The first and last freedom of Krishnamurti

  • 2013

PREFACE

Man is an amphibious being who lives at the same time in two worlds: the world of the given and the world of the self-made; the world of matter, life and consciousness, and the world of symbols. In our thinking we use a repertoire of systems that are symbols: language, mathematics, pictorial art, music, ritual and the rest. Without such a system of symbols there would be no art, no science, no philosophy, we wouldn't even have the rudiments of civilization: in other words, we would descend to animality.

The symbols are therefore essential. But, as the history of all times proves, symbols can also have fatal consequences. As an example, take on one side the domain of science, and on the other, that of politics and religion. Thinking in terms of a certain class of symbols and acting in response to them has allowed us to understand, and to some extent dominate the elemental forces of nature.

Instead, thinking in terms of other kinds of symbols and acting in response to them makes us use these forces as instruments for mass murder and collective suicide. In the first case the symbols were well chosen, carefully analyzed and progressively adapted to the facts of physical existence. In the second case, the originally poorly chosen symbols have never been subjected to rigorous analysis, nor have they been mortified to bring them into harmony with the facts of human life. Moreover, these inadequate symbols inspire everyone as much respect as if by magic they were more real than the same realities they represent. Thus, in the texts of religion and politics, words are not thought to represent defective facts and things, but rather, on the contrary. facts and things serve to verify the validity of words.

Until today, the symbols have only been used realistically in matters to which we do not give maximum importance. In everything concerning our deepest motives, we persist in using symbols not only irrationally but also with hints of idolatry and even madness. The end result of all this is that man has been able to commit, in cold blood and for long periods of time, acts that beasts are only capable of committing for brief moments, when they are at the height of frenzy, desire or terror . Men can become idealists because they make use of symbols and worship them; and, because they are idealists, they can transform the intermittent greed of the animal into the great imperialism of a Rhodes or a JP

Morgan; the intermittent eagerness to fight the animal can be transformed into Stalinism or the Spanish Inquisition; and the transitory attachment of the animal to the land that sustains it, can transform it into the deliberate frenzy of nationalism. Fortunately, man can also convert the intermittent goodness of the animal into the lifelong charity of an Elizabeth Fry or a Vincent de Paul; the intermittent animal dedication to the female, the male and the offspring, can turn it into the reasoned and persistent human cooperation that to date has proved so strong that it has managed to save the world from the disastrous consequences of the other type of idealism. Is it possible that this idealism continues to save the world? We do not know. What we do know is that with the atomic bomb in the hands of nationalist idealism the advantage of the idealists of charity and cooperation has greatly diminished.

Not even the best of books on the art of cooking can replace the worst of meals. The fact is obvious. And yet, over the centuries, the deepest philosophers and the most skilled and learned theologians have constantly fallen into the error of identifying their purely verbal works with the reality of the facts, or worse, they have imagined that, In some ways, the symbols are more real than what they represent. This cult of the word has not stopped being fought. According to Saint Paul: “The letter kills; the spirit gives life ”. "And why, " asks Eckhart, "why fall into talk about God?" Anything you say about God is false. ” At the other end of the earth the author of one of the Mahayana sutras affirmed that "Buddha never preached the truth, for he understood that you have to discover it within yourself." The respectable people disregarded those sayings because they believed they were deeply subversive. And so, as time went by, the idolatry that exaggerates the value of emblems and words persisted. Religions sank into decay, but the old custom of promulgating creeds and imposing belief in dogmas persisted even among the same atheists. During recent years, experts in logic and semantics have made a thorough analysis of the symbols that the Man uses to think. Linguistics has become a science and there is even a subject of study called by Benjamin Whorf meta-linguistics. All this is very commendable, but it is not enough. Logic and semantics, linguistics and meta-linguistics are purely intellectual disciplines that analyze the various forms, correct and incorrect, significant and insignificant, in which words can relate to things, processes and events. But these disciplines do not offer any guidance regarding the great problem, more fundamental than any other, of the relationship of man, in its entire psycho-physical, with the two worlds in which he lives: world of facts and the world of symbols.

Everywhere and in all times of history this problem has been solved individually by some men and women. Although they talked and wrote about it, these individuals created no system because they knew that every system or doctrine involves the temptation to exaggerate the value of the symbols, to give more importance to the words that the realities they represent. Its purpose was never to offer preconceived or panaceas explanations, but to invite people to make the diagnosis and treatment of their own ills, to get them to go to the place where the problem of man and his solution n are presented directly to the experience.

In this volume, which contains selections of writings and speeches by Krishnamurti, the reader will find a clear contemporary exposition of the fundamental human problem and an incitement to solve it in the only way it can be solved., solving each individual for himself and for himself. Collective solutions, in which many desperately put their faith, are always inadequate solutions. To understand the confusion and misery that is within us, and therefore in the world, we must begin by finding clarity within ourselves, and that clarity arises from right thinking. Inner clarity cannot be organized, because it cannot be received or given to another person. The thought that is organized collectively is a mere repetition. Clarity is not the result of verbal affirmation but of self-understanding and right thinking. The righteousness of thought is not reached by the mere cultivation of the intellect, nor by the imitation of models, although they are worthy and noble. The righteousness of thought is born of self-knowledge. Without understanding oneself there is no basis for thought; Without self-knowledge, what one thinks is not true.

This basic theme is developed by Krishnamurti again and again. There is hope in men, not in society, not in systems or in organized religious creeds, but in you and in me. Organized religions, with their mediators, their sacred books, their dogmas, their hierarchies and their rituals, only offer a false solution to the fundamental problem. When you quote the Bhagavad Gita, or the Bible, or some Chinese holy book, what do you do, perhaps, but repeat? And what you repeat is not the truth. It is a lie, because the truth cannot be repeated. A lie can be extended, exposed and repeated, but the same cannot be done with the truth. When the truth is repeated, it ceases to be the truth; That is why sacred books are not important. It is through self-knowledge, not through belief in symbols originated by others, that man comes to reality, eternal in which his being is rooted. The belief in perfection and the supreme value of any given set of symbols does not lead to liberation, but to history, to the repetition of old disasters. “Belief has an inevitable separatist effect. If you have a belief, if you seek security in your particular belief, you feel separated from those who seek security in some form of belief. All organized beliefs are based on separation even if they preach fraternity. ” The individual who has solved the problem of his relations with the two worlds of facts and symbols is an individual without beliefs. In relation to the problems of practical life, it maintains viable hypotheses that serve it to carry out its purposes, and which it does not attach more importance than to any other kind of instrument. As regards the neighbor and the reality in which his life is based, he has the direct experiences of love and understanding. It is with him to get rid of the beliefs that Krishnamurti "has not read any holy books, nor the Bhagavad Gita, nor the Upanishads." We do not even read sacred works; we settle for reading newspapers, magazines and detective cartoons of our preference. This means that we face the crisis of our time, not with love and understanding, but with "formulas, with systems", which really have very little value. But "men of good will should not have formulas, " because formulas inevitably lead to "blindness of thought." The attachment to formulas is almost universal. And it is inevitable that this is the case, "because our education is based on what to think, and not on how to think." We are educated as believing and militant members of some group: communist, Christian, Mohammedan, Hindu, Buddhist or Freudian. Therefore, “you respond to the challenge, which is always new, in accordance with an old standard, and hence the answer lacks validity, originality and freshness. If you respond as a Catholic or as a communist, you are responding - isn't it true? - according to conditioned thinking. Consequently, your answer makes no sense. And is it not the Hindu, the Muslim, the Buddhist, the Christian who have created this problem? Just as the new religion is the cult of the State, the old religion was the cult of an idea. “If you respond to a challenge according to the old conditioning, your response will not allow you to understand the new challenge. Therefore, "what one has to do to face the new challenge is to get rid, to completely shed the background, to face the challenge in a new way." In other words, symbols should never be elevated to the category of dogmas, and no system should be considered more than as a provisional convenience. Believing in formulas, and the acts that derive from those beliefs, cannot lead to a solution to our problem. "It is only through the creative understanding of ourselves that a creative world, a happy world, a world in which there are no ideas can emerge." A world in which there are no ideas would be a blissful world, because it would be a world without the powerful forces that condition, which force men to take improper actions, would be a world without the dogmas consecrated by tradition that serve to justify the worst crimes and give studied reason visas to the biggest folly.

An education that teaches us what to think and not how to think requires a ruling class of priests and teachers. But “the very idea of ​​directing others is antisocial and antispiritual. The leader feels satisfied his desire for power, and those who let themselves be ruled by him feel satisfied with their desire for certainty and security. The spiritual guide provides his disciples with a kind of narcotic. But someone could interrogate:

"What do you do? Do you not behave like a spiritual guide? ”“ It is obvious - Krishnamurti replies - that I do not act as your guide, because, in the first place, I do not give you any satisfaction. I do not tell you what you should do at all times, or from day to day, but I point out something; and you can accept or reject it, according to your own criteria and not according to mine. I ask nothing of you, neither your cult, nor your praise, nor your reproaches, nor your gods. I say: this is a fact; You can accept or reject it. And most of you will reject it for the simple reason that the fact does not satisfy you. ”

What precisely does Krishnamurti offer us? What can we accept, if it seems good to us, but which in all probability we will prefer to refuse? It is not, as we have seen, a belief system, a catalog of dogmas, or a repertoire of ideas or ideals. It is not about any caudillaje, or mediation, or spiritual direction, it is not even an example; neither of a ritual, nor of a church, nor of a code, nor of an elevation or some form of stimulating chatter.

Will it be about self-discipline? Nor, since it is the harsh reality that self-discipline does not serve at all to solve our problem. To find the solution, the mind must open itself to reality, it must face the facts of the outside world and the inner world, without preconceived ideas or limitations of any kind. (Service to God is perfect freedom. And, conversely, perfect freedom is service to God.) By submitting to discipline, the mind experiences no radical change; It is the same "I" as before, but "maniatado, kept under domain."

Self-discipline is on the list of things that Krishnamurti does not offer us. Won't he offer creation?

We answer again with the refusal. “Creation can bring you what you are looking for; but the answer can come from your unconscious, or from the deposit of all your desires. The answer is not the gentle voice of God. ”

“Let's see - Krishnamurti continues - what happens when you pray. By constantly repeating certain words, and dominating your thoughts, the mind becomes still, isn't it? At least the conscious mind becomes still. Kneeling, as Christians do, or sitting, as Hindus do, through so much repetition the mind of the one who prays becomes still. In that stillness springs the insinuation of something that you have asked for, which may come from the unconscious, or which may be the response of your memories. But, certainly, that is not the voice of reality, for the voice of reality must come to you; You can't appeal to her, you can't pray to her. You cannot seduce her to come to your little cage by practicing the 'puja', the 'bhajan'1 and other things like that, or making floral offerings, or propitiatory ceremonies, or forgetting about yourself, or emulating others. Once you learn the trick of quieting the mind by repeating certain words, and receiving insinuations in the midst of that stillness, the danger arises - unless you are on very alert watch to find out the origin of such insinuations - that You are trapped and prayer then becomes a substitute for the search for Truth. What you ask you will get, but that will not be the truth. If you wish, if you ask, you will receive, but in the long run you will have to pay its price. ”

From prayer we turn to yoga, another of the things that Krishnamurti does not offer us. Because yoga is concentration, and concentration is exclusion. "You build a wall of resistance by concentrating on a thought you have chosen, and you try to keep other thoughts away." What is commonly called meditation is the mere "cultivation of resistance, of exclusive concentration on an idea that you have chosen." But how do you make the selection? “What makes you think that something is good, true, noble, and the rest is not? It is clear that the choice is based on pleasure, reward or success; or it is merely a response of one's conditioning or tradition. Why do you choose something? Why don't you examine every thought? If you feel interest in many things, why do you choose one of them? Why don't you investigate everything that interests you? Instead of creating resistance by focusing on an interest or an idea, why don't you study every interest and every idea as they arise? After all, you have many interests, many disguises, conscious and unconscious. Why do you prefer one and discard the others, if by opposing them you create resistance, struggle and conflict? While if you examine all thoughts at the moment they arise - all thoughts, I have said, and not some thoughts - then there is no exclusion. It really is an arduous task to investigate each of our thoughts. Because, while we investigate a thought, another one is inadvertently introduced. But if one is fully aware of this process and without desire to justify or dominate, one devotes himself to observing a thought passively, he will notice that there will be no interference from any other thought. That interference of other thoughts only occurs when you censor, compare, or incline. ”

1 Religious ceremonies of the Hindus. (N. of T.)

"Do not judge, for not being judged". This teaching of the Gospel is as applicable to our own life as to our dealings with others. When one judges, compares or condemns, the mind is not open to the truth, it cannot be free from the tyranny of symbols and systems; It cannot escape the environment, nor the past.

Neither introspection with a predetermined purpose, nor self-analysis within any traditional norm, nor a set of established principles, can help us. There is a transcendent spontaneity in life, a "creative Reality, " as Krishnamurti calls it, which is revealed to one when the mind is in a state of "passive alertness", of "passive uptake without opinion." Judgment and comparison inevitably lead us to duality. Only passive uptake without choice can lead us to non-duality, to the reconciliation of opposites in a total understanding, in a total love. Ama et fac quod vis. If you love you can do what you want. But if you start doing what you want, or what you don't want to do, in obedience to some system, notions, ideals or traditional prohibitions, you will never love. The liberating process must begin with the understanding without choice of what you want, and of your reactions to any system of symbols that tells you that you should or should not want that. Through this understanding without choice, as it penetrates the deep strata of the ego and the subconscious with the associated one, love and mutual understanding will arise ; but these will be of a very different nature from love and mutual understanding that we know. This understanding without choice - at all times and in all circumstances of life - is the only effective meditation. All other forms of yoga lead, either to the blindness of thought that derives from self-discipline, or to some form of rapture caused by autosuggestion, that is, to some form of false samadhi . Authentic liberation is the inner freedom of creative Reality . It is not a gift; It has to be discovered and experienced. It is not an acquisition that you must withhold to glorify you. It is a state of being, like silence, in which there is no becoming, in which there is fullness. This creativity does not necessarily have to look for expression; It is not a talent that requires external manifestation.

It is not necessary that you be a great artist or that you have your public. If this is what you are looking for, you will not understand the Inner Reality. It is not a gift, nor is it a result of talent; this imperishable treasure is found only when thought is freed from lust, ill will and ignorance, when thought is freed from the mundane and the desire for personal continuity. It must be lived through the right thinking and meditation.

Self-understanding without choice leads us to the creative Reality, which is below all our destructive illusions; it leads us to the serene wisdom that is always there despite ignorance, despite knowledge, which is merely another form of ignorance. Knowledge is a matter of symbols, and is too often a hindrance to wisdom, to the discovery of oneself from moment to moment. The mind that has reached the stillness of wisdom understand being, will understand what it is to love. Love is not personal or impersonal. Love is love, and the mind cannot define or describe it as exclusive or inclusive. Love is his own eternity; It is the real, the supreme, the immeasurable.

ALDOUS HUXLEY

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Communicating with each other, even knowing each other well, is extremely difficult. I can use words that make different sense to you than to me. Understanding comes when we - you and I - are on the same level at the same time. This happens only when there is true affection between people; between husband and wife, between intimate friends. That is true communion. Instant understanding comes when we are on the same level at the same time.

It is very difficult to establish contact with each other in an easy, effective and definitive way. I use words that are very simple, which are not technical, because I don't think any technical type of expression will help us solve our difficult problems. I will not use technical terms, whether of psychology or science. Luckily, I have not read any books on psychology or religious books. I would like to convey, with the very simple words that we use our daily life, something of deeper significance; but this is very difficult if you don't know how to listen.

There is an art of listening. To really listen, we should abandon or put aside all prejudices, previous formulations and daily activities. When you are in a receptive state of mind, things can be easily understood; When your true attention is on something, you listen.

Unfortunately, however, most of us listen through a resistance screen. We hide in religious or spiritual, psychological or scientific prejudices; or in our daily desires, worries and fears. We listen with all that through sieve. Hence we actually hear our own noise, our own sound, not what is said. It is extremely difficult to put aside our education, our prejudices, our inclinations, our resistance, and, reaching beyond verbal expression, to listen in such a way that we understand instantly. That is going to be one of our difficulties.

If, during this dissertation, something that is said is contrary to your way of thinking and your belief, listen; nothing else; don't resist You may be right, and I may be wrong; But by listening and considering this together, we will discover what the truth is. The truth can not give it to anyone. You have to discover it; and, to discover, there must be a mental state in which there is direct perception. There is no direct perception when there is a resistance, a shelter, a protection. Understanding comes by realizing what it is. Knowing exactly what it is, the real, the effective, without interpreting it, without condemning or justifying it, is, by the way, the beginning of wisdom. Only when we begin to interpret, to translate according to our "conditioning", we ignore the truth to our prejudice. This, after all, is like research. Knowing what a thing is, what it is exactly, requires research; you cannot translate it according to your moods. Similarly, if we can look, observe, listen, realize what exactly it is, then the problem is solved. And that is what we try to do in all these dissertations. I'm going to point out what it is, and not to translate it capriciously; and neither should you translate or interpret it according to your background or education.

Is it not possible, then, to realize everything as it is? Starting from there, certainly, there may be understanding. Recognize, realize, discover what it is, put an end to the fight. If I know that I am a liar, that is a fact that I recognize, the fight is over. Recognize, realize what one is, already represents the beginning of wisdom, the beginning of understanding that frees you from time. Introducing the time factor - not time in a chronological sense but as a means, as a psychological process, a process of the mind - is destructive and creates confusion.

We can, therefore, have an understanding of what it is, when we recognize it without condemnation, without justification, without identification. Knowing that one is in a certain condition, in a certain state, is in itself a process of liberation; but a man who does not realize his condition, his struggle, tries to be something other than what he is, which produces habit. Keep in mind, then, that we want to examine what it is, observe and capture exactly what is existing, without any tendency, without giving it an interpretation. It takes an extremely cunning mind, an extraordinarily flexible heart, to realize what it is and follow it; because what is is in constant motion, undergoes constant transformation; and if the mind is tied to belief, by knowing, stop following the rapid movement of what it is. What is is not static, by the way; it moves constantly, as you will see if you observe it closely. And to follow it you need an active mind and a flexible heart, an impossible thing when the mind is static, when it is fixed in a belief, in a prejudice, in an identification; and a dry mind and heart cannot easily, quickly, follow what it is.

I think you realize without too much discussion, without excessive verbal expression, that there is chaos, confusion and misery, both individually and collectively. Not only in India but in the whole world. In China, in America, in England, in Germany, throughout the world, there is confusion, growing misfortune. This is not only national, something of particular here; It happens in the whole world. There is an extraordinarily acute suffering; and he is not sobo individual but collective. It is, therefore, a global catastrophe, and it is absurd to confine it to a simple geographical area, to a section of a map in colors; because then we will not understand the full significance of this suffering, global as well as individual. And realizing this confusion, what is our response today? How do we react?

There is suffering: political, social, religious. Our entire psychological being is confused, and all leaders, politicians and religious, have failed us. All books have lost their significance. You can consult the Bhagavad Gita or the Bible, or the last treatise on politics or psychology, and you will find that they have lost that timbre, that quality of truth; They have become mere words. You yourselves, who are the repeaters of those words, are confused and uncertain, and the simple repetition of words suggests nothing. Words and books, therefore, have lost their value. That is, if you quote the Bible, or Marx, or the Bhagavad Gita, your repetition becomes a lie because you are uncertain, confused. What is written there, in effect, becomes mere propaganda; And propaganda is not the truth. So, when you repeat, you have stopped understanding the state of your own being; you only cover your own confusion with words of authority. What we try to do, however, is to understand this confusion and not cover it up with quotes. What, then, is your response to the confusion? How do you respond to this extraordinary chaos, to this confusion, to this uncertainty of existence? Notice it while I elucidate it; follow not my words but the thought that is active in you. Almost everyone is used to being spectators and not taking part in the game. We read books but never write books. It has become our national and universal master tradition, that of being spectators, of watching football play, of observing politicians and public speakers.

We are simple strangers who look, and we have lost the creative capacity. We want, therefore, to absorb and participate.

If you do nothing but observe, if you are mere spectators, you will lose the meaning of the dissertation entirely; because this is not a conference that you have to listen to by force of habit. I will not give you information that you can collect in an encyclopedia. Lo que procuramos hacer es seguirnos mutuamente los pensamientos, seguir tanto y tan profundamente como podamos las insinuaciones, las respuestas, de nuestros propios sentimientos. Os ruego, pues que averigüéis cuál es vuestra respuesta a este proceso, a este sufrimiento; no cuáles son las palabras de alguna otra persona, sino cómo respondéis vosotros mismos. Vuestra respuesta es de indiferencia si os beneficiáis con el sufrimiento con el caos, si obtenéis provecho del mismo, ya sea económico, social, político o psicológico. No os importa, por lo tanto, que este caos continúe. No hay duda de que, cuanto más perturbación y caos hay en el mundo, más busca uno seguridad. ¿No lo habéis notado? Cuando hay confusión en el mundo -en lo psicológico y en todo lo demás- os encerráis en alguna clase de seguridad, ya sea la de una cuenta bancaria o la de una ideología; o bien recurrís a la oración vais al templo, lo cual es en realidad escapar a lo que sucede en el mundo. Más y más sectas se van formando; más y más “ismos” surgen a través del mundo. Porque, cuanto mayor es la confusión, más necesitáis de un líder, de alguien que os guíe para salir de este revoltijo. Por eso apeláis a los libros de religión oa uno de los instructores más en boga; o bien actuáis y respondéis de acuerdo con un sistema que parezca resolver el problema, un sistema de izquierda o de derecha. Eso, exactamente, es lo que está ocurriendo.

No bien os dais cuenta de la confusión, de lo que es exactamente, procuráis esquivarlo. Y las sectas que os ofrecen un sistema para hallar solución al sufrimiento económico, social o religioso, son lo peor; porque entonces lo importante se vuelve el sistema, no el hombre, ya se trate de un sistema religioso o de un sistema de izquierda o de derecha. El sistema, la filosofía, la idea, llegan a ser lo importante, no el hombre; y en aras de la idea, de la ideología, estáis dispuestos a sacrificar a todo el género humano. Eso, exactamente, es lo que está sucediendo en el mundo. Esta no es mera interpretación mía; si lo observáis, veréis que eso, exactamente, es lo que ocurre. El sistema se ha vuelto lo importante. Por consiguiente, como el sistema es lo que importa, el hombre -vosotros y yoperdemos significación; y los que controlan el sistema, religioso o social, de izquierda o de derecha, asumen autoridad, asumen el poder ya causa de ello os sacrifican a vosotros, al individuo. Eso, exactamente, es lo que está ocurriendo.

Ahora bien: ¿cuál es la causa de esta confusión, de esta miseria? ¿Cómo se ha producido esta desgracia, este sufrimiento que no sólo es íntimo sino externo, este temor y expectativa de la guerra, de la tercera guerra mundial que ya se está desencadenando? ¿Cuál es la causa de ello? Ella indica, por cierto, el derrumbe de todos los valores morales, espirituales, y la glorificación de todos los valores sensuales, del valor de las cosas hechas por la mano o por la mente. ¿Qué ocurre cuando no tenemos otros valores que el valor de las cosas de los sentidos, el valor de lo producido por la mente, la mano o la máquina? Cuanto mayor es la significación que atribuimos al valor sensual de las cosas mayor es la confusión. It's not like that? Nuevamente: esta no es una teoría mía. No necesitáis citar libros para descubrir que vuestros valores, vuestra riqueza, vuestra existencia social y económica, se basan en cosas hechas por la mano o por la mente. De modo, pues, que vivimos y funcionamos con nuestro ser impregnado de valores sensuales, lo cual significa que las cosas -las de la mente, la mano y la máquina- han llegado a ser lo importante; y cuando las cosas adquieren importancia, la creencia cobra predominante significación. Eso, exactamente, es lo que ocurre en el mundo, verdad?

Trae, pues, confusi n, el atribuir significaci n cada vez mayor a los valores de los sentidos; y estando en la confusi n, tratamos de escapar de ella de diversas maneras, ya sea religiosas, econ micas o sociales, o mediante la ambici n, el poder, la busca de la realidad. Pero lo real est cerca: no necesit is buscarlo; y el hombre que busca la verdad nunca la encontrar . La verdad est en lo que es; y en eso consiste su belleza. Pero no bien la conceb s, no bien la busc is, empez is a luchar; y el que lucha no puede comprender. Por eso es que debemos estar en silencio, en observaci n, pasivamente perceptivos. Vemos que nuestro vivir, nuestra acci n, est siempre dentro del campo de la destrucci n, dentro del campo del dolor; como una ola, la confusi ny el caos siempre nos alcanzan. No hay intervalo en la confusi n de la existencia.

Todo lo que actualmente hacemos parece conducir al caos, parece llevarnos al dolor ya la infelicidad. Mirad vuestra propia existencia y ver is que nuestro vivir est siempre al borde del dolor. Nuestro trabajo, nuestra actividad social, nuestra pol tica, las diversas asambleas de naciones para poner coto a la guerra, todo ello produce m s guerra. La destrucci n es la secuela del vivir; todo lo que hacemos lleva a la muerte. Eso es lo que en realidad acontece.

Podemos poner fin de una vez a esta desgracia, y no seguir siendo atrapados de continuo por la ola de confusi ny dolor? Es decir, grandes instructores, ya sea Buda o Cristo, han aparecido; ellos aceptaron la fe y se libertaron, tal vez, de la confusi ny del dolor. Pero ellos nunca impidieron el dolor, jam s pusieron coto a la confusi n. La confusi n contin a, el dolor prosigue. Y si vosotros, al ver esta confusi n social y econ mica, este caos, esta miseria, os retir is a lo que se llama vida religiosa y abandon is el mundo, podr is tener la sensaci n de que os un sa esos grandes instructores; pero el mundo contin a con su caos, su miseria y su destrucci n, con el sempiterno sufrir de sus ricos y de sus pobres. De modo, pues, que nuestro problema -el vuestro y el m o- consiste en saber si podemos salir de esta miseria instant neamente. Si, viviendo en el mundo, rehus is formar parte de l, ayudar is a otros a salir de este caos, no en el futuro, ni ma ana sino ahora. Ese, por cierto, es nuestro problema.

La guerra, probablemente, se viene, m s destructiva y aterradora en sus formas. Es indudable que nosotros no podemos impedirla, porque los puntos en litigio son demasiado marcados, demasiado pr ximos. Pero vosotros y yo podemos percibir la confusi ny la miseria de inmediato, verdad? Tenemos que percibirlas; y entonces estaremos en condiciones de despertar la misma comprensi n de la verdad en los dem s. En otras palabras: pod is ser libres al instante? Esa, en efecto, es la nica salida de esta miseria. La percepci ns lo puede ocurrir en el presente. Mas si dec s lo har ma ana, la ola de confusi n os alcanza, y entonces os veis siempre envueltos en la confusi n.

Es, pues, posible llegar a ese estado en que percib s la verdad instant neamente, y por lo tanto pon is fin a la confusi n en vosotros mismos? Yo digo que lo es; y ese es el nico camino posible. Digo que puede y debe hacerse, sin basarse en la suposici n ni en la creencia. Producir esa extraordinaria revoluci n, que no es la revoluci n para deshacerse de los capitalistas e instalar otro grupo; traer esa maravillosa transformaci n que es la nica revoluci n verdadera, tal es el problema. Lo que generalmente se llama revoluci n es tan s lo la modificaci no la continuaci n de la derecha de acuerdo con las ideas de la izquierda. La izquierda, despu s de todo, es la continuaci n de la derecha en forma modificada. Si la derecha se basa en valores sensuales, la izquierda es mera continuaci n de los mismos valores sensuales, diferentes tan sólo en el grado o en la expresión. La verdadera revolución, pues, sólo puede llevarse a efecto cuando vosotros, individuos, os volvéis perceptivos en vuestra relación con los demás. Indudablemente, lo que vosotros sois en vuestra relación con los demás -con vuestra esposa, vuestro hijo, vuestro patrón, vuestro vecino-, eso es la sociedad. La sociedad no existe por sí misma. La sociedad es lo que vosotros y yo hemos creado con nuestras relaciones; es la proyección hacia fuera de todos nuestros estados psicológicos íntimos. De modo, pues, que si vosotros y yo no nos comprendemos a nosotros mismos, la mera transformación de lo externo -que es la proyección de lo interno- no tiene significación alguna. Es decir, no puede haber alteración ni modificación significativa de la sociedad mientras no me comprenda a mí mismo en relación con vosotros. Estando confuso en mi vida de relación, doy origen a una sociedad que es la reproducción, la expresión externa de lo que yo soy. Este es un hecho obvio que podemos discutir. Podemos dilucidar si la sociedad, la expresión externa, me ha producido a mí, o si yo he producido la sociedad.

¿No es, pues, un hecho evidente que lo que yo soy en mi relación con el prójimo crea la sociedad; y que, sin transformarme radicalmente, no podrá haber transformación de la función esencial de la sociedad? Cuando esperamos de un sistema la transformación de la sociedad, no hacemos sino eludir la cuestión, porque un sistema no puede transformar al hombre; siempre es el hombre quien transforma el sistema, como lo muestra la historia.

Hasta que yo, en mi relación con vosotros, me comprenda a mí mismo, seguiré siendo la causa del caos, de la miseria, de la destrucción del miedo y de la brutalidad. Comprenderme a mí mismo no es cuestión de tiempo. Yo puedo comprenderme en este mismo instante. Si yo digo “me comprenderé a mí mismo mañana”, introduzco el caos y la miseria, mi acción es destructiva. En cuanto digo que “habré” de comprender, introduzco el elemento tiempo, por lo cual ya me ha alcanzado la ola de confusión y destrucción. La comprensión es ahora no mañana.

“Mañana” es para la mente perezosa, la mente inactiva, la mente que no está interesada. Cuando estáis interesados en algo, lo hacéis instantáneamente; hay comprensión inmediata, transformación inmediata. Si no cambiáis ahora, jamás cambiaréis; porque el cambio que se efectúa mañana es mera modificación, no transformación. La transformación sólo puede producirse de inmediato; la revolución es ahora, no mañana.

Cuando eso acontece, os halláis completamente sin problemas, pues en tal caso el “yo” no se preocupa por sí mismo; y entonces estáis más allá de la ola de destrucción.

Extracto de Libro: La Libertad primera y última de Krisnamurti

Next Article