But you are sorrow. You are not different from sorrow, are you? (J. Krishnamurti)

But you are sorrow. You are not different from sorrow, are you? (J. Krishnamurti)

What we are saying is, wherever there is a division there must be conflict. Right? That’s a law. Eternal law. Where there is separation, a division, a breaking up into two parts there must be conflict. And that conflict becomes ultimately war, killing people. As is being shown now in the world – America, Russia, in Lebanon, Muslim, the Islamic world and the non-Islam world – they are in conflict. So to understand and so be free of conflict, really be free of it, is to understand why the observer becomes so dominant, separating from him, or her, from the thing being observed. Right? Right, sir? When I observe, if I am married or have a girlfriend, there is a division between us – actual not only physical division but traditional division, the authority of the parent, the authority of someone, so there is division always in our relationships and therefore there is always conflict between human beings. There are very few human beings in the world that have a relationship in which conflict doesn’t exist. And that conflict exists because we have separated the observer from the observed. I am different from my anger. Right? I am different from my envy, I am different from my sorrow. Therefore being different, there is conflict. That is, I must get rid of sorrow, or I must overcome sorrow, tell me how to overcome sorrow, tell me what to do with my fear – so there is conflict, conflict all the time. But you are sorrow. You are not different from sorrow, are you? You are not different from anger, are you? You are not different from your sexual desires, are you? You are not different from the loneliness which you feel – you are lonely. But we say, ‘Yes, I’m lonely but I must escape from that’. So I go to the temple, or being entertained and so on. You are not different from the quality of which you are; the quality is you. I am anger. I am sorrow. I am lonely, depressed. Now, before, when I separated, I acted upon my sorrow. You understand? If I am lonely I then escape from loneliness, try to overcome it or analyze it and try to fill the loneliness with all kinds of amusements or religious activity. But if I am lonely, I can’t do anything about it. Right? You understand this fact? No? Right? Please tell me. If I am lonely and I am lonely – not, I am lonely, something different from me – I am that. Before I acted upon it, now I can’t act upon it because I am that. So what happens when you… when the observer is the observed. You understand? When the anger is me, then what takes place? Have you enquired into this or you just say, ‘Yes, I am the observer, the observed’? Meaningless. But to find out or experience, go into it and find out if anger is always different from you. That has been the tradition, that has been the conditioning, say ‘I am different from my anger’, therefore you acted upon it. But when you realize you are anger, then what do you do, what happens? First, all conflict ceases. Right? Right? Are you following this a little bit? All conflict ceases when you realize you are that. I am brown – finished. It’s a fact. Light brown or dark brown or purple or whatever color it is. So you eliminate altogether this divisive process which brings conflict, in yourself.

And why is it, the questioner asks, that we make an abstraction of a fact? The fact is I am anger. I am jealous, I am lonely. Why do we make that into an idea, an abstraction of it? Is it easier to make an abstraction rather than to face the fact? Because with the idea, I can play with it. I say ‘Yes, this is a good idea’, ‘This is a bad idea’, ‘Convince me about it’, ‘Not convince me’ – you follow? I can go on. But when there is no abstraction but the fact, then I have to deal with it. And then I separate myself and then say ‘I am going to do something about it’. But when one realizes there is no separation – you are that, you are ‘what is’ – you are a Hindu, you are a Muslim, you are a Christian, you are a businessman, you are ugly, you are brutal – you are all that – then you have eliminated altogether the sense of division in you and therefore no conflict. Do you know what the brain is like when there is no conflict? When the brain is in perpetual conflict, as most people’s brains are, what happens to that brain? It’s wounded – right? – it’s wounded, hurt.

Probably you have lived so long with conflict, with pain and sorrow, fear, and this conflict, you’ve said it’s part of my life, I’ll accept conflict, and you’ve gone on that way. But you’ve never enquired what conflict does to the brain, to a human being, to the psyche. You know, it’s being perpetually beaten – if one is constantly beaten, physically, do you know what happens? Constantly bombarded with conflict, what happens to the brain? It shrinks. It becomes very small, limited, ugly. That’s what is happening to all of us. So the fairly intelligent man asks ‘Why should I live in conflict for the rest of my life’? So he begins to enquire what is conflict. Conflict must exist where there is division – inside as well as outside. And this division deeply, fundamentally is the ‘me’, the observer, and the thing observed. Two separate activities going on, which is not true, because you are anger, you are violent. So if you come to that point, realize that the observer is the observed, then there is totally different activity going on.

If we could just for one day or one hour, see what conflict is, why we human beings are caught in conflict, with all the pain and the anxiety, lonely – all that – then perhaps we may be able to live a life with a brain that is never being harmed, never had any wound, any shock, so that it’s a free brain. And it’s only then that perhaps the mind – which is love – can contact the brain. That’s all.




Reflections on the Self
J. Krishnamurti



Follow Me on Instagram