One observes throughout the world there are two fundamental issues, violence and sorrow. That violence and sorrow is not limited to the Orient nor the Occident, to the West nor the East; it is part of the human psychological structure. Violence we have accepted as a way of life - in wars, in our business, in our outward social structure; competition and all the things we know of - how we dislike, hate, get angry, violent. We are familiar with that and have accepted it as a way of life.
Either we accept the way of life as it is, with violence and all the rest of it; or we say there must be a different way which human intelligence can find, where violence doesn't exist. That's all. And we say this violence will exist so long as comparison, suppression, conformity, the disciplining of oneself according to a pattern is the way of life. In this there is conflict and therefore violence.
So can you see the fact of violence—the fact not only outside of you but also inside you—and not have any time interval between listening and acting? This means by the very act of listening you are free from violence. You are totally free from violence because you have not admitted time, an ideology through which you can get rid of violence. This requires very deep meditation, not just a verbal agreement or disagreement. We never listen to anything; our minds, our brain cells are so conditioned to an ideology about violence that we never look at the fact of violence. We look at the fact of violence through an ideology, and the looking at violence through an ideology creates a time interval. And when you admit time, there is no end to violence; you go on showing violence, preaching non-violence.
Do not think by merely wishing for peace, you will have peace, when in your daily life of relationship you are aggressive, acquisitive, seeking psychological security here or in the hereafter. You have to understand the central cause of conflict and sorrow and then dissolve it and not merely look to the outside for peace.
With complete attention, what takes place? When you give complete attention to anything—your learning of history or mathematics, looking at your wife or your husband—what takes place? I do not know if you have gone into it—probably most of us have never given complete attention to anything—but when you do, what takes place?
Formally I have condemned violence, I have escaped from it, I have justified it, I have said it is natural. All these things are inattention. But when I give attention to what I have called violence—and in that attention there is care, affection, love—where is there space for violence?
Violence is not merely killing another. It is violence when we use a sharp word, when we make a gesture to brush away a person, when we obey because there is fear. So violence isn’t merely organized butchery in the name of God, in the name of society or country. Violence is much more subtle, much deeper, and we are inquiring into the very depths of violence. When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent.
There are so many different kinds of violence. Shall we go into each kind of violence or shall we take the whole structure of violence? Can we look at the whole spectrum of violence, not just at one part of it?…The source of violence is the “me”, the ego, the self, which expresses itself in so many ways—in division, in trying to become or be somebody—which divides itself as the “me” and the “not me”, as the unconscious and the conscious; the “me” that identifies with the family or not with the family, with the community or not with the community and so on. It is like a stone dropped in a lake; the waves spread and spread, at the centre is the “me”. As long as the “me” survives in any form, very subtly or grossly, there must be violence.
Man is all the time trying to become non-violent. So there is conflict between “what is”, which is violence, and “what should be”, which is non-violence. There is conflict between the two. That is the very essence of wastage of energy. As long there is duality between “what is” and “what should be”—man trying to become something else, making an effort to achieve “what should be”—that conflict is waste of energy. As long as there is conflict between the opposite, man has not enough energy to change. Why should I have the opposite at all, as non-violence, as the ideal?
If there was no ideal at all, you would be left with “what is”. Would that make one complacent? Or would you then have the energy, the interest, the vitality to solve ‘what is’? Is not the ideal of non-violence an escape from the fact of violence? When the mind is not escaping, but is confronted with the fact of violence—that it is violent, not condemning it, not judging it—then surely such a mind has an entirely different quality and there is no longer violence.
Now, suppose I am violent. How do I observe that violence, because I want to understand the nature of that violence. I want to go, explore, discover the extraordinary factors that contribute to violence. So how do I observe? First, is violence - please listen to this - is violence different from me? Right? You understand my question? I am asking, is that violence which I see when I say I am violent, is that violence different from me or I am that violence? When you are angry, you are angry. It is not you are different from anger. You are different from anger only when you want to control it, only when you say I must suppress it, but are you actually different, separate from violence. Please, we must go into this very carefully because most people say I am different from that object which I call violence. Is that so? Is the word 'violence' separated - you understand?
When there are two dogmatic beliefs, and each trying to convert the other, oppose each other, it is a form of violence. So are we aware of this factor in our life? And when you become aware of it what are you going to do? Do you say, 'Yes, I am aware of it' but carry on with violence? Therefore it becomes a very serious matter. If one is really to be free of violence, to look at it, to live with it, to understand it, to go into it and see all the multiple forms of violence, totally be acquainted with it - and when you are acquainted with something it flowers and then withers away, you don't have to fight it.
Sir, look: I am violent. I observe it. Because I don't run away from it, I don't suppress it, I don't transform it into something else as non -violence, which is absurd - the transformation of violence into non -violence is stupidity, it has no meaning. So as I am violent, I let it come out - not in action. Let it flower, let it grow, as you watch it, it grows and dies. Haven't you done all this? That is, sir, when you are angry, at that moment of anger you are not aware, you are full out. Then a second later you say, 'I have been angry'. Right? So you have divided yourself as not being angry and that you have been angry. So there is a division between the observer who says, 'I have been angry, and I must not be angry'. Right? So the division brings about conflict, saying, 'I mustn't be angry, how am I to get rid of my anger' - and so on and so on, so on. Whereas if you are aware of anger as it arises and let it come out non-verbally (laughs), non-actively, not say, 'I am going to hit you' - let it flower, let it come out, and you will see it disappears very quickly and withers away. And if you do it properly you are never angry again, finished..
Violence ver Nudity
167. Repressive morality was developed by the state and the Church as a tool to maintain control over otherwise free individuals.256
Paul Ableman writes: "A complex civilization has an enormous investment in differentiated apparel. It is no accident that one of the first matters that a revolutionary regime turns its attention to is clothing. The French Revolution decreed classical grace and simplicity. The Chinese homogenized clothing. The Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran returned women to the black chador and so on. . . . Sexual energy is needed by the authorities of the world to maintain order. . . . It immediately becomes obvious why the true obscenity of killing and violence has always been of less concern to those in power than the pseudo-obscenity of erotic acts. Death provides no scope for a network of regulations by which society can be manipulated. . . . But sex is a permanent fountain of dynamic energy, which can be tapped for social purposes by regulations concerning marriage, divorce, adultery, fornication, incest, homosexuality, bestiality, chastity, promiscuity, decency and so on. All those who wield power intuitively perceive that in the last resort their authority derives from the repression, and regulation, of sexuality, and that free-flowing sexuality is the biological equivalent of anarchy. All transferrals of power, all revolutions, are invariably accompanied by transformations of the regulations governing sexuality." 257 Seymour Fisher writes: "The implications of nudity as a way of declaring one's complete freedom have often elicited strong countermeasures from those in authority. Nudity is punishable by death in some cultures. The Roman Catholic church has taught in convent schools that it is sinful to expose your body even to your own eyes. The wearing of clothes represents a form of submission to prevailing mores. It is like putting on a 'citizen's uniform' and agreeing to play the game." 258
168. Repressive morality has often sought to control not only nudity, but sexuality in general.
Margaret Miles observes that "the regulation of sexuality was a major power issue in the fourth-century Christian churches. Regulation of sexual practices was a way to inject the authority of church laws and leaders into the intimate and daily relationships of Christians. Analyzing the canons of the Council of Gangra in AD 309, [Samuel] Laeuchli found that 46 percent of the eighty-one canons were concerned with sexual relationships and practices." 259 Philip Yancey notes that "between the third and tenth centuries, church authorities issued edicts forbidding sex on Saturdays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and also during the 40-day fast periods before Easter, Christmas, and Whitsuntide--all for religious reasons. They kept adding feast days and days of the apostles to the proscription, as well as the days of female impurity, until it reached the point that, as Yale historian John Boswell has estimated, only 44 days a year remained available for marital sex. Human nature being what it is, the church's proscriptions were enthusiastically ignored." 260 Don Mackenzie notes that Christ and the very earliest church, in contrast, emphasized a message of freedom--"from demonic powers, from tyrannical governments, from fate. . . . [and] a prevailing commitment to the separation of secular and ecclesiastical power. . . . [The Church] adopted asceticism, not in obedience to its founder's teachings but as a bid for support in the face of competition, offering spiritual solace to people whose material world (the Roman Empire) was collapsing. Once the Church was officially recognized, it promptly discarded Christ's dedication to poverty, but it clung tightly to sexual asceticism as a disciplinary tool in a disintegrating society." 261
169. Repression of nudity is still used today as a means to further a repressive political agenda.
Regarding nude beaches, Patrick Buchanan, on PBS's "McLaughlin Report," said, "I think we ought to let the liberals do it, if they want to do it. Then take photographs and use them in attack ads." 262 The right-wing Christian Coalition uses blanket attacks on mere nudity and other matters of "morality" to rally support for their cause. Their method, as described by ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser, is "to prey upon the fears of millions of people who are all too willing to believe that sacrificing personal liberty will help solve our nation's problems." 263 A Missouri legislator, in 1993, introduced a bill that would have made virtually all public nudity--and even some nudity in the home--a felony punishable by up to ten years in prison! This bill was fortunately defeated, though by a narrow margin. Similar bills have been proposed all over the country in recent years.264
170. Much of the origin of repressive attitudes toward nudity may be traced to the political setting of the early church and church-state, though not the teachings of Christ Himself.
The earliest writings of the Christian church show no evidence of the negative attitude toward sexuality and nudity which so characterize later years. This negative attitude grew slowly among some segments of the faith, but was by no means universal. For some, asceticism represented a means of remaining pure for the impending return of Christ. For others, it was a reaction against the hedonism and homosexuality common in Greek culture, or against the sexual excesses of the dying Roman Empire.265 For some, it grew out of a mixture of Christianity with the legalism of traditional Judaism; and for many, it grew out of preexisting personal and cultural prejudices. Clement of Alexandria, in the late 2nd century, and Thascius Caecilius Cyprianus, in the mid 3rd century, both condemned the nudity common in Roman public baths primarily because it offended their personal ideas of female modesty. (In the same era, Tertullian was condemning women as the "gateway of the Devil.") Jerome, in the late 4th and early 5th centuries, also condemned nude bathing, especially for women. He considered pregnant women revolting, and felt that virgins should blush at the very idea of seeing themselves naked. On the other hand, in the same period, Jovinianus, a Christian monk, campaigned actively in favor of the public baths. In the end, the decisive actor in the controversy was Augustine. He was a firm believer in the doctrine, introduced long after Christ, that the body and sexuality are inherently sinful. (He applied this doctrine to women's bodies and sexuality especially aggressively.) Augustine was a shrewd politician. By aligning himself closely with the imperial court at the beginning of the 5th century, he effectively ensured that his version of Christianity became the dominant one. By the Dark Ages, with the collapse of the Roman Empire, the Church became the last remnant of Western civilization, with a monopoly on education, and tremendous control over ideas. Thus Augustine's heritage of anti-sexuality became the predominant force in Christianity, even though such ideas are impossible to find in the teachings of Christ Himself.266
171. The aversion of early Christian church leaders to casual nudity was due in part to an association of nudity with paganism and homosexuality in the surrounding cultures.
In many pre-Christian pagan religions, such as those practiced in western Europe and Great Britain, nudity--especially female nudity--was a powerful force, and played an important role in pagan worship and rituals.267
172. The Church's aversion to nudity derived, in part, from its roots in the cultures of the ancient Near East, where nakedness had signified poverty, shame, slavery, humiliation, and defeat. Naked, bound prisoners were paraded in the king's victory celebration, and slain enemies were stripped of clothing and armor.268
173. Before Western civilization, nakedness was a normal element of life and considered acceptable in many circumstances. However, as Freud describes in Civilization and Its Discontents, psychological repression of the awareness of our natural being was a necessary step in building civilization, by disciplining the masses into taking part in vast and self-abdicating social projects.269
Lee Baxandall notes that, by contrast, "the post-industrial, newly greening era offers fresh options, a chance to integrate the natural human being with post-industrial values, technology, and knowledge." 270
174. Nudity has often been censored primarily to avoid the more difficult task of managing it.271
175. Recreation managers often "permit" nudity on remote beaches without facilities or lifeguards, then use nudity as a scapegoat for problems including litter and drug use that inevitably appear in high-use recreation areas without active management.
176. One of the greatest challenges faced by clothing-optional beaches is that their popularity, combined with their scarcity, leads to intensive use, which in turn conflicts with environmental and management concerns.
This has been a source of problems at several beaches across the country, including Sandy Hook in New Jersey, and Cape Cod National Seashore, which closed its traditionally nude beach ostensibly for environmental reasons in the mid 1970s.272
177. The "secondary effects" of an actively managed nude beach have in actual experience proven to be less crime, less inappropriate behavior, no drug dealers, an increase in parking revenues, and an increase in business in the adjoining commercial area.273
178. Nudity has often been repressed for economic reasons, not because it was considered immoral.
Bernard Rudofsky writes: "In the 1920s, in some parts of Europe people used to bathe in public without feeling the need for a special dress. At the height of summer the beaches on the Black Sea swarmed with bathers who had never seen a bathing suit except in newspapers and picture magazines; their holiday was one of untroubled simplicity. . . . The idyll came to an end a few years later when tourism reared its ugly head, and the protests of foreign visitors led to making bathing suits compulsory." 274 The same thing has recently happened in the former East Germany, where traditionally nude beaches are now being restricted to appease more conservative European tourists.275
179. We must never forget that for any freedom that is lost, we bear partial responsibility for letting it be lost.
150 - 166 Historical support for Naturism.
150. Social nudity is part of a long historical tradition.211 ~ Recent Western civilization stands almost alone, in the entire known history of humanity, in its repressive code against nudity.
151. Nudity was commonplace in the ancient Greek civilization, especially for men.212
By the Classical Period of ancient Greece, nude exercise and athletic competition had become part of the way of life for Greek men, and a practice which separated "modern" Greeks both from other, "barbarian" cultures and from their own past. ~ The original Olympic games were conducted in the nude. ~ Plato described nudity in exercise as a practical, useful, and rational innovation; Thucydides promoted it as simpler, freer, and more democratic, a cultural distinction between the Greek soldier who must be in shape, lean and muscular, not portly and prosperous, and the "barbarians" who announced their status and wealth by wearing expensive garments that gave a false impression of elegance and authority.213
152. Old Testament ceremonial washings, including baptism, were performed in the nude.214 Christ, too, was probably baptized naked--as depicted in numerous early works of art.215
153. Roman citizens, including early Christians, bathed communally in the nude at the public baths throughout most of the second through the fourth centuries. ~ Nudity was also common during this period in other parts of ancient Roman society.
154. The writings of early Christians such as Irenaeus and Tertullian make it clear that they had no ethical reservations about communal nudity.216
Christian historian Roy Bowen Ward notes that "Christian Morality did not originally preclude nudity. ~ There is a tendency to read history backward and assume that early Christians thought the same way mainstream Christians do today. ~ We attribute the present to the past." 217
155. For the first several centuries of Christianity, it was the custom to baptize men, women, and children together nude. ~ This ritual played a very significant role in the early church. ~ The accounts are numerous and detailed.218
Margaret Miles notes that "naked baptism was observed as one of the two essential elements in Christian initiation, along with the invocation of the Trinity. ~ In the fourth century instructions for baptism throughout the Roman Empire stipulated naked baptism without any suggestion of innovation or change from earlier practices." 219 ~ A typical historical account comes from Cyril of Jerusalem, bishop of Jerusalem from A.D. 387 to 417: "Immediately, then, upon entering, you remove your tunics. ~ You are now stripped and naked, in this also imitating Christ despoiled of His garments on His Cross, He Who by His nakedness despoiled the principalities and powers, and fearlessly triumphed over them on the Cross." ~ After baptism, and clothed in white albs, St. Cyril would say: "How wonderful! You were naked before the eyes of all and were not ashamed! Truly you bore the image of the first-formed Adam, who was naked in the garden and was not ashamed." 220 ~ J. C. Cunningham notes that "there is nothing in the present rubrics of the Roman rite against doing this today. ~ In fact, in the Eastern rites the rubrics even state the option of nude adult baptism." 221
156. Nudity was common and accepted in pre-medieval (circa 6th century) society, especially in places like Great Britain, which had been "barbarian" lands only a few hundred years before.222
E.T. Renbourn notes that nudity was widespread throughout Ancient Britain and northern Europe, in spite of the climate. ~ Even as late as the 17th century, travellers such as Coryat and Fynes Moryson found the Irish people living nude or semi-nude indoors. ~ He writes that Moryson, in his Itinery (circa early 17th century), found Irish gentlewomen "prepared to receive visitors and even strangers indoors when completely unencumbered by clothing." 223
157. Nudity was fairly common in medieval and renaissance society, especially in the public baths and within the family setting.224
Havelock Ellis records that "in daily life, a considerable degree of nakedness was tolerated during medieval times. ~ This was notably so in the public baths, frequented by men and women together." 225 ~ Lawrence Wright observes that nudity was common in the home, too: "The communal tub had one good reason. ~ The good reason being the physical difficulty of providing hot water. ~ No modern householder who has bailed out and carried away some 30 gallons of water, weighing 300 lb., will underrate the labour involved. ~ The whole family and their guests would bathe together while the water was hot. ~ Ideas of propriety were different from ours, the whole household and the guests shared the one and only sleeping apartment, and wore no night-clothes until the sixteenth century. ~ It was not necessarily rude to be nude."226
The high-ranking nobles of Edward IV's court were permitted by law to display their naked genitals below a short tunic, and contemporary reports indicate that they did so. ~ Chaucer commented on the use of this fashion in The Parson's Tale, written about 1400. ~ Many men's garments, he wrote, were so short they "covere nat the shameful membres of man." 227 ~ Between the 14th and mid-17th centuries, and especially during the reign of Louis XIV, women would often leave their bodices loose and open or even entirely undone, exposing the nipple or even the whole of the breasts, a practice confirmed by numerous historical accounts.228 ~ The Venetian ambassador, writing in 1617, described Queen Anne of Denmark as wearing a dress which displayed her bosom "bare down to the pit of the stomach." ~ Aileen Ribeiro writes that in the early 15th century, "women's gowns became increasingly tight-fitting over the bust, some gowns with front openings even revealing the nipples. ~ In 1445 Guillaume Jouvenal des Ursins became Chancellor of France and his brother, an ecclesiastic, wrote to him urging him to tell the king that he should not allow the ladies of his household to wear gowns with front openings that revealed their breasts and nipples." 229
158. Even in the Victorian era, before the invention of bathing suits, swimming nude in the ocean was commonplace; and music halls often featured nude models as living "sculpture." 230
159. Few people realize that swimsuits, as we know them today, are a relatively recent concept. ~ The idea of wearing special clothing to swim in is barely a century old.
160. Skinnydipping, in the local river or farm pond, is well-documented as an important historical part of our national heritage.
Skinnydipping and outdoor nudity appear in the writings of Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, William Allen White, Lincoln Steffens, William Styron, Anne Morrow Lindbergh, Herman Melville, James Michener, and Henry Miller, among many others, and in the depictions of Norman Rockwell, Rockwell Kent, Andrew Wyeth, Thomas Eakins, John Sloane, and Grant Wood.
161. Many YMCA, college, and high school male-only pools or swimming classes were historically "swimsuit-optional" or nude-only until federally-mandated "equal access" athletic programs (for the sake of women) were instituted in the mid 1970s.231
162. Today, there are still public locations where nudity is, by local tradition or custom, the accepted practice.
Nudity is the norm, for instance, in natural primitive hot springs and on nude beaches; and, almost universally, for models in art classes.
163. The few officially sanctioned nude beaches in the U.S. (for example, Rooster Rock State Park, Oregon) and Canada (Wreck Beach, British Columbia)--and most of the unofficial beaches as well--have existed for decades without significant problems.232
164. Many highly respected people, historical and contemporary, have espoused and/or participated in Naturism to some degree.
Benjamin Franklin took daily naked "air baths." 233 ~ So did Henry David Thoreau, who was also a frequent skinnydipper.234 ~ Alexander Graham Bell was a skinnydipper and nude sunbather.235 ~ George Bernard Shaw, Walt Whitman, Eugene O'Neill, and painter Thomas Eakins argued in favor of social nudity.236 ~ President John Quincy Adams was a regular skinnydipper. ~ According to reports, "each morning he got up before dawn, walked across the White House lawn to the Potomac River, took off his clothes and swam in the nude. ~ Then he returned to the White House to have breakfast, read the Bible and run the country." 237 ~ President Theodore Roosevelt frequently swam nude in Rock Creek Park in Washington, once skinny-dipping with the French diplomat, Jules Jusserand.238 ~ President Lyndon Johnson occasionally swam nude with guests in the white house pool, including evangelist Billy Graham.239 ~ Senator Edward Kennedy has been photographed skinnydipping at public beaches in Florida. ~ At the White House of his brother, John F. Kennedy, nudity had been common around the White House pool.240 ~ Many U.S. congressmen enjoy nude recreation, albeit segregated: U.S. Senate members may use the Russell Senate Office Building Pool in the nude (the few female Senators make appointments to assure there won't be males on hand), and Representatives may use a clothing-optional steam room, where President Bush was said by Newsweek to hang out sans towel with his buddies. ~ Congressmen also sunbathed nude on the Speaker's Porch until one day in 1973 when Rep. Patricia Schroeder wandered into the gathering inadvertently.241
Billionaire insurance man John D. MacArthur frequently went skinnydipping, and left a beach to the state of Florida, intending that a portion be designated clothing-optional (a wish that has been spurned); word has it that MacArthur went skinnydipping with Walt Disney at this beach in the late 1960s.242 ~ World Bank president and former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, and American Civil Liberties Union founder Roger Baldwin, both have been regular skinnydippers.243 ~ Charles F. Richter, the co-inventor of the earthquake measuring system, was a life-long nudist and Naturist.244 ~ Actress Lynn Redgrave and her family practice social nudism.245 ~ Actresses Bridget Fonda and Brigitte Bardot enjoy social nudity.246 ~ The late actor Gary Merrill advocated nudism.247 ~ Christy Brinkley openly admits to frequenting nude beaches,248 and Christian singer Amy Grant goes topfree on foreign beaches while on tour overseas.249 ~ Even the late Dr. Seuss published approval of a nudist philosophy, in one of his first books.250
165. Historically, a great many writers and artists have regarded Naturism, or something close to it, to be part of the utopian ideal.
R. Martin writes: "Anthropologically, nakedness would seem to be the best and worst of conditions. ~ Involuntary stripping to nakedness is defeat or poverty, but willed nakedness may be a perfect form." 251 ~ Nudity is also consistent with the Christian utopian concept of heaven, in which, according to biblical accounts, clothing is not necessary.
166. Nudity has often been used, historically, as a symbol of protest or rebellion against oppression.
For example, the early Quakers, in mid-17th century England, often used nudity as an element of protest. ~ Historian Elbert Russell notes that "A number of men and women were arrested and punished for public indecency because they appeared in public naked 'as a sign.' ~ George Fox and other leaders defended the practice, when the doer felt it a religious duty to do so. ~ The suggestion of such a sign came apparently from Isaiah's walking 'naked and barefoot three years' (Isaiah 20:2,3)." 252 ~ The Doukhobors, a radical Christian sect, used nudity as a social protest in Canada in the early 1900s.253 ~ Paul Ableman records that "In May, 1979, Emperor Bokassa, a minor Central African tyrant, arrested a large number of children on charges of sedition and massacred some of them. ~ According to The Guardian (London) of 18 May, 'Hundreds of women demonstrated naked outside the prison until the survivors were released.'" 254
In the 1920s, as part of a widening rebellion against genteel society, the size of bathing suits began to diminish. ~ Nude beaches, reaching their height of popularity in the 1970s, are the ultimate result of this process of social emancipation. ~ The free body movement in general in the 1970s fit this social and historical pattern. ~ Examples include casual nudity at Woodstock; "nude-in" demonstrations; and a record-setting demonstration by Athens, Georgia university students on March 7, 1974, when more than 1500 went naked on their college campus. ~ It took tear gas to make the students dress.255
2010 Facebook thats a whole new story
Spirituality means waking up. Most people, even though they don’t know it, are asleep. They’re born asleep, they live asleep, they marry in their sleep, they breed children in their sleep, they die in their sleep without ever waking up. They never understand the loveliness and the beauty of this thing that we call human existence. You know ~ all mystics ~ Catholic, Christian, non-Christian, no matter what their theology, no matter what their religion ~ are unanimous on one thing: that all is well, all is well. Though everything is a mess, all is well. Strange paradox, to be sure. But, tragically, most people never get to see that all is well because they are asleep. They are having a nightmare.
Last year on Spanish television I heard a story about this gentleman who knocks on his son’s door. "Jaime," he says, "wake up!" Jaime answers, "I don’t want to get up, Papa."
The father shouts, "Get up, you have to go to school." Jaime says, "I don’t want to go to school." "Why not?" asks the father. "Three reasons," says Jaime. First, because it’s so dull; second, the kids tease me; and third, I hate school. And the father says, "Well, I am going to give you three reasons why you <span>must</span> go to school. First, because it is your duty; second, because you are forty-five years old, and third, because you are the headmaster." Wake up! Wake up! You’ve grown up. You’re too big to be asleep. Wake up! Stop playing with your toys.
Most people tell you they want to get out of kindergarten, but don’t believe them. Don’t believe them! All they want you to do is to mend their broken toys. "Give me back my wife. Give me back my job. Give me back my money. Give me back my reputation, my success." This is what they want; they want their toys replaced. That’s all. Even the best psychologist will tell you that, that people don’t really want to be cured. What they want is relief; a cure is painful.
Waking up is unpleasant, you know. You are nice and comfortable in bed. It is irritating to be woken up. That’s the reason the wise guru will not attempt to wake people up. I hope I’m going to be wise here and make no attempt whatsoever to wake you up if you are asleep. It is really none of my business, even though I say to you at times, "Wake up!" My business is to do my thing, to dance my dance. If you profit from it fine; if you don’t, too bad! As the Arabs say, "The nature of rain is the same, but it makes thorns grow in the marshes and flowers in the gardens."
~ Anthony de Mello, Awareness: The Perils and Opportunities of Reality
ON THE STILLNESS OF THE MIND
Question: Why do you speak of the stillness of the mind, and what is this stillness?
Krishnamurti: Is it not necessary, if we would understand anything, that the mind should be still? If we have a problem, we worry over it, don’t we? We go into it, we analyse it, we tear it to pieces, in the hope of understanding it. Now, do we understand through effort, through analysis, through comparison, through any form of mental struggle? Surely, understanding comes only when the mind is very quiet. We say that the more we struggle with the question of starvation, of war, or any other human problem, the more we come into conflict with it, the better we shall understand it. Now, is that true? Wars have been going on for centuries, the conflict between individuals, between societies; war, inward and outward, is constantly there. Do we resolve that war, that conflict, by further conflict, by further struggle, by cunning endeavour? Or do we understand the problem only when we are directly in front of it, when we are faced with the fact? We can face the fact only when there is no interfering agitation between the mind and the fact; so is it not important, if we are to understand, that the mind be quiet?
You will inevitably ask, “How can the mind be made still?” That is the immediate response, is it not? You say, “My mind is agitated and how can I keep it quiet?” Can any system make the mind quiet? Can a formula, a discipline, make the mind still? It can; but when the mind is made still, is that quietness, is that stillness? Or is the mind only enclosed within an idea, within a formula, within a phrase? Such a mind is a dead mind, is it not? That is why most people who try to be spiritual, so-called spiritual, are dead—because they have trained their minds to be quiet, they have enclosed themselves within a formula for being quiet. Obviously, such a mind is never quiet; it is only suppressed, held down.
The mind is quiet when it sees the truth that understanding comes only when it is quiet; that if I would understand you, I must be quiet, I cannot have reactions against you, I must not be prejudiced, I must put away all my conclusions, my experiences and meet you face to face. Only then, when the mind is free from my conditioning, do I understand. When I see the truth of that, then the mind is quiet—and then there is no question of how to make the mind quiet. Only the truth can liberate the mind from its own ideation; to see the truth, the mind must realize the fact that so long as it is agitated it can have no understanding. Quietness of mind, tranquillity of mind, is not a thing to be produced by will-power, by any action of desire; if it is, then such a mind is enclosed, isolated, it is a dead mind and therefore incapable of adaptability, of pliability, of swiftness. Such a mind is not creative.
Our question, then, is not how to make the mind still but to see the truth of every problem as it presents itself to us. It is like the pool that becomes quiet when the wind stops. Our mind is agitated because we have problems; and to avoid the problems, we make the mind still. Now the mind has projected these problems and there are no problems apart from the mind; and so long as the mind projects any conception of sensitivity, practises any form of stillness, it can never be still. When the mind realizes that only by being still is there understanding—then it becomes very quiet. That quietness is not imposed, not disciplined, it is a quietness that cannot be understood by an agitated mind.
Many who seek quietness of mind withdraw from active life to a village, to a monastery, to the mountains, or they withdraw into ideas, enclose themselves in a belief or avoid people who give them trouble. Such isolation is not stillness of mind. The enclosure of the mind in an idea or the avoidance of people who make life complicated does not bring about stillness of mind. Stillness of mind comes only when there is no process of isolation through accumulation but complete understanding of the whole process of relationship. Accumulation makes the mind old; only when the mind is new, when the mind is fresh, without the process of accumulation—only then is there a possibility of having tranquillity of mind. Such a mind is not dead, it is most active. The still mind is the most active mind but if you will experiment with it, go into it deeply, you will see that in stillness there is no projection of thought. Thought, at all levels, is obviously the reaction of memory and thought can never be in a state of creation. It may express creativeness but thought in itself can never be creative. When there is silence, that tranquillity of the mind which is not a result, then we shall see that in that quietness there is extraordinary activity, an extraordinary action which a mind agitated by thought can never know. In that stillness, there no formulation, there is no idea, there is no memory; that stillness is a state of creation that can be experienced only when there is complete understanding of the whole process of the ‘me’. Otherwise, stillness has no meaning. Only in that stillness, which is not a result, is the eternal discovered, which is beyond time.
Silence has many qualities. There is the silence between two noises, the silence between two notes and the widening silence in the interval between two thoughts. There is that peculiar, quiet, pervading silence that comes of an evening in the country; there is the silence through which you hear the bark of a dog in the distance or the whistle of a train as it comes up a steep grade; the silence in a house when everybody has gone to sleep, and its peculiar emphasis when you wake up in the middle of the night and listen to an owl hooting in the valley; and there is that silence before the owl's mate answers.
There is the silence of an old deserted house, and the silence of a mountain; the silence between two human beings when they have seen the same thing, felt the same thing, and acted.
That night, particularly in that distant valley with the most ancient hills with their peculiar shaped boulders, the silence was as real as the wall you touched. And you looked out of the window at the brilliant stars. It was not a self-generated silence; it was not that the earth was quiet and the villagers were asleep, but it came from everywhere - from the distant stars, from those dark hills and from your own mind and heart.
This silence seemed to cover everything from the tiniest grain of sand in the river-bed - which only knew running water when it rained - to the tall, spreading banyan tree and a slight breeze that was now beginning. There is the silence of the mind which is never touched by any noise, by any thought or by the passing wind of experience. It is this silence that is innocent, and so endless. When there is this silence of the mind action springs from it, and this action does not cause confusion or misery.
The meditation of a mind that is utterly silent is the benediction that man is ever seeking.
In this silence every quality of silence is.
There is that strange silence that exists in a temple or in an empty church deep in the country, without the noise of tourists and worshippers; and the heavy silence that lies on water is part of that which is outside the silence of the mind.
The meditative mind contains all these varieties, changes and movements of silence. This silence of the mind is the true religious mind, and the silence of the gods is the silence of the earth. The meditative mind flows in this silence, and love is the way of this mind. In this silence there is bliss and laughter
There is silence between two notes; there is silence between two thoughts, between two movements; there is the silence between two wars; there is silence between husband and wife before they begin to quarrel. We are not talking of that quality of silence, because they are temporary, they go away. We are speaking of a silence that is not produced by thought, that is not cultivable, that comes only when you have understood the whole movement of existence. In that there is silence, there is no question and answer, there is no challenge, there is no search, everything has ended. In that silence, there is a great sense of space and beauty and extraordinary sense of energy. Then there comes that which is eternally, timelessly sacred, which is not the product of civilization, the product of thought. That is the whole movement of meditation.
This Light in Oneself, p 44
Silence comes...when you know how to observe
Silence of the mind comes naturally—please do listen to this—it comes naturally, easily, without any effort if you know how to observe, how to look. When you observe a cloud, look at it without the word and therefore without thought, look at it without the division as the observer. Then there is an awareness and attention in the very act of looking; not the determination to be attentive, but looking with attention, even though that look may last only a second, a minute—that is enough. Do not be greedy, do not say, “I must have it for the whole day.” To look without the observer means looking without the space between the observer and the thing observed, which does not mean identifying oneself with the thing that is looked at.
So when one can look at a tree, at a cloud, at the light on the water, without the observer, and also—which is much more difficult, which needs a greater attention—if you can look at yourself without the image, without any conclusion, because the image, the conclusion, the opinion, the judgement, the goodness and the badness, is centred round the observer, then you will find that the mind, the brain, becomes extraordinarily quiet. And this quietness is not a thing to be cultivated; it can happen, it does happen, if you are attentive, if you are capable of watching all the time, watching your gestures, your words, your feelings, the movements of your face and all the rest of it.
Beyond Violence, p 131
Happiness cannot be found
Brought together by a common vision of peace, thirteen tribal elders, all grandmothers from across the globe, travel to eight different countries to share one powerful message of hope.
Five years in the making and shot on location from the remote villages of the Amazon to the steps of the Vatican, this award-winning film follows these amazing women as they face a world in crisis.
Produced by Carole Hart, directed by Carole Hart and Bruce Hart, and narrated by Ashley Judd, For the Next 7 Generations weaves a beautiful tapestry of tribal traditions and hope for the future.
Watch and be inspired by their bravery, audacity, and wisdom.
Buy For the Next 7 Generations today at Beyond Words, check the schedule for a screening near you, or host YOUR OWN screening--we can help! Contact Beyond Words Publishing at 503-531-8700 or email us at
The Thirteen Grandmothers' Facebook Cause Page
Come to forthenext7generations.com to learn more about the film, to see the trailer and to hear about the successful experiences of those who have hosted community screenings. Join thousands of fans of the film on their Facebook Fan Page
Check and see if any of the Grandmothers will be visiting a city near you on their "Timeless Message Tour" on our Facebook Tour Page or send an email to
Learn more about the Center for Sacred Studies (CSS) and their programs. In 2004, CSS brought the Grandmothers together through their common mission of Peace and Unity for all Peoples: sacredstudies.org
Integrative Spirituality | PO Box 1508 | Sausalito | CA | 94965
An International and Interfaith Group of Religious Leaders
United Centers for Spiritual Living’s own Dr. Kathy Hearn has been selected for a teleconference panel with members of the International Committee for the Peace Council (http://www.peacecouncil.org). UCSL is proud to be a “supporter-in-action,” allowing us to pass along to you an additional discount to the very reasonable General Registration fee for the course.
That’s right—register through https://www.agnt.org/node/124 and receive a 20% discount! A portion of your registration fee will be directly shared back with UCSL.
Go to REGISTER NOW (https://www.agnt.org/node/124) and choose United Centers for Spiritual Living from the “Invited by..” menu, and “Supporter-in-action” from the registration rate menu of the form.
PLEASE NOTE: No one will be excluded due to ability to pay. (Choose the Full Scholarship option if this is the case for you and we will reply).
For more information, please see the attached flyer or go to http://www.peacecouncil.org.