Is the individual different from the world? Isn’t the individual, you and I, the total process of the world movement, world life? You and I are the result of the past – past thoughts, past actions. Not of any thought in particular, but the thought of human-kind. You are the result of the country, the culture, the civilization, the environmental and social influences, the religions, the climate. So is the individual ‘you’ a separate, antagonistic process, an exclusive process away from the world, away from human culture, society?
When we talk about individual craving, individual will, individual attainment, what do we mean by the individual? Are you an individual because you have a little property, a name, a family, live in a separate house, and have peculiar idiosyncrasies and a different facial expression? Though we are dissimilar, is there not an extraordinarily great similarity between us all? After all, doesn’t each one of us think more or less alike? Where is the individual, and where is the mass? Where is the demarcation between the two? I am not saying that there is not the individual, but I want to know from you, who insist on dividing the individual and the mass, where the line is between the two. We are all the result of the past; our thought is founded on the past, along with all the religious, organizational beliefs, and the orthodox traditions. Of all that, you are the result. Without that, you would not be an individual.
Is there an individuality exclusive from the world process, from the community process, from the society, from the world’s organizational thoughts, feelings and beliefs? Then your transformation, not verbal but actual revolutionary transformation, will affect the world because you are the product of the world, the environment and society. But if you think you are an exclusive process unrelated to the world, to other people, then such a thought, which is the exclusive thought, will inevitably think, ‘If I change, as I have no relationship to the other, I cannot possibly affect the world.’ But if you are the product of the environment also, the effect, the result of a deeper process, which is not unrelated to the whole world process, then when you change, obviously you do affect the world. We are affecting each other all the time, the world, the “you” and the “me” are influencing each other, modifying each other. So, you are not different from me. We have got the same passion, craving, pursuit and emotions. The same.
All this exists because of our fear of not being individuals. But we are not individuals. I wish we were – then we would be able to think clearly for ourselves and not be persuaded by politicians, priests, executives and all the rest, to do what they tell us. If you were an individual, you would not seek a guru. We would throw away all the scum of gurus and wouldn’t belong to any organization. But we are not individuals, despite our different faces and physiognomy. Inwardly, we are extraordinarily alike. Are you and I not the result of each other’s influence and relationship? Therefore, you and I exist only together. There is no such thing as isolation. And since you and I influence each other, you and I are not separate. Therefore I cannot exist without you, economically, socially or psychologically. I can be in isolation in an asylum without you, and that is what most of us are trying to do: create a character in isolation, which is a kind of asylum. Since you and I are related, since I cannot exist without you and you cannot exist without me, the ‘you’ and the ‘me’ is the whole world. Whether you live in Russia, North America, South America or Japan, you and I are the whole world.
Since we are the product, you and I, of each other’s influence and the influence of another, are we individuals? How can we be individuals when we are influencing each other all the time, when I am the product of the past, and you are the product of the past, and the two pasts related in the present, modifying? How can we be individuals? There can only be individuality with aloneness, when you are not influenced by me and I am not influenced by you, psychologically and therefore externally. Until then, we are not individuals. That is why we have to become alone to find truth. It is a clever invention on the part of the exploiter, on the part of the priest, the politician, the dictator, the ruler, the general, to treat individuals as the mass. It is so much more convenient. We do the same. But there is only you and me in relationship, which creates the society – the ‘you’ and ‘me’ all over the world. We, you and me, are constantly influencing each other. We are modifying each other. The past in conjunction with the present is producing you and me. We cannot dissociate ourselves from the past. We are the past, you and I.
Now, if you and I want to find what is true, must we not dissociate from all influence? I must have food, clothes and shelter; that has certain influences, and its organization has certain effects on me. That is an obvious fact, but when they become psychological, then I am enthralled; I am caught. In freedom only can we discover what is truth. The past in relation to the present is the ‘me’. There is no ‘me’ without the past, and the ‘me’ is the result of the past in conjunction with the present, and you likewise. So if I want to understand truth, reality, God, what you will, mustn’t I be free from that past? This means my being alone from the net of influence, whether it is good or bad, free from nationalism and belief, which are all the effects outwardly of what you call the mass. Mustn’t you be free, or mustn’t the mind be untrammelled by those things you call belief, nationalism and all the rest of it, which are the effects of our relationship to each other and inward fear? These come into being when you seek security.
Don’t you discover anything only when your mind is unoccupied, when it is unburdened? So, if you and I want to discover reality, mustn’t you and I be free from the influences which, psychologically, we are constantly creating? Therefore, mustn’t you be free from nationalism and class? So, that is why it is essential to discuss this point very clearly and simply. Because the implications are tremendous. It means throwing over all the traditions, which are mere imitation, and re-examining the whole problem anew. Surely, you can examine the whole problem anew only when the intention to discover the truth is real. But if you are merely satisfied in your occupation, which makes you superior, makes you different, gives you the hereditary title of a Brahmin or an Englishman or a Russian, or an ideologist, then you have no problem. Then you will keep to your titles, your nationalities, your beliefs. But if you want to find truth, surely there must be freedom. Not freedom from relationship – I cannot be free from you; I depend on you for food, clothes, shelter, my physical existence – but freedom to investigate, to find. I cannot be free if psychologically I am bound to you. I am bound to you as long as I am seeking something from you psychologically. And because I am seeking something from you, I create a society that is disintegrating all the time. Being influenced, being related to you, creates society. That society, which is the environment, again influences my children and me, and we are caught in the environmental influences.
So I create a society with you, and then I am caught in it. But to investigate it, to find the truth of it, I must dissociate first. And this dissociation, I call, for the moment, aloneness. Therefore, one who is seeking truth must be free of the influence of society, not of relationship. How can I be free from you? I depend on you for food, clothes and shelter. But, if I am seeking truth, I won’t use food, clothes and shelter as a means of self-expansion. You and I have to create a new society. You and I, not the labels, are going to create a new culture, a new civilization. Systems have never created new cultures; only you and I can.
The world is collapsing, the structure is disintegrating, and so you and I have to create a new culture. You and I are the salt of the earth, and it depends on you and me. That is why we must have a revolution, in you and me, in our thinking. It is a fact that the world is collapsing; it is not rhetorical. There is no individual, and therefore you and I must become the individual – not the individual who is self-enclosed – to create this revolution in each of us, not tomorrow or the day after, nor in the days to come, but now. This thing must happen now, not tomorrow. And to happen now, you must be free from the influences that make you, that influence you into a pattern of action. You are merely patterns of action, not the actor who thinks clearly and sees and acts. You have to be both the master and the pupil. You have to become the architect as well as the player – you and I. We have done away with all leaders, all organizations. We have to restart the whole thing anew. Therefore, you and I have to become the whole thing, and we can only become the master and the pupil, builder and the architect when there is truth. But truth cannot come into being without freedom, and freedom means clarity.
When you love somebody, there is no individual, no you and me – there is only a state of being. That state of being is active; that state of being is action. And that alone is going to create a new world – not ideas, not plans, not systems. A state of being can only come when there is freedom, freedom from all that is false. And to see the false, there must be the true. You cannot see the false without truth – you can only see what is false when you see what is true.