|
OJ77D3 - 教育和局限
|
|
| We are going to talk over, together – as usual, together – about education, this morning, but before we do that, I would like to make an introduction about the whole K Foundation and their schools. | 今天早上，我们将一起来讨论 ——就像往常一样，是我们一起—— 来讨论「教育」， 但在我们开始讨论之前，我想先介绍一下 整个克氏基金会（K Foundation） 和它们的学校。 |
| The speaker, K, has been concerned with education since 1925 – a long time. And he was concerned with education, and he was responsible for choosing the sites in India. There is one school in the north, near Benares, which is about 4 or 500 miles from New Delhi, and there are about two hundred acres there on the river Ganga, Ganges. And, also, there is a school in Rishi Valley, in south India, about 170 miles from Madras, which is south India. And there are also two other schools, one in Madras itself and one in Bombay. The one in Bombay, which has been going on for 25 years is entirely and wholly for the poor people, very, very poor people – they have got 160 students. And there is another school being brought into being near Bangalore. So, there are five schools in India. And there is a school, as perhaps some of you know, at Brockwood in Hampshire, in England. That has been going on for nearly eight years. There are only… we have said we’ll limit it to 60 students, and there are only 60 students there. I believe there are about 14 – I’m not quite sure – nationalities there, from all over the world. | 演讲者——克——从1925年起 就开始关心教育了， 已经有很长时间了。 他很关切教育的问题， 他负责在印度选择建校的地址。 我们在印度北部有一所学校， 它在贝拿勒斯附近， 距离新德里大约有四五百英里， 那里大约有两百英亩的土地， 就在恒河旁边，印度恒河。 此外，在印度南部， 瑞希山谷那里也有一所学校， 距离马德拉斯大约一百七十英里， 在南印度那里。 我们还有另外两所学校， 一所就在马德拉斯，另一所在孟买。 孟买的这所学校已经开了有二十五年了， 这所学校完完全全是为穷人而办的 ——为那些非常贫穷的人而办。 学校里共有一百六十名学生。 此外，我们目前正在班加罗尔附近 筹办另一所学校。 所以印度一共有五所学校。 而你们中的一些人也许知道： 我们在英国汉普郡的布鲁克伍德（Brockwood） 也有一所学校。 这所学校已经运营了将近八年了。 这所学校只有……我们曾经说过： 我们会把学生人数限制在六十人， 所以那里只有六十个学生。 我想那里有来自大约十四个国家的学生 ——数量我不是很确定—— 他们来自全世界各地。 |
| And this school, here, we’ve been discussing with the teachers, with the parents and with the architects for the last two years. This school here is entirely different from other schools in India and in England. Here, the parents are involved in it, which is a new kind of experiment, because if the children are going to be different, the parents must also be different, otherwise there is a contradiction between the children and the parents, and there’ll be conflict between them. So, to avoid all that, we thought it would be right that the parents, as well as the teachers and the students, work together as a family unit. So. | 而这里的这所学校，在过去的两年里， 我们曾经和老师、 家长以及建筑师们讨论过它了。 这里的这所学校将是截然不同的， 它将不同于我们在印度和英国的学校。 在这里，家长们也会参与进来， 这是一种全新的试验， 因为，如果我们想要让孩子与众不同， 父母家长也必须是与众不同的， 否则的话，孩子和家长之间 就会有一种矛盾， 他们之间将会产生冲突。 所以为了避免这一切， 我们认为如下的做法是很好的： 即家长、老师和学生， 这三者作为一个大家庭，来齐心协力地工作。 就是这样。 |
| And, with regard to the architecture here, we’ve been talking with some prominent architects for the last three years or two years, I’ve forgotten now, and as Mr Mark Lee has pointed out, we are going to create it, not only a school but also a centre – which is going to happen in India, which is happening in England, and it must happen here, which is, a centre where people can gather together for perhaps three weeks at a time, to discuss and be together, be concerned with the problems and so on. That’s the introduction. | 而关于这里的建筑设计， 我们曾经和一些杰出的建筑师谈过 ——在过去的两年还是三年里， 具体时间我忘了， 而就如马克·李先生所指出的， 我们将要来建造的 并不只是一所学校，它同样也是一个中心 ——印度的学校也将发生这样的转变， 而英国的学校正在往这方面转变， 所以这里的学校也必须如此， 也就是说，它（学校）将成为一个中心， 人们可以聚集在这里， 每次可能待上三周的时间， 在这里讨论问题，大家待在一起， 去关注各类问题，等等。 介绍就到此为止了。 |
| So, please, the speaker is completely and totally involved in all the schools – in India, in England, and here. These schools are not being created against his wishes, he is involved completely, and also with the centre. So, having said that, let us talk over, together, the question of education. | 所以拜托了，演讲者完全彻底地参与了 所有这些学校的事务 ——无论是印度的、英国的还是这里的学校。 这些学校的建立是符合他的意愿的， 他完全参与了其中， 对于这个中心来说也是如此。 所以在说完了这些之后， 让我们一起来讨论一下 关于「教育」的问题。 |
| Questioner: If we are parents, and have not undergone a transformation then how can we bring about, in our children, such transformation? What do we do to help them? | 问：如果我们作为父母尚未经历「转变」， 那么我们要如何才能 为我们的孩子带来这种「转变」呢？ 我们要做些什么来帮助他们呢？ |
| K: I’m going to go into that. Just give me… let me talk a few minutes first, and then we will discuss the whole question. | 克：我将会来探究这一点。 但请给我…… 让我先讲几分钟， 然后我们再来讨论这整个问题。 |
| I do not know why we educate our children. We have never asked, perhaps, what is the intention, what is the meaning of education. Is it to turn out so many engineers, technicians, academicians, professors, specialists medically and otherwise? And, apparently, that is what is happening – the cultivation of memory about facts, technologically educated, so that human beings throughout the world can earn a livelihood, settle down in a particular pattern of society, and totally, completely disregard the whole psychological structure of man. That is what is actually happening in the world: cultivate one fragment of the mind so that going through school, college and university, if one wants to, and learn sufficient information, facts, and act from that memory, skilfully or not. That is the pattern set for man in education. Right? Do we agree to this? | 我不知道为什么我们要教育自己的孩子。 我们可能从来没有问过： 教育的目的是什么？ 教育的意义是什么？ 教育是不是为了培养出 大量的工程师、技术人员、 院士、教授，以及医学等方面的专家？ 但很显然，这就是正在发生的事情 ——培养学生去记忆各类事实， 教他们掌握某种技术， 这样全世界的人都可以赚钱谋生， 在某个特定的社会模式中安顿下来， 而完全彻底地忽视 人类的整个心理结构。 这就是这个世界上实际在发生的事情： 培养“碎片化”的头脑， 所以我们会去上学，去学院，去大学 ——如果你想要的话—— 去学习掌握足够多的信息和事实， 然后经由那种记忆 来熟练或不熟练地行动。 这就是我们为人类设定的 教育模板。 |
| Q: Yes. | 对吧？我们同意这点吗？ 问：同意。 |
| K: Please, not agree, do we see this together? | 克：请注意，不是同意， 而是我们是否共同看到了这一点？ |
| And the psychological factors of human beings, because they are so utterly neglected, so disregarded, never even thought about and gone into, has produced a society that’s utterly lopsided, utterly fragmented. So, if that is the education most of us want, and that’s what our children are educated to, then we must, inevitably, face the fact of conflicts, wars, terrorism, and all the ugliness that’s going on in the world. Again, that’s a fact. So, when we talk about education, what do we mean by it? Is it the cultivation, not only of knowledge, but also be concerned with the whole, total man? The whole of man – or the woman. Forgive me, if I talk about man, in that is included woman. And, if it is the cultivation, or the concern of education is not only the technical development of man, with considerable information and knowledge, but also include in education the understanding of the whole psychological structure – the two should go together, and not one ahead, or the other – so that man is a total human being, not a fragmented, broken being. | 而人类心理上的各种因素， 由于它们如此彻底地被忽视和无视了， 甚至从来没有被思考和探究过， 由此便造就了一个 彻底失衡与碎片化的社会。 所以如果这就是我们大多数人 想要的教育， 如果这就是我们教给孩子们的东西， 那么我们就必定不可避免地 要面对这些现实：冲突、 战争、恐怖主义， 以及所有世界上正在发生的丑陋之事。 同样的，这也是一个事实。 所以当我们谈论教育的时候， 我们所说的“教育”是什么意思呢？ 这种教育是否不仅仅是知识方面的培养， 同样也要关心整个人类，关心全人类？ 所有的人（man）——也包括女人（woman）。 请原谅我，当我谈到“人（man）”的时候， 这其中也包含了女人（woman）。 如果教育所培养或关切的 不仅是人类技术方面的发展， 使其拥有大量的信息和知识， 如果教育中也能包含对于 人类整个心理结构的了解 ——这两者应该是携手并进的， 而不是哪一个走在前面—— 这样的话，人就是完整一体的， 而不是碎片化的、分裂的存在。 |
| And, also, apparently, through education as it is now, as knowledge is encouraged, is cultivated, many scientists – including some of the famous ones who have been talking on television in England and perhaps here, also – that man can only ascend through knowledge. You understand? Ascend. Like Bronowsky and others are saying, that man can climb, ascend, go forward only through the acquisition of knowledge. And these specialists, professors, experts, totally disregard the other field. And we all think, in the Foundation, that the two should go together, not one ahead of the other. So that education is concerned with the total cultivation, development, total, the whole of man. And, to bring about that, one needs not only teachers or educators who know a great deal about history and all the rest of it, but also are concerned with the other. Therefore, one finds it terribly difficult to find such teachers – you understand? – who are really concerned with the total understanding of themselves and the children, the parents, as a unit, who are concerned with the whole of man. So, that’s one of our problems, to find proper teachers, who are really concerned with not only the deep inward cultivation, but also be excellent, academically. The two, marching together. | 但很显然，如今的这种教育， 在其中人们鼓励知识，培育知识， 很多科学家——包括一些著名的科学家， 他们曾在英国的电视上发表过讲话 ——也许在这里也有这种事—— 他们说：人只能够通过知识来得到“升华”。 你理解了吗？ 升华。 就像布罗诺夫斯基（英国著名社会学家）等人所说的： 人类只能通过获取知识来提升、 升华和进步。 而这些专家、教授和专业人士， 他们完全忽略了其他的领域。 而我们都认为——基金会里的人都认为： 这两者应该携手并进， 而不是哪个在前面。 由此教育所关心的 就是那种注重完整性的培养与发展， 完整的、整体全面的人类。 而要带来这种教育， 我们所需要的不仅仅是 那些掌握了大量关于历史等等领域知识的 老师或教育者， 我们还需要对他人的关切。 所以，我们发现要找到这样的老师 是极其困难的 ——你们理解了吗？—— 这些老师真正关心的是 完全完整地去了解他们自己、 孩子，以及父母，把这三者作为一个整体， 他们关切的是整个人类。 所以这就是我们的问题之一： 那就是去找到真正的老师， 这些老师不仅真心关切 内在深处心灵的培养， 而且他们在学术上同样也是非常出色的。 这两者是齐头并进的。 |
| Then, also, one of the factors is: parents generally send their children to schools – day schools, state schools, free schools, private schools, residential schools and so on. They are not responsible for them. They feel as long as they are very young, up to, perhaps, five or six, they feel very responsible, after that, let them go, throw them to the wolves. This has happened in India, and we have talked a great deal about it in India. And the parents because for economic reasons, and also of tremendous tradition of thousands of years, want to say, ‘You know better than we do about education, educate them. Because we are much too occupied with our own lives.’ So, that is one of our problems: the parents are not totally responsible, in the sense we are using the word ‘responsibility,’ which means being responsible, feeling the depth of their relationship to their children so that they, themselves, are educating themselves as well as the children, so that there is no contradiction. When they go home, they don’t find the parents totally in a different area, dimension. That’s one of our difficulties. The other difficulty is financial. Nobody wants to do this kind of work. They would rather send their children to private, public schools because it’s much safer – at least they think so. Because they think they will have a good job – you know, all the rest of it. | 此外，还有一个因素是： 父母通常会把他们的孩子送去学校 ——比如日校、公立学校、免费学校、 私立学校、寄宿学校，等等。 父母并没有对孩子负起责任来。 他们只有在孩子非常小的时候， 也许在孩子五六岁之前， 他们才会非常负责， 而在这之后，他们就放手不管了， 把孩子扔进了狼群里。 这样的事情在印度发生过， 我们在印度的时候 对此进行了大量的讨论。 而那些父母，他们由于经济上的原因， 以及数千年以来的令人敬畏的传统， 所以他们想说，“你比我们更懂教育， 所以请你教育他们（孩子）吧。 因为我们自己的生活 已经忙得不可开交了。” 所以，这是我们的问题之一： 那就是父母并没有完全负起责任来， 这里指的是我们所说的“责任”这个词的意思， 它的意思是：对此负责， 感受到他们和自己孩子之间深刻的关系， 这样的话，他们就是在自我教育， 孩子们也在进行自我教育， 由此便不会有矛盾了。 这样当孩子回到家中， 他们就会发现父母并不是 处于一个完全不同的位置和维度的人。 这是我们的困难之一。 另一个困难是财务上的困难。 因为没有人想要做这样的工作。 父母们宁愿将他们的孩子送去 私立学校或公立学校， 因为那样会安全的多 ——至少他们是这样认为的。 因为他们认为这样孩子就会得到一份好工作 ——你知道的，所有这些事情。 |
| So, these are the many complex problems in so-called… in real education. In the so-called education, it’s comparatively easy. I do not know if you were listening last night on the television, the Presidents of Yale University and the California University. As you listened to them, they are not concerned at all with the psychological unfoldment or freedom of man. They are concerned with that and not with the other. | 所以这些就是在我们称之为「真正的教育」中所存在的 诸多复杂的问题。 而在人们所谓的“教育”中， 这件事相对来说就比较简单容易了。 我不知道你们昨晚是否听了 耶鲁大学校长和加利福尼亚大学校长的电视讲话。 如果你听了他们的讲话， （你会发现）他们根本就不关心 心理世界的展开或人类的自由。 他们关心的是那个东西，而不是这个东西。 |
| So, then we ask, what, then, is education? You understand? How is this to be brought about? What is the function of a teacher, the educator? What is his relationship to the student, and what is his relationship to the parent? You are following all this, I hope? Are we meeting each other? Let’s begin with what is the relationship of the educator with the student? What is his relationship to the student? The speaker, K, because when he goes to India he spends practically a month in each place of these schools, talking with the students, with the teachers, and all the whole school, together. So, he knows… you know, we’ve been talking, endlessly, for last 52 years about education. So, I’m asking you as parents, you as educators, what is the relationship of an educator, the teacher, to the student? Is the relationship based on giving information from a status as a teacher? You understand? Status – he knows and the other fellow doesn’t know, which is a fact, and so his relationship to the student is merely that of giving information, knowledge of a particular subject to the student. So, he has really no relationship with the student. But, when the educator steps down from his platform, from his status, and begins to establish a relationship with the student, in the sense that the teacher is concerned not only with the technological knowledge but with the whole psychological structure, but also what kind of food he eats, what kind of clothes he wears, how he behaves, how he talks, how he eats, how he walks. Do you understand? All this is part of the relationship between the teacher and the student. | 所以，那么我们就要问了： 什么是教育呢？ 你明白了吗？ 我们如何才能带来真正的教育？ 老师或者教育者的职责是什么？ 他和学生的关系是什么？ 他和孩子父母的关系是什么？ 你们跟上所有这些了吗？ 我希望你跟上了？ 我们是否彼此理解了？ 让我们从它开始吧： 即教育者和学生的关系是什么？ 他和学生的关系是什么？ 演讲者——克里希那穆提—— 由于他去过印度， 他在印度的每一所学校 几乎都待了有一个月时间， 他和那些学生交谈，和老师们交谈， 全校师生一起交流。 所以他知道……你知道的， 我们在过去的52年里一直在不停地 谈论教育。 所以我在问：你们作为父母、作为教育者， 教育者、老师， 他们和学生的关系是什么呢？ 他们的关系是基于 以老师的身份传授信息吗？ 你们明白了吗？ 某种身份地位 ——他知道这些东西，而另一个家伙并不知道， 这是一个事实， 因此他和学生的关系仅仅是 将某个科目的信息与知识传授给学生。 所以，他其实和学生并没有什么关系。 然而当教育者 能够从他的讲台上走下来， 放下他的身份， 并开始和学生建立起关系， 这里“关系”的意思是： 老师所关心的 不仅仅是学生技术上的知识， 他同样也关心学生整个的心理结构， 关心他吃的是什么样的食物， 穿的是什么样的衣服， 他的行为举止是怎样的， 他是如何说话、如何吃饭、如何走路的。 你们理解了吗？ 所有这些都是老师和学生之间关系的一部分。 |
| So, there is no teacher separate from the taught. Am I making...? The teacher isn’t merely the one who gives information, but the one who is so deeply concerned with the student, which means he’s concerned with himself, as well as with the student. That is, if I may explain a little more, if you will permit me, the student comes to the school conditioned. Right? Already conditioned, by the parents, by his friends, by the neighbour and so on – he’s conditioned. And the teacher is also conditioned. Right? Both the educator and the one to be educated are both conditioned. Right? So, the responsibility of a good teacher is to explain to the student that we are both conditioned. Right? If he can explain it in different ways, it is comparatively easy, and say, ‘I’m conditioned, as an educator, and so are you. So, let us, in talking over together’ – you understand? – in discussing, having a dialogue with each other, when we are out for a walk and so on, explore this conditioning. So that it is a constant relationship with each other. I wonder if I am making something clear. We are trying this, please, in Brockwood and in India where one of the new Principals is coming to be, with whom we have been talking a great deal, we are trying this, so that there is no division, psychologically, between the teacher and the student. Which means the teacher cares for the student. Cares in the profound sense of the word, affection, you know, all that. Am I making this clear, somewhat, what we are trying to do, what we want to do, what we will do? If not, it’s not worth trying. You understand? Because there are millions of other schools. | 所以，老师和他所教的对象并不是分离的。 我有没有说清楚……？ 老师并不仅仅是一个给予信息的人， 而是一个深切关心学生的人， 这意味着他既关心自己，也关心学生。 换句话说——如果我可以再稍微解释一下， 如果你们允许的话—— 学生来到学校的时候 已经是局限的了。 对吧？ 他已经被父母、 被朋友、被邻居等等所制约了 ——他是局限的。 而老师同样也是局限的。 对吧？ 教育者和那个被教育者 都是局限的。是吧？ 所以，一个好的老师的责任 是去向学生说明这一点： 即我们双方都是局限的。 对吧？ 如果他可以用不同的方式来解释这一点， 那么这相对来说就会比较容易， 他可以说，“作为一名教育者， 我是局限的，而你也是局限的。 所以让我们……我们可以一起来讨论” ——你理解了吗？ —— 我们一起讨论，我们彼此交谈， 在我们出去散步等等的时候， 一起来探索我们的局限。 所以这是一种我们彼此之间恒定不变的关系。 我不知道我是否把一些东西讲清楚了。 请注意，我们正在布鲁克伍德的学校 尝试这样去做， 而在印度的学校，当某位新校长任职以后， 我们也会和他进行大量的讨论， 去尝试这种做法， 这样的话，老师和学生之间 就不会有心理上的区分。 这意味着老师很关心那个学生。 是那种深刻意义上的「关心」， 情感，你知道的，所有这些东西。 我是否把这些东西稍微讲清楚一些了： 即我们试图做的事情， 我们想要做的事情， 以及我们将会做的事情？ 如果不这样的话，那它（办学校）就不值得尝试。 你理解了吗？ 因为这个世界已经有成千上万其他的学校了。 |
| So, that’s one of our problems. Not our problem, that’s a human problem. The other problem is, will the parent, who is heavily conditioned with his beliefs, with his ambitions, lack of time to be with the children, care for the children, all the rest of it, and the mother, too, has very little time for them because in modern society both the parents, both the father and the mother go out to earn more money to have more cars and more something else – God knows. So, they have very little relationship with their children. So, will the parents, also, be concerned with the total development of their children and of themselves, with the help of the teachers, all together? You understand the question? Are you following? Are we communicating with each other, somewhat? | 所以这就是我们的问题之一。 不是我们的问题， 这是人类的问题。 另一个问题是： 父母们深受他们自己信仰 和野心的制约， 他们缺少时间来陪伴孩子， 来关心孩子，等等， 而母亲也是一样， 她们也没什么时间陪孩子， 因为在现代社会中， 父母两人， 父母和母亲都要出去赚更多的钱， 为了买更多的汽车、更多其他的东西 ——天知道什么东西。 所以他们和自己的孩子并没有什么关系。 那么，父母是否也可以去关心 孩子和他们自己的全面发展， 在老师的帮助下，大家一起去关心？ 你理解这个问题了吗？ 你们跟上它了吗？ 我们是否多多少少在彼此交流着？ |
| So. And the other problem is, to relate history – I’m taking that as an example – as a factual movement, to relate it, so that the child or the student understands the meaning, the full meaning of history. You understand? If I am a teacher of history – God forbid, I’m not a teacher of history – if I am a teacher of history, how am I to teach him the full meaning of history? You understand? The full significance of history. Not the kings and the wars and the dates of wars – you know, what generally histories are. But I want him to understand the story of man, which is history. Right? I wonder if you are meeting each other. The story of man. I want to tell him about that, not only the factual kings and queens and the presidents and the wars and all the rest of it, but also, I want him to see the extraordinary story of man who has grown, who has – you follow? – all that. How am I to teach him that? I don’t know if you have ever thought about it. A few of us have already discussed this point, here, with the parents and the educators. How is an educator to teach history? Not of a particular country, of a particular group of people or a community, but the global history of man. Are we meeting each other? If I was that teacher, educator, I would proceed this way. Sorry! Because that student is the embodiment of total humanity. Right? You understand this? I wonder if you… We said in the talks, here, the world is you and you are the world. Right? That’s an absolute truth to me. It may not be to you, but it is a complete, irrevocable, inviolable fact. And so is that student, he’s the world and the world is him, because he is going to suffer, you know, go through all the mill and the travail of human beings, right throughout the world. So, in him is the history of man. You understand what I am saying? Oh, come on, sir. Do we understand this? | 然后 另一个问题就是： 如果老师要讲述历史 ——我只是拿它举个例子—— 他要将其作为一种真实的人类活动 来讲述它， 这样孩子或者学生 就能理解历史的意义， 历史的全部意义了。 你明白了吗？ 如果我是一个教历史的老师 ——但愿别发生这样的事， 我并不是什么历史老师—— 但如果我是一个历史老师， 我要如何教授学生历史的全部意义呢？ 你理解了吗？ 历史的全部意义。 不是什么什么国王，什么什么战争， 以及战争的日期 ——你知道的，通常的历史纪录都是如此。 但我想要他了解的是“人的故事”， 人的故事就是历史。 对吧？ 我不知道你们是否理解了。 人的故事。 我想要和他讲述这个， 而不只是历史中真实的国王和女王， 以及那些总统、战争等等这些东西。 我同样也想要学生看到人类特别的故事， 人类的成长， 人类已经——你跟上了吗？ ——等等这些。 我要如何才能把这些教给他呢？ 我不知道你是否曾经思考过这件事。 我们中几个人已经在这里 讨论过这一点了， 和父母与教育者讨论过它了。 一个教育者要如何教授历史呢？ 不是某个国家的历史，某个人类特定团体 或群体的历史， 而是全世界人类的历史。 我们是否都理解了这一点？ 如果我是那个老师、那个教育者的话， 我就会这样子来教学。 不好意思！ 因为那个学生就是全人类的体现。 对吧？ 你理解这一点了吗？ 我想知道你们是否 此前在这里举行的演讲中，我们曾说过： 这个世界就是你， 而你就是这个世界。 对吧？ 这对我而言是一个绝对的真理。 也许对你来说不是， 但它的确是一个完全彻底的、 不可更改的、不可侵犯的事实。 对于那个学生来说也是如此， 他就是这个世界，而这个世界就是他， 因为他也将会受苦， 你知道的， 他也会经历全世界人类 所有的那些磨难与艰难。 所以，在他身上就有着人类的历史。 你明白我在说的东西吗？ 噢，加油啊，先生。 我们明白这一点了吗？ |
| Q: Yes. | 问：明白了。 |
| K: Good, I’m so glad some of you… Yes. So, I would say, now, together, we’re going to learn the story of man, which is you. I would spend a great deal of time about that, how to read the history of man, which is you, the book, the content of that book, which is you. So, if he can read that book, that story of man, which is himself, which is the student, which is the teacher, which is the parent, which is the man, human being. Then, also, I would go into the question of wars, you know, the specialised communities – America, England, you know, the division, why the division takes place, all the rest of it, so that he becomes… he learns the history of man, through himself. Not through a book, not through some psychologist, professor or philosopher, and all the rest of it. So, he will be an authentic man. You understand? I wonder if you are getting this. | 克：很好，我很高兴你们中有一些人……明白了。 所以，我现在想说： 我们将一起来学习人类的故事 ——也就是你的故事。 我将会花费大量的时间来探讨这个， 如何去阅读人类的历史 ——也就是「你」的历史， 那本书，那本书的内容， 也就是你自己。 所以如果他可以阅读那本书， 那个人类的故事——也就是他自己， 也就是学生， 也就是老师， 也就是父母， 也就是人，全人类。 然后我也会来探究一下 关于「战争」的问题， 你知道的，那些专门特定的群体 ——美国、英国， 你知道的，那种区分， 为什么会产生这种区分，等等这些， 这样的话，学生就会变得 他便可以从自己身上来学习人类的历史。 而不是从书本、从某个心理学家、 教授或哲学家等人那里学习它。 所以他将会成为一个真正原创的人。 你懂了吗？ |
| Q: Yes. | 我不知道你是否领会了它。 问：领会了。 |
| K: He’ll not be a second-hand man or woman, as we are, but he will be the total human being. If I was a teacher in a school, that’s how I would approach history. And, if I was talking about mathematics, which is a little more complex problem, I would be concerned with order. Right? Mathematics, part of it, is very orderly. Right? Right, sir? Are there some mathematicians here? It is very orderly. Higher mathematics, deeper, going into the very higher things, it may be rather confused, uncertain, unclear, but the general mathematics is order. So, if I were a teacher of mathematics, I would talk to him about order. Order in daily life: how he behaves, how he eats, how he talks – all these are very, very important – consideration of others, politeness, which, in America, doesn’t exist. Sorry, forgive me if I am saying this. There is no respect for anything. | 克：他将不会是一个“二手”的男人或女人 ——就像现在的我们一样—— 而是会成为完整完全的人。 如果我是学校里的一名老师， 我就会这样子来教历史。 而如果要我教数学的话 ——数学的问题要更加复杂一点， 那么我就会关注「秩序」。 对吧？ 数学，它其中的一部分 是非常有秩序的。 对吧？ 是吧，先生？ 这里有没有数学家？ 数学是非常有序的。 高等数学，它会深入研究非常高层次的对象， 它的研究对象或许是 相当混乱、不确定、不清晰的， 但数学总体而言还是很有秩序的。 所以，如果我是一个数学老师， 我就会和学生讨论「秩序」。 日常生活中的秩序： 他是如何行动的，他是如何吃东西的， 他是如何讲话的 ——所有这些东西都是非常非常重要的—— 关心体贴他人，彬彬有礼 ——美国并没有这些东西。 不好意思，请原谅我这么说。 在美国，人们不尊重任何东西。 |
| So, order, consideration, how one behaves, how one talks, how one walks, and out of that comes, naturally, respect for each other. So, order in his room – you understand, sir? – order in his clothes and so on, so on. So, I would begin with that, so that he understands order. Not imposed discipline. I wonder… are you understanding something? Because, together, the student and I are concerned with order. Which means punctuality, which means turning up at meals at the correct time and so on. And I would talk a great deal about that, and introduce algebra and all the rest of it, so that he, in himself, is bringing order out of this chaos. Without discipline, which means compulsion, reward, punishment, marks, ‘You’re a good boy,’ encourage him – all that is so irrelevant. They have had discipline in all the schools, beaten and all the rest of it – it has not created any different human being. | 所以，秩序，关心体贴， 一个人如何行动，如何讲话， 如何走路， 而从这之中很自然地就会出现 人与人相互间的尊重。 所以，这样他的房间就会井然有序 ——你理解了吗，先生？ —— 他的穿着就会有条理，等等等等。 所以我会从这里开始， 由此他便能够理解秩序。 但不是那种强加于他的纪律。 我不知道…… 你们是不是明白了一些东西？ 因为学生和我一起在关心「秩序」。 它意味着「准时」， 意味着在正确的时间就餐， 等等这些。 我会谈论大量这方面的内容， 然后再向他们介绍代数学，等等这些东西， 由此，学生就可以 从这一片混乱中为自己带来秩序。 而无需纪律 ——纪律就意味着强制、 奖励、惩罚、分数， “你是一个好孩子”， 鼓励他——但所有这些都是无关紧要的。 在所有的学校里，他们都有纪律， 体罚学生，等等诸如此类的东西—— 这些学校并没有创造出 任何与众不同的人类。 |
| So, that is how I would, if I was a teacher, the two subjects and other subjects, I would go into, so that my relationship to the student is not that of an elder brother or a teacher or somebody outside but, together, we are learning. I believe the word ‘school’ comes from the word ‘leisure.’ Leisure implies a mind which is not occupied. Not occupied with books, family, problems – just not occupied. It is only when the mind is not occupied then you can learn. But if it is already occupied, crammed full of complexities, it can’t learn, in the deeper sense of the word. So, in a school of this kind, there would be leisure. Not to do what you like, have leisure to sit and look. I wonder if you understand all this. It doesn’t matter, we will go into it. | 所以这就是我的做法， 如果我是一个老师的话， 我就会这样去教导 这两个科目和其他科目， 这样的话，我和学生的关系 就不是兄长、老师或者某个外人的关系， 而是我们一起在学习。 我认为“学校（school）”这个词 源自于“闲暇（leisure）”这个词。 “闲暇”意味着一个没有被占据的头脑。 这个头脑没有被书本、 家庭，各种问题所占据 ——它没有被占用。 只有当头脑没有被占用时， 你才能够去学习。 但如果它已经被占用了， 塞满了各种复杂的东西， 那它就无法去学习了 ——深刻意义上的“学习”。 所以，在这样的一所学校里， 学生们将会有闲暇时光。 这些时间不是用来做你喜欢的事情， 而是有空闲坐下来然后观察。 我不知道你们是否理解了这一切。 不过这没有关系，我们将会来深入它。 |
| So, that’s our problem. That’s the problem of education, if one is deeply concerned with humanity, with each other, as an educator and the person to be educated. | 所以这就是我们的问题。 这就是教育的问题所在 ——如果我们作为教育者和被教育者， 深切关心人类、关心彼此的话。 |
| Now, I have talked enough, so perhaps you… Yes, sir? | 好了，我已经讲得差不多了， 所以你们或许……你说吧，先生？ |
| Q: Krishnamurti, your descriptions have been very clear and, I think, well understood by me, and they do raise the problems inherent today in education. However, I wonder if you could answer me, how is it that when two entities come together, the educator and the student, both who are conditioned, how can they generate education, create an education, in that circumstance, when both individuals are conditioned? | 问：克里希那穆提，你的讲述是非常清晰的， 我认为我已经很好地理解了它们， 它们的确揭示了 当今教育中所固有的一些问题。 不过，我不知道你能否 回答我一个问题： 当教育者和学生双方聚在一起时， 由于他们两者都是局限的， 他们又如何能够带来「教育」， 在双方都有局限的情况下 如何能创造出真正的教育？ |
| K: Wait a minute. You are the student, I am the educator. You understand the question? Have I to repeat that question? | 克：请稍等一下。你是学生，而我是教育者。 你听懂这个问题了吗？ 我需要再重复下这个问题吗？ |
| Q: No. | 问：不需要了。 |
| K: Have you heard that question? | 克：你听明白这个问题了吗？ |
| Q: No. Repeat it. Some people might not have heard it. | 问：没明白。请重复下它吧。 也许有些人还没有听到它。 |
| K: The questioner asks, how is it possible for the educator and the one to be educated, when both are conditioned, how to approach each other, how to free each other… | 克：这个提问者说： 当教育者和被教育者 双方都是局限的时候，还怎么可能…… 他们如何面对彼此， 如何解放彼此…… 问：如何去创造。 |
| Q: How to create. | 克：如何带来那种 能够使得「创造」发生的自由。 |
| K: How to bring about this freedom from which creation takes place. That’s right, sir? | 是这样吧，先生？ 问：没错。 |
| Q: That’s right. | 克：你们现在听到这个问题了吧？ |
| K: You’ve heard the question now? We are saying, you are the student, if I may, and I am the teacher. We both are conditioned. You in your way and I am in my way, but deeply held in a trap. How do we free each other from this trap? If I remain as an educator, on the platform, the blackboard behind me, then I have authority. But, if I step down from that metaphysical platform and I step down, together, we say, I am conditioned, you are conditioned – right? – let’s go into it. What does it mean being conditioned? Being conditioned implies religiously, psychologically. Right? So, as long as you belong to something, attached to something, you are bound to be conditioned – to a belief, to a person, to some kind of physical… and so on, you are bound to be conditioned. So, I talk it over with him, with you. Not as a man who says, ‘I am free and I’ll tell you,’ but together, we are both conditioned. Right, sir? | 我们在说：你是学生——如果允许我这么假设的话， 而我是老师。 我们双方都是局限的。 你有你的局限，而我也有我的局限， 但我们都深陷于陷阱之中。 那么我们如何来帮助彼此 从而逃脱这个陷阱呢？ 如果我仍然是讲台上的一个教育者， 身后有块黑板， 那我就拥有了权威。 但如果我能够从那个“形而上”的讲台上走下来， 并且我真的走了下来，我们在一起，然后我说： 我是局限的，你也是局限的 ——对吧？——让我们一起来探讨它（局限）吧。 “有局限”是什么意思呢？ 这种局限意味着 宗教上的局限、心理上的局限。 对吧？ 所以，只要你还是归属于某个事物， 执著依附于某个事物， 你就必定会有局限 ——你会受到某种信仰、某个人、 某种外在物质上事物……等等的制约， 你注定会有局限。 所以我会和他讨论这件事，和你讨论这件事。 但我并不会说，“我是自由的，让我来告诉你吧”， 而是我们一起，我们双方都是局限的。 |
| Q: But can the blind lead the blind? | 对吧，先生？ 问：但是盲人能够引导盲人吗？ |
| K: Wait. No, you have missed my point. In talking with you, I am realising I am conditioned. | 克：请等一下。 不，你没有抓住要点。 在和你交谈讨论的时候， 我意识到我是局限的。 问：你说你是盲人，没错。 |
| Q: You are saying you’re blind, yes. | 克：不，我的眼睛并没有被蒙蔽。 |
| K: No, I am not blocked. When I’m talking over with you, I am exposing myself to you. And you are exposing yourself to me. | 当我和你讨论的时候， 我就是在向你暴露我自己。 而你也在向我暴露出你自己。 |
| Q: We’re both exploring our state. | 问：我们都在探究我们自身的状态。 |
| K: We are both seeing our conditioning. | 克：我们双方都看到了自己的局限。 |
| Q: See our condition, correct, which is conditioning. | 问：看到我们的局限，没错， 但我们依然局限。 |
| K: So, in talking it over, together, we are freeing ourselves from it. | 克：所以，就在一起讨论它的过程中， 我们就可以让自己摆脱局限了。 |
| Q: I don’t see that point, sir. How I, in admitting to you that I am conditioned, and you, in admitting to me that you are conditioned... | 问：我不是很明白这一点，先生。 当我向你承认我有局限时， 然后你向我承认你也有局限时， 我又怎么可能 |
| K: No, I’ll show you. | 克：别急，让我来告诉你吧。 问：我们仍然都是局限的。 |
| Q: We’re still conditioned. | 克：我会告诉你的，先生。 |
| K: I’ll show you, sir. I am conditioned – if I am – as a Hindu – right? – as an Indian. And you are conditioned as a Christian – if you are, it doesn’t matter – and I would go into my conditioning, how tradition, superstition, the handing down, etc., etc., I would go into it very, very carefully. And I would help you to go into it, very, very carefully. So, we see the fact. I see the fact that being conditioned as a Hindu, and you conditioned as a Christian, divide people. | 如果我是局限的——我是说如果—— 我被制约为是一个印度教徒。对吧？是一个印度人。 而你被制约为是一个基督教徒 ——假如你是的话，这不是重点—— 然后我将会来探究我的局限， 那些传统、迷信、世代相传下来的东西，等等等等， 它们是如何 我将会非常非常仔细地来探究它。 然后我也会非常非常仔细地来帮助你去探究它。 这样我们便能看到事实。 我看到了这个事实： 即我被制约为是一个印度教徒， 而你被制约为是一个基督教徒， 这种局限分裂了人类。 问：话虽如此…… |
| Q: Yes… | 克：等下，请理解这一点——它分裂了人类。 |
| K: Wait, follow it – divide people. From that division arises conflict – wars, etc., etc., etc. Do you, as a student, and I, as an educator, see this fact, so that I am no longer a Hindu? | 而从这种分裂中就产生出了冲突 ——各种战争，等等，等等。 而你作为一名学生， 我作为一名教育者， 我们是否看到了这一事实， 由此我便不再是一个印度教徒了？ 问：可你还是一个有局限的人。 |
| Q: You’re a conditioned human being. | 克：不，我已经不再是印度教徒了。 |
| K: No, I’m no longer a Hindu. | 问：那么，现在你是什么呢？ |
| Q: Well, what are you then? | 克：等一下。我现在是一个自由人， 自由的人类。 |
| K: Wait. I am a free man, free human being. | 问：不，先生。恕我不能苟同 |
| Q: No, sir. If I may beg to differ… | 克：先生，不要“恕不苟同”。 我们可以一起来讨论它。 |
| K: Don’t beg, sir – differ. Let’s discuss. | 问：当你告诉我 你是一个印度教徒， 而我是一个备受制约的基督教徒， |
| Q: In showing me that you are a Hindu and I am a conditioned Christian, and both mutually, deeply understanding the point that we are both human beings with a conditioning imposed upon each of us, and understanding this point sincerely and deeply, my point remains that, in spite of that deep understanding... | 并且我们双方彼此都深刻地明白了这一点： 即我们都是被强加了制约的人， 我们由衷地、深刻地理解了这一点， 但我的问题仍旧会在那里， 尽管我有了深刻的理解 |
| K: And freedom. | 克：和自由。 |
| Q:...and feeling that we’re still conditioned, we still remain conditioned, understanding, conditioned human beings. | 问：……并且感受到我们仍然是局限的， 我们仍旧是局限的， 尽管我们有了了解， 知道自己是局限的人类。 |
| K: No, sir. You’re missing the point, sir. | 克：不，先生。 你没抓住要点，先生。 |
| Q: I must be. | 问：我肯定抓住了。 克：请原谅我。 |
| K: Forgive me. | 问：只是在我头脑中明白我正处在监狱中， 这并不能解放我们。 |
| Q: It does not liberate us, in my mind to understand that one is in jail. It does not release one from being in prison. | 它无法让我们脱离这个监狱。 |
| K: It does. | 克：它可以。 问：它不可以，先生。 |
| Q: No, sir. | 克：我会来解释这一点的。 我会来探究这一点的，先生。 |
| K: I’ll show it to you. I’ll go into it, sir. Let’s go into it, quietly. You are the student, I am the educator. Forgive me, I’m not, but we are putting it to each other. I would point out the meaning of division, what it does in the world – historically, physically, in relationship and so on – conflict. Right? | 让我们安安静静地来深入它吧。 你是学生，我是教育者。 请原谅我这么说——我并不是教育者—— 但我们需要彼此交流这个问题。 那么我就会指出「分裂」的意义， 分裂给这个世界造成的后果 ——无论是历史上的、外在物质上的、 还是关系上的，等等——结果就是「冲突」。 对吗？ 问：如果你想要这么说的话，也可以。 |
| Q: If you wish. | 克：不是我想要这么说。 |
| K: Not, if I wish. | 问：「冲突」和我们正在讨论的东西相关吗？ |
| Q: Is conflict the relevant point that we’re discussing? | 克：它是相关的，冲突。 |
| K: Yes, conflict. | 问：因为我觉得「局限」才是相关的要点。 |
| Q: Because I thought conditioning was the relevant point. | 克：不是的。如果我被某种信仰所制约， |
| K: No. If I am conditioned to the belief that all Christians are devils and only the certain type of Hindu, the Brahmins, are the holy people, what happens? We have no relationship. | 认为所有的基督教徒都是恶魔， 只有某一类印度教徒， 比如那些婆罗门才是圣洁之人的话， 那么会发生什么呢？ 我们之间就失去关系了。 |
| Q: Yes, but if I was conditioned to understand that Hindus were beautiful people... | 问：没错，但如果我受到的制约是认为 印度教徒都是美丽的人…… |
| K: No, you’re not... You may be conditioned as beautiful people but I’m conditioned to treat you as the devil. | 克：不，你不会 你也许会受到制约 而认为自己是一个美丽的人， 但我受到的制约却是把你看作魔鬼。 |
| Q: Irrespective, in my mind, we’re still in it, sir, and it is to go beyond this conditioning that education must begin. | 问：先不管这些了，在我看来， 我们仍旧是在局限中的，先生， 而正是为了超越这种局限， 我们才必须开始教育。 |
| K: I’m showing you, sir, how… | 克：先生，我正在向你展示这一点，那就是如何去…… 问：如何去超越它。 |
| Q: How to go beyond it. | 克：超越它。 |
| K: Beyond it. As long as I am conditioned, and you’re conditioned, there must be conflict. That’s obvious, sir – Arab and the Jew, Catholic and the Protestant, and go to this village and you see how many churches there are – Baptist and… you follow? | 只要我还是局限的，而你也是局限的， 就必定会有冲突。 这是显而易见的，先生 ——阿拉伯人和犹太人的冲突， 天主教徒和新教徒的冲突， 而当你去这个村庄看看， 你就会看到村庄里有多少教堂——浸礼会的教堂，等等…… 你跟上了吗？ |
| Q: All right. Conditioning can be negative, yes. | 问：好吧。局限可能是负面有害的，没错。 |
| K: No, not ‘can,’ does. | 克：不，不是“可能是”，它就是负面有害的。 问：它就是负面有害的。行吧。 |
| Q: Does. All right. | 克：所以，你和我是否可能 让自己摆脱掉局限？ |
| K: So, is it possible for you and me to uncondition ourselves? | 问：这就是问题所在。 克：我就在研究这个问题，先生。 |
| Q: That’s the question. | “让自己摆脱掉局限”意味着 不要成为一个印度教徒， |
| K: I’m doing that, sir. ‘Uncondition myself’ implies not being a Hindu, not treating you as the white devil, and you not calling me the beautiful Indian. Of course. | 不要把你当作是“白鬼子”， 而你也不要叫我什么“美丽的印度人”。 |
| Q: All right. | 当然如此了。 问：好吧。 |
| K: So, we both of us then are free of our conditioning, of our prejudices, our superstitions. | 克：所以，那时我们双方就都摆脱了我们的局限、 我们的偏见、我们的迷信。 |
| Q: I really think that discussing it, as we are does free one from that conditioning. | 问：我的确认为我们这样子讨论它， 确实可以让我们摆脱掉这种局限。 |
| K: It does if you are paying attention to it. | 克：它确实可以 ——如果你能仔细注意它的话。 |
| Q: Good, then we are, and we’re becoming free. Do you really, therefore, believe that the... | 问：很好，那样我们就是…… 我们就是正在走向自由。 那么，你真的相信 |
| K: Not ‘believe.’ | 克：不是“相信”。 问：或者说“知道”——不好意思。 |
| Q: Or know – sorry. | 克：它甚至也不是“知道”——它是事实。 问：你认为解除制约的方式 |
| K: Not even ‘know’ – facts. | 是通过讨论交流和了解。 |
| Q:...that the way to uncondition is through discourse and understanding. | 克：不只是通过讨论交流， 还要通过「关系」。 |
| K: Not only discourse, but through relationship. | 问：通过「关系」。 |
| Q: Through relationship. | 克：我结婚了，我观察我的妻子， 而她也观察我， |
| K: I’m married, I watch my wife and she watches me and I realise, through relationship, how very different, contradictory we are. | 然后我通过我俩的关系而认识到 我们之间有着多么大的不同与矛盾。 |
| Q: Is this a speedy process? | 问：这个过程是迅速发生的吗？ |
| K: You can do it instantly, or take time. If you are tremendously attentive, it is finished. | 克：你可以立即就完成它，或者你去花费时间。 但如果你是极其留心注意的， 那这件事立刻就完成了。 |
| Q: All right. I have another approach that I conscribe to. | 问：懂了。 我还有另一种方法可以使用。 |
| K: Wait a minute sir. Don’t… Let him have his... | 克：请稍等片刻，先生。 请不要……让他先说完吧 |
| Q: And that would be that the only way to uncondition an individual, or a group of individuals, is to introduce an element that has no conditioned aspect, that is unconditioned, a pure state which has no conditioning. | 问：所以这就是 让个体或群体解除制约的唯一途径： 即引入一个没有局限之处的要素， 它是一种不受制约的、纯真的状态， 它没有任何局限。 |
| K: How do you know the pure state? That’s a theory. | 克：你怎么知道这种“纯真的状态”呢？ |
| Q: No. If we assume that there is, in creation, a conditioned state, do we, at least intellectually, agree that there is, somewhere, an unconditioned state? | 这只是一种理论。 问：它不是。 如果我们假设在“万物创生”的时候， 存在着局限的状态， 那么我们是否也可以至少在智力上赞同 在某处存在着一种没有局限的状态？ |
| K: No. No, sir. No, that is like saying, the Hindus have said this, and the Christians have said this, umpteen years and centuries – that there is God, who is the unconditioned. | 克：不，不对，先生。 不是这样的，你这样就好像在说： 印度教徒曾经说过它，基督教徒也曾经说过它， 他们说了无数年、无数个世纪 ——那就是存在着「神」， 「神」是没有局限的。 问：噢，是的，没错。 |
| Q: Oh, yes, all right. | 克：但我不接受所有的神明 和那种没有局限的状态。 |
| K: I don’t accept all the gods and the unconditioned state. All that I can begin is: I am conditioned. | 我的起点只能是：我是局限的。 问：那么我们就没有希望了？ |
| Q: So, there is no hope, then? | 克：你瞧，其实恰恰相反。 |
| K: You see, on the contrary. Your hope is based on a concept. | 你的希望是建立在一个观念之上的。 |
| Q: You’re not going into it. | 问：你并没有深入探究它。 问：不对，先生。 |
| Q: No, sir. If we do not agree that there is a non-conditioned state... | 如果我们不同意存在着一个没有局限的状态 |
| K: Why do you want…? You see... Sir, our whole problem is you are already conditioned to that there is an unconditioned state. That’s your conditioning. | 克：为什么你会想要……？你瞧…… 先生，我们全部的问题就是 你已经被“存在没有局限的状态”这种想法所局限了。 这成了你的局限。 问：我有没有被局限，这是无关紧要的。 |
| Q: Whether I am or not, is irrelevant. | 克：不。唯一相关的事实就是人本身， |
| K: No. The only relevant fact is human beings through centuries, through experience, etc., etc., are conditioned. | 人类经由无数个世纪、各种经验等等而被局限了。 |
| Q: I believe that there is an unconditioned state. That may be my conditioning. | 问：我相信存在着一种没有局限的状态。 这种想法可能是我的局限。 |
| K: It is! | 克：正是如此！ 问：很好。 |
| Q: Fine. | 克：那么现在就打破这种局限，打破它。 问：好吧。 |
| K: Now break it, break it. | 我想要真诚地问一个问题， |
| Q: All right. I want to ask the sincere question, and I don’t mean to monopolise the floor, please. | 但请理解，我并不是要喧宾夺主。 |
| Q: Do it. Ask away. | 问：问吧，尽管问。 |
| Q: If there is, irrespective of my belief or not, if there is no unconditioned state then there can be no education. | 问：如果不管我是否相信， 都并不存在什么“没有局限的状态”， 那我们就不可能有「教育」了。 |
| K: Wait sir, wait, wait. It is for you and me to uncondition ourselves, to find that state. | 克：等一下，先生，等等，等等。 正是你和我需要去解除自己的局限， 去发现那种状态。 |
| Q: Oh, we can uncondition ourselves, so there is an unconditioned state. | 问：噢，你的意思就是我们可以摆脱局限， 所以存在着一种没有局限的状态。 |
| K: You see? You see, you’re still sticking to your conditioning. | 克：你们看到了吧？ 你瞧，你仍然执著于你的局限。 |
| Q: How can you find what is not there? | 问：你怎么可能找到那个并不存在的事物呢？ |
| Q: Don’t try and find out one way or the other... | 问：不要试图以这样或那样的方式去发现它 |
| Q: You said now... | 问：你现在说 |
| K: How do you know…? Sir, please, sir, do see it logically. | 克：你又怎么知道……？ 先生，拜托了，先生，请务必逻辑地来看待这个问题。 |
| Q: I am trying, sir. | 问：我正在努力这么做，先生。 |
| K: Please, sir, you suppose, you believe there is that. | 克：请注意，先生，你假定、 你相信存在着这种状态。 |
| Q: Yes. | 问：是的。 |
| K: That is part of our conditioning. | 克：但这正是我们局限的一部分。 问：是的，我接受这一点。 |
| Q: Yes, I accept that. | 克：你接受这一点？ |
| K: You accept that? So, you are accepting something which is non-existent, or may be existent. | 所以，你接受了某种可能不存在， |
| Q: Yes, I accept that. | 也可能存在的事物。 问：是的，我接受了它。 |
| K: So, put that aside. It may be or it may not be, so put it aside, break away from that conditioning, then start, say, look, we are conditioned, let us free ourselves first and see if that is there, or not. But don’t presuppose. Surely, that’s simple? | 克：那么，把它扔到一边去吧。 它也许存在，也许不存在， 所以请把它放在一边， 打破挣脱这种局限性， 然后开始，说：瞧，我们是局限的， 让我们先解放我们自己， 去看看是否存在这种状态。 但不要预先假定什么。 毫无疑问，这是很简单的道理？ |
| Q: What’ll the end result be then, if we do this? If we do this, what then would be the end result? | 问：那么如果我们这样做了， 最后的结果会是什么呢？ 如果我们这样做了， 最终的结果会是怎样的？ |
| K: Ah! First do it. Not seek the end result, or suppose. Let us first uncondition ourselves. | 克：啊！先去做它。 不要寻求什么最终结果，或者去假设什么。 让我们先摆脱掉自己的局限。 |
| Q: Therefore, there is an unconditioned state. I feel unconditioned, now, therefore, there is an unconditioned state. This is what I must arrive at in order for education to begin, my education. | 问：所以说还是存在着一种没有局限的状态。 我现在感觉自己没有局限了， 因此的确存在着一种没有局限的状态。 而这是我必须要达到的状态， 由此「教育」才能够开始， 我的教育。 |
| K: No, you’re already… forgive me for saying so, you have not broken away from your conditioning. | 克：不，你已经…… 请原谅我这么说， 你并没有打破你的局限。 |
| Q: No... but at least intellectually I have. | 问：不……我至少已经在思想理性上打破了。 |
| K: Ah, no. Intellectually is just playing words, throwing words at each other. Intellectually, we can say, it’s beautiful beyond that mountain. | 克：啊，不是的。 思想理性上打破只是在玩文字游戏， 彼此大放厥词。 我们可以在思想智力上说： 那座高山后面有美景。 |
| Q: May I ask, then, has anybody achieved this unconditioned state, other than intellectually, in the audience? | 问：我能否问一下： 在听众中，是否有人达到过这种没有局限的状态呢？ 除了思想理性上的达到。 |
| Q: Well, the fact that they are listening… | 问：啊，事实是他们正在聆听 |
| Q: You want a ninety-day guarantee, you’ll never get it, sir. | 问：你想要一个90天的质量保证， 但你永远得不到它，先生。 |
| Q:...so you’re not, you’re asking a question... | 问：……所以你并不是， 你正在问一个问题 |
| K: Wait a minute, sir. Wait a minute. Suppose the speaker says he has, what is your position? | 克：请稍等一下，先生。稍等片刻。 假如演讲者说他已经没有局限了， 你会有什么想法？ |
| Q: My position is, I also want to achieve that. | 问：我的想法就是：我也想要达到这种状态。 |
| K: Ah. Suppose the speaker says he has unconditioned himself. What value has it to you? | 克：啊。 假如演讲者说他已经摆脱了局限。 |
| Q: It is an example. | 这对你来说又有什么价值呢？ 问：它会成为一个榜样。 |
| K: Which means imitation. Which means you have an example which you are going to follow. | 克：榜样就意味着模仿。 这意味着你有了一个榜样， 而你要追随模仿这个榜样。 |
| Q: No, sir, a goal that I may... | 问：不，先生，它是一个目标，而我也许 |
| K: Which means a direction. | 克：目标就意味着有一个「方向」。 问：好吧 |
| Q: All right… | 克：而当有了「方向」， 就必然会有局限。 |
| K: Where there is direction, there must be conditioning. No, don’t laugh. Where there is a direction, there must be a conditioning. Direction implies motive. Where there is a motive, you are already veering off, you’re already... | 不，请不要笑。 当有了方向，就必定会有局限。 方向就暗示了动机。 而当有了一个动机，你就已经偏离路线了， 你已经 |
| Q: The only unconditioned state, which I agree, is directionless, is omnipresent. | 问：我只认同这种没有局限的状态： 它是“没有方向”的， 它是“无所不在”的。 |
| K: Ah, you see, you’re still caught in your old conditioning. | 克：啊，你瞧，你仍旧受困于你旧有的局限中。 |
| Q: Sir, why does motive imply conditioning? | 问：先生，为什么动机暗示了局限？ |
| K: No, I said, motive implies direction. And where there is direction, it is conditioned. | 克：不，我说的是： 动机意味着有一个方向。 而当有了「方向」，就会有局限。 |
| Q: Could we go back to that example of the mountain being over there? | 问：我们能否回到刚才那个“高山”的例子？ |
| K: Look, I sit here and imagine what the other side of the mountain is. Right? I say, it’s marvellous, it’s beautiful, it must be… it is so hot here, over there it must be cooler. But I never get up from here, walk, climb and find out. | 克：你瞧，我坐在这里，然后想象 那座高山的另一边有些什么。 对吧？ 我说：那里有绝妙的风景， 那里很美丽，那里一定是 这里这么热，那里一定会凉爽一些。 但我却从来没有从这里站起来，走到山脚下， 攀爬翻越那座高山然后去发现它。 |
| Q: Well, I have. | 问：可是我已经这么做了。 |
| K: Ah no! Which means you are free from the idea, the concept, the conclusion, the belief that there is an unconditioned state. | 克：啊，不是！这意味着你已经摆脱掉了这个想法、 概念、结论 和信仰——即存在着一种没有局限的状态。 |
| Q: And you’re only free of that concept when you realise it. | 问：只有当你了悟了这个观念后， 你才能摆脱掉这个观念。 |
| K: No, it is not a concept, it is a fact. All right, you’re only free of the knowledge of the fact… When you arrive at that state you are unconditioned. | 克：不，它并不是一个观念， 它是一个事实。 好吧，你只是摆脱掉了关于那个事实的认知 当你达到了那种状态后，你就没有局限了。 |
| K: No. When you uncondition yourself, you know the fact – not a belief, not an idea. | 克：不对。而是当你摆脱了局限， 你就会了悟到这个事实 ——它并不是一个信仰，也不是一个观念。 |
| Q: Know the fact, the reality of it. That I know. | 问：了悟这个事实，了悟它的真相。 这个我已经了悟了。 |
| K: Then there’s nothing more to be argued. | 克：那就没什么好争论的了。 |
| Q: No, there is, because I as a teacher and others as students, I must allow them to come to this unconditioned state, also, in order for their education to begin. | 问：不，还是有的， 因为我作为一名老师，而其他人作为学生， 我必须也让他们去达到这种没有局限的状态， 这样的话，对他们的教育才算是开始了。 |
| K: Which is, I would talk to them, as I said, about conditioning. | 克：那就是：就如我说过的， 我将会和他们讨论「局限」。 |
| Q: Would you then hold it up to them as an ideal? | 问：那时你会在学生面前高举这种状态， 将其作为一种理想吗？ |
| Q: No, sir, I would... | 问：不，先生，我想说 |
| Q: That is the implication of what you are saying here. | 问：这就是你在这里所说的话的暗示含义。 |
| Q: Well, I was trying to arrive at it on a discourse level. It cannot be arrived at on that basis, it has to be experienced as an irrefutable reality. | 问：唉，我试图在讨论交流的层次上 达到那种状态。 但你是无法在这种基础上达到它的， 它必须作为一种无可辩驳的事实 被我们体验到。 |
| Q: Why does it ever have to be even considered? The facts of conditioning demand action. | 问：甚至可以说，我们为什么要去考虑它？ 对于局限的事实，我们需要行动。 |
| Q: Yes, correct. | 问：是的，没错。 |
| Q: Why does the word ‘unconditioned state’ ever have to come into being? | 问：为什么“没有局限的状态”这种措词 会出现呢？ |
| Q: It doesn’t, if the teacher has the skill to lead the conditioned student to the unconditioned state without... | 问：它并没有出现—— 如果老师有这种技巧 可以带领局限的学生 达到那种没有局限的状态而无需 |
| K: You see! | 克：你看你看！ |
| Q:...to consider the possibility of being a co-learner. | 问：……要考虑那种成为“共同学习者”的可能性。 |
| Q: Don’t the facts demand the action? Why does there need to be a leader when the facts demand the action? | 问：这些事实难道不是需要我们行动起来吗？ 当这些事实需要的是行动时， 为什么我们还需要一个领导者呢？ |
| Q: Sir, the river flows into the ocean and in an ocean it realises an unconditioned state, away from its boundaries. The teacher, in my mind – and I may be completely incorrect, at this moment – is that he is the one with the knowledge. This is a fact, we have heard. | 问：先生，小河流入了大海， 它在大海中了悟了那种没有局限的状态， 它挣脱了它的界限。 在我看来，老师 ——此刻我说的话也可能是完全错误的—— 老师就是那个拥有知识的人。 |
| Q: No. No! | 这是一个事实，我们已经听过这一点了。 问：不。不对！ |
| K: Oh, my darling sir. | 克：哦，我亲爱的先生。 问：……或者老师要让学生意识到 |
| Q:...or brings the student’s awareness to this unconditioned state, which is pure knowledge. | 这种没有局限的状态 ——它就是纯粹的知识。 |
| Q: There is no ‘I.’ There is no ‘I.’ There is no ‘I.’ | 问：这里并不存在“我”。并不存在“我”。 并没有一个“我”。 |
| Q: If I have missed the point, and I quite possibly have, it is because of it, that I’m here to learn. | 问：如果我没有抓住要点 ——我很有可能没有抓住， 正因为如此，我才会来这里学习。 问：请先坐下吧！ |
| Q: Sit down! | 克：先生，你想要说什么？ |
| K: What were you going to say, sir? | 问：先生，请听听你话语中存在的陷阱吧。 |
| Q: Listen to the pitfalls in what you are saying, sir. | 问：请向我解释一下它。 |
| Q: Please explain them to me. | 问：这是很深的陷阱。 即“我拥有权威”， |
| Q: Deep pitfalls. ‘I have the authority,’ ‘I am the one who knows,’ ‘You are below me, you are nothing.’ The pitfalls are terrible in this, sir. | “我是那个知晓一切的人”， “你是在我之下的，你什么都不是”。 先生，这其中的陷阱是很可怕的。 问：可以让我来回答它吗？拜托了。 |
| Q: Please, may I answer? And this will be my last statement on the subject. | 这是我对于这个话题的最后陈述。 |
| Q: Hooray! | 问：太棒了！ |
| Q: Once an unconditioned – or shall we say, once a teacher who is capable of bringing the awareness of the student to an unconditioned state – please be with me for a moment – once this teacher enables the student’s awareness to come to an unconditioned level, then the truth is self-effulgent to the student. He doesn’t haven’t to tell him anything more. Education has begun. The student knows the unconditioned state within himself, from that point on, he can add the facts. | 问：一旦一个没有局限的…… 或者我们可以说：一旦一个老师， 他能够让学生意识到 这种没有局限的状态 ——请先听我讲一会儿—— 一旦这个老师能够让学生意识到、 达到一种没有局限的层次， 那么这个事实本身对于学生来说 就会绽放出灿烂光芒。 老师用不着……不必再告诉学生更多东西了。 那时真正的教育就开始了。 学生在自己内心 了悟到了这种没有局限的状态， 从那时起，他就可以为这些事实“添砖加瓦”了。 |
| K: Wait, forgive me, sir. May I answer your question, finally? | 克：等一下，请原谅我的打断，先生。 我是不是终于可以回答你的问题了？ |
| Q: Yes. | 问：请说。 |
| K: How can the conditioned teacher say that there is an unconditioned state? | 克：一个有局限的老师又怎么能说 存在着一种没有局限的状态呢？ |
| Q: Because… | 问：因为…… 克：面对这个事实，先生。 |
| K: Face the fact, sir. How can the teacher, you, a human being, caught in sorrow – you understand, sir? | 当一个老师，你，一个普通人还陷入于痛苦中时， 你又怎么能够 你理解了吗，先生？ |
| Q: Sir, I heard your question, very clearly. You asked me a question, how can the teacher, conditioned teacher, lead the student to an unconditioned state? | 问：先生，我非常清楚地聆听了你的问题。 你问了我这个问题：一个老师，一个有局限的老师， 他又怎么能够 带领学生达到没有局限的状态呢？ |
| K: No, no. | 克：不，不是的。 |
| Q: Pardon me. Please ask the question, again. | 问：对不起。 请你再把问题说一遍吧。 |
| K: How can the conditioned teacher talk about the unconditioned state? | 克：一个有局限的老师又怎么能够 去谈论那种没有局限的状态呢？ |
| Q: Because there are two forms of conditioning. There is a perpetual conditioned state and there is a temporary conditioned state. So, a conditioned... | 问：因为存在着两种形式的「局限」。 一种是永久局限的状态， 另一种是“暂时局限”的状态。所以，一个有局限的 |
| Oh, yes, please, listen to me. Please, it might be valuable, also. In other words, a conditioned teacher may have periods of clarity in which he is unconditioned. | 哦，是的，请听我讲。 请注意，这或许也是很有价值的。 换句话说，一个局限的老师 或许也会有清明的时期， 在这段时期里，他是没有局限的。 |
| K: Sir, be careful. Don’t get caught in ‘temporary,’ you will then be lost. | 克：先生，这里你要小心一点。 不要陷入于“暂时”中，那样的话你会迷失的。 |
| Q: No, sir, please, I’m not. I’m just trying to make a point, that conditioning can be intermittent. Would you agree with that point, that conditioning can be intermittent? | 问：不，先生，请别这么说，我并没有陷入其中。 我只是试图阐明我的观点， 那就是：局限可以是间歇性的。 你能同意这一点吗？ 即局限可以是间歇性的？ |
| K: Wait, sir. We are saying, conditioning is the fact. Right? Is the fact. You may be temporarily unconditioned… | 克：等一下，先生。 我们正在说的是：局限是一个事实。 对吧？它是事实。 |
| Q: Good. | 你也许能够暂时地摆脱局限…… 问：说的没错。 |
| K: Wait, sir, no, listen to the very end of it. You won’t agree. | 克：等一下，先生，不，请听我把话说完。 然后你就不会同意了。 |
| Q: All right. I agree so far. | 问：好吧。至少目前为止我是同意的。 |
| K: One is conditioned. One may be temporarily, for a brief second, unconditioned. Wait. That state of… temporary, which means what? A state in which time exists – for a brief moment, time is not. Wait, wait, sir. You’re not… Look, sir: I’m conditioned and, for a moment, I feel free. What is implied in that moment when I say, ‘I’m free’? Can you ever say, ‘I am free’? No, go into it, sir. You’re not… Can one ever say, ‘I am free’? Or, put it round the other way, can one ever say, ‘I am happy’? The moment you have said it, it’s gone. | 克：某人是局限的。 他也许可以暂时地， 在某个瞬间没有局限。 等一下。 但这种短暂的……暂时性的状态， 它意味着什么呢？ 在通常的状态中存在着「时间」 ——然后在某个短暂的片刻，时间不存在了。 等等，等等，先生。 你不要…… 你瞧，先生：我是局限的， 然后在某个时刻，我感到自己自由了。 然而当我说“我自由了”， 在那一刻意味着什么呢？ 你能够说出“我自由了”这样的话吗？ 不，请深入它，先生。 你还没有…… 我能否说“我自由了”呢？ 或者换句话说， 我能否说“我很幸福”呢？ 当你说出这句话的那一刻， 幸福就溜走了。 |
| Q: Yes, you can only say, ‘I have been happy.’ | 问：是的，你只能够说“我曾经很幸福”。 |
| K: Please listen to what I am saying, sir. The moment I acknowledge I am free, I am not free. | 克：请认真听我说的东西，先生。 当我承认自己是自由的那一刻， 我就已经不自由了。 |
| Q: I agree. | 问：我同意。 |
| K: So, the temporary freedom is no freedom at all. | 克：所以“暂时的自由”根本就不是自由。 |
| Q: For that moment, it was real. | 问：但是在那一刻，它是真实的。 |
| K: It is no freedom. Freedom means being out of the prison. | 克：但它并不是自由。 自由意味着已经在监狱外面了。 |
| Q: Yes, but it is the only way out, temporary, at first. | 问：话虽如此，但这是唯一逃脱的方式， 我们起初只能“暂时自由”。 |
| K: Sorry. | 克：我很遗憾。 问：然后再去变成“永久的自由”。 |
| Q: To become, then, permanent. | 问：你正在给某个没有标签的事物贴标签。 |
| Q: You’re labelling something that has no label. | 问：不，不，没有。 这是一件非常重要的事。 |
| Q: No, no, no. This is a very important thing. | 问：今天下午会播放一盒录像带， 它讲的是「聆听的艺术」。 |
| Q: There’s a videotape, this afternoon, on the art of listening. | 克：并不存在暂时的幸福。 |
| K: There is no temporary happiness. There is no temporary enlightenment. There is no temporary glory, or whatever it is. Either it is complete or not. It is never fragmentary. | 并不存在暂时的开悟。 并不存在暂时的荣耀或者无论什么东西。 它要么是完整彻底的，要么不是。 它绝不可能是断断续续的。 |
| Q: How does it go from the non to the real? | 问：那么它要如何从「无」走向真实呢？ |
| K: First, face the fact. I don’t know if there is real. All that I know is that we live in a monstrous world. Right? All that I know is that I am conditioned by this world. I am that world. That’s all I know. And I start from that, I don’t imagine that there is unconditioned state, there is a bliss – nothing. I start from the actual, daily fact. | 克：首先，你要面对事实。 我并不知道是否存在真的东西。 我唯一知道的就是我们正生活在一个 残忍丑陋的世界中。 对吧？ 我唯一知道的就是 我被这个世界所制约了。 我就是这个世界。 这就是所有我知道的东西。 然后我就从这里开始， 我不会去想象 存在着某种“没有局限的状态”， 存在着“极乐天堂”——我什么也不想。 我从现实的、日常生活中的事实开始。 |
| Q: What do you mean when you say it’s monstrous? | 问：当你说这个世界是残忍丑陋的时候， 你是什么意思呢？ |
| K: Oh, no, don’t... Monstrous, sir, all the killing, the terror, the mugging – you follow? – raping. You know, what is happening in the world! | 克：噢，不，请别……残忍丑陋，先生， 所有那些杀戮、恐怖活动、行凶抢劫 ——你跟上了吗？ ——强奸。 你知道的，这个世界上正在发生的事情！ |
| Q: Excuse me, if I could make one suggestion. This question seems to point to the place of knowledge in the transformation of man. It maybe another time for a discussion. It’s after twelve. | 问：请原谅我打断一下， 如果我可以暗示一下的话。 这个问题似乎指向了「知识」 在人类转变中的地位。 我们也许可以下次再来讨论它。 现在已经十二点多了。 |
| K: Are you saying, the lady asks, sir, are you making a point, which is, knowledge is important in freedom? | 克：你是不是在说……先生，这位女士在问， 你是不是在表达这种观点， 即：知识对于（获得）自由来说很重要？ |
| Q: My point is that freedom is knowledge... | 问：我的观点是：自由就是知识 |
| K: You’re… | 克：你是说 |
| Q: …is knowledge, but that it can be gained temporarily and then, on the basis of a temporary, intermittent experience, can become permanent, but one has to start somewhere. | 问：……它就是知识， 你可以暂时获得它， 然后在这个暂时性的、 间歇性的经验的基础之上， 这种自由可以变得永久， 但我们必须要从某处开始。 |
| K: What a dangerous argument you are going into, sir. Really don’t, because you will be caught out. | 克：先生，你将要进入的是一场多么危险的争论。 真的别这么做了， 因为你会被识破揭穿的。 |
| Q: All right, I won’t go into it… (inaudible) | 问：好吧。 那我不争论了……（听不清） |
| Q: It’s ten after twelve. | 问：现在已经十二点十分了。 克：你说什么，先生？ |
| K: What, sir? | 问：最初那个人提出的问题是： |
| Q: The original question that somebody brought up is, what do we, as parents, do with children, our children, how do we deal with them? As you were explaining between the educator and the student… | 我们作为父母，该怎么处理孩子，我们的孩子， 我们该如何应对他们？ 而当时你解释了教育者和学生之间的 |
| K: How do you deal with the children who are not here. | 克：你要如何处理应对那些不在这里的孩子。 |
| Q: Our own children. | 问：我们自己的孩子。 |
| K: Oh, your own children. All right, sir. How do we deal with our own children? How do you actually deal with them, now? | 克：哦，你自己的孩子。 好的，先生。 我们要如何处理应对我们自己的孩子？ 事实上，你们现在是怎么处理他们的？ |
| Q: Without love. | 问：我们之间没有爱。 |
| K: So, first, without love. Second, you have no time for them – you go off to the office, she goes off to the office, or she pursues her ambitions – you follow? – so, you have no time for them. Third, you are conditioned and they are conditioned. You condition them, and you are conditioned by society, by people round you – you are that. Right? So, in fact there is no love, no care, no relationship, and they are your children. | 克：所以，首先我们没有爱。 第二：你也没有时间管他们 ——你需要去办公室上班， 而你老婆也要去办公室上班， 或者说她在追求实现自己的抱负，你也一样 ——你跟上了吗？ —— 所以你们没有时间来对付孩子。 第三：你是局限的， 而孩子们也是局限的。 你制约了他们， 而你自己也被社会、 被你周围的人所制约 ——你就是这样的。 对吧？ 所以，事实上你们之间没有爱、 没有关怀，也没有关系， 然而他们都是你的孩子。 |
| Q: None? Or just not so much as we would like? | 问：没有吗？还是说只是没有我们期望中的那么多？ |
| Q: He says, none? Is there no relationship at all? | 问：他在问：难道一点都没有吗？ 难道我们和孩子没有任何关系吗？ |
| K: The questioner says, is there no relationship at all. | 克：这位提问者问： 难道一点关系都没有吗？ |
| Q: No love? Or just less… | 问：一点爱都没有吗？还是说只是少了一点…… 克：先生，那位先生同意你的看法， |
| K: That gentleman agrees, sir, the gentleman who put that question says, you are right. We think we love them. If we love them, do you think you would have wars? If you loved them, do you think you would have all this terror going on in the world? If you really cared, deeply, for your children, do you think you would have this kind of education? Your children are running away from you, they are escaping, they are forming their own little communes. You know what is happening in this country – divorce, each person occupied with his own sensations, problems – oh, sir, you know. So, sir, how will you deal with such people? So that’s what we are saying: the father, the mother, are conditioned, for God’s sake change, transform yourself. Then there’s some hope for the world, but to merely live in a kind of abstraction, means absolutely nothing. That’s what all the priests, all the do-gooders, the idealists, live in a world of non-reality. the reality is what is actually going on, with our daily life. | 那位提出这个问题的先生说：你是对的。 我们认为我们爱孩子。 可如果我们爱他们， 你们觉得你们还会有战争吗？ 如果你们爱他们，你们觉得自己还会让这个世界 发生那些恐怖骇人的事吗？ 如果你们真的关心，深深地关爱着孩子， 你们觉得你们还会有现在这样的教育吗？ 你们的孩子正在逃离你们， 他们逃跑了，他们正在组建自己的小社群。 你知道这个国家里正在发生的事——夫妻闹离婚， 每一个人都沉浸在他自己的感受 和问题中——哦，先生，你很清楚这些事。 那么先生，你会怎么来处理对待这些人呢？ 所以我们在说：父亲和母亲都是局限的， 因此看在上帝的份上，请改变吧， 请转变你自己。 这样这个世界才会有一些希望， 然而仅仅生活在某种抽象概念中， 这是毫无意义的。 所有的牧师、所有的“行善者”、那些理想主义者， 他们全都生活在一个不现实的世界里。 而现实是实际正在发生的事， 我们日常生活中的事情。 |
| Q: We come here to learn something. | 问：我们来这里是为了学习一些东西。 |
| K: If I had a child, I would say, I’m going to – follow, sir? Because we have no love for them. Have you ever watched a mother caring for her little baby? What she goes through, getting up early in the morning, all through night, watching, watching, watching? Till the age of five, after that, throw them out. Throw them to the wolves, in fact. So, can you, as a parent, father, mother, uncle, whatever it is, can you change, you bring about in you the transformation? Which is to love a child right through life. The child is far more important, because he is the future generation. If you condition him to be like you, which is to… concerned about oneself, about yourself, about your worries, about your ambitions, your fulfilments, all the rest of it, you don’t care a hoot for the child. | 克：如果我有一个小孩，我就会说， 我就会去——你跟上了吗，先生？ 因为我们对孩子们没有爱。 你是否曾经见过一位母亲 是如何关心照料她的小孩的？ 她从头到尾会做些什么事， 早上她会很早起来， 然后整个晚上都会 持续不断地照看着孩子？ 直到孩子长大到五岁， 在这之后，她就撒手不管了。 确切地说，是把他们扔到了狼群中。 所以你们作为父母，作为父亲、母亲、 伯父，无论什么，你能否改变， 能否带来自身的转变？ 这才算是终其一生爱孩子。 孩子重要的多， 因为他是未来的一代。 如果你制约了他， 让他像你一样，也就是 只关心自己，只关心你自己， 关心你自己的烦心事、你自己的抱负、你自己的实现， 等等这些东西的话， 那就说明你根本不关心孩子。 |
| Q: Sir, I’m the mother of two children and one of them is a small infant and one’s a three and half year old son and I find my time really occupied a lot with the infant, demands a lot (inaudible) …and I see my three and a half year old son coming from a very pure and innocent state of mind, going through some strong changes, being very fascinated with the excitement of violence, and I find myself, with what energy I have to devote to him, you know, being side-tracked by the infant, trying to point out to him, how, you know, the excitement is just a thrill, trying to get him to understand the intensity of the violence, but I find myself stopping constantly because I realise that I don’t know what to do... | 问：先生，我是两个孩子的母亲， 我的一个孩子是小小的婴儿， 还有一个孩子是三岁半大的儿子， 我发现我大量的时间其实都花费在了 那个婴儿身上，他需要很多的（听不清） 然后我看到我那个三岁半的儿子， 他原本非常纯洁和天真的心灵状态， 发生了一些剧烈的改变， 他变得非常痴迷于暴力所带来的刺激感， 但我发现自己本需要花费在他身上的精力， 你知道的，这些精力分散耗费在了 我更小的孩子身上， 我试图向他指出——你知道的—— 这些兴奋刺激只是一种快感， 我试着让他理解暴力的严重性， 但我发现我经常会受阻， 因为我意识到 我其实不知道应该怎么做 |
| K: I know. | 克：我理解。 问：……而当我不知道该怎么办时， |
| Q: …and when I don’t know what to do, then something happens, where I can show him something, but it only seems to be… (inaudible) | 发生了一些事情， 通过这些事情我可以告诉他一些道理， 但这看起来只不过是……（听不清） |
| K: The lady says, I’ve got two children. They are nice, clean, healthy, lovely children, and they watch the TV, the people around and they are fascinated by violence. And I, I talk to them, but they are much more attracted to that, than to what I’m saying. Right? | 克：这位女士说，我有两个孩子。 他们都是很好、很纯净、 很健康、很可爱的孩子， 然后他们看了电视，看到了周围的人， 他们变得对暴力着迷。 然后我和他们说了这件事， 但他们却深深地被暴力所吸引， 而不在意我所说的东西。对吧？ 问：是的。但他们并不看电视 |
| Q: Yes. They don’t watch TV... | 克：是的，我明白，意思就是当他们想要某个东西时， 你成了他们讨厌的家伙。 |
| K: Yes, I know, you’re a nuisance when they want the other. So, what is she to do? You understand the question? What will you do? You understand? This is an agonising problem – you understand? – this isn’t just an intellectual thing that you say... What am I to do? I’ve got two children and they are attracted to guns, soldiers, violence, and I see the absurdity, the cruelty of all that, and how am I to stop them? You understand my question? How am I to stop it? How will you stop it? | 所以她该怎么做呢？ 你们理解这个问题了吗？ 你会怎么做呢？ 你们明白了吗？ 这是一个很让人苦恼的问题 ——你们理解它了吗？ —— 这并不只是一件思想智力上的事情， 只要你去说 我该怎么办呢？ 我有了两个孩子， 但他们却被枪械、士兵和暴力所吸引， 而我看到了这一切的荒谬和残忍， 那么我要如何去制止他们呢？ 你们理解我的问题吗？ 我要如何去阻止它？ 你要如何去阻止它？ |
| Q: Sir, I don’t think you can stop it. I think that in my own case I have the same problem with my child, but I am going along and watching his programmes with him, I am not dividing myself from him. | 问：先生，我认为你无法去阻止它。 我认为：就我自己的情况来说， 我的孩子也有同样的问题， 但我会选择顺应他， 然后和他一起观看他喜欢的节目， 我不会把自己和他割裂开来。 |
| K: You’re not answering the question. I am a mother. I see my children caught in this trap, or being attracted to the trap, and I see the danger, I see the horror, I see the misery of it. What am I to do? | 克：你并没有回答这个问题。 我是一位母亲。 我看到我的孩子受困于这个陷阱之中， 或者被这个陷阱所吸引， 我看到了其中的危险， 我看到了它的恐怖和悲惨之处。 那么我该怎么做呢？ |
| Q: I think the only thing the mother or the father can do is to change themselves, fundamentally, at the root. | 问：我认为母亲或父亲 唯一可以做的事情是 从根本上、从根源上去改变他们自己。 |
| K: Yes, sir, but in the meantime, what am I to do with my child? | 克：说的没错，先生，然而在此期间， 我该怎么帮助我的孩子呢？ |
| Q: Warn them. | 问：给予他们警告。 |
| Q: I find myself through relationship with those around me, with my child, that living exposure comes out of my own violence, I see it. As I understand it, really understand it... | 问：通过我和周围的人、以及和我孩子的关系， 我发现我自己 经由我自身的暴力而成为了暴力鲜活的展示， 我看到了这一点。当我明白了它， 真正明白了这一点 |
| K: I understand all that. | 克：这些我都懂。 |
| Q: As I really understand it, it no longer exists… (inaudible) | 问：当我真正理解了它， 暴力就不复存在了……（听不清） |
| K: Yes, madame, we have understood the question. The parent may be free from violence but my children are attracted to violence – what am I to do? | 克：是的，这位夫人， 我们已经明白了这个问题。 父母或许已经摆脱了暴力， 但是我的孩子们却被暴力所吸引 ——那么我该怎么办呢？ |
| Q: Pay attention to them. | 问：对他们（孩子）保持关注。 |
| K: What do you do, sir, with your children who are attracted to violence, to all that, what will you do? | 克：先生，你会怎么处理对付你的孩子呢， 当你的孩子被暴力所吸引，被所有那些东西吸引， 你又会怎么做呢？ |
| Q: Is it that they… | 问：是不是他们 |
| K: See what happens, sir, look at it. Look at it. I can’t keep them away from other children, can I? I can’t take them away and go away, go into a forest and live with my children. That’s impossible. I can’t argue with them, I can’t point out the dangers to them because that’s much more attractive, the other. You understand? This is how all the youth movements, all the tyrannies with their youth movements are doing, making it so attractive that everyone wants to go and join it. Hitler did it, Stalin did it, the dictators are doing – you follow? So, what shall I do? Put yourself in that position, feel for it, for God’s sake, have passion about it! | 克：先生，看看发生的事情， 去看看它，去观察它。 我是无法让孩子不与其他孩子接触的， 对吧？ 我是无法把别的孩子都赶走，然后逃离， 逃到森林里然后和我的孩子一起生活的。 这是不可能的。 我是无法和孩子们去争论的， 我也无法向他们指出暴力的危险， 因为这个东西对他们来说 远远有着更大的吸引力。 你理解了吗？ 这是所有的“青年运动”， 所有的专制政府和它们的“青年运动”在做的事情， 那就是：让它变得极具吸引力， 这样每一个人都会想要参与进来，加入它。 希特勒这么做了，斯大林这么做了， 那些独裁者也正在这么做——你跟上了吗？ 那么我该怎么办呢？ 让你自己置身于那个位置， 去感同身受，看在上帝的份上， 拿出你的热情来吧！ |
| Q: Could we try and educate them differently? | 问：我们能否尝试以不同的方式 来教育他们？ |
| K: Keep them home and not meet other children? Don’t let them see TV? Don’t let them read violent books? And, if you do, when they leave, they are attracted to all that, the opposite. | 克：让他们一直待在家里， 而不要去和其他孩子接触？ 不要让他们看电视？ 不要让他们阅读暴力书籍？ 如果你这么做了，那么当他们离开你之后， 他们还是会被所有这些东西吸引， 所以这么做只会适得其反。 |
| Q: You have to be clear, yourself, that television is violent. | 问：你自己必须要清楚这一点： 那就是电视节目是暴力的。 |
| Q: The reason a child is attracted, say, at age three, to television or anything violent, is because he already has an image that he cannot have the mother’s attention, the father’s attention... | 问：一个孩子——比方说一个三岁的孩子—— 他之所以会被电视或任何暴力事物所吸引， 是因为他已经有了一个意象： 即他无法吸引母亲的关注或父亲的关注 |
| K: That’s what I’m saying… I am coming to that, madame. Look at it, sir. He is attracted to it, attracted to all that, and he won’t listen to my talk. He kind of avoids me. Right? Don’t you know all this, as parents? No? | 克：这就是我正在说的东西…… 这位夫人，我马上就会来讲它。 你瞧，先生。 孩子被它所吸引，被所有那些东西吸引， 他是不会来听我讲道理的。 他多少会有点回避我。 对吧？ 你们作为父母 难道不知道这些事吗？ |
| Q: Yes. | 不知道吗？ 问：我们知道的。 |
| K: So, what am I to do? What is wrong that they should be attracted to that? Answer my question. Why should they be attracted to that and not to something much more, you know, beautiful, whatever it is? | 克：那么我要怎么做呢？ 孩子们会被这些东西所吸引， 问题出在哪里呢？ 回答我的问题。 为什么他们会被这些东西吸引， 而不是被其他更加……你懂的， 更加美丽或无论什么的东西所吸引？ |
| Q: Spend more time talking about what’s beautiful. | 问：我们需要花费更多时间 和他们谈论美的事物。 |
| Q: Because we are attracted to it. | 问：因为我们自己都被暴力所吸引。 |
| K: Yes, sir, I understand, but the lady… Please, sir… | 克：是的，先生，我明白， 但这位女士……请注意，先生 |
| Q: …the children will not look at television. | 问：……这样孩子们就不会去看电视了。 |
| K: Then the child, in the meantime, grows up. | 克：但在此期间，孩子就长大成人了。 |
| Q: We could expose them to other things, like... | 问：我们可以让他们接触体验其他东西，比如 |
| K: You expose them – we have done all this, expose them to the most beautiful music, pictures, good talk, literature, but they prefer that. | 克：你让他们接触体验…… 这些事情我们都做过了， 让他们接触体验最美的音乐、绘画、 高尚的演讲、文学作品，但他们还是更喜欢那个东西。 |
| Q: They’re attracted to the violence, because they feel a separation, a lack of relationship with the parents. There is… | 问：孩子们之所以会被暴力所吸引， 是因为他们感到自己与父母分离了， 他们感到与父母关系的缺失。因为有那种 |
| K: Sir, are you a parent? | 克：先生，你是父母吗？ 问：不是。 |
| Q: No. | 克：请先把你自己放在父母的位置上。 |
| K: Put yourself in the position of a parent. | 问：你只需要去爱他们。 |
| Q: You just love them. | 克：先生，你要去感受那个母亲 内心因为这件事而产生的痛苦。 |
| K: Sir, feel the misery of a mother who feels this thing. Don’t intellectually answer this. | 而不要在思想智力上回答它。 |
| Q: Why are my children so drawn, attracted to this? | 问：为什么我的孩子会如此地 被它所吸引、所诱惑？ |
| K: I am going into it, sir. What am I to do? I don’t feel violent, I have worked myself out of it. I don’t feel I want to kill somebody, I don’t want to throw bombs at somebody. I don’t want to create a physical revolution because I don’t believe in physical revolution, but my two children are attracted to all that. What am I to do? What is wrong with society that allows this to happen? You don’t face all this. | 克：我正要来探讨它，先生。 我该怎么做呢？ 我不再有暴力感， 我已经努力让自己摆脱了它。 我觉得自己不想去杀人了， 我不想要朝别人扔炸弹。 我不想要发动一场外在物质上的革命， 因为我不相信外在物质上的革命， 但我的两个孩子 却被这一切所吸引。 那么我该怎么做呢？ 这个社会是怎么了， 会允许这样的事情发生？ 你们并没有去面对这一切。 |
| Q: Perhaps... (inaudible) | 问：或许……（听不清） |
| K: Let me go on, sir. You don’t face this, which means what? You don’t want to transform yourself, or society. You don’t feel passionate about anything. No? Sir, passion is something that comes out of great suffering. Right? But you avoid suffering, you escape from suffering. If you have no passion, you can’t create, you can’t build anything. | 克：先生，让我继续讲完它。 你并没有去面对它，这是什么意思呢？ 你并不想要转变你自己 或者这个社会。 你对任何事情都没有「热情」。 我说的不对吗？ 先生，「热情」是某种 源自于巨大苦难的东西。 对吧？ 然而你回避了痛苦， 你逃避了痛苦。 如果你没有热情，你就无法去创造， 你就无法去建立任何东西。 |
| So, if I had two children and I had a passion, not just intellectual concepts of what I should do, should not do, a passion to see that they understand this thing. So I would spend my time with them, point out. I would do it because I have love for them, I have affection for them, I care, profoundly, for them. I’m passionate about all this. | 所以，如果我有两个孩子 并且也有热情的话， 不只是理智思想上的观念： 我应该做什么，不应该做什么， 而是有热情去确保他们了解这个东西。 所以我会花时间和他们在一起， 向他们指出这一点。 我会这么做是因为我爱他们， 我对他们有感情， 我深深地关爱着他们。 我对这一切充满热情。 |
| Q: I think a lot of the passion is dissipated in the search for a method… | 问：我认为我们大量的热情都消耗浪费在了 寻找某个方法上 |
| K: Quite right, sir. Method, that’s what you... | 克：说的很对，先生。方法，这就是你们 |
| Q: (Inaudible) …has never experienced that, the agony of observing the child, which is the fuel. | 问：（听不清） ……从来没有经历过它， 经历那种观察孩子的痛苦 ——因为这会火上浇油。 |
| K: So, sir, if I was a mother and had two children, and I don’t want them to be thrown to the wolves – that is the society, everything – I’m concerned about them and myself, you know, in my relationship, find out. I’d spend – you follow, sir? – it’s my passion. I’ll find a way to do it. | 克：所以先生，如果我是一位母亲， 并且拥有两个孩子， 我不想他们被扔到“狼群”里去 ——“狼群”就是这个社会，所有那些东西—— 我关心他们和我自己，你知道的， 在我的关系中，去找出答案。 我将会花费……你跟上了吗，先生？ 这就是我的热情。 我会想办法去做这件事。 |
| Q: Maybe when you say ‘passion,’ you mean something different than we understand by that. | 问：也许当你说“热情”的时候， 你所说的“热情”和我们所理解的热情 有着不同的含义。 |
| Q: Maybe you just need love and the enthusiasm to give. | 问：也许你只是需要 「爱」和「热衷」才能去给予。 |
| K: Oh, no, it’s nothing to do with enthusiasm. Enthusiasm fades and disappears. You are enthusiastic about TV, or TM, which is transcendental meditation, enthusiastic about a new guru. | 克：哦，不是，这件事和「热衷」没有关系。 「热衷」会退去然后消失。 你们热衷于看电视或者TM（超觉静坐） ——也就是超觉静坐，热衷于新的古鲁。 |
| Q: I remember as a boy, I can’t speak from the parent’s point of view, but as a boy I must have been saying something very cruel to my parents, and they just broke down, both of them at once. | 问：我记得当我还是个男孩的时候， 我并不会站在父母的角度说话， 作为一个男孩，我肯定会对父母 说一些非常冷酷无情的话， 然后他们两人立刻就崩溃了。 |
| K: Yes, sir. | 克：我懂，先生。 |
| Q: It shocked me, very much. I just remembered that. | 问：这让我很震惊。 我也是刚刚想起了这件事。 |
| K: Did you hear what he said? | 克：你听到你父亲说了什么吗？ |
| Q: It really made me see the violence that I was doing, and it’s just because they broke down. They cried, and I never saw them cry, maybe three times in my life. | 问：这真的让我看到了 我对他们施加的暴力， 因为他们俩都崩溃了。 他们哭了，而我从来没有见他们哭过 ——这辈子可能也就见过三次。 |
| K: There you are. Sir, that’s enough. | 克：你说的没错，先生，今天就到此为止吧。 |
