... joyful, not because he came first but because he has left the rest behind. We are teaching violence. Violence has only one meaning: it means nothing other than experiencing happiness in others' misery. One is not free of violence just by drinking germless water or just by not eating food at night. The meaning of violence is just this: being happy in others' misery. And what else do we teach our...

... know no bounds. In becoming a president of a country, leaving behind the rest of the population of that country, one becomes very elated. That is why politics is violence - because it is a race to come first. Religion is just a different direction. Knowledge is just a different direction. Jesus Christ says: Blessed are those who are able to come last.... It is strange. Either Jesus Christ is mad or...

... you, but both cannot win." We are teaching competition. From their very childhood, we add the poison of competition, violence and ambition to the minds of children. And then we assume that these are schools. No, these are anti-schools, centers of anti-learning. These institutions pervert the mind of man and make him insane. Here inferiority is taught, and man then runs through his whole life...

... one's own self continuously. The education that teaches this process becomes liberating. I have told you a few things. I will tell you one more thing and complete my talk. Whatsoever misery, darkness, hatred and violence are born in this world of man are due to understanding false knowledge to be knowledge. If we really want to transform the life of man, a clear distinction between false knowledge and...

... pieces away from the rock - that is the no part. But the yes part is the creation of a beautiful Gautam Buddha, or a Jesus Christ. Every creation needs, as a preparation, some destruction - some destruction of the wild weeds to create a garden of roses. That much no is absolutely essential. But it is in the service of yes. You say, "One of the most beautiful and relaxing spaces I know is the one...

... a transformation, it becomes part of a bigger yes. And a yes that has not any part which is capable of destroying... that yes remains impotent because it cannot create. There is no creation possible without destruction. So remember one thing: destruction should not, in itself, be the goal. Then it is ugly, then it is simply no, then it is only negative. Then it is against life and against...

... existence. Every destruction should be in the service of some creativity. Then it is not negative. Then it is not in the service of death, it is in the service of life. It is life-affirmative. And to transform no into yes is the whole art of the meditative rebel. The ordinary rebel starts enjoying destruction and he forgets completely what he is destroying for; destruction becomes a goal unto itself...

.... Disobedience becomes his ego, his stubbornness, his adamant attitude towards life. I don't want political rebels; I want spiritual rebels whose concern is not with destruction at all. They will not destroy even a small thing unless it is absolutely needed for the new creation, for the new world. Paddy put five dollars into the collection plate at his church. "What," Paddy asked the priest, "...

... new. He may say something against the KORAN, THE BIBLE, the GITA; he is bound to. I cannot agree with Krishna, the GITA that he had spoken five thousand years ago. Five thousand years have not gone just as a waste; man's consciousness has risen, intelligence has become more solid. And what Krishna teaches is violence. If Krishna is right, then the third world war is perfectly okay. I cannot give...

..., everybody agrees - abortion is a sin. Mother Teresa was in the conference, speaking against abortion, and she said, "There is violence in the world because of abortion." I could not believe it. If someone had said, "The violence in the world is because of overpopulation," that would have sounded more true. But this old woman is given a Nobel prize - for what? Everything she does is...

... against humanity. What arguments did she place before the conference? Why does abortion create violence in the world? Because abortion means you are killing a living body, you are making people killers of their own children, that opens the door to violence. The argument looks good, but it only looks good. At what point is the child alive? If abortion creates violence, then at what point is the child...

... cells that that single man can populate the whole world. What to say about a celibate monk? Every single monk is killing millions of people! From where does the violence begin? If anybody is responsible then it is Mother Teresa, the pope, their God. Why does he go on and on producing eggs and living sperms? It is time to stop. Already the world is four times more populated than it should be. If the...

... world population can be reduced to one-fourth there will be no poverty, no violence; thousands of problems will disappear. But Mother Teresa is given a Nobel prize because she helps orphans, opens orphanages around the world. She is creating problems; these orphans will create children. And she is against abortion, because if abortion is legal from where is she going to get the orphans? And what about...

... don't have any other means of passing their time. To go to the movies, money is needed; to go to a disco, money is needed. Sex is the only free entertainment. Absolute birth control is needed. This is the only city where no child has been born in four years. Unless we cut the world population there is no way to avoid violence. People are hungry, people are starving, dying. When somebody is hungry he...

... who have created all kinds of violence on the earth, and are preparing to destroy the whole life on earth. It is absolutely men's responsibility. Women have not been participants in it. But if a woman has a philosophical mind, then no lover can explain. Then the only way is, rather than saying, "I love you," he starts making gestures of love, holding her hand, dancing with her, looking...

... boxing, they can tolerate every other thing, and asked, "Why are they against you?" The reason is clear. The boxing does not make them feel inferior. In fact, the boxing helps them to release their violence. California University has been studying why, after a boxing match, violence increases immediately fourteen percent. They have studied only violence. They should also study other things...

... after boxing -- how many more rapes happen, how many more murders happen, how many more suicides happen -- and you will find they are all increased. The society is so violent, so full of violence that just a football match, and people are ready to kill each other. A boxing match is simply ugly, barbarous. People enjoying two persons hitting each other like animals, breaking their noses, hurting their...

... eyes, bringing blood... and people are clapping and shouting and enjoying. They get in some way identified with one of the fighters. Everybody in the stadium is identified with one wrestler, boxer. His victory is their victory. When he hits the enemy they are hitting the enemy. It is unconscious, but it is a release. Those who have too much violence, when just the identification won't help, they...

... raise the percentage of actual violence after the match is over. For four days the percentage remains higher and then slowly it goes down. The same is true about football matches, about Olympics. They fit perfectly in their violent society. Even war fits perfectly. Nuclear weapons fit perfectly. I am nonviolent and I stand for love, not for war. And I don't see that there is any need... things like...

... boxing should be absolutely prohibited. They are ugly and barbarous. People can go there, thousands go, and millions of people are sitting glued to their chairs before the TV. It is strange that violence is so much appreciated, enjoyed. These people must be all carrying some violence in them, otherwise I don't see it, I cannot enjoy boxing. It is disgusting. The phenomenon of the commune is just the...

... means nothing else but perfect awareness. The second question: Question 2: "PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW IT IS POSSIBLE THAT ONE CAN BE SPIRITUALLY TRANSFORMED BY BEING TOTAL IN ACTIONS THAT ARE OF ANGER, HATRED AND VIOLENCE." Yes, you can be totally transformed through anger, through hatred, through violence. And there is no other way - because you exist in violence, in anger, in greed, in passion...

.... You cannot reach. You will have to pass through that crucifixion yourself. And this is the crucifixion - that anger is there, passion is there, violence is there, greed is there, jealousy is there. What are you doing with them? The society teaches to create the anti pole. Greed is there, so suppress it and create a non-greedy mind. Anger is there, so suppress it. Don't be angry. Push the energy back...

... create any falsity around you. The false will never lead you to the real; the false will lead you to more that is false. Don't do the false, and allow the real total expression. When I say this you may become scared, because violence is there and you may want to kill someone. So do I mean to go and kill? No! Meditate on it. Close your room and allow your violence. You can express it on a pillow, on a...

... picture, on anything. There is no need to go and kill someone, because that is not going to help. That will create more problems and a chain. On the pillow, write the name of your enemy or your friend - and remember, we are more angry at our friends than at our enemies. Just put a picture of your wife or husband on a pillow, and bring your violence out. Beat the pillow, kill the pillow, and do...

... the first time what anger, what violence is hidden within you. You are a volcano, and this can erupt from you at any moment. In any situation, the volcano may erupt. It is erupting every day. Someone kills someone, and just a day before he was as normal as you. No one ever suspected that he was going to be a murderer. No one suspects about you, and you have so many thoughts in your mind to murder...

... what is possible much more than the older generation. This generation is alive to the fact that much is possible. But nothing is happening and nothing is becoming actual, so there is more frustration. If you cannot be creative, at least you can be destructive; you feel your power in being destructive. Anger, violence, are destructive forces. They are there because creativity is not there. Don't go...

... will be released. So do anything meditatively and totally, even anger, even violence, even sex. It is easy to conceive of how to be angry alone, but you can also create a sexual orgy alone meditatively. And you will have a different quality after that. While all alone, just close your room and move as if in the sex act. Allow your whole body to move. Jump and scream; do whatsoever you feel like doing...

..., PLEASURE AND PAIN, NO SIN WILL ATTACH TO YOU, AND YOU WILL GO TO HEAVEN." DOES IT MEAN THAT IF ONE FIGHTS WITHOUT ATTACHMENT THEN VIOLENCE CEASES TO BE VIOLENCE? A few things need to be understood in the context of this question. The first thing Krishna says is that violence; is a lie which does not exist; violence is an illusion, it is not real. Nobody can be killed really. Krishna says, "Na...

... hanyate hanyamane sharire: nobody is killed when his body is killed." And so far as the body is concerned, it is already dead; so it is wrong to say that the body dies. In the first place Krishna says that violence is impossible, it is a misnomer. But it does not mean that one should freely indulge in violence. While violence itself is not real, violent mind is real. It is true, you can desire to...

... kill someone, although he cannot be killed. This is a different thing - that one cannot be killed - but if you desire to kill him then this desire is real, and this desire is sinful. Violence is not a sin, but the will to violence, a violent mind is certainly a sin. If you want to kill someone, it is enough of a sin. It is a different thing that you cannot kill, but your desire to kill is in itself...

... others is sinful, and the desire to help others is virtuous. But Krishna soars still higher; he says one can transcend both violence and non-violence, vice and virtue, pleasure and pain, and then there is nothing - neither violence nor non-violence, neither vice nor virtue. They all are illusory. If one goes beyond the dialectics of violence and non-violence, pain and pleasure, if he knows for himself...

... Jainism the Jaina monk is not supposed to use shoes, for the simple reason that in ancient days shoes were made only of leather, and leather comes from animals; animals are killed. It is a symbol of violence, and Mahavira wanted his followers not to be in any way - directly or indirectly - involved in violence. He prevented everybody from wearing shoes. He was not aware that one day shoes of rubber...

... would be available, which involves no violence. Shoes of synthetic leather would be available, which involves no violence. Shoes of cloth would be available, which involves no violence. He was not aware. So it indicates two things. The claim of the Jainas that Mahavira is omniscient is nonsense; he knew nothing of synthetic leather - he cannot be omniscient. Secondly, now twenty-five centuries have...

... in those days again a vehicle meant horse-driven, bullock-driven - and that was violence. And I can understand that it is violence. Who are you to force poor animals to pull your vehicles and to pull you? But Mahavira was not aware that there would be cars which would not be pulled by horses but would have horsepower without horses, that there would be trains, electrical vehicles. He was not aware...

... of that, that there would be airplanes with the least possibility of violence. Even walking you will do more violence because it is not only when you kill an elephant that it is violence. According to Jainism the soul has the same status in the ant, the smallest ant, and the biggest elephant. Only the bodies are different - the souls are the same. So when you are walking on the road you may be...

... Mohammedans, there would have been no violence at all, because there was no violence in 1930, no riots; Hindus and Mohammedans were not killing each other. This whole thing came into being between 1930 and 1947 because Jinnah and Gandhi went on fighting more and more, and the fight started spreading to the masses. Jinnah started provoking Mohammedans against Hindus, and the British government went on...

... supporting Jinnah in every possible way so that he remained strong, even though he was just a minority. In seventeen years everything changed. So much violence happened - and this whole violence happened because of this messiah of non-violence, Mahatma Gandhi. It would have been so simple to give Mohammedans the parts of the country where they were in the majority. They were not asking anything irrational...

.... They don't want to live with you - who are you to force them to live with you? Their religion is different, their language is different, their culture is different. In every possible way they are a separate entity, they have their own individuality. Allow them. And if in 1930 it had been allowed, there would have been no violence; Pakistan and India would have remained friendly. It is because of...

... Mahatma Gandhi that it was not possible to separate in a friendly way. The violence became necessary. India was partitioned. It was absolutely clear to anybody who had eyes that you could not stop it. Gandhi had said, "I will allow India to be divided only over my corpse" - but even that could not prevent it. India was divided, and he forgot completely that it was being divided without his...

... corpse. Politicians don't have good memories. They cannot afford good memories. They have to go on forgetting their own promises. And after the partition there was even more violence, because once both the countries were separate, with their own armies, and the British government was gone ... there was more violence because Mohammedans were moving to Pakistan. It must have been the greatest movement...

... cannot budge an inch. They would rather die completely than surrender to an idea which is not their idea. Their politicians are continuously provoking them; every day there is violence. And just a few days ago they killed the high priest, their own high priest, because the high priest was a liberal type of man; he wanted some kind of negotiation. But what negotiation can there be? Either Punjab remains...

... to me only the whole is holy; everything else is profane. Question 1: Maneesha has asked: BELOVED MASTER, YOU SPOKE THE OTHER NIGHT OF AMERICA - OF ITS BEING BLOODTHIRSTY AND DESTRUCTIVE. WHAT IS THE APPEAL OF DESTRUCTION OVER CREATION? Maneesha, the appeal of destruction over creation is very simple. Destruction needs no intelligence, destruction needs no discipline, destruction needs no education...

..., destruction needs no meditation, no love. Creation needs intelligence. It needs meditativeness, it needs love - love in its purity. It needs the perceptivity of beauty, it needs the joy of creating something - maybe just a rose bush or a painting, or a small poem, but creation needs your total being to be involved in it. It needs your whole consciousness to be dissolved in it. Destruction does not require...

... anything of you. Even animals can destroy, even insane people can destroy, even retarded people can destroy. That is the appeal of destruction over creation. But it is ugly. When you are destroying something, you are also destroying yourself, remember. And when you are creating something - a song, a dance - you are also creating yourself. You are discovering new dimensions of your being. The more you...

..., nor defeat is possible. What is possible is only a mutual conflict leading to the birth of an individual utterly depleted of strength, and finally to death. Since, in this manner all the faculties of the individual conspire together to bring about self-destruction, life becomes ugly, uninspiring, and futile. Beauty, Truth and blessedness are attainable only if life were to be engaged in the creative...

... celibate? This brahmacharya is not hostile to the power of lust; verily it is its sublimation. similarly the power that manifests itself in fury becomes peace, calmness and quiescence. It is only a question of transformation. In our life the process of creation possesses greater importance than the process of destruction. If this fact is clearly understood, the question of a struggle with, or a hostility...

... in the world, and there still are, many men of warped, distorted vision whose high-handedness, violence, unrelenting suppression and cruel tactics towards their own physical body provoke in our mind feelings of remorse and sorrow and eventually a fervent prayer, "Oh God! save mankind from such stupid spirituality!" Activities of this magnitude and seriousness go only to prove a total loss...

... reels along behind the will. We will be committing a great blunder if, instead of modifying the will, we were to torture the body, victimize it or even destroy it. Subjecting the body to harassment and suffering is another form of violence, and I never approve of violence to the self or to the physical body. I advocate self-love, and it appears to me that there cannot be anything more foolish than...

... self-violence. But what I call self-love has nothing to do with ego-centred individuality. An ego-centred individual never loves himself, for should he love himself he would have been free from egotism, for there is nothing more diabolical and dispiriting than egotism. It is the ego-centred-individual who indulges in activities of self- violence in the garb of a holy man, for the ego does not attain...

... the receptacle of limitless potentialities. Those who are hostile to it clash with these potentialities and seek annihilation at their own hands. They say that they censure and oppose the mind for its fickleness and unsteadiness. But inconstancy is a sign of life. Those who are afraid of life and eagerly wait for death, welcome sluggishness, since they see peace and restfulness in it. But let me...