Krishnamurti Subtitles home


BR80Q1 - 問與答(一)
問與答(一)
英國布洛克伍德公園
1980 年 9 月2 日



0:18 We have been looking over all the questions that have been handed in. There are perhaps a hundred or more, or less, and I am afraid we cannot answer all those questions. We could if we all stayed here for a couple of months but I don’t think that would be possible. 你們交過來的所有問題 我們都看過了 或許有一百多個左右 我恐怕無法一一回答 如果在這裡坐一兩個月或許可以 但我不認為有此可能
0:58 When one asks a question, in that is implied that someone is going to answer the question. The meaning of that word ‘question’ means to seek. So together we are going to seek the answer, not that the speaker is going to answer the question but together we are going to seek, find, discover the right answer. So please, this is not a Delphic Oracle. Together we are going to find out the meaning and the significance, not only of the question but also together seek the answer. 當我們提出問題時 其中暗示了 有人會回答這個問題 Question 這個字含有尋找的意思 因此我們要一起尋找答案 不是由說者回答問題 而是我們一起尋找 與發現正確的答案 請記住,這不是古希臘的戴爾菲神諭 我們要一起尋找 不只是問題 的意思與意義 也要一起尋找答案
2:10 A lot of questions have been asked which could be answered if one thought it over carefully for oneself, and other questions with regard to yoga – should one do it, should one not do it, why are you vegetarian, why don’t you grow your hair longer. So out of all those questions that have been handed in, the speaker has carefully chosen what seems to be representative of all the questions. So I hope you will not mind if your particular question is not answered. Perhaps it will be answered when we go through all the questions that we have typed out. Is that all right? 你們問的許多問題如果仔細思考 都可以得到解答 有些問題與瑜伽有關 瑜伽可不可以練? 為什麼要吃素? 為什麼不能留長髮? 你們問的所有問題 說者仔細地挑選了 一些似乎有代表性的問題 希望你們不要介意 如果沒有回答你的問題 或許答覆這些打字出來的問題 你就會有答案了這樣可以嗎?
3:23 1st Question: You have spoken so much against organisations, so why do you have schools and foundations? And why do you speak? 問題一:你談了很多反組織的言論 那你為什麼要成立學校和基金會? 還有…你為什麼要演說?
3:46 Need I answer this question? Yes? I think a group of us saw the necessity of having a school. The meaning of that word ‘school’ means leisure, leisure in which to learn; and a place where students and the teachers can flower, and a place where a future generation can be prepared, because schools are meant for that, not just merely to turn out human beings as mechanical, technological instruments, merely jobs and careers and so on, which is necessary, but also flower as human beings, without fear, without confusion, with great integrity. And to bring about such a good human being – I am using the word ‘good’ in its proper sense, not in the respectable sense, good in the sense of a whole human being, not fragmented, not broken up, not confused. And it is very difficult to find teachers who are also inclined that way. And as one is aware the teachers are the lowest paid, without the least respect from society and so on. So we are trying both in India where there are nearly six schools, in California and in Canada and one here, to see that they are really centres of understanding, of comprehension of life, not books only, and we thought such a place is necessary and that is why we have these schools. They may not always succeed but perhaps one or two, after ten years, might come out of it as total human beings. 我需要回答這個問題嗎?要 需要嗎? 我認為…我們之中有一群人 看到了成立學校的必要性 School 這個字含有閒暇的意思 用來學習的閒暇時間 一個讓學生和老師可以綻放潛能的地方 也是一個培育後代的地方 因為這就是學校的用意 並不只是製造一批 像機械或科技工具的人類 只為了未來的工作和生涯等這當然有必要 但也要像人類一樣綻放 沒有恐懼、沒有困惑 具有崇高的人格 培養一些良善的人類 我指良善這個詞的正確意義 不是當做一個敬語 指整個人類的善 沒有分化、破裂和困惑的人類 也具有這種傾向的老師 是很難尋找的 我們都知道 老師的待遇是最微薄的 也最不受社會的尊敬等 因此我們在印度試辦了六所學校 加州和加拿大也各成立一所 讓它們成為了解的中心 對生活的理解不只是書本的理解 我們認為這種地方是必要的 這是我們成立學校的原因 也許不一定會成功 但也許十年後會有一兩所學校 會以全人類的形式發展出來
6:48 And the Foundations in America, in India, here and other places, Canada, exist not as centres of enlightenment and all that business, but merely to publish books, to organise these gatherings, to help the schools and so on. And nobody is making any profit out of it. 至於加州、印度的基金會 這裡和其他地方,包括加拿大 不是以開悟中心的名義存在 只是為了出版書籍和舉辦演說 幫助學校的發展等 沒有人會在其中牟利,對嗎?
7:25 And why do I speak? This has been often asked. ‘Why do you waste your energy after sixty years and nobody seems to change. Why do you bother about it?’ Is it a form of self-fulfilment? You understand my question? Is it a form of whether you get energy talking about things, so you depend on the audience? We have been through all that several times. 至於我為什麼演說? 經常有人問我 你白費了六十年的精力 似乎沒有人改變 你為何要多此一舉? 這是你自我實現的方式嗎? 了解我的問題嗎? 是因為你想獲得講話的能量 所以就依賴聽眾嗎? 我們解釋過幾次了
8:05 First of all, I don’t depend on you as a group who come to listen to the speaker. The speaker has been silent, so you can rest assured that the speaker is not exploiting you, is not attached to a particular group or necessary for him to have a gathering. But then why do you speak, what is your motive? There is no motive. I think when one sees something beautiful, true, one wants to tell people about it, out of affection, out of compassion, out of love. And if those who are not interested in it, it’s all right, those who are interested perhaps can gather together. And also can you ask the flower why it grows? Why it has perfume? And it is for the same reason the speaker talks. 首先,我並不依賴你們 當做一群來聽說者講話的人 我,說者一直保持沉默 所以你們可以放心 說者並沒有剝削你們 也不依附一個特別的團體 也沒必要非有聚會不可 那麼你為什麼要演說? 你的動機是什麼?對嗎? 沒有動機 我認為當一個人看到美的…真實的事物 他會想告訴別人 出於關懷、慈悲和愛 如果有人沒興趣聽也無所謂 有興趣的人或許…可以聚會一堂 同樣地,你會問一朵花為什麼成長嗎? 為什麼散發芳香? 說者也是為了同樣的理由演說
9:57 2nd Question: Is it always wrong or misguided to work with an enlightened man and be a sannyasi? 問題二:跟開悟者一起修行 做一個出家僧是錯誤或誤入歧途嗎?
10:12 Is it always wrong or misguided to work with an enlightened man and be a sannyasi? 跟開悟者一起修行 做一個出家僧是錯誤或誤入歧途嗎?
10:27 ‘Sannyasi’ is a Sanskrit word. It is a very old tradition in India where the monks who take this vow, they really renounce the world outwardly. They only stay one night in each place, they beg, they are celibate, they have nothing except they have one or two cloths. The modern sannyasi is none of those. You understand what I am saying? He has been called a sannyasi by somebody in India and they think it is marvellous. Put on a robe, yellow robe or pink robe or whatever the robe you put on and beads and they think they are sannyasis. They are not. It is misguided, and not ethical to call them sannyasis. Sannyasi( 出家僧)是一個梵文字 是非常古老的印度傳統 宣誓出家的僧侶 是真正棄俗的人,外在的世界 他們在一個地方只住一宿 他們乞討,過獨身生活 一無所有 除了一兩件衣服以外,了解嗎? 現代的出家僧完全不是如此 明白我說什麼嗎? 印度某些人會稱他是出家僧 他們認為這個稱呼很棒 穿黃色或粉紅色的袍子 或別的袍子,掛一串珠鍊 就自以為是出家僧 不是,他們不是 稱他們是出家僧 是一種誤導,而且不道德
11:59 Is it always wrong and misguided to work with an enlightened man? How do you know who is enlightened? How do you know? Would you kindly answer. How do you know? By his looks? Because people call him enlightened? Or he himself calls himself that he is enlightened? If he calls himself enlightened then you may be assured that he is not enlightened. There are a great many gurus who are doing this, playing this game, calling themselves lords, giving themselves titles, and doing a lot of mischief. And before you find out who is enlightened why don’t you find out what is enlightenment? You understand my question? 跟開悟者一起修行是錯誤或誤入歧途嗎? 你怎麼知道誰開悟了沒有? 你怎麼知道? 請回答,你怎麼知道? 憑他的外表嗎? 因為別人說他開悟了嗎? 或者他自稱已經開悟了? 如果他自稱開悟了那你就可以確定 他沒有開悟 有很多上師 都在這麼做,玩這種遊戲 以尊者自稱,封自己一些頭銜 玩一堆雜耍 在你找出誰有開悟以前 何不先了解開悟是什麼? 了解我的問題嗎?
13:11 I may consider you as enlightened. What is my criterion which makes me judge that you are enlightened? Is it because of some tricks, a great many people come round me, put garlands round me? Or enlightenment is something that cannot possibly be talked about? The man who says, ‘I know’, does not know. Please be serious about this because lots of people are doing this in India, mostly Americans and Europeans, who gather there and do all the circus. So shouldn’t we doubt, question these people? And if you question them will they answer you? Or they have put themselves up on a platform, on a level which forbids you to question them. 我也許認為你開悟了 我用什麼標準判斷你開悟了? 是因為一些把戲嗎? 有一大群人包圍我 把花圈掛在我身上嗎? 或者…開悟是一種無法言傳的東西? 一個說我知道的人並不知道對嗎? 請你們認真以待 因為印度有很多人在幹這種事 多數都是美國人和歐洲人 他們在那裡聚集,玩那些馬戲 因此…我們不該懷疑 質問那些人嗎? 如果你質問他們他們會回答你嗎? 或者他們把自己擺在法座上 在一個禁止你提問的高度
14:52 So, to work with an enlightened human being is totally unimportant. What is important is to work upon oneself, not with somebody. Right? We are seeking this together. Please, I am not advising, counselling, etc., but together to find out what is the truth about all these matters. Because truth is something that has no path. There is no way to it, nobody can point it out to you, it is not something fixed and you can go towards it by a system, by a meditation, by a method and so on. A living thing has no path to it, and if one is seriously inclined to find out what is truth one has to lay the foundation first, to have a great sensitivity, to be without fear completely, to have great integrity. 因此跟一個開悟的人修行根本不重要 重要的是對自己下工夫 不是跟別人 對嗎?我們是在一起尋找答案 我沒有忠告你沒有提供意見給你等等 而是一起找出這些事情的真相 因為真理是無路可尋的,對嗎? 沒有道路可以通達 沒有人能指示給你 它不是一個固定不變的東西 你無法透過制度 冥想或方法等達到它 一個活的東西沒有道路可尋 如果你認真地想找出真理是什麼 你必須先奠定基礎 要具備極高的敏銳度 完全沒有恐懼 具備完整的人格
16:49 And to be free from all knowledge, psychological knowledge, and therefore the ending of suffering. From that arises love and compassion. If that is not there as the well-laid deep foundation, one is merely caught in illusions – illusions that man has fabricated, thought has invented, visions that are the projection of one’s own conditioning. So all that has to be put aside to find that which is beyond time. 並擺脫所有的知識 心理知識 因而終結了受苦 愛和慈悲便從其中生起 如果沒有這些東西 做為深厚、堅固的基礎 你只會陷在幻覺裡 由人編造出來的幻覺與發明出來的思想 由個人的制約投射出來的願景 這些都要擺在一邊 才能找到那個超越時間的東西
17:57 3rd Question: You say that fundamentally my mind works in exactly the same way as everyone else. Why does this make me responsible for the whole world? 問題三:你說基本上 我的心智運作方式和其他人完全一樣 那我為何要對全世界負責?
18:12 You say that fundamentally my mind works in exactly the same way as everyone else. Why does this make me feel responsible for the whole world? 你說根本上 我的心智運作方式和其他人完全一樣 那我為何要對全世界負責?
18:26 I am afraid I did not say that. I said, the speaker said, that wherever you go throughout the world human beings suffer, they are in conflict, they are in anxiety, uncertainty. Both psychologically and physically there is very little security. There is fear, there is loneliness, despair, depression. This is the common lot of all human beings whether they live in China, or Japan, India or here, in America or Russia, everybody goes through this. It is their life. And as a human being you are the whole world psychologically. You are not separate from the man who is suffering, anxious, lonely in India, or in America. So you are the world and the world is you. This is a fact which very few people realise, not an intellectual fact, a philosophical concept, an ideal, something to be longed for, but it is a fact as you have a headache. And when one realises that profoundly inside, not intellectually, verbally, or ideologically, then the question arises – what is my responsibility? We are asking each other this question, please. When you realise that not verbally but in your blood, that you are no longer an individual, which is a great shock for most people, they don’t accept that. We think our minds, our problems, our anxieties are ours, mine, not yours. 我恐怕沒說過這句話 我說…說者說 無論你走到世界的任何地方 人類都在受苦 活在衝突裡 活在焦慮和不確定裡 心理和生理上只有很少的安全感 有恐懼、有孤獨 絕望、沮喪 這是全人類共同的命運 無論住在中國、日本、印度這裡、美國或俄國 每一個人都要經歷這些 這是他們的生活 身為一個人類你在心理上就是全世界 你並不是孤立的 你與印度或美國那個受苦、焦慮 和孤獨的人沒有分離 你是世界,世界就是你 這是很少人能體會的事實 不是知性的事實或哲學概念 或一個可以渴求的理想 而是一個像頭疼一樣的事實 當一個人的內在深處體會到 不是知性的、言說的或意識型態的體會 接著…問題就會生起我的責任是什麼? 我們在問彼此這個問題 當你有了體會不是言說的,而是在血液裡 體會你不再是一個個體 對多數人來說,這是一大震撼 他們不接受這一點 我們以為我們的心智問題和焦慮 是我的,不是你的
21:22 And if one sees the truth of this matter, then what is our responsibility? Not only one has a family, wife and children, one has to be responsible for those naturally, but what is your responsibility globally? You understand my question? For the whole of mankind, because you are the mankind, you have your illusions, your images of God, your images of heaven and so on. You have your rituals, the whole business, exactly like the rest of the world, only in different names, they don’t call themselves Christians, they call themselves Muslims, or Hindus, or Buddhists, but the pattern is the same. 如果你看清這件事的真相 那麼我們的責任是什麼? 不只因為你有家庭、有妻小 你自然要對他們負責任 但你對世界的責任是什麼? 了解我的問題嗎? 對整個人類 因為你就是人類 你有自己的幻覺對上帝的意象 你對天堂等的意象 有自己的儀式,諸如此類的 完全和其他人一樣只有名字不同而已 他們不以基督徒自稱而是自稱為回教徒 印度教徒或佛教徒 但模式是一樣的,對嗎?
22:34 So when you realise that, what is our responsibility? That is, how do you respond to the challenge? You understand my question? How do you answer? What is your reaction when you feel that you are humanity? This is a challenge – you understand? How do you meet a challenge? If you meet it from your old individual conditioning, your response will naturally be totally inadequate. It will be fragmentary, it will be rather shoddy. So, one has to find out what is our response to this great challenge? Does your mind meet it greatly or with your fears, with your anxieties; the little concern about yourself? 當我們明白了這一點我們的責任是什麼? 也就是說,你如何回應挑戰? 明白我的問題嗎?你要如何回答? 你的反應是什麼 當你感覺自己是人類的時候? 這是一個挑戰,明白嗎? 你如何面對挑戰? 如果你從老舊的個人制約面對 你的回應自然是不充分的對嗎? 那會是支離破碎的相當粗劣的回應 因此…我們必須找出來 我們對這個大挑戰的回應是什麼? 你的心智會大膽地面對它或… 帶著你的恐懼和焦慮面對明白嗎? 帶著一點對自己的關心
24:11 So the responsibility depends, if I may point out, upon the response to the challenge. If one says this is your responsibility, join – not the League of Nations but some other nation, form a group, do this and do that, that is not an adequate challenge. How do you respond to this challenge psychologically, inwardly? Is it just a flutter, a romantic appeal? Or something profound that will transform your whole way of looking at life? Then you are no longer British, American, French – you follow? Will you give up all that? Or merely play with the idea that it is a marvellous Utopian concept? 這個責任決定於…容我指出來 你對挑戰的回應 如果有人說這是你的責任 加入…不是國聯而是其他的聯盟 成立一個團體,做這個或那個 這不是充份的挑戰 你內在的心理上如何回應這個挑戰? 這只是一個花俏或吸引人的浪漫事情嗎? 或是一種深沉的 會轉化整個生命觀的東西? 這時你就不再是英國人、美國人或法國人了,明白嗎? 你會放棄這一切嗎? 或只是玩弄美好的烏托邦概念?
25:39 So the responsibility to this challenge depends on you, whether your mind is capable of meeting this enormous human wholeness, this human current. 對這個挑戰的責任決定於你 決定於你的心智是否有能力 面對這個浩大的人類…整體性 這個人類的洋流
26:25 4th Question: When I listen to you there is an urgency to change. When I return home it fades. What am I to do? 問題四:聽你講話時我會有想改變的急迫性 回家以後就消退了我該怎麼做?
26:39 When I listen to you there is an urgency to change. When I return home it fades. What am I to do? 聽你講話時我會有想改變的急迫性 回家以後就消退了我該怎麼做?
26:55 What are you to do? Is the urgency to change influenced or pointed out by the speaker and therefore while you are here you are driven into a corner, and when you leave naturally you are no longer in the corner. That means you are being influenced, challenged, driven, persuaded, and when all that is gone you are where you were. Right? 你該怎麼做? 想改變的急迫性 是說者影響的…或指出來的 因此你在這裡被逼到角落 當你離開以後自然就不在角落裡了 這意味著你被影響 挑戰、驅使和說服了 當這些消失以後你又回到了原點,對嗎?
27:57 Now, what is one to do? Please, let’s think it out, let’s seek it out, the right answer to this. What is one to do? I come to this gathering from a distant place. It is a lovely day. I put up a tent, and I am really interested. I have read not only what the speaker has said and written, but I have read a great deal. I have followed the Christian concepts, the Buddhist investigation, the Hindu mythology, I have also done different forms of meditation, the TM, the Tibetan, the Hindu, the Buddhist, the Zen. And I am dissatisfied with all those. And I come here and I listen. And am I prepared to listen completely? I cannot listen completely if I bring all my knowledge here. I cannot listen or learn, or comprehend completely if I belong to some sect, if I am attached to one particular concept and I want to add what has been said here to that also. I must come, if I am serious, with a free mind, with a mind that says let’s find out for god’s sake. Not I want to add what you are saying to what I already know. You are following all this? 那麼你該怎麼做? 請跟我一起思考,一起找出來 正確的答案,你該怎麼做? 我從遠方來參加這個聚會 今天的天氣美好 我搭了一個帳篷而且我真的有興趣 我不只聽過、讀過說者的言論和著作 也讀了很多書 我追隨基督教的概念 佛教的參究 與印度教的神話 我也練過不同形式的靜坐 超覺靜坐、西藏的、印度教的佛教的、禪宗的 我對這些都不滿足 我來這裡…聆聽 我準備全心全意地聆聽 如果我帶著所有的知識來我就無法全然地聆聽 我也無法完全聆聽、學習或理解 如果我屬於某一個宗派 如果我…依附某一個特別的概念 還想把這裡說的東西添加進去 如果我認真的話我必須帶一個自由的心靈來 一個說,看上帝份上讓我們找出答案的心靈 並不是把你說的話添加在我已知的東西裡 你們明白嗎?
30:49 So what is one’s attitude about all this? The speaker has been saying constantly: freedom is absolutely necessary. Psychological freedom first, not physical freedom – that you have in these countries except in the totalitarian countries. So without inward freedom, which can only come about when one understands one’s conditioning, the conditioning which is both cultural, religious, economic, social, physical, and can one be free of that? Free primarily of the psychological condition? One fact which is that you are no longer an individual. The very word ‘individual’ means undivided, not broken up, and we are. Therefore we are not individuals. So will you move away from that conditioning? Me first everybody else second! 那麼你對這件事的態度是什麼? 說者三番兩次地說 自由是絕對必要的 首要的是心理的自由不是身體的自由 你在這個國家的自由 除了極權國家以外 沒有內在的自由 只有當人了解 自己的制約時才會有內在的自由 包括文化的、宗教的、經濟的 社會的、物質的制約 人可能擺脫這些嗎? 主要的是擺脫心理制約的自由 事實是,你已經不是一個個體了 Individual 這個字含有不分裂的意思 沒有支離破碎,但我們是 因此我們不是個體 你會離開那個制約嗎? 我第一,其他人都是老二
32:54 So, what is difficult in all this is that we cling to something so deeply that we are unwilling to let go. One has studied various things and one is attracted to a particular thing – particular psychological something or other. And one goes into it, studies it and finds out that by Jove there is a great deal in it and sticks to it. And then comes here and listens and adds what he has heard to that. Then he becomes a melange, a mixture of everything. Aren’t we doing that? So our minds become very confused. And for the time being when you are in the tent that confusion is somewhat pushed away or less, and when you leave it is back there again. 這一切的困難在於… 我們都深深地執著於某個東西 以至於不願意放下 我們研究過各種事物 也被某一個特別的事物吸引 某一個特別的心理…諸如此類的事物 當你深入研究以後你發現,天啊 裡面有很豐富的內容你就黏住不放 接著來這裡 聽完以後,再把你聽到的添加到那裡面 接著你就變成一個無所不有的大雜燴,對嗎? 我們不是在這麼做嗎? 我們的心靈變得非常困惑 由於你目前在帳篷裡 那個困惑多少…被推開或…減少了 等你離開以後又回來了
34:23 So can one be aware of this confusion, not only while you are here but when you are at home, which is much more important than being clear here. Nobody cares if you are or you are not. But when you go back home to face all that business, going to the office every day for the rest of your life – you understand what it all means? Day after day, coming home, children, the worry – all that goes on. 我們能覺察這種困惑嗎? 不只是在這裡 也包括在家裡的時候 比你在這裡弄清楚重要得多 這裡沒人在乎你清不清楚 但當你回到家面對一大堆的事情時 每天要上班 就這樣過往後的一生 了解這一切的意義嗎? 日復一日、日復一日 回到家,孩子、煩惱諸如此類的事情
35:25 So what does it all indicate? We have the intelligence to solve technological problems. The problem-solving mind. We all have it. And that is not intelligence. The capacity to think clearly, objectively, and know the limitation of thinking. To know, to be aware of the limitation of thinking is the beginning of intelligence. I wonder if you follow all this. We worship thinking. The more cleverly we can think, the greater we seem to be. All the philosophers who spin a lot of theories. But whereas if we could observe our own confusion, our own individual narrow way of looking at life, at home, not here, to be aware of all that, and to see how thought is perpetually creating problems. Thought creates the image and that image divides. To see that is intelligence. To see danger is intelligence. To see psychological dangers is intelligence. But apparently we don’t see those things. That means somebody has to goad you all the time, persuade you, push you, drive you, ask you, beg you, do something or other all the time to make one aware of oneself. And move from there, not just stay there. And I am afraid nobody is going to do that, even the most enlightened human being. Then you become his slave – you understand? 這一切表示什麼? 我們有解決科技問題的智力 一個解決問題的心智 我們都有 那不是智力 清晰、客觀思考的能力 也知道思考的侷限 知道並覺察思考的限制 才是智力的開始 不知你們聽懂沒有 我們崇拜思考 思考得越清晰 似乎就越了不起 那些賣弄許多理論的哲學家 如果我們能觀察自己的困惑 我們個別的、狹隘的生命觀 在家裡,不是這裡 覺察這一切 看見思想如何持續不斷地製造問題 思想創造形象那個形象就會分化 看見這一點就是智力 看見危險就是智力 看見心理的危險就是智力 但顯然我們沒有看到這些 這意味著必須有個人從頭到尾鞭策你 說服你、推動你、驅使你請求你、乞求你 始終要你做些什麼 讓你覺察自己 要你從那裡往前走不只是停留在那裡 我恐怕沒有人會這麼做 即使是一個最開悟的人 那你就變成他的奴僕了明白嗎?
38:47 So if one has the vitality, physical vitality, the psychological energy which is now being dissipated in conflict, in worrying, chattering, in endless gossip not only with others but with oneself. This endless chattering. All that dissipates energy, the psychological energy. And that energy is needed to observe. To observe ourselves in the mirror of relationship, and we are all related to somebody or other, and to observe there and discover the illusions, the images, the absurdities, the idiocies, then out of that freedom comes intelligence which will show the way of our life. Right? Are we moving together? 如果人有活力 身體上的活力 已經被分散的心理能量 分散在憂慮、閒聊和永無止境的嘮叨裡 不只是跟別人,也跟自己 沒完沒了的嘮叨 這些都會分散心理的能量 觀察需要的就是那個能量 在關係的鏡子裡觀察自己 我們都與某一個人有關係 觀察那個關係,發現它的幻相 形象、荒謬和愚痴 那個自由就會帶來智力 智力就會展示我們的生活方式 對嗎?我們有一起前進嗎?
40:05 5th Question: Is suffering necessary to make us face the necessity to change? 問題五:受苦是讓我們 面對改變所必要的嗎?
40:15 Is suffering necessary to make us face the necessity to change? 受苦是要我們面對改變所必要的嗎?
40:26 This is one of our traditions that says you must suffer in order to be good. In the Christian world, and in the Hindu world, they try to put different words for it, karma and so on, and everywhere they say you must go through suffering, which is not only physical suffering but also psychologically. That is, you must strive, you must make an effort, you must sacrifice, you must give up, you must abandon, you must suppress. That is our tradition, both in the East and the West. And suffering, being common to all mankind, one says you must go through that particular door. Someone comes along, like the speaker, and says, suffering must end, not go through it, it must end. You understand what I am saying? Suffering is not necessary. It is the most destructive element in life. Like pleasure, suffering is made personal, secretive, mine, not yours. There is not only global suffering, mankind has been through enormous sorrows, wars, starvations, violence. He has faced suffering in different forms and so he accepts it as inevitable and uses that as a means to become noble, or change himself. 我們的傳統之一 說你必須受苦才能成為善人 基督教世界和印度教世界 試圖用不同的言語表達 業因果報之類的 每一個地方都說你必須受苦 不只是生理上的苦也包括心理上的苦 也就是說,你必須嚐試、努力 必須犧牲、放棄 必須拋棄,必須…壓抑 知道嗎?這就是我們的傳統 包括東方和西方 人類共同的受苦 有人說,你必須通過那一扇特別的門 另一個人,例如說者,過來說 受苦必須終結 不是…經歷,它必須終結 明白我說什麼嗎? 受苦是不必要的 是生命中最具破壞力的元素 正如享樂一樣 受苦被當做個人的東西 秘密的、我的,不是你的 不僅有全球性的受苦 人類經歷過巨大的哀傷、戰爭 饑荒、暴力,明白嗎? 他面對各種形式的苦受 所以他接受痛苦是不可避免的 利用它做為聖化自己的工具 或改變自己
43:26 We are saying on the contrary, you may reject it, question it, doubt it, but let’s find out. That is, let us seek the right answer to this, together, not because the speaker says so. Can sorrow end? Sorrow being our grief, so many ways we suffer, an insult, a look, a gesture, a wound that we have received from childhood, a wound that is very deep of which we may be conscious, or unconscious, the suffering of another, the loss of another. And if you examine it closely, taking one fact, which is, that we are wounded from childhood, by the parents, by the teachers, by other boys, girls, this is happening all the time. And this wound is deep, covered up, and one builds a wall round oneself not to be hurt, and so that very wall creates fear. I don’t know if you are following all this? And one asks – can this hurt, can it be wiped away completely so that it leaves no scar? Please, we are going over this together – you understand? I am sure you have been hurt, haven’t you, all of you, in some way or another. It is there. And we carry it throughout our life. The consequences of that is that we become more and more isolated, more and more apprehensive. We don’t want to be hurt anymore so we build a wall round ourselves and gradually withdraw. Isolation takes place. You know all this. So one asks – is it possible not to be hurt? Not only not to be hurt in the future, today, but also to wipe out the hurt that one has had from childhood. You understand? We are thinking this together, please. Is it possible to wipe away the wound, the hurt that one carries about all the time? 我們說的正好相反 你也許拒絕它 質疑它、懷疑它但讓我們找出答案 也就是讓我們找出正確的答案 一起找,不是因為說者這麼講 哀傷可以結束嗎? 哀傷就是我們的…憂愁 我們有太多受苦的方式 一句羞辱的話、一個眼神一個手勢 一個小時候留下來的傷口 一道很深的傷口 你也許有意識,也許無意識 別人的受苦,別人的失落 如果你仔細檢視 只檢視一個事實,也就是 我們從小就受過傷害 來自父母、老師來自男女朋友的傷害 這種事始終都在發生 這個傷口被埋在深處 人為了不受傷害而築起一道圍牆 那一道牆製造了恐懼 不知你們聽懂沒有 你會問,這個傷害 能完全抹除嗎? 以至於不會留下疤痕 請跟我一起探討,明白嗎? 我確定你們受過傷害對嗎?全部都有 無論是哪一種方式,傷害都在 我們帶著傷害過一輩子 它的後果就是我們變得越來越孤立 顧慮越來越多 我們不想再受傷害了 所以就在身邊築起一道圍牆 逐漸地退縮 孤立便因此發生你們知道這些事 因此我們要問有可能不受傷害嗎? 不只是未來或今天不受傷害 還要抹除小時候的傷痛 明白嗎?請跟我一起思考 有可能抹除 我們這一生中 始終背負的傷口和傷害嗎?
47:36 If one is serious one should discover for oneself the cause of the hurt and what is hurt, and who is hurt – you are following all this? Please. Which means – is it possible not to register the insult, the flattery, the gesture that cuts you down, the look of annoyance, anger, the impatience? Not to register any of that. Do you want to go into it deeply? Shall we go into it deeply? 如果你是認真的 你就應該親自探索 傷害的…肇因 傷害是什麼? 受傷害的是誰? 你們聽懂了嗎?請注意聽 這意味著有可能不記錄…羞辱 恭維、深深刺痛你的手勢 一個厭煩的…眼神 忿怒…和不耐煩嗎? 一個也不記錄 你們想深入探討嗎? 我們要深入探討嗎?
49:10 The brain is the instrument of registration. Like a computer it registers. It registers because in that registration it finds security, safety, it is a form of protecting itself. You are following this? Right, sirs? And when one is called an idiot, or some other insult takes place, the immediate reaction is to register it, verbally, the word has its significance, wanting to hurt and it is registered. Like flattery is also registered. Now can this registering process come to an end? Bearing in mind that the mind, the brain must register, otherwise you wouldn’t know where your house is, you wouldn’t be able to drive your car, or use any language. But not to register any psychological reactions. You are following all this? 頭腦是記錄的工具,對嗎? 正如電腦會記錄一樣 它會記錄是因為 它在那個記錄中找到安全感 這是一種自我保護的形式 你們懂了嗎?對嗎?各位 當你被罵白痴或其他羞辱發生的時候 你即時的反應就是記錄言說的記錄 言說有它的意義 想要傷害別人,所以會記錄 就像恭維一樣會記錄 這種記錄的過程能結束嗎? 承載在心智也就是頭腦裡的,一定會記錄 否則你連家在哪裡都不知道 你也沒辦法開車 或使用任何語言 但不記錄任何心理反應 聽懂了嗎?
51:01 Then one will ask – how? How will I prevent registration of an insult, or a flattery? Flattery is more pleasant and therefore I like to register, but the insult or the hurt I want to get rid of. But both factors, insult, flattery, are registered. Now, is it possible not to register psychologically? Can we go on with this? 接著我們要問:怎麼做? 我如何預防記錄羞辱或恭維? 恭維比較悅耳 因此我想記錄下來 但我想擺脫羞辱或傷害 但這兩種因素:羞辱和恭維都被記錄下來 有可能不做心理上的記錄嗎? 我們可以繼續談嗎?
52:01 What is it that gets hurt? You say, ‘I am hurt’, what is that entity that gets hurt? Is it an actuality? Something concrete, something tactile, something that you can talk about? Or is it something that you have created for yourself about yourself? Are you following all this? 受傷害的是什麼? 你說,我受傷了 那個受傷害的實體是什麼? 這是一個實際嗎? 一個具體的、可觸及的東西 一個你可以談論的東西嗎? 或是你為自己創造出來的東西? 你們聽懂了嗎?
52:54 All right. I have an image about myself, most of us have. That image has been created from childhood – you must be like your brother who is so clever, you must be better, you must be good. This image is gradually being built, through education, through relationships and so on. That image is me. I wonder if you accept that? That image which is me gets hurt. Right? Are you following? So as long as I have an image it is going to be trodden on by everybody, not only by the top intellectuals but by anybody. So is it possible to prevent the formation of images? Go into it, sir. Come with me, will you? You understand, the image-making machinery. What is this machinery that makes the images? The images about my country, about the politicians, about the priests, about God? The whole fabrication of images. Who makes these images? And why are images made? Who makes it and why are they made? We can see very easily why they are made – for security, for reasons of self-protection, because if I call myself a Communist in a non-Communist world I have a rather difficult time. Or in a Communist world, if I am not a Communist, terrible things might happen. So, identifying myself with an image gives one a great security. That is the cause, that is the reason, why all of us, in some form or another, have images. And who creates this image? What is the machinery? You understand? What is the process of it? Please think it out with me, don’t wait for me to tell you. 好吧 我對自己有一個形象大多數人都有 那個形象是從小製造出來的 你必須像你哥哥一樣聰明 你一定要更好,要做好孩子 這個形象是逐漸建立的透過教育 透過關係等等 那個形象就是我 不知你們能不能接受 那個形象,也就是我,受傷了 對嗎?明白嗎? 只要我有形象這個形象就會被踐踏 被每一個人 不只是被一流的知識份子而是每一個人 因此,有可能阻止形象的構成嗎? 深入它,先生跟我一起深入好嗎? 了解那個形象塑造機嗎? 這個形象塑造機是什麼? 有關我的國家、政客的形象 有關傳教士和上帝的形象 整個形象的編造 是誰在製造這些形象? 為什麼要製造形象? 誰製造的?為什麼要製造? 我們可以輕易地看到製造的原因 為了安全感 為了自我保護的理由 如果我在一個非共產國家自稱為共產黨員 我就會吃很多苦頭 或者我是共產世界裡的非共產黨員 或許會發生可怕的事 讓自己認同一個形象 給自己很大的安全感 這就是肇因和理由為什麼我們所有人 都有不同形式的形象 這個形象是誰創造的? 那個機器是什麼?明白嗎? 它的過程又如何? 請跟我一起思考不要等我告訴你們
56:39 Will there be – please listen to it – will the machinery come to an end when there is complete attention? Or, the machinery is set going when there is no attention? Do you follow the question? Do you follow this, sir? Where am I to look? When there is complete attention, when you call me an idiot, you call me an idiot, and the verbal stone has an impact and the response is ‘You are also’! Now, can I receive that word, the meaning of that word, the insult that you want me to feel by using that word, can I be attentive of all that instantly? You understand what I am saying? Are we following each other? Can I be aware or attentive completely when you use that word? And you are using that word to hurt me. And to be completely attentive at that moment. It is not a shield. It is not something that you put up in order to avoid. In that attention there is no reception. I wonder if you see it. Whereas when you call me an idiot and I am inattentive, not paying attention, then registration takes place. You can experiment with this, do it now for God’s sake. 會不會有…請聽我說 如果有全然的關注,那個機器 會有結束的時候嗎? 或者機器在沒有關注時就會繼續運作? 明白我的問題嗎? 你明白嗎,先生? 我該往哪找? 當我有全然的關注時 如果你罵我白痴 你罵我白痴 這一把舌劍…就會產生影響 你的反擊是:你也是! 我能夠接受那個言詞 那個言詞的意義 你想用那個言詞引發我的感覺 我能即時地關注它嗎? 明白我說什麼嗎? 我們有彼此交會嗎? 我能在你用那個言詞時保持覺察或完全的關注嗎? 你想用那個言詞傷害我 當下保持完全的關注 這不是一副盾甲 不是你為了躲避而架設的東西 在那個關注裡沒有接受 不知你們明白沒有 你罵我白痴的時候如果我沒有關注 沒有付出關注那麼記錄就會發生 你可以做個實驗看上帝份上,現在就做
59:38 So that not only the past wounds, past hurts, but also your mind then is so sensitive, vulnerable, it is so moving, living, acting, it has no moment of static moment where you can hurt. I wonder if you follow all this? No. All right. 因此…不僅過去的傷口過去的傷害 而且你的心靈也會變得非常敏銳、柔軟 非常有動態、鮮活又主動 沒有一個讓你能被傷害的靜態 不知道你們聽懂沒有?沒有,好吧
1:00:23 6th Question: My problem is I have a ten-foot wall around me. It is no use trying to overcome it, so I ignore it. It is still there. What do I do? 問題六:我的問題是我築了一道六呎高的圍牆 克服它沒有用因此我忽略它的存在 圍牆還在,我該怎麼做?
1:00:42 What’s the height of the wall you have around you? Is it possible to be vulnerable, to be so sensitive, to be alive in fact that you need never build a wall? There are walls round a property – listen carefully. There are walls round a property, and you treat yourself as a property and so build a wall round yourselves. You understand what I am saying? Again, sirs, why do we do all these kinds of things? Why do we build a wall and then try to tear it down, and not being able to break it down we avoid it, we run away from it, we hide behind it. Why do we do all these things? Why do we create problems for ourselves? Why can’t we be so sane, normal, healthy – not normal, sorry. 你築的圍牆有多高? 有沒有可能…讓自己柔軟 如此敏銳事實上,是有生命力 以至於你永遠不需要築牆? 房地產的四周有圍牆,仔細聽 房地產的四周有圍牆 你把自己當做房地產 所以才在身邊築圍牆 明白我說什麼嗎? 同樣地,各位我們為何做這一類的事? 為什麼要先築一道牆然後再想辦法拆除它? 如果沒辦法…拆除我們就逃避它 遠離它 躲在牆後面 我們為何要做這些事? 為什麼給自己製造問題? 為什麼不能有理性、正常健康,不是正常,抱歉
1:02:41 This is a problem to the questioner. What is a problem? You have a problem, right, haven’t you? No? Oh my god. What is the problem? Something that you have not been able to resolve. Right? You have analysed it, you have been to a psychiatrist, you have been to a confession, or you have analysed yourself and the problem remains, the cause remains. And you have examined the effects, analysed the effects. and the peculiarity of a cause is the cause becomes the effect, and the effect becomes the cause. I wonder if you understand all this? Is this too intellectual? All right. 這是給提問人的問題 問題是什麼? 你有一個問題,對嗎?不是嗎? 沒有?噢,我的上帝 問題是什麼? 一個你沒能力解決的東西對嗎? 你分析過,看過精神科醫生 去過教堂告解 或做過自我分析 但問題還是存在 肇因還存在 你也檢視過它的結果 分析過結果 肇因最奇特的一點是因會變成果 結果會變成肇因 不知你們了不了解 會不會太知性?好吧
1:04:10 So what is a problem for all of us? What is our problem? And why do we have problems? Let’s take a common problem: does God exist? I am taking that as a silly example. Because we say, ‘If God exists how can he create this monstrous world?’ So it becomes more and more of a problem. First of all, I assume god has created it, this world, and then I get involved in it. Or I have a certain ideal, I want to live up to that ideal, that becomes a problem. I don’t see why I should have ideals at all. First I create an ideal, then I try to live up to it, then all the problem arises – struggle, I am not good, I must be good, tell me what to do to achieve and so on. You follow how we create a problem, create something illusory first, like non-violence is illusory. The fact is violence; and then my problem arises – how am I to be non-violent? Whereas I am violent, let me deal with that, not with non-violence. I wonder if you get this? 對我們來說,問題是什麼? 我們的問題是什麼? 我們為什麼會有問題? 我舉一個共同的問題吧上帝存在嗎? 我把它當做一個愚蠢的例子 因為如果上帝存在他為何創造這個可怕的世界? 這就變成一個越來越大的問題 我先假設上帝創造了這個世界 接著我就參與其中 或者我有某一個理想 我想符合那個理想 這就變成了一個問題 我不明白我為何非要有一個理想 我先創造一個理想再想辦法符合那個理想 所有問題就因此而起 奮鬥、我不夠好,我必須變好 告訴我該怎麼做如何達成…等等 看到我們如何製造問題 先創造一個幻相 比如,非暴力是一個幻相暴力才是事實 接著我的問題就生起來了我該如何變成非暴力? 我是暴力的,讓我對治暴力不是非暴力 不知你們懂不懂
1:06:18 So is this what we are doing, at one level? Or I cannot get on with my wife. I am rather nervous about this! I cannot get on with somebody or other. You follow what I am trying to say? We make problems out of everything. The question is, much more important than the resolution of the problem, is not to have problems at all so that your mind is free from this everlasting struggle to resolve something or other. What is the core of all problems? Not technological problems, not mathematical problems, but the human, deep, inward psychological problems – what is the root of it? Come on, sirs. Is there a root that can be pulled out, or withered away so that the mind has no problems whatsoever? Go on, sirs. 這就是我們在一個層面上做的事嗎? 或者我跟妻子合不來 談這種事讓我相當緊張 我跟某一個人合不來 懂我在說什麼嗎? 我們把每一件事都變成了問題 比解決問題更重要的是 完全不要有任何問題 好讓你的心靈…擺脫這個 為了解決問題而持續不止的掙扎 所有問題的核心是什麼? 不是科技問題,不是數學問題 而是人類深沉的、內在的心理問題 它的根源是什麼? 說呀,各位 有一個可以拔出來或者會枯萎的根 好讓心靈完全沒有問題嗎? 說呀,各位
1:08:45 What is a problem? Something to be dissolved in the present, or in the future. Right? A problem only exists in time. You understand what I am saying? Someone please tell me. You understand this, my question? A problem exists as long as we are thinking in terms of time, not only chronological time but inward psychological time. As long as I have not understood the nature of psychological time I must have problems. Are you meeting me? We are moving together? That is, I want to be successful in the worldly sense, or also, I want to be spiritually successful – they are both the same. Now wanting to be successful is a movement in time, you are following this? And that creates the problem. That is, wanting to be something is time and that wanting to be is the problem. So I am saying, what is the root of this that creates problems. Not only time, but go on, sirs, investigate with me. 問題是什麼? 一個要在目前或未來 解決的東西,對嗎? 問題只存在於時間裡 了解我說什麼嗎? 請回答我 了解我的問題嗎? 只要我們以時間來思考問題就會存在 不只是時序上的時間也包括內在的心理時間 只要我不了解心理時間的本質 我必然會有問題 我們有交會…有一起前進嗎? 也就是說…我想獲得世間的成功 或者想獲得靈性上的成功兩者都一樣 想成功就是時間裡的活動 你們懂嗎? 這種活動就會製造問題 也就是說,想變成什麼就是時間 這個想變成就是問題 我要問的是製造問題的根源是什麼? 不只是時間,快呀,各位跟我一起探究
1:11:00 Is it thought? Or is there the centre which is always moving within its own radius – do you understand what I am saying? Won’t problems exist as long as I am concerned about myself? As long as I am wanting to be good, wanting to be this, wanting to be that and so on, I must create problems. Which means can I live without a single image about myself? As long as I have an image to be successful, I must achieve enlightenment, I must reach God, I must be good, I must be more loving, I mustn’t be greedy, I mustn’t hurt, I must live peacefully, I must have a quiet mind, I must know what meditation is, is it possible to love so freely and so on. You follow? That is, as long as there is a centre there must be problems. Now that centre is the essence of inattention. Are you getting it? Oh, come on with me. When there is attention there is no centre. I wonder if you meet this. Right? 是思想嗎? 或者有一個中心 始終在它的圓周裡移動 了解我說什麼嗎? 是不是只要我只關心自己問題就會存在? 只要我想表現好,想成為這個 想成為那個等等我就必然會製造問題 也就是說,我能否不帶任何自我形象地生活? 只要我還有想成功的形象 我必須開悟我必須見神,我必須做好人 我必須更有愛心 我必須不貪、不害 我必須活在和平裡我必須保持心靈的平靜 我必須知道冥想是什麼 有可能自由自在地愛嗎?諸如此類的,明白嗎? 換言之,只要有一個中心在 就必然會有問題 那個中心就是不關注的本質 你們懂了嗎?快呀,跟我一起探討 有關注的時候就沒有中心 不知你們有沒有交會,對嗎?
1:13:06 Now look – when you listen, if you are listening, when you listen to what is being said and attending, not trying to understand what he says, attending, in that attention there is no you. The moment there is no attention the ‘you’ creeps up. And that centre creates the problems. Got it? No, sir, this is very serious if you go into it – to have a mind that has no problems, and therefore no experience. The moment you have an experience and you hold on to it, then it becomes memory and you want more of it. So, a mind that has no problem has no experience. Oh, you don’t see the beauty of it. 當你聆聽的時候,如果你有的話 當你關注地聆聽我說話 不是試圖了解他的話,是關注 在那個關注裡就沒有你 就在沒有關注的那一刻你就悄悄地爬上來了 那個中心就會製造問題,明白嗎? 不,先生,如果你深入這是非常嚴肅的事 擁有一個沒有問題的心靈 因此也沒有經驗 你有經驗和執著的那一刻 經驗就會變成記憶你就會想要更多 所以一個沒有問題的心靈就不會有經驗 你們看不到其中的美
1:14:41 7th Question: I derive strength from concentrating on a symbol. I belong to a group that encourages this. Is this an illusion? 問題七:我從專注於一個象徵中獲得力量 我屬於一個鼓勵這麼做的團體 這是幻覺嗎?
1:14:58 May I respectfully point out – don’t belong to anything. But you can’t help it, you do. 恕我恭敬地指出來不要歸屬於任何事物 但你們會不由自主地這麼做
1:15:16 Sir, see the reason of this. We cannot stand alone, we want support, we want the strength of others, we want to be identified with a group, with an organisation. The Foundation is not such an organisation, it merely exists to publish books and so on, you can’t belong to it because you can’t publish books, you can’t run schools. But the idea that we must be part of something or other. And belonging to something gives one strength. I am an Englishman. Immediately there is a flutter. Or a Frenchman. Once I was talking in India and I said, ‘I am not a Hindu’, and a man came up to me afterwards and said, ‘You mean you are not a Hindu? You must feel terribly lonely’. 看見你這麼做的理由 我們無法獨立 我們想要支持 想要別人的力量 想與一個團體認同 一個組織 本基金會不是這一類的組織 它只為了出版書籍而存在你無法歸屬於它 因為你不會出版書籍你不會經營學校 但我們必須成為某種事物一部分的觀念 歸屬於一個事物會給人力量 我是英國人立刻讓我有一份…虛榮感 或法國人 我有一次在印度演說我說,我不是印度教徒 演講後,有個人走過來說 你是說你不是印度教徒? 你一定覺得很孤獨吧
1:17:03 Now, the questioner asks: he derives strength from concentrating on a symbol. We all have symbols. The Christian world is filled with symbols. The whole Christian world of religious movement is symbols; symbols, images, concepts, beliefs, ideals, dogmas, rituals – the same in India, only they don’t call themselves Christians but it is exactly the same thing, or in the Far East, and so on. Now, when one belongs to a large group which adores the same symbol, you derive enormous strength out of it, it is natural – or rather unnatural. It keeps you excited, it creates a feeling that at last you are understanding something beyond the symbol and so on. 提問人問 他從專注於一個象徵中獲得力量 我們都有象徵 基督教世界充滿了象徵,對嗎? 宗教運動的整個基督教世界就是象徵 象徵、意象、概念 信念、理想、教條、儀式 印度也一樣只是他們不以基督徒自稱 但都是完全一樣的東西 或遠東等地 當你歸屬於一個大團體 都景仰同一個象徵 你會從中獲得龐大的力量這是自然的 或者不自然 它讓你興奮 製造一種你終於了解什麼的感覺 超越象徵的了解等
1:18:36 First, we invent the symbol – see how our mind works – the image in the church or in the temple, or the letters in the mosque – they are beautiful letters if you have been in a mosque – and we create those and after creating those we worship those, and in worshipping that which we have created out of our thought, we derive strength. See what is happening – you follow? Now the symbol is not the actual. The actual may never exist, but the symbol satisfies and the symbol gives us vitality, energy, by looking, thinking, observing, being with it. Surely that which has been created by thought, psychologically, must be illusion. You create me, I hope you won’t, you create me into your guru. I refuse to be a guru because it is too absurd. Because I see how the followers destroy the guru and the guru destroys the followers. You understand this? I see that. To me the whole thing is an abomination – I am sorry to use strong language. But you create an image about me, about the speaker, and the whole business begins. 我們先發明象徵…看清心智運作的方式 我們先發明象徵教堂或寺廟裡的形象 或清真寺裡的文字 如果你去過清真寺那些文字很美 我們創造了那些 創造出來以後再膜拜 膜拜我們用思想創造出來的象徵 我們就從中獲得力量 看其中發生什麼,明白嗎? 象徵不是實際 實際也許不存在 象徵帶來滿足 象徵給我們活力、能量 藉由注視、思考、觀察與它同在 由思想創造出來的東西 心理上來說,必然是幻相 你們創造我,希望你們不會你們把我創造成上師 我拒絕當上師因為這種事太荒謬了 因為我看過追隨者如何摧毀上師 還有上師如何摧毀追隨者 你們明白嗎?我看見了 我對這種事深惡痛絕 抱歉用這個強烈的字眼 但你們為我,為說者創造了一個形象 整個事情就開始了
1:20:56 So first, if I may point out, thought is the mischief-maker in this. All the things in the churches, in the temples, in the mosques, are not truth, are not actual. They have been invented by the priests, by thought, by us out of our fear, out of our anxiety, uncertainty of the future, all that. We have created a symbol and we are caught in that. So, first to realise that thought will always create the things which give it satisfaction, psychologically. Pleasure gives it comfort, therefore the reassuring image is a great comfort. It may be a total illusion, and it is, but it gives me comfort therefore I will never look beyond the illusion. 首先,容我指出 思想是其中的始作俑者 教堂、寺廟、清真寺裡的所有東西 都不是真理,不是實際 都是由傳教士、思想和我們發明出來的 出於我們的恐懼、焦慮 對未來的不確定感諸如此類的東西 我們創造了一個象徵再讓自己受困其中 首先要明白 思想永遠會創造 會帶給來心理滿足的事物 享樂,明白嗎?帶來安慰 因此那個有確定感的象徵是一個很大的安慰 也許它是一個徹底的幻相其實就是 但它帶給我安慰 因此我的眼光永遠不會超越幻相
1:22:26 We’ve talked an hour and twenty five minutes. We will continue with the rest of the questions on Thursday. Is that all right? SUBTITLE TEXT COPYRIGHT 1980 KRISHNAMURTI FOUNDATION TRUST LTD 我們已經談 1 小時 25 分鐘了 星期四再繼續回答其他問題 可以嗎? 字幕版權所有1980克里希那穆提基金會