Questioner: The process of seeing is different from the process of moving in a certain direction towards something.
Krishnamurti: Right. The process of seeing is entirely different. It is not a process. I won’t use that word. The seeing is seeing now; it is not a process of seeing. Seeing is acting. Now, does the mind see this whole map of violence and the root of it? And what is it that sees? If the ‘me’ sees it, then it is afraid to live differently, then the ‘me’ says ‘I must protect myself, I must resist this, I am afraid’. Therefore the ‘me’ refuses to see the map. But the seeing is not the ‘me’.
Questioner: Seeing has no purpose, has it?
Krishnamurti: There is no purpose in seeing the map; it just sees.
Questioner: But, immediately I say that I see it…
Krishnamurti: Wait! Do we realize that the mind which is observing this entire map is entirely different from the ‘me’ which sees it and is afraid to break from it? There are two different observations: the ‘me’ seeing, and ‘seeing’. The ‘me’ seeing must inevitably be afraid, and must therefore resist and say, ‘How shall I live?’ What shall I do? Must I give this up? Must I hold on?’ and so on. We said: any movement of the ‘me’ is violence. But there is a mere seeing of the map, which is entirely different. Is this clear? Now, which is it that you are doing?
Questioner: The ‘me’ is seeing.
Krishnamurti: You say the ‘me’ is seeing – therefore it is afraid.
Questioner: Of course, it is afraid.
Krishnamurti: What will you do, knowing any movement of the ‘me’ is still furthering that fear?
Questioner: I don’t know.
Krishnamurti: Ah! What do you mean by, ‘You don’t know’?
Questioner: To me, the ‘me’ is all I know.
Krishnamurti: No sir, we have made it very clear. Do listen to this. There are two actions of seeing. Seeing the map non-directionally, non-purposively, just seeing, and the ‘me’ seeing – the ‘me’ with its purpose, with its drive, with its directive, with its resistances. It sees and is afraid to do this, or that.
Questioner: Are you using the word ‘see’ now in the way in which you normally speak of being aware?
Krishnamurti: I am just using the word ‘seeing’ for a change, that’s all.
Questioner: Sir, you tell me there is a state in which you can see without the ‘me’, but I have never experienced this.
Krishnamurti: Do it now – I am showing it to you! There is the ‘me’ that looks at this whole map of violence and therefore is afraid and resists. And there is another seeing which is not of the ‘me’, which just observes, non-objectively, non-purposively, and says, ‘I just see it’.
But this is simple, isn’t it? I see you have got a green shirt; I don’t say, ‘I like it’ or ‘I dislike it’, I just see it. But the moment I say, ‘I like it’, it is already the ‘me’ saying ‘I like it; and therefore all the rest of it follows. This is sufficiently clear – verbally at least.
Questioner: Could we go into the question of why this looking without the ‘me’ is so very difficult and happens so rarely.
Krishnamurti: I don’t think it is difficult. Don’t say it is difficult; then you are stuck, then you have blocked yourself.
Questioner: Could one summarize this by saying that in one case there is a seeing without purpose, and in the other case purpose is involved?
Krishnamurti: Yes, that’s all. Can I look without direction? When I look with a direction, it is the ‘me’. What is the difficulty in this, may I ask?
Questioner: Usually we have the illusion that looking, with a direction is looking.
Krishnamurti: Looking with a direction is not looking obviously.
Questioner: There is a difference between looking and seeing. If one is looking, one is involved.
Krishnamurti: Don’t let’s complicate it. We said: does the mind see the whole map, without any direction?
Questioner: The map is selected from both directions.
Krishnamurti: No, no. Just look. This whole structure of the ‘me’ is violence; the structure being the way I live, the way I think, the way I feel, my whole reaction to everything is a form of violence which is the ‘me’. That is all in the category of time. The ‘seeing’ has no time – you are seeing it. The moment I see with time there is fear.
Questioner: There is seeing, and the thing seen. When once you have seen something is it the old mind that has seen?
Krishnamurti: Yes. Now do find out, how do you see? Do you see non-purposively, or purposively? Do you see in terms of time? That is, do you say, ‘It is too difficult, it is too complex, what am I to do?’ Or do you see without time? If you say, ‘I don’t see it without time,’ the next question is, ‘Why? What is the difficulty?’ Is it physical blindness, or is it psychological disinclination to look at anything as it is? Is it because we have never looked at anything directly, are always trying to avoid, to escape? Therefore, if we are escaping, let us see that – not try to find out how to resist escape.