U. Krishnamurti - The Collected Works

UG:It can happen, yes. I don't know, you see, maybe. That has nothing to do with it: the moral codes of conduct have no relationship whatsoever to this. Not that this man is immoral; he cannot be immoral — it is impossible for him, you see, impossible.

Q: His behavior automatically conforms to the moral code prevalent in the society?

UG:His behaviour patterns probably to some extent fall within the framework of the moral and religious code. But he's a danger. What I am saying is a threat to you as you know yourself and as you experience yourself. it's a threat to you.

Q: How?UG: You cannot accept this. How can you accept it?

Q: But if it comes automatically, where is the question of your being a danger? You can't give anybody a way to achieve it.

UG:That is the reason why I say that this individual cannot be of any use to society. He's a rare bird, a rare plant — put him in a cage, in a museum, and look at him — he's something different, you know.

Q: But never dangerous?

UG:All the more, you see, because he doesn't fit into the framework.

______________

Q: People say that mankind's survival will be threatened even within a century.

UG:Do you believe that? This (species) has survived for many centuries, and it is going to find some way to survive. My point is this: Not because of love, not because of universal brotherhood, not because of all that stuff, but because of the terror of liquidating ourselves, we will learn to live together. You cannot hurt anybody without hurting yourself — not psychologically, but physically — only when we realize this, will we learn to live together. As long as each individual seeks his own security, there can be no overall security. We are talking of 'detente' in international terms, but it has to percolate down to the level of individual relationships. Only then is it possible; not through this talk of 'universal brotherhood', 'unity of life', 'oneness of life' — all that stuff has not helped, and is not going to help. Only terror will make us live together in peace whether we like it or not. You can take a revolver and make the world's strongest, most powerful man dance for you — it is a fact. This is going to survive somehow; you are not going to let the whole thing blow up. It's only a madcap, a lunatic, probably, who will take it into his head that it's time for all of us to go in one blow.

Man has survived for centuries, and now we are all of a sudden talking about 'values' and all that kind of stuff. What for? It has not helped us to live in harmony and peace. We have created this moral problem, you see. Plants and animals don't have a religious problem; man has created this religious problem.

You see, this has absolutely no social content at all, and I can't think of any collective action. So this individual is just like something thrown out by Nature, and whether anybody recognizes him or not is of no importance. This man cannot be of any use to this society. The day they think that I am a threat to their existence, naturally they will liquidate me. I don't mind. If society liquidates me, what is left here is of no importance to me. I don't have the missionary zeal in me, or any desire to save mankind. Who has given me the mandate to save mankind? Mankind has existed for centuries, and he is going to continue. I am not in the 'holy business'; I sing my own song. If somebody comes, I talk; if nobody comes, I go for a walk, or look at the birds, look at the trees — so many things are happening. But I don't go out and sit on a platform and talk — I am not cut out for that kind of a thing. I am a simple man — I don't want to complicate things unnecessarily. You see, my position is very simple. I'm always available. I have no private life which I can call my own. Anybody can come at any time. I just see them and say "Good morning, what can I do for you?" — that's all I can do; I have nothing to give; that's all.

_________________

Knowledge is not something mysterious or mystical. You know that you are happy, and you have theories about the working of the fan, the light — this is the knowledge we are talking about. You introduce another knowledge, 'spiritual knowledge', but — spiritual knowledge, sensual knowledge — what is the difference? We give the names to them. Fantasies about God are acceptable, but fantasies about sex are called 'sensual', 'physical'. There is no difference between the two; one is socially acceptable, the other is not. You are limiting knowledge to a particular area of experience, so then it becomes 'sensual', and the other becomes 'spiritual'? Everything is sensual to me.

The knowledge that is essential for the living organism — all of that is necessary. But all those speculations about God, Truth, Reality, have no meaning at all to me — they are all cultural values; they are totally unrelated to the survival of the living organism; they are all socially, arbitrarily fixed, religious values. All our tastes are cultivated tastes. Likes and dislikes are all cultivated; there is no such thing as an absolute morality. By "morality" I mean questioning your actions before and after. It is all social. What is a good man good for in this world? He's good for the society, isn't he? For the smooth running of society, these codes are necessary. These religious people have created a policeman inside you. Certain actions are termed 'good' and certain other actions, are termed 'bad', either before or after you do them — that hasn't helped you in any way; it is thinking that has created the problem. Man's problem is basically the moral dilemma, questioning your actions before and after — it has become a neurological problem, not a religious problem — the whole of your body is involved. Even God is a neurological problem: 'God' is the jumbled spelling of 'dog', but the whole of your being is reacting to the word 'God'. All your beliefs — they are not just psychological; they are neurological.

______________

You don't know what is good; you know only what is good for you. That's all you are interested in, that's a fact. Everything centers around that. All your art and reason centers around that. I am not being cynical. That's a fact. Nothing wrong with it. I'm not saying anything against it. The situations change, but it is that which is guiding you through all situations. I'm not saying it is wrong you see. If it is not so, something must be wrong with you. As long as you are operating in the field of what they call the 'pair of opposites', good and bad, you will always be choosy, in every situation, that is all — you cannot help doing that.

___________

A 'moral man' is a 'chicken'. A 'moral man' is a frightened man, a chicken-hearted man — that is why he practices morality and sits in judgement over others. And his righteous indignation! A moral man (if there is one) will never, never talk of morality or sit in judgement on the morals of others. Never!

_____________

Man is always selfish, and he will remain selfish as long as he practices selflessness as a virtue. I have nothing against selfish people. I don't want to talk about selflessness — it has no basis at all. You say "I will be a selfless man tomorrow. Tomorrow I will be a marvelous man" — but until tomorrow arrives (or the day after tomorrow, or the next life) you will remain selfish. What do you mean by 'selflessness'? You tell everybody to be selfless. What is the point? I have never said to anybody "Don't be selfish." Be selfish, stay selfish! — that is my message. Wanting enlightenment is selfishness. The rich man's distributing charity is also selfishness: he will be remembered as a generous man; you will put up a statue of him there.