David Bohm: Because it’s not solid.
K: The perception of that is the ending of the conditioning. The truth is, when there is the realization that the observer is the observed. Then in that realization, which is truth, the conditioning disappears. How does it disappear? What is necessary for the crumbling of that structure?
DB: The insight into the falseness of it.
K: But I can have an insight into something that is false and yet I go on that way, accept the false and live in the false.
K: Now I don’t know if I can convey something. I want to bring this into action in my life. I have accepted reality as truth, I live in that – my gods, my habits, everything – I live in that. You come along and say ‘Look, truth is different from reality’ and you explain it to me. How will I put away that tremendous weight, or break that tremendous conditioning? I need energy to break that conditioning. Does the energy come when I see, ‘the observer is the observed’? As we’ve said, I see the importance, rationally, that the conditioning must break down, I see the necessity of it: I see how it operates, the division, the conflict and all the rest of what is involved. Now when I realize that the observer is the observed, a totally different kind of energy comes into being. That’s all I want to get at.
DB: Yes, it’s not the energy of reality then. I see it better when I say, ‘the thinker is the thought’. It’s actually the same thing.
K: Yes, the thinker is the thought. Now, is that energy different from the energy of conditioning and the activity of the conditioning and reality? Is that energy the perception of truth? – and therefore it has quite a different quality of energy.
DB: It seems to have the quality of being free of, not being bound by the conditioning.
K: Yes. Now I want to make it practical to myself. I see this whole thing that you have described to me. I have got a fairly good mind, I can argue, explain it, all the rest of it, but this quality of energy doesn’t come. And you want me to have this quality, out of your compassion, out of your understanding, out of your perception of truth. You say, ‘Please, see that’. And I can’t see it, because I’m always living in the realm of reality. You are living in the realm of truth and I can’t. There is no relationship between you and me. I accept your word, I see the reason for it, I see the logic of it, I see the actuality of it, but I can’t break it down.
How will you help – I’m using that word hesitantly – how can you help me to break this down? It’s your job, because you see the truth and I don’t. You say, ‘For God’s sake, see this’. How will you help me? Through words? Then we enter into the realm with which I am quite familiar. This is actually going on, you understand? So what is one to do? What will you do with me, who refuses to see something which is just there? And you point out that as long as we live in this world of reality, there is going to be murder, death – everything that goes on there. There is no answer in that realm for any of our problems. How will you convey this to me? I want to find out, I’m very keen, I want to get out of this.
DB: It’s only possible to communicate the intensity. We already discussed all the other factors that are communicated.
K: You see, what you say has no system, no method, because they are all part of the conditioning. You say something totally new, unexpected, to which I haven’t even given a single moment of thought. You come along with a basketful and I do not know how to receive you. This has been really a problem; to the prophets, to every…
DB: It seems nobody has really succeeded in it.
K: Nobody has. It’s part of education that keeps us constantly in the realm of reality.
DB: Everyone is expecting a path marked out in the field of reality.
K: You talk of a totally different kind of energy from the energy of reality. And you say that energy will wipe all this out, but it will use this reality.
DB: Yes, it will work through it.
K: It’s all words to me, because society, education, economics, my parents, everything is here in reality. All the scientists are working here, all the professors, all the economists, everybody is here. And you say ‘Look’, and I refuse to look.
DB: It’s not even that one refuses, it’s something more unconscious perhaps.
K: So in discussing this, is there a thinking which is not in the realm of reality?
DB: One might ask whether there is such thought, in the sense of the response of the drum to the emptiness within.
K: That’s a good simile. Because it is empty, it is vibrating.
DB: The material thing is vibrating to the emptiness.
K: The material thing is vibrating. Wait – is truth nothingness?
DB: Reality is some thing, perhaps every thing. Truth is no thing. That is what the word ‘nothing’ deeply means. So truth is ‘no-thingness’.
K: Yes, truth is nothing.
DB.: Because if it’s not reality it must be nothing – no thing.
K: And therefore empty. Empty being – how did you once describe it?
DB: Leisure is the word – leisure means basically ‘empty’. The English root of ‘empty’ means at leisure, unoccupied.
K: So you are saying to me, ‘Your mind must be unoccupied’. It mustn’t be occupied by reality.
DB: Yes, that’s clear.
K: So it must be empty, there mustn’t be a thing in it which has been put together by reality, by thought – no thing. Nothing means that.
DB: It’s clear that things are what we think about, therefore we have to say the mind must not think about anything.
K: That’s right. That means thought cannot think about emptiness.
DB: That would make it into a thing.
K: That’s just it. You see, Hindu tradition says you can come to it.
DB: Yes, but anything you come to must be by a path which is marked out in the field of reality.
K: Yes. Now, I have an insight into that, I see it. I see my mind must be unoccupied, must have no inhabitants, must be an empty house. What is the action of that emptiness in my life? – because I must live here; I don’t know why, but I must on the other side you do have to take care of your real material needs.
DB: There arises a conflict because what you are proposing appears to be reasonable, but it doesn’t seem to take care of your material needs. Without having taken care of these needs you’re not secure.
K: Therefore they call the world of reality ‘maya’.
DB: Why is that? How do you make the connection?
K: Because they say, to live in emptiness is necessary and if you live there you consider the world as maya.
DB: You could say all that stuff is illusion, but then you would find you were in real danger…
K: Of course.
DB: So you seem to be calling for a confidence that nothingness will take care of you, physically and in every way. In other words, from nothingness, you say, there is security.
K: No, in nothingness there is security.
DB: And this security must include physical security.
K: No, I say, psychological security…
DB: Yes, but the question almost immediately arises…
K: How am I to be secure in the world of reality?
DB: Yes, because one could say: I accept that it will remove my psychological problems, but I still have to be physically secure as well in the world of reality.
K: There is no psychological security in reality, but only complete security in nothingness. Then if that is so, to me, my whole activity in the world of reality is entirely different.
DB: I see that, but the question will always be raised: is it different enough to…
K: Oh yes, it would be totally different, because I’m not nationalistic, I’m not ‘English’, I am nothing. Therefore our whole world is different. I don’t divide…
DB: Let’s bring back your example of one who understands and the one who wants to communicate to the other. Somehow what doesn’t communicate is the assurance that it will take care of all that.
K: It won’t take care of all that. I have to work here.
DB: Well, according to what you said, there is a certain implication that in nothingness we will be completely secure in every way.
K: That is so, absolutely.
DB: Yes, but we have to ask: what about the physical security?
K: Physical security in reality? At present there is no security. I am fighting all my life, battling economically, socially, religiously. If I am inwardly, psychologically, completely secure, then my activity in the world of reality is born of complete intelligence. This doesn’t exist now, because that intelligence is the perception of the whole and so on. As long as I’m ‘English’ or ‘something’, I cannot have security. I must work to get rid of that.
DB: I can see you’d become more intelligent, you’d become more secure – of course. But when you say ‘complete security’ there is always the question: is it complete?
K: Oh, it is complete, psychologically.
DB: But not necessarily physically.
K: That feeling of complete security, inwardly, makes me…
DB: It makes you do the right thing.
K: The right thing in the world of reality.
DB: Yes, I see that. You can be as secure as you can possibly be if you are completely intelligent, but you cannot guarantee that nothing is going to happen to you.
K: No, of course not. My mind is rooted, or established, in nothingness, and it operates in the field of reality with intelligence. That intelligence says, ‘There you cannot have security unless you do these things’.
DB: I’ve got to do everything right.
K: Everything right according to that intelligence, which is of truth, of nothingness.
DB: And yet, if something does happen to you, nevertheless you still are secure.
K: Of course – if my house burns down. But you see we are seeking security here, in the world of reality.
DB: Yes, I understand that.
K: Therefore there is no security.
DB: As long as one feels that the world of reality is all there is, you have to seek it there.
DB: One can see that in the world of reality there is in fact no security. Everything depends on other things which are unknown, and so on. That’s why there is this intense fear.
K: You mention fear. In nothingness there is complete security, therefore no fear. But that sense of no fear has a totally different kind of activity in the world of reality. I have no fear – I work. I won’t be rich or poor – I work. I work, not as an Englishman, a German, an Arab – all the rest of that nonsense – I work there intelligently. Therefore I am creating security in the world of reality. You follow?
DB: Yes, you’re making it as secure as it can possibly be. The more clear and intelligent you are, the more secure it is.
K: Because inwardly I’m secure, I create security outwardly.
DB: On the other hand, if I feel that I depend inwardly on the world of reality, then I become disorganised inwardly.
K: Of course.
DB: Everybody does feel that he depends inwardly on the world of reality.
K: So the next thing is: you tell me this and I don’t see it. I don’t see the extraordinary beauty, the feeling, the depth of what you are saying about complete inward security. Therefore I say, ‘Look, how are you going to give the beauty of that to me?’