How does one transform oneself?
Intelligence is the capacity to see the truth that thought is limited
1st Public Discussion, Ojai, California
April 05, 1977
Every Tuesday and Thursday for the next two weeks we will have dialogues. The word 'dialogue' - I looked it up in the dictionary - means putting our thoughts into words. And a dialogue between friends, and I hope this is that way, implies that there are no arguments, no assertions, that two friends are talking over together their problems, amicably, frankly and easily, because they are friends. So perhaps we could approach these dialogues that way. That is, if you could ask a question and go into it very, very deeply, patiently, and see the whole implications of those questions. And so what shall we talk about this morning together?
Questioner: I wonder if we might talk about mysticism, and whether or not there actually is mysticism, or is mysticism inevitably an escape?
Krishnamurti: Mysticism. Could you talk about mysticism.
Q: Yes. I have a problem which I have been exploring for weeks and weeks and weeks and it is this: to see the false as false, to see the true as true, and to see the truth in the false. It is this that’s thirsting my brain.
K: That's your question, is it, sir?
Q: Yes, I don’t understand it
K: All right, we will go into that. Anything else?
Q: Is there such a thing as sacred or timeless art, or is all art conditioned?
K: Is there something that's sacred, unconditioned, not touched by thought. Is that it, sir?
Q: I am asking a question not about the nature or the meaning of belief in traditional religions because mere reason shows that it creates duality and strengthens the self. Instead, I am asking why did the call to believe arise in these religions in the first place?
Q: I would like to talk about reality, the nature of it.
K: She would like to talk about reality.
Q: In your writings you refer to ‘the Beloved’. What is this beloved and
K: (Laughs) All right, sir. Look, it is not what I write and what I think. What is your question, it is not my question. Don't say, well you have written this, and what do you mean by that. Could we honestly, simply and easily talk about what we are concerned, each one is concerned.
Q: How can I bring this inward psychological revolution?
K: How is it possible to bring about psychological revolution.
Q: How can I be emptied of my content?
Q: The content of consciousness.
K: The content of one's consciousness. Now just a minute, that's enough questions. Let's see. Now what shall we take among all these questions?
Q: Content of consciousness.
K: Shall we take the question, if you are really concerned, not what somebody has said, but your own problem - you understand, sir? - your own concern about what is truth, why religions have so separated themselves and we are caught in it, what do you mean by the false and the true, could one talk about the unconditioned, is there such a thing as the unconditioned, sacred, untouched by thought, and is it possible to really bring about a transformation in oneself. These are all the various questions, more or less, that have been put to each other. So which shall we take first?
Q: What does it mean to be serious about those questions? What does it mean to be serious?
K: What does it mean to be serious. I don't know. (Laughter) I do know for oneself when one is very, very serious, for oneself, but I don't know what you mean by being serious. You may translate it in so many ways, that in seriousness there is no humour, no laughter, seriousness committed to a particular ideology, and also one can be quite serious neurotically, and so on, so on. I think we generally mean by seriousness, that one is really concerned, deeply concerned with something that we want to solve, we want to understand or go into.
Q: I’d like to talk about fear.
K: Like to go into the question of fear.
Q: Could you please say something about the relationship of individuality to consciousness? I think there is lot of confusion about where individuality fits in, by unconsciousness and all the contents are made and where does individuality fit in?
K: Now, I don't know how many questions to all these questions, how is one to answer all the various questions. Perhaps if we take one question amongst all this which might cover the whole field.
Q: Could it be reality and truth, the relationships? That might cover
K: I am afraid that wouldn't - that's too an abstract subject.
Q: How does one start to transform oneself?
K: How does one start - may we start with that question? Would that be all right with all of you?
K: How does one start to bring about a radical, deep psychological revolution? That's the question, isn't it, sir?
K: One has to go into this question rather carefully. First of all we have to understand what do we mean by change? Change from this to that - right? - we generally mean that. Change from what one is into what one should be. Is that change at all? You follow my question? I want to change from what I am, with my greed and all the rest of it, and change that into something much better. Right? Right, sirs? This is a dialogue, please, I am not talking by my so please. And when there is such change, is it really a transformation? Or is it merely a reaction? Or is it a premeditated desired end to which you want to change - change. You understand? And is transformation, inward psychological revolution, is that totally different from change? You understand my question? Please, let's talk over as two friends, please. You understand? Wait a minute, sir, wait a minute - let me finish.
There is capitalism and communism. The communism is change from capitalism - at least they think so, coming along more or less all political things are becoming the same, more or less. Is that change? They talk a great deal about revolution, outward revolution, and is that revolution based on a change which is preconceived? You understand? And therefore conforming to a pattern already established, and therefore it is not radical change. I wonder if I am making myself clear.
Q: They seem two forms, communism and capitalism, of the same conflict.
K: No, no, forgive me, if you Don't - forget capitalism and communism. I want to change from greed to non-greed. The non-greed is already established in my mind, is already put into words - there is a pattern to which I am conforming. Or I will conform when there is change.
Q: It’s an idea.
K: No, just Please, don't Go slowly, please. First I want to be clear that the difference between change and transformation, a mutation, if you want to use that word. Change implies changing 'what is' into 'what should be'. Right? Into 'what should be' is already established, by thought, by environment, by circumstances, by pressures and so on, so on - it is already established. And when I change, I am changing from 'what is' into 'what should be', which is conceived. Therefore I say to myself, that is not change at all. Right? It is still pursuing the same pattern only in a different field. So, I see that very clearly. I hope you do too. I see that fact, that change implies a continuity of 'what is', modified. Right? Whereas transformation is something entirely different. The ending of 'what is', not 'what should be'. Am I right? This is a discussion between two friends, I am not being logistic or reasoned and all the rest of it. Do we as two friends - please I really mean it - as two friends see this, the difference between change and total ending of something.
Q: Are you saying that change is like, sort of totally non-directional? In other words when someone...
K: That's right, sir, that's right. One is directional, the other is non-directional. But sir, just get it, what it means. Because we have operated, our mind is always directional. Whereas we are saying the ending is non-directional and therefore it is something tremendous and not limited.
Q: I see very clearly intellectually that all ways to change lead to no change at all, no transformation. How is it that we don’t feel it inside?
K: We are going to go into that, just a minute. If we see clearly the meaning of these two, verbally, even verbally or intellectually; that is, change implies continuity of 'what is', modified, directional, and transformation, mutation, total psychological revolution has no direction, is not modified. It is the ending of something. Right? Is this clear? Verbally at least.
Q: Isn’t it legitimate to assume though, that if someone is in a situation where they want to, say, move out of where they are, like someone who’s standing in the middle of, you know, on the planet, and he wants to go somewhere, he has to seemingly at least at some point have some sense of direction because...
K: Wait, sir, wait, sir. Don't particularise yet, we are going slowly. First let's understand this really very Please, to understand this psychologically is more important than merely verbal understanding of it. The 'better' is the evil. The whole mentality, our whole mentality is 'becoming better'. The 'better' is directional, 'the better' is modification of 'what is' into 'what should be'. It's all directional, preconceived, modified. Whereas the other is a total ending of 'what is'. Now if that is clear, now which is it you, please, as a human being, want, or demand, or seeking? Sociologically, economically, psychologically.
Q: Isn’t this the difference between prayer for something, and meditation to listen.
K: Prayer and meditation - we are not quite discussing that, sir, if you don't mind. Lordy!
Now which is it as a human being, actually not theoretically, is caught up in: a directional movement or the ending of that directional movement? You understand my question, sir?
Q: One can get caught in the directional movement.
K: You don't understand my question?
K: Sir, when you have a direction Look, you are looking at a map, a map of America, or Europe or India - map - and if you have a direction from this place, Ojai, to Nebraska, whatever that is, you have a direction. Right? So, when you are concerned with the direction you don't see the whole map. But we are trying to see the whole map, not direction. Right? Is that all right?
K: Thank god! (Laughter) So, now which is it as a human being you are caught in?
Q: Mr Krishnamurti, I feel that when I am caught in that situation I am very scared.
K: No, madame...
Q: We are always seeking temporary solutions.
K: No, I am asking, please don't go off to something else. We are asking each other, as two friends - I am not sitting on a platform, we are walking together or sitting under a tree and we are asking: which is it you as a human being actually are caught in, directional or non-directional?
Q: Are we seeking a temporary direction?
K: Directionally, isn't it. Now how, if it is directional, and you are aware that you are caught in a directional movement, how do you end that movement? That's all the question. Not how to transform that movement into something else. You understand my question? I am going north - rather, south - I am going south, and I really want to go north, so I turn round and go. You see the difference? I break the movement of going towards the south and turn and go north. But I must know, be aware by the sun or by the compass that I am going south. Now if we agree, or if we see actually that you are caught in a direction, in modified continuity of 'what is', then I am asking how do you end that?
Q: There’s no way to end it. As soon as there is a way to do it...
K: All right. How does it is it possible - put it, not the 'how', the method, the system - is it possible to end that?
Q: Become objective. Stand back and become objective. Step out of the circle and look at the circle.
K: I can't quite hear that, sir.
Q: Step out of the circle, become more objective and look at the circle.
K: Are you doing it?
K: Ah, no, no, you can't try. (Laughter) The compass says go south, and you really want to go north. You don't say, 'Well, I'll try and turn round and go north', you turn round and go north. (Laughter)
Q: Sir, when you use words like ‘tremendous’ and ‘revolution’, we project the idea of a tremendous
K: Sir, that's what I'm I am asking, sir, please listen quietly, sir. As two friends, are you aware that you are caught in a directional movement? And if you are aware of it, is it possible to end that directional movement? It is a very simple question. The complication comes a little later. (Laughter)
Q: You stop making comparisons.
K: I don't quite follow.
K: I am going, sir, please I realise that I am caught in a directional movement, which is modified the continuity of 'what is' modified. That is directional. Am I aware I am doing this? I am violent, I should not be - non-violent; I am greedy - non-greedy; I am this and that, and all that is a modified continuity of 'what is'. Right? Is that clear? If that is clear, then I am asking myself, is it can that end? That is the that is transformation. Not transformation of 'what is' into something else. Bene, sir?
Q: When the mind...
K: No, no, stick to this one question, sir.
Q: The mind can’t answer it because having never not been going in a direction, it seems impossible to tell if it is possible not to go in a direction, from memory.
K: All right, sir. Are you saying our memory, our brain is so conditioned that it is always moving in a direction. Which means what?
Q: It means we are always trying to be somewhere other.
K: No. Which means a brain, our brain is conditioned generations after generation to go in a direction. Right? Have you observed it? Have you observed your brain? Your whole process of thinking is directional. Direction either lateral or vertical, horizontal or vertical, it is always a direction. Right? Are you aware of that?
Q: Is the non-directional a fixed point?
K: Is it because we are talking about it and therefore temporarily it is non-directional? What is temporary is not actual. Right?
Q: Doesn’t it all cease when there is no longer someone who wants anything to change, anything to be different?
K: Madame, that comes a little later. But we proceed We are already ahead when we have stated that, when we have not actually realised the directional movement, which is modified continuity of 'what is', and can that end? That's all I am asking.
K: Actually, not intellectually, not verbally and say, 'Yes' - finished.
Q: We do not see that.
K: Wait. And see the implications when you say, 'It is finished'.
Q: How can I see I move in a direction?
K: Don't you, madame, don't you want to be better? To be - if you are fragmented don't you want to be integrated? Don't you want fear to end? That's a direction.
Q: The looking at the fear and the attachment...
K: Don't take fear as an example. Please, it is so difficult
Q: Sir, aren’t you saying that it is not bad to be non-directional, you should be directional but know what your direction is
K: No, no, no, no. No, no, we are not saying that. To know your direction - how do you when you use the word 'know', what do you mean by the word 'know'?
Q: You see the whole map.
K: No Yes, sir. You have used the word 'know', what do you mean by that word?
Q: It is a conclusion.
K: No, please, two minutes. When you use the word 'know', what is implied, what is the significance, what is the meaning of that word 'to know'?
Q: To be sure of it.
K: I know you because I met you yesterday. Right? You were introduced to me, and I say, 'Yes, I know you'. Which is what?
Q: To recognise.
K: To recognise. How does that recognition process take place?
Q: From memory.
Q: The past.
K: Which is what? Your name - you were introduced to me yesterday - your name is registered in the brain, and therefore it is memory, therefore it is already known. Right? So when I say, 'I know', you are already you are speaking from the past. You don't see the complications of all this.
All right. So we are asking, is it possible to end the directional movement? Not have a new direction, but have no direction at all. Because to have a new direction is another modified continuity. Right? I wonder if you see.
Q: We don’t know to the answer to the question because we’re driving, or I’m driving in a car and I have never stopped, I have always been going and I don’t know how to stop.
K: So you have always been going in a particular direction and you don't know how to stop. Let us take that. You have always gone along a particular road, directional, and you really don't know how to stop. Can we start from there? Now what is the impetus that makes you want to stop? What is the motive?
K: No, please, don't (laughs)
Q: See you are going the wrong way.
Q: The fact that I have crashed into one horrible thing in life against another makes me begin to see
K: So your motive is the horror, or you have seen the results of direction. Is that so, or is it a conclusion? You see the difference? I can conclude it is a wrong direction. I can think it is wrong, but I may want another direction.
Q: Stop the one you’re on. Before you go in another direction you have to stop the one you’re on.
K: All right. Before you go into any other direction you have to stop. What makes you stop, sir?
Q: Crisis in consciousness.
K: No, please don't complicate. Crisis in consciousness - madame, do you know what that means? Crisis means a challenge, it is such a great challenge, and your response must be equal to that challenge. This is what is going on now. So I am asking, when you say can you stop moving in a certain direction, and I am asking what makes you stop? What is the motive, what is the urge, the desire, the necessity?
Q: I see I am getting nowhere.
Q: The direction is hazardous.
Q: You crash into the wall of reality, you see my desires did nothing for me.
K: So, when you crash into reality and you say, 'I get nothing from it', so your motive is reward and punishment. Be simple about it, sir. Your reward is - punishment and reward. That is directional. That is what we are brought up on, from childhood. Modern psychologists - I don't read their books but I have friends who talk about it who have come to see me and we discuss it - they are saying we always punish people, now let us do the other: reward people. Which is the same thing. So are you do you want to stop because you want a reward?
Q: Because of discontent.
K: Do you want a reward and therefore you stop? Or you are frightened of punishment and therefore you stop?
Q: You stop because you are aware.
K: You stop because you are aware. Now please, what do you mean by being aware? I am not being facetious, I want to understand each word that you use so that you and I both are on the same level. I may have a different meaning to that word, and you may have a different meaning to that word. So what do you mean by being aware?
Q: I see the futility of making effort.
K: Do you see that actually? That means you no longer make effort, of any kind? You see
Q: You realise that the thinker is fabricating the whole sense of directional living...
K: Agreed, madame. I agree, but when you say, 'I am aware of that fact', what do you mean by aware, we are asking. When you see thought, or when you realise the whole fabrication is brought about by thought, are you aware of it? And what do you mean by that word 'aware'?
Q: You see it clearly.
K: Now, when you use - I am sorry, I am going to push this point if you don't mind - when you see, what do you mean by seeing?
K: What do you mean by understanding? Madame, this is understanding, how? Intellectually?
K: Therefore what do you mean by that?
Q: It is sort of like a dawning.
K: All right. It dawns upon you, which means what? Go into it. Don't stop.
Q: I see the difference between being the thinker and fabricating an illusory sense of things, and being the wholeness that is the very living that life is, right now, everything.
K: Which means what? That you have an insight. You see the actuality of the falseness of moving in a certain direction. You are aware of the total implications of moving in a certain direction, you grasp it, you have got it, it is in your blood. So you don't go back ever again in any direction.
Q: You just be.
K: No! You see that's what I want to prevent. Being - you have already...
Q: Scratch that word, please. (Laughter)
Q: We see this clearly in a logical
K: You see her point, sir, what she is saying? The lady there says, 'I see it'. Either one sees it verbally, intellectually and therefore it is not actual seeing. And when you say, 'I see', she meant, 'I understand'. When you say, 'I understand', what do you mean by that word? Understand what is explained. I understand verbally, intellectually, grasp the meaning of words and I understand that. She said, 'No, I don't mean that'. I said, have you really grasped the falseness of direction, that it leads nowhere? Do you actually, as you perceive that tree, is it as actual, as real as that, therefore you will never knock against that tree again. So when you use the word 'direction', when you use the word, 'I understand', it means you have finished altogether moving in a modified continuity, in a direction, which means that you have ended it. Now is that a fact? Please, if it is a fact, what has taken place in daily life? What has taken place in the movement of the brain? You understand? Because our brain is conditioned, centuries and centuries, generations after generation of millennia, to move from this to that - right? - improve oneself, change oneself, become oneself, identify yourself, fulfil yourself, be yourself; if you cannot, then achieve god - move always in a direction, direction. Now when you see that direction is false, is there the brain free of that movement? You follow? Or it's merely superficial capture of the meaning. I wonder if I am making myself clear.
Q: It’s stopped.
K: You understand? Which means - go slowly - which means the brain has broken away from the past conditioning, so it will never function in that direction at all, because it has captured the danger of it. Because the brain demands security - I won't go into all that for the moment - the brain demands security, and it thought it found security in a directional movement. You are following this? You are following it, madame? And the brain sees the danger of it, therefore says, 'I can't go in that direction'. So the brain itself has understood the movement, the danger - not merely a verbal understanding. I wonder if Am I explaining something, sir?
Q: But the next time it happens...
K: It won't, it never happens! That's what I am trying to show you. It can never happen.
Q: The momentum of all these...
Q: It will come up though.
K: That's what I am saying. Unless the brain itself, the structure, the whole Sir, you know, the brain - please I am not a brain specialist, I haven't read a book about brains and so on, but I have watched this movement of brain, which is really part of meditation - I won't go into all that. The brain is conditioned, and it is conditioned to go in a certain direction: change 'what is' into 'what should be'. It is always modifying, and in that modification it finds security, because the brain can only function when there is complete safety, properly. So it will find safety in some neurotic belief, or it's saying, 'I have achieved something' - you know, all that. Here, when the brain sees the danger of a directional movement, it itself stops naturally. It can never go back. Now does this happen to you?
Q: Are you saying stop directional movement, but not movement, are you saying to stop movement altogether?
K: No, no, directional movement.
Q: Is directional movement preconceived
K: Sir, I won't go into movement. Movement means time, time means - I won't go into all that for the moment.
Q: If that did happen, we wouldn’t be here.
K: No, sir. Sir, two friends are talking over together this question.
Q: But aren’t we here because we’re seeking something?
K: It's up to you. If you are seeking something, and the speaker has nothing to give.
Q: It hasn’t happened.
K: Wait, wait. The speaker has nothing to give. But the speaker says, let us talk over as two friends - that's completely different. You are used to - not you, sir, particularly - you are used to being given something, told something, what to do, that is the whole function of the priest, the gurus, the authority. To me all that is absurd. I would deny all that. So I can't give you anything. But I say to you, please, let's talk it over together - which is entirely different. You understand, sir?
Q: Are you saying that if you don’t seek anything, and you allow the brain basically just to
K: No sir, no, no. Don't go on with it. No, no. It's much more complex than that, sir, please. The brain itself is conditioned. We are taking one small section of the brain, as it were, which is functioning in a direction, that's all. I am not touching the rest of it. The rest of it we can go into later - the rest of it is fear, pleasure, the whole human structure. So we are asking - it is really a very important question if you once grasp this - that the ending of direction is the complete transformation. That means you will never seek direction, psychologically. Of course, if I want to know how to go to Santa Barbara I will ask somebody if there is a direction and so on, but we are not talking on that level.
Now I am asking, if I may ask my friend, I say, look we have talked about forty minutes, thirty minutes, have you really got this? Have you really grasped this, does it mean anything?
Q: You say transformation occurs all the time. Occasionally you will perhaps be at this timeless place, this place where you can see. Perhaps at one time it is seen, but then as you lose that vista...
K: No. No, sir. Would you once you realise the rattler, once you have seen the rattler and seen the danger of it, would you go back and play with it?
Q: No. But it stops being a rattler for a while, it turns back into something else again.
K: You see, that means we haven't really actually seen the danger of a directional movement. That's all.
Q: Directional movement seems to be inconsistent with nature...
K: No, sir, please.
Q: I don’t understand how
K: I explained at the beginning, sir, if you don't mind if I repeat it again, we said: change and transformation. Don't forget what we started out with. Change implies modified continuity.
Q: Does a caterpillar change into a butterfly, or...
K: Leave the caterpillar, poor thing, it's a marvellous thing, leave it alone. (Laughter) I am talking of human beings. Human beings think they are changing, when actually the change is modification of 'what is'. That's all we are saying. The modification of 'what is', they consider is change. I say that's not change at all. The ending of 'what is' is radical transformation.
Look, sirs, make it much simpler: one is violent, human beings are violent for various reasons I won't go into, from the beginning of the animal to now we are violent. Now we have a direction, which is to become non-violent. There has been the philosophy of it in India, Tolstoy, Ghandi - you follow? - the whole mess of all that. Sorry, I consider it mess, you may not. So we are conditioned to a modified change, and I say when we discuss transformation, how to bring it about, I say, look at these two words first: the word 'change' implies that; the word 'transformation' implies the ending of this movement of change - the ending, psychologically. Not the caterpillar, the and so on, so on.
Now, after talking over together for forty minutes or more or less, two friends say, please, have we understood each other?
Q: Verbally we understand.
K: Wait, wait. So you have not understood.
Q: I have not understood
K: Wait. So you say, now let's begin again. I have not understood - why? Look, sir, careful. Wait, wait. You and I are great friends - I am your husband or your wife, we are holding hands. You would say when I tell you something very extraordinary for me, deep, you say, 'I don't understand'. Would you tell her that?
Q: If I didn’t understand.
K: Ah, wait. No. What is your relationship, first? She is trying to tell you something she feels most profoundly. And you say, 'Sorry, I don't understand' - would you say that?
Q: I would say nothing.
Q: Because I would
Q: Wouldn’t you have to feel it?
K: Feel it. What do you mean by the word 'feel'? You see, I am very critical of words - sorry, forgive me - which is not avoidance, which is not escape, which is not merely argumentation or avoidance. I am saying one has to be terribly careful in investigating, the usage of words.
Q: Well, if you can’t understand it and you can’t feel it, then what
K: No. Which is what? Either you feel with your touch, smell, taste, or you think. Now when you say, 'I don't understand', we are saying is it emotional that makes you understand, a feel that makes you understand? Please, you are not answering my question. After forty minutes, we are holding hands together, and I say to you, please, listen to what I have got to tell you. It's most tremendously important, because it will perhaps change our relationship entirely. And listen to me, paying attention to what I am saying, and he tells you. And at the end of forty minutes you say, 'Sorry I don't understand what you are talking about'. Would you say that to your girlfriend?
K: You would?
Q: No, because
K: I don't know, don't jump on me! (Laughter) What kind of relationship have you then?
K: You have no relationship at all, apparently.
Q: I have relationship when I say I don’t understand, at that point. When I say I don’t understand, at that point I do have relationship.
Q: There’s no love.
K: That's it, sir. There is not even affection to understand something. If you and I had affection - if you had affection and I had affection for you, and I say, look, for god's sake, do look at this, and because you have affection for me, or love for me, and what I say becomes important to you.
Q: ‘I’m sorry I don’t understand’.
K: So our relationship, sir - we are not friends. I tell you I am your friend, you say, 'Buzz off, it means nothing to me'. (Laughter) And I say, look, please, this is one of the most fundamental things in life that you must understand, and I tell you as a wife, as a husband, as a girlfriend, as a boyfriend holding your hand, kissing - everything. I say, look. And you don't even say at the end of forty minutes, 'I really don't see what you are talking about'. I don't think you say that to your girlfriend. She would leave you the next minute. (Laughter)
Q: The last words.
Q: You wouldn’t say it because we wouldn’t want to hurt, but...
K: Sir, it's not a question of hurt. We have no we don't understand what relationship is.
K: Do think about it a minute. We don't understand what relationship means. Because I come along and say, look, let us talk as two friends, which implies care, affection, love, consideration, involvement, commitment, and you sit there and say, 'You go on talking, but...' You would never say that to your wife or husband or girlfriend or boyfriend because you are involved in it.
Q: Please explain it again.
Q: I don’t agree.
K: What is it you don't agree with, sir?
Q: If I don’t understand someone, I don’t care if I love them or not, I’ll tell them that I don’t understand. And it may be the end of our relationship but I have to take that chance.
K: Therefore you are not concerned with relationship.
Q: Not as much as I am understanding.
K: Ah, no, relationship is the only thing in life.
Q: What is relationship?
K: That's just it, we'll go into that. What is relationship? It's a very complex question. What is relationship? To be related to somebody. Is it merely a physical attachment - sex and all that? Are you related then? What do you mean by relationship? When you say it's my wife, my girlfriend, boy, husband, whatever it is, my father, what do you mean by those words, what is the significance, the depth of those words?
Q: Relationship is loving and caring.
K: The actual fact. What do you mean by relationship?
Q: Sharing. Relating. Experiencing something together.
K: Are you sharing? Are you sharing?
K: Don't try, sir, please. You're not serious.
Q: To give your attention to someone
Q: To be free of attachment to another.
Q: Even when we are aware of relationship
K: I am related to my wife. What does that mean? Facts, not theories, suppositions, and hopes and what I would like, but facts, everyday fact.
Q: We share the last name.
K: We share the bed?
K: That's about all.
Q: The name, we share the name.
K: Sir, you are not being... you are not going into it.
Q: Relationship has to do with realising that we are all part of the same. That each is part of each other and that you are part of humanity is relationship.
K: Oh, that's just theories.
Q: Sir, we don’t know relationship.
K: Please, madame, as somebody says, we really don't know what relationship is.
Q: Relationship is relating to the other as yourself, I see you as myself speaking.
K: That's just an idea.
Q: No, its a fact.
K: Wait, wait! Go into it slowly, madame. You are all coming to you all have conclusions about it. I haven't. No, I refused conclusions. I refuse - forgive me, as a friend - I say, my friend, my lady, please, don't come to conclusions. Let's look at it. Let's start as though we don't know about it. Right? Then we can learn an infinite lot. But if you say, 'Yes, I know'. You know, if you start with certainty you end up in doubt. Right? But if you doubt, you'll end up in certainty. But we start the other way, we are all certain.
So let's find out, if you are willing - what time is it?
Q: Five to twelve.
K: Five to twelve. Briefly. You haven't yet solved this problem which we started out with. This always happens. (Laughter) I want to find out deeply, with your help, and you want out deeply with my help, in exploring, what does it mean to change and what does it mean to transform one's Transformation. We said any form of change is a continued modified continuity, which is the essence of mediocrity. (Laughs)
Q: Mr Krishnamurti, what happens if we end direction?
K: I am saying... What happens when there is an end.
Q: Are we coming in a vacuum?
K: Oh, no, no, no. That's just it, sir. You haven't ended it, and therefore you have never found it. You have already come to a conclusion. Do we enter into a vacuum, is there nothingness, is it annihilation. You follow? You haven't really answered the question whether you have ended it. Then you will find out something totally different.
So, I am asking after an hour, holding your hand, we have been friends - and I really mean it, we have been friends, and you feel probably, temporarily, poor chap, let's be friends with him because he is talking so much about it - and I say, look we have talked forty minutes, have you understood this simple fundamental fact? Understood in the sense not intellectually but it's in your blood so that you will never again go in any direction.
Q: Is it that we move together when we are talking?
K: Have you done it, madame?
Q: I think I
K: That means you have ended direction. After an hour. (Laughs) See the importance of it, sir, for god's sakes.
Q: How might I understand?
K: See the importance of it. We want success; that's a direction - sociologically, politically, religiously, in every way we want to be achieve something, become something, gain something. That's a direction. When we conform, imitate, that's a direction. I say that is the very core of mediocrity. That's what we are - except the present company, you are all mediocre. (Laughter)
Q: How do you stop
K: Which means, can you end direction?
Q: You can end direction but you become established in the non-directional. When the minds transcends and finds its own nature, which is pure consciousness, which is non-direction, and you experience non-direction and direction at the same time, then you have solved the problem.
K: No, no, you are off the mark. Forgive me, sir, you are off the mark. You haven't even listened.
Q: It’s from the known, the past, directed from the known all the time – right? – and from the known, it becomes memory which is the past
K: Look, sir, when you go to school, in the school you are told you must be as clever as 'A'. You are given marks. All directional - you understand? - competitive, which brutalises people, children. You have seen the American children - oh, you are all American, sorry! (Laughter) So, from childhood till you die, be something, become something, achieve something, be a millionaire, become the president, become the governor - you follow? - move out. Which is all directional. And if you are religious you say, 'Well I must be the right hand of Jesus', or god, or whatever it is. So you are all trained, conditioned to accept this norm. Somebody comes along, like me, a poor chap, and says, look, just look what you are doing. You haven't the time, you haven't the patience, you won't listen. I say just look what you are doing. This produces the directional movement produces violence, hatred - you follow? - the whole thing, which is modern society. And you say, 'Yes, I understand that but I don't know how to stop it'. Which means you really don't want to stop it - you follow? - you want to go on because that is your conditioning. Or you are frightened. Frightened - if you stop what will happen? Which means you already you are seeking a reward. When you are frightened you are seeking. If you don't get your reward, you say...
So, here we are together as friends - and I really mean it as friends. And I say, please, this is a fundamental thing to understand, the beauty of it, it is really most extraordinarily beautiful if you understand. When there is no direction, it is it's the heavens. So, at the end of an hour, I ask you as a friend sitting under a tree, holding hands or whatever you will, very close friends, I say have you really understood this thing?
Q: We say we are...
K: Have you - just listen, sir - have you really understood it in your heart, in your blood, in your nerves, in your brain, you've captured something. If you have, then you will never again seek direction. That means you will never again want to be something, socially, psychologically.
Q: That cannot be.
K: There we are.
Q: No. If you have no direction, it will always be with you as a shadow until the concept is removed, until the concept is gone into the essence, it shall be with you.
Q: Direction or non-direction, it doesn’t matter. If you ask a bird how it flies...
K: Oh, no, sir. You can ask a caterpillar which foot it puts first, and then it stops. If you ask a caterpillar which is the first whether it puts the first leg, then he will be paralysed, he will be looking at it and won't move. (Laughter) Please, sir, this is don't fritter it away, please.
Q: Sir, may I ask for a – dare I ask, sorry – a confirmation or a denial. Last night when I was coming up here, someone told me I was a fool, and I was very upset. She said, you sleep in your car. Yes, I said, I will if I have to, and I did. So I was very upset. So I started to analyse then. It seemed like it wasn’t me but it must have been me, I saw I was trying to do the impossible
K: Madame, this is not what we are discussing.
Q: I wanted her to accept what I do, and she couldn’t. So it seems the trouble was in my head and not really what she thought, and so this is the same thing you are talking about.
K: You see what the difficulty is at the end of an hour. Each man is going on with his own So that means you and I have no relationship whatsoever. Which means if you haven't with me, you have no relationship with anybody. Because I am an ordinary human being. You understand, sir? I am a human being. If you have no relationship with another human being, how can you have relationship with another human being?
Q: Is relationship direction or no direction?
K: No, sir. That is a complex question, perhaps we will discuss it the day after tomorrow. But see what we have done. That we don't care. Right, sir?
Q: When you talk and say ‘you’, and I talk and say ‘I’, who is
K: We. We.
Q: who is you and I? Is it the body, is it the consciousness? What is it?
K: Sir, when we say 'you', I am talking as a human being to another human being, not as 'I' and 'you'. You understand? We are talking as human beings. I've explained very carefully that every human being is the total history of mankind. It is a fact. And if you know how to read that book, you don't have to read any other book in the world, because everything is contained in you - man's misery, confusion, sorrow, death, love, sex - all that is you. You are the world and the world is you. Therefore there is no 'you' and 'I' when there is that.
Q: But isn’t that all directional?
K: Please sir, when I say 'you', we are talking quickly, en passant.
Q: You say ‘end’. You say the end of direction.
K: Yes, sir, I said that. Sir, don't you see the end of something is something new born. Don't you see if we go on the same way, over and over and over and over again there is no ending to something, it is only when something ends a new beginning can come like... If we were satisfied with the piston engine, we would never have had the jet. Right? The jet came into being when the man said, 'I know all about pistons, let's stop it. Let's look in other directions' - directions, you know what I mean.
Q: Would you share a moment of silence with us?
K: Would you stop talking and be quiet for a while together. To be actually quiet. Unoccupied mind.