26. The Ending of Time

The highlight of the Krishnamurti-Bohm collaboration was the fifteen dialogues that the two men held in 1980. They began in April in Ojai, with eight discussions, and continued with two discussions in June and five in September at Brockwood Park in England.

Thirteen dialogues were published in the 1985 book The Ending of Time, and the remaining two posthumously in 1999 in a book titled The Limits of Thought.

The cover text of the first edition encapsulates the spirit of the dialogues well. It describes the book as "the most important book we have had from Krishnamurti since the publication of his Notebook and his Journal, an in-depth and sustained discussion between a leading religious teacher and a leading physicist".

According to K, if the brain remains in self-created darkness, it wears itself out through resulting conflict. He suggests that "through insight, it is possible for the brain to change physically, and act in an orderly way which leads to the healing of the damage caused by many years of wrong function. This insight originates in an energy that is beyond thought, beyond time, and beyond matter.

Therefore, what acts is the order of the whole universe, of the whole of being, in both its physical and mental aspects. Thus, it is neither personal nor exclusive; it belongs to all humanity.

Mankind can change fundamentally, but this requires shifting the focus from one's narrow and particular interests to the general, and ultimately moving deeper still, to the purity of compassion, love and intelligence, which originates in the ground beyond thought, beyond time, and even beyond emptiness. This means giving one's mind, one's heart, one's whole being, to the enquiry that has been carried on throughout these discussions."

The revised and expanded 2014 edition contains all fifteen dialogues from 1980, as well as two dialogues from 1983 concerning the future of humanity.

The book is subtitled "Where Philosophy and Physics Meet" and features a foreword by the editor, David Skitt.

The back cover captures the essence: "These fascinating conversations between two men from vastly different worlds reveal the potential for the ending of time to bring about a new beginning for humanity."

Time Is the Enemy

K gets the ball rolling by asking, if mankind has taken a wrong turn. Bohm recalls having read that this happened five to six thousand years ago, when humans first became capable of plundering and taking slaves. Since then, their main purpose in existence has simply been to exploit and plunder.

K clarifies that he actually meant the sense of inward becoming, which brings conflict into our consciousness. When we are not satisfied with what we are, we try to become something that we are not.

Bohm assumes that it is intrinsic in the structure of thought to project a goal of becoming better, both outwardly and inwardly. While outward goals are not a problem, inward goals build an egotistic centre that inevitably causes conflict.

"Is it that one's brain is so accustomed to conflict that one rejects any other form of living?" K asks.

"After a while, people come to the conclusion that conflict is inevitable and necessary", Bohm answers.

We need a certain sense of identity to function, but things took a wrong turn when the ego became dominant. If there were no becoming, the mind would simply be silent.

To K, the cause of human confusion is that we introduced time as a means of becoming, evolving and loving more.

"To me, the idea of tomorrow doesn't exist psychologically – that is, time as a movement, either inwardly or outwardly. I want to abolish time, psychologically. To me, time is the enemy."

What takes place if there is no movement in time?

If one's brain has been trained, accustomed for centuries to go north, and then he suddenly realises that this means everlasting conflict. As the brain realises this, its quality changes.

Bohm adds that the key point is the direction of movement.

"When the movement is fixed in direction, inwardly, it will come to conflict. But outwardly we need a fixed direction."

At the Source

K rarely spoke about his own experiences. Now, however, he recounts how one night in Rishi Valley, he woke up and "the source of all energy had been reached".

"I hesitate to say this because it sounds extravagant and rather childish. There was no division at all, literally no sense of the world and me, only this sense of tremendous source of energy. That had an extraordinary effect on the brain, and also physically."

K says that for sixty years he has been talking, wanting other people to 'reach' it. This would "resolve all our political and religious problems, because it is pure energy from the very beginning of time".

"Suppose you have come to that point and your brain itself is throbbing with it. How would you help another to come to that?"

The brain has evolved over time and can only live and think within the confines of time. It is accustomed to the evolutionary idea of becoming. As long as time dominates brain functions, there is no end to conflict. Can the brain realise that there is no such thing as time?

"For the brain to deny time is a tremendous activity, of not having no problems, for any problem that arises, any question is immediately solved."

Bohm asks whether this situation is sustained or only temporary.

"It is sustained, obviously", K answers. "Otherwise there is no point in it. It is not sporadic or intermittent".

But does the brain have the capacity to see what it is doing? There seems to be no end to conflict. Is the brain totally caught in time, or can it change and be free?

K asks what is the factor that will make the brain see that the way it has worked is not correct and that it is totally mischievous.

"People have tried fasting, no sex, austerity, poverty, chastity in the real sense, purity, having a mind that is absolutely correct, but none of these ways has succeeded", says K.

"To go further, I think that one has to deny the very notion of time in the sense of looking forward to the future, and deny all the past", answers Bohm.

"That's it. Time is the enemy, meet it and go beyond it", comments K.

Bohm clarifies: "Deny its independent existence. We have the impression that time exists independently of us. We are in the stream of time, and therefore it would seem absurd for us to deny it, because that is what we are."

There is one way to handle problems.

"Can the mind realise, resolve any psychological problem immediately? Not deceive itself, not resist it, but face it and end it?" asks K.

Bohm answers that with psychological problems, that is the only way. Otherwise, we would get caught in the very source of the problem.

"Any action which is not immediate has already brought in time. The ending of time is immediate."

In Nothing There Is Everything

When we feel that something is psychologically out of order, we introduce the notion of time and the thought of becoming, which create endless problems.

"Man has taken a wrong turn and got caught in psychological knowledge which is dominated by time. He lives in time because he has attempted to produce knowledge of the nature of the mind", explains Bohm.

"Psychological experience is in time", K adds. "What is the mind without psychological knowledge? Is it disorder? Certainly not."

What is existence without psychological knowledge, without the sense of the 'me'? At this point, most people might – according to K –say, "What a horror this is."

Bohm comments that it seems as though there would be nothing. This is either frightening, or it is all right. K takes a different view: "Because there is nothing, it is everything."

"Nothing is no thing. A thing is limited, this is not. There are no limits. It has everything in potential", as Bohm describes.

K adds: "Everything is energy."

However, this is not physical energy; it is cosmic energy. This idea has been embraced by many religions. It is seen as the source of all energy.

K asks: "Is one walking in emptiness, is one living in emptiness?"

"This, the body is not different from energy. But the thing that is inside says 'I am totally different from that'. Why has it done this, why has this separation arisen? Is it because outwardly I identify with a house and so on, and that identification has moved inwardly?"

Bohm has noticed that, once we establish a notion of something inward, it becomes necessary to protect it.

"There is no 'me' at all, except the passport, name, and form, otherwise nothing? And therefore, there is everything, and all is energy?", K reflects.

The form has no independent existence; there is only an outward shell in this energy.

"Do you realise what we have said, sir?" K asks Bohm. "Is this the end of the journey? Has mankind journeyed through millennia to come to this? That I am nothing and therefore I am everything and all energy?"

Bohm says it cannot be the end, it might be the beginning. K agrees.

"The ending is the beginning. In the ending of time, there is a new beginning", summarises K.

Towards the Ground

The first session delves deeply into the ending of time. The second session explores unimaginable dimensions even more deeply.

K begins by asking what happens when the 'me' as time has come to an end. He wonders why we have not said: "Let's end conflict!"

On the contrary, conflict has been encouraged. Wethink it helps us to progress. It may do so. However, ending all conflict would mean solving every issue instantly and time is abolished totally.

We need no becoming, no hope, no wanting, no belief, and no promises from anyone. When the 'I' comes to an end, new growth and creation emerge from the ashes.

K uses the term particular mind, meaning a mind belonging to an individual. This is what we call the self, a person with certain individual features, properties, and qualities that make them unique.

This is an integral part of what he calls the universal mind, which is common to all human beings. Despite our superficial differences in tendencies, we are all born with these features and share them with

others. The basics are the same for all of us: fear, sorrow, desire, will and conflict.

But that is not the end of the story. Beyond the universal mind, there is something that is impossible to give a name to.

After a short search for the right word, they decide to call it the ground.

K says that "in the universal order, there is disorder where man is concerned" and asks, why intelligence has allowed this mistake?

Bohm thinks "it is part of the order of the universe that this particular mechanism can go wrong, but it is not disorder in the universe, but at a much lower level".

"The possibility of creation is also the possibility of disorder. If man had the possibility of being creative, there would also be the possibility of a mistake. He could not be fixed like a machine, always to operate in perfect order."

In order to 'come to the ground', there must be the ending of time as desire and thought. Then there is absolutely nothing, not a thing from reality, only emptiness full of energy. The ground is also beyond that emptiness. Our mind can never capture or grasp this absolute. It has no cause or limits. It is simply immensity.

"There is nothing beyond it", says K, "that is the beginning and the ending of everything. Everything is dying, except that..."

At the end, Bohm says that "the Christian idea of heaven as perfection may seem rather boring because there is nothing to do".

The mood shifts from the sublime to something else as K recalls a joke about a man who goes to heaven and asks Saint Peter for the final judgement.

Insight Transforms Thought

Bohm begins the third discussion by stating that science attempts to make the material universe the ground of our existence.

Not only physicists, but also geneticists and biologists have tried to reduce everything to the behaviour of matter – atoms, genes, and DNA. The more they study, the more meaningless it seems.

"That is one of the difficulties of modern life, the sense that it doesn't mean anything."

Religious people have long believed that the ground of our existence is beyond matter. However, science has begun to deny this, and people no longer accept the religious teachings. Yet people still want life to have a purpose or meaning beyond their daily activities.

People used to feel that God was the ground who was not indifferent to mankind and this belief gave them tremendous energy. In Eastern traditions, this infinite being also has ultimate significance.

This raises the question of whether the ground is indifferent to humanity in the same way that the universe is indifferent to us. Perhaps it does not care whether humanity survives.

How could it be shown that the ground exists? How could its existence be proven scientifically, rationally, or how could it be sensed and communicated?

K answers: "One must do it, not just talk about it. The ground has certain demands, which are there must be absolute silence, absolute emptiness, which means no sense of egotism in any form. Am I willing to let go all my egotism, because I want to prove it, I want to show it, I want to find out if what you are saying is actually true?"

'Willing' does not mean exercising willpower, effort or determination, but being ready to discover whether the ground exists. It means having no beliefs, being in a state of absolute, rational observation.

"I think if ten people do it, any scientist will accept it. But there are no ten people", K notes.

"We have to have the thing done together publicly so that it becomes a real fact that which is actually done", adds Bohm.

Our whole background is against this. It gives us the notion of what makes sense and what does not.

Bohm suggests that the nature of time must be seen. K says that, in order to realise whether the ground exists, we must start 'at the schoolboy level'.

First: no belief. Don't control anything. Observe that you have belief, acknowledge that it gives you a sense of security, and recognise that belief is an illusion and has no reality.

"You don't believe the sun rises and sets. It is a fact."

Secondly, see the facts without prejudice. Don't accept theories. A fact is what is actually happening, not what we think of it.

We think we are rational and see the world as it is. We think we can know what is happening. We think we are different from others. But actually, we are irrational; we don't see or know the facts, and we are not fundamentally different psychologically. We live in a make-believe world.

This all happened after we took the wrong turning and made thought all-important. We enthroned thought as the only means of operation and made it supreme, the king, the equivalent of truth.

To reach the ground, we must be extremely rational, yet we are irrational in our everyday life. This irrationality is brought about by thought creating this idea of me as separate from everybody else. If we cannot find the cause of irrationality and wipe it out, we cannot reach the ground which is totally rational.

Thought is now the dominant factor in our life. By definition, thinking is the movement of memory, consisting of experience and knowledge stored up in our brain. When memory operates, we become irrational.

However, insight can use thought. Then it is the instrument of thought. Memory is used, but action is not based on it. As thought is limited and divisive, it can never be rational without insight.

Insight is not the product of thought. Although it may use thought to explain, insight acts and in that action no thought is needed. Every response must be viewed with insight. Insight wipes away everything that is not true. Then we are not observing using time.

"You could say that time is a theory which everybody adopts for psychological purposes", says Bohm.

Insight, being free of time, makes thought rational. When there is insight, there is only action. Since insight is rational, so is action.

Old Maps Mislead Us

Breaking the pattern of ego-centred activity is the topic of the fourth discussion. There is something fundamental in human nature that resists change. We almost purposely, yet not consciously, resist seeing the necessity of radical change.

Thought deceives itself and does not wish to see the meaninglessness of the conflict in which we live. Our egotistic attitudes and actions may appear to change slightly, but the centre remains the same.

Philosophers and religious people have emphasised the importance of striving, struggling, controlling, making effort. Our minds are held in this pattern. We are used to it. We are in prison, yet we resist seeing it. We hope that our efforts will finally produce something better, but everything happens within a very limited area.

There are various things that keep us in this pattern. Even if we are convinced on an abstract level that this pattern makes no sense, we can find a thousand ways to perpetuate it.

We cling to our old patterns and won't let go. In a real emergency, we may drop the self-enclosed pattern and cooperate, but after the crisis, we quickly return to life as usual.

We are only willing to change if there is a big enough reward for us. We will climb the highest mountain if we get something out of it. This is how our mind works. We either want to be rewarded or we act to avoid punishment.

The difficulty is that we only see this abstractly. Our thoughts abstract outward events and turn them into inward ideas. To break free from this cycle, we must look at things differently.

We are conditioned to a pattern that doesn't work. To break free, we must discard all our knowledge, experiences, and explanations. When we do that, our mind changes. Having walked this path for millennia without being freed from egocentrism, we must now stop.

When we have an insight, our mind breaks the old pattern. We then listen without resistance and refuse to engage in the game of words. Insight is passion; it won't let us sit still. Like a river flowing with a great volume of water, passion propels us forward.

Knowledge cannot solve our psychological problems. In fact, it can only make them worse by giving them continuance. When we are in trouble, we turn to others for help, but instead of helping, their advice makes us dull, dependent, and more helpless.

Out of the Shock: A New Mind

The ground can be a comforting concept or an actual fact for us. It cannot be investigated with a mind disciplined in knowledge, or be touched as long as there is any form of illusion, deception or desire. Under no circumstances can we come upon it through the manipulation of thought.

Is there a way to comprehend it, or is this impossible? Someone on the other side of the river tells me that there is no boat or bridge to take me across, and I cannot swim.

"Suppose I want you, who say that there is the ground, to prove it to me", K starts.

"I have only this mind that has been conditioned by knowledge. How am I to move away from all that, to feel this thing, to touch it, and to comprehend it? I want to have this passion that will explode me out of this little enclosure."

If we try to find a way, we apparently fail to see that the centre is an illusion. An illusion cannot be related to something that is true. This insignificant little thing wants to have a relationship with that immensity. Impossible.

A million years of experience tells us to go after the ground. In trying to do so, however, we may realise that there is no relationship between us and the ground. We cannot 'go there'; there is no way.

"That is a tremendous shock to me. It is as if you have knocked me out", says K.

"I am asking: is it a shock to discover that your brain and your mind, your knowledge, are valueless? All your examinations, all your struggles, all the things that you have gathered through the years and centuries, are absolutely worthless. What you have done or not done is absolutely of no value."

We must be very careful not to translate it into a concept or an idea, but "receive the full blow of it!"

If it is just an idea, it does not fundamentally affect the way we live, feel, or think.

"I have finished with that kind of game. That is the purpose of investigating the mind, not to blast each other off the earth with guns!" K says.

The idea does not change the centre, so everything I do has no meaning. All the work I have done is valueless. If I drop all that, my mind is the ground. From there, I create society.

Knowledge has not freed us from illusion; it has prevented us from seeing the truth.

"I want to clear up all the illusions that I hold – not some. I have got rid of my illusion about nationalism, illusion about belief, about

Christ, about this, about that. At the end of it, I realise that my mind is illusion. To me, who has lived for a thousand years, to find that all this absolutely worthless is something enormous", K says.

Bohm asks what K means when he says that he has lived for a million years. Does it mean that all of humanity's experiences are him?

He answers: "I feel it. It is not sympathy or empathy; it is not a thing that I have desired, it is a fact, an absolute, irrevocable fact."

But why don't we all see this?

"Because we are caught in this self-centred, narrow little cell which refuses to look beyond", K says.

"Our brains are not my particular brain; your brain is the brain of mankind. It is so obvious. You go to the most primitive village in India, and the peasant will tell you all about his problems, his wife, children, poverty. It is exactly the same thing, only he is wearing different clothes, trousers, kimono, or whatever. We are so soaked with disputations and arguments and knowledge. We don't see a simple fact. We refuse to see it."

When we do see it, it does not depress us. That is the beauty of it. It is like the phoenix.

"Out of the ashes, something totally new is born. It is a new mind."

Mutation in the Brain Cells

In the sixth discussion, Bohm asks whether insight can actually change brain cells.

K points out that the brain now only functions in one direction, using memory to gather experience and knowledge. Most people are satisfied with this, perhaps because they don't know of anything else.

Looking at the state of the world, it is clear that a change is urgently needed, yet this has not yet happened. We cannot rely on the society or the environment to change us, and changing the contents of consciousness is not an actual change. This will only lead to the problem continuing in a new form.

So what is there to change in the brain, what will change it and how?

According to K, the brain cannot change itself; a flash of insight is needed. Insight is not a material process, yet it can change the material process such as thinking.

Bohm finds it difficult to imagine how something non-material could affect the material. In science, one-sided action is not possible; there must always be interaction in both directions.

K gives an example. Love is independent of hate. When there is hate, love cannot exist. Similarly, violence and peace are two entirely different factors. Where there is violence, peace cannot be.

"Love has no cause; hate has a cause. Thought has a cause, insight has not. The action of insight has an extraordinary effect on the material process", says K.

"The flash of insight enlightens the whole field which means that ignorance and darkness have been dispelled. That light has ended ignorance, dispelled the centre of darkness."

We may then ask how to have insight and why we don't have it. Instead of looking for methods or explanations, we should dig deeper and see the whole process in action.

Insight stops causal responses, and we no longer react to hate with hate or violence with violence. Then we are free from reactive, time-bound behaviour.

Dispelling Darkness

Human beings still behave on the basis of animal instincts. Feelings of hatred have become entangled with and sustained by thought. Society as a whole is organised under the assumption that fear, pleasure and pain will rule us if we do not control them.

Thought has operated in darkness, but dispelling that darkness enables new actions in the brain. Humans will then function rationally rather than by rules and reason. There is a freely flowing movement.

As long as the centre creates darkness, there will be disorder. This process has created our society. Because of the darkness, we don't realise the state we are in. We either respond to hatred with hatred or control our feelings. A third option is to escape into dreams and hope.

There are two ways to view the source of darkness. One is to think that it is in the distant past and has been gathered in our minds ever since. We made a mistake once, and here we are.

Bohm suggests another way where we think that darkness is timeless because we continually take this wrong turn. The self creates darkness

and breeds division all the time. The self could leave this state at any time, but it does not do that.

It is a shock to realise that there is actually no such thing as a division between light and darkness, our thoughts produce it. Insight breaks this pattern and the division between God and us ceases. All divisions are born out of darkness and all religions maintain these beliefs.

"In that ground, there is no darkness as darkness, or light as light. In that ground, there is no division. Nothing is born of will, or time, or thought. There is something else; a perception that there is a different movement, which is 'non-dualistic', rather, there is no division, no movement which breeds division."

There is movement in darkness, but there is also a movement which that is undivided. Can the mind be of that kind of movement?

At this level, death of an individual has no meaning. Then one has broken the spell of darkness, meaning that death has very little significance.

"You have removed the fear of death, one of the greatest fears of life", says K.

"I understand that when the mind is partaking in that movement then the mind is that movement", Bohm puts it, and K agrees.

In darkness, we can invent a lot of images: that there is light, God, beauty. Caught in a dark room, we can invent a lot of pictures, but it won't bring light in.

A mind living in darkness is in constant movement. Brain cells wear out and decay due to conflict and strain. Yet, the rate of decay can be significantly slowed down if the brain stops thinking in terms of psychological time. Direct perception would bring order to the brain.

According to K, the brain would then have undergone 'a surgical operation' and would no longer be subject to death, as it would no longer live in the field of time.

Immensity Calling

The final discussion in Ojai raises the question of how lives a human being who has dispelled the darkness within himself. Of course, she or he doesn't take part in the process of becoming. His mind is not static. A mind that is empty of all psychological knowledge, acts from insight.

He lives in society physically, but is mentally out of it. He must obey the laws and earn a livelihood, but he does not identify with or conform to human-made divisions.

Various religions have described the saved and illuminated human: how they walk, how they look, how they talk. K describes such a person as 'a single tree in a field'.

What can such a person do for others? Not much. He can talk and write, but there is no guarantee that he will have an effect. It depends on how the listeners take it. Will they listen, worship or kill him?

K asks, what would happen, if there were ten or fifteen undivided people.

The whole thing would change. According to Bohm, even if just ten or fifteen people were undivided, "they would exert a force that has never been seen in our history".

These individuals would be intelligent enough not to provoke society, and society would not react until it was too late. However, the wise person has a function that goes beyond trivial matters. He is doing something totally different to affect human consciousness.

There is a more direct action at a level that one could not possibly conceive. This insight has a direct effect on a much deeper level, affecting the consciousness of people living in darkness.

As Bohm puts it, "he somehow makes possible an activity of the ground in the whole of the human consciousness which would not have been possible without him".

While he may appear similar to others, something happening that is not visible. He is saying something completely different. His insight comes from the ground. In some sense, the ground is using him, employing him.

Doing nothing may be the most fundamental kind of doing. According to Bohm, that person is "supremely active in doing nothing" and enables the action of the ground.

There is an analogous process in chemistry: a catalyst enables a reaction without itself taking part in it itself, merely by existing.

However, Bohm disagrees with the general view that the universe has no meaning and that things just happen randomly and none of them has any meaning.

K also disagrees with the idea of the insignificance of the universe.

"None of it has meaning for the man who is here, but the man who is there, speaking relatively, says it is full of meaning and not invented by thought."

Whatever the insightful man says is translated into some illusory substance. We are offered the whole universe, but the mind either reduces it or does not acknowledge it at all. If everyone were to see this immensity, we would, in K's words, 'have a paradise on earth' and an organism of a totally new kind.

"I am not 'satisfied' in leaving this immensity to be reduced to some few words. It seems so stupid, so incredible. People are looking at it with eyes that are accustomed to this pettiness, they put it in a temple and therefore lost it completely."

In order to divert the course of destruction, someone must listen to that call of the immensity. The immensity may divert the course of humanity; the individual can never do it.

The Old Brain Cannot

The next two sessions were held at Brockwood Park in June 1980. The first of these dealt with senility and cosmic order.

K expressed his severe concern about the state of the human brain. It seems to be deteriorating.

"We have a civilisation that is highly cultivated, and yet at the same time barbarous, with selfishness clothed in all kinds of spiritual garbs. Deep down, however, there is frightening selfishness."

The human brain has evolved over millions of years, yet it has come to this divisive, destructive point. We do not know if it is capable of renewal, or if it will slowly and steadily decline.

Our brain is old and does not belong to any individual. Although we mistakenly think of it as being something personal and subjective, it bears the history of humankind.

The brain functions in patterns: scientific, business, or family.

K asks, what would break down the formation of these patterns and whether, after experiencing so many shocks, the brain is even capable of renewing or rejuvenating itself.

Fundamental change cannot be imposed from the outside; yet the brain does not seem to have enough energy to break free from its patterns and escape its own prison.

The brain is constantly occupied with various problems. Keeping busy gives the brain energy. However, if it works mechanically in a routine, it becomes dull and begins to shrink.

Bohm says that science has shown that the brain to be similar to a muscle. We must exercise it to keep it fit. However, if we move in a pattern, the brain is not using its full capacity. K comments:

"People who have spent years and years in meditation are the dullest people on earth."

Bohm adds that, when people lived close to nature, it was not possible to live in a routine. The brain begins to shrink when we begin to gather psychological knowledge about the self and our relationship with others. Routine in this area is much more dangerous for the brain than routine at work.

It is well known that large parts of the brain are responsible for movements of the body, muscles, and various organs. This part does not shrink, but the part responsible for rational thought does if it is not used. There may, of course, be other functions that are unknown, or very little is known about them.

K argues that we only use our brain very partially. Using the brain in a wrong way may result in degeneration of the brain cells. Bohm acknowledges that scientists have provided little evidence for this, but adds that brain science does not know very much about this.

K points out that "brain specialists are examining things outside, but not taking themselves as guinea pigs. Any kind of occupation – apart from physical occupation – the occupation with oneself brings about shrinkage of the brain. The Freudians, the Jungians and the latest psychologists are all helping to make the brain shrink."

We must discard the tradition of analysis and introspection and focus instead on direct perception and immediate action. The past perceives and distorts the present, making the brain senile. Our illusions are immensely vital.

The sense of individuality is the root of the problem, and when we recognise that it is a fallacy, something happens to our brain cells. According to K, they bring about a change in themselves.

"You may disagree, you may say, prove it. I say this is not a matter of proof; it is a matter of action. Do it, find out, test it."

An occupied brain is unable to listen or act properly. A flash of insight frees the brain from the past.

There is silence, which brings about a sense of the limitless.

"The silence of insight has cleansed, purged all that. There is no movement as we know it; no movement of time". K concludes.

Cosmos Is in Meditation

Is there a cosmic order, something that man has not made nor can ever possibly conceive? The brain is so contradictory and bruised that it cannot find any order, either within or outside itself.

Nature is in order, but consciousness is not. We accept living in disorder because it is all we know.

If we give up the past, the 'me' has no existence, we have nothing, we are nothing. Yet we do not feel that we cling to the past, nor we think that we are reaching for the future.

"As long as I have my roots in the past, there cannot be order. If I give up the past, there is nothing to reach for. Sometimes people dangle a carrot in front of me and foolishly I follow it. If I have no carrots, no rewards or punishments, how is this past to be dissolved?", K asks.

"My brain says it is willing to do that, to face this absolute nothingness and emptiness, because it has seen for itself that all the places where it has taken refuse are illusions."

This state of nothingness is totally new to the brain, and appallingly frightening. The brain could possibly let go of the past if it were not damaged. There are many factors that cause this damage.

One factor is strong, sustained emotions such as hatred, anger, violence, excessive excitation, fear, and the emphasis placed on sustained pleasure. Drugs can also damage the brain.

A damaged brain is healed when there is insight. This wipes away the past. When there is no becoming, no being something, the universe, the cosmic order, is in the state meditation, in a state of infinity.

Once the past is cleaned up and consciousness is empty of its content such as anger, jealousy, beliefs, dogmas, attachments, the universe is no more governed by the past. It is in order, free and creative. K adds:

"I think that the feeling, the actual reality of having no tomorrow is the healthiest way of living."

Thought entangles the brain in time, but when this entanglement is released, the universe is the mind. That is order.

From a Pond to the Ocean

Three months later, Krishnamurti and Bohm met again at Brockwood Park for five dialogues over the course of one week.

For some reason, the first two discussions were not included in the first edition of the book, but were published in the 2014 edition.

K first describes what they talked about in their earlier meetings, identifying three basic questions: Is there an original source, a ground from which nature, human beings, and the whole universe sprang? Is it bound by time? And is it in itself complete order, beyond which there is nothing?

Bohm says that, in its current form, science cannot answer any of these questions.

"Implicitly, science has always been concerned with trying to come to this ground, but studying matter to the greatest depth is, of course, is not enough."

When we witness turmoil and disorder in the world and within ourselves, a fairly intelligent and cultured human being must feel the urge to do something.

We may be able to put our own house in order, yet we lack the energy, courage and vitality to do even that. Without insight into the root of conflict, there will be no change.

We could start our investigation by first seeing what we are tied to: a belief, person, idea, habit, or experience. All forms of dependence inevitably create disorder. Total insight penetrates the very centre of darkness, causing the dark clouds in the mind to vanish instantly.

Society is destructive in itself. Having realised this, any sane person will want to take action rather than just sit back and talk about it. Sadly, most people feel that doing means solving particular problems is more important than tackling the whole issue.

However, solutions do not address the question of their origin. We are dealing with a little pond and do not see the great stream.

To bring order, our minds must be free from measurement. The almost instinctive reaction to disorder is to try to correct it. This is a fundamental mistake.

This is a very different approach to what we have been taught. Any attempt to control is the source of disorder. An insight into this liberates the mind from a massive burden.

Insight comes from looking at a problem purely, without pressure or motive. We think that if we don't control the mind, it will run riot. On the contrary, controlling causes confusion and makes it go wild.

Through the right kind of meditation, the mind can find a state that is not man-made. Everything man-made is limited: religions, science, worship, prayer, anxiety, sorrow, suffering, attachment, detachment, loneliness, and revolutions. Humans have also invented the concept of God and given Him absolute power.

Because we are caught up in thoughts, we block the tremendous potential of the human mind to transcend its limitations, which are created by the illusion that we are individuals.

A Thorn in Thought

Bohm says that people can be divided into two groups. One group feels that the ground is the concrete: the daily activities we perform. The other group believes that the universal is the ground. The former view is more practical, while the latter is more philosophical. People tend to emphasise one or the other.

However, K says that the essence of everything is beyond both the particular and the general. We are not one or the other, but both. Thought has created both, and moves between them all the time.

This movement occurs in time – or rather: in moving it creates time. Thought gathers knowledge and experiences. Without gathering, there is no time.

Time is needed to make physical progress, but in the psyche, there is nothing else progressing or growing but images.

The images we have gathered are limited. There can always be more of them, or more to them. Having 'more' is a real thorn. It arouses desire and will, and then we are stuck into gaining, achieving, comparing, advancing. Consequently, we become caught up in living in time.

It may be difficult to see the harm in wanting more. What could be wrong with being a better person or having a better life?

The problem is not in having, but in wanting. This means that we always live with a sense of shortage.

The worst consequence of this is that desire creates divisions between individuals and between groups. If I am a Muslim and you are a Jew, we are separate and in conflict. We may tolerate this, but it is always waiting inside us to explode. We could avoid this if we never met, but we cannot live in isolation – or it would not be right to call it living.

Another problem is that the self prevents us from being free. We have tied ourselves to a short rope, living within our little territory of fears, hopes, pleasures, sorrows, likes, dislikes, preferences and prejudices.

There is no real love in a world of images. Love is not something we gather and store. Either there is love, or there is none. If we love our images, we are actually loving ourselves rather than the person or thing itself.

Knocked by Knowledge

The next session starts with K asking: "What makes the mind always follow a pattern? If it lets go of one pattern, it picks up another."

There are many possible answers, some of which are correct and some of which are not. It is important to understand why we disregard our own flowering and fall into this groove. Psychological knowledge stupefies the brain and prevents it from seeing what it is doing.

K asks: "One is strangely intelligent, capable or skilled in other directions, but here, where the root of all this trouble is, why don't we comprehend what is happening?"

It takes effort to grapple with this: first to recognise this, and then to eliminate it. If I am nationalistic or have a strong belief, I am blind in that area. Nothing convinces me.

Knowledge about a nation or God seems to hold tremendous value. It captures the mind, and the mind refuses to let go. A lot of feelings and meanings are invested in them. To us, they are all-important.

As Bohm points out, "The general difficulty is that knowledge is not just sitting there as a form of information; it is extremely active, meeting and shaping every moment according to past knowledge".

However, we tend to regard knowledge as passive information that we know and can use or discard as we wish. This is not the case. Knowledge actively prevents the truth from entering our mind.

We may see the logic and reason for change, but it is not a burning thing that demands action, it is merely a lame idea to think about.

The capacity to listen is far more important than any explanation. When we listen completely, the wall of opinions is broken down. K argues that it may be as simple as that.

To attend diligently, our mind must be empty. We must have a certain emptiness from which a different perception will emerge.

Universe as the Body of the Mind

K begins the next session by asking what materialism is.

Bohm says that all matter seems to obey the law of action and reaction. Every action has a corresponding reaction. All human beings react physically, and these reactions are sustained by
thought. Therefore, these reactions are materialistic responses.

But can the mind go beyond reaction? Physically we must, of course, react; otherwise, we would be paralysed or dead. However, continuous reacting is also a form of paralysis.

Action and reaction seem to be a constant movement of matter that create new forms. Can reactions end? Alternatively, there may be a movement that has no beginning or no end. This movement is not in time nor in space. To understand this, we must be free of thought.

This movement cannot be defined as a succession of events from the past. It is active, not static; yet within that energy, there is stillness. It is not a movement of causation. This silent movement, with its unending newness, is total order of the universe.

It is important to recognise that this emptiness is within the brain itself, rather than being something that thought conceives as empty. In any case, thought wants to do something about it. It thinks it can
be helpful and make a contribution.

In this movement, there are neither things nor time. It is easy to deceive oneself and indulge in imagination. In this timeless energy, there is no centre reacting. It is not determined by a series of past events. There is no causation.

This tremendous energy is active. It can never be still, yet it has stillness in it. It is both still and moving, a movement emerging from stillness.

"When the mind is completely still, there is a movement out of it", K says, adding joyfully: "It sounds crazy!"

Bohm says that this is similar to what Aristotle called the unmoved mover, referring to God. However, K abruptly states that he is not talking about God, nor does he want to create an intellectual concept about this.

This movement is eternally new. It is in order, or literally: it is order. The order of thought is of time, and there is an inherent contradiction in it. When it is rational, it is in order; however, this order is broken down in contradiction.

Our daily life is a series of reactions and struggles to bring order within disorder. In trying to do so, we perpetuate disorder.

Some people think that being happy within these limits is enough: discovering new thoughts, enjoying new art and science, accepting the human conditioning and making the best of it.

We may be happy until we encounter conflict. Our fears come true and we suffer. Then we have a chance to realise that we are in prison. Although this prison may be pleasant, there is no freedom in it and we suffer. This pain either compels us to move on or to transcend it.

The urge for freedom may be a reaction to pain or it a profound insight into the structure of our mind. Any form of escape is merely a reaction, another form of idiocy.

When the mind has emptied itself, it is no longer separate from the universe. Then they are one. Therefore, the material universe is like the body of the absolute mind.

Refuse to Have Problems

The final dialogue is about solving our problems – not one or two, but all of them. Although we have solved very difficult technological problems, we have not solved our fundamental human problems, such as sorrow, fear and violence.

We are drowning in problems of communication, knowledge, relationship, freedom, heaven and hell. Our existence has become one vast, complex problem.

There seems to be something extraordinarily wrong here. It seems that our education and deeply rooted traditions encourage us to accept things as they are, even when we see that they are not right.

K asks: "Is it possible to have no human problems at all? Personally, I refuse to have problems."

It seems almost impossible for us to think and work together, share the same outlook, and put aside our opinions and self-interest. Each person has their own opinion, which is often contradicted by others. The United Nations is not working together either. The same goes for India. People in no country feel or work together. How are we to face and break this pattern?

We can offer many answers, but explanations won't solve the issue. A new factor is needed. K suggests that this factor is attention.

"Where there is attention, there is no problem. Where there is inattention, every difficulty arises", says K.

Attention is not concentration. Being attentive is not a struggle. To find out what attention actually is, we must understand inattention; through negation come to the positive.

In our lack of attention, we identify with many things, both pleasant and unpleasant. There is indolence and negligence, as well as self-concern and self-contradiction.

The attempt to become means that there is no attention. Psychological becoming breeds inattention. Becoming is a curse, both outwardly and inwardly. A poor man wants to be rich, a rich man richer still.

Though it brings a great deal of pain and sometimes pleasure, this sense of becoming and fulfilment has made our life what it is. We expect a reward, but we are also afraid of not getting it; and we try to avoid pain and punishment. We are caught in that vicious circle.

We realise this, but we cannot stop. This illusion is so strong, and has been nurtured by religion, tradition and our family. We refuse to let go of that burden.

We may say we want to change, but deep down, we don't. Our minds are diseased, so corrupt and confused that, even when someone points out the dangers, we refuse to see them.

"I am sure there is another way of communicating which is not verbal, another element which breaks through the inability to listen and break the walls that human beings have built for themselves."

The Missing Element

Love is the missing element that could break through this clever, analytical approach. Attention, perception, intelligence and love are all essential in life.

Love is not an isolated thing. It is neither yours nor mine. It is not personal. It is common ground for all of us.

"That word – love – has become corrupted, loaded, dirty. I am chary beyond words of that word, which is why I said it is rather a risky word", says K.

It is the fragmented mind that invents the illusion that love is personal. The same holds true for grief and intelligence.

This illusion is common to us all. Earth is neither English nor French, and in chemistry, sodium is not my sodium.

Our minds refuse to see this because we are conditioned to feel so personally invested.

"If love is common to all of us, why am I blind to it?" K asks.

"The ordinary language does not convey properly that love is universal, not personal, to a man who has lived completely in the narrow groove of personal achievement.", Bohm comments.

He suggests that the first step to realising this is to question our 'unique' personality, which we assume to be something special and different from all others. We are all basically human and of the same quality.

K specifies: "Let's say I have a brother who refuses to see all this. As I have great affection for him, I want him to move out of this. I have tried to communicate with him verbally and sometimes non-verbally, by a gesture or by a look, but all this is still from the outside. And perhaps that is the reason why he resists. Can I point out to my brother that in himself this flame can be awakened? It means he must listen to me, but refuses to listen!"

K cries out almost painfully: "We must solve this. It has not been solved. The way we are living is so wrong. We have not changed it. We are seeking after that but the weight of our body, brain, tradition draws us back. So it is a constant battle. This whole way we are living is so wrong."

Bohm suggests that if a person is caught in a certain thought, such as fragmentation, he can't change it, because there are a lot of other thoughts behind it.

"He is not actually free to take this action because of the whole structure of thought that holds him."

Thoughts, rewards and punishments will never change us profoundly. How can we transmit something that the other is not capable to understand?

"We have laid out the map. We have also pointed out something much deeper than that, which is love. He is groping after all this. But the weight of body, brain, tradition – all that draws him back. So it is a constant battle – and I think the whole way we are living is wrong."

K comes back to where the dialogues started: "We asked whether man has taken a wrong turning and entered into a valley where there is no escape, but that is too depressing, too appalling."

Bohm asks whether K perceives any possibility of real change in human nature.

"Of course. Otherwise, everything would be meaningless: we'd be monkeys, machines! You see, the faculty for radical transformation is attributed to some outside agency, and therefore we look to that, and get lost in that. If we don't look to anybody, and are completely free from dependence, then that solitude is common to all of us."

It is not an isolation. When you see all this, you are naturally solitary, you are naturally alone. That sense of aloneness is common.

The Practical and the Particular

Bohm then comments: "I think all the fundamental things are universal, and therefore you are saying that when the mind goes deep, it comes into something universal."

According to K, "To go profoundly requires not only tremendous courage, but the sense of constantly pursuing the same stream".

The mind can go from the particular to the general and from the general to the universal, but Bohm says that many people might say that this is all very abstract and has nothing to do with daily life.

K disagrees emphatically:

"This is the most practical thing and not an abstraction."

Constant killing, endless conflicts, brutality and cruelty are not practical in the least.

Bohm points out that "in fact, it is the particular that is the abstraction and the most dangerous, because you get to the particular by

abstracting. People feel they want something that really affects their daily life and they say that all these vaporous generalities don't interest them."

While it is true that all this must work in daily life, daily life does not contain the solution to its problems. When we try to solve the concrete issues that arise in daily life, we get lost in ideas, in endless thinking and talking. There is no attention, no intelligence, no compassion, and no end to human problems.

The ending of time comes when we give ourselves to find out what is true.

"If the mind can go from the particular to the general, and from the general move still deeper, there perhaps is the purity of what is called compassion, love, and intelligence. But that means giving your mind, your heart, your whole being to this enquiry. "