BENGALURU: We were talking the last time we met here about the whole structure of thought and its activities, how thought does divide, thereby bringing about a great deal of conflict in human relationship. I think this morning we should consider, not intellectually or verbally, what is the nature of pleasure, fear and sorrow. Whether it is at all possible to be totally free of sorrow. And in enquiring into that, again non-verbally, non-intellectually, one has to consider, go into, examine very carefully the whole question of time.
You know it’s one of the most difficult things to convey something which not only demands the accuracy of words, but also the accuracy of perception that lies beyond the word, a feeling, a sense of intimate contact with a reality. And if you, listening to the speaker, merely interpret the word according to your personal like and dislike, without being aware of your own tendencies for interpretation, then the word becomes a terrible nuisance, then the word becomes a prison, in which most of us are unfortunately caught. But if one is aware of the meaning of the word and what lies behind the word, then communication becomes extraordinarily interesting.
Communication implies, as we were saying the other day, not only a verbal comprehension, understanding the meaning of words, but also going together, examining together, sharing together, creating together. And this is very important specially when we are talking about sorrow, time, the nature of pleasure and fear. This is a very complex question, and every human problem is quite complex. It needs a certain austerity, simplicity of perception.
When we use the word ‘austere’, we don’t mean the harshness that’s involved in the meaning of that word, a sense of dryness, a sense of discipline, control, following a particular dry course; we are using that word ‘austere’ stripped of all that meaning of harshness, but there must be the austere simplicity in the examination, in the understanding of what we are going to talk about. One’s mind must be very sensitive because sensitivity implies intelligence, and intelligence is beyond the interpretation of the intellect, or the emotional enthusiastic action.
And in examining, in looking, in listening, in learning, about time, pleasure, fear and sorrow one has to have this quality of sensitivity of perception, of immediate seeing something as true; which is not possible if, as we explained the other day, intellect with its activity of thought divides, interprets. I don’t know if you were all here last time we talked about thought, and the nature of thought and how it divides human relationship. Though thought is necessary, thought as reason, sanity, clarity, objective clear thinking is absolutely necessary, but thought also becomes a dangerous implement when one is analysing, not looking.
Jiddu Krishnamurti