A: I have quarrelled with my brother, and I am on my guard whenever I meet
him. So I am unable to really see him; I only see an idea I have of him.
R: The brain cells carry the image of the hurt.
K: There is anger. At the moment of anger, there is no naming. A second later, I
call the feeling ‘anger’. To name the feeling ‘anger’ is to record the fact of anger
and to strengthen the past, the memory which has recognized that feeling as
anger.
R: This is different from naming.
K: We are coming to that. I see a person with whom I’m angry and then the
emotional reactions set in. At the moment of anger there is no naming, but it is
there a second later. Why do we name? Why do we say: I am angry? Why is
there the need to put it into words? Or, is naming merely habit, an instant
response?
A: A defence mechanism starts to operate. The recognition itself is creating a
situation which says: I do not want to get into conflict.
K: Naming as a process of self-defence is one part of it. Why does one name a
particular reaction?
R: Otherwise one would not feel that one existed.
A: If I did not name, there would not be continuity.
K: Why does the mind give it continuity?
R: To feel that it exists.
K: What exists—the feeling of anger? Why has naming become so important? I
name my house, my wife, my child. Naming strengthens the ‘me’. What would
happen if I did not name the anger I feel? The anger would be over.
Why should there be continuity? Why does the mind operate in continuity?
Why is there this constant verbalization?
A: Verbalization establishes a residue.
K: But why do we do this? Giving continuity to the feeling of anger, not ending
the feeling may be a habit. It indicates that the mind needs occupation. Now, why
does the mind demand to be occupied?—with sex, with God, with money. Why?
A: The mind needs stimulating. If there is no stimulus, it will fall asleep.