|
SA78T2 - 思想的认同
|
|
| May we continue with what we were talking about the day before yesterday? Before we go into that, I would like to ask if I may, with all due respect and all the rest of it, why you are here, why you come to these talks and discussions. Is it out of curiosity? Is it that you have nothing better to do, therefore, you might just spend an hour or so, here? Or since you, apparently, have taken a lot of trouble to come, you must be fairly serious. And if you are serious, how far are you willing to go? Not another long journey, physically, but inwardly, psychologically, inside the skin, as it were, how deeply you are willing to go? One can go very deeply, only – if you’re willing – not with an intellectual concept of depth, then if you have an intellectual concept of depth, then it takes time to travel into that depth. And you may be serious enough to find out for yourself whether you can observe this whole movement of time, the measurement, height and depth, climbing and descending, enquiring into depth, which requires, also, a great deal of time and energy. Or there may be a totally different action, which doesn’t involve physical expansion, the travelling from this country to India to find some ugly guru or beautiful guru, but rather to have a quick perception into things, to have an insight, an immediate understanding, immediate contact with actually ‘what is.’ Not what you think ‘what is,’ or what you might want it to be, but actually perceive in its entirety what actually is taking place. When one observes so totally, holistically, then that gives an insight. From that insight, you act, therefore, insight and action are immediate, not a postponement of action. So, that is what we are going to enquire, if we may, this morning, if you’re willing, and if that is what you want to discover. | 我们可以接着 我们前天所讲的东西 继续下去吗？ 在我们开始探讨它之前，我想问 ——如果可以的话， 请恕我冒昧，等等这些—— 为什么你们会在这里？ 为什么你们要来听这些演讲和讨论？ 是出于好奇心吗？ 是因为你们没有别的、 更好的事情可做吗？ 所以你才会来这里，只是为了消磨 大约一个小时的时间？ 或者说，由于你显然是不辞辛劳的 才来到了这里， 所以你必须要相当认真才行。 而如果你是认真的， 那么你愿意走多远呢？ 不是另一场肉体层面的长途旅行， 而是内在的、心理上的、 就像是身体内部的探索之旅， 那么你愿意探索得多深呢？ 要探索得非常深入，只有当 ——如果你愿意深入探索的话—— 只有当你所持有的并不是那种 思想智性上的关于「深度」的概念才行， 如果你持有的只是 思想智性上的关于“深度”的概念， 那么你就需要花费时间 才能探索至那种深度。 而你也许足够认真，想要亲自去发现 你是否能够观察这整个「时间的运动」， 那种量度、高度和深度， 去往上观察和往下观察，去深入地探询， 而这同样也需要大量的时间与能量。 或者说，我们或许可以有 一种截然不同的行动， 它并不涉及到外在物理范围的扩展 比如从这个国家旅行至印度， 去找到某个丑陋的古鲁或美丽的古鲁， 而是要去迅速地看清事物、 洞察事物、立即了解那个事物， 立即接触到「真实现状」。 不是你所认为的“真实形状”， 或者你可能想要它（真实现状）成为的样子， 而是切实地看到它的整体， 看到实际上正在发生的事情。 当一个人能够如此完全地、整体地去观察， 这便能带来一种「洞察」。 然后你就会经由这种「洞察」而行动， 由此，洞察和行动就是即刻的， 而不是一种被推迟的行动。 所以，这就是我们将要来探询的东西 ——如果今天早上我们可以来探询它的话， 如果你们也愿意、 如果它也是你们想要发现的东西的话。 |
| And as we were saying the other day, why, throughout the world, human beings are so occupied with themselves, with their growth, intellectually, with their physical beauty or whatever it is, and psychologically, inwardly, so anxiously occupied with themselves, with their understanding, whether they are meditating properly, whether the right posture, whether it is the right thing to do, what one should do – this constant expanding enquiry and occupation about themselves. If one discovers for oneself the danger of such occupation, the actual, not only psychological, as well as physiological danger of this centralised occupation, then, perhaps, one can clearly and easily go into the question ‘why.’ Why human beings, of which we all are, and every human being, if you enquire into it more deeply, is the representative of all humanity, and that’s very important, I think, to understand, too, because every human being, right throughout the world, suffers, is anxious, uncertain, in despair, elated, confused, attached. So, all human beings are that. So you, when you look at yourself very carefully, objectively, non-personally, then you will see that you’re like the rest of humanity. And that discovery that you are actually, truly, irrevocably, the representative of every human being, that gives you an extraordinary sense of vitality, strength. This is not mere sentiment, a romantic concept, an intellectual idea, but an actual, daily fact. | 而就如我们前几天所说的， 为什么全世界的人们， 都会如此地专注于他们自己， 专注于他们知识智性的成长， 专注于他们身体的美丽，或者无论什么外在的美， 而心理层面、内在而言， 人们也是如此焦虑地专注于自己， 专注于他们的「了悟」，他们的冥想是否正确， 是否采用了正确的姿势， 它是否是一件我们能够做的、正确的事， 我们应该怎么做—— 这种持续不断扩展的询问， 以及对自我的专注。 如果我们亲自发现了 这种「专注」的危险所在， 真切实际的危险，不只是心理上的危险， 也包括生理上的危险， ——它们是由这种自我中心化的专注所造成的， 那么我们或许就能够清楚地、 容易地去探究“为什么”的问题了。 为什么人类——我们都是人类的一员—— 如果你更深入地去探询它， （你会发现）每一个人 他都代表了全人类， 而我认为，了解这一点 也是非常重要的， 因为全世界的每一个人都在受苦， 每个人都会焦虑、不确定、绝望、 得意洋洋、困惑、执著依恋。 因此，所有的人都是如此。 所以对于你来说，当你非常仔细地、 客观地、不带个人色彩地观察你自己时， 你会看到：你和其他的人是相似的。 而当你发现你的的确确、真真正正、 永永远远都 代表了其他每一个人时， 它便会赋予你一种 非凡的活力感和力量感。 这并不仅仅只是一种 感情用事、浪漫化的概念， 一个思想智力上的观念， 而是一个日常生活中真切的事实。 |
| So, we were saying the other day, this occupation limits energy. And when energy is limited, narrowed-down, canalised, it begins to lose its pristine vitality, energy. And this narrowing down of self-occupation with oneself, if one observes, has created a lot of misery in the world. When each person is occupied with himself, with his ambitions, with his fulfilment, with his despairs, with his fears and so on, so on, you have no relationship with anybody else. You may think you have but, actually, you have no relationship when the whole of your mind is occupied with one’s own progress, with one’s anxieties, with one’s own problems and so on. It’s so obvious. But though it is very obvious, we do nothing about it. On the contrary, we work at it, improve it – it’s called self-improvement, to become better, but always within the narrow limits. | 所以，前几天的时候，我们说了： 这种「专注」会约束限制能量。 而当能量被限制、被缩减、被引导， 它便会开始失去 它原始的活力与能量。 而这种「专注自我」所带来的狭隘化 ——如果我们观察一下的话， （就会发现）它已经给这个世界 造成了无数苦难。 当每一个人都专注于他自己时， 专注于他自己的雄心抱负、 他的满足感、他的各种绝望、 他的种种恐惧，等等等等， 那时你就与别人失去了关系。 你也许会认为你和别人有关系， 但实际上，你和他们并没有关系 ——因为你全部的心思 都专注于你自己的进步、 你自己的各种焦虑、 你自己的各种问题，等等。 这是如此显而易见。 虽然它非常显而易见， 但我们却没有对此做些什么。 相反，我们还为此努力， 去改善提升它 ——这被称为“自我改善”， 也就是去“变得更好”， 但（这种改善）永远都是在那个狭小的有限范围内。 |
| So, that’s what we were talking about the other day. Perhaps, some of you are new to this, so, if you are new to what is being said, don’t say to yourself, ‘Oh, that’s old stuff. We have heard all this, in different ways, before.’ Or say, ‘He’s repeating what somebody else has said.’ Or you don’t quite understand the vocabulary – we are using ordinary English language, no jargons, no specific meaning to special words, but ordinary, daily English. And if we both are speaking English, communication becomes easy, but verbal communication is not merely enough. We can understand that it’s a lovely day, fortunately, but when one goes deeply, enquires extensively, wisely, hesitantly, the words are not enough. Words are never the thing, the description is never the described. So one must be not only aware of the meaning of the words but also, the word is not the thing. | 好了，这就是前几天我们所谈论的东西。 也许你们中有些人是第一次听到这些东西， 所以如果你是首次听到 我所说的这些东西， 请不要对自己说，“噢，这是老掉牙的东西了。 我们以前通过不同途径 已经听过了所有这些东西。 ” 或者说，“他（克氏）只是在重复 别人说过的东西。 ” 或者你并不是很理解（我所说的）那些词汇 ——但我们使用的都是 很普通的英语词汇， 没有行话术语，也没有那些 包含了特定含义的专用词语， 我们用的只是很普通的日常英语。 而如果我们双方都是说英语的， 那我们之间的交流就会变得很容易了， 但仅仅口头文字上的交流是不够的。 幸运的是，我们都可以理解 “今天天气真好”的意思， 然而当我们深入地探究、广泛地探询， 智慧明智地、迟疑踌躇地去探究时， 那么仅有文字词语是不够的。 「词语文字」永远都不是它所指的那个东西， 「描述」永远都不是那个「被描述物」。 所以我们必须不仅仅知道词语的意思， 同样也要明白：词语并不是这个词语所指的东西。 |
| Then one begins to enquire very, very deeply, slowly, hesitantly, without any conclusion. Right? Like a first-class lawyer or a surgeon, doesn’t bring all his concepts. He first enquires into the case – the case is us, we are the problem. So, we must be very clear what is our problem, which I begin to question whether we are. We are so diffused, emotional, sentimental, so we are always colouring the problem, looking at it from a very, very narrow, limited point. Isn’t this so? So one has to be very, advisedly, careful that in our examination into why human beings are so destructively occupied with themselves, in enquiring into that, and whether it is possible to be totally free from this occupation, completely. Freedom is the complete dissolution of the self. Then there is freedom. We are going to go into all that. Phew! Il fait chaud. It’s hot! | 那样，我们就会开始 非常非常深入地去探询， 非常缓慢地、迟疑踌躇地、 没有任何结论地去探询。 对吧？ 就像一位一流的律师或外科医生， 他并不会带着自己所有的观念。 他会先去调查询问那件案子 ——而这里的“案子”就是「我们自己」， 「我们自己」就是问题所在。 所以我们必须非常清楚 我们的问题是什么， 但我开始有点怀疑了： 我们是否真的清楚它？ 我们是如此的散乱、 情绪化和多愁善感， 所以我们总是在给问题添加主观色彩， 从非常非常狭隘和局限的观点去看它。 难道不是这样吗？ 所以我们必须 非常深思熟虑和小心谨慎地 去检视为什么人类 会如此自我毁灭性地专注于自己， 去探询这个问题， 以及我们是否有可能 完全地摆脱这种「专注」， 彻底地摆脱掉它。 「自由」就是完全地消解掉「自我」。 那时才会有自由。 我们将会来探讨所有这些。 唉！天气很热啊（法语）。 太热了！ |
| Does one see the actual danger of this self-centred occupation? That occupation may identify itself with a nation, with a group, with a particular ideal or belief. It is the same process. I hope this is clear. When I identify myself with a group, with an idea, with a belief, with a conclusion, that identification is the very essence of being occupied with oneself. Right? When one is occupied with, say, internationalism, you have moved from occupying yourself with yourself to something with which you identify yourself. Therefore, that identification is still the occupation with oneself. Is this clear? When I identify myself with Christ or Jesus, or Krishna, or whatever it is, I am still in the process of identifying myself with that, but it is still occupation with myself. I wonder if this is clear? Bene? Can we go on, if that’s clear? | 我们是否看到了 这种以自我为中心的专注的切实危险？ 这种「专注」也许会把自己 认同于一个国家、 认同于一个团体， 认同于一种特定的理想或信仰。 但这是同样的过程。 我希望你们清楚了这点。 当我把自己认同于某个团体、 某种理念、信仰或结论， 那么这种「认同」， 它就是「专注于自我」的本质所在。 是吧？ 当你专注于——比方说——国际主义， 那时你就从专注于你自己 转移到了 专注于某个你所与之相认同的事物上。 所以，这种「认同」仍旧是「专注自我」。 这点清楚了吗？ 当我把自己与基督、耶稣、 奎师那或者无论什么相认同， 我仍旧是处于 “把自己认同于某物”的过程中， 但这仍旧是专注于自我。 我不知道这点是否清楚了？ 好吗？如果这点清楚了，我们可以继续下去吗？ |
| So, this central issue is whether one can exist healthily, sanely, harmoniously without identifying with anything, not only outwardly but inwardly – identifying myself with my experience, identifying oneself with the family, with beliefs, with institutions and so on. That means, can one live in this world with no identification? Which means can one live harmoniously, both with the outer and the inner, without any sense of occupation and identification? Is this clear? Let’s be clear of the problem, first, before we operate on it. When one is occupied with oneself, with one’s body, with one’s beauty, with one’s eyes – you know, this constant occupation with oneself, you deny, actually, all relationship, though you may sleep with another, though you may hold hands with another, say, ‘How darling you are’ – all the rest of it, but the identification process separates human beings. And from that, violence, wars, division of races, everything takes place. Right? | 所以，这个核心问题就是： 我们是否能够 健康地、心智健全地、和谐地存在？ 不把自己与任何事物相认同 ——不管是与外在事物认同， 还是和内在事物认同—— 我会把自己认同于我的经验、 认同于我的家庭、 我的信仰、我的团体 等等。 这意味着：我们是否能够 生活在这个世界上而没有「认同」？ 这意味着，我们是否能够和谐地生活 ——外在和内在都保持和谐， 没有任何「自我专注」与「认同」的感觉？ 这点清楚了吗？ 让我们先搞清楚这个问题， 然后再来着手处理它。 当一个人专注于他自己时， 专注于他的身体、他的美丽、他的眼睛 ——你知道的，这种持续不断的、 对自己的专注—— 那么你实际上就否定了所有的「关系」， 尽管你也许会和另一个人睡在一起， 尽管你也许会握住对方的手， 说，“你是多么可爱迷人” ——等等这些话语， 然而这种「认同过程」却分隔了人类。 从它之中就产生出了暴力、 战争、种族划分， 所有那些事情都发生了。 对吧？ |
| Now, the next question is, whether it is possible to live in this world, daily, without any sense of identification? Not only with the senses – the body – but with the name, with all the past, the heredity – you understand? – The Englishman, the German, all the history of all the past, to be completely free from all that and yet live in harmony with activity in daily life. Is this problem clear, now? | 好了，接下来的问题就是： 我们是否可能每天生活在这个世界上， 却没有任何认同感？ 不仅仅是感官感觉上的认同 ——认同于身体—— 也包括认同于名字、 认同于所有的「过去」、遗传 ——你们懂了吗？ —— 英国人、德国人， 所有过去的全部的历史， 去彻底地摆脱掉所有这一切， 同时也能够在日常生活中 和谐地生活行动。 现在，清楚这个问题了吗？ |
| First of all, there is no speaker, as we pointed out the other day. You are speaking to yourself, you are looking at yourself. The speaker may be the mirror, but the mirror has no value. You use the telephone to speak, but the telephone, itself, has very little importance. What you say in the telephone is important. So, similarly, there is no speaker, here. You’re talking to yourself, you’re observing yourself, you’re observing your occupation with yourself, and the result of that occupation in your daily activity, which is creating such chaos in the world. When people identify themselves with Russia, with a certain ideology, you become terribly brutal, you are willing to torture people and so on – we won’t go into all that, everybody knows about it. Every magazine, every newspaper goes into all this. | 首先，并不存在什么“演讲者” ——我们在前几天就已经指出了这一点。 你正在和自己讲话， 你正在观察你自己。 演讲者或许是一面镜子， 但这面镜子是没什么价值的。 你会使用电话来讲话， 但电话本身并不重要。 你在电话中所讲的东西才是重要的。 所以同样的，这里也并不存在什么“演讲者”。 你正在和自己对话， 你正在观察你自己， 你正在观察 你对于自己的「专注」， 以及这种「专注」在你日常活动中 所造成的后果， 它正在给这个世界带来如此的混乱。 当人们将自己认同于俄罗斯这个国家、 认同于某种意识形态， 你们就会变得极其残忍， 你们会甘愿用酷刑去折磨别人，等等 ——这些东西我们就不细讲了， 每一个人都知道它们。 每一本杂志、每一份报纸 都会谈论这些东西。 |
| So, the next question is, can the mind totally disassociate, not only with the knowledge which it has acquired and stored up, to which it becomes attached, but also, can the mind remain not in isolation? Because when one thinks, if one is not occupied oneself you have no relationship to others, you are so totally isolated. Those are all concepts, conclusions, theories. So, what we are saying is, can the mind, including the brain, the senses – when we use the word ‘mind’ I’m including all that, the brain, the movement of thought, the experiences accumulated as knowledge, memory, the whole momentum of thinking, and the senses, all that is the mind, which is, essentially, consciousness. Right? Can that mind, which has been so conditioned, through millennia, because our minds, brains are very, very, very old, it’s not something new that we have acquired when you’re born, it is a tremendously old mind, heavily conditioned to occupy itself, with itself. Can that mind free itself, completely, from the past, which includes knowledge, tradition, heredity, all that, and actively, sanely, live in daily life, harmoniously? Is this possible? Right? You understand the problem? The identification between the Jew and the Arab in the Middle East, what is happening, when the Russians are occupied with an ideology and forcing man to shape himself according to that ideology – the authoritarian totalitarianism, which is destroying and so on, so on. Does one see this centralised occupation is an enormous danger that’s going to destroy man? | 因此，接下来的问题就是： 头脑是否能够完全地脱离出来？ 不仅是和那些「知识」脱离 ——它获得了知识并将其储存起来， 然后执著于这些知识， 同样的，头脑能否不再处于孤立之中？ 因为当你去思考一下 ——如果你没有那么专注自我的话—— （你会发现）你与他人并没有「关系」， 你是如此彻底的孤立。 而那些东西都只是概念、结论和理论。 所以，我们在说的是： 头脑是否可以…… 头脑包括大脑、各种感觉 ——当我们使用「头脑」这个词时， 我所说的「头脑」包括了所有这些东西： 大脑、思想活动、 那些积累起来的经验 ——它们成为了知识、记忆， 思考的整个动力，以及各种「感觉」， 所有这些就是「头脑」 ——而它们本质上来说就是「意识」。 对吧？ 这个头脑上千年以来一直深受制约， 因为我们的头脑、大脑， 它是非常非常非常古老的， 它并不是某个 我们出生时才获得的崭新事物， 它是一个极其古老的头脑， 它深受制约，被制约着去 专注于自己、去关心它自己 那么这个头脑可以让自己 彻底地摆脱掉「过去」吗？ 「过去」包括了知识、传统、遗传， 所有这些东西， ——那么头脑可以摆脱过去，然后积极地、 健全地、和谐地过日常生活吗？ 这可能吗？ 对吧？ 你们理解这个问题吗？ 那种犹太人的认同 和阿拉伯人的认同 ——目前中东地区就在发生着这样的事， 当俄罗斯人专注于某种意识形态， 然后强迫人们依照这种意识形态 来塑造他自己的话 ——那种专制极权主义， 它正在带来毁灭，等等这些东西。 我们是否看到了这种自我中心化的专注 是一种巨大的危险， 它将会摧毁人类？ |
| Then the problem is, how to disentangle, how to unravel all this and put it all away? Right? Now, what is your answer? I’m not answering it, you’re answering. You’re looking in the mirror. There is no speaker. You are looking and asking these questions. If you ask this question looking in the mirror, you might say, ‘Well, it’s not possible’ – that’s the instinctual response, ‘No, it’s not possible.’ If you say, ‘It’s not possible,’ then you have blocked yourself. Right? That’s natural, isn’t it? But if you say, ‘It is possible,’ that also means you have blocked yourself. Both negative and the positive is a way of avoiding the issue. Right? So, you’re looking at the mirror, there’s no speaker, and you are neither accepting nor denying, saying it is, or it is not possible, but looking. | 然后我们的问题就是：如何去挣脱它， 如何去搞清楚这一切， 然后把它们全都抛开？ 对吧？ 那么现在，你的答案是什么呢？ 我并没有在回答它，是你自己在回答它。 你正在看那面镜子里的事物。 而那里并没有演讲者。 你正在审视和询问这些问题。 如果你询问了这个问题， 并看了镜子里的事物， 你也许就会说，“啊，这是不可能的” ——这是一种很本能的反应， 你会说：“不，这不可能。” 而如果你说“这不可能”的话， 那你就自我设限了。 对吧？ 这是很自然的道理，不是吗？ 但如果你说“它是可能的”， 这也意味着你自我设限了。 不管是「否定」还是「肯定」， 都是一种回避问题的方式。 对吧？ 所以，你正在看那面镜子， 那里并不存在「演讲者」， 你既没有去接受、也没有去否定， 你没有说“它可能”或者“它不可能”， 你只是在「看」。 |
| So, here comes the problem whether you’re actually looking, or you are looking at an idea which you have projected. You understand my question? Whether you are actually looking in the mirror, or you are looking with the conclusion or idea, or a hope, and through that hope, through that idea, through that conclusion, looking at yourself. You understand? When you do that, you can’t see. If I am prejudiced about you because you wear a white shirt, or a blue shirt, or crinkly hair, or this or that, I can’t, I mean, it’s silly. If I want to have any contact with you, it’s not possible. But to look at oneself in the mirror and find the answer for yourself in the mirror, because nobody is going to answer it. Then you might say, ‘Why are we here? If you don’t answer this question, as the speaker, what the dickens am I sitting here for?’ Which would be a natural response. But, as we said, we are human beings. There is this immense problem confronting us, a crisis, danger, destruction, and sane, healthy, serious people must answer this, find an answer out of all this. So, looking at the mirror where there is no speaker, you say, is this possible at all, to move out of this habitual, constant, apparently irrevocable movement of this occupation? Right? | 所以这里问题就来了： 你是否真的在看？ 还是说你只是在看那个 你所投射出来的观念。 你们理解我的问题吗？ 你们是不是真的在看那面镜子， 还是说，你们是带着结论、 观点或希望在看， 你在通过那种希望、观点 和结论在观察着你自己。 你们理解了吗？ 当你这么做的时候，你就无法去「看」了。 如果我对你心怀成见 ——因为你穿了一件白色衬衫 或者蓝色衬衫，或者头发卷曲， 这样或那样， 那我就无法……我的意思是，这是很愚蠢的行为。 如果我想要和你有任何交流接触，这就不可能了。 然而你要去看一下镜子里的自己， 然后在镜子里亲自找到答案， 因为没有人将会来回答它。 然后你们或许就会说， “那为什么我们要在这里呢？” 如果你没有回答这个问题， 那么作为演讲者， 我究竟还坐在这里干什么呢？ ” 这是一种很自然的反应。 然而就如我们所说的，我们是「人类」。 我们面临着这种巨大的问题， 危机、危险与毁灭， 而心智健全的、健康的、认真的人 就必须回答这个问题， 从所有这一切中找出答案。 所以，你看着这面镜子 ——这面镜子里并没有演讲者—— 你会说：它究竟有没有可能呢？ 去脱离这种习惯性的、持续不断的、 看起来不可更改的「专注」的活动？ 对吧？ |
| So, are you looking at the mirror, or looking at the idea that you have a mirror in front of you? You see the difference? Do you? The idea, which is not the fact. The idea is an abstraction of the fact, a movement away from the fact. So, if it is terribly important that you find the answer, urgently, seriously, then ideas have no place, you are actually looking. Then what takes place? | 所以，你是在看这面镜子呢， 还是在看这个“你面前有一面镜子”的观念？ 你们看到这两者的区别了吗？ 看到了吗？ 「观念」并不是「事实」。 「观念」是「事实」的抽象化， 是对于「事实」的一种远离。 所以，如果这件事变得无比重要了 ——那就是你迫切地、很认真地想要找到答案， 那时「观念」就没有一席之地了， 你只是切实地在看。 然后会发生什么呢？ |
| Here comes a different problem, whether you are looking, as an outsider in, or you are in it, not outside. That is, are you looking as though you were different from that thing which you see? You have understood? You understand, sir? This is fairly simple, isn’t it? | 这里就出现了一个不同的问题， 你是作为一个局外人在往它里面看呢， 还是说你就是“局内之人”，而不是在外面的。 换句话说，在你看的时候 你和你所看的事物 是不是好像是有所不同的？ 你们理解了吗？ 你理解了吗？先生？ 这是相当简单的，不是吗？ |
| Now let’s… I’m going to begin differently, which is, when you are jealous, greedy, angry, violent, are you different from that violence, greed, envy, anger? Are you? Or you are that anger, that greed, that violence? So, can you observe yourself in the mirror, not as an observer but only the thing that is being observed, without the observer? Does this become rather difficult? Or is this old hat that you have heard before, umpteen times, and you say, ‘Well, please get on with it’? Because this is very important to understand, because as long as there is a division between the observer and the observed – you understand? – there must be conflict, there must be effort, there must be a sense of either conquering it, suppressing it, or avoiding it. So, to totally eliminate, altogether, effort, there must be no division. Right? If there is no division between the Jew and the Arab, it’s finished. Or North Ireland to South Ireland – it’s over. | 好了，让我们…… 我将会换个说法来讲一下它， 也就是：当你嫉妒、贪婪、愤怒、暴力的时候， 「你」和那种暴力、贪婪、嫉妒 或愤怒是不同的吗？ 是不同的吗？ 还是说，你就是那个「愤怒」、 你就是那个「贪婪」、你就是那个「暴力」？ 所以，你能否观察镜中的自己， 不是作为一个观察者， 而是只有那个被观察之物， 而没有什么观察者？ 这是不是变得相当困难了？ 还是说这些老掉牙的东西 你以前已经听过无数次了， 于是你会说，“嘿，你还是继续讲下去吧”？ 了解这一点是非常重要的， 因为只要还是存在 观察者和被观察物之间的分裂 ——你们理解了吗？ —— 那就一定会有冲突， 一定会有“努力”， 一定会有某种想要去战胜它（被观察物）、 压抑它，或者回避它的感觉。 所以，要完全地、彻底地消除掉努力， 就必须没有这种分裂。 对吧？ 如果没有了犹太人和阿拉伯人之间的区分， 那就没啥事儿了。 如果没有北爱尔兰和南爱尔兰的分裂， 那这事儿就结束了。 |
| So, in ourselves, there is this division, the observer and the observed, which is dualistic. You follow? And we are conditioned, through education, culture and all the rest of it, through religion, so-called religion, to maintain this division, to seek God. You are nobody – you follow? – this whole division, which is the corridor of opposites. And when there is the corridor of opposites, there must be conflict, effort, practice. So, it is absolutely necessary to understand that there is only observation, not the observer trying to control the observation, that which is observed. Is this clear? Can one do this? You may hear this. You may say, ‘I see the gist of it, I have a feeling for it, I think what you’re saying is true,’ but it avoids you, it escapes, but it is yours, you have to find out. Which means that as there is no division between yourself and anger – right? – you are anger, at the moment when you’re angry, there is no observer, you’re only that. Later on you say, ‘I have been angry.’ Then you say, ‘I shouldn’t be angry,’ or you give reasons, explanations for being angry. Or you suppress anger. The moment of anger, of greed, of violence, there is no division. This is a fact. So, similarly, is there an observer at all? This is very… Please give your mind, your attention, your love, your care to understand this because we are totally, completely eliminating conflict, if you understand this. One can live a life in which there is not a shadow of conflict, not only within yourself, but outwardly. And this is immensely important to understand, because, as we said, the manner of your observation in the mirror – there is no mirror, you are watching yourself, but, for the moment, we invent the mirror. Who is the observer? You understand? When you say, ‘I observe the tree, the stream, I observe you and I observe myself,’ who is this observer? That’s very important to understand before we begin to understand the observed. Right? Are we coming together? Are we communicating with each other? Say, ‘Yes,’ or ‘No,’ for God’s sake. Are you all asleep? | 所以，在我们身上存在着这种分裂 ——观察者和被观察物之间的分裂， 而这就是「二元性」。 你们跟上了吗？ 而我们被教育、文化、 等等诸如此类的东西所制约了， 被宗教，被所谓的“宗教”制约着 去维持延续这种分裂，去寻找上帝。 你只是个无足轻重的人 ——你们跟上了吗？ —— 全部的这些分裂，这种对立面的通道。 而当有了对立面的通道， 那就必然会有冲突、努力、练习。 所以，理解这一点是绝对必要的： 那就是：只存在「观察」， 而并没有什么「观察者」在试图 去控制「观察」、 控制那个被观察物。 这点清楚了吗？我们能够这么做吗？ 你也许听到了这些。 你也许会说，“我明白它的主要意思， 我对此也有些感受体会， 我认为你所说的东西是正确的。 ” 但这样它就回避了你，它就逃走了， 然而它是你的事情，你必须要去搞清楚它。 这意味着：因为你自己和愤怒之间 没有了区分 ——对吧？ ——你就是愤怒， 在你愤怒的那一刻， 是不存在什么「观察者」的， 你只是「愤怒」本身。 在愤怒过后，你才会说，“我刚才生气了。 ” 然后你会说，“我真不应该生气”， 或者你会给予那种愤怒一些理由和解释。 或者你会去压抑愤怒。 在你愤怒、贪婪或暴力的时刻， 是没有区分（分裂）的。 这是一个事实。 所以，同样的道理， 究竟是否存在「观察者」呢？ 这是非常……请动动你的脑子， 付出你的注意力、 你的「爱」、你的关心 从而去理解它， 因为如果你理解了它，那我们就是在 完全彻底地消除冲突。 我们可以去过一种 没有丝毫冲突阴影的生活 ——不仅是内在的冲突、也包括外在的冲突。 理解这点是极其重要的， 因为，就如我们所说的： 你观察镜子的方式是 ——那里并不存在什么“镜子”， 你只是在观察你自己， 只是暂时来说， 我们发明出了“镜子”这个比喻。 谁才是「观察者」呢？ 你们理解了吗？ 当你说，“我观察那棵树、观察小溪， 我观察你、我观察我自己”时， 谁才是这个「观察者」呢？ ——在我们开始去了解「被观察物」之前， 理解这一点是非常重要的。 对吧？ 我们达成共识了吗？ 我们正在彼此互相交流着吗？ 看在上帝的份上，请说一句“是”或者“不是”吧。 难道你们全都睡着了吗？ |
| So, who is this observer? When you say, ‘I have been angry’ or ‘I have been violent,’ who is that entity that says, ‘I have been’? That entity is the observer, isn’t it? Who says, ‘Yes, I have been angry.’ Is not the observer the past, who says, ‘I have been angry’? Right? Not only in that instance, but whenever he observes, the whole observation is the movement of the past. I observe a Frenchman – because I have been told he’s a Frenchman – the conditioning, the past, knowledge. So, this whole movement of observation, is born from the past. Right? So the observer, in essence, is the past. Right? Don’t accept what I’m saying. That’s the fact, looking in the mirror, there’s no speaker, because you’re questioning, desperately, anxiously, passionately, you’re questioning. I hope you are! | 所以，谁才是这个「观察者」呢？ 当你说，“我刚才很生气”， 或者“我刚才很暴力”的时候， 那个说“我刚才怎么怎么样”的存在体， 他是谁呢？ 那个存在体就是「观察者」，难道不是吗？ 是这个观察者在说“是的，我刚才很生气”。 而那个说“我刚才很生气”的观察者， 他难道不就是「过去」吗？ 对吧？ 不只是在这个例子中， 而是无论何时，他的「观察」 他全部的观察 就是「过去」的运动。 我观察一个法国人 ——因为我已经被告知说他是一个“法国人”了—— （“法国人”的概念）就是制约、过去和知识。 所以，这整个观察的运动， 它是源自于「过去」的。 对吧？ 所以那个观察者——他从本质上来说—— 就是「过去」。 是吧？ 请不要接受我所说的东西。 这是事实，去看看那面镜子， 那里并没有演讲者， 因为你正在拼命地、 焦急地、强烈地去质疑， 你正在质疑这一切。 我希望你在这么做！ |
| So, the observer is the past – past memories, past experiences, past knowledge. With the past, he’s observing himself in the mirror. Right? So, you have created a division between what you see now and what has been. So, there is a division between the observer and the observed. Right? Are you getting this? So, the conflict begins. In your occupation with yourself, don’t you have a conflict with another, however intimate your relationship be? So, to totally eliminate that conflict permanently, everlastingly, one must understand the nature of the observer. Right? And as you observe and enquire and learn, the observer is the past, so the past is always dividing. Right? I am a Jew and you are an Arab. The Jew is tradition, propaganda, belief, certain mode of life and so on, so on, so on, and the Arab has his own mode of life and so on. Right? So, wherever there is division, there must be conflict, not only outwardly but inwardly. Right? Is this clear? That is, if you’re serious, if you want to live completely without contradiction, without effort and, therefore, live in peace, live in love and compassion. If that is to be, you must eliminate, totally, the division, in yourself, outwardly – understood this? This is not an idea, intellectual concept but actuality. | 所以，观察者就是「过去」 ——过去的记忆、过去的经验、过去的知识。 而他会带着「过去」来观察镜子里的自己。 对吧？ 所以你就制造出了一种区分 ——一种 你现在所看到的事物 和过去事物之间的区分。 由此「观察者」和「被观察物」之间 便有了分裂。 是这样吧？ 你们明白这一点了吗？ 因此「冲突」便开始了。 当你专注于你自己时， 你难道不会和别人产生冲突吗？ ——不管你和对方的关系是多么亲密。 所以，要完全地、永久地、永远地 消除掉这种冲突， 我们就必须了解「观察者」的本质。 对吧？ 而当你去观察、探询和学习以后， （你会发现）观察者就是「过去」， 所以「过去」一直在制造着分裂。 是这样吧？ 我是一个犹太人，而你是一个阿拉伯人。 「犹太人」就代表了一种传统、宣传洗脑、信仰、 特定的生活模式，等等 等等。 而阿拉伯人也有着 他自己的生活模式 等等。 对吧？ 所以，当有了「分裂」，就必然会有冲突 ——不仅是外在的冲突，也包括内在的冲突。 是吧？这点清楚了吗？ 换句话说，如果你是认真的， 如果你想要充分完全地去生活 且没有矛盾、没有努力 从而生活在「平静」之中、 生活在「爱」与「慈悲」之中的话。 如果你想要实现这一点， 你就必须完全地消除掉这种「分裂」 ——既包括你内在的分裂，也包括外在的分裂—— 理解它了吗？ 这并不只是一个观念、 一个思维智力上的概念，而是事实。 |
| So, can you look at yourself in the mirror, without the observer? This is the real issue where, in which rather, identification ceases and, therefore, division. You understand? Where there is no identification, there’s no division. So, can you observe your anger, your violence, your hurts and all the rest of it, without bringing in the past memories, past knowledge, past struggles, just to observe without the observer? Then what takes place? I’m not asking the question, you’re asking the question, yourself. Then what takes place when you’re looking at the fact? Not with the memories about the fact. Right? Is this possible? Can you do it? If you can’t, we cannot go further, because this is a very important issue as man has lived millennia upon millennia, constantly in battle with himself, with the devil and god, with the lower self and the higher self. You understand? This battle, this conflict, you see it in all the ancient pictures, drawings, the division between that which is good and that which is bad, the constant battle. And why should we live in this way? | 所以，你能否看着镜中的你自己 而没有「观察者」？ 这才是真正的问题所在，在其中 确切地说：在其中「认同」停止了， 由此「分裂」也结束了。 你们理解了吗？ 当没有了「认同」，就不会有「分裂」。 所以，你能否观察你的愤怒、 你的暴力、 你受到的伤害，等等这些， 而不带入过去的记忆、 过去的知识、过去的斗争， 只是不带着「观察者」地去观察？ 那时会发生什么呢？ 并不是我在问这个问题， 是你、是你自己在问这个问题。 而当你看着那个事实的时候， 那时会发生什么呢？ 不要带着各种关于事实的记忆去看。 好吧？ 这可能吗？ 你能够这样做吗？ 如果你不能的话，我们就无法深入下去了， 因为这是一个非常重要的议题， 因为人类数千年以来， 一直生活在「自我斗争」之中， 魔鬼和上帝的斗争， 低级自我和高级自我的斗争。 你们理解了吗？ 这种战斗、这种冲突， 在所有古老的图片和绘画作品中， 你都能看到这一点， 「好」的一方与「坏」的一方 之间的分裂， 这种持续不断的斗争。 为什么我们要这样子生活呢？ |
| So, we’re going to enquire and find out if it is possible to live, totally, in a different way. That is, if you’re serious. So, do you see the truth, not the idea, but the truth, the fact, the reality, that the observer is the past, accumulated memories, knowledge, and so he never perceives the present? To perceive the present, there must be absence of the past, obviously. And there is no effort involved in removing, or putting aside the observer, because you see it is so – you understand? | 所以，我们将会来探询和发现 我们是否可能 用一种截然不同的方式去生活。 也就是说，如果你是认真的话。 所以，你是否看到了「真相」 ——不是概念，而是真相、 事实、现实——那就是： 观察者就是「过去」、 他就是积累起来的记忆、知识， 因此他永远无法看清「当下」？ 因为要看清「当下」，就必须先拿掉「过去」 ——这是显而易见的。 而在这种“拿掉”中， 或者在将「观察者」抛开的过程中是没有努力的， 因为你看到：它就是如此 ——你理解了吗？ |
| Let’s put it differently, is love a remembrance? What do you say? Is love something that you have remembered and then you say, ‘I love you’? So, if it is a remembrance, a thing that is past, then it’s merely pleasure, and that pleasure says, ‘I love you’ because it wants more of that pleasure. Is that love? The speaker is not here, you’re asking this question, yourself, you’ve got to answer it, you can’t sit there and deliberately think about it. You’ve got to answer it. | 让我们换个说法吧， 「爱」是记忆吗？ 你们怎么看？ 「爱」是某种你记忆里的事情， 然后你才说，“我爱你”吗？ 然而，如果它是一种「记忆」、 一个过去的东西， 那它就只是「快感」罢了， 是这种「快感」在说“我爱你”， 因为它想要更多那样的快感。 可这是「爱」吗？ 这里没有演讲者， 你正在问你自己这个问题， 你必须要来回答它， 你不能坐在那里 然后刻意地去思考它。 你必须回答它。 |
| So, can you observe this fantastic, enduring occupation with yourself? Observe it without the observer. You understand? Then, is there an occupation? I wonder if you see this. Occupation with yourself is the movement of the past. ‘I have been that, I must be different from what I have been. I am a failure, I must be a success. I am depressed, I must be happy. I am not good but I will be good. I haven’t got virtues but I will have virtues. I will understand’ – you follow? This whole movement of identification and occupation is born from the past. Because if you don’t identify yourself with something: with a human being, with an idea, with a country, with a family, with something, with a rock, what are you? So, the fear of being nothing, makes you identify, makes you occupied. Right? Face... That is a reality, it’s not an intellectual structure. If you’re not identified with your country, with your body, with your god, with your knowledge, with your wife or girlfriend, or boyfriend, you’re empty, aren’t you? Right? If you’re empty, in that emptiness there’s tremendous energy. But we’re so frightened of this emptiness, this void in oneself. And to avoid that void, we occupy with god, with society, with our goodness. You follow? | 所以，你能否去观察一下 这种奇异的、长期持续的「对自我的专注」？ 去观察它而没有观察者。 你们理解了吗？ 那时，还会有「专注」吗？ 我不知道你们是否明白了这点。 「专注于自己」就是一种「过去」的运动。 “我曾经是那样的，我必须变得和以前不一样。 我是个失败者，我必须获得成功。 我抑郁沮丧，我必须要快乐幸福。 我还不够优秀，但我将会成为优秀之人。 我尚未拥有美德，但我将会拥有美德。 我将会「了悟」”——你们跟上了吗？ 这整个的「认同」与「专注」的运动， 它是源自于「过去」的。 因为如果你不把自己认同于某些事物： 认同于一个人、一种理念、一个国家、 一个家庭，或者认同于某个东西、 认同于一块岩石的话， “你”又是什么呢？ 所以，这种“自己啥都不是”的恐惧 会促使你去认同、 促使你去专注于自我。 对吧？ 请面对它……这是现实情况， 它并不是某种思想智力的架构体系。 如果你不认同于你的国家、 你的身体、你的上帝、你的知识、 你的妻子或女朋友，或者男朋友， 那你就空空如也了，不是吗？ 对吧？ 如果你“空空如也”了，那么在这种「空无」中， 就蕴藏着巨大惊人的能量。 但我们是如此害怕这种「空无」、 这种内心的空虚感。 于是为了避免这种空虚， 我们便专注于上帝、 专注于社群、专注于我们的良善。 你们理解了吗？ |
| So, the question is, are you listening to the mirror which is telling you that there is no observer, that the observer is the past, and most of us live in the past? ‘How beautiful I was when I was young. How quickly I could walk when I was young. What a lovely time I had, I ate so much, I enjoyed so much.’ You know, the past, living, living in the past. That is the observer. So, the observer creates the division, and the whole conflict begins. Now, do you see the truth of that? Not the words of it, not the meaning of the words, but the fact of it? If you don’t, why don’t you? Is it that you’re incapable of thinking, observing, watching, or your brains have gone so old, you can’t… or you’re not concerned? | 因此，问题在于：你是否在聆听这面镜子， 这面镜子告诉你说：并不存在什么“观察者”， 那个观察者就是「过去」， 而我们大多数人都是生活在「过去」中的？ “我年轻时是多么美丽。 我年轻的时候可是健步如飞啊。 我曾有过多么美好的时光， 我大吃大喝、尽情享受。 ” 你知道的，过去……活在「过去」之中。 这就是「观察者」。 所以，观察者创造出了这种分裂， 然后所有的冲突便开始了。 而现在，你是否看到了这个真相？ 不是关于真相的话语， 不是语言文字的含义， 而是它的事实性？ 如果你没有看到，为什么没看到呢？ 是不是因为你没有能力 去思考、去观察、去看？ 或者你的大脑已经变得如此陈旧衰老， 所以你无法 还是说，你并不关心这件事？ |
| So, is it that you don’t, actually, see this fact: the observer creates the division, which is the past. The Jew and the Arab, the Hindu, Muslim, the Catholic and the Protestant – you follow? The past creates this division and conflict, both inwardly and outwardly. Do you see what danger that is for humanity, for you and your children and all the rest of the stuff? | 所以，是不是因为你实际上 并没有看到这个事实： 即观察者制造出了分裂 ——「观察者」就是「过去」。 犹太人和阿拉伯人， 印度教徒和伊斯兰教徒， 天主教徒和新教徒 ——你们跟上了吗？ 「过去」制造出了这种 分裂和冲突 ——既包括内在的、也包括外在的。 那么你看到它对于人类、 它对于你和你的孩子、 对于人类所有其他成员的危险了吗？ |
| Then, when there is no observer, then there is only observation, the observation of the senses, without identifying with the senses. You understand this? Can you observe without identifying yourself with the senses, can you observe the movement, the activity of the senses, whether it is sexual senses, taste, smell and all the rest of it, the activity of the senses? From which arises the question, is there an observation of the whole movement of the senses? Not one particular sense. Are you meeting all this? Then, when there is an observation of the whole movement of the senses, there is no centre which identifies itself with the senses. | 那时，当没有了观察者， 那就只剩下「观察」了， 观察那些感官感觉， 但却不认同于感官感觉。 你们理解它了吗？ 你能否去观察而不把自己认同于 那些感官感觉， 你能否去观察感官的运动、活动 ——不管它是性爱的感觉、味觉、嗅觉， 还是其他什么感觉， 那些感官的活动？ 从这之中就产生出了一个问题， 我们是否能够去观察 各种感官的全部运动？ 而不是某个特定感官的活动。 你们理解所有这些了吗？ 然后，当我们能观察感官的全部活动时， 那时是不存在一个 将自己认同于感官的中心的。 |
| Am I talking to myself? If I’m talking to myself, I will go in my room. But I’m not, you’re talking to yourself. There’s no speaker. So, this requires no discipline, no practice. Right? When you practise, again, there’s a division. Right? But to see, instantly, the fact, the truth – that is insight, which we began this morning, talking about having insight, having an insight into the whole movement of identification. If I may – what time is it? | 我是在自言自语吗？ 如果我是在自言自语， 那我还不如回我的房间去。 但我并不是在讲给自己听， 而是你正在讲给自己听。 这里并不存在什么“演讲者”。 所以，这并不需要什么戒律或练习。 对吧？ 当你去练习的时候， 那时也会有一种「分裂」。 是吧？ 然而立刻看到事实、看到真相 ——这就是「洞察」， 今天早晨我们一开始的时候 便谈论了要拥有「洞察」， 要洞察到这整个「认同的运动」。 如果允许我……现在几点了？ |
| Q: Eleven thirty. | 提问者：十一点半了。 |
| K: There was no announcement this morning, so. Last time we were here, there was an announcement. I took five minutes longer. It’s half past eleven but I’ll go on a little while. Where was I? | 克：今天早上并没有来通知，所以 上次我们在这里演讲的时候，来了通知。 但我还是多讲了五分钟。 现在已经十一点半了，但我还会再讲一会儿。 我讲到哪儿了？ |
| Q: To observe the whole movement of the senses. | 提问者：去观察感官的全部运动。 |
| K: Yes, to observe the whole movement of the senses without identification. Which means, is it possible to observe, without forcing yourself, without disciplining yourself to watch, to practise? Because when you do, again, you have brought in this whole dualistic effort. And can you disassociate, can the mind disassociate with its tradition, with its conditioning of identifying, which creates duality? You understand? Do it! Can you disassociate and not identify with your girlfriend? Can you be free of attachment, which is identification, obviously? Attachment to your country, to your group, to your family, to your children – you follow? – attachment, holding on to your name, to your ideas, to your conclusions. Does that non-identification with another, does it end in isolation, does it end the fact of love? You understand my question? Do we know what love is? Not know intellectually, verbally, volumes have been written about what love is, good God! Can we, looking in the mirror, ask these fundamental questions? When there is no identification or attachment with another, does it mean the end of affection, the end of tenderness, the end of love? Because now, when we are attached, we say, ‘I love you.’ You have to look at it, answer it. Basta per ora. | 克：对，去观察感官的全部运动 而没有「认同」。 这意味着：我们是否可能去观察…… 但无需强迫自己、 也不是约束自己去观察、去练习？ 因为当你这么做（强迫、约束）的时候， 你又带入了这整个二元性的努力。 那么你是否能够脱离 头脑能否摆脱掉它的传统、 它的局限性——也就是「认同」？ 因为「认同」创造出了二元性。 你们理解了吗？ 去这样做一下！ 你能够放下你的女朋友，而不认同于她吗？ 你能够摆脱这种执著依恋吗 ——这种执著依恋很显然就是认同。 执著于你的国家、你的团体、 你的家庭、你的孩子 ——你们跟上了吗？—— 那种执著、紧紧抓住 你的名字、你的观念、你的各种结论。 而当你不与别人相认同后， 这是否会导致「孤立」， 这是否会终结「爱」的事实呢？ 你们理解我的问题吗？ 我们知道什么是「爱」吗？ 不是思想智力上、口头文字上知道它， 人们曾经写了无数的书 来谈论什么是「爱」，天哪！ 那么我们能否看着这面镜子， 问一问这些根本性的问题呢？ 当没有了对另一个人的认同或执著依恋， 这是否意味着 感情的结束、 柔情的逝去、 或「爱」的终结呢？ 因为现在，当我们执著依恋的时候， 我们才会说，“我爱你”。 你必须要审视一下它，然后回答它。 （意大利语）今天先讲到这里吧。 |
