very thinking about something that is of the past gives continuity to the past.
Therefore there is no ending to the past. But if you have the most extraordinary,
happy incident, see it, perceive it, and completely end it, not carry it over, then
there is no continuity as the past which thought has built. Therefore every step is
the last step.
So we have to go into the question of whether thought, which is giving
continuity to memory—memory is the past—can ever come to an end. That is
part of meditation. It is part of a total mutation of the brain cells themselves. If
there is continuity of the movement of thought, it is the repetition of the old,
because thought is memory; thought is the response of memory; thought is
experience; thought is knowledge.
We are talking about most serious things. This touches your life, not the
speaker’s life, but your life—your battles, your misfortunes, your ugliness, your
sorrows. Please give a little attention to this, I beg of you. Because it is your life,
it is your sorrow, and to find the ending of sorrow is part of this thing called
meditation, not to escape into some visions.
So, thought is always perpetuating itself through experience, through the
constant repetition of certain memories. Knowledge is always in the past, and
when you act according to knowledge, you are giving continuity to thought. But
you must have knowledge to act technologically. See the difficulty. If you didn’t
use thought, you couldn’t go home, you couldn’t work in an office. You must
have knowledge. But see the danger of a mind that is caught in the perpetual
movement of thought and therefore never sees anything new. Thought is always
old; thought is always conditioned, never free, because it is acting according to
the past. So the question is, Since this movement of thought is absolutely
necessary at one level to function logically, sanely, healthily, but not for a mind
to perceive something totally new, to live totally differently, how can this
movement of thought come to an end?
The traditional approach to this question is to control thought, hold it, or learn
to concentrate. This again is all absurd. Because who is the controller? Is not the
controller part of thought, part of the knowledge that says, “You must control”?
You have been told to control, but is there a way of observing thought without
any control, without giving it continuity, but observing so that it ends? Because if
thought continues, the mind is never quiet, and it is only when the mind is
completely quiet that there is the possibility of perception, seeing. See the logic
of it: if my mind is chattering, comparing, judging, saying, “This is right; this is
wrong,” I’m not listening to you. To listen to you, to understand what you are
saying, I must give my attention, and if I give attention completely, that attention
itself is silence.
One sees very clearly that silence is completely necessary not only at the
superficial level, but at the deepest level; at the very root of our being there must
be complete silence. How is this to happen? It cannot possibly happen if there is
any form of control. Then there is conflict because then there is the one who
says, “I must control,” and there is the thing to be controlled. In that there is a
division; in that division there is conflict. Therefore is it possible for the mind to
be completely empty and quiet, not continuously but at each second? That is the
michael s
(Michael S)
#1