BENGALURU: Why does the mind try to solve each problem as though it was unrelated to other problems? The other day somebody asked, what about starvation, as though by itself, it is the result of human relationship, of human conditioning, of human education, of this constant division between people, both Economic, social, personal. So to understand this very, very deeply and so completely, we must ask, why do we do this? I do not know if you have asked that question, ever.
And if you do, if you are at all serious you must have asked it, if you are mature, not in age, maturity does not mean age, you can be mature when you are twenty both psychologically, inwardly, so any person who is serious and mature, must have asked this question: why the human mind, the brain always divides, me and mine, you and yours, we and they, on one side, god, religion and politics, on the other side, and so on, this constant division, and trying to solve each problem by itself, isolated, why? No, don’t answer me please, because I don’t want to break it up, you can ask at the end of the talk if you have the patience, and if you don’t mind allowing me to talk for twenty or thirty or forty minutes, first, I hope you don’t mind.
In asking that question we have to also find out, what is the function of thought? What is the meaning, substance, structure of thought, because it may be thought that divides, and to find an answer through thought, through reason, obviously must separate each problem and try to find an answer for itself. We are asking why the human brain and the mind, the totality of one’s being why we are always inclined to solve our issues separately, as though it was unrelated.
They want a physical revolution to upset the social order in order to bring about a better order and they forget all the implications of physical revolution. Dictatorship, either of a group or a bureaucracy and so on and they forget the whole psychological nature of man. So one has to ask this question, why? And in asking the question, what is the response? Is it the response of thought or is it the response of understanding the totality of this immense, vast, structure of human life? You’re following? Am I making my question clear, if not I will go into it?
I want to find out why this division exists. We went into it the other day as the observer and the observed, let’s forget that, put that aside and approach it differently. Does thought create this division, and if we find thought does, and thought tries to find an answer to a particular problem, it is still a problem separated from other problems.
Are we going together? No, don’t, please, agree with me, it’s not a question of agreement, it’s a question of seeing for yourself the truth of it, or the falseness of it, not accepting - and if I may add here under no circumstances accept what the speaker says at any time, with regard to what we are talking about, not with regard to your doing something or other outside the tent. There is no authority, at least when we are talking together about these matters, with me, neither you have the authority nor the speaker, we are both of us investigating, looking, observing, learning, therefore there is no question of agreement or disagreement.