Krishnamurti Subtitles home


BR80T3 - 內在與外在混淆的關係
公開談話(三)
英國布洛克伍德公園
1980 年 9 月6 日



0:26 There are a lot of people – aren’t you? I wonder why you all come. The last two talks that we have had here we talked a great deal about relationship, we talked about taking life as a whole, so we are going to start with that this morning. 今天來的人很多,對嗎? 不知道你們為什麼要來 這裡舉辦的前兩場談話 談了很多關係的問題 談過…把生活當做一個整體看待 今天早上就從這裡談起
1:24 One wonders why, observing what is going on in the world, why there is so much disorder, why man is destroying man. Why are they building up such enormous expenditure on armaments? Why have people divided themselves into tribal, romantic nationalism? Why religions throughout the world, the organised religions, the accepted religions, have also divided themselves – the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Christians, the Muslims, etc., why is there such division in the world? And we are inclined to think that an outside agency has created all this mess: God, or some other supreme entity, having created man, has let him loose on the earth. And what man has done is quite incredible and shocking, not only to the other man, but also to himself. Why in the world there are so many neuroses, neurotic people. Why is there this constant battle between man and woman? Why is there this inward disorder which naturally must express itself in outward disorder? 我們會納悶為什麼 當我們觀察世界的現狀 為什麼有這麼多失序? 為什麼人要互相毀滅? 人為什麼花費龐大的軍備支出? 人為何把自己分化成部落的 浪漫的國族主義? 為什麼全世界的宗教 有組織的宗教 被接受的宗教 也把自己分化成 印度教徒、佛教徒、基督教徒和回教徒等? 世界為什麼有這麼多分化? 我們很容易認為 有一個外在的代理者創造了這一團混亂 上帝或某一個至高的實體 把人創造出來以後就把他放生到地球上 人的所做作所為 相當不可思議且令人驚懼 不僅是對別人 也對他自己 世間為什麼有這麼多神經質的人? 為什麼男人和女人之間 會有持續不斷的戰鬥? 為什麼人會有內在的失序 進而自然地展現為外在的失序?
4:06 If we could this morning and tomorrow morning, go into this question, not only why we have become like this after millions of years, slightly modified, slightly more tolerant, less vicious, which I question, we ought to, together, as we said, go into these problems. Tomorrow we will talk about what is religion, what place has, in religious life, a career, marriage and all the things that we go through? But this morning if we could think together. As we said, it is not a talk by the speaker when you listen to him disagreeing or agreeing, but rather together examine all this, our lives. Our lives which have produced the society in which we live. The society is not created by some extraordinary events but by the extraordinary lives we lead, not only by us but also by the past generations. If we could go together into it. That is, think it out together, not only think it out but also go beyond the realm of thought. As we pointed out over and over again, that thought is born of memory, memory is the result of knowledge and experience. And thought therefore is always limited, for knowledge is everlastingly limited because there can be no complete knowledge about anything. And thought born out of that must also be very, very limited. And the world in which we live, our daily life, our careers, our anxieties, fears and sorrows, are the result of our thinking, are the product of our daily activity. 希望今天和明天早上 能深入這個問題 不只要問人為何經過幾百萬年會變成如此 稍微有一點修正 稍微…多了一點包容 邪惡少了一些,我質疑這一點 正如我說過的,我們應該一起深入這些問題 明天要談什麼是宗教 生涯、婚姻以及我們所有的經歷 在宗教中的地位是什麼? 今天早上我們要一起思考 我們說過不是說者自己在說 你們聽他說再表達同意或不同意 而是一起檢視我們的生活 我們的生活製造了我們生存其中的社會 社會不是由一些不平凡事件製造的 而是我們的尋常生活 不只是由我們也是由以往的世世代代 希望我們能一起深入 也就是說,一起思考 不只是思考 也要超越思想的範疇 正如我們一再指出來的 思想從記憶中誕生 記憶是知識和經驗的結果 因此思想始終是有侷限的 因為知識永遠有限 沒有一個事物會有完整的知識 從知識誕生的思想必然是非常非常有限 我們生存其中的世界我們的日常生活、生涯 焦慮、恐懼和哀傷 都是思考的結果 是日常活動的產物
7:26 So if we could together this morning take life as a whole: our education, our occupations, our hobbies, work, and all the travail that exists inwardly – the psychological conflicts, the anxieties, the fears, the pleasures, the sorrows, all that, to take all that as a whole; and not let thought occupy itself with one particular part, with one particular pattern, or cling to one particular experience and look at life from that point of view. Could we this morning together go into this? Together, not I go into it, you listen, but together enquire very seriously why we live the way we are living. Why there is so much disorder in the world, and also this disorder in ourselves. Is the world disorder different from our disorder? Please, let’s talk together as though we were two people, not this large audience but two people sitting quietly in a room, or in a garden or walking along in a wood, amicably, hesitantly enquiring into this. Why there is disorder outwardly and disorder inwardly. Are they two separate disorders? Or are they one unitary process? It is not disorder out there different from the disorder in me. But rather this disorder is a movement which goes outward and comes inward. It is like a tide going back and forth endlessly. And can we begin to bring about order in our life? Because without order there is no freedom, without complete order, not occasionally or once a week, but in our daily life to have this complete total order not only brings freedom but there is then in that order, love. A disordered, confused, conflicting mind cannot have or be aware what love is. 如果今天早上能一起探討生活的整體 我們的教育、職業 嗜好、工作 以及內在所有的煩瑣 心理的衝突 焦慮、恐懼 享樂、哀傷這一切 把這些當做一個整體 不讓思想占據一個特別的部分 一個特別的…模式 或執著於一個特別的經驗 進而從那個觀點看生活 我們今天早上可以一起深入探討嗎? 一起,不是我深入,你們聽 而是一起非常認真地參究 我們為何過這種生活方式? 世界為何有這麼多失序? 為什麼我們的內在也有失序? 世界的失序不同於我們內在的失序嗎? 讓我們像兩個人一樣交談 而不是這個大聽眾群 而是兩個人安靜地坐在房間裡 在花園或樹林裡散步 友善地、不急不徐地參究這個問題 為什麼會有外在和內在的失序? 它們是兩種個別的失序嗎? 或者是單一的過程? 並非外在的失序不同於我內在的失序 反之,這種失序是一種 出出進進的活動 就像漲退不息的潮水一樣 還有,我們能把秩序帶進生命裡嗎? 因為沒有秩序就沒有自由 沒有完整的秩序 不是偶發的,或一週一次的 而是在日常生活裡有這種徹底、完整的秩序 不只帶來自由而且那個秩序裡還有愛 一個失序、混淆、衝突的心靈 不可能有愛或覺知愛是什麼
11:28 So should we not go together into this question of what is order? Can there be absolute order? We are using the word ‘absolute’ in its right sense – complete, total, not an order that is intellectually brought about, an order that is based on value, not order that is the outcome of environmental pressures, or adaptation to a certain norm, certain pattern. But when we are talking about absolute total order, in that there is no division as disorder at all. We are going to enquire into that. I hope we understand this: we are enquiring whether there is an order in which there can never be disorder. Not that we have disorder and occasionally have order, but order, complete, total. So let us together – together go into this question. 我們不該一起深入這個秩序是什麼的問題嗎? 可能有絕對的秩序嗎? 我們使用絕對這個詞的正確意義 完整的、全然的 不是知性帶來的秩序 而是建立在價值上的秩序 不是環境壓力下產生的秩序 或為了適應某一種規範 某一個模式 當我們談絕對的、全然的秩序時 意味著其中完全沒有失序的分裂 我們要參究這個問題 希望我們了解這一點 我們要參究是否有一種 永遠沒有失序的秩序? 並不是在失序中偶而才會有的秩序 而是徹底、全然的秩序 讓我們一起,一起!深入這個問題
13:10 Why is the mind, which includes the brain, our emotional responses, sensory responses and so on, why does the mind, our mind accept and live in disorder? If you observe your own mind, that is your own life, which is based on your mind, your thoughts, your emotions, your experiences, your memories, regrets, apprehension, why is that mind, which has all this in its consciousness, why does it accept disorder? Which is not only the neurotic disorder, the acceptance of disorder and living with disorder, getting used to disorder, why does the mind have this sense of division, this sense of order, disorder, this constant adjustment? You understand? I hope we are meeting together – are we? Is this inevitable? Is this our natural state? If it is natural then one must live with this conflict from the moment you are born till you die, in this disorder. And if it is unnatural, which obviously it is, what is the cause of it? What is the basis of it, what is the root of all this? Does the basis depend on our particular attitudes, on our particular desire? One wants to find out what is the basis of this disorder, the root of it. To find out, how do we approach it? You understand my question? Please, how do we approach this problem? The problem being, we live in disorder, both outwardly and inwardly. How do we approach the problem in order to totally resolve it? What is your approach? You understand my question? Are you approaching to find order out of disorder, therefore your approach is already directed? You understand? Because I am in disorder – suppose I am in disorder – I have the desire to bring about order, and that very desire dictates what the order must be. Whereas if I approach the problem of disorder as though I want to find out the root of it, then my direction is not diverted, wasted in various intellectual, verbal, emotional directions, but my whole attention is directed to the cause of it. You are following all this? 為什麼心智,包括頭腦在內 我們的情緒反應、感官反應等 為什麼心智,我們的心智 會接受並活在失序裡? 如果你觀察自己的心智也就是你的生活 建立在你的心智、思想和情緒的基礎上 你的經驗、記憶 懊悔、顧慮 為什麼心智…在意識中擁有這一切的心智 為什麼要接受失序? 這不只是神經性的失序 接受失序與失序共存 習慣於失序 心智為何會有這種分化感 這種秩序、失序感以及不斷的調整? 了解嗎?希望我們有交會,有嗎? 這是不可避免的嗎? 這是我們的自然狀態嗎? 如果是自然的那麼人必須與這種衝突共存 從出生那一刻到死亡為止 活在這種失序裡 如果是不自然的,顯然它是 它的肇因是什麼? 它的基礎、根源是什麼? 這個基礎決定於我們特別的態度 或特別的欲望嗎? 我們要找出這個失序的基礎 它的根源 找出對治的方法?了解我的問題嗎? 請注意我們該如何對治這個問題? 問題是我們活在這個失序裡 包括外在和內在 如何對治這個問題以便徹底解決它? 你的途徑是什麼? 了解我的問題嗎? 你是為了從失序中找到秩序 進而已經設定了途徑?明白嗎? 因為假設我活在失序裡 我有想帶來秩序的欲望 那個欲望就會支配 必須有什麼樣的秩序,對嗎? 如果我對治失序問題的途徑 是為了找出它的根源 那麼我的方向就不會被誤導 不會浪費在知性、言說與情緒的方向 反而我全副的關注都導向它的肇因 聽懂了嗎?
17:54 So how do you, as a human being, living in this world, both outwardly and inwardly in disorder, what is your approach? Because we must be very clear what our approach is. If it is clear, then let’s find out together what is the root of it. Is it self-contradiction? Is it desire that has created this division in us because wherever there is division there must be conflict, and therefore the conflict means disorder. Conflict is disorder, whether it is minor, major, or conflict that brings about a great crisis. So is our conflict self-contradictory, saying one thing, doing another, having ideals and always trying to accommodate ourselves to that ideal and therefore conflict? Is it our desire to become something? You are following all this? Or this conflict is created by thought? Because thought in itself, as we said, is limited and therefore it breaks up as the outer and the inner, the ‘you’ and the ‘me’, thought striving to become something which it is not. This constant division, becoming, contradicting, conforming, comparing, imitating – psychologically, is that the various expressions of a central cause? You understand? Are we clear so far? 身為一個人類你如何活在這個世界 包括外在和內在都活在失序裡 你處理的途徑是什麼? 因為我們必須非常清楚自己處理的途徑 如果你的途徑清楚那就讓我們一起找出來 它的根源是什麼 是自相矛盾嗎? 是欲望…在我們的內在 製造了這種分化嗎? 因為有分化的地方必然會有衝突 因此衝突就意味著失序,對嗎? 衝突就是失序 無論是小衝突或大衝突 或者會帶來重大危機的衝突 我們的衝突有自相矛盾嗎? 說一套做一套 抱著一個理想,始終試圖… 讓自己適應那個理想因而引發衝突? 這是我們…想變成什麼的欲望嗎? 你們明白嗎? 或者,這個衝突是由思想創造的? 因為我們說過思想本身是有侷限的 因此它會分化 分化為外在和內在 分化為你和我 思想掙扎著要變成一個它所不是的東西 這種持續的分化、變成…矛盾 順應、比較 心理的模仿 這是各種展現的中心肇因嗎? 明白嗎? 目前為止,清楚了嗎?
21:27 So what is the central cause, the root of all this? Please, you are thinking together, therefore you are exercising your mind, therefore you are aware of how you approach the problem, you are aware of your own contradictions, your own conflicts, your own divisions, your own apprehensions. And in that consciousness, which is made up of division, conflicts, beliefs, non-beliefs and so on, is one aware of all that? Or one is only aware of a fragment of it? A fragment being that which demands an immediate response. If I am concerned about my livelihood I am not concerned about anything else because that is an immediate demand. I need money, food, I have children, responsibility, therefore my approach to this whole problem will be directed by my desire to have a job. Or I have been thinking along a certain pattern, along a certain direction, and I am unaware that I am caught in that pattern and therefore when I approach this question I am always approaching it according to the pattern which my mind has established. Or if I am emotional, romantic, all that business, then my approach will be sloppy, not precise, not exact. 這一切的中心肇因 它的根源是什麼? 請了解,我們是在一起思考 因此你要運用心智 你要覺察自己如何面對問題 覺察自己的矛盾、衝突 自己的分化和…顧慮 在那個意識裡 由分化、衝突 信仰與非信仰等等組成的 你有覺察這一切嗎? 或者只覺察其中的一個片段? 一個要求你立即反應的片段 如果我關心自己的生計 就不會關心其他的事 因為那是最切身的要求 我需要金錢、食物我有子女、有責任 因此我處理這個問題的途徑 會被我想擁有工作的欲望主導 或者…我一直沿著某一模式思考 沿著某一個方向 我覺察到自己陷在那個模式裡 因此我處理這個問題時 始終根據那個模式 我的心智建立的模式處理 或者…如果我感性、浪漫諸如此類的 那麼我處理的途徑就會…懶散 不精密、不正確
24:07 So one must be very clear for oneself how we approach this problem, because if we approach it with any pattern at all we shall not be able to solve this problem. Therefore is our mind free from patterns, from ideas, from a direction? You understand my question? Please go into it with me, with us, together. Are you aware first of the confusion of the world which is becoming worse and worse every day? And the confusion in us which we have inherited, to which we have added, the society in which we live which is so utterly confused, there is such immense injustice, millions starving and the affluent society on the other side. Tyranny and democratic freedom to vote, to think what you like, to express what you like. 因此你必須非常清楚 我們要如何處理這個問題 因為如果我們帶著任何模式處理 就無法解決這個問題 我們的心智有擺脫模式 觀念和方向嗎? 了解我的問題嗎? 請跟我,我們一起深入 你有先覺察世界的混淆 這個每況愈下的混淆嗎? 我們內在繼承而來的混淆 我們附加給它的混淆 我們生存其中的社會 如此混淆的社會 大量的不公義 幾百萬人在挨餓 以及另一個富裕的社會 暴政和民主式的自由 有投票和思考的自由 隨心所欲地表達自己
26:00 So as we pointed out the other day, we human beings, our minds and our consciousness, is the consciousness and the mind of the world. Wherever you go, in the most remote part of the world, there, man is suffering, anxious, uncertain, lonely, desperate in his loneliness, burdened with sorrow, insecure like the rest of the world. Psychologically, as we have pointed out over and over again, you are the humanity, you are not separate from the rest of mankind. This idea that you are an individual with a mind specially yours, which is an absurdity because this brain has evolved through time, the brain of mankind, and that brain is part of mankind, genetically and so on, so on. So you are the world and the world is you. It is not an idea or a concept, a Utopian nonsense, it is a fact. And that mind is utterly confused. And we are trying to discover for ourselves the root of it. 我們前幾天已經指出 我們人類 我們的心智和意識 就是世界的意識和心智 無論你走到哪裡 包括最偏遠的地區 都有人在受苦 焦慮、不確定、孤獨 孤獨中的絕望 背負著哀傷的重擔 像世界其他部分一樣不安全 心理上來說 正如我們一再地指出過你就是人類 你和其他人類不是分離的 認為你是個體的觀念 擁有你獨屬的心智 這是荒謬的事因為頭腦是透過時間演化來的 是人類的頭腦那個頭腦是人類的一部分 基因等的一部分 因此你是世界,世界是你 這不是觀念、概念或烏托邦式的胡言亂語 這是一個事實 那個心智是徹底混淆的 我們要親自探索它的根源
28:17 What is the cause of this division? As we said, wherever there is a division, with man, woman, between nation and nation, with a group and a group, this division of belief, ideals, concepts, historical conclusions, and materialistic attitudes, all these are divisions. The Arab and the Jew, you know. This division must inevitably create conflict. That is a fact. And we are saying: what is the cause of this division in us as well as in the world? Through division we thought or we imagined that there can be security. Where there is division as the British there is certain physical security; as the French, the German, each group holding together as an idea, as a concept, under a flag, think there is security in this isolation. And this isolation must inevitably create division – the Arabs and the Israelis say ‘I must be secure’ – as a group, and all the rest of it. So do we understand, realise, very deeply the truth of this, that as long as there is division there must be conflict? Because in that division we think there is, in this isolation, in this seclusion, we think there is security and obviously there is no security. You can build a wall around yourself as a nation but that wall is going to be broken down. 這種分化的肇因是什麼? 我們說過,有分化的地方 男人和女人 國家和國家、團體和團體 信仰、理想的分化 概念、歷史結論的分化 物質主義的態度 這些都是分化 阿拉伯人和猶太人,你們都知道 這種分化必然會製造衝突 這是事實 我們要問的是 我們內在和世界的分化 它的肇因是什麼? 透過分化,我們認為或想像 分化會帶來安全感,對嗎? 有分化為英國人的地方 就會有一種身體上的安全感 正如法國人或德國人一樣 每一個團體都聚合在一起 在一個觀念、概念以及一面旗子的保護下 認為這種孤立中會有安全感 這種孤立感必然會製造分化 阿拉伯人和以色列人說我必須有群體的安全感 以及諸如此類的事 我們有深刻地了解和體會其中的真相嗎? 只要有分化的地方 就必然有衝突 因為我們認為在那個分化裡 在這種孤立和封閉裡 我們認為其中有安全感 顯然並沒有安全感 你大可用圍牆築起一個國家 但那堵牆會有倒塌的一天
31:09 So what is the cause, the root of this division? Which is, each one, each human being in the world thinks, lives according to the pattern that he is separate from another. His problems, his anxieties, his neurosis, his particular way of thinking and so on, so on. The centre of this is this idea that ‘I am separate from you’. Right? Could we go along there? 因此…這個分化的肇因或根源是什麼? 也就是說 每一個人,世界上的每一個人類 都根據那個模式思考和生活 認為自己與他人是分離的,對嗎? 他的問題、焦慮、神經質 他特別的思考方式等等 它的中心就是一個觀念 認為我與你是分離的 對嗎? 我們有交會嗎?
32:23 Now, is that a fact? As a fact as the microphone, is that a fact that we are separate individuals, totally different from another? You may be tall, you may be short, black hair, white, etc. – it is division, but inwardly are we different? Inwardly we go through all the... you know. And those who live in the Far East, they go through exactly, or similar, like yourselves. So there is no division psychologically. And as long as we accept that idea that we are separate you must have conflict and therefore division, and confusion. 那麼這是事實嗎? 就像麥克風是事實一樣 我們是分離的個體是事實嗎? 彼此完全不同的個體 你也許長得高、也許矮頭髮是黑的、白的等 這是分化 但我們的內在有不同嗎? 我們內在都會經歷…你們知道 那些住在遠東的人 也有和你同樣或類似的經歷 因此心理上並沒有分別 只要我們接受我們是分離的觀念 你必然會有衝突因而有分化和混淆
33:45 Are we thinking together, or you are accepting this as an idea and then saying to yourself, ‘Let us examine the idea, whether it is true or false’ – the idea – you understand what I am saying? You hear a statement like this, that as long as you think you are separate from another human being psychologically, there must be conflict and disorder. That is a fact. When you hear that, do you make an abstraction of it as an idea and then see how that idea can be carried out? I don’t know if you follow this. Or it is a fact. If it is a fact, then you can do something about it. But if you are merely making an abstraction of a fact into an idea then we are getting lost, because you have your idea and I have my idea and so on, so on. But it is a common fact upon which we stand as human beings, that as long as there is division inside, me and you, there must be conflict and disorder and confusion. But our minds are so conditioned, for millennia, thousands of years, we have been conditioned by what other people have said, that we are separate, by religions that have said we are separate, that each individual must save himself – you know, the whole pattern repeated over and over again. Being so conditioned it is very difficult to accept something which perhaps is true – I am using the word ‘perhaps’ because I am being not dogmatic. But it is a fact. I am willing, the speaker is willing to go into it analytically, with argument, intellectually, reason, at the end of it, if you are willing too, we come to the same fact. Then it will not be dogmatic. We are not dogmatic about this tent, it is a fact. 我們有在一起思考嗎? 或者你當做一個觀念在接受 接著對自己說 讓我們來檢視這個觀念 檢視它是真或假,那個觀念 了解我說什麼嗎? 你聽到這一類的陳述 只要你認為自己 與其他人類是分離的,心理上 就必然有衝突和失序 這是事實 當你聽到這個陳述就把它變成抽象的概念 當做一個觀念 再看如何執行那個觀念嗎? 不知道你們是否了解 或者這是事實 如果是事實 那你就能對它做些什麼 但如果你只把那個事實變成一個抽象觀念 那我們就會迷失 因為你有你的觀念 我有我的觀念等等 但如果它是我們立足的共同事實 以人類的身份 只要內在有你、我的分別 就必然有衝突、失序和混淆 但我們的心智被制約得太深 經過幾千年的制約 我們都被制約了 別人說我們是分離的 宗教說我們是分離的 因此每個人必須自救 你們知道那些千篇一律的模式 由於被制約得太深 讓我們很難接受一些… 或許是真理的東西 我使用或許這個詞 因為我不想武斷 但這是一個事實 我,說者願意以分析的態度深入 以知性的論辯和理性 如果你們也願意,到最後 我們會來到同一個事實 那就不會武斷了 我們不會對這個帳篷武斷這是事實
37:06 So are we, if we want to understand the nature of confusion and the ending of confusion, completely, not relatively, are we aware of this fact? If we are aware then the question arises: what shall I do? You understand? I know I am divided, that’s a fact, that we have accepted. Now how am I to put away this division? Now please follow this a little bit, carefully, if you will. 因此,我們… 如果我們想了解混淆的本質 以及混淆的終結 徹底地,不是相對地 我們有覺察到這個事實嗎? 如果有,接下來的問題是我該怎樣麼做? 了解嗎? 我知道我分化了 這是我們都接受的事實 我該如何擱下這個分化? 請你們仔細聽
37:59 Is the fact of this division different from the observer who is observing the fact? You understand my question? No? No, I will explain a little. I observe greed. I am greedy. Is that greed which I observe different from me, from the observer who says, ‘I am greedy’? You understand my question? Or greed is the observer? So there is no division between the observer who says, ‘I am greedy’ and acts upon greed saying, ‘I must not be greedy. I must control it. I must suppress it. I must go beyond it’ – whatever. So there is a division, and that division is conflict and therefore disorder. But the fact is, the observer who says ‘I am greedy’, that observer is greed itself. Have you gone so far? If you have gone so far, then I am asking: is this confusion, this division, different from the observer who is me observing it? Or this confusion, this division, is me? My whole being is that. I wonder if you’ve come to that point, otherwise we can’t go much further. Please, avanti! This is really important if you can really understand this once and for all, the fact. If you understand it, it will make life totally different, because in that there is no conflict. That I will point it out when we... 這個分化的事實有別於 那個觀察事實的觀察者嗎? 了解我的問題嗎?不了解? 好,我稍微說明一下 我觀察貪婪 我是貪婪的 我觀察的貪婪不同於我 不同於那個說「我貪婪」的觀察者嗎? 了解我的問題嗎? 或者貪婪就是觀察者? 因此其中就沒有分化 那個說「我貪婪」的觀察者 並對貪婪反應的行為,對嗎? 與那個對貪婪的反應 說「我不能貪婪」「我必須超越貪婪」之類的 兩者之中有分化 那個分化就是衝突 因此是失序 事實是 說「我貪婪」的觀察者 那個觀察者就是貪婪本身對嗎? 你們明白了嗎? 如果明白,那我就要問 這種混淆、這種分化 不同於那個觀察它的觀察者嗎? 或者這個混淆、分化就是我? 我整個存在就是那個,對嗎? 不知你們有沒來到這個點 否則就無法再進一步了請你們前進 這一點真的非常重要如果你們能了解 一次了解這個事實 如果你們了解生命就會截然不同 因為其中沒有衝突 這一點我會指出…
40:34 Suppose I am attached to a person. In that attachment and the consequences of that attachment are innumerable: pain, jealousy, anxiety, dependency, the whole sequence of attachment. Is that attachment to the person, which brings about a division – I am attached to you as an audience. Thank god I am not! But I am attached to you. Please, do pay attention to this. I am attached to you. In that attachment there is division immediately. Now is that attachment, the feeling of dependence, clinging, holding on to somebody, different from me? Or I am that? I am attachment. So if one realises that conflict ends – you understand? It is so. Not that I must get rid of it, not that I must be independent, detached. Detachment is attachment. You understand? If I try to become detached, I am attached to that detachment. I wonder if you follow all this! 假設我依附於一個人 在那個依附中 那個依附產生了無數的後果 痛苦、嫉妒、焦慮、依賴 依附的整個序列 那個對人的依附 帶來分化的依附 我依附你們…對嗎?把你們當成聽眾 感謝上帝,我沒有 我依附於你們 請注意聽 我依附於你們 分化就立刻出現在那個依附中,對嗎? 那個依附,那個依賴感 執著,緊抓著一個人 不同於我嗎? 或者我是那個? 我就是依附 如果你體會這一點衝突就結束了,明白嗎? 事實如此 不是我要擺脫它 不是我要…獨立、出離 出離就是依附,明白嗎? 如果我試圖變得出離我就是在依附出離,對嗎? 不知你們聽懂沒有
42:36 So am I very clear that there is no division when I say ‘I am attached’ – I am attached, I am the state of attachment. Therefore you have removed completely all conflict, haven’t you? Do you realise that? I am that. I wonder if you understand this. May I go on from there? 因此,我說的很清楚了 當我說我有依附其中就沒有分化 我是依附,我是依附的狀態 因此你就把所有的衝突完全移除了 不是嗎? 明白嗎?我是…我是那個 不知你們是否了解 我可以接著講嗎?
43:12 So I, me, is confusion, not that I realise I am confusion, or that I have been told I am confusion, but the fact is: I, as a human being, am in a state of confusion. Any action I do will bring more confusion. You understand my question? So I am in a state of total confusion. And all the struggle to overcome it, suppress it, to be detached, all that is gone. I wonder if it has! See how difficult it is for our minds to be precise in this, to learn about it, to be free, to have the leisure to learn. 因此我就是混淆 不是我體會自己是混淆 或別人說我是混淆 事實是,身為人類的我 就是混淆的狀態 我做的任何行為都會帶來更多混淆,對嗎? 了解我的問題嗎? 我處於完全混淆的狀態 為了克服、壓制、出離的 所有掙扎都不見了,對嗎? 不知你們有沒有 看到這有多困難了嗎? 讓我們的心智以精確的態度 學習、釋放,有學習的閒暇
44:29 Then what takes place? I am confusion; not, I realise I am confusion. You see the difference? I am that. Therefore what has happened? All movement of escapes, suppression, have completely come to an end. If it has not, don’t move from there. Be free first of all escapes, of all verbal, symbolic escapes but remain totally with the fact that you are, as a human being, in a state of confusion. Then what has taken place? We are two friends talking this over, this is not a group therapy, or any of that nonsense, or psychological analysis. It is not that. Two people talking over together. Say now we have come to that point, logically, rationally, unemotionally, therefore sanely. Because to be sane is the most difficult thing. So we have come to that point: that is, I am that. What has taken place in the mind? Right, can we go on from there? 接著會發生什麼? 我…我是混淆 不是我體會自己是混淆 看到差別了嗎? 我是那個 因此發生了什麼事? 所有逃避、壓抑的活動 已經完全停止了,對嗎? 如果沒有,也不要移動 先擺脫所有逃避 所有言說和象徵性的逃避 全然與事實同在 也就是說,身為人類的你處於混淆的狀態,對嗎? 接著會發生什麼? 我們是兩個朋友在討論 這不是團體治療或那一類的胡言亂語 或心理分析,全都不是 兩個人一起討論 假設我們到了那個點 邏輯上、理性上、非情緒性的 也因此是理智的 因為理智是最困難的一件事 我們來到那個點 也就是說,我…我是那個 我的心智裡發生了什麼? 對嗎?我們可以繼續講嗎?
46:42 Before, I wasted energy in suppressing it, trying to find how not to be confused, going to some guru, some other – you follow? – – all that I have done which is a wastage of energy. Now when there is the realisation I am confused, what has happened? Go on, sirs, come with me. My mind therefore is completely attentive to confusion. Right? My mind is in a state of complete attention with regard to confusion. You are following this? Are you? Therefore what takes place? It is when there is complete attention there is no confusion. It is only when there is no attention then confusion arises. Confusion arises when there is division, which is inattention. I wonder if you get this! 以前我浪費能量 壓抑它,想找出不混淆的辦法 去找某一個上師之類的,明白嗎? 我做的這一切都是浪費能量 現在我體會了自己是混淆 發生了什麼事? 先生,跟我一起思考 我的心智便完全關注在混淆上,對嗎? 我的心智完全處於關注的狀態 關注於混淆 對嗎?你們明白嗎? 懂嗎? 因此會發生什麼? 當你有完全的關注時 就沒有混淆,對嗎? 只有當沒有關注時混淆才會生起 混淆在有分化也就是不關注時生起 不知你們懂不懂
48:21 So where there is total attention without any dissipation of energy, saying, ‘How am I to get this total attention?’ – that is a wastage of energy. But you see that where there is confusion and that is brought about by inattention, then that very inattention is attention. You get it? Come on, sirs. You have got something, right? Now with that attention, we are going to follow, we are going to examine not only fear, pleasure, suffering. Right? 有全然關注的地方 沒有任何能量的耗散 你問,我如何獲得這種全然的關注? 那是浪費能量,對嗎? 但你看見有混淆的地方 混淆是不關注造成的 那麼那個不關注就變成關注了 明白了嗎?先生明白了一些,對嗎? 我們要用那個關注追蹤 檢視的不只是恐懼、享樂、受苦 對嗎?
49:17 Because it is important to be free of fear. Mind has never been free of fear. You may cover it, you may suppress it, you may be unaware of it, you may be so enchanted by the world outside that you never are aware of your own deep-rooted fears. And where there is fear there is no freedom, there is no love, there is discontent. You are following all this? Please, sirs, don’t let’s waste time on all this. Sir, you must have the capacity to run – not physically but inwardly run, jump, not go step by step like a snail. 因為擺脫恐懼很重要 心智始終沒有擺脫過恐懼 你也許掩飾它、壓抑它 也許沒有覺察它 也許太迷戀於外在的世界 以至於從未覺察內在根深柢固的恐懼,對嗎? 有恐懼的地方就沒有自由 沒有愛 就有不滿足 你們明白嗎? 請說話呀,先生 不要為了這個浪費時間 你必須有跑的能力 不是肢體的跑 而是內在的奔跑、跳躍 不是像蝸牛那樣一步一步地爬
50:44 One sees what fear does in our life. If I am afraid of you because you bully me, because you oppress me, because you dictate what I should do, you have told me as the priest that I must do this, etc., and I am not doing it and I am not doing it because I am discontent with something else and therefore fear. You understand? So discontentment also has fear with it. And fear brings darkness to the mind. You know we are not talking of a particular neurotic fear, but we are talking about fear itself, not about something. When we understand the root of fear, fear about something disappears. You understand what I am saying? If I am afraid of the dark – that's my particular fear – and I want that particular fear to be resolved. I am not concerned with the whole field of fear. But if I understand the whole field of fear the other thing doesn’t exist. I wonder if you see that. 你們看到恐懼在生活中的情形 如果我因為你的霸凌而怕你 因為你壓迫我 因為你支使我該做什麼 你以傳教士的身份叫我必須這麼做等 而我沒有做 我不做是因為我對別的事不滿 因此有恐懼 明白嗎? 因此不滿足也伴隨著恐懼,對嗎? 恐懼把黑暗帶進心裡,對嗎? 我們談的不是特別的神經性恐懼 而是恐懼本身不是你恐懼的那件事,對嗎? 當我們了解恐懼的根源 你恐懼的那個事物就消失了 明白我說什麼嗎? 如果我害怕黑暗 這是我特別的恐懼 我想解決那個特別的恐懼 我不關心整個恐懼的領域 但如果我了解整個恐懼的領域 我恐懼的事物就不存在了你們能了解嗎?
52:35 So we are now concerned not with a particular form of fear – a man who is afraid to face the public, a man who is afraid, or a woman who is afraid of something or other, but we are concerned with the whole field of fear. Can that fear be dissolved completely, so that the physical fear – you understand? – we will go into this little by little – the physical fear and the complex fears of the psyche, the inward fears? The physical fears one can deal with fairly simply. But if you are attached to physical fears and are concerned only with resolving the physical fears then you are attached to that which then will create division and therefore conflict. You follow all this? So if we understand first, first the psychological fears then you can deal with the physical fears, not the other way round – clear? See the reason of it. Because if I am concerned only with my fear, which is: I have got cancer or some disease, or some incident that has warped my mind, and therefore I am frightened, and I am only concerned with that and I am asking, first solve that please before you go into the other. You understand? Whereas we are saying first deal with the wider fear, the depth and the nature and the darkness of fear, then you will yourself resolve the particular physical fear. Don’t start the other way – the physical first and then the other. That is what we all want to do. You understand? Give me bread first, we will talk about the other. 我們關心的不是一個特別形式的恐懼 一個害怕面對群眾的男人 一個男人 或一個女人會害怕什麼事物 我們關心的是整個恐懼的場域 那個恐懼能完全化解嗎? 以至於身體的恐懼 了解嗎? 我們會一點一點深入 身體的恐懼與心理的恐懼情結 內在的恐懼,對嗎? 處理身體的恐懼很簡單,對嗎? 但如果你執著於身體的恐懼 只關心如何解決身體的恐懼 那麼你就會執著於那個 接著就會製造分化 進而產生衝突,明白嗎? 如果我們先了解先了解!心理恐懼 接著就能處理身體的恐懼了 不是反向處理,清楚嗎? 看見其中的理由 因為我只關心自己的恐懼 例如,我有癌症或其他疾病 或一個扭曲我心智的意外 我因此害怕 我只關心那件事 我要求你先解決這個再進入另一個問題 了解嗎? 我們說的是先處理廣泛的恐懼 恐懼的深度、本質和黑暗 接著你自己就能解決身體的恐懼,對嗎? 不要反向進行 先處理身體的恐懼再處理心理的 我們都想這麼做,了解嗎? 先給我麵包,再談其他的
55:19 So we are saying psychological fears are far more important. That makes us such ugly human beings. When there is fear we become violent, we want to destroy in the name of God, in the name of religion, in the name of social revolution and so on. Now can we as human beings who have lived with this fear for immeasurable time, can we be free of it? We have asked the question. Now how do you approach the problem of fear? Do you approach it with the desire to resolve it? You understand? If you do you are again separating yourself from the fact of fear. I wonder if you get this. Right? Can we go on? 我們要說的是 心理的恐懼更重要 它使我們變成醜陋的人類 恐懼讓我們變得暴力 我們想毀滅 以上帝之名或以宗教之名 以社會革命之名等 試問,身為人類與這個恐懼共存的我們 經過無量劫的時間 我們能擺脫恐懼嗎?對嗎? 我們問過這個問題 那麼…我們該如何處理恐懼的問題? 你是帶著要解決的欲望來處理它嗎? 明白嗎? 如果是,那你又把自己和恐懼的事實分離了 不知道你們懂不懂對嗎?可以繼續嗎?
56:34 So are you approaching it as an observer who is afraid and wants to resolve it? Or you realise that you are fear? Right, sir? Can we go on from there? Have you given your total attention to this fact? That you, as a human being, who is the rest of humanity, and that human being is frightened, lives in fear, consciously or unconsciously, superficial, psychological superficial fears, or deep hidden fears. The hidden fear becomes completely open when you are attentive. You understand? Are you following? Can we go on? Don’t agree with me, please. You are investigating, you are looking at yourself, not agreeing with the speaker, the speaker is not important. And I mean it, he is not important. What is important is that you walk out of this tent without a single shadow of fear. So when you become aware of fear, do you escape from it? Do you try to find an answer for it? Do you try to overcome it? If you do you are dissipating, therefore you are dividing, and therefore conflict about fear, how to be free of it. You follow? All that arises. But if you realise that fear is you, therefore there is no movement to be made. No movement to be made, you are that, and therefore all your attention is directed, is that, in that attention fear is held. Right? 你是以一個害怕的觀察者來處理它 想要解決它 或者…你明白自己就是恐懼? 對嗎,先生?可以繼續講嗎? 你有把全副的關注交給事實嗎? 也就是說,做為人類的你也就是其他的人類 那個人類有懼怕 活在恐懼裡 有意識或無意識地 膚面的、心理的、膚面的恐懼 或隱藏在深處的恐懼 當你關注的時候隱藏的恐懼就會完全打開 了解嗎? 明白嗎?可以繼續講嗎? 請不要同意我的說法 你在探究,你在注視自己 不是同意說者的話說者並不重要 我說真心話,他並不重要 重要的是當你們走出帳篷 沒有半點恐懼的陰影 當你覺察到恐懼時你會逃避嗎? 你會試著找出答案嗎?會試著克服它嗎? 這麼做就是在分散能量因此自我分化了 因此有恐懼的衝突如何擺脫的衝突 明白嗎?這些都會生起 但如果你明白恐懼就是你 因此就不需要做任何活動了對嗎? 不需要做任何活動你就是那個 因此你所有的關注都導向那個 恐懼就被困在那個關注裡對嗎?
59:16 Are you getting tired? It is up to you. You see, as long as we try to overcome, the very overcoming has to be overcome. You understand? But if you say, ‘Yes, it is a fact and I realise it, I won’t move from that’, then the thing dissolves completely, not relative, not one day and then next day full of fears. It is gone, when you have given complete attention to it. Similarly with regard to pleasure. Careful now! We have to be very careful here. 你們累了嗎? 由你們決定 只要我們試圖克服它 那個克服本身也要被克服 明白嗎? 但如果你說,是的這是事實,我體會到了 我不會離開它 那麼那個東西就會完全化解 不是相對性的今天化解明天又充滿了恐懼 而是不見了 當你給它完全的關注時 對享樂也是同樣的方式 小心點,我們要非常小心
1:00:25 I don’t know if you have noticed right from the time of man, one thing that has driven him everlastingly forward is pleasure, the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of sorrow. You understand? You see the pictures, the paintings, the ancient writing, the symbols, everything says, ‘Pursue that, avoid that’. As though you can divide life – fear, pleasure, sorrow, job – you understand? They are all one. Aren’t they? But see what we have done. Our mind has been conditioned, accepting, living in this norm of constant pursuit of pleasure. God – if you have that image, is the essence of pleasure. You name it differently but your urge is to attain that ultimate sublime pleasure so that you will never be disturbed, you will never be in conflict, and so on, so on. And we must understand it, not suppress it, not run away from it. 不知你們是否注意過 自有人類以來 自始至終驅動人類的是享樂 對享樂的追逐 以及對哀傷的迴避 明白嗎? 你們看過照片、圖畫 古代的書寫、象徵 每一樣東西都說追求那個,避免那個 就彷彿你能把生活 分割成恐懼、享樂、哀傷、工作 了解嗎? 它們是一體的,不是嗎? 但看我們做了什麼 我們的心被制約了、接受了 活在持續追逐享樂的規範裡 如果你有上帝這個意象的話他就是享樂的本質 你們各有不同的命名 但你們都有想達到那個終極享樂的驅力 好讓你永遠不受干擾 永遠沒有衝突等等 我們必須了解它不是壓抑它、逃避它
1:02:16 Why has pleasure, like sorrow, like fear, become so all important in life? Like sorrow – do you understand the word ‘sorrow’, the suffering of man, the suffering of centuries, war after war, destroying human beings, destroying nature, destroying animals, whales, everything. Man not only suffers but causes suffering. That is part of us, part of our consciousness. And we try to avoid that because we haven’t solved it but we think pursuit of pleasure is the main thing. We at least can have something accurate, something real that will go on. So that becomes dominant and fear, sorrow, anxiety, all that in the background; not only sexual pleasure, the remembrance, the pictures and all the rest of the thing that goes on in the mind, if you watch it, see what is happening. Your own minds become full of that, not the actual act but the whole build-up, and that building-up is called love. So pleasure, love, suffering, fear are all entangled, all interrelated. 享樂為什麼像哀傷和恐懼一樣 變成生活中如此重要的東西? 比如哀傷… 了解哀傷這個詞嗎? 人的受苦 幾世紀以來的受苦 接二連三的戰爭 摧毀人類、摧毀大自然 摧毀動物、鯨魚等每一樣東西 人不僅受苦,也製造苦難 這是我們的…意識的一部分 我們想逃避受苦 因為我們沒有解決它 我們認為追逐享樂是主要之事 希望至少有一個正確的事 一個可以永續的真實事物 因此它就變成生活的主導了 恐懼、哀傷、焦慮全都拋到背景裡了 不只是性的享樂 還有記憶、照片以及諸如此類的東西 一直在心中縈繞的東西 注視它,看發生些什麼事 你心中充滿了這些東西 不是實際的行動而是架構起來的東西 那個架構就被稱為愛 因此享樂、愛、受苦和恐懼全都糾纏在一起 全都互相關聯
1:04:39 So the question is: will you take fear, pleasure, sorrow, separately? You understand? One by one. Or will you have the capacity to deal with the whole of it? You understand? Because our minds, being broken up, take one by one, and hoping to resolve one by one that we will come to the end of breaking up, the fragments. Now how will you deal with the whole of it? You understand my question? Deal with your disorder, pleasure, fear, sorrow as a total movement of life. You understand my question? Please, come with me. Not as something separate – as a whole. Can you do it? That is, can you look at yourself as though it were in a mirror, psychologically, as a whole being, or you only look at a part? Do you understand? Go with it, sir. How do you look at yourself? Your job is different, your wife and children are different, your religion is different, your particular way of thinking is different, opposed to so many other ways, you have your own experience which is different from others, your own ideals, you own intentions, ambitions, all that – you follow? Can you take all that as one unitary movement? You understand what I am saying? Come on, sirs. That is the only way to solve the whole thing, not through fragments. 因此問題是 你會個別看待恐懼享樂、哀傷嗎? 了解嗎?一個接一個 或者你有能力把它們當做一個整體處理? 了解嗎? 因為我們分裂的心智 會一個接著一個 希望能一個接一個地解決 最後就能終結分裂和片段 你要如何以一個整體來處理? 了解我的問題嗎? 處理你的失序 享樂、恐懼、哀傷 當做生命的整個活動 了解我的問題嗎?請跟我一起探究 不是當做個別的東西而是一個整體 你們做得到嗎? 換言之,你能注視自己 就像一面心理的鏡子一樣 看到整個存在 或者你只看局部? 明白嗎? 先生,你是怎麼看自己的? 你的職業不一樣 你的妻子和兒女不一樣 你的宗教不一樣 你特別的思考方式不一樣 與許多其他方式截然不同 你的經驗也不同於別人 你的理想、意圖、野心等了解嗎? 你能把這些當做一個單位的活動嗎? 了解我說什麼嗎?回答呀,各位 這是解決整件事的唯一方法 不是透過片段,對嗎?
1:07:36 Now how will a mind that has been broken up for generations upon generations, how will that mind, the brain, the emotions – mind, how will that mind approach or realise the totality? Which is more important? Not more – which is necessary – you follow what I am saying? Will you approach it fragmentarily, the whole of life, business first, money first, house first, wife, children, sex, bit by bit? Or the whole of existence? Can your mind see the whole of it at all, is it capable? Or are you striving to see the whole of it? If you are striving to see the whole of it, that is finished, you will never have it, because then you create a division, conflict, confusion. But when you see that life is one movement and to see that you need to learn – you understand? – learn, not from me, learn from yourself by observing. Learn to observe the division and see the futility of approaching that, the obvious fact, you can’t – through one fragment you can’t approach the whole universe. You must have a mind that is capable of receiving the whole universe and that is possible only when the mind is clear of confusion, fear. Then there is no shadow of division, as the ‘me’ and ‘you’, my country, your country, my dogma – all that. That means when there is complete freedom then there is a perception of the whole. And from that – comprehension; from that – intelligence. That intelligence can act in the world, to get a job, to get no job, to do anything. But now we approach it as parts and therefore we are creating havoc in the world. Right? 一個被分裂的心智 經過世世代代的分裂 那個心智、頭腦、情緒也就是心智 那個心智 如何處理或體會整體? 哪一個比較重要? 不是比較,哪一個是必要的明白我說什麼嗎? 你會以片段的方式處理生命的整體嗎? 事業、金錢、房子第一妻子、兒女、性 一點一點地處理? 或是…存在的整體? 你的心智能看到整體嗎?它有這個能力嗎? 或者你試圖要看到整體? 如果你試圖看到整體一切就結束了 你永遠都看不到 因為你會製造分化衝突和混淆 但當你看見生命是一個活動 你需要學習才能看見,了解嗎? 學習,不是跟我學是藉由觀察跟自己學習 學習觀察分化 看見處理它的徒勞 明顯的事實是,你做不到 你無法透過一個片段進入整個宇宙 你必須有一個能接納整個宇宙的心靈 只有當心靈擺脫了混淆和恐懼才有可能 接著就不會有…分化的陰影 我和你,我的國家和你的國家我的教條,這一切! 這意味著有徹底的自由時 就會有對整體的感知 從那個理解,從那個智慧 那個能在世間運作的智慧 找工作或不找工作它能做任何事 但只要我們以局部來處理 就會為世界製造災難,對嗎?
1:11:10 Finished for this morning. May we go on tomorrow when we meet again? 今早就講到這裡 明天聚會時再繼續講
1:11:23 SUBTITLE TEXT COPYRIGHT 1980 KRISHNAMURTI FOUNDATION TRUST LTD 字幕版權所有1980克里希那穆提基金會