K: What is the problem?
P: You have seen us through a span of time. Do you think we are able to
communicate with you?
K: Obviously up to a point.
P: What is the hitch at that point?
K: Obviously, all communication is up to a point. I cannot go into this unless we
begin very simply. I want to understand what the problem is. Communication
implies telling you something and you listening to me, and either agreeing or
disagreeing. That is, you and I have a common problem and we discuss it. We
can only discuss the problem if we both see the common problem in its entirety,
and if the meaning, the description each of us has, tallies. We can then say that
we have understood each other.
Then the next point is: I may want to tell you something which you resist. I
may be telling you something which is not accurate, and you have a right to
resist. Then I tell you something which is true, mathematically true, and you say
that it is not true because you have your own judgements and opinions. At that
moment communication stops. I want to tell you something as between two
human beings, not I as the guru and you as the disciple. I will express it as well
as I can in words, but I know that what I want to say is not the word, nor the
meaning of the word. I want to tell you something which can partially be
described, and the rest of the meaning cannot be described. You take the
description and not the other. Therefore, there is no communication. You are
satisfied with the explanation and say that that is enough. I want to communicate
something through the word, through the meaning, through the description,
something which is not the word, which is not the meaning, but which is more
than the description.
I want to tell you something which I feel very strongly, which I feel I must
communicate to you. I describe, but you refuse to enter into that, and our
communication comes to an end. Verbally we understand, but the ‘other’ cannot
be communicated.
A: There is no refusal on our part; there is only incapacity.
K: I question it. Listen to what I said. I use words which you understand. You
listen to the meaning, the word, the description, the explanation. But all that does
not cover the thing which I want to convey to you. At first you refused to go
beyond. You refused in the sense that you did not know what was being talked
about. You felt that what could not be put into words did not exist.
I am not concerned with the word and the description. I want to tell you
something now. How do I communicate what is not in the word or in the
meaning, what is not a description, and yet is as real as the word and has as much