Small Group Discussion 7, New Delhi, 22 January 1961

(New Delhi, 22-1-61)

Discussion No. VII

This is the last discussion. Day before yesterday when we met we were considering the question of fear and the compulsive urge to seek power in different forms. And it seems to me that it is quite important to understand how to meet fear. For most of us fear is constant, and unconsciously or consciously.

Would you mind sitting down where you are, Sir? It disturbs others.

We will begin again. As most of us has this fear, it is quite important, I think, to meet that fear, without engendering other problems. We were saying that we are afraid of death, we are afraid of, insecurity, we are afraid of losing jobs, we are afraid of not furthering, we are afraid of not being loved, we are afraid of so many things. And how is it possible to meet fear openly, easily, and not let the fear breed other problems, which consciously or unconsciously build up our lives. I think if we could approach that issue by understanding what is sleep and what is meditation. You may think it is far-fetched, but I do not think it is, if we go a little along.

For most of us effort seems to be the very nature of existence, every form of effort is our daily bread, effort to go to the office, effort to work, effort to get up, effort to achieve a certain result; we live by effort. And it has become part of us. And we fear that if there is no effort, we shall stagnate and so we are constantly battling with ourselves to be alive by pressure, by discipline, by this pursuit of not only ambition as this means of stirring us up, but also we make effort to think rightly, to feel rightly, to resist! That is our very existence and I wonder if any of us have really seriously considered why we make effort at all, and is effort necessary. Or, does that prevent understanding? Understanding, it seems to me, is the state of mind which is not only capable of listening to everything that is being said explicitly and directly perceiving things very simply. And a mind that is merely interpretative, is not capable of understanding. A mind that merely compares is incapable of clear perception.

We will discuss this as we go along, but I am just laying the foundation as it were for our discussion. We do see things very clearly and sharply and precisely when we give our complete attention, not only verbally, intellectually, emotionally, but with our whole being. Then we are in a state of real perception, real comprehension. And that state, obviously, is not the result of effort. Because, if we are making an effort to comprehend, that effort implies struggle, resistance, a denial, and all our energy is taken away by that effort to resist, to try to understand, to try to resist.

So, I think, if we could understand this, that effort does prevent perception. You know when you try to hear something and you are making an effort to hear, you really don’t hear; all your energy is gone in making an effort. And if we could merely see this issue, not how to make effort, just see it, then we can go to something, which I think is important in discussing not only effort but fear, which is for most of us consciousness as broken up into the unconscious and the conscious. The superficial layer which is often a dull, which has been educated, has acquired, certain techniques and functions at the superficial level.

Please, Sirs, if I may suggest, and I hope you do not mind, you are not merely listening to a certain series of words or ideas, but actually in the very listening you are experiencing what is being said, then such a listening would be worthwhile. But if you are merely listening the words, the ideas, then such a hearing has no value at all. If it is self-applicable then what you listen to has real depth. So I hope you are, if I may suggest that you will so listen.

We function superficially; and our daily life is very superficial. But there is a great depth, hidden away in the vast recesses of the mind which is the hidden, the unconscious. That is the race, the traditional, the accumulated knowledge, experience of the race, of the human being, of the individual. So, there is a contradiction between the conscious mind which has acquired knowledge, technique, is capable of adjusting itself to any environment and to that vast store-house of hidden aspirations, compulsions, urges, motives, which is not so easily educated. So there is a contradiction. And that contradiction shows itself in dreams during sleep, through symbols, through sense, through hints, intimations. And just before going to sleep you have perhaps various forms of the senses, ideas, pictures, images and as you dream you have the interpretation of those dreams at the same time as you are asleep. So, the mind, the conscious as well as the unconscious, when it is asleep, it is in a constant turmoil, is constantly in a state of enquiring, searching, answering, responding, creating visions, symbols, which we call dreams. So, the mind is never at rest even though it is asleep. You must have noticed all this. There is nothing mysterious about it. These are obvious psychological facts which you can discover yourself without reading any book. And I think one must investigate all that, because that is part of self- knowledge, surely, of knowing the whole process of one’s own mind.

So, without really understanding this process of contradiction within the mind and the breeding of illusion which comes from this self-contradiction, meditation has very little meaning, because meditation is an action, because we have been discussing action. I do not know what that word ‘meditation’ means to you. Surely, meditation is, is it not?, a process through exploration into the depths of the mind, and that exploration is the awakening of experience, which is not the experience according to a pattern, or a way, or a system, but uncovering those processes of conditioning, so that the mind is actually experiencing those conditionings, and going beyond. So, it seems to me, merely to have a desire to achieve a certain result in meditation does lead to various forms of illusion. You understand, Sirs? Without knowing the process of thinking, being aware of the contents, of the nature of thinking, meditation has very little value. But yet we must meditate, because that is part of life. As you go to your office, as you read, as you think, as you talk, as you quarrel, as we do this and that, meditation is also part of this extraordinary thing called living. And if we do not know how to meditate, you are missing, a vast field of life, perhaps the most important part of life.

You know, I was told a lovely story of a disciple going to a master and the disciple taking a posture of meditation and closing his eyes, and the master asks the disciple, “I say, what are you doing, sitting in that way”?. And the disciple says, “I am trying to reach the highest consciousness”, and the disciple shuts his eyes and continues. So, the master picks up two pieces of rock and rubs and keeps on rubbing them together, the noise awakens the disciple. And the disciple looks at it and says, see, Master, what are you doing?” And the master says, “By rubbing I hope to produce in one of the pieces of stone a mirror”. And the disciple smiles and says, “you can continue like that for ten thousand years Master, but you will never produce a mirror”. And the master says, “you can sit like that for the next million years and you will never find”. You see, it reveals a great deal if you think about that story, We want to meditate according to a pattern, or we want a system of meditation. We want to know how to meditate, there is no harm, because meditation is a process of living, meditation is the awareness of what you are doing, of what you are thinking, of the motives, of the inner secrets of the mind, because we do have secrets. We never tell everything to another. There are hidden motives, hidden wants, hidden desires, jealousies, aspirations. Without knowing all these secrete, hidden urges and compulsions, mere meditation leads to self-hypnosis. You can put yourself quietly to sleep through following a certain pattern, and that is what most of us are doing, not only in meditation but in daily life. Great parts of us are asleep and blindly some parts of us are active, the part that is earning livelihood, quarrelling, successful, the part that is aspiring, hoping, achieving, breeding in innumerable fears. So, without understanding the totality of the mind, and the very understanding is meditation. You know how you talk to another, how you look at another, how you look at a tree, the evening sunset, the capacities that you have, the understanding of your vanity, the urge for power in which there is pride of achievement. Without understanding all this, there is no meditation. And the very understanding of this complex process of existence is meditation. And as one goes into this question very deeply, one begins to discover that the mind becomes extraordinarily quiet, not induced, not hypnotised by that word into a state of silence. Because most of us lead a very contradictory lives; our lives are in a state of conflict all the time; whether we are awake or asleep, there is a burning conflict, misery, travail, and to try to escape from them through meditation only produces fear and illusion. So, it is very important to understand fear. And the very understanding of fear is the process of meditation.

If I may, let us go deeply into this question of fear, because for most of us fear is very near, very close to us. And without understanding that which is very close, we cannot go very far, So, let us for a little spend time in understanding the extraordinary thing called fear. Would that be of value?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: You see, if we could understand that, then sleep has a totally different meaning. I will come to that at present. How to, I mustn’t use the word ‘how’, because that only awakens in your mind the pattern of meeting fear. We are aware that we are afraid. I am sure you are aware of it. Now, before we enquire into fear, what do we mean by being aware. Let us examine that word and the feeling behind that word.

How do we see things actually, visually see. And do we see anything? Or, do we merely interpret things? I hope you are following, I am making myself clear. Do I see you and you see me, or do you interpret what you see and I interpret what I see? Interpretation is not seeing. Is it? Please do spend a little time on this matter. Don’t be too anxious to find out what meditation is. This is part of meditation. Can I see without interpretation? Can you see me without giving all kinds of tributes, without evaluation, judgment, just to see?, in which is employed no name, isn’t it? I do not know if you have ever experimented with this thing. The moment you name, you have blocked yourself from seeing. Because, Sir, please give your attention to this, because we are going to enquire into what it is to be aware of fear. So, we are examining what it means to be aware. What does it mean? It means, obviously, not only to be aware of the outward thought and movement of perception but also inward movement of thought and perception. Isn’t it? I see the trees and I respond. I see the people and I respond and I see beauty, and there is a response to ugliness, to beauty, to all this squalor, the pomp, the sense of power. There is an observation externally, outwardly, which is interpreted, which is judged, criticised, and that very movement which goes outward also comes in. It is like a tide going in and out. By observing outward movement, the mind also observes the inner movement of that same act with all its reactions. So, awareness is this total process of the outward and inner movement of that, of judgment, of evaluation, of acceptance, denial. An I making it clear, or not? Because unless we are clear on this point, we cannot go into the question of fear.

Sir, do we understand anything by naming it? You understand? Do I understand you, when I say you are all Hindus, Buddhists, Communists, this or that? Do I understand by giving you a label? Or do I understand you when there is no, when there is no interference of the label? You follow, Sirs? So, the process of labelling, giving a name is really a hindrance to comprehension. And it is extremely subtle, extremely arduous, to observe something without giving a name, without giving a quality, because the very process of our thinking is verbalising. Isn’t it? Is this, am I going. Sirs, if this is not being made clear, please let us discuss it. What I am trying to convey is the awareness is a total process, not merely a state of mind which criticises, evaluates, condemns or compares. To understand why it compares, why it criticises, why it evaluates, what is the process of this evaluation, what lies behind this judgment, the whole process of that is awareness, which is really the mind being aware of this whole process of its activities.

If one has grasped a little bit of that, we can then go into the question of fear. Most of us have tasted this sense of envy, have we not? We know what jealousy means. Don’t you?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: Now, can you look at that feeling, you know the sense of jealousy, envy? Can you look at that feeling, without giving it a name? You understand? Because the naming process is the process of the thinker, who merely observes thought as though it was something apart from the thinker. Am I going, are you, some of you following what I am talking about, or am I talking Greek?

AUDIENCE: It is very clear.

KRISHNAMURTI: You are sure?

AUDIENCE: Clear as possible, very sure.

KRISHNAMURTI: Good. Clear, it may be verbally, sir. (Laughter). No, no, please don’t laugh it away.

AUDIENCE: I want silence, Sir.

KRISHNAMURTI: I know, clear it may be, verbally. But is it clear inwardly of the mind that is following the issue? You see, we know the division between the thinker and the thought, of experiencer and the experienced. The thinker gives words to the thing that is being experienced as pleasure and pain. When the thinker observes and does not give words to the things that it observes, then there is no difference between the thinker and the thing which is being observed, then it is one. Please do comprehend this thing, because it is quite difficult. This is an extraordinary experience, because you see, the moment when there is no division between the observer and the observed, then there is no conflict. Is there? No. Do please understand this. This is really very — I do not know what word — very essential, because most of us live in a state of contradiction. And the problem, is one of the essential problems is, whether a mind can be so completely, totally whole, in which there is no observer and the thing observed, and thereby be free of contradiction. And so one must understand how this contradiction arises.

Yes, Sir, take a very simple example of envy, jealousy, anger. In all these things in the moment of experiencing there is no contradiction. But the second after that experiencing there is the contradiction, as the thinker, the observer, looks at the thing and says it is good, or it is bad, it is anger, or it is envious. At the moment of experience there is no contradiction which is an extraordinary thing. Only when the experiencing is over, the second after, begins the contradiction. And this contradiction arises when the thinker is in the process of judging, evaluating that he has observed, either accepting or denying it, which is essentially a process of verbalising, or reacting according to its conditioning. So, to wipe away this contradiction, can the thinker observe without giving words to that thing which is being observed? And if there is no word, because word, that is, have you — I mustn’t go into that — have you ever gone into the question of words. The word, how the mind is a slave to the word, the Hindu, the Buddhist, the Mohammedan, the Communist, the Capitalist, the Democrat, the Congress, the wife, husband, the word God, or no God. Our mind is slave to words. And to free the thought from the word, whether it is possible? First you understand. Don’t accept anything that I am saying. Is it possible to free a thought from the word? And if it is possible, then can the thinker, the observer, look at the thing without the label, without the term, without the symbol, to look. And when it can so directly look, without the interference of the label, the word, the symbol, then there is no thinker observing the thing. Now this is meditation. You understand, Sirs? And that requires enormous attention, which is not concentration at all. Attention implies a totality, an extension of a totality, whereas concentration is a limitation. So, the mind enquiring into the problem of fear, which is essentially a problem of contradiction, must understand this process of looking at a thing without the verbalisation which is essentially a memory interfering with the observer. (Pause)

Will you see, Sirs..

AUDIENCE: Complete abstraction.

KRISHNAMURTI: What, Sir?

AUDIENCE: That totalisation of the mind is an abstraction, withdrawing from the word.

KRISHNAMURTI: Unfortunately, probably you hear for the first time, Sir. Aren’t you, Sir?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: Yes, Sir. We have. It is not an abstraction, Sir. You see, that is the difficulty. You give one meaning to a set of words and I give another meaning and you come for the first time with your meaning which we have gone into and we have to begin all over again. So, I am sorry I will not go into all that again. We are not talking in terms of abstraction. We are talking at the actual fact. We are not abstracting. You understand?, we are looking, we are looking into the process of the mind. The mind is looking at itself, which is not an abstraction. It is not deriving a conclusion from something. It observes, it is in a state of observation, and therefore, there is no abstraction from which it judges. There is no deduction, there is no conclusion. The mind that has observed is never in a state of conclusion and that is the beauty of a mind which is alive. A mind that functions from conclusion is no mind at all.

Look, Sirs, let us begin again. Most of us have various forms of fear, which distorts our thinking, our way of life, we tell lies, we get angry, we are ambitious because we are afraid. A man who is not afraid, who has no fear, he has no ambition. He does not want to say he lives, he is in a state of complete being. And from there you can begin to enquire into something that is not measurable. But a mind that is afraid tries to find that which is unnameable, not measurable/ such a mind can never discover what is true. It can create illusions and it does and lives in illusions. So, if we could really meet fear, as it arises, and in the meeting of the fear not bring about other series of reactions in that meeting, but meet it. You are following what I am talking, Sirs?

Now, how is one to meet it?, without reacting from it. Surely, the reaction arises only when you use the word fear itself, isn’t it?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, look, you don’t mind using the word ‘love’. When you use that word, you feel elated. And when you feel, when you use the word anger, it has a condemnatory value already. So, to look at fear so totally, so that the observer is not separate from that feeling, through the word and the label is not made separate. Sir, am I explaining something at all? Eh?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: Would you discuss that point a little with each other? Let us discuss that point.

AUDIENCE: Sir, may I ask you one question, whether it is an observer and the thing, one is consciousness and the other is observer?

KRISHNAMURTI: No, no, don’t use that word. Sir, you know fear, don’t you? Yes?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: How do you look at it? How do you observe it? How do you know you are afraid?

AUDIENCE: By behaviour.

KRISHNAMURTI: Oh, no.

AUDIENCE: If I find a cobra I try to go back or do something and that tells me afterwards that I was afraid of that cobra.

KRISHNAMURTI: Yes, Sir, so what do you mean by fear, the nature of fear, not what makes you afraid, cobra makes you afraid, what public opinion says makes you afraid, death makes you afraid, eh? Your not achieving your marvellous height in social ladder makes you afraid. They are things that make you afraid. But you know the nature of fear not the things that make you afraid. Surely, there is a difference between the two, isn’t it?

AUDIENCE: Fear is only a state of mind.

KRISHNAMURTI: Yes, Sir, I understand that Sir.

AUDIENCE: I interpret the thing or feeling of fear, Sir.

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, let me ask you a question. Have you ever really felt fear, felt, lived with fear? Have you? Or, have you always avoided fear? Obviously, we have always avoided fear. When I am afraid, I turn on the radio, take a drink, go to the temple, or go for a walk, do a number of things, but I never live with fear. Do I, as I lived, as I want to live with pleasure? Both requires a certain energy. Doesn’t it? Sirs, don’t, eh, to live with that is something that gives you great pleasure, you must have great energy. Isn’t it? Equally, to live with fear, you must have immense energy to live with it. Otherwise, it destroys you. Now, to live with beauty and to live with ugliness demands energy. And this energy is destroyed when the word comes in, the label, the symbol comes in and thereby creates a division in the living with the thing. I don’t know. Do you understand?

AUDIENCE: The man with the cobra live…..

KRISHNAMURTI: Don’t, Sir, don’t talk absolute nonsense. I don’t know what is it you are talking about.

AUDIENCE: Sir, the word comes in when the experience is over. Isn’t it, Sir, when you try to recollect and verbally….

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, have you listened to what I have said?, or you are just thinking out how to answer me? Eh? How to cunningly put in words what you think is the right answer? I said something just now, Sir, but I have forgotten what I have said, which was really, it doesn’t matter.

AUDIENCE: Live with fear, that is what you said.

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, look, Sir, I say you are dull, Eh? Can you look at yourself, without reacting? Ehm?- Can you?

AUDIENCE: No.

KRISHNAMURTI: There we are. Why, you think you are awfully clever.

AUDIENCE: No, I don’t like to withdraw that.

KRISHNAMURTI: Aren’t you? You may like to be told by somebody that you are dull, but when you realise, when you look, when you observe, you realise that you are dull. Don’t you.

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, aren’t you dull, when you don’t see the beauty of the skies, the heavens, the earth, the trees, the squalor, the misery, the pomp, the power, observe all this, when you are blind don’t you realise that you are dull? Has somebody to tell you that you are dull?

AUDIENCE: The very fact of knowing that a person is dull, according to you, will remove that dullness.

KRISHNAMURTI: Not according to me. I am telling you something. Please don’t count. Please listen to what I have to say. Have I to be told by somebody that I am dull. Have I to be told by somebody that I am blind, when I don’t see, eh? Is my dullness indicated by another, or do I realise myself that I am dull? Sir, see the difference between the two. If you tell me I am dull, am I dull because you tell me? Don’t I know that I am dull? Don’t I know that I have no eyes, that I am blind? Have you to tell me that I am blind? Now just a minute, hold on to it. I say to you, you are dull. Do you accept that, and if you do accept it you merely react to it. Don’t you? You say, “I am not dull. I don’t want to be talked. Who are you the heck, are you tell me that I am dull”. Now, apart of being told, don’t you know that you are dull. No? How very serious you are. Sir, I am asking you, Sir, don’t you know that you are dull.

AUDIENCE: No one feels that he is. If he were to feel that he is dull the very fact that he is. He feels that he is wise enough.

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, look, Sir, without being told I feel myself being insensitive. If you don’t like the word dull, because that has a condemnatory meaning, you think you are so very clever, so very superior, which you are not, the fact is that you are dull. Otherwise, you won’t be sitting here and I won’t be sitting here. I am insensitive, nobody has to tell me. I realise, this insensitivity because into being, when the mind functions in habit, when it doesn’t see, when it doesn’t feel it, it is not alive to everything in life. So, I realise I am insensitive. I realise I am dull. What is my reaction; immediately, to become clever, try to make an effort not to be dull. How can a dull mind make effort and be clever be superior and free from dullness. It must realise that state fully. Now, to realise that state fully, completely, wholly to the very bottoms of one’s being, there must be no reaction. I must observe it. The mind must see it. And it may not observe, if it merely says, “Oh, I am not dull, I must become clever, I must do this”. It must live with it. Every form of condemnation is an escape from the fact, and to live with that fact requires tremendous energy.

Sir, look, you see over it a tree, don’t you, you see over it the blue sky and the evening star, the Venus, or you see everything there, but you don’t observe, you don’t feel. Now to feel all this, the mind must be in a state of astonishing aliveness, a sense of vibrant energy. And you cannot have energy if there is a contradiction between the observer and the observed. And the contradiction arises through reactions, through the employment of words, symbols, when the memory interferes between the observer and the observed. So, to look at fear, to live with fear, to meet fear, without creating a contradiction between the fear and the observer is the problem. You understand, Sirs? I may, through some trick, avoid one set of fears. But as I move in life there is another fear and so on; fear is like a shadow that suddenly comes and constantly comes. It is there. A mind that wants to understand fear and to be totally free of fear, you understand, Sir?, not just one form of fear, but to be completely free, so that the mind is capable of being something else, than being a slave to fear. To go into that, to live with it, it means this state of energy. Now, the whole process of what we have been discussing is meditation, not sitting in a room, or a corner, cross-legged and all the rest of it, breathing and all that. It is sheer nonsense; it is not meditation, it is self-hypnosis; It is deceiving yourself, pretending. But to go into this, so that the mind, as you will see, if you can go into it, so that the mind during the day, as it walks, as it works, as it plays, as it observes, the mind is aware, without reacting, aware, watching, choiceless, so that when it does go to sleep there is no other process of action, which is not the mere action of the conscious mind, or the unconscious mind; so that the mind being so alert during the day watching, observing, unearthing every motive, every thought, every movement of thought, so that, when it does sleep it is in a state of quietness, then it can experience other things which is not merely experienced by the conscious mind, so, that meditation is a process not only during the waking period but also during the sleeping period. And then you will find that the mind has emptied itself of everything it has known, emptied itself to all its yesterdays, not that there are not yesterdays, they are the yesterdays, but the responses of the yesterdays which condition a mind so that the mind is made so that the mind empties itself. You know, Sirs, a thing that is completely empty is totally full. And it is only such a mind that can receive or comprehend that which is not measurable by a mind, which is the outcome of time. Well, Sirs, will you like to discuss what we have been talking about? What Sirs?.

AUDIENCE: Isn’t, Sir, fear born of….

KRISHNAMURTI: What, Sir?

AUDIENCE: Does not fear born, that is, is it not an instinct born with the child?

KRISHNAMURTI: So, you are maintaining fear as instinctive, as natural. Sir, you come across as you are walking a cobra, a snake and instinctively jump back. Now, is that fear, and is it not natural, if it is fear, to observe oneself? If you do no such instinctual self-contradiction, reaction, you will be committing suicide. Wouldn’t you? The bus is rattling along full speed. If you had any reaction you would walk straight into it. Is that wrong? So, we are to draw a line between the rightful self-contradiction, the rightful, the sense of preservation, to conserve, and when that insensitivity interferes with the psychological demand for security — you are follow- ing this, Sirs?

Let me put it round the other way. Sirs, we need food, clothes and shelter. We need a certain cleanliness, a certain comfort, and that is essential. In probably 50 years or 100 hundred years the world will have an over-flow of food, because science is so advanced. Everybody knows about it. Now, when does food, cloth, shelter interfere, or when does the mind use those things to be secure inwardly, psychologically? You are following what I am saying, Sir? I need those things, you and I need food, clothes and shelter. But we use the needs for psychological purpose. You understand, Sirs, bigger house, bigger position, you know, the needs we use for power, position, prestige and thereby create the whole picture of fear.

AUDIENCE: Sir, may I ask you a question. You are saying here is a disturbance within you. Now can it be possible to observe that without destroying the neurological disturbances which are different from other neurological disturbances and that very discernment is the name. I say it is this which causes difficulty, because in itself the neurological difficulties are difficulties from the name. They exist, but can there by an observation of this neurological names without desires, without the neurological desires or pleasure. How is such observation possible, because immediately one observes the discernment says that this is not pleasure, this is fear and name is instantaneous with the neurological disturbances. Then how is observation possible?

KRISHNAMURTI: You understand the question?

AUDIENCE: No, Sir, no, Sir.

KRISHNAMURII: The lady asks, there are neurological disturbances. I see a snake, but the reaction to nerves…

AUDIENCE: I said. No, Sir. I am not talking about the snake now, not the instinctive reaction. I am saying here is a neurological fear, which is not in the sense of seeing a snake, but sitting in a room that a snake may come…..

KRISHNAMURTI: Which is what? Wait a minute. No, Sir, please. The lady asks something the neurological process of fear, we understand. To responding to a snake, the nerves. Then sitting in a room and imagining, thinking. Now, please follow this, thinking, that is the house might catch on fire, my wife running away, the snake coming in, you follow, the thinking process may engender, breed fear. Right? That is what she was saying.

AUDIENCE: Sir, I said, this is the only form of fear one knows.

KRISHNAMURTI: Wait, wait, I am coming to that. So, the lady says, this is the only fear that we know, the fear that thought creates. Right?

AUDIENCE: Yes, now that…

KRISHNAMURTI: In neurological fear…

AUDIENCE: But that is neurological response..

KRISHNAMURTI: Wait. There are two sets of neurological fears, one with the meeting of snake and thought awakening the fear through the nerves, eh?, through imagination, through supposition which react, also interfere.

AUDIENCE: In the sense that is the only fear, the instinctive response is not fear at all.

KRISHNAMURTI: Right. So it is said that fear is only there when thought is in operation. Don’t, Sir, don’t say ‘no’, examine it. Have I understood your question?

AUDIENCE: Then I went one step further. I said their nature is different from neurological responses.

KRISHNAMURTI: Yes, there is the ordinary instinctual neurological response, of which you say is not fear. Perhaps it may be. The second is that thought, we summarise it, thought awakens certain responses neurologically and thereby creates fear. Now these two are totally different; the one awakened by thought as fear, the other is not….

AUDIENCE: No, Sir, my question was that these neurological responses awakened by fear, by thought, is it possible to observe that, knowing that in nature all are different from the neurological responses.

KRISHNAMURTI: Yes, that is right.

AUDIENCE: And how is it…..

KRISHNAMURTI: I am going to, I am going into that. First I want the question to be perfectly clear. Neurological fears, fears of thought awakened and to observe the one and the other, so that the thought observes without awakening fear. That is right?

AUDIENCE: Yes, Sir. But you have said in the discussion so far that is it possible to observe fear without the word, without thought, without the name. I say, that there are certain neurological responses which are awakened by thought which we call fear. The very observation of this neurological responses makes me discern that they are different from the neurological responses of pleasure. So, I say how is it possible to observe those very knowing is the word? How is it possible to observe the neurological responses of fear without the word, fear, without the name?

KRISHNAMURTI: Right, I got it.

AUDIENCE: It is in the very knowing that the word comes into existence.

KRISHNAMURTI: Wait. But if, if we understood the ways of thinking, the ways of thought, when we meet these fears which are awakened through the word, eh?, through the word which awakens the neurological fears. I am not sure I am meeting your mind.

AUDIENCE: Sir, I say I am to ask further what is fear without the neurological thought.

KRISHNAMURTI: Now, that is it. Let us stick to that. I sit in a room, or I go for a walk, I am walking, living, and my thought imagines, that says, by Jove, I am going to lose my job, based on facts, I am inefficient, or whatever it is, or my wife is going to run away, it may be or may not be factual, or there is death, a thought which is the very sense of time, eh?, creates fear. You are meeting my mind? I sit in my room and say, my God a snake is going to come, or my wife is this and that, or I am going to, thought is creating through future fear.

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: Right? Future is involved. In all fear future is involved. Please listen to this. That is tomorrow. I am living, I am functioning, but death may be there tomorrow. So, thought through time as the future creates fear, right?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: So, thought is time, right? Thought based on the reactions and the responses of knowledge of many yesterdays through the present to the future.

AUDIENCE: Sir, may I? Sorry…

KRISHNAMURTI: It is all right.

AUDIENCE: ” I think it is important. Sir, when you say that is time, you know only which is psychological.

KRISHNAMURTI: Of course, Sir, that is time chronologically time by the watch.

AUDIENCE: Which is also thought.

KRISHNAMURTI: We are talking of thought which is the content which is the nature of time. I have, I am going to become a big man, and I also think. I may not. And so there is a fear. Thought creates fear. That is important. So, the question is, can thought look at fear, eh, that is can thought look at neurological responses which is natural? Now, wait a minute. Can I look at that, can thought look at fear? That is the question, right? Now, can thought, which is the creativity of fear look at fear? You are following this?

AUDIENCE: May I.

KRISHNAMURTI: Stick to the point, Sir. Don’t expand it.

AUDIENCE: The state of mind which we call fear is essentially a state of consciousness of one’s own to meet the situation.

KRISHNAMURTI: Don’t go through all that now.

AUDIENCE: I am replying to Pupul.

KRISHNAMURTI: I understand all that. Just that, look at fear, that is thought, I want to go back to that. Do you look at anything that thought. Wait, wait. Half a moment. Give me a minute.

AUDIENCE: Sir, what is that involved? What do you say, can you look at fear. I am not talking about anything. Can you look at fear?

KRISHNAMURTI: I am also asking a question which is do you look at something, is thought in operation when you observe?

AUDIENCE: No, Sir.

KRISHNAMURTI: No? You are sure?

AUDIENCE: Sir, when you observe and there is recognition, thought is in operation.

KRISHNAMURTI: That is what? I observe the rose, a flower. When I observe and the word comes into being as thought, as the rose, then the thought begins…

AUDIENCE: No, Sir, when I observe the rose, the word is there.

AUDIENCE: No.

KRISHNAMURTI: Wait, half a moment, Sir. This is important, because we are dealing with something which is very complex problem. You need infinite patience, not yes and no. You have to observe, you have to have patience, to go into something. Now the lady says, when you observe a fear the very observation includes the word.

AUDIENCE: You may not use the word.

KRISHNAMURTI: You may not use the word, but the very observation is the process of verbalising. Don’t say, no, Sir. Please look. You cannot. You look at me, I look at you. You look at your wife, you look at your sons, you observe, the very observation is verbalising, No?

AUDIENCE: Sir, the very observation is the thing which distinguishes you from the other.

KRISHNAMURTI: The other. So, this is too complex. Doesn’t matter, I will go into it. We will go into it for a minute. Do you, in observing a flower, employ a word, a term and that very observation is so intricately tied with word that you cannot put away without observing. You have understood the question, Sirs?

AUDIENCE: Yes.

KRISHNAMURTI: No, you have not understood, Sirs. Look, Sir, I look at this watch. The looking at it is the recognition of the word, that it is a watch, and if I, can I look at it, and is there a looking at it without recognition?

AUDIENCE: There is a movement.

KRISHNAMURTI: Don’t, don’t. First look at the word, before we answer.

AUDIENCE: No, Sir, I have experimented this any number of times. There surely is a word which does not involve. Whenever you look at something, so long as I know your name. But my looking at you does not involve the name…

AUDIENCE: Sir, the looking at you, it may not involve the name, you and I. It may or it may not, Sir.

KRISHNAMURTI: All right.

AUDIENCE: Sir, excuse me for a minute, I will take only one minute. Suppose one says.

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, just a minute. Sir, these two people have asked a question and you have not answered them.

AUDIENCE: No, Sir.

KRISHNAMURTI: The more people put in as all their own we get confused. It is a very simple thing. You are not, you are not giving your attention, you are not paying attention, Sir. What Sir?

(A gentleman goes out of the room saying something “silence, etc.”)

KRISHNAMURTI: Sir, would you be a little bit quiet, because this requires a great deal of investigation. You cannot just brush it off. What makes for differentiation and mustn’t differentiation exist? It is inevitable, is it not? Red, black, blue, you, I, man, woman, child, you know, that is inevitable. Is it not? There is a difference between a pear, a banana and an apple. And to say I must be without differentiation would be the highest form of silence. But when I look at fear, eh?, is there an element of differentiation. Go slow. I am just enquiring. But there is a sense of differentiation.

(An old man slowly gets up and walks on)

KRISHNAMURTI: I am afraid you will have to help him, he does not know the way, he is blind, please help him out. Please help him. He cannot see where he is.

OLD MAN: Sorry, Sir.

KRISHNAMURTI: It is 11 O’clock, we ought to really stop, he will stop after this, Sir. Please don’t disturb. I have understood the question of that lady. I am going to answer, whether you have understood it or not I am sorry we must limit. We say differentiation must exist, it is inevitable, a mind which says this is bad, all this is wrought, differentiation must exist. But do I look at, is there observation of fear without differentiation? And when I use the word fear, there is inherent in it differentiation. The very employment of that word fear is a differentiation, eh? I am saying the differentiation exists, because there is the observer with its seeds of words, symbols, ideologies and reactions and with these he looks, and thereby creates in the very observation a differentiation. I am trying to find out and thereby, because he so observes through differentiation he runs away from it or acts upon it. Now, can the observer look without differentiation, which means meet fear without differentiation and he can only meet fear with differentiation when there is no thinker with all the responsive reactions, the thing that he is observing. You are getting me? I am answering your question. Right? So, we come back. Can the observer who is in the very sense of the word look without differentiation of the thing which he calls fear? And he can only do that when he has understood the whole significance of living that something entirely, totally. And he is not capable of living that something totally, when he is avoiding or accepting. And he avoids or accepts according to pain and pleasure unreliable, physical as well as the psychological, which means, that the word has assumed importance. Sir, you are all believers $n God, aren’t you?, or something else. Or may not, you are believers in something and that believing is conditioning your mind to certain responses. Now, we are saying to ourselves, we are asking, whether the mind can look without the differentiation which the word makes? And to go into all that which is the very essence which is the process of self-knowledge is meditation. And if you so meditate, then you will begin to discover for yourself that you can observe the feelings, the fears without this differentiation which the word creates and therefore live with it so completely, totally that the entire body of fear ceases. And such a mind is the creative mind, such a mind is the good mind, such a mind is the mind that can only receive that which is not measured by the immeasurable, such a mind can receive the blessing of the eternal.

Thank you.

This is the last meeting.