Krishnamurti Subtitles
SM72T1 - Konať okamžite, znamená vidieť to, čo sa v skutočnosti deje
1. Verejné vystúpenie
Santa Monica, USA
18 marec 1972
| 0:43 | Krishnamurti: As we are going to talk during these four meetings about many things, I think it is important, first, that we should understand that these meetings are not a kind of entertainment, but rather that we are going together, sharing the many problems that face all of us. I mean by 'entertaining' that you are not being told what to do, or to understand a particular philosophy, or comply to a certain dogma, theory. Most of us, I am afraid, like to be informed, entertained, told, follow a certain theory, dogma, or a belief, or follow the latest psychologist or a philosopher. It is like going to a church to be entertained – however much you may like the ceremony, etc. | Krishnamurti: Pretoћe sa ideme rozprбvaќ, poиas tэchto љtyroch stretnutн, o mnohэch veciach, myslнm si, ћe je dфleћitй po prvй: ћe by sme mali vedieќ, ћe tieto stretnutia nie sъ nejakэ druh zбbavy, ale ћe skфr spolu ideme zdieѕaќ mnoho problйmov ktorэm vљetci иelнme. Tou zбbavou myslнm, ћe vбm nikto nebude hovoriќ иo mбte robiќ, alebo ako mбte pochopiќ konkrйtnu filozofiu, alebo vyhovieќ urиitej dogme alebo teуrii. Vдиљina z nбs, obбvam sa, je rada, keп nбs informujъ, zabбvajъ, povedia иo robiќ, keп sledujeme urиitъ teуriu, dogmu alebo presvedиenie, alebo nasledujeme najnovљieho psycholуga alebo filozofa. Je to ako chodiќ do kostola, aby sme sa zabavili, alebo lepљie povedanй, pбиi sa nбm tб ceremуnia, atп. |
| 3:01 | Here, during these four talks, we are not going to be entertained at all, for there is nothing that the speaker has to say that will be either intellectually stimulating, or psychologically, that needs acceptance. For we are going to share together the many problems, such as love, death, and the utter madness that is going on in the world. We are going to understand these problems together, share them, and therefore, it is very important from the very beginning that we should understand each other, and what it means to observe the problems into which we are going, to observe, to listen. | Tu, poиas tэchto љtyroch rozhovorov, sa vфbec nebudeme zabбvaќ, pretoћe reиnнk nemusн hovoriќ niи takй иo bude intelektuбlne stimulujъce alebo psychologickй, nieиo, иo treba prijaќ. Pretoћe sa spolu ideme podeliќ o mohй problйmy, ako je lбska, smrќ, a totбlne љialenstvo ktorй sa deje vo svete. Ideme spolu porozumieќ tэmto problйmom, podeliќ sa s nimi, a preto je veѕmi dфleћitй od ъplnйho zaиiatku, aby sme si rozumeli, a aby sme rozumeli tomu, иo znamenб skъmaќ problйmy do ktorэch sa dostбvame. Skъmaќ, poиъvaќ. |
| 4:44 | We generally listen according to our fancy: comparing what we already know with what is being said, translating, interpreting, comparing, and trying to follow what the speaker is saying. And it seems to me, such forms of listening prevents actual listening. You are not only listening to what the speaker is saying but also listening to your own reactions. For after all, the speaker acts as a mirror into which you are looking, and what you see doesn't need any interpretation, you merely observe. So our first enquiry together is what it means to listen, to observe, whether it is at all possible to observe actually 'what is' without any interpretation, without any categorising, putting it into a certain groove, into a certain path, but to merely observe. And this is going to be rather difficult, because for most of us observation means interpretation, interpreting what you see according to what you already know, and therefore you are looking at what you see with the knowledge of the past. Therefore you are actually not seeing. | Zvyиajne poиъvame podѕa toho, иi sa nбm chce: porovnбvame, иo uћ vieme, s tэm иo nбm hovoria, prekladбme si to, interpretujeme, porovnбvame, a snaћнme sa sledovaќ, иo rozprбvajъci hovorн. A mne sa zdб, ћe takб forma poиъvania zabraтuje skutoиnйmu poиъvaniu. Vy nepoиъvate len to, иo hovorн rozprбvajъci, ale tieћ poиъvate vlastnй reakcie. Koniec koncov, rozprбvajъci sa chovб ako zrkadlo, do ktorйho sa pozerбte, a иo vidнte, nepotrebuje ћiadnu interpretбciu, jednoducho pozorujete. Takћe naљa prvб spoloиnб otбzka je, иo to znamenб poиъvaќ, pozorovaќ. Иi je vфbec moћnй pozorovaќ v skutoиnosti to, иo je, bez nejakej interpretбcie, bez akйhokoѕvek zaraпovania, dбvaќ to do urиitйho љuplнka, do istej kategуrie, len pozorovaќ. A to bude dosќ ќaћkй, pretoћe pre vдиљinu z nбs pozorovanie znamnenб interpretбciu, tlmoиiќ si to, иo vidнte podѕa toho, иo uћ viete, a preto sa pozerбte na to, иo vidнte s vedomнm minulosti. Preto sa v skutoиnosti vlastne vфbec nepozerбte. |
| 7:35 | And I think this is very important to understand, because to bring about a radical transformation in 'what is', you have to observe it, not translate it in terms of your particular tendency, idiosyncrasy or temperament, or what you like or dislike, which prevents the actual observation. In the same way, to listen to what is being said completely. If you listen completely, then you will find out for yourself what is truth and what is falsehood in what is being said, but if you listen according to a particular pattern of your thought, according to your like and dislike, any form of distortion prevents actual listening. This is an obvious fact. | A myslнm, ћe to je veѕmi dфleћitй pochopiќ, pretoћe aby ste radikбlne zmenili nieиo "иo je", tak to najprv musite pozorovaќ, nie prekladaќ si to podѕa toho, ako sa nбm chce, podѕa vэstrednosti alebo povahe, alebo, иi sa vбm to pбиi, иi nepбиi, иo zabraтuje skutoиnйmu vnнmaniu. Rovnakэm spфsobom poriadne poиъvaќ tomu, иo druhэ hovorн. Ak poriadne poиъvate, potom sami prнdete na to, иo je pravda, a иo je loћ v tom, иo sa hovorн, ale ak poиъvate podѕa nejakйho vzoru svojej mysle, podѕa toho, иo sa vбm pбиi a nepбиi, akбkoѕvek forma skreslenia brбni skutoиnйmu naиъvaniu. To je oиividnэ fak. |
| 9:30 | So, this is not an entertainment in the sense that you either accept or reject what is being said, neither comparing what is being said with what you have read or what you have experienced or what you know, which prevents the actual listening. And if you want to be entertained in the sense to follow a particular philosophy, or investigate together into a particular theory, a concept, all such forms, I feel, are a kind of entertainment because they prevent the actual observation of yourself. If that is fairly clear, that this is not an entertainment, but together we are going to investigate into our human problems, their complexity, and if it is possible to resolve them totally. | Takћe, toto nie je zбbava, v zmysle ћe buп prijнmate alebo odmietate to, иobolo povedanй, ani neporovnбvate to иo bolo povedanй s tэm, иo bolo napнsanй, alebo s tэm, иo ste zaћili, alebo иo viete, иo zabraтuje skutoиnйmu poиъvaniu. A ak sa chcete zabбvaќ, v zmysle nasledovaќ urиitъ filozofiu, alebo skъmaќ spoloиne konkrйtnu teуriu, nejakэ koncept, cнtim, ћe vљetky takйto formy sъ druhom zбbavy, pretoћe zabraтujъ skutoиnйmu pozorovaniu seba. Keп je to dosќ jasnй, ћe to nie je zбbava, spolu budeme skъmaќ ѕudskй problйmy, ich zloћitosti, a ak je to moћnй, ъplne ich vyrieљime. |
| 11:42 | As one observes, right round the world, there is utter chaos. Something has happened to humanity, to the human being. There are these problems of overpopulation, pollution, the tremendous economic imbalance, social injustice, and so on and on and on, the utter chaos in the political field. So seeing all that, the chaos, the suffering, the extraordinary sense of brutality and violence in the world, in observing that, it becomes absolutely necessary that one be a light to oneself, not depending on anybody, psychologically. One has to be totally a light to oneself in this world of chaos, which we, all together, have created it. I mean, by being a light to oneself, not depending on some philosophy, on a guru, on some external authority, or the latest psychologist, but to understand totally ourselves, and therefore our relationship with each other and with the world. And I think that too is fairly obvious, considering that everything around us has failed: the churches, the temples, the gurus with their absurdities, the various disciplines, the little groups and sects separating themselves in search of truth – all those things have utterly, totally failed. And therefore seeing all that, being aware of it – not something outside, over there, but as a thing very close to us, in which we are totally committed, which is part of us, which is us, me, you – unless one becomes a light to oneself, we will only further bring about misery and confusion. | Keп иlovek pozoruje svet, kol dokola, vlбdne tam totбlny chaos. јudstvu sa nieиo stalo, ѕudskej bytosti. Sъ tu problйmy preѕudnenia, zneиistenia, obrovskб ekonomickб nerovnovбha, sociбlna nespravodlivosќ, a tak пalej a tak пalej, totбlny chaos v politickej oblasti. Vidiac toto vљetko, chaos, utrpenie, neskutoиnъ brutбlnosќ a nбsilie vo svete, pozorujъc to, zaинna byќ nevyhnutnй aby bol иlovek svetlom sebe samйmu, aby nebol psychologicky na nikom zбvislэ! Иlovek musн byќ absoltъtnym svetlom sebe samйmu, v tomto svete chaosu, ktorэ sme si my, vљetci spoloиne, vytvorili. Myslнm tэm...byќ svetlom sebe samйmu, nebyќ zбvislэ na nejakej filozofii, na guruovi, na nejakej vonkajљej autorite, alebo najmodernejљom psycholуgovi, ale chбpaќ seba samйho, a tэm aj naљim vzќahom medzi sebou a so svetom. A myslнm si, ћe je je celkom jasnй aj to, ћe vљetko okolo nбs zlyhalo: kostoly, chrбmy guruovia so svojimi absurditami, rфznymi nasledovnнkmi, malй skupiny a sekty, ktorб sa separujъ pri hѕadanн pravdy... vљetky tieto veci ъplne, totбlne zlyhali. A preto, vidiac toto vљetko, uvedomujъc si to - nie nieиo tam vonku, ale ako vec, veѕmi blнzko nбs, v ktorej sme ъpne vљetci sъиasќou, иo je иasќou nбs, иo je my, ja, ty- pokiaѕ sa иlovek nestane svetlom sebe samйmu, budeme len naпalej prinбљaќ biedu a zmдtok. |
| 16:06 | So that is what we are going to discuss, talk over together these four morning meetings, so that we act, behave, in the light of our own understanding, not according to some analyst, guru, philosopher, professor, even according to the speaker, especially. | Takћe toto si ideme prebraќ. Preberieme si spoloиne na tэchto љtyroch rannэch stretnutiach, ћe to ako konбme, ako sa sprбvame vo svetle nбљho vlastnйho chбpania - nie je podѕa niektorэch analytikov, gurua, filozofa, profesora, dokoca ani podѕa reиnнka, to uћ vфbec nie. |
| 17:02 | And to find out how to be a light to oneself is an immense problem, because we have depended on external authority, as you can observe: all the books that are written, the growing assembly of analysts, the latest psychologists who maintain that you are bound to be conditioned, whatever you do, that you can never be free. And these things are being constantly repeated, maintained, asserted, and you depend on all that, not knowing what is true, what is false. And not knowing, enquiring, hoping to find the right answer and always looking outwardly: to some leader, to some special authority, whether it is the oriental or the occidental authority. And so it becomes extraordinarily difficult to put aside all that and to find out for oneself what is truth in the midst of this chaos. And if you are willing – and apparently you must be willing because you are all here, to go into this problem very seriously, right to the very end of it, not just listen for ten minutes or for an hour, agreeing or disagreeing, which is irrational – when you are really trying to understand you cannot possibly agree or disagree with 'what is'. | Zistiќ, ako byќ svetlom sebe samйmu je obrovskэ problйm, pretoћe zбvisнme na vonkajљej autorite. Ako mфћete pozorovaќ: vљetky knihy, ktorй sъ napнsanй, rastъci poиet analytikov, modernн psycholуgovia ktorн tvrdia, ћe sme predurиenн na podmienenie, nech robнme, иo robнme, ћe sa nikdy nemфћeme byќ slobodnн. A tieto veci sa neustбle opakujъ, udrћiavajъ, uplatтujъ, a vy ste na tom vљetkom zбvislн, neviete иo je pravda, иo je loћ. A tak nevediac, pэtate sa, dъfate, ћe nбjdete sprбvnu odpoveп, a vћdy to hѕadбte navonok: u nejakйho lнdra, u nejakej љpeciбlnej autority, иi sa uћ jednб o orientбlnu alebo zбpadnъ autoritu. A tak to zaинna byќ nesmierne ќaћkй daќ to vљetko bokom a sбm prнsќ na to, иo je pravda uprostred tohto chaosu. A ak ste ochotnн - a oиividne vљetci ste, lebo ste tu, pustiќ sa do tohto problйmu naozaj vбћne, ъplne aћ do samйho konca, nie len poиъvaќ 10 minъt alebo hodinu, sъhlasiќ, nesъhlasiќ, иo je neracionбlne. Keп sa naozaj pokъљate porozumieќ, nemфћete teoreticky sъhlasiќ alebo nesъhlasiќ s tэm "иo je". |
| 20:13 | As we are willing to share together, then we can investigate actually what is going on, not only outwardly but inwardly. The outer is the response of the inner, it is one movement. There is no outer separated from the inner, it is one movement, like the tide that goes out and comes in. Please do listen to all this with some care, because we are concerned with your life, not with the life of the speaker, with your life, and we are trying to understand together that life, in which there is this interrelationship between the outer and the inner, between human beings. | Pretoћe sme ochotnн to spolu zdieѕaќ, mфћeme skъmaќ иo sa deje naozaj. Nie navonok, ale vo vnъtri. To vonkajљie je odpoveп na to vnъtornй - je to jeden pohyb. Neexistuje vokajљie oddelenй od vnъtornйho, je to jeden pohyb, ta ako prнliv ktorэ prichбdza a odchбdza. Prosнm, poиъvajte toto veѕmi pozorne, pretoћe sa obбvam o vбљ ћivot, nie o svoj, o vбљ ћivot, a spolu sa pokъsime porozumieќ tomuto ћivotu, kde sъvisн vonkajљie s vnъtornэm medzi ѕudskэmi bytosќami. |
| 21:45 | So how do we look at these problems? How do we look with clarity so that there is instant perception? Because we have no time. You know what I mean by time? There is time by the watch, time as yesterday, today and tomorrow, but psychologically, from which all real action takes place, is there time? Please, let's go together into this. We have to act. Action means always in the present, not in some distant future or tomorrow, action means now. And seeing what the world is, action is immensely important now, not tomorrow. So, to act instantly is to see actually 'what is'. You know, when you see some danger, some physical danger, you act instantly, the seeing and acting are not two separate things. There is no interval between seeing and acting when there is danger there is instant action. Psychologically, inwardly, there is a gap between the seeing, the understanding, and acting. Isn't that so? I do not know if you have not noticed it, the interval between psychological perception and the action that takes place from that perception. There is a wide gap, and in that wide gap lies all our conflict. Are you following what we are talking about? I see, for example, that there must be no fear, and I argue, discuss, think about it, and action follows much later. Whereas to see instantly is to act. So, what is it that prevents this action taking place? Not only outwardly – pollution, overpopulation, wars, the appalling things that are going on in the world, which we seem to accept so easily, so casually. And action on the part of each one of us to change not only the outward environment, the destruction of nature, the pollution of every river, sea, lakes, and all the rest, and the pollution that is going on in ourselves. And to see that inward pollution and to end it instantly, that is our problem. And therefore in that observation and action there is no time. Am I making myself clear? Am I? | Takћe ako sa pozerбme na tieto problйmy? Ako sa pozerбme s jasnosќou tak aby tam bolo neustбle vnнmanie? Pretoћ nemбme ћiadny иas. Viete, иo myslнm tэm иasom? Existuje иas podѕa hodнn, иas ako vиerajљok, dneљok a zajtrajљok, ale psychologicky, z иoho vљetky иiny vznikajъ, je v tom иas? Prosнm, pozrime sa na to spolu. Musнm konaќ. Aktivita znamenб ћe konбm vћdy v prнtomnosti, nie v nejakej vzdialenej budъcosti alebo zajtra. Aktivita znamenб - teraz! A vidiac akэ svet je, иinnosќ je dфleћitб teraz, nie zajtra. Takћe, konaќ okamћite v skutoиnosti znamenб vidieќ to "иo je." Viete, keп vidнte nejakй nebezpeиenstvo, nejakй fyzickй nebezpeиenstvo, konбte okamћite. Videnie a konanie nie sъ dve oddelenй veci. Neexistuje interval medzi videnнm a konanнm tam kde je nebezpeиenstvo. Je tam okamћitб reakcia. Psychologicky, vnъtorne, existuje medzera medzi videnнm, chбpanнm, a konanнm. Nie je to tak? Neviem, иi ste si nevљimli interval medzi psychologickэm vnнmanнm a reakciou ktorб sa deje z tohto vnнmania. Je tam љirokб medzera, a v tej љirokej medzere leћн celэ nбљ konflikt. Sledujete o иom hovorнme? Naprнklad! Vidнm ћe tam nemб byќ strach, a hбdam sa, diskutujem, rozmэљѕam o tom, a reakcia nasleduje oveѕa neskфr. Zatiaѕиo vidieќ okamћite, znamenб konaќ. Takћe, иo zabraтuje tomu aby nastala reakcia? Nielen navonok - zneиisќovanie, preѕudnenie, vojny, tie otrasnй veci иo sa dejъ vo svete, ktorй, zdб sa, tak ѕahko akceptujeme, tak nedbalo. A je na kaћdom z nбs zmeniќ nielen vonkajљie prostredie, deљtrukciu prнrody, zneиisќovanie kaћdej rieky, mora, jazera, a vљetkйho ostatnйho, ale aj zneиistenie, иo sa deje v nбs. A vidieќ to vnъtornй zneиistenie a okamћite ho ukonиiќ, to je nбљ problйm. A preto v tom pozorovanн a иinnosti, nie je иas. Som zrozumiteѕnэ? Som? |
| 27:34 | Questioner: Yes. | Pэtajъci sa: Бno! |
| 27:35 | K: Wait sir, we'll see. You see, we are so accustomed to the idea of gradualness, evolution, psychologically. Outwardly there is evolution, the child grows to a man, and all the rest, outwardly there must be gradual growth, but is there such a thing inwardly? I don't think so. And we are accustomed to accept the gradual process of evolution, psychologically. that is a form of laziness, indolence. We don't want to have enough energy, vitality to look, and we waste this vital energy not in observation but being entertained by some philosopher, some guru, some psychologist, analyst – you know, all that is happening around the world – the leader. And when you follow somebody, it doesn't matter who it is, you are destroying, because you are preventing yourself from being a light to yourself. So, time becomes of the utmost importance, the understanding of it. | K: Poиkajte pane, uvidнme. Vidнte, sme zvyknutн na myљlienku postupnosti, vэvoja, psychologicky. Navonok existuje vэvin. Dieќa vyrastie v muћa, a to vљetko, navonok, musн byќ postupnэ rast. Ale deje sa takб vec aj vo vnъtri? Nemyslнm si. Sme zvyknutн akceptovaќ postupnэ proces evolъcie, psychologicky. Je to z lenivosti, z ѕahostajnosti. Nechceme maќ kopec energie, vitalitu aby sme to videli. My mrhбme touto ћivotnou energiou nie tэm, ћe to pozorujeme, ale tэm, ћe sa nechбme zabбvaќ nejakэm filozofom, nejakэm guruom, nejakэm psycholуgom, anylэzou - viete, toto vљetko sa na svete deje. - Vodca. A keп niekoho nasledujete, nezбleћн na tom koho, niинte sa, pretoћe zabraтujete staќ sa svetlom sebe samйmu. Takћe иas, sa stбva tэm najpodstatnejљнm, pozoruzumenнm tohto. |
| 30:07 | We see that there must be a radical change in the human being, fundamental, complete transformation in the human behaviour, in the human thinking, in the human conduct. Can that conduct, behaviour, take place instantly? Because we have no time. You understand my question? Because the moment we say it will happen, we will gradually change, then you are allowing time, which brings about other factors, other strains, other experiences, which prevent the actual action taking place. Look, as human beings we are conditioned, that is a fact, as Christians, as communists, as what you will, we are conditioned, we are shaped by the environment, shaped by the culture, by all that we read and see and feel outwardly. And is it possible to change this conditioning and not be caught in another form of conditioning? This conditioning that has created such havoc in the world, is it possible to totally shed the conditioning of prejudice, our own particular vanity, our particular little temperament, idiosyncrasy, the conclusions that you have, which all act as conditioning, can those be immediately wiped away? If it is not possible then you will slip from one conditioning to another. And therefore the latest psychologists say man can never be free, he must go beyond his freedom and his dignity and be better conditioned, which means division between man and man, and further destruction of man and man. | Vidнme, ћe v ѕudskej bytosti musн nastaќ radikбlna zmena. Fundamentбlna, kompletnб zmena v ѕudskom sprбvanн, v ѕudskom myslenн, v ѕudskom chovanн. Mфћe to sprбvanie, chovanie, nastaќ okamћite? Pretoћe nemбme иas. Rozumiete mojej otбzke? Pretoћe v tom momente, keп poviete, ћe sa to stane, ћe to postupne zmenнme, potom uznбvate иas, иo prinбљa inй faktory, inй energiu, inй skъsenosti, иo zbraтuje aktuбlnej situбcii. Pozrite sa! Ako ѕudskй bytosti sme podmienenй. To je fakt! Ako kresќania, komunisti, ako to, иo bude. Sme podmienenн, sme formovanн okolнm, formovanн kultъrou, tэm vљetkэm иo инtame a vidнme a cнtime navonok. A je moћnй zmeniќ toto podmienenie a nebiќ lapenэ v inej forme podmienenia? Toto podmienenie, ktorй spфsobilo toѕko chaosu vo svete, je moћnй sa ho zbaviќ ъplne? Podmienenie predsudkov, naљe vlastnй konkrйtne mбrnosti, naљa konkrйtna malб povaha, vэstrednosќ, zбvery, ktorй robнte, to vљetko sa deje ako podmienenie. Dб sa to vљetko okamћite zmazaќ? Ak to nie je moћnй, tak potom skеznete s jednйho podmienenia k druhйmu. A preto modernн psycholуgovia hovoria ћe иlovek nikdy nemфћe byќ slobodnэ, ћe musн нsќ za rбmec svojej slobody a svojej dфstojnosti a byќ eљte podmienenejљн, иo znamenб rozdelenie medzi иlovekom a иlovekom, a пalљia deљtrukcia иloveka - иlovekom. |
| 34:13 | So we have this problem, that your mind, living in a particular culture, in the recent culture, where freedom has lost its meaning, where there is disorder, racial hatreds, wars, competition, the appalling violence, the division between Christianity and Hinduism, Muslim, all the religious divisions, political divisions, national divisions. These divisions exist not only outwardly but in us, as the me and the you, we and they, the guru who says he knows and the disciple says, 'I don't know', the one who says, 'I am enlightened and you, poor blighter, you are in darkness. I will teach you'. This division is one form of conditioning, you the American, the Indian, you know what is happening, for God's sake. So that is our conditioning, and being so conditioned, our behaviour becomes extraordinarily superficial, based on pleasure. I do not know if you have not noticed, power, money, sex are the most important things in this world. | Takћe tu mбme tento problйm, ktorэ vaљa myseѕ ћijъca v urиitej kultъre, v modernej kultъre, kde sloboda stratila svoj vэznam, kde je chaos, kde je rasovб nenбvisќ, vojny, sъќaћenie, desivй nбsilie, rozdelenie medzi kresќanstvom a hinduizmom, islamom, vљetky tie nбboћenskй rozdiely, politickй rozdiely, nбrodnostnй rozdiely. Takйto rozdeѕovanie neexistuje len navonok, ale aj v nбs, na ja a ty, my a oni, guru ktorэ hovorн "ja viem", a jeho uиeт ktorэ hovorн "ja neviem", ten иo hovorн: "Som osvietenэ, a ty si ъbohэ chudбk. Si v temnote. Ja ќa budem uиiќ!" Rozdelenie je istб forma podmienenia, ty Ameriиan, Indiбn. Veп viete иo sa deje, preboha! Takћe, je tu naљe podmienenie, a byќ takto podmienenэ, naљe sprбvanie sa stбva neobyиajne povrchnэm, je zaloћenй na poteљenн. Neviem иi ste si to nevљimli - moc, peniaze, sex. To sъ najdфleћitejљie veci na svete. |
| 36:53 | Though you may pretend to worship God and go to church, and follow some beastly little guru or whatever he is, that is the main urge, and as long as one is conditioned in that pattern you cannot possibly bring about right relationship between man and man, live peacefully, live with an extraordinary sense of joy and clarity. So that is our first problem. Seeing that, that we are so dreadfully conditioned, we say we must have time to chip away little by little all the conditioning. Is that the way? Or is there a totally different way? You understand the question? | Hoci mфћete predstieraќ zboћтovanie boha a chodenia do kostola, a sledovaќ nejakйho brutбlne malйho guru alebo иo to je, je tu tб zбkladnб potreba, a pokiaѕ bude иlovek takto podmienenэ, nemфћe vznikъќ vzќah medzi иlovekom a иlovekom, ћiќ v mieri, ћiќ s mimoriadnym pocitom radosti a jasnosti. Takћe toto je nбљ prvэ problйm. Vidiac, ћe sme tak hrozne podmienenн, hovorнme, ћe postupne sa musнme zbavovaќ podmienenia. Je to tak? Alebo existuje ъplne inэ spфsob? Rozumiete otбzke? |
| 38:18 |
Q: Yes. K: Good. That is, if I am conditioned as a Hindu and you conditioned as a Christian, communist, different cultures and so on, being conditioned, there is division between you and me, although we may pretend to be brotherly and talk about unity and all that nonsense ideologically, sounds beautiful on paper and in words, but actually there is division between you and me, because I am conditioned by a culture, by a society, economically, socially, religiously, politically, as you are. I am aware of this conditioning and I neither accept it nor reject it, because if I accept it there is no problem, I live in that particular groove and go on for the rest of my life, fighting, quarrelling and all the rest, and die. If I want to understand it then I must look at it. And am I capable of looking at it? Do I really want to look and break through this conditioning, knowing this division between man and man, not only outwardly but deeply inwardly, is creating such misery not only for you but also for me. And is it possible for me to break down this wall of separation? Not gradually because there is no gradualness. When you are suffering you don't say, I will gradually get rid of this suffering, when you have violent pain physically you don't talk about gradualness, you want to act, and you do act, when there is tremendous pain you go to the doctor, you do various kinds of sane and insane things. |
P: Бno. K: Dobre! To znamenб, som podmienenэ ako hinduista, a ty si podmienenэ ako kresќan, komunista, inб kultъra atп. Byќ podmienenэ znamenб rozdelenie medzi mnou a tebou, hoci mфћeme predstieraќ bratstvo. A hovoriќ o jednote, a celom tom ideologickom nezmysle znie krбsne na papieri a v slovбch, ale v kutoиnosti medzi nami existuje rozdelenie, pretoћe ja som podmienenэ kultъrou, spoloиnosќou, ekonomicky, sociбlne, nбboћensky, politicky, tak to je. Ja si toto podmienenie uvedomujem, a ani ho neakceptujem, ani ho neodmietam, pretoћe ak ho akceptujem, problйm neexistuje. Ћijem v urиitej bubline, a tak pokraиujem celэ mфj ћivot. Bojujem, hбdam sa a vљetko to ostanй, a zomriem. Ak tomu chcem porozumieќ, potom sa na to musнm pozrieќ. Ale som schopnэ sa na to pozrieќ? Naozaj sa chcem na to pozrieќ a prelomiќ to podmienenie, vediac, ћe toto rozdelenie medzi иlovekom a иlovekom, nie len navonok, ale aj hlboko vo vnъtri, spфsobuje neљќastie nielen tebe, ale aj mne? A je moћnй, aby som prelomil tъto stenu separбcie? Nie postupne, pretoћe v tom nie je ћiadna postupnosќ. Keп trpнte, nehovorнte "Postupne sa zbavнm tohto utrpenia," ak mбte nбsilnъ fyzickъ bolesќ tak nehovorнte o postupnosti. Chcete konaќ, a konбte. Keп vбs nieиo veѕmi bolн, idete k doktorovi. Robнte mnoho normбlnych a nezmyselnэch vecн... |
| 41:44 | So, is it possible for my mind and so your mind, you know, your mind is not different from the mind of the Hindu, he has his problems, poverty, overpopulation, pollution, lack of food. Here you have abundance but also you have poverty, you are unhappy, suffering, which you very carefully avoid looking at. He has death and you also have death, but you never think about it, you want to postpone it. So your mind is my mind, your sorrow is my sorrow. There is no division in sorrow, there is no division in love. And realising that I am conditioned, can the mind break through this conditioning – and so behave? And you do behave when there is no division. So, I am asking myself as well as you are asking yourself, I hope, whether you can un-condition yourself totally, in spite of all the psychologists, theorists, you know, all the gang that exists round you to tell you that you cannot or you can. | Takћe, je moћnй, aby moja myseѕ a takisto vaљa myseѕ, veп viete, vaљa myseѕ sa nelнљi od hinduistovej, on mб svoje problйmy, moc, preѕudnenie, zneиistenie, nedostatok jedla. Tu mбte hojnosќ, ale tieћ tu mбte aj chudobu. Ste neљќastnн, trpнte, a snaћнte sa na to nepozeraќ. On mб smrќ, aj vy mбte smrќ, ale nikdy na тu nemyslнte. Chcete ju odloћiќ. Takћe vaљa myseѕ je moja myseѕ, vбљ smъtok je mфj smъtok. V smъtku nie je rozdiel, ani v lбske. A uvedomujъc si, ћe som podmienenэ, mфћe moja myseѕ zruљiќ toto podmienenie a sprбvaќ sa podѕa toho? Vy sa naozaj sprбvate sluљne keп tam nie je rozdelenie! Takћe, ja sa pэtam sбm seba, tak ako vy sa pэtate sami seba. Dъfam, иi sa mфћete ъplne zbaviќ tohto podmienenia, napriek tomu, ћe vљetci psychlуgovia, teoretici, veп viete, celэ ten gang ktorэ existuje okolo toho, vбm hovorн, иi mфћete alebo nemфћete. |
| 44:13 | So my concern, your concern is, seeing that this division between man and man, between you and me exists, and that division exists because of our various cultures, religions, political, economic environment, can I and you break it down? And in the very act of breaking is righteous behaviour. What prevents right behaviour, right conduct, order, is this division in myself and in yourself, and therefore division between you and me. | Takћe moja vec, vaљa vec je vidieќ, ћe toto rozdelenie medzi иlovekom a иlovekom, medzi mnou a vami existuje, a to rozdelenie existuje kvфli naљim rozliиnэm kultъram, nбboћenstvu, politike, ekonomickйmu prostrediu. Vieme to zruљiќ? Priamo v tom akte zruљenia je sprбvne sprбvanie. Иo zabraтuje sprбvnemu sprбvaniu, sprбvnnemu chovaniu, poriadku, je rozdelenie vo mne a v tebe, a preto rozdelenie medzi tebou a mnou. |
| 45:22 | The speaker says that this conditioning can be dissolved instantly. You may say, well, poor chap, he is mistaken, he is in some kind of illusion, a wish-fulfilment, caught up in his own mystical absurdities, irrational, because he likes to believe that he can, you know, all the intellectual arguments that one puts forward when you are confronted with something totally new. It is possible if you deny time. Which is, that you cannot understand this conditioning if in any form you have the element of time entering into it. If you say, well, not today, I will do it tomorrow. | Rozprбvajъci hovorн, ћe toto podmienenie sa dб zruљiќ okamћite. Mфћete povedaќ: Dobre, chudбk, mэli sa. Ћije v nejakej ilъzii, v ћelanн - hѕadб naplnenie, je lapenэ v jeho vlastnэch mystickэch absurditбch, iracionбlnych, pretoћe sa mu pбиi veriќ ћe to dokбћe... viete, vљetky tie intelektuбlne argumenty ktorй niekto vznбљa keп ste konfrontovanэ nieинm novэm... Dб sa to, ak popriete иas! Иo znamenб, ћe nemфћete rozumieќ tomuto podmieneniu ak sa vбm tam v hocijakej forme dostane element иasu. Ak poviete: Dobre, nie dnes, urobнm to zajtra. |
| 47:02 | What will happen if I do un-condition myself? I may lose my job, my position, my prestige – so there is that, and: how do you know that it can be done when all the experts in the world say that you must take time? This thing can't be done. Now, if you are willing to listen, listen in the sense not accept, which is too ridiculous, or deny, which is equally absurd, but to actually find out, and to find out you must give your heart to it, not your mind only, you must give your mind and your heart completely to find out. That means you must be attentive, you must be immensely aware. |
Иo sa stane ak sa vymanнm z podmienenia?
Mфћno stratнm prбcu, pozнciu, prestнћ,
- takћe to je to.
A: Ako viete, ћe sa to dб, keп vљetci experti na svete hovoria, ћe na vљetko treba иas? K: Dб sa to! Teraz, ak ste ochotnн poиъvaќ, poиъvajte tak, aby ste neakcepto- vali - иo je prнliљ smieљne - alebo popierali, иo je rovnako absurdnй, ale aby ste to naozaj zistili. A aby ste na to priљli, musнte daќ do toho celй svoje srdce, nie len svoju myseѕ. Musнte daќ do toho kompletne svoju myseѕ a srdce, aby ste na to priљli. To znamenб, ћe musнte byќ pozornн, ћe si musнte plne uvedomovaќ. |
| 48:29 | Now listen to me: be aware. You don't know what it means, and so you say, well, I must learn to be aware. That means time. I must learn from somebody who is aware and he will tell me how to be aware. So you are caught in time. Can you put away from your mind, now, sitting here, the idea that you have to learn to be aware? You know, it is like those people who go to some school or some enclave, some group, where they are going to learn to be sensitive. Learn to be sensitive, you understand what it means? Which means you are never going to be sensitive. And the man who is going to teach you how to be sensitive is insensitive. No, don't laugh, this is what you are doing, for God's sake. Because you have reduced everything to outward phenomena, that you can learn from somebody how to be sensitive, how to look, how to be aware, how to love, how to be kind, how to stop wars, always swimming on the surface, and that is what is happening in this country. If you look at the television, you will see what they are doing to you. If you go to a church, see what they are doing to you, politically, religiously, economically, live on the surface. And when you do look inside, look according to somebody, some analyst, some philosopher, some guru. So you never look, you are looking according to somebody. So, to find out for yourself whether you are conditioned, which obviously you are, and whether you can break down that conditioning instantly. And you can do it only if you know how to look. So looking becomes important, not the conditioning, but the manner of your looking. Are you looking from a centre, which is the self, or are you looking without that centre, without the me? You understand my question? Right? | Teraz ma poиъvajte: Uvedomovaќ si! Vy neviete, иo to znamenб, a tak hovorнte, dobre, musнm sa nauиiќ uvedomovaќ si. To znamenб иas. Musнm sa nauиiќ od niekoho, kto si uvedomuje, a on mi povie, ako byќ vedomэ. Takћe ste lapenэ v иase. Vy teraz vypustite z vaљej mysle, teraz, sediac tu, myљlienku, ћe sa musнte uиiќ ako byќ vedomн! Viete, je to ako tн ѕudia ktorн chodia do nejakej љkoly, alebo do nejakej enklбvy, nejakej skupiny, kde sa uиia byќ vnнmavн. Uиiќ sa byќ vnнmavн... Rozumiete, иo to znamenб? Иo znamenб, ћe nikdy nebudete vnнmavн. A иlovek, ktorэ vбs bude uиiќ ako byќ vnнmavн je nevnнmavэ. Nie, nesmejte sa! Toto predsa robнte, preboha! Pretoћe ste vљetko zredukovali na vonkajљн ъkaz, ћe sa viete od niekoho nauиiќ ako byќ vnнmavэ, ako sa pozeraќ, ako si uvedomovaќ, ako milovaќ, ako byќ milэ, ako zastaviќ vojny. Vћdy plбvajъci na povrchu... to je to, иo sa deje v tejto krajine_! Ak sa pozriete na televнziu, uvidнte иo s vami robia! Ak pфjdete do kostola, pozrite sa, иo s vami robia! Politicky, nбboћensky, ekonomicky. Aby ste ћili na povrchu. A ak sa pozerбte dovnъtra, ak sa pozriete podѕa niekoho, podѕa nejakйho analytika, nejakйho filozofa, nejakйho guru, nikdy sa nepozerбte. Pozerбte sa podѕa niekoho. Tak, prнпte sami na to, иi ste podmienenн, иo oиividne ste, a иi to podmienenie viete okamћite zruљiќ. A to mфћete spraviќ len vtedy, ak viete ako sa pozeraќ. Takћe nбhѕad je dфleћitэ, nie podmienenie, ale spфsob akэm sa pozerбte. Pozerбte sa z centra, ktorэm je JA, alebo sa pozerбte bez tohto centra, bez JA? Rozumiete mojej otбzke ћe? |
| 52:52 |
Q: No. K: No, right. It is so simple. Look, I am looking at myself, conditioned as somebody, as something, and I am looking at it from a selfish point, from a centre which says, I will change that and I won't change that, because that gives me a great deal of pleasure, great deal of amusement, great deal of excitement, I won't change that but I will change that. So you are looking at your conditioning from a point which is based on pleasure and pain, reward and punishment. Right? Is that simple? So that centre is the 'me', is my ego, is my personality, and therefore I can never look completely and totally at my conditioning if there is this me who is looking. Is that simple? That is clear, isn't it? Me that wants to be dominating, me that is seeking power, position, prestige, me that is competitive, angry, jealous, furious, the me. And when there is that me, and through the screen of that me there is a looking, then you cannot possibly end that conditioning. |
P: Nie. K: Nie? V poriadku. Je to takй jednoduchй. Pozrite, pozerбm sa na seba, podmienenэ ako niekto, ako nieиo, a pozerбm sa na to zo sebeckйho hѕadiska, z centra, ktorй hovorн: Zmenнm tamto, nezmenнm hento, pretoћe mi to dбva nesmierny pocit poteљenia, nesmiernu zбbavu, kopec vzruљenia. Nezmenнm toto, ale zmenнm hento! Takћe pozerбte sa na svoje podmienenie z bodu, ktorэ je zaloћenэ na radosti a bolesti, odmene a treste. Ћe? Je to takй jednoduchй? Takћe to centrum som JA, je to moje ego, moja osobnosќ, a preto sa nikdy neviem pozrieќ kompletne a ъplne na svoje podmienenie pokiaѕ tam je moje Ja, ktorй sa pozerб. Je to takй jednoduchй? Je to jasnй, nie? JA, ktorй chce dominovaќ. JA, ktorй chce moc, pozнciu, prestнћ, JA, ktorй je sъќaћivй, zlostnй, ћiarlivй, zъrivй, to JA. A kde je toto JA, a skrz obraz tohto JA je pozeranie, tam neviete ukoиiќ toto podmienenie. |
| 55:20 | So the question then is: can there be a freedom from the me? You are following all this? Are you sufficiently interested in this question? I wonder. Do you know how serious it is, how serious it is to enquire into this question? It means you have to give your life to it, not just this morning for a few minutes, you have to give your whole life to it. That means you have to give your whole life to find out a way of living differently. And people do, therefore they say, I will retire from the world, go into a monastery – listen to all the arguments – go into a monastery, and at least I am alone, I can go into this, get rid of myself, call myself a different name or give myself a number. Or go to the East, join a monastery or follow some guru who will help me to get rid of the me, or identify myself, the me, with something greater, God, or greater nationality, or greater activity, greater ideology – you follow? – always moving away from reality, in which you have been so beautifully trained. | Takћe otбzka je: Dб sa oslobodiќ od JA? Sledujete to vљetko? Zaujнma vбs dosќ tбto otбzka? Pochybujem! Viete, akй je to dфleћitй, akй je dфleћitй zaoberaќ sa toutu otбzkou? Znamenб to, ћe tomu musнte zasvдtiќ celэ svoj ћivot, nie len dnes rбno, na pбr minъt, musнte tomu zasvдtiќ celэ ћivot. To znamenб, ћe musнte tomu obetovaќ celэ svoj ћivot, aby ste naљli spфsob ako ћiќ inak. A ѕudia to aj robia, preto hovoria: Utiahnem sa zo sveta, pфjdem do klбљtora - poиъvajte vљetky tie argumenty - Pфjdem do klбљtora a aspoт ja sбm, to mфћem urobiќ, zbaviќ sa seba, daќ si inй meno, alebo инslo. Alebo нsќ na vэchod, vstъpiќ do klбљtora, alebo nasledovaќ nejakйho guru, ktorэ mi pomфћe zbaviќ sa seba, alebo identifikovaќ sa, to JA, nieиo vэznamnejљie, Boha, alebo ъћasnejљiu nбrodnosќ, ъћasnejљiu иinnosќ, ideolуgiu, - sledujete? - Vћdy sa to pohybuje preи od reality, v иom ste boli tak prefektne vytrйnovanн... |
| 57:37 | So to find out whether you can live without the me, which is the cause of separation, which is the cause of conditioning, because where there is conditioning there must be separation, and therefore the conflict and therefore all the mischief in the world. So is it possible, living in this world and not in a monastery, not in a small little community or commune, living here, daily, meeting all the problems without the me, without that centre? And what is this centre which has become so extraordinarily important in our lives? Have you ever gone into this? Not according to some analyst, for God's sake leave those people alone. If you do, you are not looking at yourself, but looking at yourself according to the philosopher, according to the analyst, according to somebody else, and that is what you have been doing. So there is nothing original. To look at yourself without the eyes of another, but with your own eyes. Now, this me is the past. Right? The past being all the accumulated knowledge, images, myths, hopes, fears, despair, longing, the me. And that me separates itself from other parts of me. There is the conscious me and the unconscious me. Is it becoming difficult? Am I making the thing too difficult? May I go on? The me has divided itself, the me that is good, the me that is bad, the me that wants to do something, the me that says, oh, you shouldn't do that. The me that pursues violence and the me that says, I must live peacefully. Haven't you noticed all this in yourself? So there is the me, conscious, and the me that is hidden. The me having divided itself as the observer, and the me that is observing. Right? Right, I see. So there is this me. Can I look at it, can the mind look at it without separation. You understand? No. Right. Let me explain. There is this me. You accept that, don't you? The me that says, I am a Christian, the me that says, I want to be the boss of something, the me that is frightened, the me that says, I must have more knowledge, you know, the me: my house, my property, my money, my God, my country, my politics, you know, the me, not only superficially but the me deep down, unconscious, hidden, with all the secret motives, all the inherited racial instincts, all that is the me. That me has divided itself into the higher, more intelligent, and the less intelligent me. Are you following all this? Are we travelling together? Audience: Yes. |
Takћe, aby sme zistili,
иi vieme ћќ bez JA,
ktorй je prниninou oddeѕovania,
иo je prниinou podmienenia,
pretoћe tam, kde je podmienenie je aj separбcia,
a preto konflikt,
a tak aj vљetko zlй na svete.
Takћe, je moћnй
ћiќ vo svete a nie v klбљtore,
nie v malej komunite alebo obci?
Ћiќ tu, denne,
stretбvaќ sa so vљetkэmi problйmami
bez JA,
bez tohto centra?
A иo je toto centrum
ktorй sa stalo takй nesmierne dфleћitй v naљich ћivotoch?
Zamysleli ste sa niekedy nad tэm?
Nie podѕa nejakйho analytika,
preboha, nevљнmajte si tэch ѕudн.
Ak tak robнte, nepozerбte sa na seba,
ale pozerбte sa na seba skrz toho filozofa,
podѕa analytika, podѕa niekoho inйho,
a to je to, иo robнte.
Takћe tu nie je niи originбlneho.
Pozrieќ sa na seba
bez pohѕadu inйho, len svojimi vlastnэmi oиami.
Teraz...To JA je minulosќou.
Ћe?
Tб minulosќ ktorб nazromaћdila vљetky vedomosti,
predstavy, mэty,
nбdeje, strachy, zъfalstvo, tъћbu, to JA.
A to JA oddeѕuje seba od ostatnэch иastн mтa.
Je tam moje vedomй a moje nevedomй JA.
Zaинna to byќ ќaћkй?
Robнm to ќaћkэm?
Mфћem pokraиovaќ?
To Ja rozdelilo samйho seba,
to JA ktorй je dobrй, to JA ktorй je zlй,
to JA, ktorй chce nieиo robiќ,
to JA, ktorй hovorн, ach, to si nemal robiќ!
To JA, ktorй je nбsilnй
a to JA, ktorй hovorн: Musнm ћiќ v mieri!
Nevљimli ste si v sebe toto vљetko?
Takћe je tu to JA, vedomй,
a to JA, schovanй.
To Ja, rozdeѕъc sa na pozorovateѕa,
a to Ja, ktorй pozoruje.
Ћe?
Ћe? Je to tak!
Takћe toto je moje JA.
Mфћem sa na to pozrieќ... mфћe sa na to myseѕ pozrieќ
bez separбcie?
Rozumiete? Nie? V poriadku!
Vysvetlнm to!
Je tam toto JA.
To akceptujete, ћe?
To JA hovorн: Som kresќan,
to Ja ktorй hovorн: Chcem nieиomu rozkazovaќ,
to Ja ktorй sa bojн, to JA ktorй hovorн: Musнm maќ viac znalostн,
viete, to J A: mфj dom, mфj majetok, moje peniaze, mфj Boh, moja vlasќ, moja politika, viete, to JA, nielen na povrchu ale aj hlboko vo vnъtri, nevedomй, schovanй, so vљetkэmi tэmi skrytэmi motнvami, so vљetkэmi tэmi zdedenэmi rasovэmi inљtinktmi, to vљetko som JA. To JA rozdelilo seba na vyљљie, inteligentnejљie, a menej inteligentnй. Sledujete? Chбpeme sa? Obecentsvo: Бno. |
| 1:03:25 | K: Right. So there is division not only outwardly but also in me, inwardly, the me that says, this is right, and I must control the thing which is wrong. The me that says, consciously, I want to do this, but the me hidden says, steady, don't do it, be careful. So there is division in the me itself, as the higher, the more intelligent, the spiritual, the soul, God, the Hindus call it atman, and so on and so on, it is still the me. Now, can the mind look at the totality of the me without division? You understand? Am I making the question clear? Can this mind look at itself without the division, knowing the division is the conditioning, is the source of conflict, can the mind look at this me without any distortion, without any image, conclusion, formula? You know, that is meditation. You understand? Which we will go into another time. That is the beginning of meditation, and the beauty of it is to look without any division. What is the time? | K. V poriadku! Takћe je tu rozdelenie nie len navonok, ale aj vo mne, vnъtorne, to Ja ktorй hovorн: To je sprбvne, a musнm kontrolovaќ tъ vec, ktorб je zlб. To JA, ktorй hovorн, vedome: Chcem toto, ale to schovanй Ja hovorн: Opatrne, nerob to, buп opatrnэ! Takћe vo mne samotnom je toto rozdelenie, na nieиo vyљљie, inteligentnejљie, duchovnй, duљa, Boh, hinduisti tomu hovoria Atman, a tak пalej a tak пalej. Je to stбle to JA. A teraz...Mфћe sa myseѕ pozrieќ na ъplnosќ mтa bez rozdelenia? Rozumiete? Pэtam sa jasne? Mфћe sa myseѕ pozrieќ na seba bez rozdelenia, vediac, ћe to rozdelenie je podmiennй, je zdrojom konfliktu, mфћe sa myseѕ pozrieќ na toto JA, bez nejakйho skreslenia, bez nejakej predstavy, zбveru, vzorca? Viete, to je meditбcia. Rozumiete? V ktorej sa dostaneme do inйho иasu. Toto je zaиiatok meditбcie, a krбsa toho je pozeraќ sa bez akйhokoѕvek rozdelenia. Иo je to иas? |
| 1:06:02 | Q: Twelve-thirty. | P: Dvanбsќ - tridsaќ. |
| 1:06:11 | K: Have you had enough for this morning? | K: Mali ste dosќ иasu dnes rбno? |
| 1:06:13 | A: No! | A: Nie! |
| 1:06:20 | Q: Will you answer questions? | P: Budete odpovedaќ na otбzky? |
| 1:06:22 |
K: You will ask questions presently, please, if you will.
But is this clear so far? Q: Yes. |
K: Nech sa pбиi, pэtajte sa teraz, ak chcete.
Ale je to zatiaѕ jasnй? P: Бno. |
| 1:06:32 | K: No, look, please don't say yes, not verbally. We are not children to say yes. I don't mean verbally. Inwardly, see the clarity of it, for yourself, not because the speaker points it out. If he points it out and you follow it, then the speaker becomes another one of those beastly leaders. We are talking of being a light to yourself, and therefore no following of anybody. | K: Nie, pozrite prosнm, nehovorte бno, nie verbбlne. Nie sme deti aby sme hovorili бno. Nemyslнm verbбlne. Vnъtorne, vidieќ tъ jasnosќ , sбm! Nie preto, ћe rozprбvajъci na to poukazuje. Ak na to poukazuje, a vy ho nasledujete, potom sa rozprбvajъci stбva jednэm z пalљнch tэch hnusnэch vodcov. My hovorнme o tom byќ svetlom sebe samйmu, a preto nikoho nenasledovaќ. |
| 1:07:31 | So there is this problem, perhaps it is the only problem. And when we ask the question: can the mind observe totally, without any division in itself, the answer inevitably will be: I cannot, I don't know what it means to look at anything without division. So I must investigate what it means to look without division. There is this me who is the result of a thousand years with a thousand activities, with all their knowledge, the past, that is the me, always accumulating, that is the centre, that is the maker of image. Haven't you got images about yourself and about another? Do observe it, please. Haven't you got images? What you think you should be, or what you are, or what you might become? Haven't you got an image about another? Your wife, your husband, your boy or girl, haven't you have an image? Obviously. The machine that builds the image, is the me. When you say, I believe in God, you don't know a thing about God but you believe. And that belief is fostered, built up by your fear, by your culture, you know, all the rest of it. And equally, you deny God because that is another part of your culture. So you have images. Can you live without a single image? Go into it, you will find out. Which means, can you be aware of your images that you have, not say that I must get rid of them or transplant them, I will put new images in place of old images, just to look at your images. That means to be aware of the images that you have about yourself, your country, your politician, your god, your wife, your husband, etc. If you are aware of your images then you will see, from that awareness you come to the centre which creates these images. | Takћe tu je tento problйm, moћno je to jedinэ problйm. Keп sa pэtame otбzku: Vie myseѕ skъmaќ ъplne, bez nejakйho rozdelenia v sebe? Odpoveп bude nevyhnutne: Neviem! Neviem, иo je to pozeraќ sa bez akйhokoѕvek rozdelenia. Takћe musнm prнsќ na to, иo to znamenб pozeraќ sa bez rozdelenia. Je tam toto JA, иo je vэsledok tisнcky rokov, s tisнckami иinnostн, so vљetkэmi jeho znalosќami, minulosќou, to je JA. Vћdy akumulujъce. Je tam centrum, ktorй je tvorcom imidћu. Nemбvate predstavy o sebe a o ostatnэch? Skъmajte to, prosнm. Nemбvate predstavy? Keп si myslнte, ћe by ste mali nejakэ byќ, alebo иo ste, alebo иo by malo byќ? Nemбvate predstavy o tom druhom? O manћelke, manћelovi, vaљom chlapcovi, dievиati, nemбvate predstavy? Samozrejme! Ten stroj, ktorэ buduje imidћ, som JA. Keп hovorнte: Verнm v Boha, nemбte ani љajnu o Bohu, ale verнte. A tб viera je ћivenб, budovanб vaљim strachom, vaљou kultъrou, viete, s tэm vљetkэm. A takisto, popierate Boha, pretoћe to je inб sъиasќ vaљej kultъry. Takћe mбte predstavy. Viete ћiќ bez akejkoѕvek predstavy? Choпte do toho! Zistнte to. Иo znamenб, mфћete si byќ vedomн vaљich predstбv ktorй mбte, nehovoriac, ћe sa ich musнm zbaviќ alebo ich zmeniќ, a namiesto starэch predstбv dбm novй. Len ich sledovaќ! To znamenб, uvedomovaќ si predstavy,ktorй o sebe mбte, o svojej krajine, vaљich politikoch, vaљom bohu, vaљej manћelke, manћelovi, atп. Ak si uvedomujete svoje predstavy tak uvidнte, ћe vпaka uvedomovaniu si prнdesa dostanete k centru, ktorй vytvбra tieto predstavy. |
| 1:11:40 | And after all, these images are the factors of conditioning. If one lives in India, you have got a thousand images. The misery, the poverty, the agony, the appalling degradation of having nothing, and wanting, wanting, wanting. And you have your images here in this country, the image of success, of abundance, buy, buy, buy. The images of your gods, your saviours, and when you observe these images you will see that it is created by the me, the whole machinery of the me builds these images, and it builds it because without an image, what are you? So one is afraid of being nothing. You know, to go very far, very deeply, you must be nothing. Not become enlightened, not become somebody marvellous have certain powers, position and all that. So, to be a light to oneself means to see actually 'what is' in yourself, see the division in yourself, and the conflict that comes through this division, the me with all its separate compartments, separate divisions, and be aware, just look at it. And when you know how to look at it you will see that there is a transformation. | A koniec koncov, tieto predstavy sъ faktory podmienenia. Ak ћijete v Indii, mбte tisнcky predstбv. Utrpenie, chudoba, agуnia. Desivб degradбcia toho, ћe niи nemбte, a chcete, chcete, chcete. A predstavy mбte aj tu, v tejto krajine. Predstavu ъspechu, dostatku, kupovaќ, kupovaќ, kupovaќ. Mбte predstavy o vaљich bohoch, vaљich spasiteѕoch, a keп budete skъmaќ tieto predstavy uvidнte, ћe sъ tvorenй tэm JA. Celб tб maљinйria toho JA tvorн tieto prestavy, a stavia ho, lebo bez imidћu... иo ste bez imidћu ? Takћe иlovek sa obбva byќ niинm. Viete, aby ste sa dostali veѕmi пaleko, veѕmi hlboko, musнte byќ niинm. Nestaќ sa osvietenэm, nestaќ sa niekэm vэnimoиnэm, maќ istй schopnosti, pozнciu a to vљetko. Takћe, byќ svetlom sebe samйmu znamenб v skutoиnosti vidieќ to "иo je" vo vбs, vidieќ rozdelenie v sebe, a konflikt, ktorэ pochбdza z tohto rozdelenia, to JA, so vљetkэmi samotnэmi иasќami, samotnй rozdelenia, a uvedomovaќ si to. Len sa na to pozeraќ. A ak viete, ako sa na to pozeraќ, uvidнte, ћe tam nastane zmena. |
| 1:14:40 | Now, if we may, perhaps you would like to ask questions. Before you ask questions, if I may point out, ask the right question. Because to ask the right question brings the right answer. And it is very difficult to ask the right questions. And besides, from whom are you expecting the answer? I ask a question because I am dreadfully serious. I am asking the question either for confirmation, or ask the question which will be a challenge to myself and therefore the capacity to investigate. And if you are waiting for somebody to answer your question then I am afraid you will have to wait. But if you ask the question in order to find out together, investigate, share the problem together, then we will find the right answer. In saying all this, the speaker is not preventing you from asking questions. | Teraz, ak mфћeme, moћno by sta sa chceli nieиo spэtaќ. Predtэm, neћ sa budete pэtaќ, ak mфћem upozorniќ, pэtajte sa sprбvne otбzky. Pretoћe pэtaќ sa sprбvnu otбzku prinбљa sprбvnu odpoveп. A je veѕmi ќaћkй, pэtaќ sa sprбvne otбzky. A okrem toho, od koho oиakбvate odpoveп? Ja sa pэtam otбzku, lebo to myslнm veѕmi vбћne. Pэtam sa otбzku buп pre potvrdenie, alebo sa pэtam otбzku, ktorб bude pre mтa vэzvou a preto obsahom na skъmanie. Ak ak иakбte, ћe niekto zodpovie vaљu otбzku, obбvam sa, ћe budete musieќ иakaќ. Ale ak sa pэtate preto, aby sme spoloиne zistili, skъmali, delili sa o problйm spolu, potom nбjdeme sprбvnu odpoveп. Hovoriac toto vљetko, reиnнk vбm nebrбni pэtaќ sa otбzky. |
| 1:16:40 | Q: I want to put a question. Please, if you will share this with me. You remember, surely, when you were not famous, when you were not venerated, when you were not so well known. A question in me wants to know from you whether the power that you have – with your being so well known and sharing yourself in this way with so many as you do – brings you joy, or whether, if there are other times in your life where that word 'joy' has more meaning for you. | P: Chcem sa spэtaќ. Prosнm, ak to budete zdieѕaќ spolu so mnou. Uriиte si pamдtбte na иasy, keп ste nebol slбvny, keп ste nebol uctievanэ, keп ste nebol tak dobre znбmy. Otбzka vo mne chce od vбs vedieќ, иi tб sila, ktorъ mбte - pretoћe ste tak dobre znбmy a prezentujete sa takэmto spфsobom - robнte to mohн - prinбљa to radosќ, alebo иi xistujъ takй chvнle vo vaљom ћivote, kde slovo radosќ mб pre vбs vдиљн vэznam? |
| 1:17:23 |
K: Right, I understand madame. I have understood the question.
The questioner asks
– oh lord –
the questioner asks: through fame,
through notoriety,
you have gained this power – whatever that may mean.
Surely, when you were young you didn't have all this,
and how did you get this?
Is that right, madame? Q: No. K: Oh, sorry. |
K: Бno, rozumiem pani. Rozumel som otбzke.
Pэtajъca sa pэta
- у, boћe -
pэtajъca sa pэta: cez slбvu,
cez znбmosti,
ste zнskali tъto silu - nech to uћ znamenб hociиo.
Iste, keп ste bol mladэ, nemal ste toto vљetko,
a ako ste to dosiahol?
Je tak madam? P: Nie. K: Och, prepбиte! |
| 1:18:16 | Q: No, I really wanted to ask if you could, and would it be possible to share with us some of yourself that would reveal to us which times in your life you know the feeling of joy. | P: Nie, naozaj som sa chcela spэtaќ a mohli by ste sa s nami podeliќ nieиim z vбs, иo by nбm odhalilo ktorй chvile vo vaљom ћivote, viete, pocit radosti. |
| 1:18:29 | K: Ah, I see, right. Did you have this joy, or did it come to you suddenly, or this sense of urgency, energy, vitality, and the beauty of this joy, apparently you seem to have it and therefore could you share it with us. That is right? No? | K: Aha, chбpem, no dobre! Mali ste tъto radosќ, alebo ste k nej nбhle priљli, alebo tento pocit naliehavosti, energia, vitalita, a krбsa tejto radosti, oиividine sa zdб, ћe ju mбte, a preto by ste sa s тou mohli s nami podeliќ. Je to tak. Nie? |
| 1:19:00 | Q: No. Don't rephrase it for me. It is a simple question. It is only to ask if you can share with us, and will, the recollection of those times of your own life as you have lived it, when you have known a quality, that you would put that word 'joy' to name. | P: Nie! Neopakujte to po mne! Je to jednoduchб otбzka. Je to len otбzka, иi sa snami podelнte, a budete, spomнnaќ na tie chvнle vбљho ћivota, keп ste ho ћili, keп ste poznali kvalitu, ћe by ste to nazvali slovom "radosќ?" |
| 1:19:29 | K: Have you understood it? | K: Rozumeli ste tomu? |
| 1:19:31 | Q: When are you happy? When are you elated and free and open? | P: Kedy ste љќastnэ? Kedy ste povznesenэ, slobodnэ a otvorenэ? |
| 1:19:37 | K: When have you experienced joy? | K: Kedy ste zaћili radosќ? |
| 1:19:42 |
K: Is that it? Q: Yes, that is it. |
Je to ono? P: Бno, to je ono! |
| 1:19:51 | K: When have you experienced joy? I am afraid I have never experienced joy. No, please, go slowly, go slowly, go slowly, listen to what I have to say. When you experience joy it is not joy, it is pleasure. When joy happens, it happens, doesn't it? Look, you are wandering down the street or in a garden or looking at the sea, suddenly you feel extraordinarily happy, joyous, you see things very clearly. And you remember that joy, that experience, and then you want to repeat that experience. Then that becomes pleasure. You see the difference between the two? Joy is not something that you can experience as: I experience joy. You know what happiness is don't you? You know what it means to be happy, don't you? No? Oh! Does that happiness come naturally or do you cultivate it? It comes naturally, doesn't it? And it happens. When it happens you want to cultivate it, don't you? That is the me that says, I must cultivate that happiness, and therefore loses its happiness. And the lady asks: could you share with us this joy, how it came about in your life. Now, look what you are asking: you are asking the speaker to share with you something which you haven't got. Is that it? | K: Kedy ste zaћili radosќ? Obбvam sa, ћe som nikdy nezaћil radosќ. Nie, prosнm, postupujte pomaly, pomaly, pomaly, poиъvajte, иo vбm musнm povedaќ. Keп zaћнvate radosќ, nie je to radosќ, je to poteљenie. Keп sa radosќ stane, tak sa stane, nie je to tak? Pozrite, idete po ulici alebo po zбhrade, alebo pri pohѕade na more sa zrazu cнtite nesmierne љќastnэ, radostnэ, vidнte veci veѕmi jasne. A tъ radosќ si pamдtбte, tъ skъsenosќ, a potom chcete aby sa tб skъsenosќ opakovala. To sa potom stбva poteљenнm. Vdнte rozdiel medzi tэmi dvomi? Radosќ nie je nieиo, иo mфћete zaћiќ ako: Ja zaћнvam radosќ. Viete, иo je to љќastie, vљak? Viete, иo to znamenб byќ sќastnэ, ћe? Nie? Och. Priachбdza to љќastie samo, alebo ho musнte pestovaќ? Prichбdza prirodzene, ћe? A deje sa. Keп sa to stane, chcete ho pestovaќ, ћe? Je to to JA, ktorй hovorн: "Musнm sa staraќ o to љќastie!" a preto strбca svoje љќastie. A tб pani sa pэta: "Mohli by ste sa snami podeliќ o tъ radosќ, ako priљla do vбљho ћivota?" Teraz sa pozrite, o иo prosнte! Prosнte reиnнka aby sa s vami podelil o nieиo, иo nemбte. Je to tak? |
| 1:22:30 |
Q: No. K: No? |
P: Nie. K: Nie? |
| 1:22:34 | Q: It is only to know you on another level, if you would be willing in that way. So it isn't to suggest what I have or haven't, but to suggest that: if you know a time in your life that has been joyous – I am suggesting in my question – they are probably not those times when you have an enormous audience. | P: Je to len spoznaќ vбs lepљie na inej ъrovni, ak by ste bol ochotnэ. To nie preto, aby som naznaиila иo mбm alebo nemбm, ale naznaиila, ћe: иi ste zaћil v ћivote chvнѕu, ktorб bola radostnб. - Naznaиujem v mojej otбzke - ћe to pravdepodobne nie sъ tie иasy, keп mбte obrovskй publikum. |
| 1:23:00 | K: Ah, I see. Beauty – just let me introduce another word instead of yours – beauty. You know, beauty demands great sensitivity. Beauty demands that the me should be completely absent. Beauty says, you cannot see me completely if there is any form of egotism, selfishness, any form of conclusion, fear, hope, you must completely be free of the separation. | K: Ach, rozumiem! Krбsa, - dovoѕte mi predstaviќ пalљie slovo namiesto vбљho - krбsa. Viete, krбsa si vyћaduje veѕkъ citlivosќ. Krбsa si vyћaduje, aby to JA absolъtne chэbalo. Krбsa hovorн: Ty ma nemфћeљ vidieќ ъplnъ, ak existuje nejakб forma egoizmu, sebectvo, akбkoѕvek forma zбveru, strach, nбdej. Musнљ byќ ъplne oslobodenэ od separбcie. |
| 1:24:11 |
Joy
exists only
when you understand the difficulties of pleasure,
when you understand the up and down of moods,
when you understand how to live alone,
not in isolation,
but to live alone inwardly, untouched.
So to share something with you,
or was there a time when you were not joyous,
all this implies, doesn't it,
that you want to understand the speaker,
don't you? Q: Yes. |
Radosќ
existuje len vtedy,
keп ste pochopili ќaћkosti rozkoљe,
keп ste pochopili vzlety a pбdy nбlady,
keп ste pochopili ako ћiќ sбm,
nie v izolбcii,
ale ћiќ sбm. Vnъtorne, nedotknutэ.
Takћe nieиo zdieѕaќ s vami,
alebo, boli иasy keп ste nebol radostnэ,
toto vљetko to naznaиuje, vљakћe?,
ћe chcete porozumieќ reиnнkovi,
ћe? P: Бno. |
| 1:25:19 | K: You want to understand the speaker. I say please don't understand the speaker, understand yourself. Just a minute. The speaker has no value, and I really mean it. And if you really want to understand the speaker, you have to live with him, you have to watch him, you have to see what he does, what he doesn't do. And when you watch him, you watch him according to your image, your principles, your beliefs, your conditioning, your judgements, your evaluations, which all becomes so tiresome and so useless. What the speaker is saying is: look at yourself, understand yourself, be a light to yourself, not in a hundred years or ten days but now. And that means you have to be vitally interested, not be distracted by the speaker. And we want to be distracted. And our religions are based on this distraction. But whereas when you understand yourself completely, you will understand the speaker. Yes, sir? | K: Chcete rozumieќ reиnнkovi. Ja hovorнm, prosнm, nesnaћte sa porozumieќ reиnнkovi, porozumejte sebe. Len na minъtku. reиnнk nemб ћiadnu hodnotu, a myslнm to vбћne. Ak naozaj chcete rozumieќ reиnнkovi, musнte s nнm ћiќ, musнte ho pozorovaќ, musнte sa pozeraќ иo robн, иo nerobн. A keп ho pozorujete, pozorujete ho podѕa vaљich predstбv, vaљich zбsad, presvedиenн, vбљho podmienenia, vaљich ъsudkov, vбљho hodnotenia, to vљetko sa vљak stбva takй ъnavnй a tak zbytoиnй. Иo reиnнk hovorн, to je: "Pozrite sa na seba, rozumejte sebe samйmu, buпte svetlom sebe samйmu! Nie za sto rokov, za desaќ, ale teraz!" A to znamenб, ћe musнte maќ ћivэ zбujem, nie nechaќ sa vyruљovaќ reиnнkom. Ale my sa chceme nechaќ vyruљovaќ. A naљe nбboћenstvб sъ zaloћenй na tomto vyruљovanн. Ale pokiaѕ sa poznбte dobre, budete reиnнkovi rozumieќ. Бno, pane? |
| 1:27:19 | Q: What does it take to snap from adaptiveness to spontaneity? What does it take to snap from adaptive conditioned behaviour to spontaneity? |
P: Иo treba na to, aby sme preљli od prispфsobivosti k spontбnosti?
K: Иo treba na to, aby sme preљli od prispфsovivosti k spontбnnosti? |
| 1:27:31 | K: Ah, yes. What does it take, from conditioned behaviour to spontaneity? You know what it means to be spontaneous? Do you? Wait, go slow. You know the meaning of the word, the dictionary meaning of the word, to be spontaneous, to be free, to do things instantly, without any previous meditation, previous order, previous will, to do something easily, quickly, which is natural, which is beautiful, which is free. How can a mind be free when it is conditioned? And what does it take from that conditioned mind to come to that sense of total freedom of spontaneity? Now, that comes about only, surely, when you observe the totality of your conditioning. Don't bother about spontaneity, you follow? Begin with what is, not with what should be. Begin with the conditioning, and out of that perception comes the other. But if you say, well, I am searching for spontaneity, then you will be searching forever. Yes, sir? | Aha, бno. Иo treba na to, z podmienenйho sprбvanie sa k spontбnosti? Viete, иo to znamenб, byќ spontбnny? Viete? Poиkajte, pomaly! Poznбte vэznam slova, slovnнkovэ vэznam slova, byќ spontбnny, byќ slobodnэ? - Robiќ veci okamћite, bez predchбdzajъceho meditovania, predchбdzajъceho prнkazu, predchбdzajъcej vфle, robiќ nieиo s ѕahkosќou, rэchlo, иo je prirodzenй, иo je krбsne, иo je slobodnй. Ako mфћe byќ myseѕ slobodnб, keп je podmienenб? A иo treba na to, aby sme z tej podmienenej mysle priљli k takйmuto pocitu ъplnej slobody spontбnnosti? Teda, to urиite prichбdza iba vtedy, keп pozorujete ъplnosќ vбљho podmienenia. Nezaќaћujte sa spontбnosќou, sledujete? Zaиnite s tэm иo je, nie s tэm, иo by malo byќ. Zaиnite s podmienenнm, a z toho vnнmania prichбdza пalљie. Ale ak poviete, dobre, ja hѕadбm spontбnnosќ, potom budete hѕadaќ navћdy. Бno, pane? |
| 1:29:30 | Q: If you throw a stone into the water, do the ripples stop? | P: Ak hodнte kameт do vody, vlny prestanъ? |
| 1:29:35 | K: What, sir? What's that? | K: Иo pane? Иo to? |
| 1:29:39 | Q: If you throw into a clear lake that is clean, throw a rock in the water, do the ripples stop? | P: Ak hodнte do pokojnйho jazera ktorй je иistй, hodнte kameт do vody, иi vlny prestanъ? |
| 1:29:50 | K: I haven't heard, perhaps somebody who has heard it would repeat it? | K: Eљte som to nepoиul. Moћno niekto kto to poиul, aby na to odpovedal. |
| 1:29:56 | Q: If you throw a stone into the lake and it forms ripples on the water, do these ripples ever stop? | P: Ak hodнte kameт do jazera, a to utvorн vlny na hladine, иi tie vlny niekedy prestanъ? |
| 1:30:11 | K: As you throw a rock into the lake, the ripples go on. Do those ripples ever stop – is that the question? | K: Keп hodнte kameт do vody, vlny sa vlnia. Иi tie vlny niekedy prestanъ - to je otбzka? |
| 1:30:20 | Q: Yes. | P: Бno. |
| 1:30:24 | K: If I may ask, what is the relationship with what you are saying, your question and what we have been talking about? No, please, this is not meant to be rude. Please don't applaud. If you must applaud, please applaud after I have left. Just a minute, please. You see, the questioner has something in mind. | K: Ak sa mфћem spэtaќ, akб je spojitosќ s tэm иo hovorнm a vaљou otбzkou, a s tэm o иom hovorнme? Nie prosнm, nepovaћujte to za drzй! Prosнm, netlieskajte! Ak musнte tlieskaќ, prosнm, tlieskajte aћ odнdem. Len minъtku, prosнm. Vidнte, pэtajъci mб nieиo na mysli. |
| 1:31:02 | Q: I am using symbols that are very familiar. The water is the consciousness, the rock is the [inaudible] | P: Pouћнvam symboly ktorй sъ veѕmi znбme. Voda je podvedomie, kameт je... (nedб sa poиuќ) |
| 1:31:14 | K: Oh, I see. Do you mean this: that our whole consciousness is like a lake into which incidents, accidents happen and they set up ripples, which are our activity – is that it? | K: Aha, chбpem. Myslнte toto: ћe celй naљe podvedomie je ako jazero v ktorom sa udalosti, nбhody dejъ a to posiela vlny, ktorй sъ naљou aktivitou - je to tak? |
| 1:31:46 | Q: In a very incomplete form. | P: Veѕmi zhruba. |
| 1:31:49 | K: In an incomplete form, is that what you are trying to say, sir? | K: Veѕmi zhruba. Je to to, иo sa pokъљate povedaќ, pane? |
| 1:31:53 |
Q: The lake has no form. K: Yes, that is right. Now, look, do you want to go into this? |
P: Jazero nemб ћiadnu formu. K: Бno, to je pravda. Teraz sa pozrite, chcete sa do toho pustiќ? |
| 1:32:06 |
Q: No. Q: Yes. |
P: Nie! P: Бno! |
| 1:32:12 | K: You know, to talk about consciousness, which is a lake which apparently has no form, you must know what the content of that consciousness is. Whether the content makes consciousness, and without the content what is consciousness? You have to investigate that. Perhaps this is not the moment, we might do it tomorrow or another day. But we can see, as long as there is a frontier to our consciousness – that means a limitation, a conditioning – the content makes up the consciousness, the content is consciousness. You understand? My consciousness is made up of the content which it holds, the prejudices, the fears, the hopes, the despairs, the longings, the jealousies, the anxieties, the guilt, the racial, all that – that is, the content is my consciousness. When there is no content, what is the meaning of consciousness? That we will have to go into some other time. Is that enough? | K: Viete, hovoriќ o podvedomн, ktorэm je jazero ktorй nemб formu, musнte vedieќ, akэ je obsah toho podvedomia. Иi ten obsah vytvбra podvedomie, a bez toho obsahu, иo je to podvedomie? Musнte to skъmaќ. Moћnoћe toto nie je sprбvna chvнѕa, mфћeme to urobiќ zajtra alebo inokedy. Ale vidнme, pokiaѕ sъ hranice v naљom vedomн - to znamenб obmedzenie, podmienenie - ten obsah vytvбra vedomie, ten obsah je vedomнm. Rozumiete? Moje vedomie je zloћenй z obsahu, ktorй ho drћн dokopy. Predsudky, obavy, nбdeje, strasti, tъћby, ћiarlivosќ, ъzkosti, vina, rasa, to vљetko - to znamenб, ten obsah je moje vedomie. Keп nie je ћiadny obsah, akэ vэznam mб vedomie? Na to sa budeme musieќ pozrieќ niekedy inokedy. Staин to? |
| 1:33:50 | Q: If an identity does not have its roots in conditioning, what are identities worth? | P: Ak identita nemб svoje korene v podvedomн, akъ hodnotu majъ identity? |
| 1:33:59 | K: If you are free of conditioning, what is your identity worth? What is the worth of your identity if you are unconditioned? | K: Ak ste slobodnэ od podmienenia, akб je hodnota vaљej identity? Akб je hodnota vaљej identity keп nie ste podmienenэ? |
| 1:34:21 | Q: [Inaudible] | P: (nerozumiteѕnй) |
| 1:34:33 | K: I haven't understood. What, madame? | K: Nerozumel som. Иo, pani? |
| 1:34:40 | Q: What are the roots of the identity? | P: Akй sъ korene identity? |
| 1:34:43 | K: What are the roots of the identity? Right? What are the roots of identity. Identity with what? You must have identity with something. You can't say identity by itself, it has no meaning. | K: Akй sъ korene identity? Ћe? Akй sъ korene identity? Identity s инm? Musнte maќ identitu s nieинm. Nemфћete povedaќ - indentita sama o sebe. To nemб zmysel. |
| 1:35:07 | Q: She means where is the me after the transformation. | P: Myslн tэm, kde je JA po transformбcii. |
| 1:35:17 | K: Sir, you have not understood this at all. Now wait a minute. This is one of the things that in America, I believe, is becoming rather prominent: identity. You want to identify yourself with yourself, is that it? You identify yourself with America, with the flag, with the politician, Republican or Democrat or whatever it is. You identify yourself with the family, with the house, with the furniture. So you are the furniture. You are the bank account, you are your car. You have identified yourself with something. Now, you brush all that aside, say, I don't want to identify with worldly things, they are stupid, but I want to identify myself with something else. What is that? With your ideas? With your hopes, with your images? And when you do identify yourself, what are you identifying yourself with? | K: Pane, vфbec ste tomu neporozumeli. Poиkajte chviѕoиku! Toto je jedna z vecн, ktorъ verнm ћe v Amerike sa stбva dosќ prominentnou: identita. Chcete urиiќ sami seba vami samotnэmi. Je to tak? Stotoћтujete sa s Amerikou, so zбstavou, s politikom, republikбnom alebo demokratom, иi иo to je? Stotoћтujete sa s rodinou, s domom, s nбbytkom. Takћe ste nбbytok. Ste bankovэ ъиet, ste auto. Stotoћnili ste sa s nieинm. Teraz to vљetko strasiee dole a hovorнte: Nechcem sa stotoћтovaќ s pozemskэmi vecami, sъ hlъpe, ale chcem sa stotoћniќ s nieинm inэm! Иo je to? S vaљimi myљlienkami? S vaљimi nбdejami? S predstavami? A keп sa stotoћтujete, s инm sa stotoћтujete? |
| 1:36:48 | Q: What is wrong with identifying with the Godself? | P: Иo je zlй na tom stotoћтovaќ sa s boћstvom? |
| 1:36:51 | K: What is wrong with identifying yourself with Godself. Now just a minute, sir, don't get irritated with me, or angry with me, just listen to it. Who has invented this Godself? | K: Иo je zlй na tom, stotoћтovaќ sa s boћstvom? Momentнk, pane, nebuпte podrбћdenэ alebo nahnevanэ na mтa. Len poиъvajte! Kto vynaљiel boћstvo? |
| 1:37:16 | Q: Mankind. | P: јudstvo. |
| 1:37:17 | K: Man. You have invented it. You call it Godself here, in India they call it the Atman or the Brahman, in other religions they call it something else. It is your conditioning that says you must identify yourself with Godself, because you have identified yourself with furniture, with a house, with property, and you say that is too bourgeois, too silly, whatever, square or circle, and then you say, I must identify myself with Godself. Why do you want to identify yourself with anything? And if you do, who is the entity that is identifying himself with? | K: Иlovek. Vy ste ho stvorili. Tu ho volбte boћstvo, v Indii to volajъ Atman alebo Brahman, v inэch nбboћenstvбch to volajъ nejako inби. Je to vaљe podmienenie ktorй hovorн: "Musнљ sa stotoћniќ s boћstvom!", pretoћe ste sa stotoћnili s nбbytkom, s domom, s majetkom, a hovorнte si: "To je takй burћoбzne, prнliљ hlъpe.", иokoѕvek, љtvorec alebo kruh, a potom hovorнte: "Musнm sa stotoћniќ s boћstvom." Preиo sa chcete s nieинm stotoћтovaќ? A ak to robнte, kto je tб entita, ktorб sa stotoћтuje? |
| 1:38:13 | Q: Is there God? | P: Existuje Boh? |
| 1:38:15 | K: Now you come back to that question: is there God? Sir, look, I will go into it. Either you create God into a belief or you want to find out for yourself if there is something that is that without a belief, you want to find out, don't you? Not say, well, I believe in God, it has no meaning. Which means, to find out, you have to have a very clear mind, a mind that is not caught in any illusion, deception. You have to have a mind that is terribly honest, that is incapable of deceiving itself. | K: Teraz ste spдќ pri otбzke: Existuje Boh? Pane, pozrite sa, Pozriem sa na to! Buп tvorнte Boha vierou, alebo chcete sбm zistiќ, иi nieиo existuje. - To je bez viery. Chcete to zistiќ,vљakћe? Nie hovoriќ: Verнm v Boha... to nemб vэznam. To znamenб, aby sme to zistili, musнte maќ veѕmi иistъ myseѕ, myseѕ, ktorб nie je lapenб v nejakej ilъzii, mэlke. Musнte maќ myseѕ, ktorб je plne ъprimnб, ktorб nie je schopnб klamaќ samu seba. |
| 1:39:15 | Q: Is that possible? | P: Je to moћnй? |
| 1:39:18 | K: Is that possible? It is possible if you are seeking God. | K: Иi je to moћnй? Je to moћnй, ak hѕadбte Boha. |
| 1:39:24 | Q: Is it objectivity? | P: Je to objektнvne? |
| 1:39:29 | K: Is it objective or is it subjective? Is God objective or subjective? Now, of whom are you asking this question? Are you asking the question of the speaker, or are you asking this question for yourself? If you are asking your question for yourself, that is, your mind is putting the question to itself, you have to find out. And to find out you must take a journey, you can't just sit comfortably in your bourgeois little house or in your little church and say, well, I am going to find God and be comfortable, you have to act. That means you have to go very deeply into yourself to wipe out every form of deception so that your mind becomes extraordinarily honest. Knows when it lies it says, it is a lie. I am deceiving myself. Be very clear. Then out of that clarity, when the mind is completely clear, then you will find out. | K: Иi je to objektнvne alebo subjektнvne? Je Boh objektнvny alebo subjektнvny? Teraz, koho sa pэtate tъto otбzku, pэtate sa tъ otбzku reиnнka, alebo sa pэtate tъto otбzku seba? Ak sa pэtate vaљu otбzku pre seba, to jest vaљa myseѕ kladie otбzku sama sebe, musнte na to prнsќ. A aby ste na to priљli, musнte sa vydaќ na cestu. Nemфћete len tak sedieќ vo svojom malom pбnskom dome, alebo vo svojom malom kostole a hovoriќ: "Dobre, idem nбjsќ Boha a budem v pohode." Musнte konaќ! To znamenб, ћe musнte нsќ do seba do hеbky, zmazaќ vљetok klam, takћe vaљa myseѕ bude nesmierne ъprimnб. Bude vedieќ keп klame, bude hovoriќ: To je klamstvo. Klamem sбm seba. Buпte veѕmi ъprimnэ. Potom z tej jasnosti, keп je myseѕ ъplne jasnб, potom na to prнdete. |
| 1:40:55 | Q: Is the speaker aware of the contradiction between his words, his message, and his life, what he is doing, the medium of his message? | P: Uvedomuje si reиnнk protiklad medzi jeho slovami, jeho posolstvom, a jeho ћivotom, tэm иo robн, sprбvou jeho posolstva? |
| 1:41:07 | K: Is he aware between what he is speaking and the medium of what he is doing. What am I doing? And what am I saying? Where is the contradiction? To find out whether I am contradicting myself in my life, you must live with me, mustn't you? You must know me, you must know what I think, what I do, what I feel. | K: Иi si je vedomэ medzi tэm иo hovorн a sprбvou toho, иo robн? Иo robнm? A иo hovorнm? Kde je protireиenie? Aby ste zistil иi si protireинm vo svojom ћivote, musнte ћiќ so mnou, nie? Musнte ma poznaќ, musнte vedieќ, иo si myslнm, иo robнm, иo cнtim. |
| 1:41:45 | Q: What is the speaker feeling now? | P: Иo teraz reиnнk cнti? |
| 1:41:50 | K: What is the speaker feeling now? The speaker is feeling nothing, but trying to explain a question. | K: Иo teraz reиnнk cнti? Reиnнk necнti niи, len sa snaћн vysvetliќ otбzku. |
| 1:42:01 | Q: Explain dislocation, the art of saying, Why was I born, I don't know, God help me. | Q: Vysvetlite nepohodu, umenie hovoriќ. Preиo som sa narodil? Neviem. Boh mi pomбhaj! |
| 1:42:10 | K: Then leave it to him. Now, sir, just a minute. Look, this must be answered. This must be answered. It is for the speaker to find out if he is leading a double-life. Right? If he is dishonest, if he is crooked, says one thing, thinks another, does another, it is for him to find out. You can't sit there and judge the poor chap can you? Because you don't know him. You may have an image about him. And your image has no value whatsoever, has it? Your image is built on reputation, or some idea of your own, which has no validity. | K: Tak to nechajte naтho. Teraz, len na minъtku, pane! Pozrite, toto musн byќ zodpovedanй! Na toto treba odpovedaќ! Je na reиnнkovi, aby zistil, иi vedie dvojakэ ћivot. Ћe? Ak je neиestnэ, ak je skazenэ, hovorн jednu vec, a myslн si druhъ, robн пalљiu, je to na тom, aby to zistil. Nemфћete tam sedieќ a sъdiќ ъbohйho chlapa, ћe? Pretoћe ho nepoznбte. Mфћete maќ o тom predstavu. A vaљa predstava nemб ani najmenљiu hodnotu, иi? Vбљ imidћ je postavenэ na reputбcii, alebo vaљej predstave, ktorб nemб ћiadnu platnosќ. |
| 1:43:08 |
Q: How old are you? K: Wait, sir, let me finish. What is important is not what the speaker is or is not, but what you are. I must come back to that essential thing, which is more important than anything else on earth, which is what you are, not what somebody else is. It is for you to find out what you are, and become a light to yourself. Sir, then we will talk together, then we will have a relationship together. |
P: Koѕko mбte rokov? K: Poиkajte pane, dokonинm! Иo je dфleћitй nie je to, akэ reиnнk je alebo nie je , ale akэ ste vy! Musнm sa vrбtiќ k zбkladnej veci, иo je dфleћitejљie neћ иokoѕvek inй na zemi! To je: akэ ste vy, nie akэ je niekto inэ. Je na vбs aby ste zistili akэ ste, a stali sa svetlom sebe samйmu. Pane, potom sa budeme spolu rozprбvaќ, potom budeme maќ spolu vzќah. |
| 1:43:48 | Q: I don't understand: When I am being aware of myself the thing being aware is always me. I always find that it is my ego being aware of the rest of me. How do I go about being aware of all myself with all myself? | P: Nerozumiem: Keп si uvedomujem sбm seba, tб vec ktorб si uvedomuje som stбle ja. Vћdy prнdem na to, ћe je to moje ego, ktorй si uvedomuje zbytok mтa. Ako prнdem k tomu aby som si seba uvedomoval kompletne? |
| 1:44:07 | K: That is the real question, if you really want to know: how to be aware of myself? First of all, it is very simple, first find out what it means to be aware. Find out, not from somebody else, not from the speaker, what it means to be aware. To be aware of this hall, to be aware of the various lights, to be aware of all the colours in the hall, to be aware of the proportions of the hall, to be aware of your neighbour, how he sits, how you sit. Begin outwardly then work inwardly. Be aware of what you think, don't try to condemn or justify what you are. You don't condemn or justify the colour that person is wearing, she is wearing it. In the same way, be aware of yourself without judging, without saying, I will keep this, I will not keep that, this is right, this is wrong, this is beautiful, that is all too silly. When you do that, you are judging from a centre, therefore you are not aware. Right? Aware, be aware. Then, what are you aware of? | K: To je naozaj otбzka, ak to naozaj chcete vedieќ: ako si byќ vedomэ sбm seba? Tak za prvй, je to veѕmi jednoduchй. Zistite, иo to znamenб uvedomovaќ si. Zistite, nie od niekoho inйho, nie od reиnнka, иo to znamenб, uvedomovaќ si. Vnнmaќ tъto sбlu, uvedomovaќ si rфzne svetlб, vnнmaќ vљetky farby v sбle, vnнmaќ rozmery haly, vnнmaќ suseda, ako sedн on, ako sedнte vy. Zaиnite navonok, potom pracujte dovnъtra. Uvedomujte si, иo si myslнte, nesъпte sa, alebo neospravedlтujte, иo ste. Neposudzujete ani neospravedlтujete farbu, ktorъ mб tбto osoba na sebe, ktorъ nosн. Takэm istэm spфsobom si uvedomujte seba, bez posudzovania, bez toho aby ste si hovorili: "Toto si zapamдtбm,, hento nie, toto je sprбvne, toto je zlй, toto je peknй.". To vљetko je veѕmi hlъpe! Keп to robнte, posudzujete z centra, a preto nie ste pozornэ. Ћe? Pozornэ, buпte pozornэ. Potom, иo si uvedomujete? |
| 1:45:42 | Q: How, with the conditioned mind that I have, can I observe myself without looking at the centre? | P: Ako mбm, s podmienenou mysѕou ktorъ mбm, pozorovaќ sбm seba bez toho, aby som sa pozeral na to centrum? |
| 1:45:48 | K: That is right, how can I, my mind being conditioned as it is, observe with clarity – you can't. Therefore observe your conditioning, how you are conditioned. Isn't that simple? Not how to be clear, clarity, what it means, but first be aware of your conditioning. See what is implied in it. The communist in Russia is conditioned in one way, he doesn't believe in God, he doesn't beleve in – whatever he believes and doesn't believe, and you believe in something because you are conditioned this way. Be aware of your conditioning and see what is involved in it, learn. Now, either you can learn instantly or take time. If you take time then you are actually not learning, then you are merely adding. Sir, let me finish. | K: To je pravda, ako? Moja myseѕ ktorб je podmienenб tak ako je, pozorovaќ s jasnosќou - to neviete. Preto pozorujte vaљe podmienenie, ako ste podmienenэ. Nie je to jednoduchй? Teraz, ako byќ jasnэ? Jasnosќ. Иo to znamenб? Ale najprv si uvedomujte vaљu podmienenosќ. Pozrite sa, иo obsahuje. Komunista v Rusku je naprogramovanэ jednэm spфsobom, neverн v Boha. Neverн - иi uћ verн a neverн, a vy v nieиo verнte, lebo ste tak naprogramovanэ . Uvedomujte si vaљe podmienenie, a pozerajte sa иo obsahuje - uиte sa! A teda, buп sa to nauинte okamћite alebo vбm to mфћe trvaќ. Ak vбm to trvб, pravdepodobne sa neuинte, potom sotva pridбvate. Nechajte ma dokonиiќ, pane! |
| 1:47:20 | Q: You were talking about the me, and you said many things about the me. My question is: what is the one thing in all those things you said about the me, that is, by virtue of which, the me is? You understand, what one thing is the me? | P: Hovorili ste o JA, a povedali ste veѕa vecн o tom JA. Moja otбzka je: иo je tб jedna vec medzi ostatnэmi vecami ktorй ste o mne povedali, to jest, na zбklade akej vlastnosti, иo je to, to JA? Rozumiete, aspoт jedna, ktorб je JA? |
| 1:47:39 | K: What is the me, are you saying, sir? | K: Иo je Ja?, hovorнte pane? |
| 1:47:46 | Q: I could give an example but I don't want to be wordy. | P: Mohol by som vбm daќ prнklad, ale nechcem dlho hovoriќ. |
| 1:47:51 | K: What is the source of the me? | K: Иo je zdrojom toho JA? |
| 1:48:00 | Q: In the same way that you might think about a bee, a bumble bee, a honey bee. We might be able to say that one bee can differ from another. | P: Rovnakэm spфsobom by ste mohli rozmэљѕaќ o vиele, иmeliakovi, vиeliиke. Mohli by sme povedaќ, ћe jedna vиela sa lнљi od druhej. |
| 1:48:12 | K: I understand. Then what is the question? | K: Rozumiem. To bolo v otбzke? |
| 1:48:15 | Q: I am trying to give an example of how we might be able to think about the one thing that something is. | P: Snaћнm sa daќ prнklad akэm spфsobom by sme mohli rozmэљѕaќ o jednej veci, ako nieиo je. |
| 1:48:23 | K: What is the question, sir? | K: Akб to je otбzka pane? |
| 1:48:26 | Q: The question is that you were speaking about the me, and saying many things about it. What is the one thing in all these many things that you say about the me that is, by virtue of which, you say 'the me'? | P: Otбzka je, hovorili ste tom JA, a povedali o tom veѕa vecн. Иo je aspoт jedna vec, medzi tэmito vecami, keп hovorнte o JA, to znamenб - ktorб vlastnosќ je "to JA"? |
| 1:48:41 | K: By the virtue of that one thing, me exists, what is that virtue, what is that central thing? | K: Na zбklade jednej veci, kde to JA existuje, иo to je zбkladom toho JA? Иo je tб hlavnб vec? |
| 1:48:50 |
Q: What is the me? K: What is the me? |
P: Иo je to JA? K: Иo je to JA...? |
| 1:48:53 | Q: The one thing that it is in the many things you said about the me. | P: To je tб jedna vec v mnohэch veciach, keп ste hovorili o JA. |
| 1:48:57 | K: I see, what is the one thing which is the me? Though you have described the many things which is the me, what is the centre which is the me – is that it? | K: Rozumiem, иo je jedna vec, ktorб je JA? Hoci ste popнsali mnohй veci, ktorй sъ to JA, иo je to centrum, ktorй je to JA - tak? |
| 1:49:17 | Q: Well, no. It is similar to the difference between the two questions: what is a colour and what is colour, you might be able to say. | P: Teda, nie. Je to podobnй ako rozdiel medzi tэmito dvoma otбzkami: akб je to farba a akб je to farba, by ste mohli povedaќ. |
| 1:49:27 | K: Sir, I can't hear. There are people moving about. Be brief, we'll have to stop because it is time. | K: Pane, nepoиujem. јudia sa tu chodia hore - dolu. Buпte struиnэ, budeme musieќ prestaќ, je иas. |
| 1:49:52 | Q: [Inaudible] | P: (nedб sa rozumieќ) |
| 1:49:59 | K: I see, what is the me without the word, without the description, without the colour. Is that right? Better. Now listen to this, very interesting, what is the me without the word, without the description, without the colour, without the various attributes that are related to the me? You understand the question? The me without the description, the me without the word, the me without the attributes, is there then the me without the attribute? Of course not. I must stop, sorry. We will meet tomorrow. | K: Rozumiem, иo je to, to JA, bez toho slova, bez opisu, bez farby? Je to tak? Lepљie? Teraz poиъvajte toto, je to veѕmi zaujнmavй: Иo je to JA, bez slov, bez opisu, bez farby, bez mnohэch vlastnostн, ktorй so mnou sъvisia? Rozumiete otбzke? To JA bez opisu, to JA bez slov, to JA bez vlastnostн, je tam potom to JA, bez vlastnostн? Samozrejme ћe nie! Musнm skonиiќ, prepбиte! Stretneme sa zajtra. |