excerpts

It seems to me very important, then, to understand the total process of individuality, because it is only when the individual changes radically that there can be a fundamental revolution in society. It is always the individual, never the group or the collective, that brings about a radical change in the world, and this, again, is historically so. (this first paragraph is from a previous lecture)

I do not think we realize the full significance of individual freedom from the collective, nor do we see its importance. And is it possible for the individual to emerge from the collective? After all, though we have different names, private bank-accounts, separate houses, distinctive personal qualities, and so on, we are really not individuals, we are merely the result of the collective.

are we truly individuals

Century upon century of traditional values, of beliefs and dogmas, either conscious or stored away in the unconscious, guide our path and compel the mind, which we think is an individual.

But the mind is a result of the totality of these compulsions, these urges and desires, and though a separate name is given to it as Mr. X., it has no real individuality; and I do not think we realize how essential it is that the individual should emerge from this total conditioning of man.

It is in the instant of being liberated from the collective that there is the creative individual, and the releasing of this creativity is the fundamental issue, because it is only then that one can find out if there is a timeless reality, a state which may be called God.

Mere assertion that there is or is not such a state, has no value at all; what has value is direct experience uncontaminated by the past.

Memory must exist, otherwise you would not know how to get back to your house, how to do your job, how to build a bridge, and so on. We learn a multitude of necessary things, and obviously such knowledge is not to be forgotten.

But I am talking of a totally different kind of knowledge - [different from] the knowledge that the psyche accumulates in order to guard itself in the future and achieve whatever it wants to achieve psychologically, spiritually. It is this knowledge that makes us self-centred, because the mind uses it as a means to its own continuity, which is the expansion of the `me', and it is this knowledge that must be totally renounced. That is the only real renunciation [the real denying of self] - not giving up a little property, a house, or a bit of land, and putting on a loincloth.

So there is this accumulated knowledge on which the psyche builds and sustains itself; and can the mind, which is a result of the past [conditioning by society], renounce all that?

Surely, until the mind puts all that aside, it can never find out what is new, it can never know that instant of timelessness which is creativity. You see, what we need in this world is not more physicists, scientists, engineers, bureaucrats, politicians, but individuals who have felt this creativity, for they are the truly religious people - which means that they do not belong to any society, to any group, to any classification.

That is why it is very important to understand this whole process of the accumulation of knowledge, by which I mean identification [with this knowledge related to one's conditioning] and the sense of evaluation [of oneself based upon the values of society].

Can the mind be free to observe without evaluation, without judgment? Surely, its evaluations, its comparisons, its condemnations, are all based on [conditioned] knowledge, and such a mind is incapable of understanding what is true.

If you observe the process of your own thinking, you will see that the mind is only concerned with accumulating more and more knowledge, and therefore [enslaved to one's conditioned self] there is never a moment of freedom to explore.

Editor's note: K well articulates. He is absolutely right.

And I think it is important to understand, which is actually to experience on the instant, this state of freedom without the continuity of the past, and not merely assert that the mind can or cannot be free.

… there comes [it is possible to achieve this] a state which has no continuity as memory, but which on the instant is the totality of being.

Editor's note: This doesn't mean that we lose our memories but that the true self, unchained, is quite separate from the old conditioned self created by society. 

the supreme moment of one's entire existence, the moment we come alive

It is this moment that is the highest, the supreme, and that must be experienced; but it can be experienced only when the mind is completely still through understanding the totality of its own structure.

It is through self-knowledge that there is quiescence of the mind, not through discipline, not through compulsion; and in that total stillness you will find there is a moment unrelated to the past, an instant in which all creation takes place. It is this creativity that is essential, for it releases the mind from the collective, and makes for individuality.

we cannot precisely define the meaning of life, but we can witness our own confusion

So the question is not what is the purpose, the significance of life - because you cannot hold the wind in your fist, nor put the vastness of life in a frame and worship it. But what you can do is to see the state of confusion you are in, and find out how to tackle it.

Once we understand our own confusion, we shall never ask what is the significance of life, for then we shall be living, [that is, we shall glimpse the energies of the soul deep within,] we shall not be bound by the tyrannical pattern of a particular society [ie, their definitions of meaning or reality], whether communist or capitalist; and that very living [energy] will find its own answer.

A confused mind seeking clarity will only find further confusion. That is so, is it not? If I am confused and I seek a way, a directive, the way or the directive will also be confused. It is only a clear mind that can find the way, if there is a way - not a confused mind. Surely, that much is simple and obvious.

Now, if I realize that it is futile to seek a directive as long as I am confused, will I go on seeking it? Or will I refuse to go to anybody to ask for a directive, because I see that my choice of a guru, of a politician, of a book, or of certain values, being based on my own confusion, must also be confused? So I think it is essential to realize the totality of one's own confusion, not theoretically, but as an actual experience.

The fact is that you are confused, only you are frightened to acknowledge it; you are nervous, apprehensive, because if you admit you are confused, you will not know what to do; so you get carried away by immediate action.

But if you become aware of the totality of your own confusion, what happens? Knowing that any movement of a confused mind can only create further confusion, don't you stop? Then all seeking ceases; and when a confused mind ceases to seek, confusion also ceases, and there is a new beginning. It is quite simple; but the difficulty is to acknowledge to oneself that one is confused.

So, are you experiencing, actually and not merely verbally, this state of confusion in which you are caught? If you are, then you will not ask anybody what the significance of life is. If you really see your own confusion, actually experience it as a fact, a reality, you are bound to stop asking, demanding, searching; and that very act of stopping is the beginning of an entirely new kind of inquiry. Then the mind will discover the extraordinary significance of life without being told.

At present we want to be led out of our confusion by another; but no one can lead us out of our confusion. As long as choice exists, there must be confusion.

Choice indicates confusion; yet we are very proud of that choice, which we call free will. It is only the [unchained] mind that does not choose, but sees directly without interpretation, without being influenced - it is only such a mind that is not confused, and can therefore proceed to discover and explore the unknowable.

The problem is, how can we experience the real, the unknown, if the mind cannot capture it through its own effort, striving? So we have to understand the mind, and why we make effort.

If we did not make effort at the physical level, we would not survive. If there were not the effort of working at a job, eating the right kind of food, taking exercise, and so on, the body would disintegrate. That is an obvious fact. So we make effort in order to survive physically.

Now, similarly, we make effort in order to survive psychologically; that is, in order to achieve what we call reality. We think that reality is a state to be attained through discipline, control, suppression, through various forms of compulsion, and we force the mind to conform to a pattern in the hope of arriving at that state.

All this implies, does it not, that the mind is continually seeking security; being afraid of uncertainty, it wants to find certainty - a certainty which is permanent, and which it calls reality, God, truth, or what you will. That is what most of us are concerned with.

We want a state in which there will be no disturbance of any kind, and which will never come to an end, a permanent state which we call peace; and the mind is making a constant effort to capture that state, to enter into it. So we have to understand the process that is involved in this effort.

As I said, just as we make effort to survive physically, so also we make effort to continue as the `me'. Do you understand? As long as I want to survive spiritually, I must make an effort [we believe] towards the attainment of that which I call reality.

Now, what is the `me' which is making this effort? What are you? Surely, you are a name attached to a bundle of memories, experiences; you are an accumulation of hidden motives and outward pursuits, of various qualities, passions, fears, virtues. All that is the `you' [we believe]... 

And that `you', you want to continue in a direction which will lead to reality; so [by habit, by what works on the physical level] you make an effort, you meditate, you practise some form of discipline.

[However, the reality is] only when the mind ceases to make this effort and is completely still without being induced or compelled to be still, only when it does not want anything, and is therefore not seeking any experience - only then is there a possibility of the coming into being of the unknown.

The [conditioned] mind, after all, is the result of the known, and any effort which the mind makes must be within the field of the known; therefore it cannot make an effort towards the unknown.

No movement in the field of the known can ever lead to the unknown. This again is very simple and clear.

The mind [becomes] still [not needing anything] only when it has totally renounced the known; in that stillness there is no effort, and only then is it possible for the unknown to come into being [percolating upwards from the depths, an aspect of self which we have long repressed].