Public Talk 2, Ojai, California, 22 May 1960

Talk II

May 22, 1960

TALK IN OJAI

I would like, if I may this morning, to talk about authority, knowledge and freedom. It seems to me that the more the mind becomes mechanical, the more intense the desire to feel strongly, to perceive more deeply, to have wider perceptions and intuitions and insights. And so, most of us resort to various forms of stimulation in order to have these intense feelings, intense experiences, intense perceptions. The more the mind become shallow, mechanical, a routine, bound, the greater the demand for wider, deeper, more profound feelings. I think one must have observed this quite casually, even. So one resorts to every form of stimulation: drink, sex; and if you are at all intellectual, you resort to mescaline, L.S.D., and various forms of outward and inward stimulation. Either you go to church to enjoy the Mass, which is a form of stimulation; or you resort to various forms of drugs, so that you perceive more profoundly the beauty of a flower, see more intensely the colour, more deeply feel the beauty of the hills, and the quietness of an evening. And I think it is inevitable as long as the mind is being conditioned by the inevitable process of civilization. And before I go into all that, I would like to say that it is very important that you and I establish right communication between ourselves. Because, after all, the purpose of these talks is to communicate with each other. Not to impose upon you a certain series of ideas. Ideas never change the mind, never bring about a radical transformation in the mind. But if we could, individually, communicate with each other at the same time and at the same level, then perhaps there is an understanding which is not merely propaganda. Because it is not the intention of any of us to persuade you in any direction, to think along any particular line. Because the more we are persuaded, the more we pursue the influences of propaganda, the less we are capable of feeling, the less intense we are. And these talks are not in any way meant to dissuade or persuade you in any way, either actually, or subliminally.

So, to communicate we must have the opportunity to listen to each other. To listen is an art in itself. Because very few of us do listen: to the winds, to the silent operations of our own minds. We never listen to another, or listen to the hints, intimations of the unconscious. Because we are so occupied with the daily activity, with the daily routine, with the daily anxieties, worries, angers, jealousies, that there is no space when the mind can be quiet to listen, to find out, to understand. So I would suggest that we listen, not in any way to deny or accept, but merely to listen as though you were listening to some facts. Because the very act of listening to a fact is its own action. If I know how to listen, that very listening is an action in itself. But if I do not know how to listen, but only partially listen, then there is the idea, that needs to be put into action. Because the listening is a form of harmonious action, in which there is no interval between the idea and the action. You think this out and you will see how true it is.

So, bearing that in mind, that in no way do we intend to persuade you to a course of action, or to any particular philosophy, or to any particular form of meditation, but rather, in communicating with each other, we see for ourselves very definitely and distinctly how the mind is becoming more and more mechanical. And, being mechanistic, we invariably turn to some form of stimulation, religious or superficial. And I feel that as modern civilization is making the mind more limited with knowledge, with authority, we resort to various forms of stimulation; and those stimulations inevitably deaden the mind further.

So, I would like, this morning, to talk over with you the question of authority. Because authority does corrupt the mind. Authority limits the depth of the mind. Authority cripples all thought, it lays the frontier to the mind. A mere breaking away from authority is not the solution, but the understanding of the complex problem of authority is the answer — the understanding of authority is the freedom from authority. So I would like to explore, to talk over with you this question of authority. Because, as we see, more and more governments, education, scientific investigation demands authority, that you copy, imitate, follow, obey. All the religious organizations demand obedience, not only in the monasteries, but also from the layman. All religions, with their dogmas, with their beliefs, assert and exercise their influence to make you conform to a pattern laid down by the church, by organized religions.

Why does the mind seek authority? Not only the authority of the specialist, of the doctor, the technician, but also of the priest, of the teacher, of the guru, of the master; or the authority of a book, whether it he the Bible, or the Gita, or the latest book on health. Why does the mind seek authority? I do not know if you have gone into it, if you have thought it out. I think it seeks authority because the mind demands to be secure, it wants to be secure; it wants, it abhors the idea of being uncertain — uncertain in our relationships, uncertain of not being able to arrive, to succeed, to discover. It puts aside the fear that uncertainty creates, the anxiety of a mind that is not sure.

Please, do follow, not merely verbally or intellectually what is being said. Do see this operation, this fact operating in each one of us: the uses(?) and demands to be secure, to do the right thing, not to face, to copy, to imitate, in order to succeed, in order to be healthy, in order to arrive, in order to fulfil.

So, authority is built, and the understanding of authority is quite complex; because there is the authority of the policeman, the law; there is the authority of a community, of a society; there is the authority of nature. And where is that authority right, and where is authority totally wrong? To discover that requires a great deal of investigation and understanding. To follow the laws of society, to keep to the right side of the road, is necessary. But where does authority make the mind mechanistic? Because it is only when the mind is free that it can feel intensely, without drugs; it’s only when the mind is clear, unhindered by authority, by imitation, by the desire to be secure — it’s only then the mind, being free, it can feel without stimulation, without drugs.

So, authority, whether it is the authority of the church, or the book, or of the law, or of the specialist — without understanding this complex process of authority, with its imitation, with its corrupting and freeing (?) qualities, without understanding authority, there is no freedom. And it is only when the mind is free that there is a state of creation.

I do not know if you have if you have thought, or observed, or ever experienced what it is to create, or what it is to be in a state of creation. Because I feel God or what you will is that state of creation. And it’s only a mind that is free can discover that absolute state. So it is necessary to understand the whole problem of authority. Understanding itself brings its own fruit. There is no understanding first, and freedom after. When you understand the complex problem of authority, that very understanding is a process of freeing the mind from authority. Because understanding frees the mind from effort. Effort implies, does it not?, a conformity to be according to a particular pattern of thought. And therefore effort implies essentially, basically, deeply, the question of authority. So the mind which is caught in effort, in trying to be something — the very action and the desire and the impulse to be something, demands authority and conformity.

So, that is what is implied, though we cannot go into all the details that exist in this question of authority, one can grasp immediately, if your mind is given to it, this question of authority. Then there is the problem of knowledge.

I know it is the fashion now, and always has been, probably, that the more learned you are, the more wise you are, the more free you are, the more you are cable to cope, the more books that you have read, the more knowledge that you have accumulated, the more capable, the more intense, the more free you are. I wonder if knowledge does free the mind? I’m not advocating ignorance; I’m not saying that you should not read. But I want to question this whole problem of knowledge. What do we mean by knowledge, to know? Surely, it implies, does it not?, the process of recognition; and the process of recognition is based on experience, is it not? So experience is the beginning of knowledge; and does experience free the mind? Experience may give you a technique in action, and probably it is necessary. If you’re an engineer, if you’re a potter, if you are a violinist, or a writer, or a technician of some kind or other, knowledge is necessary. But where does knowledge cripple the mind and darken the mind? Where is the demarcation between knowledge and darkness? When is the mind made crippled by knowledge? And when is mind is made free when knowledge no longer cripples the mind? To understand this question, surely, we must go into, must we not?, the problem of experience. We think the more experience that we have, the more free we are, the more enlightened we are, the more capable we are. Surely, the more experience we have, the more capable we are in a certain direction, obviously. The more technique, the more perfect we are with our hands, with our mechanistic, technical knowledge, the more capable I am in earning a livelihood. That’s obvious, we don’t have to discuss that. But we do have to find out, haven’t we?, if the mind is darkened by knowledge, by experience. That is, does not, is not the mind, through knowledge makes itself secure. You understand? The more knowledge I have, the more secure I am. The mind, in its knowledge, makes itself a shelter, it makes itself secure; and a mind that is secure is a dead mind. Haven’t you noticed the people who are very religious, who are clothed in righteous behaviour, who are absolutely sure of their dogma, in their belief, how dead they are? Though they call themselves religious, mystical and all the rest of it. It is this desire to be completely secure that breeds darkness through knowledge. And such a mind can never be free.

So knowledge, which is really a very, very complex thing, if you go into it very deeply you will find that the whole of our consciousness, not only the consciousness which is operating daily, going to the office, learning a technique, application, and all the rest of it, the daily occupation of the consciousness with which we are familiar; but also the unconscious part, the hidden part. If you go into all this process of the unconscious, you will find there is no corner in which knowledge has not penetrated and conditioned, either the racial inheritance, or the modern acceptance of education, and all the rest of it, has made our consciousness a vehicle of the known. And, without understanding knowledge, our minds, though they function brilliantly, intellectually, it is still functioning in darkness. If you examine experience you will see that every experience is strengthening of recognition.

I wonder if I am conveying anything at all? Because you see, we are concerned with the liberation of the mind, so that the mind can be in that state of creation which is not concerned with expression, though expression may come from it. A creative mind is never concerned with expression, it’s not concerned with action, with reform; it’s a movement, and a movement is never concerned with the immediate. And the immediate only is concerned with reformation. And creation is timeless.

You know, I do not know if you have walked in the woods alone, or when you are by yourself along a street, if you have not noticed of a moment when everything in you is silent, completely still; and there is an unexpected, uninvited moment in which the mind, with all its anxieties, with all its worries and its pursuits and compulsions, has completely come to an end; and that given moment, unexpected, spontaneous, is a moment in which time has ceased totally, absolutely. And if you have got a gift as a painter, as a writer, or as a housewife, you express that moment in action. But that action is not that moment; But that action, to paint, may give you fame, money, position, prestige; and man, seeking position, power, prestige, goes after the technique and loses the other. It must have happened to most of us sometime or other in our lives; and that moment we wish to capture and to hold and to continue in that moment.

So, experience of that moment darkens the mind with the knowledge of that moment to experience further. So, knowledge as experience is destructive to the new.

Please, this is not my special way of looking. These are facts. The more experience you have, the more the mind is made dull; there is no innocency of the mind. And that moment when the mind is no longer caught in knowledge, which is really, essentially of time, then you will see that knowledge as we know and as we practice, hold, darkens the mind. And so the mind, being darkened, seeks greater, wider stimulation, and so turns to religion, philosophies, theologies, speculations, or to the latest drugs.

So, the mind which is concerned with freedom must explore this question of authority, as well as knowledge; because both knowledge and authority go together. Most of you are listening probably, unfortunately, because you think I have some authority. You probably think I know what I’m talking about. (Laughter). No, no, Sirs, please don’t laugh it away, do listen. There is all this absurdity, absurd reputation, and all that. But you are listening actually, are you not?, to find out —to find out what I have experienced, and to be able to communicate that experience to you. But actually, when you examine this whole problem of experiencing, you will see that every form of experience which takes root in the mind, in the soil of the mind, is detrimental to the mind, destroys the freedom of the mind, because that breeds a sense of security, and therefore there is no innocency, there is no freshness to the mind. The mind cannot renew itself. It can now renew itself only in further experiences, which are the process of recognizing, which is the result of the past, and so the continuation of the past, modified.

So, a mind that is concerned with the understanding of freedom must inquire, not superficially, but delve within itself to discover intelligently the anatomy and the structure of authority. Because a mind that merely follows, can never know what it is to be creative. A mind that has disciplined itself to a pattern of action, is not a free mind. Through discipline the mind can never be free. The mind can be free only by understanding this whole problem of discipline, not at the end, but at the very beginning of the process of discipline.

You see, understanding a problem like knowledge, that very attention to understand knowledge is its own discipline. I do not need a discipline to understand knowledge. If I begin to explore the question of knowledge, that very exploration is, that very exploration demands that the mind discipline itself in the very process of understanding. Do you understand? A material demands its own discipline, is its own discipline. A wood, a piece of wood, to do anything with it, according to the material is the demand of its discipline. So, in the same way, to understand this question of knowledge and authority, in which is implied discipline, experience and time, the very understanding of it is discipline. And that discipline is not self-imposed. In that discipline there is no conflict or contradiction.

So, the very process of understanding is its own discipline and its own freedom. And the mind that has not investigated, discovered the truth of authority and of knowledge, can never be free. It may go to all the churches, may read all the books, it may discipline itself from morning till night, conform: such a mind is not a free mind. I am talking of the mind as a total thing, not only the mere machinery of thought, but the mind that succeeds, that feels, that loves, that remembers, that recognizes, that suffers, that knows pity, enjoyment, the totality of the mind. We are talking about that totality. And that totality of the mind as a whole cannot be perceived through any part. One must perceive it totally, feel it entirely; then after that, you can apply, you can take the individual things of the mind. Because the mind is both the unconscious as well as the conscious; there is no division between the two. And to feel the whole nature of it, the quality of that mind is essential if you would understand what it is to be free, and what it is to be in that state of creation in which there is no beginning and no end.

This is not mere, silly, frustrating sense of mysticism. This demands a great deal of attention and application of thought — or rather, not thought, but insistent examination into the very process of thinking, feeling, being. And as one begins to understand one will discover for oneself, naturally, without any compulsion, without any urge, what it is to be free, and what is that state which is of no time and which is not measurable by the mind.