Exploration into Insight

P: Can we go on? So there are two problems involved, which are, what is listening - in which is implied what is not listening - and what is compassion? What is the nature and the structure of the feeling and the depth of it, and the action that springs from it?

K: Agreed, but we have not got it, unfortunately. So how should we approach this matter? What does it mean to listen, and what is the nature and the structure of compassion?

FW: Could we enquire into the nature of matter?

P: I am not saying I use the energy wrongly. The `I' itself is a concentration of energy that dissipates. As the body wears out, the `I' in that sense has the same nature, it gets old, it gets stale.

P: What one does in observing is a different issue. We are talking of that nature of energy which brings about the momentum. Now I am saying the momentum is the very nature and structure of the `I' which is caught in becoming.

Q: Sir, the very nature of this insufficiency at a physiological level leads to sufficiency at the metaphysiological level. It leads from some inadequacy in the physiological machine to the completion of it. And it is this cycle that is operative; that is how the brain works. If the physiological spill-over is ever to continue in the psychological field, then this cycle of insufficiency and sufficiency must continue.

P: If I may ask, there may be another state, but I do not know what it is. How does this answer the question, how does this further the question of the nature of this force which brings it into being and then keeps it going? Basically, that is the question.

DS: What is the momentum of this energy that becomes mechanical? Let us stay out of the fantasy realm for a while but keep to just this momentum of thought and desire and its mechanical nature. What is the momentum of this energy, of thought, desire and the creation of the thinker?

FW: Is there fear when there is not the word `fear'? And what is the nature of the energy in the body or in the whole being if there is no naming?

K: My son is dead. That is a fact. And that fact reveals the nature of my relationship to him, my commitment to him, my attachment to him, etc. which are all non-facts.

P: You have said that in the depth of sorrow is the summation of all energy. This must be of the same nature.

J. Krishnamurti Exploration into Insight `The nature of Despair'

P: Can we examine the roots of despair? It is a very real problem in our life. In a sense, the root of sorrow is the root of despair; it must be of the same nature.

P: In all observations, we have sat with Krishnaji and we have observed the self in operation and the nature of the self has been revealed.

K: Stop there. So I have discovered something, that the centre creates space and time. Where there is space and time, there must be division in relationship and, therefore, disorder in relationship. Having disorder in relationship, it creates further disorder because that is the very nature of the centre. There is not only disorder in relationship, there is disorder in thought, action, idea.

S: Pupulji, the whole physical world, in spite of chaos, maintains an extraordinary order. It is the very nature of the universe to maintain order.

S: What is the nature of `what is'?

P: But what is the nature of a steady mind?

P: What is the nature of a steady mind?

K: No, obviously not. It is not a verbal direction. I think that is really quite important. What is the nature of a steady mind? Can we discuss that, not the verbal description of a steady mind?

K: No. I have not moved away to `what is not'. I know my mind chatters. That's a fact. I know it is irrational, involuntary, unintended, a wastage of energy; I also know I am wasting energy in ten different ways. To gather all the wastage of energy is impossible. You spill mercury and there are hundreds of little droplets all over the place. To collect them is also wastage of energy. So I see, there must be a different way. The mind, not being steady, chatters. My enquiry now is: What is the nature and structure of steadiness?

P: Isn't it the very nature of the mind?

K: You say you can face these fears intelligently. I question whether you face them intelligently. I question whether you can have intelligence before you have resolved fear. Intelligence comes only when fear is not. Intelligence is light and you cannot deal with darkness when light is not. Light exists only when darkness is not. I am questioning whether you can deal with fear intelligently when fear exists. I say you cannot. You may rationalize it, you may see the nature of it, avoid it or go beyond it, but that is not intelligence.

P: And the nature of that is the transformation of the human mind.

P: What is the nature of the soil of the human mind which has to be cultivated to receive the other? You tell me that is also a wrong question. You say I am in conflict, I am suffering and I see that a life of conflict and suffering has no end.

P: As it does not seem possible to proceed with this discussion, may I put another question? What is the nature of the field which needs to be prepared, to be able to receive that which is limitless?

K: Then, why call it energy and bring the word `soil'? Prepare, work at it. We live a life of contradiction, conflict, misery. I want to find out if it can end sorrow, the whole of human sorrow and enquire into the nature of compassion.

P: It is really like this: we have done everything to understand the nature of this self-centred activity. We have observed, we have meditated, but the centre does not cease, sir.

P: The really deep hurts are because of a crisis, the very nature of your being is on the edge of sorrow.

K: Let us not take too many. A pursuit, based on choice, which has the motive of satisfaction of fulfilment or the desire to achieve, that action must create conflict. So, conflict is one of the factors of deterioration. Perhaps that is the major factor of deterioration. I decide to become a politician. I decide to become a religious man. I decide to become an artist, a sannyasi; that decision is made by a conditioning brought about by a culture which is in its very nature fragmentary. That is, I decide to be a bachelor because from what I have seen, from what I have heard, I think that to attain God, Truth, Enlightenment, I must remain celibate. I disregard the whole structure of human existence, the biological, the sociological, and all the rest of it. That decision obviously brings about a conflict in me, a sexual conflict, a conflict in keeping away from people, and so on. That is one of the factors of the deterioration of the brain. I am only using one part of it. The very factor of dividing one sector of my life from the rest is a factor of deterioration. So, choice and will are factors of deterioration.

P: Let us explore that. The brain cells themselves have an inbuilt sense of time, sense of memory, instinct. They operate as reflexes. The very nature of operating in reflexes limits the brain from functioning totally. And we know no other way.

P: Then I know its total nature.

P: You see, I feel myself totally helpless in this situation. The fact is there is conflict and the operation of the self on it leads to further conflict. Seeing the nature of that, can the mind see that it is totally in conflict?

S: Of course it can be free of conflict, but the question arises: What is the nature of that freedom from conflict?

P: Then I am bound to ask: Is it the nature of the mind?

P: Look, sir, we need not have gone through this. But I thought it was better to go step by step. There is an ending here. May be to someone else there may not be an ending, but for me there is. What is the nature of this? I now come back to my first question: Is the undercurrent in that ending still operating? When we talk of different qualities and natures and dimensions of silence it means just this. The traditional outlook is that the gap between two thoughts is silence.

P: We moved from silence to harmony and we found that it is impossible to go into the nature of harmony without going into disorder.

P: I observe the nature of disorder. I don't look for the cause. I don't know.

K: Therefore there is a duality, a division, a contradiction in your observation, as the observer and the observed. We can play with this endlessly. Please follow what we have so far discussed. We started out with asking: What is the nature of silence, are there different varieties of silence, are there different approaches to silence? Pupul also asked: `What is the right way to silence?, We said perhaps there may be a `right' way but that any artificial means to bring about silence is not silence; we made that very clear. Don't let us go back. If there is no artificial way, is it possible to come upon silence naturally without effort, without inducement, without direction, without artificial means? In examining this we came to harmony. To that Pupul says: `We don't know what harmony is, but what we do know is disorder.' So let us put aside everything else and consider disorder, not what silence is. A mind that is in disorder enquires after silence. Silence then becomes a means of bringing about order or escape from disorder. Silence then is imposed on disorder. So we stop all that and ask: Why is there disorder? Is it possible to end disorder?

S: When pranayama is done there is no conflict, it does not exhaust you but there is silence. What is its nature?

S: You seem to be giving emphasis to the true approach rather than to the true nature of silence.

K: Where shall we start? Are you saying: Is there a right approach to silence and if there is, what is it? And are there different varieties of silence, which means different methods by which to arrive at silence? What is the nature of silence? Shall we go into it in that order? First, is there a right approach to silence and what do we mean by `right'?

P: Is there only one approach? If all the silences are of the same nature, then there may be many approaches.

P: Can we discuss what is silence? Does silence have many facets or forms? How is it reached? Does it imply only the absence of thought? Or is the silence which arises through various experiences and situations, different in nature, dimension and direction?

K: In that attention there is no going after, there is no wiping away. From that attention, observation, belief ends in me, not in you. It ends. In that attention, I see that any form of conformity breeds fear, suppression, obedience. So, in that very attention, I wipe that away in me, and any action based on reward or punishment is out, finished. So, what has happened? I see that any action in relationship, based on an image, divides people. In paying attention to the known, all the factors of the known, their structure and their nature, end. And then attention becomes very important. Attention says: `Is there any action which has none of these things?'

K: It perceives. I will show it to you. Thought has investigated and analysed it for the moment, thought has enquired, pushed, investigated, and it says it has seen the whole movement of measurement and that very perception of that movement is the ending of that movement. The very perception of it, that is, the seeing is the acting and ending. Seeing that this movement is time, is measure, seeing the whole map of it, the nature of it, the structure of it, that very perception acts in ending it. So, the seeing is the ending. There is no effort involved in it all. You say, `I have seen this.' Have you?

P: Is it of a different nature?

The Vedantins will say to you that the source which you refer to as ignorance is of the nature of Sat, Chit and Anand. It is constantly renewing itself, it is constantly coming into being; and the entire process of birth, death, decay is a movement in it. I feel that a man who does not accept the Buddhist position, will not immediately accept what you say, that the beginning is ignorance and that it is a self-sustaining process. You cannot trace the beginning, but it can be brought to an end. I have stated the two positions and they are conflicting positions.

P: Shall we discuss the question of consciousness and the relationship of consciousness to the brain cells? Are they of the same nature or is there something which gives them separate identities?

P: Is it the inability to observe the observer which gives one the understanding of the nature of the observer?

P: One of our difficulties, in understanding and going beyond, is that one takes your word, either the spoken word or the written word, and it becomes an abstraction to which one approximates. Then, on the other hand, there is the process of self-knowing in which the truth of your word can be revealed; but it does not normally happen that way. It always seems to me that listening to you without obstacle may bring about a change in the nature of my mind as such, but the discovery of the actuality of the words you use, can only be revealed in the process of self-knowing.

P: What is the relationship between your teaching, as expressed in the words you use in your books and in your talks, and the actual process of self-knowing? In all other ways of arriving at truth, the words of the teacher are taken as an indication of a direction, something to move towards. Are your words of the same nature and, if so, what is their relationship to the perceptive process of self-knowing?

Krishnamurti's role in these dialogues is of great interest. The dialogues are not questions and answers. Krishnamurti's mind is tentative, pliable, learning, seeking, probing; it is questioned, it pauses, observes, withdraws, to move forward again. There is no exchange of opinion, no spilling out of the verbal, no operation of memory as past experience, blocking the new. There is a listening with the total flowering of the senses'. In that intensity of enquiry, insight arises. Speaking of the nature of this state, Krishnamurti says `there is only perception and nothing else. Everything else is movement in time. Perception is without time. There is a momentum which is timeless.'

These dialogues extend over a wide range of subjects. For over 30 years, a group of people from various disciplines, backgrounds and pursuits, deeply concerned with the enormity of the challenge facing humanity and with one central interest, the unfoldment of the self through the perceptive field of self-knowledge, have gathered around J. Krishnamurti to undertake together, through dialogue, the investigation of the structure and nature of man's mind and consciousness and the energy resources that lie dormant within man's being. The concern in these dialogues is the freedom of the mind from the bondages of memory and time, a mutation in consciousness and the arising of insight that gives deep roots of steadiness to the mind.