Jiddu Krishnamurti on insight, how knowledge can never be creative, using art as an escape, and wanting to be famous.
A brief overview of J. Krishnamurti before delving into his own words:
| Who (Identity) | Jiddu Krishnamurti, an Indian philosopher, speaker, and writer, known for his profound philosophical and spiritual teachings. He was considered a revolutionary thinker who questioned traditional beliefs and emphasized psychological revolution, the nature of the mind, meditation, inquiry, and human relationships. |
| What (Contributions) | Krishnamurti’s teachings focused on the fundamental nature of human thought and consciousness. He advocated for a form of education that emphasizes holistic understanding of the human mind and heart, free from the constraints of organized belief and dogma. He wrote numerous books and conducted public talks and discussions worldwide. |
| When (Period of Influence) | Krishnamurti’s influence spanned much of the 20th century, from the 1920s until his death in 1986. His philosophical and spiritual teachings continue to be relevant and influential in contemporary discussions on consciousness and spirituality. |
| Where (Geographic Focus) | Born in Madanapalle, Andhra Pradesh, India, Krishnamurti traveled extensively, speaking in various countries around the world, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and India. |
| Why (Artistic Philosophy) | Krishnamurti’s philosophy centered on the belief that a fundamental change in society can emerge only through a radical transformation in the individual’s understanding of their own mind. He emphasized the importance of self-awareness and critical inquiry over adherence to religious or ideological systems. |
| How (Technique and Style) | Krishnamurti’s approach was characterized by his conversational and non-authoritarian style, often engaging in dialogues and discussions rather than formal lectures. He encouraged personal introspection and self-inquiry, urging individuals to become aware of their conditioning and psychological barriers. |
This post is a collection of selected quotes and excerpts from secondary sources used for educational purposes, with citations found at the end of the article.
Wanting To Be Famous
We want to be famous as a writer, poet, painter, politician, singer, or what you will. Why? Because we don’t love what we are doing. If you love to sing, paint or write poems, if you really love it you would not be concerned with whether you are famous or not. To want to be famous is tawdry, trivial, stupid, has no meaning, but because we don’t love what we are doing, we want to enrich ourselves with fame. Our present education is rotten because it teaches us to love success and not what we are doing. The result has become more important than the action.
It is good to hide your brilliance under a bushel, to be anonymous, to love what you are doing and not to show off. It is good to be kind without a name. That does not make you famous, it does not cause your photograph to appear in the newspapers. Politicians do not come to your door. You are just a creative human being living anonymously, and in that there is richness and great beauty. 1
When you are doing something with a motive behind it, of becoming popular, famous, having more money, that is not doing something which you really love to do. A musician who says, ’I love music,’ but is watching how many titled people there are in the audience, how much money he is going to make, he is not creative, he is not a musician; he is using music in order to become famous or to have money. So there can be no creativity if there is a motive behind it. 2
Creative Thinking Never Seeks A Result
What we call happiness or ecstasy is, to me, creative thinking. And creative thinking is the infinite movement of thought, emotion and action. That is, when thought, which is emotion, which is action itself, is unimpeded in its movement, is not compelled or influenced or bound by an idea, and does not proceed from the background of tradition or habit, then that movement is creative.
So long as thought is circumscribed, held by a fixed idea, or merely adjusts itself to a background or condition and, therefore, becomes limited, such though is not creative. So the question which every thoughtful person puts to himself is how can he awaken this creative thinking, because when there is this creative thinking, which is infinite movement, then there can be no idea of a limitation, a conflict.
Now this movement of creative thinking does not seek in its expression a result, an achievement, its results and expressions are not its culmination. Is has no culmination or goal, for it is eternally in movement. Most minds are seeking a culmination, a goal, an achievement, and are holding themselves upon the idea of success, and such thought, such thinking is continually limiting itself, whereas if there is no idea of achievement but only the continual movement of thought as understanding, as intelligence, then that movement of thought is creative.
That is, creative thinking ceases when mind is crippled by adjustment through influence, or when it functions with the background of a tradition which it has not understood, or from a fixed point, like an animal tied to a post. So long as this limitation, this adjustment, exists, there cannot be creative thinking, intelligence, which alone is freedom.
This creative movement of thought never seeks a result or comes to a culmination, because result or culmination is always the outcome of alternate cessation and movement, whereas if there is no search for a result, but only continual movement of thought, then that is creative thinking.
Again, creative thinking is free of division, which creates conflict between thought, emotion, and action. And division exists only when there is the search of a goal, when there is adjustment and the complacency of certainty.
Action is this movement which is itself thought and emotion, as I explained. This action is the relationship between the individual and society. It is conduct, work, cooperation, which we call fulfilment. That is, when mind is functioning without seeking a culmination, a goal, and, therefore, thinking creatively, that thinking is action which is the relationship between the individual and society. Now if this movement of thought is clear, simple, direct, spontaneous, profound, then there is no conflict in the individual against society, for action then is the very expression of this living, creative movement.
So to me there is no art of thinking, there is only creative thinking. There is no technique of thinking, but only spontaneous creative functioning of intelligence, which is the harmony of reason, emotion, and action, not divided or divorced from each other.
Now this thinking and feeling, without a search for a reward, a result, is true experiment, isn’t it? In real experiencing, real experimenting, there cannot be the search for result, because this experimenting is the movement of creative thought. To experiment, mind must be continually freeing itself from the environment with which it conflicts in its movement, the environment which we call the past. There can be no creative thinking if mind is hindered by the search for a reward, by the pursuit of a goal.
When the mind and heart are seeking a result or a gain, thereby complacency and stagnation, there must be practice, an overcoming, a discipline, out of which comes conflict. Most people think that by practicing a certain idea they will release creative thinking. Now, practice, if you come to observe it, ponder over it, is nothing but the result of duality. And an action born of this duality must perpetuate that distinction between mind and heart, and such action becomes merely the expression of a calculated, logical, self-protective conclusion.
If there is this practice of self-discipline, or this continual domination or influence by circumstances, then practice is merely an alteration, a change toward an end, it is merely action within the confines of the limited thought which you call self – consciousness. So practice does not bring about creative thinking.
To think creatively is to bring about harmony between mind, emotion and action. That is, if you are convinced of an action, without the search of a reward at the end, then that action, being the result of intelligence, releases all hindrances that have been placed on the mind through the lack of understanding.
Where the mind and heart are held by fear, by lack of understanding, by compulsion, such a mind, though it can think within the confines, within the limitations of that fear, is not really thinking, and its action must ever throw up new barriers. Therefore, its capacity to think is ever being limited. But if the mind frees itself through the understanding of circumstances and, therefore, acts, then that very action is creative thinking. 3
Art As An Escape
Most of us are constantly trying to escape from ourselves; and as art offers a respectable and easy means of doing so, it plays a significant part in the lives of many people. In the desire for self-forgetfulness, some turn to art, others take to drink, while still others follow mysterious and fanciful religious doctrines.
When, consciously or unconsciously, we use something to escape from ourselves, we become addicted to it. To depend on a person, a poem, or what you will, as a means of release from our worries and anxieties, though momentarily enriching, only creates further conflict and contradiction in our lives.
The state of creativeness cannot exist where there is conflict, and the right kind of education should therefore help the individual to face his problems and not glorify the ways of escape; it should help him to understand and eliminate conflict, for only then can this state of creativeness come into being.
Art divorced from life has no great significance. When art is separate from our daily living, when there is a gap between our instinctual life and our efforts on canvas, in marble or in words, then art becomes merely an expression of our superficial desire to escape from the reality of what is. To bridge this gap is very arduous, especially for those who are gifted and technically proficient; but it is only when the gap is bridged that our life becomes integrated and art an integral expression of ourselves.
Mind has the power to create illusion; and without understanding its ways, to seek inspiration is to invite self-deception. Inspiration comes when we are open to it, not when we are courting it. To attempt to gain inspiration through any form of stimulation leads to all kinds of delusions.
A true artist is beyond the vanity of the ego and its ambitions. To have the power of brilliant expression, and yet be caught in worldly ways, makes for a life of contradiction and strife. Praise and adulation, when taken to heart, inflate the ego and destroy receptivity, and the worship of success in any field is obviously detrimental to intelligence.
Any tendency or talent which makes for isolation, any form of self-identification, however stimulating, distorts the expression of sensitivity and brings about insensitivity. Sensitivity is dulled when gift becomes personal, when importance is given to the “me” and the “mine” – I paint, I write, I invent. It is only when we are aware of every movement of our own thought and feeling in our relationship with people, with things and with nature, that the mind is open, pliable, not tethered to self-protective demands and pursuits; and only then is there sensitivity to the ugly and the beautiful, unhindered by the self.
Sensitivity to beauty and to ugliness does not come about through attachment; it comes with love, when there are no self-created conflicts. When we are inwardly poor, we indulge in every form of outward show, in wealth, power and possessions. When our hearts are empty, we collect things. If we can afford it, we surround ourselves with objects that we consider beautiful, and because we attach enormous importance to them, we are responsible for much misery and destruction.
The acquisitive spirit is not the love of beauty; it arises from the desire for security, and to be secure is to be insensitive. The desire to be secure creates fear; it sets going a process of isolation which builds walls of resistance around us, and these walls prevent all sensitivity. However beautiful an object may be, it soon loses its appeal for us; we dull. Beauty is still there, but we are no longer open to it, and it has been absorbed into our monotonous daily existence.
Since our hearts are withered and we have forgotten how to be kindly, how to look at the stars, at the trees, at the reflections on the water, we require the stimulation of pictures and jewels, of books and endless amusements. We are constantly seeking new excitements, new thrills, we crave an ever increasing variety of sensations. Art is this craving and its satisfaction that make the mind and heart weary and dull.
As long as we are seeking sensation, the things that we call beautiful and ugly have but a very superficial significance. There is lasting joy only when we are capable of approaching all things afresh – which is not possible as long as we are bound up in our desires. The craving for sensation and gratification prevents the experiencing of that which is always new. Sensations can be bought, but not the love of beauty.
When we are aware of the emptiness of our own minds and hearts without running away from it into any kind of stimulation or sensation, when we are completely open, highly sensitive, only then can there be creation, only then shall we find creative joy. To cultivate the outer without understanding the inner must inevitably build up those values which lead men to destruction and sorrow.
Learning a technique may provide us with a job, but it will not make us creative; whereas, if there is joy, if there is the creative fire, it will find a way to express itself, one need not study a method of expression. When one really wants to write a poem, one writes it, and if one has the technique, so much the better; but why stress what is but a means of communication if one has nothing to say? When there is love in our hearts, we do not search for a way of putting words together.
Great artists and great writers may be creators, but we are not, we are mere spectators. We read vast numbers of books, listen to magnificent music, look at works of art, but we never directly experience the sublime; our experience is always through a poem, through a picture, through the personality of a saint.
To sing we must have a song in our hearts; but having lost the song, we pursue the singer. Without an intermediary we feel lost; but we must be lost before we can discover anything. Discovery is the beginning of creativeness; and without creativeness, do what we may, there can be no peace or happiness for man.
We think that we shall be able to live happily, creatively, if we learn a method, a technique, a style; but creative happiness comes only when there is inward richness, it can never be attained through any system. Self-improvement, which is another way of assuring the security of the “me” and the “mine,” is not creative, nor is it love of beauty. Creativeness comes into being when there is constant awareness of the ways of the mind, and of the hindrances it has built for itself.
The freedom to create comes with self-knowledge; but self-knowledge is not a gift. One can be creative without having any particular talent. Creativeness is a state of being in which the conflicts and sorrows of the self are absent, a state in which the mind is not caught up in the demands and pursuits of desire.
To be creative is not merely to produce poems, or statues, or children; it is to be in that state in which truth can come into being. Truth comes into being when there is a complete cessation of thought; and thought ceases only when the self is absent, when the mind has ceased to create, that is, when it is no longer caught in its own pursuits. When the mind is utterly still without being forced or trained into quiescence, when it is silent because the self is inactive, then there is creation.
The love of beauty may express itself in a song, in a smile, or in silence; but most of us have no inclination to be silent. We have not the time to observe the birds, the passing clouds, because we are too busy with our pursuits and pleasures. When there is no beauty in our hearts, how can we help the children to be alert and sensitive? We try to be sensitive to beauty while avoiding the ugly; but avoidance of the ugly makes for insensitivity. If we would develop sensitivity in the young, we ourselves must be sensitive to beauty and to ugliness, and must take every opportunity to awaken in them the joy there is in seeing, not only the beauty that man has created, but also the beauty of nature. 4
Creativity and Conditioning
We are the result of society, we are the depositories of society, and we either conform to society or break away. Breaking away from society depends upon our background and conditioning; therefore, our breaking away does not indicate that we are free. It may be merely the reaction of the background to certain incidents.
So, one who is creative merely in the accepted sense of the word may be disruptive without transforming in any fundamental way the respectable, exploiting society. Society is the outcome of our projections and intentions, and therefore we are not separate from society. Since one who goes against society is not necessarily a revolutionary, is it not important to understand what we mean by revolution?
As long as we base revolution on an idea, it is not a revolution. A revolution based on belief, dogma or knowledge is no revolution at all but merely a modified continuation of the old. A reaction of the background against the conditioning influence of society is an escape, not a revolution.
There is a real revolution only when one understands the whole total process of oneself. As long as we accept the pattern of society, as long as we produce the influences which create a society based on violence, intolerance and static progress – as long as that process exists, society will try to control the individual.
As long as you are attempting to be creative within the field of your conditioning, you cannot be creative. There is creativeness only when the mind is completely understood, and then the mind does not depend on mere expression. The expression is of secondary importance.
So, the important thing is to discover what it is to be creative. Creativity can be discovered and understood, the truth of it seen, only when I understand the whole total process of myself. As long as there is a projection of the mind, whether at the verbal or any other level, there cannot be a creative state.
When every movement of thought is understood and comes to an end, then only is there creativeness. 5
Constant Insight Without Conclusion
It is important seeing what the various types of organisations are, both religious, secular, and social structure, how corrupt they inevitably are, and to belong to any of them prevents not only the unburdening of one’s conditioning but also prevents one from seeing things clearly. So it is important to stand completely alone, not belonging to any group, sect, following any guru, or teacher, and being able to stand completely alone so that we can bring about quite a different kind of society.
Most of us are very confused, we don’t know what to do, there are so many demands, pressures, that most of us lean on somebody – we want to be guided, we want to be told what to do. In ourselves we have no clarity and naturally there are those who say that they are very clear, that they are in a state of enlightenment, or freedom, and so on. And being uncertain, confused ourselves we more or less yield to their persuasion, and so become not only more conditioned but accept a new form of conditioning. If we are so conditioned it is inevitable that our mind becomes almost mechanical.
It is only the mind that is really capable of standing alone, in the sense of not belonging to any group, to any party, any community, any set of dogmas, beliefs, conclusions, it is only such a mind that can be creative. I think we have to go into that question of what is creation, what is it to be creative because if that is not clear we are apt to follow those things that make the mind more and more mechanical, more and more dependent, more and more attached.
So what is creation? What is it to be creative? Because if you are not creative inevitably you will be fragmented, accept authority, follow all the absurdities of escapes. So one has to understand very clearly for oneself what it means to be creative in this world. I do not know what that word to you means. It is not, surely, creating some physical thing which is new – new invention, new mode of speech, new painting, new kind of music. We are talking of a mind that is alone and therefore capable of being creative.
Most of us are in conflict, most of us are caught in various kinds of demands, not only physical but environmental, social and so on. We depend on each other both physically and psychologically and therefore our whole nature, psychological structure, is fragmented. Can a mind that is fragmented, contradictory in itself, be creative? Or does creation take place when there is this absence of the continuity of fragmentation?
If we are not creative in the deeper sense of that word, into which we are going, we are bound to escape from the central fact of deep frustration. And the escapes become very important, whether they are religious escapes, political escapes, sexual escapes, or escapes into good works. So the escapes become all important and not the factor of this fragmentation in which a mind is caught. And observing this in oneself, how one is fragmented, contradictory, being pulled by different desires, demands, how is a mind to be free in which alone there can be creation?
First of all do you know what it means to have an insight? Do you know what takes place when you have an insight into something? Say for instance, you have an insight into the whole religious organisation, let’s take that for an example. An insight, see what is implied in it, how corrupt it is, how false it is. Now that insight you can only have when the mind is not conditioned, is not attached to any particular form of belief. Having an insight into the religious structure, then you draw a conclusion from that. When you draw a conclusion you are terminating that insight. You put an end to that insight when you draw a conclusion which you perceive through the insight.
Now look: I must make this very clear so that you understand it. I see very clearly belonging to any political party, which must be nationalistic, run by people who are utterly corrupt, people who are working for themselves in the name of the party, wanting power, position, and all the rest of it, I have an insight into that. Not through book knowledge, not through reading, but actually see it. From that perception I draw a conclusion. I see all politicians, all politics are dreadful. Now when I have drawn a conclusion I have terminated that insight. So I act from the conclusion not from that insight. So my action from a conclusion is mechanical.
And being mechanical then I say, ‘How terrible to live mechanically, I want to escape’. I join a community, I become whatever I do, escaping from the mechanical process of living, which is the result of a conclusion which came when I had an insight into something. You see the sequence of it?
So when I act on a conclusion my action must be continuously mechanical, though at the beginning I may have had an insight into it. Now if one doesn’t draw a conclusion at all but only insight then action is non mechanical. Therefore that action is always creative, it is always new, it is always living. So a mind that has insight and doesn’t draw a conclusion and therefore acts, is in the movement of continuous insight, constant insight.
Now this constant insight without a formula, without a conclusion which puts an end to that insight, is creative action. It is astonishingly beautiful and interesting, how the mind, which is thought, is absent when you have an insight. Thought cannot have an insight. It is only when the mind is not mechanically operating in the structure of thought, then you have an insight. Having an insight, thought draws a conclusion from that insight. And then thought acts and thought is mechanical.
So I have to find out whether the insight into myself, myself being the world and world is me, and I am the world, having an insight into myself, which means into the world, and not drawing a conclusion from it, and if I draw a conclusion I act on an idea, on an image, on a symbol which is the structure of thought, and so I am constantly preventing myself from having insight, preventing from understanding things as they are. So I have to go into this whole question of why thought interferes and draws a conclusion when there is a perception.
I perceive something to be true, I perceive that to control oneself brings about a division in myself. The controller and the controlled and therefore conflict. I have an insight into that, that is the truth, but my whole thinking process is conditioned on the idea that I must control, my education, my religion, the society in which I live, the family structure, everything says to me ‘control’, which is the conclusion which has been handed to me, which is the conclusion which I have also acquired, and I act according to that conclusion, which is mechanical. And therefore I live in constant strife.
Now I have an insight into this whole problem of control. So I have an insight which came into being when the mind was free to observe, unconditioned, but this whole structure of conditioning still remains. So there is now a mind that says, ‘By Jove, I have seen this thing very clearly, but I am also caught in the habit of control’. So there is a battle. The one is mechanical, the other is non-mechanical. Now why does thought cling to the whole structure of control. Because thought has brought about this idea of control.
What does it mean to control? First it implies suppression. Right? Division in oneself, which is one part, one segment of me says, ‘I must control the other segments’. That division is created by thought – no? The division is created by thought. Thought says, ‘I must control myself because otherwise I would not adapt myself to the environment, to what people say and so on and so on, therefore I must control’. So thought being the response of memory, and memory is the past, memory is the experience, the knowledge, which are all mechanical, has such immense power. So there is constant battle between perception, insight and the conditioning.
Now what is the mind to do? This is our problem. You see something new but the old is still there – the old habits, the old ideas, the beliefs, all that is tremendously waiting. Now how is the mind to sustain an insight without a conclusion at all times? Because if I have a conclusion it is mechanical, the conclusion is the result of thought, is the result of memory. Right? From memory there is a reaction as thought. Then it becomes mechanical, then it becomes old.
There is insight, seeing something new, seeing something totally new, clear, beautiful, and there is this past with all the memory, experience, knowledge, and from that the thought that is cautious, watching, afraid, how to bring the new into the old. Now when you see this question, when you see this problem clearly, what takes place? We are the result of the past, though the younger generation may try to break away from the past, and think they are free to create a new world, they are not free from the past. They are re-acting to the past and therefore continuing with the past.
Mind must have knowledge: I must know where I live. It must know the language it speaks. It must exercise thought – thought which is the response of memory, experience, knowledge, which is the past. It must operate otherwise there would be no communication between you and me, I wouldn’t know where I lived and all the rest of it and the absurdities begin, if I am not capable of thinking clearly. So I see knowledge is necessary to function in the mechanical world. Right? Going from here to the place I live is mechanical, speaking a language is mechanical, acting from knowledge is mechanical, acting from all kinds of experience is mechanical.
And that mechanical process to a certain extent must continue. Like my insight. So there is no contradiction between knowledge and the freedom of knowledge when there is an insight. The insight I have now, that knowledge is necessary, and there is also the insight which comes when there is the absence of thought. So there is perception, insight all the time, not a contradiction.
See the difficulty in putting into words what I want to convey. I want to convey to you that a mind that is constantly operating upon a conclusion becomes inevitably mechanical, and being mechanical it must escape into some kind of illusion, some kind of mythology, some kind of religious circus. Right? And you have an insight into that. You say, ‘By Jove, how true that is’. Now if you draw a conclusion from that insight, you have moved to a different place but it is still mechanical. So when you have constant insight without conclusion, that state of mind is creative – not the mind that is in conflict and through conflict produces pictures, books, you understand? Not the mind that is in conflict, it can never be creative. Now if you see that, that is an insight, isn’t it?
You know in literature, in the world of art, and so on, people say, he is a great artist, he is a great creative writer. Right? Now if you look behind the literature, the author, you will see that he is in conflict daily – with his wife, with his family, with society, he is ambitious, he is greedy, wants power, position, prestige. And he has certain talents for writing. Through tensions, through conflict, he may write very good books but he is not creative in the deep sense of the word. And we are trying to see if each one of us can be creative in the deep sense of that word, not in expression, that is, writing a book, poem, or whatever it is, but having insight and never drawing a conclusion from that insight, so that you are moving constantly from insight to insight, action to action. That is spontaneity.
Now such a mind must obviously be alone – alone in the sense of not being isolated. You know the difference between isolation and being alone? I am isolated when I build a wall of resistance round myself. Right? I resist. I resist through any criticism, to any new idea, I am afraid, I want to protect myself, I don’t want to be hurt. And therefore that brings about in my action a self-centred activity which is an isolating process.
And most of us are isolating ourselves. I have been hurt and I don’t want to be hurt. The memory of that hurt remains and therefore I resist. Or I believe in Jesus or Krishna, or whatever it is, and I resist any question of doubt, anything criticising my belief because I have taken security in my belief. That isolates. That isolation may be of thousands of people, millions of people, but it is still isolation. When I say I am a Catholic, I am isolating myself, or a communist or whatever it is, isolating myself. And aloneness is entirely different, it is not the opposite of isolation but having an insight into isolation that insight is aloneness – have you got it?
So, a mind that is free has insight every minute, a mind that is free has no conclusion and therefore non-mechanical. Such a mind is in action, non-mechanical action because it sees the fact, the insight into everything each minute. Therefore it is constantly moving, alive, and therefore such a mind is always young, fresh and incapable of being hurt: whereas the mechanical mind is capable of being hurt.
So thought, upon which all our civilisations are based, becomes mechanical, all our civilisations are mechanical. And therefore corrupt. Therefore to belong to any organisation is to become corrupt, or allow oneself to be corrupted. Right? Now that is an insight, isn’t it? Now can you move from that insight to another insight and keep moving, which is living. 6
Who Is An Artist?
The artist is one who is skilled in action. This action is in life and not outside of life. Therefore it is living skilfully that truly makes an artist. This skill can operate for a few hours in the day when he is playing an instrument, writing poems or painting pictures, or it can operate a bit more if he is skilled in many such fragments – like those great men of the Renaissance who worked in several different media.
But the few hours of music or writing may contradict the rest of his living which is in disorder and confusion. So is such a man an artist at all? The man who plays the violin with artistry and keeps his eye on his fame isn’t interested in the violin, he is only exploiting it to be famous, the “me” is far more important than the music, and so it is with the writer or the painter with an eye on fame. The musician identifies his “me” with what he considers to be beautiful music, and the religious man identifies his “me” with what he considers to be the sublime.
All these are skilled in their particular little fields but the rest of the vast field of life is disregarded. So we have to find out what is skill in action, in living, not only in painting or in writing or in technology, but how one can live the whole of life with skill and beauty.
Are skill and beauty the same? Can a human being – whether he be an artist or not – live the whole of his life with skill and beauty? Living is action and when that action breeds sorrow it ceases to be skilful. So can a man live without sorrow, without friction, without jealousy and greed, without conflict of any kind?
The issue is not who is an artist and who is not an artist but whether a human being, you or another, can live without torture and distortion. Of course it is profane to belittle great music, great sculpture, great poetry or dancing, or to sneer at it; that is to be unskilled in one’s own life.
But the artistry and beauty which is skill in action should operate throughout the day, not just during a few hours of the day. This is the real challenge, not just playing the piano beautifully. You must play it beautifully if you touch it at all, but that is not enough.
It is like cultivating a small corner of a huge field. We are concerned with the whole field and that field is life. What we always do is to neglect the whole field and concentrate on fragments, our own or other people’s. Artistry is to be completely awake and therefore to be skilful in action in the whole of life, and this is beauty. 7
Learning And Creativity
It is important to consider the question of what is learning, and also to understand what is creativity. In the deepest and most profound sense, creativity and learning are closely related. To most of us, creativity means either painting a picture, writing a poem, having children, or enjoying the sunset on the river. But creativity is not the mere expression of a feeling or technique; creativity is something entirely different. It is a state of mind in which all thought has completely ceased, and which may be called reality, God, or what you will. This state of creativity comes into being when we understand what it is we call learning.
Do we learn anything? And what is it that we learn? Deeply, fundamentally, is there anything to know? Is it not important to ponder over this whole question of teaching and learning? Beyond all expression, beyond all verbal statement and explanation, beyond all the restless activity of the mind, is there anything to learn? And what do we mean by learning?
Learning is the accumulation of experience; it is skill in action. One learns a language, a craft, a skill, one learns how to drive a car, how to draw, how to read, build a dynamo or sail a ship. Learning is also the accumulation of knowledge, knowledge of various philosophies, of science, and so on. Is there anything more to learn? Can one learn about oneself? Or is the understanding, the knowledge of oneself only from moment to moment and not from accumulation to accumulation? Must not the mind understand this whole process of accumulating knowledge, with its imitative capacity, and go beyond it?
What do we actually know? What we call knowledge is education imparted at different levels of our existence by society and religion, and with its help, we try to survive. In the process of survival, our lives are nightmares of ambition, corruption, competition and the struggle to be something; there is a constant battle, a conflict going on within ourselves and around us.
Modern existence, based on self-survival, greed, jealousy, violence and war, is an everlasting struggle. That is our life, and we have learned how to survive within that culture of ambition, ruthlessness, belief, quarrels and fragmentary thought; we have learned how to manipulate our way through this chaos and mess. What is it that we have learned?
We have learned various techniques, various forms of expression. We are gathering, and we express what we have gathered. One learns the technique of painting or of building a bridge, and from that learning comes expression. We are constantly accumulating knowledge and information. If we go beyond all that, what is it that we know? Do we know anything? We know the distance between the stars, how to build aeroplanes, how to split the atom, and so on, but apart from that, do we know anything at all? Do we know anything except technique, skills, facts? Must not the mind go beyond all knowledge, all learning?
Now, if without being mesmerised by words we can listen to the description of what lies behind this extraordinary struggle to acquire knowledge, learning, and let that struggle come to an end, then a totally different state will come into being, and we shall find out what is true creativity. We have acquired many forms of technique, we are familiar with the complex machinery of living, of survival, and we may have studied various philosophies and be capable of scholarly disputations with erudite people.
But as long as one merely practices a technique or lives along the lines of any particular philosophy, one is living according to a pattern, and therefore there must be imitation and copying. Is it possible to experience that state in which there is no copying or imitation? To find out if such a thing is possible, we must begin by inquiring what it is that we know. Have you ever considered what it is that you know?
You may be scholars, very clever people who have read, who have studied, and who have suffered in the battle of life, but what is it that you know? Do you actually know anything? You know how to survive, how to do a particular job, you know a certain technique and have acquired the skill which comes with experience. But beyond that, do you know anything at all? Can the mind ask that question and remain with it, without trying to justify itself or answer the question?
The moment you have explanations, the moment you answer that question, you have already entered the field of the known. So, is it not important for the mind to inquire and remain in that state of inquiry, which is not to seek an answer but simply to see if you know anything at all beyond the knowledge which has already been accumulated?
All that we learn and all that we know is accumulation. It is the accumulative memory which acts; therefore it is imitation. Is it possible to find a state of being in which all knowledge has ceased and there is only that state of being? It is very important to find this out because we approach existence not with the unknown but always with the known. We translate experience in terms of the known, in terms of the past, and therefore living becomes a series of reactions based on the known. As the known is mere imitation, our lives become dull and empty.
Is it possible for the mind to live in a state of not knowing? After all, what is it that we know? Everything that we know is based on experience, conformity and fear; we know in order to survive, and with that same mentality we approach the unknown, which is reality, God, or what you will. Can the mind be totally free of the known?
This is an important question to ask oneself because we are always content with the known, and when you scratch the surface of the known there is nothing, there is emptiness, a void. It is very important for the mind to live completely in that void, in that silence, and from that void, that silence, to think, to express, to invite thought and thereby action. That is why we must understand what it means to learn.
Beyond a certain point, we cannot learn anymore because there is nothing to learn, there is no teacher to teach, and we must come to that point, which means being completely free from all sense of becoming something, from all sense of the ‘more’. It is only when the mind is in that state of void in which there is no knowledge, in which there is no longer the experiencer who is learning, who is gathering, who is accumulating – it is only then that there is this creativity which can express itself through various skills and crafts without causing further misery. 8
Knowledge Can Never Be Creative
What is knowledge? It is acquired through thousands of years through experience, stored in the brain as knowledge and memory. And from that memory thought arises. So knowledge is limited always, whether now or in the future. And so thought is always limited. And where there is limitation there is conflict. So what place has creativity with regard to knowledge? Is there a relationship at all?
We have given tremendous importance to knowledge, from the ancient times, from China, India, before the Christian civilisation came into being they were tremendously respectful, worshipped knowledge. And knowledge, as we said before, is always limited because it is based on experience and so memory, thought, is limited.
Thought has created most extraordinary things in the world – all the great monuments, from the ancient of times, great art, vast technology in the present day, and the creation of a nuclear bomb, and so on. Thought has brought about extraordinary state in the world. Thought has created god, built vast cathedrals of Europe, all the things that are filled in the museums – poetry, statue, and all the marvellous things that thought has done. Because thought is the outcome of knowledge, knowledge is science, expressed technologically or otherwise.
So can thought ever be creative, in its most profound sense? What is creation? Must creation be always expressed, manifested? That which is manifested must be limited. We are the result of tremendous years, or centuries of endeavour, conflict, struggle, pain, sorrow – we are the result of all that. Our brains have infinite capacity, but it has been conditioned, not only religiously but also nationally. You are all Americans, Chinese, Russians, and so on.
And so thought has brought about tremendous conflict between human beings – that’s a fact – not only between individuals, but also collectively. We have also suffered through wars, through pestilence, every form of disease. And science has been able to help or cure some of all that. But also science has produced most destructive instruments of war. Before, you killed a man perhaps in a war, two or three hundred people, or more, now you can destroy the whole world. Again based on ideals, ideologies, tribal glorification, which is nationalism.
Taking all that, what we are after 45,000 years as Homo sapiens, what are we, what have we become? And in this confusion – because most human beings are terribly confused, though they may not admit it – uncertain, not only seeking physical security, but also they want inward psychological security in their relationships, with regard to future, and so on.
So taking all this into consideration, our brains are specialised, conditioned by knowledge, and so our activities are conditioned, limited. Wherever there is limitation there must be conflict. When you divide the world into the Americas, the Asiatics, the Europeans, the Jew and the Arab, there must be conflict; not only wars but conflict between individuals, between man and woman. Considering all this, what place has creation?
Knowledge can never be creative. Knowledge can bring about a better physical world, externally, and when we give such extraordinary importance to knowledge, which is the intellect – to us intellect is vital, important, essential, but intellect is also limited. We never look at life holistically, as a whole, not as a scientist, a physician, psychiatrist and so on. We are human beings first. And as human beings what are we, what have we become, after millennia upon millennia? Are we civilised?
I know you are all very affluent society, you have a great many cars, marvellous country, beautiful roads and so on, but we, as human beings, what are we? And it is human beings that are capable of creation, not only as scientists but also in our daily life. Because after all what is important? We have forgotten, or we never had the art of living, not as scientists, as human beings. We are perpetually in conflict. And can conflict, struggle, pain, anxiety, uncertainty, can such a brain be creative? Or creation is something entirely different?
I wonder if one realises whether we are individuals at all. Because our consciousness, which is made up of our reactions, physical, biological reactions, our beliefs, our faith, all the prejudices that we have, multiplication of opinions, the fears, the insecurity, the pain, the pleasure, and all the suffering that human beings have born for thousands of years. All that is our consciousness. Our consciousness is what we are. And in this confusion, in this contradiction, can there be creation?
And we share the consciousness of entire humanity because you suffer, you have pleasures, beliefs, conclusions, opinions, and all the religious dogmas and faiths, which is shared by all human beings on this earth. So one questions whether we are individuals psychologically. You may be different, you may be tall, you may be short, but as human beings with our consciousness, are we different from the rest of mankind? We have never questioned all this.
We trot along all the days of our lives accepting, imitating, conforming. When we rebel, we rebel outwardly: there have been revolutions – Russian, French, and thousands of revolutions have taken place. But inwardly we remain more or less as we have been for thousands of years. So taking all this, not intellectually but as a whole, are we creative?
Or creation is something entirely different. You can invent a new method, discover, explore, break up the atom and so on and so on. It is all the activity of thought – cunning, capable, deceptive, creating illusions, and worshipping those illusions. After all, all religions are based on that. Thought has created god. I am not an atheist, but thought has created wars, murdered in the name of god millions of people, and thought has created all the things in the cathedrals, in the churches, in the temples, in the mosques.
Thought is limited because it is based on knowledge, and knowledge is the result of vast experience. So we are asking a really very fundamental question: whether thought can ever be creative. It can invent, it can produce new weapons of war, the surgery, medicine and so on. And in our relationship with each other, man, woman, what place has thought in that? Is thought love? I know we say not, but if we look at ourselves and our relationship with each other – husband, wife and boy and a girl, and so on – our relationship is based on the image you have built about her and she has built about him. That relationship is based on thought.
So thought has been extraordinarily capable of certain things, and thought has also brought about the destruction of man, of human beings like ourselves, dividing them into ideologies – the Russian ideology, democratic ideology and so on. So thought can never be creative because what it can manifest must be limited.
And where there is limitation there must be conflict – between man and woman, between ideologies, between the Arab and the Jew, between the American and the Russian – this division geographically, nationally, religiously. And conflict can never under any circumstances bring about a creativity of creation.
So if thought is not the ground of creation then what is creation? When does it take place? Baking a bread is also creation of a certain kind, having babies, also creation, and so on, all the way up. But surely creation can only take place when thought is silent. You may totally disagree with this. I hope you do. I am sure you do! Because to us thought is extraordinarily important, which means the intellect, which is only part of a human being.
So I say creativity can never take place where there is the activity of thought.
So, science is the movement of knowledge, gathering more and more and more. The ‘more’ is the measurement, and thought can be measured because thought is a material process. And knowledge has its own insight, its own limited creation, and therefore it brings conflict. But we are talking about holistic perception, in which the ego, the ‘me’, the personality doesn’t enter at all. Then only there is this thing called creativity. 9
Without Love There Is No Art
All we know is action with a cause, a motive, action which is a result. All action is in relationship. If relationship is based on cause it is cunning adaptation, and therefore inevitably leads to another form of dullness.
Love is the only thing that is causeless, that is free; it is beauty, it is skill, it is art. Without love there is no art. When the artist is playing beautifully there is no “me”, there is love and beauty, and this is art. This is skill in action. Skill in action is the absence of the “me”. Art is the absence of the “me”.
But when you neglect the whole field of life and concentrate only on a little part – however much the “me” may then be absent, you are still living unskilfully and therefore you are not an artist of life. The absence of “me” in living is love and beauty, which brings its own skill.
This is the greatest art: living skilfully in the whole field of life. 7
Get access to a FREE cheatsheet for this post which includes:
Concise summary of the most powerful advice and ideas.- 3 creative challenges inspired by the artists’ methodologies.
Next up: J.K. Rowling on Her Writing Process and Routine
References and Related Resources
- The Book Of Life, J. Krishnamurti, 1995
- Beginnings of Learning, J. Krishnamurti, 1975
- J. Krishnamurti, Ojai 11th Public Talk 30th June, 1934
- J. Krishnamurti, Chapter 8 – ‘Art, Beauty and Creation’, Education and the Significance of Life
- J. Krishnamurti in Paris 1950, Talk 3
- J. Krishnamurti, Public Talk 2 Saanen, Switzerland – 18 July 1972
- J. Krishnamurti, ‘Beauty and the Artist’, The Urgency of Change
- J. Krishnamurti in Bombay 1955, Talk 5
- J. Krishnamurti Talking With Scientists at Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA – 20 March 1984