Tradition and Revolution Dialogues with J. Krishnamurti

(Nora) #1

K: Go slowly. We have come to this very carefully.


P: Is that movement in space a question of my feeling the movement of space in
you?


K: Please, simple words, simple words.


P: Is it a question of contacting the movement of emptiness which you are
communicating?


K: Wait, wait. I am not communicating anything. I am only communicating this,
not that. There is no communication there; there is communication only here.


A: You are saying that you have gone through words and descriptions, but all the
while we have held the hand of thought. This is something which cannot be held
by thought.


K: Do look at what is taking place between you two, A and P. You have a
meaning, you have the word, the description, the analysis. You have come to a
conclusion, and she has not come to a conclusion; communication has stopped.
The moment you come to a conclusion and the other man has no conclusion,
communication is finished.


P: Krishnaji says that he communicates through words up to a point, then there is
a communication for which no words can be found. How is that to be done?
Again I am putting it into my own words. I say that up to the point where the
mind becomes fluid, rarefied, communication through words is possible because
there is a point of reference. An instant after, I ask him whether the movement in
that space has to contact or be contacted by the movement of Krishnaji in silence.
Is it then not a problem of Krishnaji and me at all?


K: Not at all; there are no ‘two’. What you have said is simple. Have you got it?
(pause)
Two things can take place: The word, description, meaning, analysis and a
conclusion; word, meaning, description, analysis, but no conclusion. The man
who has got a conclusion stops there, and he cannot communicate with a man
who has no conclusion. They cannot meet. They can go on discussing endlessly,
but these two cannot meet.
Now we are asking: Is there something which is totally outside thought,
which is the ‘other’? And, is the ‘other’ communicable? Communicability
implies ‘two’. When you have no conclusion but I have a conclusion, there is an
ending of communication. When there is a state where I have no conclusion and
you have no conclusion, we both move, and we both smell the flower. Right?
What is there to communicate when we are both smelling the flower? (pause)

Free download pdf