:12 You see, when you compare yourself with somebody else, you are not only denying your own light, you are trying to imitate, conform to the light of another. That is fairly simple. Conformity, morally, is immoral, because conformity implies comparison, it implies a continued approximation to a symbol, to an idea, to a person, so that in conforming there is always a struggle, a conflict with 'what is' and with 'what should be'. 'Should be' may be your own projection or established by tradition. So conformity is a form of disorder. So we are investigating what brings about disorder, and in the understanding of that, of the causes of disorder, basically, we will bring about order, naturally. Right? I see conformity, comparison, brings disorder in one's life, because when I compare myself with somebody, always superior, always better, nobler, more intelligent, I feel inferior, smaller, and out of that feeling, aggression grows, competitiveness, conformity. That act of conformity is one of the causes of disorder in one's life. This is a fact, this is so.
20:21 And I see where there is any form of imitation, conformity, comparison, in which is implied every form of suppression, there must be in my life disorder. So, in enquiring into this you have to see for yourself if you are comparing, imitating, conforming, and when you see that – not verbally only, because the word is not the thing, the description is not the described – when you see that, that is, non-verbally, actually, directly, then out of that perception there is order, which is totally different from the order brought about by thought. Are we meeting?
21:58 And I see also, thought invariably conditions, thought invariably divides – the 'me' and the 'not me', we and they, both nationally, religiously, individually. So thought, which is the response of memory, accumulated by the race, through culture, through the individual and so on, that memory is in the brain cells themselves, and according to that the response – which is thought – conditions. Are you all going to sleep? Right. So thought divides. Thought divides not only outwardly but inwardly. That is, thought says, I must control. 'I' being different from that which is controlled. So in that division, inwardly, there is conflict. I must become better, I must follow the ideal. So thought divides. And this division is one of the major causes of conflict, both outward and inward – which is so simple, isn't it? When you call yourself an American, with certain standards, certain ideas and beliefs and conduct, and some other country has its own beliefs, conducts and rituals, ceremonies, there is a division. You are the Muslim, the Hindu, the Christian, the Protestant, the Japanese, the Chinese, the Russian, all that, all the product of thought. So thought not only pursues conformity, comparison, but also thought conditions the mind not only outwardly but inwardly. And that very conditioning is division and therefore conflict. So I have discovered – you are discovering this, not me, we are sharing this thing together – so we have discovered for ourselves that any form of psychological conformity, comparison, must produce conflict.
26:00 We also see that any form of conditioning – which is the result of thought or culture – is division and therefore further conflict, further confusion. We have found that out for ourselves, we are a light to ourselves. So we are enquiring into what brings about disorder, not what order is, but what is disorder, how it comes into our life, into our human structure and nature.
27:02 And thought creates beliefs, hoping to be secure in an uncertain world, inventing all the innumerable gods, saviours, and the potty little gurus all over the world, with their particular systems, philosophies, disciplines – it is all the result of thought, the 'I' thinking that I will attain enlightenment through somebody, which is thought contriving. And yet thought has produced a marvellous world, a world of technology, a world where we can live comparatively safely, but also thought has divided man: you and me, you and your wife, you and your friend, and so there is a battle going on inwardly and outwardly, there is confusion. And out of this confusion we are trying to create order, both politically, legally, morally. So, can thought bring about order, which is not conformity, which is not acceptance of a particular pattern of behaviour? So can thought ever produce order? Or will thought always bring about disorder? Now what do you find out for yourself? Because order, as we said, implies discipline. That is an unfortunate word, because discipline implies conformity, discipline implies drill, discipline implies constant adjustment to a pattern. And this constant approximation to an idea and the conformity to that idea is what is called discipline. The word discipline means to learn – to learn, not to conform, not to suppress, not to control – to learn. And you cannot learn if you are not free. Freedom isn't to do what you like, your individual idiosyncrasies rampant. And that is what you have done in this world, you have let your particular idiosyncrasies, aggressiveness, your demand for pleasure and pursuit of it, has produced this world. And you think you are free. And therefore, psychologists are saying that you must be conditioned, otherwise your behaviour produces a monstrous world. And their conditioning is through reward. Before you were conditioned through punishment and perhaps occasional reward, now there are proposing that you will be rewarded, not punished. And that is also going to condition, beautifully. And then some other philosopher, psychologist will come along and say no, no, you are wrong, you must be unconditioned in a different way – and be conditioned. This game goes on. Fortunately, in America, you are always experimenting, so the latest guru is thrown over for a newer guru. The latest psychologist with all his authoritarian enquiry and assertion, through torturing animals or birds or whatever it is, and he comes to a certain conclusion and he himself is conditioned and therefore his assertions must be conditioned, and we fall into that trap, until somebody comes along and releases us, and fall into his trap. This is going on. And this falling from trap to trap, into one, into another, is called freedom.
33:51 No, don't laugh, please, this isn't funny, this is appalling, what is taking place. This breeds sorrow, because we are at war with each other. And when you see this, when you see what discipline has done, what conformity has done, the acceptance of the latest psychologist, guru, what it has produced, those groups that want to study this particular teacher, or another group, another teacher, the division, when you see all this appalling mess, confusion, misery, you must find a different approach to all this.
34:58 So, when you discover for yourself what is disorder, what brings about this chaos in oneself and therefore outwardly, out of this disorder, the understanding of that disorder, comes order, naturally, with its own law, with its own beauty of discipline, with its own order. So, with that clarity let us look at what we call living, and what we call love, and what we call death, because these are the three most important things in our life – the living, the dying and what we call love.
36:06 Questioner: Before we go on, could you go into thought and why we desire to separate, to divide ourselves from one another?
36:15 K: Why do we separate and divide ourselves from one another. Oh, it is fairly simple, isn't it? Why are you American and me a Hindu? We are brought up in a different culture, with a different tradition, with different myths. America has no particular myth – Europe has and Asia has. This division is the assertion of the ego, the me. The me with all its desires, pleasures, fears, accumulation of what it calls pleasure, happiness. You know, the symbol of the cross, do you know what it means? Wipe out the 'I'. Right? You understand what I am saying? No? Oh Lord. You have seen the symbol of the cross, haven't you? The I – wipe it out, because the I separates. The me that is constantly asserting, the me that says, I must have this, I will be that, the me that is competitive, aggressive, the me that is comparing, wanting to be something greater, nobler, wiser, more enlightened, and that me is the cause of all this unfortunate disorderdly division in the world. Therefore you say, how can I live in this world without the me? We are going to find that out. We are going to find that out by understanding what living is, and what actually it is. We are going to find out how to live in this world without the me, when we understand what dying is and what love is. Without the understanding of that, merely to indulge in a theoretical pursuit of whether we can live in this world without the I, that has no meaning. You know, they have tried to live in this world without the me, by going to the monasteries, by assuming a different name or number, by withdrawing into small groups, communes or communities. There have been ten different ways or a thousand different ways to get rid of the me: through meditation, through control, through suppression, through identifying oneself with the greater, with God. We have tried every way possible and we have not succeeded because we have not faced the fact, actually what is. We want to destroy what is without understanding what is, without facing what is. And that is what we are going to do this morning, a little bit, to look at our living, your living, not the living according to some psychologist or according to the speaker – he has no pattern, thank God.
40:56 Look at it – the living, your daily life. Is there any order in it? The going to the office day after day, earning a livelihood, spending forty, fifty years, the monotony, the boredom, the conformity, the responsibility. You know, freedom has its own responsibility, not this responsibility of duty, of conformity. Look at your own life and you will see that there is fear, there is agony, there is sorrow, guilt, the constant demand to be something different from what is, the battle inwardly. That is what we call living, isn't it? No? With occasional joy, with an occasional outing, look at the sun, if there is a sun, to go out whenever you can, to kill animals and birds, which is called sport. This constant competition between each other, the lying, the hypocrisy. And that is what we call living, isn't it? And in that there is disorder. Without understanding that and bringing order in that, we want to produce order outwardly, more laws, more legislation, preventing corruption, outwardly, and inwardly we are corrupt, polluted. And all this inward confusion has been brought about by the me, which is the very essence of thought, as the me. No? Oh Lord, come on, sirs. You won’t face this, will you?
43:59 So living is a process of fear, basically, deep down, which again is the result of thought. And when you look at that living then what is dying? Again, one is terribly frightened of dying. You avoid it, you never think about it. Old age, accident, disease, the fear of all that, and the inevitable postponement of death. And all the pretensions that go on, the trying to be young, all the old ladies dressing as though they were young girls, and old men playing golf for the rest of – you know what is taking place in this world. So that is what you call living, a terrible mess, confusion, disorder. And you are frightened to let that go, which is to die. And therefore out of that fear you have every form of belief, survival. And we haven't time to go into all that because, you know, the whole culture, Asiatic culture is based on this idea of a future life, and you have your own, Christians have their own form of a future life, resurrection, and so on. And you never question either those who believe in reincarnation or those who believe that they will sit next to God in Heaven, never question what it is that survives. There is a physical ending, but what is it that survives, which will reincarnate or live in a different world?
47:07 When you believe in reincarnation it means that there is a permanent me, a permanent entity which – don't let's call it permanent – which is, there is an entity which continues until it is completely worn out, through experience, through good behaviour, pain, suffering, through good acts, the me comes to an end eventually, after ten lives or a hundred lives in the future. And you aren't burdened with that kind of fear, because if you believe in a particular saviour, in a particular belief, idea, you will be cleansed, because someone else suffers for you. And you believe that and you are happy in that. Look at it all, the whole pattern, not just your particular little pattern. And all this breeds disorder in one's life. And in that disorder you are trying to bring about order.
48:42 And the living is called also a life in which there is love. What does that word mean, bearing in mind that the word is not the thing, the description is not the described? The word is never the thing. So what does that mean, that word mean to us? To you, not to some philosopher but actually to you, what does it mean? Love, as we know it, is pleasure, pain, jealousy, anxiety, anger, hurt, you know, the things that we go through life. And not being satisfied with that, we will call it the love of the country, the love of God, love of books, you know, all the rest of it. That is our life. Throw in a few gods, saviours, gurus into that mess, and we will continue day after day until we accidentally, or through disease, die – old age.
50:41 So is there a different way of living so that we live without confusion, without fear? Because to die is to live more, is to live totally. So we must find out. And thought cannot produce order, thought will not bring you understanding, it can only bring division. So, what will bring about total order? A life in which there is real compassion? You understand what that word means? Passion for all, love without jealousy, without anger, without bitterness, without pain, sorrow – a living daily in which there is no conflict whatsoever. To live that way demands tremendous energy, and you dissipate that energy when there is conflict – it is a wastage.
52:19 So, what we have done through freedom, so-called freedom, is to bring about disorder both outwardly and inwardly. Now, seeing all this brings order. So how do you see? You understand my question? How do you see all this? As something separate from you? As something out there? Or as something in which the observer has not divided himself from the thing he sees. He is that. You understand? When you see, you are seeing not only visually, seeing not only verbally, but seeing without words, without concepts, without formulas – to see. Which means to see without an image. Now, when you can see without a formula, without concepts, which are verbal images put together by thought, when you can see without formula, concept, image, this whole movement of what is called living: fear, pain, anxiety, great sorrow, killing each other, when you see that very clearly, that very perception brings order. Now, do you see this? And this is really important, this is the only thing that matters, whether you, as a human being, living in this monstrous, stupid, insane world, whether you see this whole thing as a whole. Whether you live here or in India or in Russia or in China or Timbuktu, it is a human problem. And you have to see this clearly. When you see this thing without image, conclusion, without prejudice, without any concept, then you will see that very perception is order. And that order has its own law, not imposed, not conforming, not pursing a particular ideal it is itself order.
56:21 Are we sharing this thing together? Or are you merely listening to a series of words and holding on to your concepts, to your beliefs, to your conclusions, to your particular images, and therefore continuing in your own disorder, and therefore contributing to the world's disorder? You know, a new race must come into being, a new people, a new group not the long-haired ones or the short-haired ones, not the people who take drugs and don't take drugs, square and circle, whatever it is – a new group of people. Do you know, the Aryans came, I believe, historically, from Sumeria. One group went east and they entered India from the north west. And they found in that country quite a different people – brutal, whatever they were, they were quite different people. And these new people that came into it had to live amongst them. So those who have listened to these talks, who really live it, are the new people living in a world of darkness. That is why it is so immensely important to listen, to find out, and to be a light to yourself, not dependant on anybody, on any psychologist, on any guru, on any speaker. Then, when we are a light to ourselves, then we will come together. I don't know what time it is. Just a minute, sir.
59:21 Q: Sir?

K: Wait, just a minute. Take your time, we have got plenty of time. You know, we are not doing propaganda. I am not doing any propaganda for anything. If you repeat what has been said, it becomes a lie. But if you see it for yourself, totally, for yourself, you are a light for yourself and therefore, when you say things it will be yours, and therefore no hypocrisy. Truth is not something in the distance but to see what actually is. And the perception of what actually is, is truth. To see that when you lie, to see that. The perception of a lie in yourself is the truth. So, we are not doing any propaganda or propagating an idea. Therefore it is a marvellous thing to be free to observe, to see things clearly for yourself. And you cannot see things as they are if you have images, conclusions, prejudices, authoritarian beliefs and tradition. Just to look with clear eyes at yourself. And then you don't have to go to any class, to any group to understand yourself, it is all there. You don't have to read books to find out about yourself, or go to Africa to study animals in order to understand, through animals, yourself. You are both the African animal and the civilised American. Right? Only you do not know how to look. And how to look is in your own hands, not the means but the actuality of looking. Right, sir.
1:02:32 Q: Can you describe the states of being which does and does not, or do and do not permit the new to enter. May we know from whence the new comes from?
1:02:48 K: May we know from where comes the new? Do you know from where comes the new? First of all, sir...
1:03:15 Q: Do you hear what he said? I can't hear what you are saying. I didn't hear what the question was and I didn't understand what you said just now.
1:03:27 Q: We can't hear.

K: Can't hear. Oh, that is very simple. The gentleman asks: from where does the new come, the new invention, the new perception. You know, I have been told, these inventors come upon something new, when they have put aside – if they are really great inventors, not just footling little bathtubs and so on. The great inventors, the great people who have seen something new, they must not only have knowledge of the old, as you, but also there must be an interval – listen to this carefully – an interval, not only of time but of space between the old and the new. Which means the old must be in abeyance completely. That is, the old knowledge of the piston, or of whatever it is, that must be totally in abeyance, set aside. And then perhaps, because your mind is so sharp, clear, sensitive, then the new takes place. The new is not born of the old. How can it? The old must be quiet. Now wait a minute, I haven't finished yet. Just a minute, sir, just a minute. When you say 'the new', what do you mean by that word? You sit on the banks of a river. The river has a name. Is the name the river? Is the water that you are watching, is it new water or a constant movement of water?
1:06:41 And we are always, as human beings, wanting to find something new, not only in the technological world but also in ourselves, something new. Why? I can understand in the technological world but why do you want to find something new in yourself. If you find it, is the new the me? You understand? If I find something new and I have at the same time the me that exists, then the me uses the new. Right? And in using that, it becomes powerful, it seeks position, fame, notoriety, you know, all the rest of the nonsense that goes with the discovery of something new. So then, the me that discovers the new becomes the most mischievous entity. So you have to find out for yourself what is new. Is there such thing as the new? The new being totally different from the past, it has no relationship to the future, that is not contained within the space of consciousness something totally new. To find that out the self must be totally absent. The new is the total goodness.
1:09:03 Q: Sir, I have followed very intensely. It has been a most extraordinary kind of experience to follow thought, to observe myself following the thought. And I felt, after you left the question of dying and entered into the question of becoming new – are you following?
1:09:40 K: Yes, what is the question? I understand.
1:09:44 Q: I felt derailed, sort of, because in seeing the old, the thought, in being aware of the subtleties of the me, the thought, that self-knowledge that you speak of, that is what I was waiting for you to delve into, and reading and rereading and finally slowing thought down to where I can watch the thought.
1:10:36 K: I understand.
1:10:42 Q: In that awareness, thought disperses, in a sense. Are you following?

K: I understand, sir.
1:10:55 Q: But it is extraordinarily difficult to get even to the point of following one's own thought. The interval between the thought, for it to come in, one must first follow the thought, and it must end, and then the interval, the immensity, the new...
1:11:22 K: I understand. What is the question, sir?
1:11:29 Q: Well, for me, this entering, coming close to this interval is a very frightening kind of experience. Would it be all right to continue or is it too far already?
1:12:03 K: I follow. I have understood, sir. Aren't you saying this, that: I have followed what you have said, read what you have written, and the more I delve into myself, the knowing of myself, is rather frightening. And also in that delving I see there is an interval between two thoughts, between perception and action – all this is rather frightening. And are you asking, how can one – not how – is it possible to go beyond all this, this fear, this constant searching, constant enquiry, constant uncertainty – is that what you are asking, sir?
1:13:32 Q: Not exactly. I am following you and those things build the me. Once, or in the past, on drugs, entering into this realm, without seeing the self, it was most terrifying.
1:13:56 K: Sir, I understand, it is fairly clear. There are other people asking questions, sir. Wait a minute, sir, the gentleman asked something. You see, most of us are frightened of the unknown. After all, death is the unknown. The tomorrow is basically the unknown. Therefore tomorrow, death, or ten years later, is something we must know in order to be free of any form of fear. So we are always carrying with us the knowledge of yesterday. And the knowledge of yesterday prevents us the understanding of the unknown. The freedom from the known is the new. Yes, sir?
1:15:12 Q: Sir, the observer and the observed – I have read what you have said about the observer and the observed. Sometimes by the observed you are talking about inwardly, aren't you?
1:15:23 K: Why the observer?
1:15:25 Q: The observer and the observed. Sometimes when you are talking about the observed, you were talking about a flower, I believe, and sometimes you were talking about something inside you as the observed, are you not?
1:15:38 K: No, it is fairly simple. When you look at somebody, now you are sitting there and I am sitting here, the speaker is here and you are there. You are the observer and the speaker is the observed. Right? How do you look at the speaker? You are the observer. What are you observing? The form of the speaker, the language you hear of the speaker, the gestures, the features, the form, the name? Is that what you are observing? Or you have an image of the speaker, haven't you? So what are you observing? You are observing your own image that you have built about the speaker. Right? Now, can you look at the speaker without any image? Which means then you are really looking, aren't you, then you are really listening. Not listening to your image, your preconceived ideas, but actually putting all that aside you are listening, you are looking. Now, can you look at yourself similarly? Because when you look at yourself you have an image of yourself, what you should be, what you should not be. Right? You have an idea, which is again an image that you must succeed, you must be good, you must achieve, you know, you have images, not only about yourself, you have images about others and the world. So you are always looking through an image, through a formula, in a sense. Now, can you look without the image, without the formula? The image, the formula, is the me. It is very simple, sir, to look at a tree, the cloud, the bird, your neighbour, your wife or your girl, whatever it is, to look without a single image. Then you are related, then the bird, you look, without the me without the word, then you will never kill anything in your life.
1:19:02 Q: Sir?

K: Wait a minute, sir. Yes, sir?
1:19:08 Q: Before when you were speaking of how we move from one trap to another trap, and to another trap after that, and many in the audience laughed. You said: please do not laugh, this is very serious. Is not that conception of how serious or not serious to take the whole matter?
1:19:28 K: Not at all, sir. Right, I'll show you, I'll show you. When you are serious and you begin to laugh about something, I know why you laugh, it is a release. Laughing, a kind of a pent up feeling which you have built up during the talks suddenly releases. Laughter is good, laughter has its place and occasion. One must laugh, one must smile, there is beauty in laughter. But there are also occasions when laughter has no place. When one is deeply concerned, deeply trying to find out about oneself, the understanding of sorrow. And somebody suddenly laughs, it rather jars, doesn't one? It isn't that you mustn't laugh but it isn't appropriate, it isn't the right moment, that is all. Yes, sir?
1:20:39 Q: It seems to me that to be free one must be able to see what actually is. And yet, to see what actually is, it seems that one must be free.
1:20:48 Q: Is that not a paradox?

K: That is good, sir. It is not a contradiction. First, to investigate anything, especially into oneself, there must not only be great sensitivity but freedom – freedom from your prejudices about yourself, how beautiful you are or how good you are or how ugly you are – freedom to look. That is all. Listen to this. So, the first step is the last step. The first step, which is to look at myself without any prejudice, without any conditioning, just to see actually what is. That is the first step and the last step. There is no contradiction. To see clearly into myself and the world there must be no me who says, I am right, you are wrong, my opinion is this, I am this, you know. Which doesn't mean you become vague, indifferent or casual, you know, whatever it is. But when you see, to see there must be absolute clarity. And you cannot have clarity if there is no freedom. So, when you look at yourself you will see that you are looking at yourself with a formula, with an image. So, what is important, not what you will see but to be free of your image. Free of your image, why you have images. Which is, you have images because you protect yourself, you resist, you think you are better than what you are, or inferior than what you are. So all these images are a form of resistance, a form of defence, which prevent the actual looking. So, your first concern is not what you find but whether you can look without prejudice. And therefore that is the first step and therefore it is the last step. Yes, sir?
1:23:58 Q: Could you discuss loneliness, how it drives us in different directions?
1:24:05 Q: Did you hear the question, sir?

K: I can't hear.
1:24:08 Q: Will you take up the matter of loneliness and how it drives us in different directions in our lives?
1:24:15 Q: Loneliness.

K: Loneliness. Yes, I understand. Does loneliness drive us in different directions? Now, let's look into it, please, let's go into this quietly. Because most of us are lonely people. We may have children, grandmother, you may be surrounded by a crowd, you may go to the temple, to the church, you may read a great many books, write, philosophise, but when you wake up in the dark, in the middle of the night, you suddenly feel completely lonely. You may be sleeping next to your wife, you may be walking with your friends and companions, you feel deeply, suddenly, this sense of not being related to anything, desperately lonely. Don't you know this? Don't you? If you do, then what do you do? Just go step by step into it. What do you do? You try to escape from it, don't you? Radio, television, books, images, imagine the days that you are not lonely, and fight it, try to escape from it, try to rationalise your loneliness, try to resist it, avoid it. Don't you do all those things? But you never face it, you never come directly into contact with it. Like sorrow, you never come immediately into its total contact.
1:26:56 So you look at this loneliness as an observer, as an outsider, who says, I don't know what it is, I am frightened, I don't like it. I will get drunk, I will take drugs, anything to avoid this terrible thing. So when you escape from it, the loneliness and the fear of it increases, it is always there. You may run away a thousand miles, it is always there. You may place, in that loneliness, your gods, your saviours, your gurus, your idea of enlightenment – it is always there, like your shadow. So knowing, seeing clearly, that any form of escape, however subtle or however stupid, however brutal, doesn't answer this question of loneliness. So when you see the truth of that, then you are that loneliness. Not you are different from that loneliness, you are that loneliness. Aren't you? You, married, wife, children, you are struggling, you are self-assertive, you have your own problems, you are working for yourself, in the name of your family, you are working for yourself, isolating yourself all day long, aren't you? So this daily isolating process, through aggression, through assertion, through the dominance, me and not me, all that process, that movement of the me, is loneliness, isolation. And from that sense of isolation you want to assert, you become aggressive, brutal, violent, angry. So, all those are forms of an escape from the fact of what is. Now can you look at that loneliness without any conclusion, without wanting to go beyond it, wanting to overcome it? The wanting to overcome it is another form of escape, but just to look at it. Then you will see, because you are no longer escaping and therefore wasting your energy, then you can look. And when you observe totally, the thing is not. Right? You have understood this? Yes?
1:30:48 Q: I thank you for giving me new freedom, and if I must be led, I wish we could have a president like you.
1:31:04 Q: If I am looking at you, the speaker, and these images that you are talking about that I would bring in between what I am seeing and what you really are, is that thought, isn't that thought?
1:31:15 K: No, just look, sir. You have a friend, haven't you, or a wife, or a girl? How do you look at that person? Do you see her or him without any image? When you say: I know somebody, what do you mean by that – I know somebody? You have met him half a dozen times or talked to him a great deal, you say, I do know that person. What do you mean by that? You know him from what you have observed, experienced, known his idiosyncrasies, you know him. Which is, you know him according to the image that you have built, which is the past. Right? Isn't that so? You all look so mystified. Therefore it is the most dangerous thing to say: I know somebody. You only know him from your past knowledge. He may have changed, he may be different now, but you say: I know him. Either contemptuously or in a friendly way. Which is, always according to the past knowledge, disregarding what he actually is. So, when you look at your wife, husband, or whatever your relationship, intimate relationships are with another, with your neighbour who may be a thousand miles or ten thousand miles away, or next door, you have an image about him, and that image is the division, and that image is the source of conflict. To look at another without an image is a blessing.
1:33:47 Q: Is not wanting the new an escape?
1:33:52 K: Absolutely. Wanting the new is an escape, obviously.
1:33:57 Q: Is there not knowing the knower, knowing the seer...
1:34:03 K: Please, just a minute. Oh Lord. Look, sir, when you love somebody – love, not desire, not pleasure – when you love somebody, because love is not pleasure, love is not desire. When it is desire then it becomes pleasure. Then it is no longer love. When you love somebody, is there a me? Is there the entity that says, I must find new love? There is no me because love then is always new. Pleasure is always old, because it is the product of thought. So a mind that is really observing, aware, to that mind there is always something new going on.