Krishnamurti Subtitles home


OJ80Q4 - 第四次问答会
美国，加州，欧亥
1980年5月15日



0:24 In talking over together these questions we are sharing not only with the question but also with the answers with the exploration of the answer. So it is not just I answer and you listen and you all agree or disagree, but together we are trying to find the right answer to these questions. 在一起讨论这些问题的过程中， 我们不但一同分享问题， 同时也分享这些问题的答案， 以及探究答案的过程。 所以，这不仅仅只是我解答而你聆听， 然后你们表示同意或不同意，而是我们一起 试着给这些问题找到正确的答案。
1:04 First question: 'I am not asking how fear arises, that you have already explained. Rather, what is the actual substance of fear? What is fear itself? Is it a pattern of physiologic reactions and sensations, tightening of muscles, surge of adrenaline and so forth or is something more? What am I to look at whenI look at fear itself? Can this looking take place when fear is not immediately present?' 第一个问题：“我不是问恐惧是如何产生的， 这一点你已经解释过了。 而是问：恐惧的本质实际上是什么？ 恐惧本身到底是什么？ 它是一种生理上反应和感受的模式吗， 肌肉紧张，肾上腺素激增等等， 还是还有别的什么？ 当我观察恐惧本身时，我到底要观察什么？ 当眼前没有恐惧时，这种观察还能发生吗？”
1:58 'I am not asking how fear arises, that you have already explained. Rather, what is the actual substance of fear? What is fear itself? Is it a pattern of physiologic reactions and sensations, tightening of muscles, surge of adrenaline and so forth or is something more? What am I to look at when I look at fear itself? Can this looking take place when fear is not immediately present?' “我不是问恐惧是如何产生的，这一点你已经解释过了。 我其实是在问恐惧的本质实际上是什么？ 恐惧本身到底是什么？ 它是一种生理上反应和感受的模式吗， 肌肉紧张，肾上腺素激增等等， 还是还有什么别的？ 当我观察恐惧本身时，我到底要观察什么？ 当眼前没有恐惧时，这种观察还能发生吗？”
2:48 Rather a long question. The questioner, as far as I can make out from this question, wants to know what is the substance of fear, what is actual fear and how can one observe fear present or past. Right? That's the question. Do we understand the question? 相当长的一个问题。 这个提问者，从我对他问题的理解来看， 想要知道什么是恐惧的本质， 恐惧实际上是什么， 一个人要如何观察现在的或过去的恐惧。 对吗？就是这个问题。 我们明白这个问题了吗？
3:30 What is fear itself, apart from the physiologic reactions, tightening and so on, what is the actual moment of fear? What is the nature, the inward structure of fear, the substance? Right? Can we go on with that? We have all understood this rather long question? What is fear itself? We are generally afraid of something. Right? Or a remembrance of something that has happened or a projection of the reaction into the future. Right? But that is not what the questioner asks, only. He asks also what is the actual nature of fear. I really don't know, we'regoing to find out. 恐惧本身到底是什么，抛开生理上的反应， 例如紧张等等，恐惧实际发生的那一刻到底是什么样的？ 恐惧的本质和内在结构是什么？什么是恐惧的本质？ 对吗？我们能继续下去吗？ 我们现在都明白这个长长的问题的意思了吧？ 恐惧本身是什么？ 我们通常都会害怕一些事情，对吗？ 或是想起一些曾经发生过的事情， 或是把这个反应投射到未来，对吗？ 但这并不是提问者所提问题的全部。 他还问到了什么是恐惧真正的本质。 我的确不知道，让我们一起去弄清楚。
5:12 When one is afraid both physiologically as well as psychologically it is, is it not, something that one has a feeling of danger. A feeling of total isolation called loneliness, deep, abiding, lasting loneliness. Those are all reactions to something: one is afraid of the snake or one has had pain and is afraid of that pain and so on. So it is either a remembrance and therefore something that has happened in the past and recalled when any dangerous moment arrives, the remembrance of the past identifying, and say, that is fear. The questioners says - and I think there is something which we have to go into it together - which is: apart from all this physical, psychological reactions which we know as fear, apart from it, is there fear in itself, not fear of something? You understand? Am I making it clear? Is there fear per se? Or we only know fear in relation to something else. If it is not in relation to something else, is it fear? We only know fear in relation to something, from something or towards something. But if you eliminate all that, is there actual fear? Which you can examine? You understand my question? Or is fear, deep-rooted fear, in the mind which has always wanted total security and, not finding it, it's afraid? You understand? 当一个人害怕时， 不光心理上感到害怕，身体上也害怕时， 就是这个人感到危险的时候，不是吗？ 有一种完全隔绝的感觉， 叫做孤独，彻骨的、不变的、恒久的孤独。 这些都是对于某些事物的反应： 如果一个人怕蛇， 或者曾经历过疼痛，而他很害怕那种疼痛，等等。 所以这或者说是一种记忆， 当危险时刻来临的时候，一些过去发生过的事情 的记忆被唤起， 对过去的记忆被识别出来，我们说这就是恐惧。 提问者问道——我认为其中 有些问题是需要我们共同探讨的——也就是： 除了这些在身体上和心理上， 我们知道是恐惧的反应以外， 除了这些，有没有什么是恐惧本身，而不是对某些事物的恐惧？ 你明白吗？我说清楚了吗？ 恐惧本身是什么？ 或者说我们只知道恐惧总是与某些事物相联系的。 如果没有同其他的事物相关联，那么它还是恐惧吗？ 我们只知道恐惧是与某些事物相关联的， 恐惧来源于某些东西或是指向某些东西。 但如果你消除了所有那些外在事物，那么实际上还有恐惧吗？ 你可以研究的恐惧？ 你明白我的问题吗？ 还是说恐惧，深深植根于头脑中的恐惧， 头脑总是想要彻底的安全感， 却找不到，于是它就害怕了？你明白吗？
8:37 Please, we are examining it together, you are not just playing games with me. The ball is not in your court or in my court. We are looking at it together. The mind, the brain needs complete security to function well, healthily, sanely. Not finding it in anything, in a relationship, in an idea in a belief, in an image, an intelligent mind rejects all that. But yet it must have complete security. And lacking that, fear comes into being. Right? That is, is there something totally, completely secure, certain? Not the certainty of belief, dogma, rituals and ideas which can be abolished and new ideas, dogmas, theories can replace them, but if we put aside all that, is the mind, the brain, seeking a security that is imperishable? And not finding it it has deep-rooted fear. I don't know if you... Are we meeting together? 拜托，我们是在一起探究， 你不是在和我玩游戏。 不是说球落在你的半场还是落在我的半场。 我们是一起来看这个问题。 心智、大脑需要彻底的安全 来良好、健康、清醒地运转。 由于无法从任何东西中找到安全，无法从关系中、从想法中、 从信仰或是意象中找到安全，一个智慧的头脑就会摒弃那一切。 但它又必须拥有绝对的安全。 如果缺乏安全感，恐惧就会出现。对吗？ 也就是说，有没有彻底、全面的安全感和确定性？ 不是来自于信仰、教条、仪式或是观念的确定性， 那些会被废除，会被新的观念、教条、 理论所取代。但如果我们抛开那一切， 心智和头脑是不是在寻找一种不朽的安全？ 如果没有找到，就会产生深深的恐惧。 我不知道你是否......你明白我所说的吗？
10:41 So I am asking, one is asking oneself: apart from the ordinary kind of fears, is the mind, brain, creating the fear itself? You follow? Because there is nothing valid nothing that is whole and is that the substance of fear? That is, can the brain - and the mind includes the brain, reactions and all that - can that total mind have complete security, certainty not about something - you understand what I'm saying? Not about God, belief, all that, but in itself completely whole? Right? Am I conveying something? That is, can the mind in itself have no fear? Am I conveying something, are we meeting each other? Thought, which is part of the mind and brain, desiring security, has created various illusions, philosophical and so on, theological, and not finding it there it either creates something beyond itself in which it can find total security, or the mind is so totally complete it has no need for fear. Are we meeting? This is rather difficult. 所以我在问，你在问自己： 除了普通意义上的恐惧以外， 心智和大脑是否自己制造了恐惧？你明白吗？ 因为没有什么是有效的， 没有什么是完整的， 那么这是不是恐惧的实质呢？ 也就是说，大脑——心智包含了大脑、反应 等等所有这些—— 整个头脑能否拥有彻底的安全和确定性， 而不是就什么而言的安全——你明白我所说的吗？ 不是因为神、信仰什么的安全，而是头脑本身就是彻底完整的？ 对吗？我是不是表达清楚我的意思了？ 也就是说，头脑自身是否可以没有恐惧？ 我表达清楚了吗，我们互相理解了吗？ 思想，是头脑和心智的一部分， 它渴望安全，于是制造出各种假象， 哲学上的、神学上的等等的假象， 却无法从中找到安全， 它要么制造出一些超越自身的东西， 想在其中找到彻底的安全， 要么头脑本身就是彻底完整的，所以它根本不需要害怕。 我们互相理解了吗？这相当困难。
13:38 We are not talking of getting rid of fear, or suppressing fear, what is the cause of fear - we went into all that the other day - but we are asking something totally different, which is: can the mind in itself have no cause or substance or reaction which brings fear? Sir, please, this is rather a difficult question to find this out, that is, can the mind... can it ever be in a state... - again that word 'state' implies static, I don't mean that. Can it ever be in a quality, in a state where it has no movement reaching out or going - you follow? Completely whole in itself? 我们不是在讨论如何去除或抑制恐惧， 或是什么造成了恐惧——我们以前曾探讨过这个问题—— 我们现在讨论的是截然不同的事情，即： 头脑本身是否可以不具备 任何带来恐惧的原因、实质或是反应？ 先生，请想一想，这是一个相当难的问题， 去找到答案，也就是说头脑是否可以 它究竟是否可以处于一种……的状态 ——再次重申，“状态”这个词意味着静态，而我不是这个意思。 头脑是否可以处于某种品质、某种状态中， 在这种情形下头脑没有向外求取或走出去的运动——你明白吗？ 而是自身就是彻底完整的？
15:18 You see this implies going into understanding what is meditation, if you are interested in it. Meditation isn't all this nonsense that is going on but to be free from fear - you follow? - both physiological as well as psychological, be free from it. Otherwise one can't love there is no love, there is no compassion, you know? As long as there is fear the other cannot exist. And to meditate, not to reach something, to understand the nature of fear, and to go beyond it which is to find out whether the mind has no memory or remembrance of something which has caused fear so that it is completely whole. 你看，这就意味着，如果你感兴趣的话， 去深入了解什么是冥想。 冥想并不是那些无稽之谈， 而是要从恐惧中解脱——你明白吗？—— 不但从肉体上而且从精神上摆脱恐惧。 否则一个人就无法去爱， 没有爱，也就没有慈悲，你明白吗？ 只要恐惧还在，另一个就不会存在。 而冥想不是去达成什么， 而是理解恐惧的本质，并超越它， 也就是要发现头脑是否可以 没有那些造成恐惧的记忆和回忆， 那样头脑就是彻底完整的。
16:49 I think I have more or less answered that question. Oh yes, except: 'Can this looking take place when fear is not immediately present?' One can recall fear, can't one? And the recalling of that fear can be observed, can't it? You are sitting here quietly, probably you have no fear now. But you have had fear in the past and you can summon it, but it is not actually the same. Right? Because, at the moment when there is... No. Fear exists a moment after, not at the actual moment. I don't know if you... You have given it a name, a reaction and so on and that you call fear. But at the actual moment of great danger the moment of facing something that may cause fear, at that second there is no fear, there is nothing. Then there is a recollection of the past and then the naming of it and you say, 'By Jove, I am afraid'. All the tightening of the muscles, the adrenaline and so on and so on. So one can, I think, recall the past fears and look at them. The observing of that fear is important because either you put it outside of you or you say, 'I am that fear'. There is not you observing that fear, you are that reaction. Then when there is no division as you and fear but only the state of that reaction, if you have noticed it, something entirely new takes place. Right? 我想我或多或少已经回答了这个问题。 噢对了，除了：“如果眼前没有恐惧， 那么这种观察还能否发生？” 人是可以回想起恐惧的，不是吗？ 这种对恐惧的回想是可以观察到的，不是吗？ 你正安静地坐在这里，你现在大概没有恐惧。 但你过去经历过恐惧， 你可以回想起这种感觉， 但那实际上已经不是一回事了， 对吗？因为在……发生的那一刻并没有恐惧。 恐惧存在于这一刻之后，而不是真正发生的当时。 我不知道你是不是 你给了它一个名称、一个反应等等， 你管这个叫恐惧。 但在巨大的危险真正发生的那一刻， 在面对造成恐惧的事情的那一刻， 当时是没有恐惧的，什么都没有。 之后才有了对过去的回想， 于是你给那一刻命名，你说，“天哪，我真害怕。” 所有的肌肉紧张， 肾上腺素等等，等等之类的事情。 所以，我认为，人可以回想过去的恐惧并看着它们。 对于恐惧的观察是很重要的，因为 你或者将它置于你自身之外， 或者你说“我就是那个恐惧”。 没有一个你在观察那个恐惧，而是说你就是那个反应。 当你和恐惧之间没有了分别， 存在的只有那个反应的状态， 如果你已经注意到了这个， 一些全新的事情就发生了。 对吗？
19:49 Second question: 'When one sees in the world about us no demonstrable universal principle of justice, I feel no compelling reason to change myself or the chaotic society outside. I see no rational criteria by which to measure the consequences of action and their accountability. Can you share your perception on this matter with us?' 第二个问题：“当一个人看到我们周围的这个世界 并没有明确而普遍适用的公平的法则， 我觉得没有非常必要的理由去改变自己 或是改变这个混乱的外部社会。 我看不到有什么合理的标准可以用来衡量 行动的后果和责任。 你能和我们分享一下你在这方面的看法吗？”
20:29 'When one sees in the world about us one cannot demonstrate universal principle of justice, I feel no compelling reason to change myself or the chaotic society outside. I see no rational criteria by which to measure the consequences of action and their accountability. Can you share your perception on this matter with us?' “当一个人看到周围这个世界， 并没有明确而普遍适用的公平的法则， 我觉得没有非常必要的理由去改变自己 或是改变这个混乱的外部社会。 我看不到有什么合理的标准可以用来衡量 行动的结果和责任。 你能和我们分享一下你在这方面的看法吗？”
21:07 Is there justice in the world? This has been a question which all the philosophers have gone into, spinning a lot of words about it. Now is there justice in the world, rational, sane, justice? You are clever, I am not. Right? You have money, I have not. You have capacity and another has not. You have talent, you can enjoy all that, another is born poor. One has crippling disease and the other has not. The criminal, what we call criminal, he is judged and sent to prison, or whatever takes place. So we consider that there must be justice. Right? Seeing all this we say, 'There must be somewhere justice'. So we move from lack of justice to an idea of justice. I don't know if you are following this? God is just and so on. But the fact remains that there is terrible injustice in the world. Right? And the questioner wants to know: If there is no justice why should I change? You understand? There is no point in it. Why should I change this chaotic world where the dictators are so supreme. Their very life is injustice, terrorising millions of people. And seeing all that there is no rational cause for me to change. I think that is a rather... not rational question - if I may say so. Do you change for some cause, because you are under pressure? Or you are rewarded? You follow? Is change brought about by reward and punishment? Or you see human beings are so irrational right through the world and all the things they have made are also irrational, and you, as a human being, you as a human are the rest of humanity. I don't know if you see that Right? We went into it the other day. And if you are the rest of mankind, you are responsible! Not because you find you are rewarded or you see so much injustice in the world, how the crooks get away with everything, they build marvellous churches and all the rest, a lot of money and there are millions and millions and millions starving. 在这个世界上存在公平吗？ 这是一个所有的哲学家都曾经探究过的 问题，他们为此耗费了许多笔墨文字。 而世界上有公平吗， 理性的、健全的公平？ 你很聪明，而我不是。对吗？ 你有钱而我没有。 你有才能而别人没有。 你有天赋，可以尽情享受那一切而其他人出身贫乏。 有人遭受残疾而另一个人没有。 被我们称为罪犯的那些犯了罪的人， 被审判并送进监狱，或受到其他惩罚。 于是我们认为公平一定存在，对吗？ 看到了这一切，我们说：“一定在什么地方存在着公平。” 于是我们从缺少公平向着公平这个想法前进。 我不知道你是否跟得上我说的这些？ 上帝是公平的，等等。但事实上 世界上还存在着可怕的不公正。 对吗？ 而提问者想知道： 如果公平不存在，我又为什么要改变？ 你明白吗？改变没有任何意义。 为什么是我来改变这个混乱的世界？ 在这里独裁者们都高高在上， 他们的生活本身就是不公正的，用恐怖统治着数百万民众。 面对这一切，没有什么合理的原因能让我改变。 我想这是一个相当 没有理性的问题——如果我可以这样说的话。 你是否因为某种原因才会改变？因为你处于压力之下？ 还是因为你得到了奖赏？你跟得上吗？ 作出改变是因为奖赏和惩罚吗？ 还是说你看到世界各地的人们 都如此没有理性，他们做着各种 不理智的事情，而你作为人类的一份子， 你就是其他人类。 我不知道你是否明白这点。 对吗？我们前几天曾经探讨过这个。 如果你就是其他人类，你就要负责！ 不是因为你发现自己得到了奖赏， 或是你看到世界上还存在如此多的不公正， 骗子们如何能得到一切又能逍遥法外， 他们建造了宏伟的教堂以及那一切，拥有巨额的财富， 而还有成千上万的人在忍受饥饿。
26:09 So change is not brought about through compulsion, through reward or punishment. The mind itself sees the absurdity of all this and says: I will... You follow? It's per se, it sees the necessity of change in itself not because you tell me to change or God or the priest or somebody tells me to change. I see the chaos around me and that chaos has been created by human beings and I am that human being, and I have to act, it is my responsibility, a global responsibility! 所以改变不是由强迫带来的， 也不是来自于奖赏或是惩罚。 是头脑本身看到了这荒谬的一切然后说：我要...... 你跟得上吗？ 本质上，它看到了自身改变的必要性， 不是因为你让我改变， 或是上帝、牧师或是什么人让我改变。 我看到我周围的混乱，这种混乱 是人类制造的，而我是人类的一份子，所以我必须行动。 这是我的责任，全球的责任！
27:19 Third question: 'Can we die psychologically to the self? To find out is a process of choiceless awareness' - I wish you wouldn't quote me - (Laughter) 'However in order to observe choicelessly it seems we must have ended, or died to the ego, 'me'. So my question is, how can I observe in my current state of fragmentation? Is it like the 'eye' trying to see the 'I'? 第三个问题：“我们可以在心理上让自我消亡吗？ 发现真相的过程就是一个无选择觉察的过程。” ——我希望你不要引用我的话——（笑声） “但是为了能够毫无选择地观察， 似乎我们必须要先终结自我或是让自我消亡。 所以我的问题是，在我现在支离破碎 的状态下要如何观察？ 这是否像是用眼睛试图看到‘我’？
28:00 As you have said, we must be free of fear in order to observe fear. This is an impossible paradox. It is driving me mad. (Laughter) Please clarify this issue'. 正如你所说，为了观察恐惧， 我们必须摆脱恐惧。这是一个不可能的悖论。 它快把我折磨疯了。（笑声） 请你帮我澄清这个问题。”
28:18 I will clarify the issue: don't quote me. Or anybody, because then it is not yours, you become second-hand human beings, which we are. So please, that is the first thing to do because that distorts our thinking. You understand? We are the result of a million years of pressure of other people's thinking, propaganda, all that. And if one is not free of all that you can never find out the origin of all things. You understand? 我来澄清这个问题：不要引用我的话， 或任何人的话，因为这样就不是你的了， 你就变成了一个“二手人”，我们都是这样的“二手人”。 所以请注意，这是首先要做的事情， 因为那么做会歪曲我们的思想。你明白吗？ 我们是上百万年间他人的思想、宣传 等等诸如此类的东西所造成的压力的产物。 如果你不能摆脱这一切， 你就永远不会找到所有事物的起源。 你明白了吗？
29:30 So my question is: how can I observe in my current state of fragmentation? You cannot. Right? But you can observe your fragmentation. I don't know if you follow this. I am observing myself. In observing I discover that I am looking at myself with certain prejudice so I forget looking at myself, I go into the question of prejudice. I am aware, I become aware of my prejudice and can I look at it without any sense of distortion, without choice, and all the rest of it, just to observe the prejudice I have. Let the story of prejudice tell me not I tell the story about prejudice but let prejudice unroll itself. You understand what I am saying? What is the cause of prejudice: the image, conclusions, opinions - you follow? 所以我的问题是：在我现在支离破碎 的状态下要如何去观察？ 你办不到。对吗？ 但是你可以观察你的支离破碎。 我不知道你有没有明白这点。 我在观察我自己。在观察中我发现 我抱着某种偏见在看我自己。 所以我忘了去观察我自己， 而是去探究关于偏见的问题。 我意识到，我开始觉察到我的偏见， 我是否可以毫不歪曲地看待这个问题呢， 没有任何选择，以及其他诸如此类的， 只是去观察我持有的偏见。 让偏见本身来告诉我， 不是我去讲述这个有关偏见的故事， 而是让偏见本身来展现它自己。 你明白我所说的吗？ 什么是偏见形成的原因： 意象、结论、观念——你明白吗？
30:56 So I begin to discover, one begins to discover, in looking at fear I realise that I am fragmented, that fragmentation is brought about by thought - naturally - and therefore I begin to be aware of the movement of thought. So what is important is not: observe fear when my mind itself is clouded, confused, so I enquire into my confusion. Why are human beings confused? Why are you all confused? If you are very clear you wouldn't be here and I wouldn't be here - thank God! Because we are confused, our question is, what is this confusion, who has created this confusion, in us and outside of us? Right? So in enquiring, or observing confusion the movement is to be aware of the movement of thought, the contradictory nature of thought. You follow? The whole thing unrolls itself if you watch. The story is there, but we don't read the story. We are telling the book what it should say. You understand? We are not saying yes, there is the history of myself, the history of mankind is myself. So in enquiring into, reading that book, I read the book, chapter by chapter, or I understand the whole book instantly. That implies one has to have a deep insight, I don't want to enter into all that. I don't know if you want me to go on into that. 所以我开始发现，一个人开始发现， 在观察恐惧时我意识到自己是支离破碎的， 这些碎片由思想带来——自然如此—— 于是我开始意识到思想的运动。 所以重要的并不是： 在我的心智本身模糊、混乱的时候去观察恐惧。 所以我探究我的混乱， 为什么人类会混乱？ 为什么我们都是混乱的？ 如果你很清楚，你就不会在这儿了， 我也不会在这儿了——感谢上帝！ 因为我们都是混乱的， 我们的问题是，这种混乱是什么， 谁在我们的内心和外部世界制造了这种混乱？ 对吗？ 所以在探究或观察混乱的过程中， 整个活动是要认识到思想的运动， 思想中矛盾的本质。 你跟得上我说的吗？ 如果你观察，那么整个事情就会自动展现在你眼前。 整个故事就在那里，但是我们不去读那个故事。 我们在告诉那本书要讲些什么。 你明白吗？ 我们没有说：是的，这里有我自己的历史， 人类的历史就是我自己的历史。 所以在探询、阅读那本书的过程中，我或者是逐章阅读那本书， 或者说我在瞬间读懂了那整本书。 这意味着你必须有很深刻的洞见。 我不想深入讨论所有这些了。 我不知道你是不是想要我深入讨论这个。
33:57 Sir, look: there is confusion in all of us and if we say, 'I am not confused', that would be too silly. Or, 'I have perfect relationship with another' that's equally silly. So one is confused. Now either you analyse it, the cause of it, - you understand, please follow this a little bit. The cause of it, which is thought, thought in its very nature contradictory, thought in its movement is divisive, as national... - divisive - thought in itself must be limited because it is based on knowledge and knowledge can never be complete. Never! Right? So that is the way we go into analytically or let thought move in a particular direction to examine, which means he remembrance, the memory, the experience is observing. Right? You are following all this? No? All right. 你看，先生：在我们所有人之中都存在着混乱， 如果我们说：“我不困惑”，那就太傻了。 或是说：“我和其他人有完美的关系”， 这种说法也同样愚蠢。 所以你很困惑。 现在你或者来分析一下造成困惑的原因， ——你明白吗？请稍微跟上我说的。 造成困惑的原因是思想， 思想的本质是矛盾的， 思想的运动是分裂的， 就像民族——是分裂的——思想本身必定是局限的， 因为思想是以知识为基础的， 而知识永远不可能是完整的。永远不可能！对吗？ 这就是我们进行分析的方式，或者说让思想 沿某一特定的方向运动，借以研究问题， 也就是说是记忆、 回忆、经验在观察，对吗？ 你跟得上所有这些吗？跟不上？好吧。
35:45 When you observe somebody, your friend or whoever it is, you are observing what? Not the face, not the figure, not how she looks, or he looks, long hair, short hair, you are observing the image that you have built about her, or him. So we are saying all that is a movement of thought based on remembrances, conclusions, ideas. All that is a movement of thought. I mean this is an obvious fact. You don't have to prove it to anybody that thought in itself is divisive, fragmentary, partial. It can never be complete therefore it must create confusion. Now, I have explained it. Now can you look at this sense of confusion in oneself - please follow this a little bit - without going through all that process? You understand? Without explanation, without remembrance, just to look at it and see, to have an insight into it, then you can explain it. Vous avez compris? I mean, have I explained it? I'll get it, I'll get it. Have I explained this? Insight, the very word means to have sight in the thing - insight. But you cannot have insight if it is merely the response of memory. Look sir, organised religion is not religion - right? - with all the nonsense that goes on with it: rituals, dogmas, theories, theologians spinning out new theories about - and so on, so on, so on, so on. That is not religion! Now what makes you say, that is not religion? Is it merely a thoughtful examination of all the religions, their dogmas, their superstitions, their ignorance, their rituals, and saying at the end of it, 'This is nonsense'? Or you see immediately that any form of propaganda, pressure, and so on, that is never religion? Either you see it immediately and therefore you are out of it. I don't know if you see. But if you are merely examining various religions and then coming to a conclusion then that conclusion will be limited, can be broken down by argument, by superior knowledge and so on. But if you get an insight into the nature of this religious structure which man has invented, the mind is immediately free of it. I don't know if you are following all this. It's like - I'll take another example. If you understand the tyranny of one guru - right? Tyranny. They are tyrants because they want power position and all the rest of it, they know, others don't know. So if you see the tyranny of one guru you have seen the tyranny of all gurus. You understand? So you don't go from one guru to another. I am afraid you are doing that. (Laughter) 当你观察某人，观察你的朋友或其他什么人， 你在观察什么？ 不是观察他的脸、他的体型， 不是她长相如何，或他的头发是长是短， 你在观察你心中关于他或她建立的那个意象。 所以我们说所有这些都是思想的运动， 是建立在记忆、结论以及观点之上的。 这一切都是思想的运动。 我认为这是一个显而易见的事实。 你不必向任何人证明 思想本身是分裂的、支离破碎的、局部的。 它永远不可能完整， 因此它肯定会带来混乱。现在我解释完了。 那么，你能否看着自己身上这种混乱的感觉 ——请你多少跟上我说的—— 而不必历经那整个过程？ 你明白吗？ 没有那些解释，没有那些记忆， 只是看着它，并且看清它、 对它有了洞察，然后你就可以解释它了。 你明白了吗？ 我的意思是，我解释清了吗？我会解释的，会解释的。 我解释过这个了吗？ 洞见，这个词本身的意思是对某事深刻洞察——洞见。 但是，如果那仅仅只是记忆的反应， 你就不会有洞见。 你看先生，有组织的宗教并不是宗教——对吗？—— 所有那些与之相关的无稽之谈： 宗教仪式、教义、理论，神学家们 编著着相关的新理论——没完没了，没完没了。 这不是宗教！ 是什么让你说那不是宗教的？ 是单纯地对于各派宗教的一种深思熟虑的审视吗？ 审视他们的教义、他们的迷信、他们的无知、他们的仪式， 于是最后你说“这是一派胡言”吗？ 还是说你立刻明白了任何形式的布道或是压力， 或是其他等等，都从来不是宗教？ 你要是能立刻看明白，你就会从中脱离出来。 我不知道你有没有明白。 但如果你只是单纯审视各种宗教， 然后得出一个结论， 那么这个结论将会是非常有限的， 是会被争论、被更高级的知识所打破的。 但是，如果你对于宗教结构的本质，也就是宗教都是人为虚构的 这一本质有所洞察， 那么你的头脑就会立刻从中脱离出来。 我不知道你有没有明白这一切。 这就好像——让我来举另一个例子。 如果你了解了一个上师的专治——对吗？专治。 他们都是暴君，因为他们都渴望权力、 地位，以及所有诸如此类的东西， 只有他们知道，其他人都不知道。 所以，如果你明白一个上师的专治， 你就看到了所有上师的专治。 你明白吗？ 你就不会再从一个上师追随到另一个上师了。 我恐怕你们正在这么做。（笑声）
41:07 Fourth question: 'In observation without the observer is there a transformation from staying with the fact that leads to an increase of attention? Does the energy created have a direction?' - Good lord! I don't know what's all this - 'What is the relationship of attention to thought, to the centre, the self? Is there a gap between attention and thought that leads to freedom?' 第四个问题：“在没有观察者的观察中， 有没有一种转变，是从与事实共处， 变成不断增强的关注？ 从中产生的能量是否有个方向？” ——天哪！我真不知道这都是些什么—— “关注和思想之间的关系是什么， 与中心点、与自我的关系是什么？ 在关注和通向自由的思想间 是否存在间隙？
41:41 Look sir, these questions unfortunately don't relate to your actual life. Right? I am not saying you should not put these questions but I am only asking you most respectfully all these questions, actually, have not touched the living, daily life. You understand? Right? Is that so, or not? So all these questions become theoretical, something abstract, something that you have heard and you then say well, who is the observer and the observer is the observed and so on. But if you say, look, my life is this. Let us find out why I live this way. You understand, sir? Why I am worried, why my mind is eternally chattering, why I have no right relationship with another, why am I cruel. You understand? Why is my mind so narrow? Why am I neurotic? A neurotic person never says, 'I am neurotic'. But one can observe the person who is neurotic it may be my wife, or my husband who is neurotic, but we never apparently deal with questions that affect our daily existence. I wonder why. You understand my question? 你看，先生，这些问题， 不幸的是，这些问题与你的实际生活没有什么关联，对吗？ 我不是说你不应该问这些问题， 我只是很谦恭地向你指出， 所有这些问题实际上 并没有触动每天的日常生活。你明白吗？ 对吗？ 是这样吗？不是吗？ 所有这些问题都变得很理论化、 很抽象，你听到了某些说法， 然后你说，好吧，谁是观察者， 观察者是否就是被观察者等等。 但是如果你说：你看，我的生活就是这样的， 让我们找出为什么我要这样生活的原因。 你明白吗，先生？ 我为什么忧虑？我的头脑为什么永远都是喋喋不休的？ 为什么我与他人总是没有良好的关系？ 为什么我这么残酷？你明白吗？ 为什么我的头脑如此狭隘？ 为什么我这么神经质？ 一个神经过敏的人从来不说“我是神经质的”。 但我们可以观察到那些神经质的人， 神经质的可能是我的妻子或丈夫， 但是我们显然从未处理 这些影响着我们日常生活的问题。 我想知道为什么。 你明白我的问题吗？
44:06 All these questions are that. I think there are about 250 questions, we went through them. Please, I am not scolding, or impatient, or preaching but I am just asking myself after reading all those questions I say, why isn't there one question that affects psychologically the inward - you understand? Why I am unhappy, why am I in conflict with my neighbour, with my husband? You follow? So why is this happening? I will answer these questions, if I must, but why are we so timid, or so enclosed, or we are afraid to expose ourselves to another which doesn't mean that you must expose. If we ask a really, a genuine, a question that affects deeply our life it has much more vitality than this. Right? 我收到的所有问题都是这样的。 我想我们已经讨论了大约250个问题了， 请注意，我不是在指责或是不耐烦，也不是在说教， 我只是在看了你们提的所有这些问题后问我自己， 为什么没有一个问题 是影响内在的心理的，你明白吗？ 为什么我不快乐？为什么我处在 与邻居、与丈夫的冲突中？你明白吗？ 这些事为什么发生？ 如果我必须回答，我会回答这些问题的， 但为什么我们如此胆怯，或者说如此封闭， 或者说为什么我们害怕把自己向别人敞开？ 这并不是说你必须向别人敞开。 如果我们提出一个真正的、一个真实的、 一个会深刻影响到我们生活的问题， 那这个问题会更加有活力。 对吗？
45:48 So I'll ask the question. (Laughter) Why do we, each one of us, live the way we are doing? Taking drugs, pot, drinking, smoking, pursuing pleasure and aggression, why? You understand? Why? Why are we like this? Please sir, go into it with me. Why are we aggressive? The whole society in which we live, in this society of the West, aggression is one of the most important things. And competition, they both go together. Why? You can see in the animals how aggressive they are in mating, in a certain season. They don't compete, do they? You know when a lion has killed a zebra, other lions share it. You have seen this on television and so on. But apparently with us aggression is the most deep-rooted thing and competition. Why are we like this? Is it the fault of the society? Our education? But the society is what we have made of it. So don't say, 'society', blame the society for this or some education but apparently we are deeply aggressive and competitive. And if you are not competitive, if you are not aggressive in this society you are trodden down. Right? You are discarded, you are looked down upon. Why are we aggressive? Go on sir, examine it. Is it that this emphasis on individual freedom - you understand? - individual freedom and that freedom demands that he must express himself at any cost? Is that it? Especially in this country, in the West this sense of freedom, you know. If you have an instinct to do something, if you want to do something, do it. Don't restrain, don't examine it, it doesn't matter, if you have this feeling, act. 所以我来问这个问题。（笑声） 为什么我们每个人都过着我们现在的生活？ 吸食毒品、大麻，酗酒、吸烟， 追求享乐，具有攻击性，为什么？ 你明白吗？为什么？ 我们为什么会这样？ 来吧，先生，和我一起深入探讨一下。 为什么我们具有攻击性？ 在我们所生活的整个社会，我们所处的西方社会， 攻击性是其中最重要的一件事。 还有竞争，它们是并肩而行的。 为什么？ 你可以看到动物们，在交配的季节 它们是多么具有攻击性， 但它们并不相互竞争，不是吗？ 你知道，当一只狮子咬死一只斑马后，其他的狮子会前来分食。 你一定曾在电视上看到过类似的场景。 但显然对我们人类来说，攻击性和竞争 是最为根深蒂固的特性。 我们为什么会这样？ 这是社会的错吗？ 还是教育的错？ 然而，社会是我们自己缔造的。 所以不要说是社会的错， 不要埋怨社会或是埋怨教育， 但很显然我们都具有强烈的攻击性和竞争性。 如果你不去竞争，如果你没有攻击性， 你在这个社会上会被践踏蹂躏。对吗？ 你会被抛弃，会被轻视。 我们为什么会有攻击性？先生，继续检视下去。 是因为对个人自由的这种强调吗？ ——你明白吗？—— 强调个体的自由，而那种自由需要 人不惜任何代价去表达自己？ 是这样吗？ 尤其是在西方，在这个国家， 这种对自由的理解，你知道的。 如果你本能地感到要去做什么事， 如果你想去做什么，那就去做。 不要去克制，不要去审视它， 如果你有这种感觉，那么别的都不重要，去做吧。
50:02 Q: Is there no difference between aggression and competition? 问：攻击性和竞争是否有区别？
50:06 K: Madame, please, I'll go into it, don't bother about that. 克：女士，请不要着急，我会深入讲这个问题的。
50:11 Q: They look different to me right now. 问：目前对我来说，它们看起来是不同的。
50:16 K: Either you write the questions, I'll answer them, or let me talk a little about this. 克：你或者把问题写下来， 我稍后解答，或者我们现在就来讨论一下。
50:27 You can see what aggression does. Right? You are aggressive, I am aggressive for the same job, for the same this, that, the other. And so we are fighting each other all along the way - right? Both psychologically and physically. And we carry on. That's part of our pattern, part of our social education, and to break that pattern we say we must exercise our will. Right? Which is another aggression. I don't know if you follow this. Right? Right? Are you following this, sir? When I exercise my will, will is another form of 'I must' - you understand - that's another form of aggression. So can you have an insight into aggression? You have understood my question, or is it too difficult? You understand my question, sir? That is, I am aggressive - thank God I am not I have never been, I don't want to be. (laughs) Suppose I am aggressive and that's the pattern from childhood that is the education, the mother, the father and the society, the boys around me, are all aggressive and I see, and I like that, it gives me pleasure. And I accept it and I also become aggressive. Right? Then as I grow up somebody shows me the nature of aggression, what it does in society, how competition is destroying human beings. It is not only the speaker is saying this, scientists are beginning to say this so perhaps you will accept the scientists. So you explain it very carefully, all the reason, the cause and the destructive nature of competition which is to compare, always comparing. You understand? 你可以看到攻击性的所作所为，对吗？ 对于同一个工作，或是同一件别的什么事等等， 你具有攻击性，我也具有攻击性。 于是我们彼此一直都相互对抗，对吗？ 不但从心理上，也从身体上彼此斗争， 并且把这种斗争继续下去。 这是我们行为方式的一部分，我们社会教育的一部分， 而要打破这种方式， 我们说就必须运用我们的意志。 对吗？ 这又是另外一种形式的攻击性。我不知道你有没有明白这点。 对吗？ 对吗？你明白这点了吗，先生？ 在我运用我的意志的时候，意志是另一种形式的“我必须” ——你明白吗——那是另一种形式的攻击性。 那么你是否能洞察这种攻击性？ 你明白我的问题吗？还是说这太难了？ 你明白我的问题吗，先生？ 如果我具有攻击性——感谢上帝我并非如此， 我从来都没有攻击性，我也不希望如此。（笑） 假设我具有攻击性，这是从童年就开始的行为模式， 它来自于我受的教育，来自于我的父母、 我所处的社会，我周围的伙伴都具有攻击性， 我看到这些，我喜欢这些，它给我带来了快乐。 我接受了它，同时自己也变得具有攻击性。 对吗？ 等我长大后，有人向我指出了 攻击性的本质，以及它在社会中的所作所为， 竞争是如何毁掉人类的。 并不只有谈话者这样说， 科学家们也开始持相同的说法， 所以也许你更愿意接受科学家们的说法。 于是你仔细地解释了竞争所有的起因、缘由 及其破坏性属性， 那就是比较，不停的比较。你明白吗？
53:36 Now a mind that doesn't compare at all - you understand? - is a totally different kind of mind. It has got much more vitality. So one explains all this, and yet we go on being aggressive, competitive, comparing ourselves with somebody, always something much greater, not with the poorer, but always something greater. So there is this pattern established, this cadre, this framework and in which the mind is caught. And listening to it you say, 'I must get out of it I must do something about it', which is what? Another form of aggression. You understand? I wonder if you see that. So can you, can we have an insight into aggression? You follow? Not explanations, not the remembrance of all the implications of it and so on and so on, which is constant examination, then coming to a conclusion and acting according to that conclusion. That's not insight. Whereas if you have immediate insight into it - you understand? - then you have broken the whole pattern of aggression. 而一个完全没有比较的头脑——你明白吗？—— 是一种截然不同的头脑。 这种头脑远远更有活力。 所以，有人解释了这一切，但我们仍然具有攻击性 和竞争性，仍然把自己和其他人相比较， 并且总是和那些更伟大的人相比，不是和更贫乏的相比较， 而总是和更伟大的去比较。 所以这种模式、这种框架、这种结构就建立了起来， 而我们的头脑则被禁锢其中。 聆听了这一切后你会说：“我必须摆脱这些， 我必须要做些什么”，这又是什么呢？ 这只是另一种形式的攻击性。你明白吗？ 我不知道你有没有明白。 所以，你能不能，我们能不能洞察攻击性？你明白吗？ 不是这些解释，不是所有这些有关攻击性的 含义的记忆和其他等等什么， 那些只是不停研究然后得出结论， 并且根据结论来采取行动。 那不是洞察。 然而，如果你能对攻击性拥有即刻的洞察——你明白吗？—— 那么你就打破了这整个攻击性的模式。
55:26 That is, sir, we compare - don't we? - both physically Or psychologically, there is constant comparison. Which means what? I don't know if you have gone into this. To compare oneself with somebody else, greater, more intelligent, bright, and so on, is to what? Deny what you are and change what you are. I wonder if you understand this. Am I making this clear? Look, I compare myself with you and I say you are awfully clever, all that, and in that comparison I say, by Jove, I realise I am very dull. Right? You are following this? But if I have no comparison, am I dull? I begin then to discover the thing is 'as is'. I wonder if you see. 也就是说，先生，我们都在比较——不是吗？——不但从物质上， 你的……比较长，我希望我能像你一样好看， 而且从心理上总是在不停地比较。 这说明了什么？我不知道你是否深入思考过这个问题。 把自己和其他更伟大的、更智慧的、 更聪明的人相比较，这说明了什么？ 这意味着否认你现在的一切，想要改变现在的你。 我不知道你是否明白这个。 我说清楚我的意思了吗？ 看，我把自己和你相比较， 我认为你非常非常的聪明什么的， 在比较中我说：天哪，我可真笨哪！ 对吗？你明白这些吗？ 但如果我不比较，我还笨吗？ 于是我开始发现事情本来的样子。 我不知道你是否明白我说的。
56:57 So what shall we do with the way we are living? Sorry to bring it home. What shall we do? You will attend meetings, other forms of other kinds of meetings, discussions, philosophers explaining their philosophy, the latest psychologist non-Freudian, non-this, and non-that but the latest, he will explain to you. You understand? We are doing this all the time, moving from one thing to another and that's called an open mind. But we never say look, this is so, I am like this, let me find out why am I like this. Why I have wounds, psychological bruises - you understand? - why? Why do I live with them? I don't know if you are following all this. But reading somebody like... books of... or attending Krishnamurti's talks, and then quoting back, 'It is so, I know all this by heart!' (Laughter) I have been at this for sixty years and more so you don't have to quote to me. But if you don't quote, and find out for yourself - you understand, sir? - there is greater energy, more fun, more alive, you become much more alive. 那么，我们该如何处置我们的生活方式呢？ 很抱歉把问题带回了家。 我们该怎么办呢？ 我们去参加集会，另一种形式、另一种风格的集会、 各种讨论，哲学家们宣讲他们的哲学， 最新的心理学家，那些非弗洛伊德学派，非这个学派、非那个学派， 最新的学派，他会解释给你听。你明白吗？ 我们一直在这么做，从一件事到另一件， 而这被称为一个开放的头脑。 但我们从不说：你看，这就是我的样子，让我来找到原因 为什么我是这样的？ 为什么我在心理上总是受伤，满是伤痕——你明白吗？——为什么？ 为什么我要带着伤痕生活？ 我不知道你是否能跟得上我所讲的这些。 但是阅读某人的著作，比如……的书籍，或是 参加克里希那穆提的演讲，然后再引用其中的话：“就是这样的， 我都记在心里了！”（笑声） 我四处演讲已经有六十多年了， 所以你不要对我来引用我自己说的话。 然而，如果你不引用而是亲自去探寻 ——你明白吗，先生？——那么你会感到更有能量，更有乐趣， 更有活力，你会变得更有活力。
59:27 'What is the relationship of attention to thought? Is there a gap between attention and thought?' Right? “关注和思想之间有着 什么样的关系？ 在关注和思想之间有间隙吗？” 是吗？
59:40 This is a good question because it affects us. That is, what is attention. What is the relationship of thought to attention. Is there, in attention, freedom? Right? Is this a question that affects us? That is, we know what concentration is. Right? Most of us do; from childhood we are trained to concentrate and the implications of that concentration is narrowing down all energy to a particular point, and holding to that point. Right? A boy in a school is looking out of the window, looking at all the birds and the trees and the movement of the leaves or the squirrel climbing up the tree and the educator says 'Look, you are not paying attention, concentrate on the book.' Right? 'Listen to what I am saying', and so on and so on. Which is what? Go into it, sir. Which is what? You are making concentration far more important than attention. That is, if the boy is looking out of the window watching that squirrel, I would help him to watch - if I am the educator - I would help him to watch that squirrel completely. You follow? Watch it. Watch the movement of the tail, the mouth, the nozzle, how its claws are, everything, watch it. Then if he learns to watch that attentively he will pay attention to the beastly book! (Laughter) You follow what I am saying? So there is no contradiction. 这是一个很好的问题，因为它影响到我们每个人。 也就是说，什么是关注？ 关注和思想间的关系是什么？ 在关注中是不是存在自由？ 对吗？ 这是不是一个影响到我们每个人的问题？ 我们都知道什么是专注，对吗？ 我们大多数人都这样做。从童年起，我们被训练如何集中注意力， 这种做法隐含的意思是：专注是把所有的能量 都收拢集中到一点，并固定在这一点上， 对吗？ 学校里的一个男生看向窗外， 看外面的树木，还有那些鸟儿， 还有树叶的运动， 以及爬上大树的松鼠， 这时老师说：“你看，你根本就没有集中注意力， 快专注到书本上来。” 对吗？“注意听我讲的”，等等这些。 这又是什么？ 深入进去，先生。这又是什么？ 你认为专注远远比关注更重要。 也就是说，如果这个男生正在向窗外看， 看那只松鼠， 我会帮助他去看——如果我是那个教育者—— 我会帮助他去完整地观察那只松鼠。 你跟得上吗？去看那只松鼠。 去看它嘴和尾巴的运动， 还有它的鼻子，它的爪子是怎样的。观察它的一切。 那么，如果他学会了如何全神贯注地去看那个， 他就会去认真读那本该死的书了！（笑声） 你跟得上我说的吗？ 所以这之中没有矛盾。
1:02:02 So attention is a state of mind in which there is no contradiction. Right? There is no entity, or a centre, or a point which says, 'I must attend'. In that state there is no wastage of energy. Whereas in concentration there is always the controlling process going on: I want to concentrate on that page but thought wanders off and then you pull it back, the constant battle going on. Whereas in attention, if you go into it, it is very simple really. When somebody says, 'I love you' and he means it, you are attending! You don't say, do you love me because I look nice or I have money, or sexual, or this or that. You follow what I am saying? So attention is something totally different from concentration. 关注是头脑的一种状态， 其中是没有冲突的，对吗？ 这之中没有主体，也没有一个中心或焦点 在说：“我必须专注。” 在这种状态下就没有能量的浪费。 然而在专注的过程中总是有 控制这种进程在发生，比如： 我想要专心看书，但思想总是开小差， 于是你努力把思想拽回来，这场不停的战争就一直在上演着。 然而在关注的时候——如果你深入探究的话——情况就会非常简单， 当某个人说“我爱你” 而且他这么说是真心诚意的，你就会全神贯注地听！ 你不会问你是因为我长得好看 或是有钱，或是性感等等其他什么才爱我的吗？ 你跟得上我说的吗？ 所以关注是和专注截然不同的事情。
1:03:33 And this attention, the questioner asks, what is the relationship of this attention to thought? Right? None, obviously. I don't know if you follow this. Concentration has a relationship to thought because thought directs: 'I must learn, I must concentrate in order to control myself'. Right? Thought then gives a direction from one point to another point. Whereas in attention thought has no place - you attend. 提问者问到这个关注 和思想有着什么样的关系。 对吗？很显然没有关系。 我不知道你是不是明白这点。 专注和思想是有关系的， 因为思想命令道：“我必须学习， 我必须集中注意力控制好自己。”对吗？ 思想接下来给出指令从一点到另一点地专注。 然而在关注的情形下思想是没有立足之地的，你只是关注。
1:04:37 'And is there a gap between attention and thought?' Good Lord. Sir, as we explained the other day if you once understand if one once has a grasp of the whole movement of thought you wouldn't put this question. You understand sir? I am not... - I'll answer it but first, one has to understand what thought is. You understand? Not somebody telling you what thought is. But to see what thought is, how it comes into being. And if you will go... I will do it again, we will go into it. “那么在关注和思想之间存在缝隙吗？” 天哪！ 先生，就像我前几天解释的那样， 一旦你理解了， 一旦你领会了思想的整个运动， 你就不会问这个问题了。你明白了吗先生？ 我没有…...——我会回答你的问题的，但是 你首先要弄清思想是什么，你明白吗？ 不是什么人告诉你思想是什么。 而是真正理解思想是什么，它是怎么来的。 如果你愿意……我会再讲一遍，我们再来深入探究一下。
1:05:34 There can be no thought if there is total amnesia. Right? But unfortunately, or fortunately we are not in a state of amnesia. And one wants to find out what thought is what place it has in life. You understand? So one begins to examine thinking - right? So what is thinking? Thinking takes place as a reaction to memory. Obviously. Memory responds to a challenge, to a question, to an action, or responds in relationship to something or to an idea, to a person. Right? You see all this in life. So what is thinking, what is thought? How does thought exist in the human mind? So one asks then, what is memory? You understand? What is memory? Memory is: you have trodden on some insect that has bitten you. That memory, that pain is registered and stored in the brain, that pain, which becomes a memory, it is not actual pain. That pain is over but the memory remains. So next time you are careful. So there is experience as pain, which has become knowledge and that knowledge, experience, is memory, that memory responds as thought. Right? That memory is thought. And knowledge, however wide, however deep, however extensive, must always be limited. Right? There is no complete knowledge. I don't know if you are following all this. 如果一个人彻底失忆的话，他就不会有思想，对吗？ 但不幸的是，或者说幸运的是 我们没有处在失忆状态之中。 而你想要知道思想是什么， 在生活中思想处在什么地位。 你明白吗？ 所以我们开始检视思考的过程，对吗？ 那么什么是思考？ 思考是作为对记忆的一个反应而发生的。显然如此。 记忆对于一个挑战、一个问题或一个行动作出反应， 或是在与某个事物、 某个观点、某个人的关系中作出反应，对吗？ 你可以在生活中看到这一切。 那么什么是思考，什么是思想？ 思想是如何在人类的头脑中存在的？ 所以接下来你又会问：什么是记忆？ 你明白吗？什么是记忆？ 记忆是：你曾踩死过某个咬了你的小虫， 这种记忆，这种疼痛被记录和储存在了你的大脑里， 这种疼痛，成为记忆后就不再是真实的痛楚了。 那种痛楚已经结束了，但是记忆还存在。 所以下一次你就会很小心。 那么像这种痛苦的经历会转变成知识， 而这种知识、经验就是记忆， 这个记忆产生的反应就是思想。对吗？ 这种记忆就是思想。 而知识，无论如何宽泛、如何深入， 无论如何广博，都一定是有局限的，对吗？ 并不存在完整的知识。 我不知道你是否跟得上我所说的。
1:08:25 So thought is always partial, limited, divisive because in itself it isn't complete. In itself it can never be complete, it can think about completeness. - you understand? - it can think about totality, whole, but it's not... thought itself is not whole. So whatever it creates philosophically, religiously, it is still partial, limited, fragmentary because knowledge is part of ignorance. You understand, sir? I don't know if you understand this. As knowledge can never be complete it must always go hand in hand with ignorance. Right? That's logical, rational. And if one understands the nature of thought and understands what concentration is then thought cannot attend, because attention is: giving all energy - you understand? - without any restraint. I wonder if you understand this. If you are listening now, I hope you are, if you are listening and attending, what takes place? There is no 'you' attending. Right? There is no centre that says, 'I must attend'. You are attending because it is your life, your interest. If you are not interested, lying down in the sun, saying, 'Well I'll listen partly, that's a different matter. But if you are serious and giving attention you will soon find out all your problems, all that is gone - at least for the moment. 所以思想总是部分的、局限的、分裂的， 因为它本身就是不完整的。 它本身永远不可能完整， 但它可以思考完整。 ——你明白了吗？—— 它可以思考整体、全部，但它并不 思想本身并不完整。 所以不管思想在哲学上、在宗教上创造了什么， 都依然是局部的、有限的、不完整的， 因为知识就是无知的一部分。 你明白吗，先生？ 我不知道你是否明白这个。 因为知识永远都不可能完整， 它必定一直都要与无知相伴而行。 对吗？这是符合逻辑的、理性的。 那么，如果一个人理解了思想的本质， 并且理解了什么是专注， 此时思想无法关注， 因为关注是付出所有的能量——你明白吗？—— 没有任何限制。 我不知道你有没有明白这个。 如果你现在正在聆听，我希望你是的， 如果你正在聆听并且全神贯注，那么会发生什么？ 就不会有一个“你”正在注意听，对吗？ 没有一个中心说“我必须要注意听”。 你注意听，因为这是你的生活，你感兴趣。 如果你不感兴趣，只是躺在阳光下， 说“好吧，我只听一部分”，那就是另外一回事了。 但如果你很认真并且投入了注意力，那么你很快就会发现 你所有的问题，那一切都不存在了——至少此刻是这样的。
1:10:54 So to resolve problems is to attend. I wonder if you have got it. You understand this? It's not a trick! (Laughs) 所以要想解决问题，就需要关注。 我不知道你是不是明白了我说的。 你明白了吗？这不是什么戏法！（笑）
1:11:17 What time is it sir? 现在几点了，先生？
1:11:21 Q: Seventeen minutes to one. 问：12点43。
1:11:24 K: I am so sorry, it is 17 minutes to one. 克：我很抱歉，现在是12点43了。
1:11:35 So sir, other questions are of the same kind. As this is the last question and answer meeting we shall perhaps some of us meet again on Saturday and Sunday and after that we close the shop! (Laughter) 所以先生，其他问题都属于同一类。 这是最后一次问答会了， 我们有些人也许会在周六或周日再见面， 之后我们就关门大吉了！（笑声）
1:11:54 So all these questions, 250 questions of them and more are always somehow not dealing with the facts of oneself. You understand sir? 所有这些问题，250多个问题 都没有真正触及到 人自身的事实。你明白吗，先生？
1:12:17 Why is my mind chattering, so restless? You follow? 为什么我的头脑总是喋喋不休，总不安宁？你明白吗？
1:12:23 You don't ask such a question! Have you ever asked that question to yourself, why are you so restless, specially in this country, the mind so chattering, restless, moving, going from one thing to another, constant entertainment. Right? Why is your mind chattering? And what will you do about it. Right? Your immediate response is to control it. Right? Say, 'I must not chatter' which means what? The very controller is chattering. I don't know if you see that. Do you see that? There is a controller who says, 'I mustn't chatter' is in himself part of chattering. See the beauty of it? So what will you do? Go on sir. 你不问这样的问题！ 你有没有问过自己这个问题， 为什么你总是躁动不安，尤其是在这个国家， 头脑总是纷纷扰扰，不得安宁，蠢蠢欲动， 从一件事到另一件事，永远需要娱乐。 对吗？ 为什么你的头脑总是喋喋不休？ 你又能对此做些什么？ 对吗？ 你的第一反应是控制它，对吗？ 你说“我必须停止喋喋不休”，这又意味着什么呢？ 正是那个控制者在喋喋不休。 我不知道你是否看到了这点。 你看到了吗？ 有个控制者说：“我不能喋喋不休。” 而他本身就是这喋喋不休的一部分。 看到这之中的美妙了吗？ 那么你会做什么呢？ 请继续，先生。
1:13:58 Q: Watch it. 问：观察它。
1:14:00 K: If you observe it, if you say, look, my mind is chattering and I can examine the causes of chattering because chattering is part of the mind being occupied. Right? I don't know if you have noticed, the mind, the whole structure of the brain must be occupied with something. Right? With sex, with problems, with television, with going to football, going to church - it must be occupied. Right? Why? Why must it be occupied? If it is not occupied, aren't you rather uncertain, won't you fear not being occupied? You follow? You feel empty, don't you? 克：如果你观察它，如果你说，你看，我的头脑正在喋喋不休， 而我可以检视这种喋喋不休的根源， 因为喋喋不休正是被占据的头脑的一部分，对吗？ 我不知道你是否注意到了，头脑， 大脑的整个结构都必须被某些事情占据。 对吗？被性、被问题、被电视、 被看足球、去教堂所占据——总要被占据。 对吗？ 为什么？ 为什么它必须被占据？ 如果它没有被占据， 你难道不会感到非常不确定吗？你不害怕没有任何事情占据着你吗？ 你跟上了吗？你觉得空虚，不是吗？
1:15:07 No? You feel lost. You feel - then you begin to realise what you are, that there is tremendous loneliness inside. Right? And so to avoid that deep loneliness with all its agony, the mind chatters, is occupied about everything else except that. And then that becomes the occupation. You follow? If I am not occupied with all the outward things, like cooking, washing up, cleaning the house, and so on then it says, I am lonely, that's my concern. You follow? How am I to get over it, let me talk about it, how miserable I am - back to chattering. But if you say, 'Why is the mind chattering?' Ask the question sir, go on with me. Why is your mind chattering? Never a moment it is quiet - you understand? - never a moment when there is complete freedom from any problem. Right? 没有？ 你觉得茫然若失。 你觉得——然后你开始意识到你是怎样的， 你内心深处有着巨大的孤独。 对吗？ 为了躲开那种孤独以及它所带来的痛苦， 你的头脑开始喋喋不休，被除了孤独之外的一切牢牢占据。 然后又被这种孤独所占据。你明白吗？ 如果我没有被外界那些事物所占据，比如说做饭、 洗涮、打扫房子等等， 那么头脑就会说：我很孤独，这是我忧虑的事情。你明白吗？ 我要如何才能克服这个问题呢，让我来说说这件事情， 我是多么的悲惨——于是又回到了喋喋不休。 但是，如果你问：“为什么头脑会喋喋不休？” 问问这个问题吧，先生，和我一起进行下去。 为什么你的头脑总是喋喋不休？ 没有一刻是安静的——你明白吗？—— 从来没有一刻彻底摆脱了所有问题。 对吗？
1:16:51 So again is that occupation the result of our education of the social nature of our life? Those are all excuses obviously. But when one realises, if one does, your mind is chattering and look at it - you follow? - wait with it, stay with it - I don't know if I am explaining. My mind is chattering. All right, I'll watch it. I say, 'All right, chatter'. I am attending to it. You follow? I wonder if you understand this. I am attending, which means I am not trying not to chatter, I am not saying, I must suppress it, or any of it. I am just attending to chattering. If you do, you will see what happens. Then your mind is so clear, free of all this. And probably that is the state of a normal, healthy human being. Right? That's enough I think, sirs. 所以再问一次，这种占据是不是我们所受教育的产物， 是不是我们生活的社会属性的产物？ 很显然这些都是借口。 但是，如果你确实意识到了自己的头脑在喋喋不休， 并且看着它——你跟得上吗？——等着它，与它待在一起 ——我不知道我是不是解释清楚了。我的头脑正在喋喋不休。 那么好，我会看着它，我说“好吧，喋喋不休吧。” 我关注它。你明白吗？ 我不知道你是否明白这点。 我关注，也就是说我并没有努力不去聒噪不休， 我没有说，我必须抑制它或任何此类的做法。 我只是全神贯注于喋喋不休。 如果你这样做，你将看到会发生什么。 然后你的头脑就会非常清晰，摆脱了那一切。 也许这就是一个正常的、健康的人具有的状态。 对吗？ 我想今天就到这儿吧，先生们。