Krishnamurti Subtitles home


BR84T3 - 是否可能结束所有的「苦」？
第三次公开演讲
布鲁克伍德公园，英国
1984年9月1日



1:59 Krishnamurti: May we go on where we left off last Sunday? We were talking about various problems of life, not technological problems, but human problems. Our psychological hurts, the wounds that one receives from childhood, which we carry throughout life; and these hurts prevent us from having real relationship with others. And these hurts bring about fear. We resist every form of further hurts, therefore we have to build a wall round ourselves, and thereby become more and more isolated, neurotic, and so on. We talked about that; that we have created an image for ourselves, about ourselves and these images, whether they are political, religious, or one’s own psychological images, that is subjective images, are the cause of these hurts. Those are the images that are hurt. 克里希那穆提：我们可以接着我们上周日结束的地方继续讲下去吗？ 此前我们谈论了各种生活的问题， 不是技术上的问题，而是人类的问题。 我们心理上的创伤， 我们从小开始所受到的伤害， 我们会终身携带着这种伤害， 而这些伤害阻止了我们 拥有与他人真正的关系。 这些伤害带来了恐惧。 于是我们便抵制各种形式的进一步的伤害， 所以我们在自己周围建造了一道围墙， 并由此而变得越来越孤立，越来越神经质，等等。 我们谈论了这些东西， 那就是我们为自己创造出了一个形象，一个关于我们自己的形象， 而这些形象 ——不管它们是政治上的形象，宗教上的形象， 还是我们自己心理上的形象，也就是个人主观上的形象—— 这些形象就是导致这些伤害的原因。 是这些形象受到了伤害。
3:54 And we talked about relationship – how important it is to have really good, healthy, rational, without any conflict between man and woman, and so on, and we went into that fairly deeply. 我们也讨论了关系 ——在男人和女人，等等之间拥有一种真正美好的、 健康的、理性的、 没有任何冲突的关系是多么重要， 我们非常深入地探究了这一点。
4:21 We talked about fear last Sunday and the whole problem of time. We said time is the movement of the past modifying itself in the present, and the future is what is now. So we said all time is contained in the present. If one could really deeply go into that question – the nature of time, the nature of thought and time is thought – we talked about that quite considerably. And if all the present, if all time is contained in the now, then what is change, is there any change then at all? And what is action? And what is also relationship when there is no tomorrow? Tomorrow and the further thousand tomorrows are contained in the present. And if there is no radical change in the present, the future is what we are now. We are, as we said, a whole accumulation of memories, we are memories gathered through thousands of experiences, knowledge from experience, and that knowledge is limited and therefore all knowledge, whether in the past, the present, or in the future, is always limited. And thought, which is also the response of memory, that thought is also limited. So we are going to enquire this morning several things like morality, justice, whether it is possible completely to end sorrow. And if there is time, we will also talk over together what is the nature, what does it mean to die? And also we would like to point out this is not an entertainment, intellectual, romantic, sentimental. This is not a propaganda by the speaker. He is not inviting you to any theory, to any ideology, to any form of persuasion. And also we would like to point out that he is not a guru and all that nonsense. 我们上周日还谈论了「恐惧」， 以及关于「时间」的整个问题。 我们说：时间就是一种「过去」的运动， 「过去」在当下修改了自己， 而「未来」就是现在的模样。 所以我们说：所有的时间都包含在当下之中。 如果我们可以真正深入地去探究这个问题 ——即「时间的本质」和「思想的本质」， 时间就是思想—— 我们已经详尽地讨论过了这一点。 而如果所有的「当下」， （说错了）如果所有的时间都包含在「当下」中， 那么「改变」是什么呢？ 那时还会存在任何「改变」吗？ 而「行动」是什么呢？ 「关系」又是什么呢——如果不存在什么「明天」的话。 明天，以及未来上千个明天， 它们都包含在「当下」之中。 而如果我们在此刻没有根本性的改变， 那么我们的未来还是会和我们现在一样。 就如我们说过的，我们就是 全部积累起来的记忆， 我们就是记忆， 这些记忆是通过成千上万的经验收集起来的， 以及那些来自于经验的知识， 而那种知识是有限的， 因此所有的知识， 无论是过去的、现在的，还是未来的知识，永远都是局限的。 而思想——思想同样也是记忆的反应—— 那种思想也是局限的。 所以今天早上我们要来探询几个东西， 比如道德、 正义、 以及是否可能彻底地结束苦难。 而如果我们还有时间的话，我们也将会来一起讨论一下： 死亡的本质是什么？死亡意味着什么？ 而我们同样也想要指出这并不是一次娱乐活动 ——智力上的、浪漫多情的娱乐活动。 这也不是一次来自于演讲者的宣传洗脑。 他并没有向你介绍任何理论， 任何意识形态， 或者任何形式的信仰。 我们还想要指出： 那就是他并不是一个古鲁和所有这些荒谬之物。
8:43 So we should talk over together, that is, you and the speaker, investigate together. And therefore when that investigation is true, deep and continuous, then it is your own, then it is nothing to do with the speaker. As we pointed out quite often, the speaker is merely a telephone and what he says is important – important in the sense that it covers the whole of our human existence, psychologically, subjectively, inwardly, and therefore if we could think together, explore together, take a long journey together, then that journey, that investigation is yours, therefore it is your own understanding, not the understanding of what K is talking about. That is very clear. 所以我们应该一起来讨论这些东西， 也就是：你和演讲者一起来探究。 由此当这种探究是真实的、 深刻的和持续的， 那它就会成为你自己的东西， 那时它就和演讲者无关了。 就如我们经常指出的， 演讲者仅仅是一个话筒， 他所说的东西才是重要的 ——之所以重要，是因为它涵盖了 我们人类的整个存在， 这里指的是心理上的、主观上的，内心的存在， 因此如果我们可以一起思考、一起探索、 一起踏上一段漫长的旅程， 那么这段旅程、 这种探究就会成为你自己的东西， 因此它就是你自己的了解， 而不是对于克（即克里希那穆提）所说东西的了解。 这是很清楚的事。
10:08 Then we should talk about morality. The word ‘morality’ means behaviour, manner, habit according to any kind of culture, environment, and is there a morality that is not time-binding? Can we go along with this together? A morality that is not within the field of time. Our morality is relative. Our morality, which is habit, custom, manners, behaviour, all that is either born of thought, and thought being limited, therefore morality is limited, relative, or it is brought about through various cultures, environment, and so on. All that is relative and therefore in the field of time and thought. Are we together in this? And we are asking: is there a morality – which is action, manner, that is not within the area of time and thought? One thinks this is important to discover because on that is freedom. Freedom per se, for itself, not freedom from something. 然后我们也应该来谈一下「道德」。 “道德”这个词意味着行为、举止、习惯 ——它取决于我们所身处于的文化与环境， 那么，是否存在一种不被时间束缚的道德呢？ 我们可以一起来探讨下它吗？ 那种不落入于时间范畴中的道德。 我们的道德是相对而言的。 我们的道德，它是一种习惯、风俗、礼貌和行为举止， 所有这些要么是来自于思想 ——而思想是局限的， 因此道德也是局限的、相对的， 要么，这种道德是 各种文化与环境等等所带来的。 但所有这些都是相对性的， 因此它是落入于时间和思想的领域中的。 我们都理解它了吗？ 而我们正在问：是否存在一种道德 ——道德就是行为、举止—— 它不是落入于时间和思想的范畴的？ 某人认为发现这一点是很重要的， 因为在这基础之上才会有「自由」。 是自由本身，就其本身而言， 而不是挣脱某事物的“自由”。
12:26 So we ought to talk over that first, perhaps. What is freedom? Is freedom a reaction from bondage, from loneliness, from every form of depression, anxiety, loneliness, despair, and so on? If there is a reaction from those and you call that freedom, then that is not freedom, it is merely a response to a condition. Freedom implies also, as we understand it now, choice. We can choose to come here, or go there, choose between various jobs, functions and vocations. Choose whom you will marry, or not marry, and so on. Choice implies confusion. And choice is not freedom. Freedom is not a reaction to a condition. So is there such freedom? Are we together in this? I hope the tent is not too hot, or you are comfortably hot. 所以我们或许应该首先来讨论下这一点： 什么是「自由」？ 自由是否是一种反应？一种由束缚、 孤独、 各种形式的沮丧、焦虑、 孤单、绝望等等所引发的反应？ 如果它是经由这些事物而产生的反应，而你将其称之为“自由”的话， 那它就不是「自由」。 它仅仅是针对于局限所产生的一种反应。 自由也暗示着——就我们现在的理解来说——它也暗示了「选择」。 我们可以选择来这里，或者去那里， 选择各种各样的工作、职责和职业。 选择你要和谁结婚，或者不结婚，等等。 但「选择」暗示了困惑。 所以选择并不是自由。 自由并不是一种对局限所产生的反应。 那么，是否存在这样的自由呢？ 我们都理解这点了吗？ 我希望这个帐篷并不是太热， 或者说你们热得很舒服。
14:26 So this is really a very serious question one must ask of oneself: whether freedom is from bondage, or from the prison, which we have created for ourselves, away from the prison, and therefore it is still within the area of the prison. If one is in a prison, both physically and inwardly, subjectively, then the physical control, being enclosed within a certain area, and to escape from that one calls freedom. And psychologically, one has built a prison for oneself by one’s own desires, by one’s own anxieties, loneliness, and so on. And freedom from that is still within the area of that prison, psychological prison. Are we together? Therefore it is not freedom at all. So is there a freedom that is not a reaction, a freedom per se, for itself, not away from something, or from something? 所以这真的是一个非常严肃的问题，我们都必须问问自己： 自由是否就是摆脱束缚或者脱离监狱， 这个监狱是我们为自己创造出来的，然后我们去逃离这个监狱， 所以这种自由仍旧是落入于那个监狱的领域中的。 如果我们身处于监狱中， 既包括身体处于监狱中，也包括内心、主观上处于监狱中， 那时我们身体受到了控制， 我们被关在某个区域中， 而逃离这个区域，便被我们称之为“自由”。 而心理上， 我们也为自己建造了一所监狱， 经由自身的欲望， 自身的焦虑、孤独等等而建造了它。 而挣脱这个监狱， 仍旧是落入于这个监狱 ——这个心理监狱——的范畴中的。我们都明白这点了吗？ 因此它根本就不是自由。 所以，是否存在着一种「自由」？它不是一种「反应」， 而是自由本身，就其本身而言， 而不是脱离某个事物，或者摆脱掉某个事物？
16:15 So one must understand for oneself why we are always trying to escape or to rationalise, or to go beyond that which is. If one understands that which is, understand not merely intellectually, verbally, but see the depth of it, see the truth of it, the substance of it, the vitality of it, then observe, perceiving that and remaining with that, and explore into that movement, learning, not memorising – from that, if one goes very deeply, then there is freedom per se. 所以我们必须自己去了解 为什么我们总是试图去逃避「真实现状」，去把它合理化， 或者去超越它。 如果我们了解了真实现状， 不仅仅是智力上、口头上的了解， 而是要看到它的深度，看到它的真相， 它的实质，它的生命活力， 然后观察它， 觉察它，与之共存， 并且去探索那种运动， 去学习它，而不是去记住它 ——从这之中， 如果我们能非常深入地探究它，那么便会出现自由本身。
17:27 Now, morality is still within the area of time and thought. I think we will agree to that. Depending on the countries, cultures, religious conditioning, national bondage, and so on. So that is a relative morality. Is there a morality that is totally free from all time and thought? Are we following this? Or is the speaker talking to himself? And to find such – or to discover it, or to live with that sense of timeless morality, morality not put together by thought and therefore limited, relative, passing, and to go into that very deeply, as we said, time must be understood, the nature of time. Time is a series of events and movements. Now time is also the whole accumulation of 40,000 years, or 50,000 years of human existence on this earth with all their experiences – racial, tribal, religious, fears and so on, all that is the past, the tradition. And that past is now operating, working, which is the past is conditioning us. And the future, the tomorrows, is the continuation of the past, modified, but it still has its roots in the past. And if there is no radical, fundamental change now, the tomorrows will still be what is now. So the tomorrow is now. The future is now – right? I think it is fairly simple to understand this. We have lived on this earth, according to the biologists and scientists, for 50,000 years, more or less. We are supposed to have evolved through that time, through that long duration of time, both physically, biologically, and also all the content of our consciousness. And during this long period of time we still remain very primitive, barbarous, cruel, destructive, wars. So we have changed very, very little because we are still violent, appallingly violent – terrorists, wars, all the things that are going on in the world today. And this has been going on for 50,000 years, more or less. Perhaps we didn’t kill a million people with one bomb. We killed another with a cudgel, an arrow, but still, the killing instinct of other human beings is still with us. So we are, after all this long evolution, we are still barbarians. And we shall remain barbarians – I am using that word, one is using that word in the real sense, not in the Roman sense. The Roman sense was, anybody in the ancient Rome was no good, who does not belong to the Roman Empire, or who didn’t speak Latin, and so on. We are using that word ‘barbarous’ in the sense that we are extraordinarily primitive, self-centred, amazingly violent, incredibly violent and brutal – in our gesture, in our words, and so on. We are still tribalists – the British, the French, the Indian with their divisions of Sikh and all the rest of it. And if we are that now after centuries of evolution, we will be still that in the tomorrows. So the future is now. Right? 你瞧，道德仍旧是落入于时间和思想的范畴中的。 我认为我们会同意这一点。 道德的定义取决于不同的国家、文化、 宗教的局限， 以及民族的约束，等等。 所以那是一种相对而言的道德。 那么是否存在一种完全脱离于时间和思想的道德呢？ 我们都跟上它了吗？ 还是说演讲者在自言自语？ 而要找到这种道德，发现这种道德， 或者以那种超越时间的道德感而生活 ——那种道德并不是由思想所拼凑起来的， 所以它不是局限的、相对的、暂时的 ——就如我们说过的，想要非常深入地探究它， 我们就必须了解「时间」，了解时间的本质。 时间就是一系列的事件和运动。 而时间同样也是 四万或五万年以来 人类在这个地球上的生活及其所有经验的全部积累 ——种族、部落、宗教、恐惧等等的经验。 所有这一切就是过去，就是传统。 而那个「过去」就是「现在」，它在运作着、工作着， 是这个「过去」在制约着我们。 而「未来」，那些「明天」， 它们就是「过去」的延续，只是稍加修改而已， 但它们仍旧是根植于「过去」中的。 而如果此刻我们没有彻底的、根本性的改变， 那么我们的明天还是会和现在一样。 所以明天就是「现在」。 未来就是「现在」——对吗？ 我认为理解这一点一点儿也不难。 根据那些生物学家和科学家的说法， 我们已经在这个地球上生活了有 大约五万年之久了。 我们据说已经在这段时间里进化了， 在这段漫长的时间里有了进化， 不管是在身体上、生物学上， 还是我们所有的意识内容，都进化了。 然而在这段漫长的岁月里， 我们依然是非常的原始、 野蛮、残忍、破坏、战争。 所以我们几乎没有什么改变， 因为我们仍旧很暴力， 骇人的暴力——恐怖分子，各类战争， 所有这些事情正在当今的世界上发生着。 而这些事情已经持续了有大约五万年了。 也许从前我们并没有用一颗炸弹就炸死上百万人。 但我们却会用棍棒和弓箭来杀死别人， 所以，我们仍旧带着那种杀戮他人的本能。 因此，在经过了如此漫长的“进化”以后， 我们仍旧是「野蛮人」（barbarians）。 而我们未来也仍然会是野蛮人 ——我使用「野蛮人」这个词，某人使用这个词语， 意指它真实的含义，而不是古罗马语的含义。 古罗马语中，「野蛮人」指的是 古罗马时代中的“不好的人”， 那些不属于罗马帝国的人， 或者那些不说拉丁语的人，等等。 而我们使用「野蛮人」这个词，它的意思是 我们是极其原始、自我中心， 和有着令人惊讶暴力的人，我们有着难以置信的暴力与残忍 ——它体现在我们的手势姿势上，体现在我们的言语上，等等。 我们仍旧是部落主义者——英国人、法国人、 印度人以及他们的种种分裂，分裂锡克教教徒，等等这些。 而如果在经过了无数世纪的“进化”之后，我们仍旧是现在这个样子， 那么在未来无数个「明天」里，我们也仍将是这样的。 所以「未来」就是现在。 对吗？
23:53 And is it possible to change now, completely, without the concept, the idea of tomorrow? And if there is such fundamental timeless change, that is true freedom. And when there is freedom of such a kind there is no fear and therefore there is no... all the invention of gods and rituals and all that disappears. 那么我们是否可能现在就彻底地改变， 而不要有什么关于「明天」的概念和想法？ 如果能有这种根本性的、超越时间的改变， 那么这就是真正的自由。 当有了这种自由后， 就不会再有恐惧了， 所以我们也不会再去 发明所有那些神明和宗教仪式，所有这些东西都会消失。
24:43 And we ought also to talk over together: what is suffering? Why human beings, who are technologically so vastly advanced, so capable, both intellectually and physically, why after all these years and centuries, why we have not ended sorrow. We all suffer – from the most highly sophisticated individual to the most primitive person, uneducated, and so on. We all suffer for various reasons – suffering from lack of food, from lack of clothes, and so on, in that physical sense. And there are thousands and millions of people in India and elsewhere who have very little to eat. And also there is the suffering of millions of people through wars: what is happening in North Ireland, Lebanon, and so on, Afghanistan and India. And that suffering of wars, of thousands and thousands of years ago, wars continue. And those wars have created immense suffering for mankind. And also there is suffering if one loses one’s friend, one's... with whom one has lived for many years. And also there is suffering of not fulfilling, not achieving, not becoming, and so on. So there is the vast human suffering of which we are. That suffering has existed for thousands of years. And also there is personal suffering, the limited suffering. We don’t think that is limited suffering 而我们同样也应该一起来讨论一下：什么是「苦」？ 为什么人类 人类已经在科学技术上取得了如此大的进步， 人类是如此的能干， 不管是在智力上还是外在活动上， 为什么在经过了这么多年，这么多个世纪以后， 为什么我们还是没能终结苦难？ 我们都在受苦—— 从最世故老练的人 到最原始的、没文化的人等等。 我们都在因为各种原因而受苦 ——因为缺少食物而受苦， 因为缺少衣物而受苦，等等，这些外在物质上的痛苦。 在印度以及世界的其他地方， 有数百万人 在忍饥挨饿。 同样也有数百万人在经受着战争的痛苦： 比如正在北爱尔兰、 黎巴嫩等地方发生的战争，以及阿富汗和印度地区的战争。 而这种战争的痛苦， 它在数千年前就有了， 而至今战争仍在继续着。 而这些战争给人类带来了巨大的苦难。 我们还会有失去朋友的痛苦， 失去那个与自己生活多年之人的痛苦。 我们也会有无法得到满足，无法实现目标， 无法成为理想中的自己，等等的痛苦。 所以人类背负着巨大的苦难， 这就是我们的真实状况。 这些苦难已经存在了有数千年了。 而我们同样也会有个人的痛苦， 那种局限性的痛苦。 但我们并不认为它是局限性的，
28:16 because it is ours: my suffering. So what is the cause of suffering? Why haven’t we resolved it after such a long duration of time? Are we at all aware of this great suffering of humanity? And also this suffering of each one of us? And when we become aware it is a great shock, something that nearly paralyses one. All suffering makes one’s own outlook narrow, petty, very destructive. And why is it that we have not solved this question? 因为它是属于我们的：我自己的痛苦。 所以，痛苦的原因是什么呢？ 为什么在经历了如此漫长的岁月后，我们依然未能解决它？ 我们是否真的察觉到了这种人类深重的苦难？ 以及我们每个人所背负的痛苦？ 当我们察觉到它后，我们会发现它是一个巨大的打击， 某种几乎可以让人瘫痪的东西。 所有的痛苦都会让我们自身的视野 变得狭隘、琐碎、极具破坏性。 那么为什么我们未能解决这个问题呢？
29:25 Christians have avoided this question. The Hindus, including the Sikhs and all those tribal divisions, or religious divisions, they have explanations as Karma, that is, what you do you sow, and so on. Everyone has some kind of explanation for suffering. But the explanations, the causes of suffering, if we merely explain it, put it into words, as we shall presently, knowing that the words are not this feeling, the actuality of pain, so the word is not the thing. The explanation, the description are not the actual. So if we are caught in the words, then we shall not be able to understand the substance, the quality, the depth of suffering. So first, can we be free of words? This is important because words condition our thinking. Words like Communist, or Socialist, and so on, they have already... those words have certain significance, and we accept those significances, and thus we are conditioned by words. Sir, please, would you kindly let me finish the talk. We asked last Tuesday and Thursday, we answered many of the questions that have been given, not all the questions because that would be impossible. There were two or three hundred questions. That would take perhaps several weeks. We can’t sit here for several weeks at least. We can’t. 基督教徒已经回避了这个问题。 而印度教徒，包括锡克教徒，以及所有那些分离独立的部落 或分离独立的宗教， 它们将其解释为是「业力」（Karma）， 也就是因果报应，等等这类东西。 每个人对于痛苦都会有某种解释。 然而那些解释，那些造成痛苦的原因， 如果我们仅仅是解释它，将其用语言表达出来 ——我们马上也会这么做， 那我们就要明白：词语文字并不是那种感受，那种事实上的痛苦， 所以词语文字并不是它所指的东西。 那个解释，那个描述，并不是实际的事物。 所以如果我们沉湎于词语文字之中， 那我们就无法了解 痛苦的实质、特质与深度了。 所以首先，我们能够摆脱掉词语文字吗？ 这点很重要，因为词语文字局限了我们的思考。 诸如「共产主义者」、「社会主义者」等等这类词语， 它们已经……这些词语已经具有了某种含义， 而我们则接受了这些含义， 由此我们便被词语文字所制约了。 先生，请稍安勿躁，你能让我把话讲完吗？ 上周二和上周四，我们问了问题， 我们回答了很多提交上来的问题， 我们并没有回答所有的问题，因为那是不可能的。 有两三百个问题。 那可能要花费好几周时间（才能回答完）。 我们不可能一直坐在这里至少几个星期。 我们做不到。
32:14 Q: But you were talking about suffering and being irritated. It is suffering, isn’t it?

K: What, sir? 		听众：然而你在谈论痛苦，并因此而感到恼火。 它（恼火）也是一种痛苦，不是吗？

克：你说什么？先生。
32:22 Q: Talking about suffering and getting annoyed, irritated about suffering.

K: Sir, would you mind, you ought to have put this question the other day. So if you will kindly forgive me, I will go on with what I want to say. I hope you don’t mind. 		听众：谈论痛苦，并为痛苦而感到 恼怒和生气。

克：先生，你是否介意 你其实应该在前几天的时候提出这个问题。 所以如果你可以谅解我的话， 我将会继续我想要讲的东西。 我希望你不要介意。
32:47 There is this suffering. Does the word like ‘fear’ bring fear? The word itself. Or is fear free from the word? Like love. That is a word, but that word is not the actual. So the word ‘suffering’, does it shape our thinking? Therefore one has to be very careful, if one may point out, that we are not a slave to words, which is quite difficult. Father, mother, wife, husband. Those words have tremendous significance. And we are – those words shape our thinking. Words have immense power, either destructive, or words that have to be understood, the depth of it, the meaning of it, the quality of it, the tonality of it. 所以我们有着这种痛苦。 诸如“恐惧”这样的词语会带来恐惧吗？ 这个词语本身。 还是说恐惧是脱离于文字词语的？ 就像「爱」一样。 「爱」是一个词语， 但这个词语并不是真实的爱。 所以「痛苦」这个词，它是否塑造了我们的思考？ 因此我们必须要非常小心， 如果允许某人指出这一点： 那就是我们不应该成为词语的奴隶 ——这是相当困难的。 父亲、母亲、妻子、丈夫。 这些词语具有重大的意义。 而我们被……这些词语塑造了我们的思考。 词语具有巨大的力量， 它要么会具有破坏性， 要么需要被我们所了解，去了解它的深度、它的意义、 它的品质、它的音调。
34:32 So we are not dealing with explanations, descriptions, or the words that can entangle us. We are trying – we are, not trying, actually – we are endeavouring, going into the question of what is suffering. 所以我们并不是在处理各种解释、描述， 或那些会让我们混乱的词语。 我们正在试图——我们正在……其实并不是“试图”—— 我们正在竭尽全力 去探究这个关于「什么是痛苦？」的问题。
35:07 When we suffer there is intense pain, not only physical pain, but the subjective, psychic, inward pain. That pain acts on the nerves, our whole thinking is a process of shrinking. And it awakens us to a sense of desperate loneliness. We are saying facts, not imaginative statements: facts. What is. And that sense of shock, sense of loneliness, brings the urge to find some comfort, a sense of wanting to be helped. Don’t you go through all this? And the desire to be helped is one of the causes of suffering. You understand? We are always seeking help. That is why most of you probably are here. We want to be helped with our problems, with our secret desires conflicting, with our secret longings, and so on, which causes pain, discomfort, a sense of annoyance, and so on. And we want to be helped. When we want to be helped from another, whether it be the priest, the psychiatrist, and so on, we then become dependent, we then become attached to that dependence. And that is one of the basic causes of suffering. Right? Please, this is important to understand because all our gods, our prayers, and so on, are the demands of every human being throughout the world, seeking help. And therefore when one is being helped one becomes weak. If you are constantly depending on some kind of drug, pill to escape from suffering, pain, then you become more and more and more dependent on those drugs, pills, doctors. I hope there are no doctors here. If there are, we need doctors, but we are talking about dependence. And we are saying that where there is dependence there is attachment. And attachment is one of the causes of sorrow. When I am attached to my wife, to a building, to some ideological concepts, I am attached to it, I cannot live without them. They mean so much to me. My God, my faith, my belief, my ritual. If I depend on all those, and when they are questioned, like they should be questioned, when somebody becomes sceptical about all that, then you suffer. So can there be total freedom, not a reaction, from all kinds of attachments? Attachment is to the memories of pleasure – are you following? – sexual pleasure, attachment to it, holding on to it. And the pleasure of power, the pleasure of knowledge, and being attached, holding on to that as though there were something concrete. And where there is this attachment there must be sorrow. 当我们受苦的时候，我们会感到强烈的痛苦， 不仅仅是身体上的痛苦， 也包括主观上的、精神上的、内心的痛苦。 那种痛苦会作用于神经系统， 然后我们的整个思考就成了一个退缩的过程。 它唤醒了我们内心那种绝望孤独的感觉。 我们说的是事实，不是一些凭空想象的陈述，而是事实。 是真实的现状。 而那种打击感，那种孤独感， 会使得我们非常渴望去找到某种慰藉， 一种想要得到帮助的感觉。 你们难道没有经历过所有这些吗？ 而想要寻得帮助的渴望就是导致痛苦的原因之一。 你理解了吗？ 我们总是在寻求帮助。 这可能也是你们大多数人来这里的原因。 我们想要得到帮助，以解决我们的问题， 解决我们隐秘欲望的冲突， 我们内心秘密的渴望，等等 ——它们导致了痛苦、不安、 烦恼，等等。 我们想要得到帮助。 当我们想要从他人那里获得帮助时， 不管那个人是牧师也好， 心理医生也好，或是其他什么人， 那时我们就会变得有所依赖， 然后我们会执著于自己所依赖的事物。 而这就是导致痛苦的最基本的原因之一。 对吧？ 请注意，了解这一点是很重要的， 因为我们所有的神明、 祈祷，等等， 是全世界每一个人 想要寻得帮助的诉求。 因此当一个人得到了帮助后，他就会变得虚弱。 如果你持续依赖于某种药物或药片 来消除疼痛、痛苦的话， 那么你就会变得越来越依赖于 这些药物、药片和医生。 我希望这里没有医生。 如果有的话，我想说：我们需要医生，但我们正在谈论「依赖」。 我们在说：当有了依赖， 便会有「执著」。 而「执著」就是导致苦难的原因之一。 当我执著于我的妻子， 执著于一幢房子，执著于某些意识形态的概念， 我执著于它们，没有它们我无法生活下去。 它们对我来说意义重大。 我的上帝、我的信念、我的信仰、我的仪式。 如果我依赖于所有这些东西， 那么当它们受到了质疑时，它们应该受到质疑， 当有人怀疑这一切时， 你就会感到痛苦。 所以，是否可能有一种完全的自由， 它不是一种反应，而是摆脱所有执著的自由？ 执著于那些享受快感的记忆 ——你跟上了吗？—— 性的快感，所以你执著于它，紧抓着它不放。 以及权力带来的快感， 知识带来的快感， 你执著于它们，紧紧抓住它们， 就好像它们是某种具体实在的东西一样。 而当有了这种执著，就必然会有「苦」。
41:04 And why are we attached? We are questioning. We are enquiring into this. We are not saying you must not, or you must. The speaker has no ‘must’ or ‘don’t’ – it is up to you. And we are asking: in attachment there is desire, and what is desire in all that? Perhaps if we have time we will go into it. So can we, knowing the nature of time, that is tomorrow is now, and if we... there is no ending of attachment, tomorrow will be still – we will still be attached, therefore we will still be suffering – you understand? 那么，为什么我们会执著呢？ 我们正在发问。我们正在探询这个问题。 我们并没有在说你绝不能这么做，或者你必须这么做。 演讲者并没有说“必须要怎样”或者“不能怎样”——这一切取决于你。 而我们在问： 在执著之中存在着欲望， 那么执著中的欲望是什么呢？ 如果我们还有时间的话，我们或许会来探讨下它。 所以我们是否能够……在知晓了时间的本质 ——即「明天就是当下」后， 而如果我们……如果我们不结束执著的话， 我们的明天仍旧会是这样， 我们仍旧会有执著， 所以我们仍然会受苦——你明白了吗？
42:20 So is there an instant ending of attachment? Not allowing time to enter into the ending of it. Time is continuity. Right? And the gradual process of time is, ‘I will gradually get rid of attachment, gradually become non-violent’, because all that stuff is nonsense. So suffering is synonymous with attachment. And we are attached because we are so lonely; we are nothing in ourselves. We depend on books, paintings, on other people’s knowledge. The whole religious world is based on other people’s experience and experience is always limited, but they have become sacred. One doesn’t know why but they have become sacred. A printed thing is never sacred! What you – one hasn’t got to go into all that. 那么，是否可以立即结束执著呢？ 不让「时间」进入到「结束执著」之中。 时间就是延续。 对吧？ 而那种渐进的时间过程就是： “我将会逐渐地摆脱掉执著， 逐渐地变得不暴力”，因为所有这些东西都是胡扯。 所以「痛苦」和「执著」是同义词。 而我们之所以执著，是因为我们是如此的孤独， 我们的内心空洞无物。 所以我们依赖于书本、画像， 依赖于别人的知识。 整个宗教世界都是建立他人的经验之上的， 而经验总是有局限的， 但这些经验已经变得很神圣。 某人并不知道为什么会这样，但它们已经变得神圣了。 印刷出来的东西永远不可能是神圣的！ 你们……某人就不细讲这些东西了。
44:15 And suffering also, suffering comes when there is self-centred pursuit – right? – because self-centredness, egotism, selfishness, is very, very limited. It is always living in a small little area of one’s brain. The brain has extraordinary capacity, as you see it in the technological world. Immense capacity, limitless capacity. And when we are self-concerned, as most people are, – sorry – the self-concern is very limited and therefore it brings conflict. Anything that is limited must inevitably bring conflict. When we say, British, French, Indian, American, Russian, it is all just very limited geographically, nationally, it is a form of tribalism. And that is why wars – one of the reasons of war is this limitation. So attachment to a person, a concept, an image, to some form of knowledge must inevitably bring trouble, disturbance, sorrow with its pain. And also where there is this self-centred outlook on life, life being so extraordinarily vast, that limited outlook, that limited way of living must inevitably bring sorrow. And is there an ending to sorrow? Completely ending. Because without ending sorrow there is no love. So we should consider, go into the question of what is to end. The finality, the ending of something, not the continuation in a modified form of what has been, or what is. 而痛苦同样 当有了以自我为中心的追求时，痛苦便会降临， 对吧？ 因为自我中心、利己主义、自私自利， 它们是非常非常狭隘局限的。 它永远都活在我们大脑中很狭小的区域内。 大脑有着非凡的能力， 你们可以在科技领域中看到这一点。 大脑惊人的能力，无限的能力。 而当我们以自我为中心时——大多数人都是如此， 抱歉 「自私自利」是非常局限的， 因此它会带来冲突。 任何局限性的事物必定不可避免地会带来冲突。 当我们说：英国人、法国人、印度人、美国人、俄罗斯人时， 这从地理学意义上以及国家意义上来讲，都是非常局限的， 它是部落主义的一种形式。 而这就是为什么战争 为什么导致战争的原因之一就是这种局限。 所以执著于某个人、某个概念、某个形象， 执著于某种知识， 这必然不可避免地会带来麻烦和困扰， 悲伤及其痛苦。 此外，当有了这种对于生命的以自我为中心的视野， 生命是如此惊人的广阔， 而那种局限的视野， 那种局限的生活方式， 必然不可避免地会带来苦难。 那么苦难可以结束吗？ 彻底地结束。 因为如果不结束苦难，就不会有爱。 所以我们应该来考虑下， 来探究下这个问题：什么是「结束」？ 那种终结，某个事物的终止， 而不是以一种修改后的形式来延续 此前的事物或真实现状。
47:44 So what is ending? Ending immediately a habit, a manner – ending. Not, ‘If I end this, what will I get from that?’ – you understand? Are you interested in all this? Really? Or is it just a form of amusement? 所以什么是「结束」呢？ 立即结束掉一个习惯、 某种态度举止——终结它。 而不是，“如果我结束了它，我能从中获得什么呢？” ——你理解了吗？ 你们对这些东西有兴趣吗？ 真的有兴趣吗？ 还是说它只是一种娱乐活动？
48:26 Have you ever really enquired what it is to end? Have you gone into that question of terminating something and discovering what happens after if you end? Isn’t that death? We will come to that presently. 你们是否真正探询过「什么是结束」？ 你们是否探究过关于「终结某个事物」的问题， 然后去看看当你终结掉它后会发生什么？ 这不就是「死亡」吗？ 我们待会儿就会来谈论「死亡」。
49:08 So we are saying, where there is suffering there is no love. And is it possible to end all sorrow? You might say what effect has that ending of sorrow; if one is free from that sorrow completely, then what effect has that on the world, on the majority of people? That is the usual question one asks. Isn’t that a rather unreasonable question? First, end it and see what happens. Not say, ‘If I do this, what effect will it bring about?’ One feels that is a way of escape. One person has affected the world. Right? One leader in a war, from the most ancient of times till now, they have affected the world. One or two propagandists in Christianity have affected the world – Peter and Paul. One person, like the Buddha, has affected the whole of the Asiatic world. He didn’t ask the question: ‘If I do this will it affect mankind?’ – that’s such an absurd question! Forgive me if I use that word. So when there is an ending of sorrow there is love. And then we have to ask: what is love? That word, like every other good word, has been spoilt. Is love desire? Is love pleasure? Is love a movement of thought? And time? One can ask these questions, the speaker is asking that question, but the asking of that question... if one doesn’t remain with the question, with the words, then we can go into it very deeply. We asked if love is desire. To us it is, love is pleasure, love is something possessive, power, position, status. So we ought to consider together, first, what is desire. Perhaps some of you, if you will kindly accept what the speaker is saying, have heard this word, the explanation of what is desire, and perhaps you say, ‘Yes, get on with it’. But to find out for oneself very deeply the nature and the structure of desire, and see its relationship in life, and find out why human beings throughout the world are driven by that, in various ways, for power, for position, you know, all the rest of it. Desire, that extraordinary energy. The desire to go to the moon and how they worked at it! 300,000 people probably worked at that one project, to go to the moon. And then put a silly flag up there. No, sir, if the British put their flag up there, it would be still silly. 所以我们在说： 当有了「苦」，就不会有爱。 那么是否可能结束所有的「苦」呢？ 你也许会说：结束这种苦又能带来什么影响呢？ 如果某人彻底脱离了痛苦， 那么这对全世界、 对大多数人，会产生什么影响呢？ 这是我们通常会问的一个问题。 可这难道不是一个很不合理的问题吗？ 首先你要结束掉它，然后看看会发生什么。 而不是说，“如果我这样做了，它能带来怎样的影响？” 某人觉得这是一种逃避的方式。 一个人也可以影响这个世界。 对吧？ 某位战争中的领袖 ——从最古老时代的战争直到如今的战争—— 这些领袖已经影响了这个世界。 基督教中的一两位传道者 已经影响了这个世界 ——彼得与保罗。 而佛陀一个人 影响了整个亚洲世界。 佛陀并没有去问这个问题： “如果我这样做，它能够影响人类吗？” ——这是一个如此荒谬的问题！ 请原谅我使用“荒谬”这个词。 所以当苦难结束后，爱便会出现。 然后我们就要问了：什么是「爱」？ 「爱」这个词——就像其他好的词语一样——已经变质了。 「爱」是欲望吗？ 「爱」是快感吗？ 「爱」是思想的运动吗？ 是时间的运动吗？ 我们可以询问这些问题， 演讲者正在问这个问题， 但是在问了这个问题后 如果我们没有停留于这个问题，停留于文字词语， 那么我们便可以进入到问题的最深处了。 我们在问：爱是不是欲望？ 对我们来说，它是的，爱就是快感， 爱是某种占有、 权力、地位、身份。 所以我们首先应该一起来考虑下：什么是欲望？ 也许你们中一些人， 如果你们接受了演讲者所说的东西， 你们曾经听过这个词，听过关于「什么是欲望」的解释， 也许你会说，“是的，要与欲望友好相处”。 然而，你要亲自去非常深入地发掘 欲望的本质与结构， 看到它在生活中关系上的体现， 并去搞清楚：为什么全世界的人们 会以各种方式被欲望所驱使？ 对权力的欲望，对地位的欲望，你知道的，所有这类东西。 欲望，这种非凡惊人的能量。 人类渴望登上月球， 看看他们是如何为此而努力的！ 有大概30万人致力于这一个项目， 那就是登上月球。 然后在那里插上一面愚蠢的国旗。 请别笑，先生。 即使是英国人在那里插上他们的国旗， 这也仍旧是愚蠢的。
54:48 So what is desire? Look at it yourself. Why is it that we are so – we are slaves to desire. The various religions in the world have said desire must be eliminated, or one must transcend it, or that desire must be concentrated on a figure, on a symbol. Suppress every other desire except the search for God. The monks have been doing this for centuries. But desire is a flame. You can’t burn it out. You can’t put it out. It is there. You can have desire for something noble, and so on. It is still desire. And desire is causing havoc in the world. Each person desires his own way of living, his own way of thinking, and so on. That is so obvious. 所以，什么是「欲望」呢？ 自己去观察一下它。 为什么我们会如此……我们是欲望的奴隶。 全世界的各种宗教 都曾说过：我们必须要消除欲望， 或者，我们必须要超越它， 或者必须要把那种欲望 集中在某个人物、某个符号上。 除了追寻神明的渴望之外——要压抑所有其他的欲望。 僧侣们已经这样做了无数个世纪了。 然而欲望就像是熊熊火焰。 你是无法让其烧尽的。 你是无法熄灭它的。它就在那里。 你可以渴望去追求某种崇高的东西， 等等。但它仍旧是欲望。 而欲望正在导致这个世界的灾难。 每一个人都渴望拥有他自己的生活方式， 他自己的思维方式，等等。这是显而易见的。
56:43 So we must understand very deeply, not intellectually, but profoundly, what is desire. Not escape from it, not rationalise it, not find a substitute for it, but what is desire? Desire is born out of sensation. Physical sensation. Sensation of perception, seeing, visual seeing, the hearing, the tasting – those are all the reactions from any sensation. Those are normal healthy sensations. And we have tried to suppress those natural sensations by fasting, discipline, by attributing – all that, or turning all that energy towards a particular object, and so on. So out of desire – out of sensation there is desire. That’s obvious. That doesn’t need further explanation. One sees a thing in the window, a blue shirt, or a nice dress; the perception – going inside and touching it, and sensation and then desire to own it, or not to own it. Right? It is as simple as that. And what makes – how does that desire arise out of sensation? You understand? You see something beautiful, a woman or a man, or some beautiful dress or a car, or something, and there is sensation. Then what takes place? Then thought creates out of that sensation the image of you owning that car or that shirt. When thought creates the image out of sensation, at that second desire is born – right? Can we go along with this? Do you refute that? That is, I see a beautiful thing, a beautiful picture, or a statue, or a woman, or whatever it is. We are not discussing what is beauty, that is a different matter. And there is sensation immediately. Then thought says, ‘I wish I had that’. Thought then says, ‘I will get into the car and drive’ – you understand? Then desire is born. 所以我们必须非常深刻地了解， 不是智力上了解，而是深入地去了解 什么是欲望。 不是逃避欲望，不是去把它合理化， 也不是去为其找个替代品， 而是去搞清楚：什么是欲望？ 欲望源自于感官感觉。 身体的各种感觉。 那种感知，看见，视觉上的看到， 听觉、味觉 ——这些全都是来自于某种感官感觉的反应。 这些都是正常合理的感觉。 然而我们却试图压抑这些自然的感觉， 通过斋戒，通过自制， 通过归因——等等这些， 或者把所有的能量转向某个特定的对象，等等。 所以，从欲望之中——哦，从感觉之中便产生了欲望。 这是显而易见的。 这一点并不需要更多的解释。 我们看到了玻璃橱窗里的一个东西，一件蓝色的衬衫，或者一件漂亮的连衣裙； 我们有了视觉上的感知——于是我们走进店里，并触摸它， 我们有了某种感觉，然后开始渴望拥有它，或者不要拥有它。 对吧？它就是这么简单。 那么，是什么造成了——这种欲望是如何从感觉中产生的呢？ 你明白了吗？ 你看到了某种美丽的事物，一个很美的女人或男人， 或者漂亮的衣服或汽车，或者别的什么， 你对它有了感觉。 然后发生了什么呢？ 然后思想便会经由那种感觉而创造出 那个你拥有那辆车或穿着那件衬衫的画面。 而当思想经由感官感觉而创造出那个画面时， 在那一刻，欲望便产生了——对吗？ 我们能赞同这一点吗？你们会反驳它吗？ 也就是说，我看到了一个美丽的事物， 一幅美丽的图画，或者一个雕像，或者一个女人，无论是什么。 请注意我们并没有在讨论「什么是美」， 那是另一回事了。 那时我们立即就会产生某些感觉。 然后思想会说，“我希望我能拥有它”。 那时思想会说，“我要坐进那辆汽车里，然后驾驶它” ——你们理解了吗？ 那时欲望便产生了。
1:00:45 Now, just a minute. So the question is: is it possible for sensation and thought, not to immediately – for thought to immediately give shape to sensation? You understand? Do we understand what it is? That is, to have a gap. If one has – we will use the word ‘time interval’ between sensation and thought creating an image out of that sensation, if there is a little space between the two, then desire becomes something entirely different. You understand? So that requires extraordinary attention, extraordinary awareness of the sensation, and the image immediately being formed, so that there is an interval. And you can then extend the interval, not suppress it, not try to transcend it, not try to escape from it. When you understand something very deeply it becomes very simple. A mechanic, to him it is very simple, the whole motor, but to us it is rather complicated. But if we see this, it becomes extraordinarily simple. Then there is no conflict between desires. Right? 现在，请稍等一下。 所以我们的问题就是： 是否可能让感觉和思想 不要立即—— 让思想不要立即就把那种感觉具体形象化？ 你们理解了吗？ 我们是否明白了这是什么？ 也就是说：要有一个「间隔」。 如果我们能 我们将会使用「时间间隔」这个词，在感官感觉产生 和思想经由那种感觉而创造出画面之间， 如果在这两者之间有一个小小的空隙， 那么欲望就会变成某种截然不同的事物。你们理解了吗？ 所以这需要非凡的注意力， 能极其敏锐地觉察到那种感觉 以及瞬间就形成的画面， 由此便会有一个「间隔」。 然后你可以延长这个间隔， 不要去抑制它， 不要试图去超越它，不要试图去逃避它。 当你非常深入地了解了某个事物后，它就会变得非常简单了。 对于一位机修工来说，整个发动机都是非常简单的， 然而对我们来说，它却是相当复杂的。 然而如果我们看到了这一点，它就会变得无比简单了。 那时就不会有欲望之间的冲突了。 对吧？
1:02:53 So we are saying, asking: is love desire? You answer that question for yourself. Desire, we said, is sensation, and thought giving shape to that sensation. The remembrance of pleasure, and the demand for that pleasure, more and more and more. So is love pleasure? Is love jealousy? Possessiveness, attachment, fear? Or is love something totally – please just listen to it – totally outside the brain? The brain is the response, is the centre of all response of nerves, thought, emotions, reactions. One doesn’t have to go to the brain specialist. This is so obvious. And if love is within the centre of that, which is conflict, pain, desire, anxiety, all the nervous responses, then how can love exist there? And if it – if all that is free, you wouldn’t even ask whether it is outside or inside. You understand? And what is the nature of compassion? The word itself – passion for all, and all that business. What is compassion? Is compassion pity, sympathy? Compassion, helping the poor? We are examining the word, the meaning, the significance of that extraordinary word. Where there is suffering and the ending of that suffering is passion. You understand? Passion. And with the ending of that suffering there is passion. And is that passion part of compassion? You understand? Can there be compassion if one is attached to one’s religion, one’s guru, one’s beliefs, anchored in a particular sect, in a particular belief? You understand? I am asking. Or is compassion something that is entirely per se, for itself, free from all that? And being free from all that, therefore it is supreme intelligence. And where there is compassion, love and intelligence then action, behaviour, morality, is entirely different, it is not then time-binding. And to live with that, not just words. To live with that extraordinary sense of depth and passion, with that intelligence. 所以我们在说，我们在问：爱是欲望吗？ 请你自己来回答下这个问题。 我们说过，欲望就是感觉产生了 然后思想将那种感觉具体形象化。 我们会记得那种快感， 并要求再次获得那种快感，更多那样的快感。 所以爱是快感吗？ 爱是嫉妒吗？ 爱是占有、执著或恐惧吗？ 还是说爱是某种完全 ——请听好—— 某种完全在大脑之外的事物？ 大脑是反应 大脑是所有神经、 思想、情感、反应的回应的中心。 我们并不需要去大脑专家那里才能明白这一点。 这一点是如此显而易见。 而如果爱是在这个中心内的， 这个中心就是冲突、痛苦、欲望、焦虑， 所有神经上的反应， 那么爱又怎么可能存在于那里呢？ 而如果爱 如果爱是完全自由的， 那么你甚至都不去会问它是在大脑之外还是大脑之内的。 你明白了吗？ 而「慈悲」（compassion）的本质又是什么？ 这个词语本身的意思是——对所有人的热情（com-passion），等等这些。 什么是「慈悲」？ 慈悲是怜悯，是同情吗？ 慈悲，就是去救济穷人？ 我们正在检视这个词语，检视它的含义， 这个非凡词语的意义。 当有了痛苦， 那么结束这种痛苦——这就是热情。 你理解了吗？ 热情。 伴随着痛苦的结束，就会产生热情。 而那种热情，它是否就是「慈悲」的一部分？ 你明白了吗？ 然而如果一个人执著于 他的宗教、他的古鲁、 他的信仰， 固守于特定的教派、特定的信仰，那他还会有慈悲吗？ 你们理解了吗？我正在问你们。 还是说慈悲是某种完全自我独立， 超脱于所有这些东西的事物？ 而由于它脱离了所有这些东西， 所以它就是至高的智慧。 而当有了慈悲、爱与智慧后， 那时行为、举止和道德就会截然不同了， 那时它就不再会受到时间的束缚。 而我们要去经历体验它，而不只是停留于文字。 去经历体验那种极具深度和热情的非凡感觉， 经历体验那种智慧。
1:07:31 We also ought to talk over together – death. Are you tired at the end of this? 而我们同样也应该一起来讨论一下 「死亡」。 在演讲的最后，你们是不是感到有点疲惫了？
1:07:48 Q: No. 听众：没有。
1:07:50 K: No? Why? Please, you say, no, but why? Is it that you have not expended energy? Your energy, not the speaker’s energy. Your energy. Going into this so deeply. So pursue it to the very end, not stop in the middle of it. That requires tremendous energy. And we waste our energy. And to enquire into this question, which demands a great deal of energy to go into it, the nature of death. The total ending of something. Actually to find out, not just agree or disagree, or say that is hopeless, or saying how can I end everything in the modern world, and so on, so on, so on. But if we understand at its greatest depth the nature and the ending of something, that brings tremendous vitality, energy. And that you need that energy to meditate, to find out what is truth, what is sacred. if there is something permanent, something that is timeless and so on. It requires not only physical energy but the energy of intelligence. Intelligence is not, as we have often repeated, the energy of thought. Thought has been tremendously intelligent, creating a computer, in putting this television, or the microphone, or the implements of war, surgery, and so on. It has been... thought has been extraordinarily intelligent, but that intelligence, because it is born of thought, it is limited. As all painting, all sculpture, all books, all poems, and all the gods put together, that is still limited. And that limitation causes conflict, war, conflict between us, each one. So to enquire, to explore into the nature of death, see the immensity of it, not just personal dying or someone else dying, the immensity of death, which is the ending. And if there is an ending, what is there? And so on. 克：没有吗？为什么？ 请注意，你说你并不疲倦，但这是为什么呢？ 是不是因为你并没有花费能量？ 你的能量，而不是演讲者的能量。 你的能量。去非常深入地探究这个问题。 去追踪它，直到它的终点， 不要在半路停下来。 这需要巨大的能量。 而我们却浪费了自己的能量。 而要探询这个问题， 我们需要大量的能量才能深入它， 深入了解死亡的本质。 也就是彻底结束掉某个事物。 真正地去搞清楚它，而不只是表示同意或不同意， 或者说这事儿没希望， 或者说在现代世界里， 我怎么可能结束掉一切事物呢？等等诸如此类的东西。 然而如果我们了解了「死亡」惊人的深度， 了解了它的本质，然后去结束掉某个事物， 那么这就会带来巨大的活力与能量。 而你需要这种能量才能去冥想， 去发现什么是真理， 什么是神圣的。 去发现是否存在某种永久的、 永恒的事物，等等。 而这不仅需要身体的能量， 还需要智慧的能量。 就如我们经常反复提到的：智慧并不是 思想的能量。 思想是无比聪明的， 它创造了电脑， 发明了电视， 或者麦克风， 或者战争的工具，外科手术，等等。 思想一直都是……思想是无比“智慧”的， 但这种“智慧”，由于它是源于思想的，所以它是局限的。 就像所有的绘画、雕塑、书籍、 诗歌、神明一样，它们是思想拼凑起来的， 所以它们仍然是局限的。 而这种局限就导致了冲突、 战争，我们之间的冲突，每个人之间的冲突。 所以我们要去探询、去探索死亡的本质， 看到它的广阔无限， 「死亡」并不只是个人的死去，或者别人去世了， 死亡的广阔无限——它就是「结束」。 而如果某个事物结束了，那么还会剩下什么呢？ 等等此类问题。
1:12:16 So we will continue with this tomorrow morning, if you don’t mind. May I get up please? 所以我们明天早上将会继续来讨论它， 如果你们不介意的话。 请问我可以站起来了吗？