May we now continue with what we were talking about yesterday evening? We were saying, weren't we, that this is a conversation between us, not a lecture. A lecture is a discourse on a particular subject intended to give you information. But this is not a lecture. We are talking over together, amicably, in conversation, observing what is happening in the world, not only externally, outside of us, but also we were talking about what is happening to man inwardly, psychologically. And as one observes in the world outside, there is greater and greater chaos practically in every country and in this country it is fairly obvious, it is blatant, it is palpable. And where there is uncertainty, disturbance, the lack of political credulity, knowing that the politicians all over the world are making things far worse, knowing that religions throughout the world have lost all their meaning, seeing all this, there are those who have called themselves the fundamentalists: they are those who go back to the Bible or to the Koran or to the various scriptures - so-called religious - thinking that if they follow those books, there will be less chaos. This is what is happening the world over: go back to the past, hold on to certain beliefs, tradition, and these books are incorruptible; they speak the truth and so on. Most of us are doing this in some way or another. In a world that is very, very chaotic, very disturbing, dangerous and the preparation for wars, one naturally wants some kind of security - outside of us or inside. There is not much security in the outward world. You may be very rich, you may be very powerful politically, or you may be one of those gurus who are making a lot of money, or you might find security in some dogma, in some belief; but in none of these there is absolute security. Man wants security. We must all have security - security in the sense of food, clothes and shelter. But also we want security inwardly, something that will give us assurance, stability, a sense of strength, and there too there is no security, in any belief, in any dogma, in any ideal. And not finding security in any of these, he turns to the past, and hopes thereby to find some ray, some kind of words, traits to hold on to.

I do not know if you have not noticed that the more you cling to some kind of conclusion, reasonable conclusion, logical conclusion or the conclusions of certain authorities, where there is conclusion there must be lack of energy because when you come to a conclusion, which means after discussing, arguing, come to a point which you think is right, conclude it, then you shut the door for further enquiry. And that is what is happening too in the world. We all want conclusions: whether there is god, whether there is going to be any peace and so on and when you conclude, which means to bring about an end to various arguments, suggestions, ideas, then when you have those conclusions, you are bound to lose energy, because you have shut the door against further enquiry, further exploration. And perhaps that is what is happening in this country and the world over. That is, lacking obviously security inwardly and outwardly, security in the sense something on which we can totally rely, on which we can depend, which will give us comfort, a sense of well-being; not having that, we cling to some traditional conclusion and thereby lose that creative energy of enquiry. Enquiry means to penetrate, to investigate, to explore, to open the door to find out further. But most of us have not that energy, the drive, and so we fall back upon something which we call tradition or some book or other.

And in these talks today and the next weekend, we are not giving any formula, any panacea, any sense of certainty, but together, you and the speaker are in friendly conversation, exploring, so that we release our own energy and not depend on anybody, on any book, on any person or any idea, belief. It seems to the speaker, that we are not releasing the creative energy to bring about a new culture, a new way of life, because the old Brahmanical culture of this country has completely disappeared. A culture - we are not saying what is good or bad - a culture that has existed perhaps five to three thousand years has completely gone overnight, disappeared altogether. And one questions, asks, why human beings who have lived with a particular culture for so long, that culture has disappeared. Perhaps it was not culture at all; it was a series of words, traditions, without any life behind them.

So, together in exploring the condition of our mind and heart, in investigating the nature of the brain which is the centre of all our actions, of all our feelings, of every thought, whether it is possible, surrounded by chaos, uncertainty, danger, whether each one of us can release that creative energy, and we are going to go into this very carefully this evening.

As we said yesterday, there is an art of listening and there is an art of learning. Most of our learning is the accumulation of knowledge: not knowing mathematics or biology or physics, gradually accumulate a great deal of information about physics and store it up in the brain which becomes our knowledge about physics, mathematics or what you will. That is what we do, and that is what we call learning, accumulating a lot of knowledge about various subjects as an engineer, as an astronomer, and if you will, unfortunately, as a politician. We accumulate knowledge in order to act skilfully in the world as a carpenter, as a mason, as a doctor. That's what we do - knowledge accumulated, from which we act either skilfully, or not skilfully, efficiently or inefficiently.

So we must enquire together what is knowledge? What place has knowledge? What place has knowledge in our relationship with each other? Please, we are enquiring into this, don't merely just listen to the speaker. If you merely casually hear the words that the speaker is using, then it will become very shallow, empty. We are already full of other people's knowledge. But you have never, perhaps we have never questioned what is the place of knowledge in life, apart from having an occupation, becoming a good scientist, doctor, engineer and so on. We are asking a very serious question which is: what place has knowledge in human relationship?

Let me talk, if you don't mind, and then perhaps if there is time you can ask questions. Is that all right?

We are asking, what place has knowledge in human relationship? Knowledge is always in the past. There is no future knowledge. Knowledge implies the process of time as the past. Right? That's clear. And this knowledge, both in the scientific world and in human existence is based on experience. And this experience is gathered for millions of years, or for the last 300 years with the scientists. And that knowledge is used to accumulate further knowledge, further exploration, but always knowledge is in the past. There is no question about that. And knowledge is never complete about anything. Right? Are we going together in this? Please, we are not agreeing; you are not just listening; you are thinking together. We are saying that knowledge is incomplete always. There is no complete knowledge about anything. That's a fact. So, our knowledge is stored in the brain as memory, and the response of that memory is thought. That is experience, either inherited or accumulated in the present, that becomes knowledge, then that knowledge is memory, which is the past, and from that memory, the reaction is thought.

Is this clear? Can we go on from that? So thought is always limited. Right? I have accumulated - one has accumulated, say for example, scientific knowledge. That knowledge is being added to all the time: more and more and more they are discovering. And so scientific knowledge is never complete. Right? So thought, whatever it does, is limited. Perhaps some of you will reject this, but if you would kindly investigate it, go together to look at it, not take a definite stand about it, but let us think over it together.

We are saying categorically and definitely that knowledge being limited, because there is no complete knowledge about anything; knowledge always goes with the shadow of ignorance. And any thought born of knowledge must inevitably be fragmentary, limited, finite; but thought can invent something immeasurable, something beyond our infinite, but it is still the movement of thought. Right? A person can invent god because he feels god is necessary for his comfort, for his security, but that god is the product of thought which is limited. Please, we must be very clear on this point, not that you agree with the speaker which will be useless, but if you for yourself see the fact, the truth, that thought under all circumstances, whatever the thought of the scientist is, or the great philosophers, it is always bound, narrow, limited.

Thought has invented nationalities, and thought having created them, brings about division between people - the Muslim and the Hindu, the Jew and the Arab, the Communist, the Socialist, the capitalist and so on. Thought has invented all this. Our society, however corrupt it is, as it is in this country, not that corruption doesn't exist in other countries, but in this country one can see so blatantly, and this corruption is invented by thought. All the ritual is the product of thought, whether the military rituals or the religious rituals, they are all forms of entertainment invented by thought. And thought has created problems like war, like conflict and so on. Then thought tries to solve these problems. Right?

Are you following all this? Does it interest you - all this? Could you tell me? Perhaps a little. Or probably you have not thought about it at all. You have not gone into all this. You've just accepted thought as the only instrument man has. And that instrument has created havoc in the world. A good carpenter, when he finds his instrument is useless, he throws them away and tries to find new instruments, but we don't. We see that thought, politically, religiously, as human beings between each other, thought has created innumerable problems. And thought politically, religiously says, 'I will solve it.' And in their solution, you are producing more problems. So life is becoming more and more complex, more and more full of problems because we think that thought is the only instrument; and that thought is limited. Right? Is this clear, not verbally clear, but clear for yourself, so that we can then ask, is there a new instrument? You follow? We find all over the world even the greatest scientist, greatest - whatever they are, are beginning to question - because the speaker has talked with many of them - are beginning to question the nature of thought. Thought is a material process because thought is held in the brain - in the very brain cells themselves. So thought is a material process. So whatever thought thinks about or invents is the result of a material process. So when thought creates god, it is still a material process. Thought is not sacred. So, if this is very clear, not verbally but deeply, profoundly, then we can ask: is there a new instrument. Not higher consciousness or lower consciousness - I don't mean that at all; that is another invention of thought. The higher consciousness and bring it down to the lower consciousness. You know all that game one plays, which is still the product and the process of thought.

So, we are going to find out together if there is a new instrument totally different from thought, which thought has not touched at all; because whatever thought touches must be limited, and being limited it must inevitably create conflict, bring about fragmentation, as it has done in the world: religious fragmentations, political fragmentations and so on. Is this clear? Can we go on from that? Right sir? Well, if you are merely accepting the words or just accepting the words, you can't go much further, but if you are really deeply concerned with humanity, deeply concerned with what is happening in the world, profoundly concerned with the future of man, that is, future of your children, grand-children, you must inevitably ask this question, if you are at all serious, deeply concerned, if you have great affection for humanity. But you see most of us have not the energy to enquire, have not the drive, the passion to find out, so we turn to Marx, Lenin, or the Bible or the Koran and those will never give energy for the discovery of the new instrument which is so absolutely necessary in this world, which is degenerating day by day, destroying itself.

So please, together, we are going to find out without any shadow of doubt, by questioning the very nature of thought, by questioning, doubting, asking, probing and finding out for ourselves that thought, at whatever level is fragmentary, limited, finite, and this limitation has conditioned the brain. The brain has got extraordinary capacity, as can be seen in what is happening in the technological world, extraordinary capacity, but that capacity has only been developed in one direction, that is, the technological world: as the doctor, surgeon, mathematician, the computer experts and so on. But the human problems, which is our conflict with each other, our sorrow, pain, grief and endless conflict, the technological world can never solve; they are not concerned with it at all. No politician, no system, no method is concerned with all that. So we, as ordinary human beings, we are going to find out for ourselves if there is, or if there is not a new instrument which is not touched by thought, which is not the result of time, which is not caught in the process of evolution which is thought.

We are going to ask, we are going to go into it, step by step, if you are willing, if you are serious. You must be serious, which doesn't mean you must not laugh, which doesn't mean you must torture your body as the religions advocate. You must have great alertness, attention, capacity, sensitivity; you cannot be committed to any group, to any belief, to any dogma. You have to have a mind that is really a global mind, not a petty little mind concerned with one's own little problems. In the greater, the lesser disappears. That is, in the greater humanity, the few little human problems are solved, but we are trying to solve little problems without understanding the vast complexity of the human brain and mind and heart, then you will never solve any problem. So please give your attention, care, to find out for yourself, not repeat what the speaker says. The speaker has no value. He is just a telephone, but what he says, perhaps, may have importance. So please find out.

Have you ever tried to observe yourself, your wife, the tree across the road and that animal that goes by, without the word? Have you ever tried to look at a tree without naming it, without bringing all the past pictures about a tree - just to observe the tree without the word, which is thought, to look at it. Have you ever done it? No, of course not. Have you ever looked at your wife or your husband or your limited politician, have you ever looked at them - your wife, your husband and so on - without the word, without the picture, without the symbol? Will you look at the speaker without the word - will you? Without all the rubbish and all that reputation - which is loathsome anyhow - look at him without the image that you have built about him. Can you do it? Perhaps it will be easier to look at the speaker that way because he doesn't know you, and you don't know him. So perhaps it is easier, but to look at your wife, at your husband, at the tree, at the animal without the picture, the image, the word - which is not identification with the tree, of course, obviously. If you identify yourself with the tree, you are the tree. Right? Are you following all this? Am I talking to myself?

So first, to be aware whether you can see, observe, look, without a single word, the picture, because then you will awaken your sensitiveness. We are not sensitive; we have accepted; we are not sensitive to the dirt, to the squalor, to the misery, to the poverty. We just accept it. The poverty of this country can never be solved, it's not ever going to be solved unless you drop your nationalism completely. It will be solved only when you have understood the global relationship of man to man. Then there will be no frontiers. But you are not probably interested in it.

So, we are saying that the first essential quality in the investigation, in the enquiry, if there is another instrument, the first thing is, one has to be extraordinarily sensitive. That is, all religions have said 'suppress your senses'. Right? 'Suppress your feelings, everything, suppress it', so that we have gradually lost the sensitivity of the senses. The speaker is saying quite the contrary. We live by senses, and perhaps some have developed a particular sense. But the speaker is saying to awaken all your senses to their highest degree so that you look at the world with all your senses. You understand what I am talking about? To look at the world with that immense feeling when all the senses are fully awakened. In that there is a great extraordinary sense of energy, beauty. So that in the investigation of another instrument, we see the first thing is that the man who has become dull through repetition, through tradition, through the oppression of the environment - the environment is not merely nature, the environment is the politician, the guru, all that's going on around you. And we are oppressed by all that. So we have gradually lost all sensitivity, all energy to create. And we are using that word 'create', not creating a picture, a poem, literary works, but we are talking of creation in the sense of bringing about something totally new. And to have that capacity, the drive, that beauty, one must have great sensitivity. And you cannot have great sensitivity if every sense is not fully functioning, fully aware.

Now, why have we destroyed our senses? You understand my question? Religions have said, the Christian world and in the scriptures of this country, and the religious leaders have said, 'suppress desire, suppress your feelings; don't look at a woman; torture yourself, then only will you find god, or nirvana or moksha or whatever you want. Only then, you will be illumined,' - which is utter nonsense. How can you destroy the most extraordinary instrument that we have, the body, with all its senses; the body which is - if you have gone into it - such an extraordinary instrument. So these people say, 'suppress desire; don't yield to desire but if you have desire, identify it with the saviour, with Krishna or whatever the religious gods be in the world.' I wonder if you have realised in this country, somebody calculated, there are three hundred thousand and thirty gods. Perhaps it is better than having one god, you can have more fun with the many. Right? Don't be so serious!

So we must understand the nature of desire; it is very important in the investigation of a new instrument, realising the old instrument, which is thought, is not solving any human problems. So in the investigation of that, we have come upon this thing called desire. What is desire? Why have people said, 'suppress it, deny it, if you cannot identify it with something greater'. It is always a problem of struggle. So we are not advocating suppression, avoidance, escape and all that, of desire. We are investigating together the nature of desire: how desire arises, why we are caught in it, why it has become so extraordinarily powerful. Right? So we are together going into the question of what is desire.

What is desire? You see a pleasant object, a beautiful object, a beautiful woman or a man; you desire him or her or that object. That is so. You see a nice car, polished, good lines, powerful, and you touch it, get inside, feel the pleasure of owning it, if you can afford it - perhaps not in this country, never mind. And the desire is there. First the object creates the desire or desire exists apart from the object - you are following all this? - which is the object, 'car', creates the desire, or desire exists and the objects may vary. So we are not discussing the objects of desire: to be a powerful minister or prime minister, Governor, executive or a talented violinist, but we are enquiring into the very structure, nature of desire. If we understand that, not verbally but factually then there is never a question of suppressing it, never a question of controlling it. Please listen carefully to what the speaker is saying. We have controlled, never understanding who is the controller. We have controlled desire; we have controlled our sex - we are brought up to control. And where there is desire, we are trying to understand it, explore it, probe into it, not control it. If this is clear, then we can go together into the understanding, the truth of desire. What place it has in life, or no place at all? So we cannot possibly start with any conclusion. That is 'suppress desire' or 'let desire run rampant'. But we are together slowly, hesitantly, carefully probing into this which has become an extraordinary factor in life and a torture too. So we are asking: what is desire? What is the origin, the source of desire? Please, you are thinking with me, not just listening to the explanation the speaker is going to give. You are thinking, actively participating in this search of the origin of desire, whether the object creates the desire, or it is independent totally of all objects. Is it clear? Can we go on? Sirs, please, and ladies, it is very important to understand this; to go into it very, very deeply, to capture the whole movement of desire, the implications of it, the depth of it, the reality of it.

If you had no senses, there would be no sensation. Sensation arises when you see something in the window of a shop: a shirt, a robe, a radio, or whatever or what you will. You see it, visual perception. Then you go inside that shop, touch the material, and from the touching of it there is a sensation. Right? This is simple. You see the car, you touch it, you look at the lines, the polish - not the beauty of Indian cars but some of the European cars are extraordinarily beautiful, like an aeroplane, it is extraordinarily beautiful. And you touch it, you touch that shirt you see in the window, a blue shirt, and by the very touch there is a sensation. This is quite obvious. There is a sensation. Then what happens? We are thinking together. You are not accepting what I am saying. You touch that shirt, look at that radio, television, whatever it is and the very touching, looking creates a sensation. Then if you observe very closely, thought says, 'how nice it would be if I had that shirt on me; if I stepped into that car.' So at that moment when thought creates the image out of the sensation is the origin of desire. Right? Are you following all this?

I see a beautiful tree which man hasn't created. He has created the cathedral, the mosque, the temple and all the things therein. He has created all that, but he has not created the tree; he has not created nature, but man is destroying nature. So you look at a beautiful tree. You wish it were in your garden. And you see it; there is the sensation of the dignity, the shadows, the light on the leaf, the movement of the tree. Then sensation arises. Then thought says, 'How nice it would be if I had that tree in my garden.' When thought creates the image of that tree in your garden, at that second, desire is born. Right?

So the question then is; it is natural to be sensitive, to have sensations, otherwise you are paralysed. You must have sensation; you must have sensitivity in your fingers, in your eyes, in your hearing and looking, and when you are sensitive you watch, you look and out of that looking, watching, observing, sensation inevitably arises - it must, otherwise you are blind, deaf. Now when there is sensation, then thought creates an image and at that moment desire is born. Right? Have you found this to be so? Or you are going to repeat just what the speaker has said? Or go back to your tradition and say, 'we must suppress desire' or, 'what you are talking about is nonsense. All our religious books have said god...' - I don't know why you read these religious books, anyhow. So if you really go into this question of desire, which is so important in life, then you will find out for yourself the origin, the beginning of desire. Now the question is to look at a car, at a shirt, at a woman, at a picture, there is arising of sensation, and find out whether thought can be in abeyance, not immediately create a picture, immediately create an image of you in that shirt, or in that car and so on. Can there be a gap between sensation and thought impinging upon that sensation? You understand this question? Find out. It will make your mind - brain alert, watchful.

And also we ought to talk over together, in the investigation of a new instrument, whether man can ever be free from fear. We are all frightened about something or another, frightened ultimately of death. We will talk about that perhaps next weekend, if we have time. We are all frightened about something, either of the past, or of the future or the present, the living present, uncertain of the living activity, the process of the present. We always have this fear. Aren't you afraid? Perhaps you are not afraid of your wife, because you may dominate her and so on, or you may be afraid of the politician. Have you ever noticed how you behave in front of a minister? Have you ever noticed it? How you crawl in front of him, go almost on your knees to him as you do to a guru? Haven't you noticed all this? So one has this burden of fear. Man has never solved the problem: he has escaped from it; he has various means of suppressing it, denying it, escaping from it, but he has never solved this problem. And when there is fear, dreadful activities take place, all kinds of wrong actions take place. Your whole body, your whole mind shrinks when there is real danger of fear. So this is a problem we must solve, not theoretically, but actually, finish completely with fear. Is that possible? Right? We are going to enquire together into that question - not take any dogmatic stand or say, 'it cannot' or 'it can'. We are together probing, looking into the nature of fear, the cause of it, the root of it, the beginning of it, not the various branches of fear, nor the many, many leaves of fear. You understand this? We are looking or trying to find out what is the root of fear? When you find that out the branches wither away, the leaves disappear; they dry up. So please, if you are not tired, give your attention to this question: whether it is possible to be totally, completely free of fear, so that when you walk out of this place, you are really free of fear, fear of - you know, death and all that. That means you must apply your brain, be active in the investigation of it.

What is the cause of fear? Where there is a cause there is always an end to that cause. Right? This is logic; this is natural. I may have pain, the cause may be cancer. And if I discover the cause, the pain will end, or it will be terminal. It may kill me but I must discover the cause; like all good doctors, they want to know the cause, so they investigate through the symptoms the cause. So we are looking together, not at the symptoms of fear: dark, frightened of the dark, frightened of your parents, or grandparents, frightened of your husband or wife, frightened of the politician and so on. Those are all symptoms, the objects of fear, but we are asking what is the root of it? It is like cutting down a tree, and I hope you will never cut a tree down. It is like going to the very root of things. Now we are going to look at it.

So first we are asking, is the cause of fear time? T-I-M-E, time. Look at it carefully. Please, look at it. Don't accept whatever the speaker says, question it, doubt it, ask. The speaker has no authority. He is not important - the person, but what he says - find out. Is time a major causes of fear? That is, time being tomorrow, what might happen tomorrow or what has happened yesterday or many thousand yesterdays, or what might happen now? You understand my question? Is time the factor of fear, one of the factors? I may have done something wrong last week and what I have done has caused pain, and I hope it will not recur again. That is the word 'hope' implies the future. Are you following this? So time by the watch, time by the sunrise and sunset, time as yesterday, today and tomorrow, time as yesterday's memories, experiences, modifying itself in the present and proceeding to the future. All that is time - physical time, to cover a distance from here to there, from one point to another point, from this place to go to your home, that requires time. So there is physical time, and there is so-called psychological time, the inward time. That is, I hope I will get a better job at the end of the year. I hope I will be better, nobler or whatever it is, sometime later. I hope I'll meet a nice man tomorrow. So the word 'hope' implies time. Right? Or another, is the idea of 'better'. I am this, but I will be better. I am violent but I will become non-violent. So this process of 'what is' and transforming 'what is' to something else is a process of time. Right? Is this clear?

So time is a factor of fear. I am living; I am full of energy but something, an accident might kill me. I am born, but there is always death. So there is this sense of time, an interval. That interval is translated as the better, as hope, as self-improvement and so on. I want to fulfil; I may not be able to fulfil. I apply for a job; I may not have the capacity for that job. So there is fear. So time is one of the factors of fear. Right? We are not saying how to wipe away time. We are enquiring into the nature of fear. Then, is not thought, is not the process of thinking another factor of fear? Look at it. I think I may die. I think that god exists, but you come along and threaten my belief - I am frightened. So thought, thinking of the past incident, hoping that pain will not recur again, thinking about it and wishing that it will not happen again, is the movement of thought. Right? So thought and time are the very root of fear. You cannot stop time, the physical time, from here to your house, that requires time, you cannot stop that. Time to learn a language. To learn any technique requires time. And we see that time is one of the factors of fear, as well as thought. Right? So thought is a movement, isn't it? Time is a movement. Are you understanding all this? Are we together or you and I are far apart? Sir, I don't know what has happened to your brain, to your capacity to investigate. Let's go on.

Is there actually, factually, psychological time at all? You understand my question? Is there in me, in my feeling, actually, is that time invented? No, I'll show you what I mean. It's quarter past seven, oh - quarter past six. Are you tired? Shall I go on with it?

Audience: Yes, yes.

K: You mean to say you are not tired?

A: No, no.

K: Why?

A: (Laughter)

K: Ah, no, just listen, sir. I'm asking a serious question, don't just laugh it off. Why?

A: Inaudible.

K: No, no sir, just listen to the question. Don't immediately answer. If you have been working, investigating, active, exercising every capacity that you have to find out, you would be tired; you should be tired. Which shows that you have just listened casually, played around with words.

So I'm asking you, the problem of time is very important, as the problem of thought. We live by time. All our knowledge is based on time. The struggle to become less violent, to struggle to become something, which is all measure. I mustn't go into all this. Are you following all this? Sir, look: I am this; I am what I am. That is 'what is'. I am unhappy, violent, lonely, depressed, anxious, that's what one is; that is a fact. Then comes the idea I must become something else from 'what is'. That 'becoming' is time, as becoming from a clerk to a manager, that requires time. That same process of thinking we have brought over into the field of the psyche, into the field of consciousness, in the field of feeling, thinking. That is, I am violent, I will become non-violent; which is, you are allowing time to come, interfere. But when you say, 'I am violent, I am going to understand it, look at it, watch it, go into it very quickly, deeply,' there is no time. But if you are trying to become something else, there is time. Right? The becoming, which is measure, that demands time. Say for instance, if you compare yourself with somebody, more intelligent, more bright, more etc., if you compare, comparison is measurement. If you don't compare at all with anybody, including your great gods and saints and gurus and all the rest of it, don't compare at all, then what happens? You are what you are, from there you start. But when you are comparing, trying to become something else you will never understand yourself, what you are.

So time is a becoming - a becoming which is non-fact. That is, I am violent, I must become non-violent. The non-violence is not a fact, has no reality. Though you talk a great deal about it in this country. It doesn't exist. What exists is violence. And if you forget the non-violence then you can tackle violence, go into it. And the understanding of violence can be long or very quick, either the investigation of violence can take time because you are lazy, or you say, 'Well, I'll investigate it tomorrow, it's not important', and so on. But a man who is concerned with violence, which is spreading all over the world, more and more, destroying humanity; if he is concerned and wanting to understand the depth of violence he will understand it instantly.

So where there is a becoming you must have psychological time. That becoming is illusory. What is fact is what exists, what you are at the moment: your anger, your reactions, your fears - look at it. So time is a major factor of fear, and also thought. You cannot stop physical time. When you begin to understand the nature of time inwardly, the becoming, and not becoming, and understand the whole movement of thought - understand it, not suppress it, deny it, how am I to control thought. Those are all absurd questions, because who is the controller? The controller is another part of thought. I won't go into that, we haven't time. So if you really, deeply are concerned with the nature of fear and the total ending of psychological fear, one has to go into the question of time in depth and also the nature and structure of thought. But if you say, 'Please tell me a method to get rid of fear,' then you are asking a terribly wrong question, because the very question implies that you have not understood yourself, you have not looked at yourself.

So we will talk about sorrow, love and compassion. We will talk next Sunday perhaps, on what is religion? What is the nature of the religious mind, and what is meditation, and if there is something sacred beyond all thought. We must investigate all that, because that is all life: death, the conflict, pain, sorrow, pleasure, fear, meditation, all that is our life, and we if don't understand all that - and to understand it one must have vitality, strength, and you will not have that energy if you are merely repeating words, if you cling to some belief, to some conclusions, that destroys all energy. Energy implies freedom, not what you like to do but freedom. Only then you have an extraordinary energy. Right, sir.