Can thought give human beings security?
Where there is total attention there is no self
2nd Public Talk, Madras
January 04, 1985
Shall we continue where we left off last time we met, that was last Sunday - last Saturday, sorry. Sunday was too much rain and we had to leave. I think we have to go back a little and go over what we said on Saturday. We're thinking together, not, the speaker is thinking, and you not thinking, but together we are thinking, exercising our brain to its highest level, to its highest capacity. Also, we would like to point out as we did last Saturday, that we're not doing any kind of propaganda. We're not trying to convince you of anything, on the contrary. We're together going to observe all the activities of thought and the lives that one leads.
As one observes, we live a very superficial life, rather a shallow life, because of various reasons, overpopulation, few occupations, it is a constant struggle, and struggle makes us rather superficial, makes us shallow. We build, as we pointed out, a marvellous scaffold of various theories, various traditions, including superstitions and all that, and behind this scaffold we have no building at all. We don't start to build at all, that's a fact. We're going to discuss together only facts, not a theory, not an ideal, not something that we imagine, but actually observe our own lives, if you are willing. And we've built a marvellous scaffold, not only in the universities, colleges, schools and kindergarten schools, but also we've built, gathered together, a great deal of knowledge, almost about everything, about the nature of the earth, the air, we can deal with all the diseases, transplants, new hearts, artificial hearts, liver and so on. We've acquired, during the last million years or 50,000 years, a great deal of information not only of the world externally, but philosophers and those who have given their little thought to the psyche, like the psychologists and so on - but all those remain a verbal structure. To us, they mean very little in our daily life.
And we are concerned, not with acquiring more knowledge, but rather together, think together and observe our life. Are we wasting our lives? Please this is a serious question which each one of us must answer. Are we living a shallow life, a superficial life, without much meaning to our lives or have we put aside all the trivialities of religion - and they are trivialities - all the nationalistic, limited points of view? And do we think of the rest of the world, the rest of humanity as something separate from us? Do we think that way, do we look at the world that way? Then our lives, when we do look at it that way, narrowly, our lives become very individualistic, narrow, limited and rather shallow - because all of us are concerned with ourselves, with our own progress, with our own success, with our own religious conclusions and achievements. There's a tremendous lot of self-interest in all of us, whether we're highly placed politicians or the cheap gurus who are only accumulating a lot of money and all of us pursuing, in the search of truth, or illumination, basically in all these movements there is self-interest. That self-interest may be covered up or that self-interest may be absorbed into something else. And this self-interest whether in the name of God, in the name of illusion, illumination - not illusion - we've plenty of. All right? Whether it be our own particular success and so on, there is deep, abiding self-interest in all of us. We may pretend we are seeking truth, we want to be illumined, or find how to live properly - but basically, inwardly, there is this turmoil of self-interest.
Please, as we said, don't agree with the speaker. What the speaker says has no value unless you yourself understand exactly yourself whether there is this deep self-interest. And this self-interest prevents total attention, which we went into the other day. Perhaps we may go into it later on.
And we have built an extraordinary world outwardly, thought has built. The great churches and all the rituals therein, the ancient temples, and the beautiful mosques are all the result of thought. All the rituals therein are put together by thought. Right? Please don't accept what the speaker is saying. Question yourself, delve into these facts that thought has created not only nationalistic, religious divisions, but also, thought has created the most amazing technological world. They have invented artificial hearts to be implanted in human beings, quick communications - you know all the rest of it - the computers - thought has done all that in co-operation with others and each one being independent to work together. I don't know if you have gone into the question of co-operation - unless one is totally independent, thinking for oneself, not accepting authority of another especially in spiritual matters (if I may use that word 'spiritual') - thought has been responsible for all this. That's a fact.
So, thought has been capable of extraordinary work: great paintings, great statues, great inventions. And also thought is always seeking security for itself and therefore it has created gods - I know you may not like this, but you have to see these facts. It has created gods of various kinds - Christian Gods, Muslim, and the Hindu Gods - thousands of them in this country. And together, we ought to consider why thought has become so tremendously important; and why thought has worked, expanded incalculably in the technological world, and that thought itself has said, I will understand myself. That is, thought has built, put together, 'myself'. Do you agree to that? Are we going together? Are we thinking together, or am I forcing you to think? Or can we have a dialogue about this? A dialogue means a conversation between two people, amicable, who are friends, who are not merely expressing merely at the verbal level - but they're concerned with themselves, with their wives, with their husbands and the whole human nature - they're talking about it together. You and the speaker are in that position - we're having a dialogue together. Right? This is not a clever statement. It should be that way - that means we must together, I mean together, think of all these things, not according to your opinion or my opinion, according to your point of view, or according to your prejudice and so on.
To think together is very important. That means both of us are free to enquire, free to question each other, in a friendly manner, not as a dialectical business, but together find out what place has thought, and where thought is not necessary. Right? We are going to enquire into that: where thought is necessary, and the more you think, the more energy, vitality there is in that direction - which is the world of technology. And observe the nature of thought which has built the self-interest. Right?
All of us need security, both biological, physical as well as inward security, all of us need it. And it is the urgency, the demand of the brain that says, I can only function excellently if the brain is completely secure. Right? Are we together? Where does security lie? Of course you must have security as a house, a flat or a hut, furniture - if you have furniture, or a bed, and a few clothes or many, many clothes. There we must have security otherwise you and I wouldn't be sitting here. And the brain also says, I must be secure not only outwardly, physically, but also inwardly. Right? That's what you want, don't you? In the search of security, there is also fear involved in not having security - they both go together. You understand this? That is, I want security - my brain demands that you shall be secure. Either it accepts an illusion and that illusion gives it a sense of security, which most people do - security in tradition, security in the old beliefs, security in carrying on day after day in the same habits. Security in doing puja or ritual, to make you feel a little more holy.
So, we have to investigate together, have a dialogue, a conversation, to find out if there is security at all. You understand my question? The search for security may be an illusion, inwardly. You understand? That is, we find security in a family with a wife or a husband, having a house and so on, or living in one of those filthy huts along the beach. I won't talk about politics or government. Is there security? We want security: I worked for so long with regard to something, I'm growing old, and I want in my own way to be sure, certain about death, about my life, about my family. Or I find security becoming a monk, a sannyasi, or go away and live in the Himalayas and find security in my thinking, in my meditation. Right? Are you following all this?
So, is thought capable of giving human beings security? You understand what I am asking? Thought has put together a series of activities which is called National Security, and thought has divided this security as belonging to America, Russia, China and India and so on. Are you following this? A little bit at least. And in its search for security it has created division and therefore conflict between various nations and so on, and it hasn't realised that in division, in separation, there must be conflict. Right? Am I talking to myself? You understand? Please this is important to understand as a dialogue, a conversation that where there is division, separation as French, German and all that, there must inevitably be conflict, that's a law. As long as you're a Hindu, attached to an idea called India and become patriotic and all that business, there must be the other, who is the Muslim. He has also got his conditioning, his propaganda, his beliefs. So where there is division, you're going to have a war: between Russia and America, or England, you know all the rest of it. That has been the history of mankind from the beginning of time. Wars have been our heritage. Who creates this division? You understand my question? Is it thought? I am asking you, please, a conversation: is it thought that has divided the world into nationalities, into economic divisions, into various forms of culture and religion and so on? Is it thought?
And then we have to ask, you and I, the speaker, about what is the beginning of thought? What is the reality, what is the origin of thinking? Please, work together. Thought has done the most extraordinary things, there is no question of that. And also thought has done the most diabolical things. And thought which is so essential for all of us - because you can't, the speaker couldn't use words if he has no vocabulary, accumulated memories of English. So thought is limited. (Don't agree, sir, don't nod your head in constant agreement sir.) You have to look at this very carefully, understand it for yourself, the speaker can only describe, put it into words, draw a design, but you have to think, find out, doubt, question, ask - not agree at all. You know, that's one of our peculiarities as human beings: we agree and disagree. What is the need to agree or disagree? When you see something to be actual, there is no agreement or disagreement, it is so. But we don't see anything clearly, we're all rather confused and out of this confusion arises agreement and disagreement.
But if you and I, if you and the speaker saw something very clearly, there is no need for agreement. It is so. You understand? Please understand this. This is important. Go into it. (It's hot here, isn't it? No, don't look at the fan!) You see on this basis - agreement and disagreement - there is always division, and therefore conflict. I agree with you, and I don't agree with him. Or I follow this and you don't follow that, I choose this and you don't choose that - this constant division, agreement and disagreement. You and I would never disagree that this is a microphone; we have been told, put together by electronic experts and they would call it a microphone - and we say it is a microphone. There is no disagreement. If you like to call it a giraffe, you can, but nobody will understand, you can say, this thing is a giraffe, but they have a picture of a giraffe, they have seen it in a book and so there is no communication. But there is communication when you and the speaker see the same thing and say, that is a microphone. The perception of that, the seeing of that doesn't demand or ask agreement or disagreement. I wonder if you can go along in that direction. Because the speaker is not trying to convince you of anything, nor trying to make you feel you agree with the speaker. All that the speaker is doing is describing what actually is going on, not only externally, but inwardly. He is your mirror and the mirror has no authority, the mirror is not your guru. Right? I wonder if you see all this. It's a mirror. And when you begin to see things very clearly, then you can throw away the mirror altogether, destroy it.
So, this is not a personal or personality cult. To the speaker, that is an abomination - to make the person into something extraordinary. But rather, thinking together, having a dialogue together, a conversation as deeply as possible, not superficial conversation about the weather, but a conversation which touches our hearts and brains. So, we're asking, who has created all this division in the world? The good and the bad. This duality in us, who has brought this about? Is it not thought, and is not thought limited? Thought can imagine that it is limitless. It can project limitless, infinite horizons but thought itself being limited, whatever it projects, whatever it does, is still limited and therefore breeding conflict. We must go into this carefully. Most of us live with conflict. Conflict between the wife and the husband, conflict with your neighbour, conflict between the Muslim and the Hindu - all our life, from the beginning till we die, there is this perpetual struggle: to meditate, how to meditate, how to sit properly to meditate, you know - the whole business.
Is conflict necessary and can one live without a single conflict - which means having no problem at all. Why do we have problems? Religious problems, social problems, problems in our relationships with others, intimate and so on, we always have problems. Can one live a life without a single problem? Have you ever asked that question? And if you're asking it, as you must, how will you find out if it is possible - not take it for granted it is possible, or say, it is impossible - but to find out for yourself what a problem is, and whether you can live without a single shadow of it. Would you like to go into that?
Our brain which is a most extraordinary instrument, which has got immense capacity, capable of the most astonishing subtleties, and that brain has got so crowded with problems - why? Please find out, ask ourselves why. The meaning of the word 'problem', etymologically is, something thrown at you. Problem means a challenge. And the brain from the moment it is born till it dies has problems. It cannot write - and the teacher and the poor parents and the others, teach him how to write, and to the child, that becomes a problem. Right? You understand all this? So from childhood through the university - if you're unlucky or lucky to go through that machinery - your brain is educated to have problems. Right? Do you agree to that - not agree, sorry! Do you see the fact of that: that every human being is educated to have problems, and having a brain that is educated to having problems, it can never solve any problem, because it is conditioned that way. You can observe it politically, religiously and so on. Can that conditioning, which is, having been trained to have problems, can that brain be free of all problems - religious, economic, social and so on, and problems of relationship. Do you understand the question? If I have problems, my brain is conditioned to that, how can I solve any problem? I only can solve attend partially one and thereby create two or three others, politically, religiously - this is what is happening in the world.
So I am asking, you are asking yourself whether it is possible to be absolutely free so that you can meet problems freely, not with a brain that is conditioned to problems. Right? Are we meeting each other, somewhat? We'll go into this. We are asking why and who has created this division which creates the problems. We said, thought, because thought is limited. And we said also, memory is stored in the brain and that memory is thought. Memory is knowledge and that knowledge can never be complete, whether scientific knowledge or knowledge about anything including yourself, it can never be complete, there is always something more to discover, to understand, to find out. So knowledge is the past and knowledge also in the future will always be limited. Is this clear? And knowledge is the result of experience. Right? Experience which is always limited, knowledge out of that experience is also limited; then memory, stored in the brain, and that memory responds, and the memory is thought. It is not a question of agreement or disagreement, it is so. Our brains are full of memories, which is, our brains are recording, like a tape-recorder, it is recording. Right? Are you following all this? And so the brain is becoming gradually or rapidly mechanical. Not in the technological world - it has invented extraordinary things like the computer - I won't go into the computer business. I'll tell you about it a little later. The computer is programmed, programmed by the experts. A mathematician, who is a top mathematician can programme and it can teach others mathematics. Our brains are also programmed: you're a Hindu, I'm a Buddhist, I follow the Tibetan way of meditation and so on.
We are programmed as a computer is programmed: you're an American, great, you know all the rest of it. It's not the moment to go into all that. As the computers are developing so rapidly, they can do almost anything, and what is going to happen to the human brain when a computer can do a lot of things which the human brain has been doing, what happens to us as human beings? In exercising the brain, the brain becomes active, more and more and more. But if the brain is not active, gradually the machine is going to take over, our brains are either going to wither or enter into the world of entertainment. Right? You understand all this? Are you interested in all this?
Either the brain will be involved in great entertainment - it wants it because it cannot do much in the technological world - so the brain will gradually wither, either become involved, be amused, entertained, by sport, by religious ceremonies, which is happening now more and more; or there is only another possibility - enter into the psychological world, into the world that is beyond the psyche, beyond the limited self-interest, go into that most profoundly. Now, can thought do all this? You understand? Thought has created the computer, and it will build cars with robots, there will be a great deal of unemployment and so on and so on, so on. So, as thought being always limited, and that's the only instrument apparently we have, and you may say, what about feelings, emotions, sentimentality? Is not all that also part of thought? No? I'm very devoted to my guru, or to some idol in a temple: the idol in the temple is created by thought. My guru, if I have one, and fortunately I haven't got any - if I had one, thought has given him a great many attributes: he knows - I don't know, I'll be helped. That's one of the curses of gurus, wanting to help others. Do you listen to all this, without throwing something at me? Because we all want to be helped, and we have been helped not only by surgeons and doctors and so on, we've been helped by philosophers, by ancient books, the Bible, Koran and the Upanishads, or whatever your particular religious book is, or your guru, or the local pundit, you all want to be helped. I have a problem, I want to be helped, I come to you, you know much better than I do. I obey.
So what happens to me when I'm being helped, actually? I become weaker and weaker mentally, morally, I just follow, obey, I become a machine, there is no independence at all. I never question, doubt, be sceptical. If you are sceptical, doubt, question, religions wouldn't exist.
So, we're enquiring now, talking over together, as thought is limited, and whatever it does in the world of technology or in the world of the psyche, I must understand myself, know myself, and then thought begins to investigate and that very investigation becomes limited because thought is limited. Right? Are you following all this? So, we are asking, if that is the only instrument we have and if we see, actually observe the fact, not agree or disagree, but actually see the fact that whatever thought does must always be limited, and therefore conflict. There is conflict because we have duality: the good and the bad. Would you follow all that a little bit, if it interests you? From ancient days, this has been the conflict, between the good and the bad: the good trying to overcome the bad and the bad trying to overcome the good. The good is expressed in a thousand different ways and the bad in a thousand different ways, called evil and so on, so on, so on. Now is it possible - please listen to this - not to have duality at all? Do you understand my question? To find that out, urgently, not just theoretically: is there a duality at all? All right? We are questioning.
Fear is a fact for all human beings, like violence is a fact, and the opposite of fear is courage, or escape or try to overcome it. Right? So there is duality. The fact and the non-fact. I wonder if you see that. The fact is fear and the non-fact is, I should not be afraid, and therefore, suppression, conflict and all that arises; between violence and non-violence, non-violence is not a fact. It is just an invention of thought saying, I must reach non-violence - in the meantime, it is being violent. So, I'm asking myself, and you are asking yourself, is there an opposite at all - except man and woman, dark and light, tall and short - measurement - apart from that, psychologically is there duality at all? And there have been all kinds of philosophers saying when there is no duality you can only reach that level when you've reached heaven, or something or other. There have been lots of books written about that. But we're pushing aside all authority in these matters and enquiring: is there duality at all, or only facts? The fact is, I am afraid. If the brain knows how to deal with that, how to be free of fear, then there is no opposite. Right? I wonder if you understand this? Right, sir? If I'm free - if there is no violence in me altogether, because I understand the nature of violence, I've looked at it, I have held it, I have observed it, I've gone into it, seen what it is; not only physical violence but also psychological violence - 'I must not be, I must be,' and imitation, conformity, anger, jealousy, hate, that's all violence. If I can understand it, deal with it, there is no opposite, I don't need an opposite. You understand what I'm saying? All right, sirs?
Now, can I deal with that instantly, not postpone it. When I postpone it, I've already gone into conflict. I wonder if you understand this. Anything I postpone, if I say, I'll get over my anger, give me time, let it be gradual, I've already created conflict. I wonder if you understand this. All right? Do we go together in this? So, can I, can my brain deal with the fact of what I am and not what I should be? There is fear. Can I deal with that completely? Not say, I'll gradually get rid of fear, tell me how to get rid of fear. Don't ever ask, as we said the other day, 'how' to do any psychological thing. You can ask a doctor 'how' to do this and that. But psychologically never ask 'how'. There are a thousand people who will tell you what to do. Now can I be free of fear, completely? I'll go into it, but you are going to go with me into it, not just listen and say, well, that's an excellent description, I don't know how to do it, I'll think about it. Now we're looking at fear, not the objects of fear, not causes, not results of fear. You may be afraid of darkness, one may be afraid of one's wife or husband, one may be afraid of losing a job, or afraid of public opinion, afraid of not being able to face yourself as you are, and say I can do this, and hold on, but you can never do it - various forms of fear. We are not dealing with the various forms - right? Are we together? - not the objects of fear, but to find out, for ourselves, what is the causation of fear, the cause? Where there is a cause, the effect can be put away. If I understand the cause, the effect has no meaning. You understand? If I can find out the cause of my illness, then I'll be healthy. So, if I can find out the cause of fear, not the multiple forms of fear, but the cause of fear. So, let us investigate it together, talk about it. Not agree or disagree.
Is it time, the cause? Is time a factor of fear? I might die tomorrow - tomorrow is time. I might lose my job. I might not love my wife, she'll get angry and so on. That is, time is involved as a cause of fear. Do we see that? Right, sir? I am asking you, do you actually perceive for yourself the fact - the fact, not the idea, the idea is different from the fact. Idea is not the fact. You are sitting there, and the speaker is sitting here, that's a fact. But we can make an idea of it. So the idea is not the fact. Like the word 'door' is not the door. So we're only looking at the fact which brings about fear. Right? And we are saying, you and I in our conversation together, not persuading each other, see that time is a factor of fear. I have done something wrong last year and I hope nobody will discover it because I've got a certain reputation, and if they find that out they will throw me out, so I'll hide it. And therefore that is the cause of fear which is time. I've done something in the past which might cause trouble for me, therefore I'm afraid of that incident - that means time. Time is a movement, a series of movements.
Are you interested in all this, or have you heard the speaker talking about this endlessly, therefore you are bored with it? I'll go on with it, if you are bored it's up to you.
So, time is a factor and what is time? I know time by the watch; I know time by the sunrise, sunset, the evening star, the beautiful slip of a new moon, and the full moon. Time is the past, time is now, time is tomorrow. This whole movement of the past which is the accumulated memory through time, through experience, knowledge and so on, all that accumulation is time, and that accumulation as memory, knowledge, goes through the present, modifies itself and goes on to the future. This whole movement of knowledge, experience, memory and thought is movement in time. All right? So time is not only this movement from the beginning to the end, but also time is now, because tomorrow is what I am today. Tomorrow is what I am actually today. If I'm angry, violent today, if there is no radical, fundamental change, tomorrow I'll be still the same. Right? Right sirs? You all look so puzzled. So that is time. I won't go into the question of change. That demands a great deal of investigation. I don't want to do that now for the moment.
So, fear is time and fear is also thought. I may lose my job, I may lose my wife who is looking at somebody else, I may not reach heaven and so on. Thought is the movement of the past, present and future. So, thought and time together - they're both movements - together are the cause of fear.
Then the question arises, is it possible to stop thought and time? That's the normal question. If fear is the result or the effect of the cause - time and thought - then is it possible to stop thought and time - otherwise, I'll go on with fear. Right, sir? Do we meet this? Are we together a little bit? Let's take the journey a little bit quickly. What shall I do? I see the cause, and I also see the effect. The effect is fear. The cause is time and thought. If there is a putting away of thought and time I've no fear. Then one needs no God, no guru, when there is freedom from thought you are entirely different. So we ask ourselves: is it possible to stop time and thought? That's what meditation does. You hope through meditation to control thought and thereby push it behind, control it - never enquiring who is the controller, which is also thought. I wont go into all that now for the moment. Is it possible to end thought and time? Answer it, sir, work. Our brains are so sluggish; we've become so lazy, indolent, because we've been told so many things and we don't know where we are. So here what we are trying to do in our conversation is to see the facts and live with the fact, not escape from the fact. The fact is, I'm afraid, we're afraid, each one of us in different ways, there is fear and we know the cause. There is the absolute fact, that is, time and thought are the causation of fear. And also we see that by the ending of the cause, the effect is totally ended.
If I know what my illness is, I can take certain remedies and that's the end of it. Similarly, we know the cause, the effect is fear, now what shall we do? Don't wait for me to answer it. This is a conversation between us. How do you observe the cause? How do you discover the cause? Not by being told or having it described, put into words, but to find out the fact, not the idea of the fact. Right? Please see this: not the idea, the conclusion about the fact, but the fact is time and thought. Is it possible to totally end all that - knowing the evolution of the brain has taken a million years. Your brain has evolved through time and through that long duration, long voyage of time, it has gathered certain conditionings: that thought will solve fear, thought will do something in order to escape from fear; do puja - escape, every form of escape. And all escapes have stopped because you know the cause, therefore you have to do something with the cause. If that cause is not eradicated, you'll always live with fear, psychologically. Psychologically it's far more important than biologically, physically, because the psychological states always overcome the biological states. I won't go into that, there is no time left.
Now, do you put the question seriously to yourself, or is it just a passing question? You put that question today and forget about it the next day, and pick it up the day after tomorrow. Or do you put the question most seriously, with all your intensity, with your passion? And that means, are you willing to give your complete, passionate attention to the cause, or you just listen and carry on with your fears? If you put that question, profoundly, seriously, put that question with all your heart and mind and passion to find out, that means giving all your energy, vitality, attention to that. When you give all your energy, which you've wasted in trying to escape from it, or in trying to find a substitute, or rationalising fear, if you drop all that completely, then there is no escape from fear. No god, no other human being can help you to be free of fear. If you really put it with all your energy, strength, vitality and especially the passion to comprehend something which mankind has lived with, fear, for millennia upon millennia, then you are giving that passionate, flaming attention to the cause. When you give such burning attention, the cause is burnt away. But very few people - we're not discouraging - very few people do this - they've got so many things to do: family, husband, children, earning money and so on, and that takes a great deal of energy, all that. So you say, 'sorry I haven't got the energy, help me to have that energy'. Take a drug, instead of asking for help. I'm not advocating drugs. They are horrid.
So, passion is something entirely different from lust; lust is sensation, sexuality. We are not against that, we're pointing out. But passion is something entirely different. That passion comes with all its tremendous energy and capacity when sorrow ends. When there is no sorrow in your heart or mind, brain - which is part of self-interest - when there is the ending of that, there is great, immense, inexhaustible passion, which can never be burnt away. And that passion, which is attention, burns away the cause of fear, which is time and thought.
We ought to talk about many other things. It is now quarter to seven. Should we go on? What would you like to talk about? What is your deep interest, what you demand of yourself apart from earning money, apart from all that business, what is it that each human being wants? You want something, otherwise you wouldn't be here listening to K. Somebody is yawning, tired - go to bed and rest, but we are asking something very serious. When you say, I want something, the 'wanting' is to fulfil the emptiness in oneself: I want to be happy; I want to reach nirvana or moksha or liberation or illumination. Wanting means, there is something missing. What are you missing? Is it that the emptiness, the loneliness can never be filled, but we are trying to fill it with puja, with books, with knowledge, with chatter, with talking endlessly about politics - you know, the whole thing. Do we realise how extraordinarily shallow we are? And realising that shallowness I want to have depth. So, we're always wanting, wanting, wanting - wanting to be loved, wanting to be encouraged, wanting to find somebody who will be a long lasting companion. And this want is endless, if you've filled one want, you want some other want - that goes on for the rest of one's life. I want to know or one wants to know what happens after death. That is one of the questions asked all the time. We'll go into that tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. (At the other place, I hope, not here.)
Can you ever stop wanting? You know, you want to find roots for yourself in a country, in a person, in an image or an illusion, you want to establish your roots, and you want to fulfil, become somebody. This goes on all our lives. Have you ever asked yourself, that I don't want a thing? I want food, clothes and shelter, that's understood, but otherwise I don't want a thing. Have you ever asked yourself that? I think you should, if I may most respectfully suggest, you should ask that question. Because in discovering your wants, you must also discover why you want, and if there is an ending to all craving, to wanting. When you find that out, that you don't ask anything for yourself, then there is that state which is indescribable. I know you are waiting for the description. That description is futile, it is merely words. But to come to that point, and that is not a long journey. It is the shortest journey, the next step - which is not to want psychologically anything. Right sirs.