The Heart, as Well as the Mind, Is Involved in Perception

From Krishnamurti’s Book CAN THE MIND BE QUIET?

The action of thought is one thing and the action of perception is another. The action of thought must inevitably lead to confusion and to bondage. It has a quality of time-binding, whereas seeing and doing is a movement in freedom. One is a form of resistance in continuity, the other is the total absence of any form of resistance, defence or aggressive pursuit. Thought sees that demanding a particular attitude destroys relationship, and comes to a conclusion or a decision that it must not pursue that path. But in the very decision is its continuity.

Thought can analyse the destructive nature of possessing in relationship and push away from itself, underground into the unconscious, the idea that it must not pursue a particular desire. But it remains there; thought has only pushed it further away from itself. In this analytical process, thought doesn’t bring about right relationship. It is still the action of thought considering itself to be love. The other, the seeing and the doing, is entirely different. In seeing and doing there is no implication or analysis of thought whatsoever.

Thought cannot perceive in the total sense of that word. Analysis cannot bring about perception. Then what does bring about perception? Does thought bring it about, or the absence of thought? If perception is something that has come about through the medium of thought then it is still not the freedom of perception – acting then is according to a pattern set by thought in the present or the past. Therefore that action is incomplete and not free.

How does perception come without the interference of thought? What is the nature of perception? What is the structure? What makes the mind, including the heart, see something so clearly that the very seeing is the acting? Does analysis bring this about? Or is it that after analysing and the exhaustion brought about through analysis, the mind becomes quiet and perception takes place? That implies that analysis is a primary requisite – but is it? Or is all analysis futile? In analysis there is always the analyser and the analysed, and therefore there is duality, conflict and decision, which really is a form of resistance. If this is understood, it is very clear that analysis has no place in perception. Seeing, doing, takes place instantly but in analysis there is always a remnant of the past. When a decision is made according to the past it is still within the field of time and therefore idea and action are two separate states, two separate activities, hence duality, conflict and contradiction.

How does perception and immediate action happen? Does it depend on the sensitivity of the mind, the heart, the brain, the nerves, so intelligence is awake, working, and when there is any form of crisis or challenge it responds immediately and acts? If it is the result of previous perceptions or actions, it is memory that responds and action then is still the old, still the product of thought. So perception is really the quality of the mind that has become highly sensitive and therefore intelligent. This intelligence operates when any danger is seen—the danger of nationalism, of postponement, of the interference of thought. There is grave danger in all that. So, being sensitive and therefore intelligent, it is this intelligence that sees and acts, and not thought at all.

Intelligence is not the product of thought, because thought is memory, the response of experience, tradition, knowledge, and that cannot possibly bring about intelligence. Intelligence is freedom to act; to act in a totally different dimension at a totally different level. The past, which is thought, has no place and cannot bring about intelligence.

How does intelligence come about? The mind with its brain cells – and mind also means the heart – sees the full implication of thought because it has seen the danger of analysis and its dualistic state as the analyser and the analysed. The sensitivity of the mind sees that because it has observed, it has looked; therefore the sensitivity has come about without thought. It is this quality of sensitivity that perceives and acts instantly.

This is what we do when we meet great danger, physical danger. It is like meeting a snake; there is instant response. That response is the conditioned response, conditioned for millions of years to protect from danger. That protection is essential and that protection is the action of intelligence, not of fear. Intelligence has discovered that to survive you must run away from snakes. Fear only resists or gets excited, does some foolish thing. With intelligence, when there is danger there is instant action. That same intelligence operates when there is psychological danger if the mind is extraordinarily awake. When there is psychological danger to a mind that is awake and alert, a mind that has been watching, there is instant action. In this there is no duality, it is a surgical operation, and therefore no conflict, no residue as resistance or thought.