克里希那穆提 - 心理失序的根源

Krishnamurti Subtitles

OJ82CNM1 - 心理失序的根源

与博姆、希德利和谢尔德雷克各位博士的第一次讨论
加州，欧亥
1982年4月16日

0:05	The Nature of the Mind	希：心的本质
0:19	Part One	第一部分
0:23	The Roots of Psychological Disorder	心理失序的根源
0:37	This is one of a series of dialogues between J Krishnamurti, David Bohm, Rupert Sheldrake, and John Hidley. The purpose of these discussions is to explore essential questions about the mind, what is psychological disorder, and what is required for fundamental psychological change?	这是J·克里希那穆提、大卫·博姆、鲁伯特·谢尔德雷克以及约翰·希德利之间的系列对话之一。这些讨论旨在探索最根本的心灵问题，即何为心理失序，以及彻底的心理转变需要什么？
0:57	J Krishnamurti is a religious philosopher, author, and educator, who has written and given lectures on these subjects for many years. He has founded elementary and secondary schools in the United States, England, and India.	J·克里希那穆提是一位宗教哲人、作家、教育家，他多年来就这些问题著书立说并进行演讲。他在美国、英国和印度建立了几所小学和中学。
1:10	David Bohm is professor of theoretical physics at Birkbeck College, London University in England. He has written numerous books concerning theoretical physics and the nature of consciousness. Professor Bohm and Mr. Krishnamurti have held previous dialogues on many subjects.	大卫·博姆是理论物理学教授，就职于英国伦敦大学的伯克贝克学院。他著有多部著作，论述理论物理学和意识的本质。博姆教授与克里希那穆提先生，之前曾就很多问题进行过对话。
1:27	Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist, whose recently published book proposes that learning in some members of a species affects the species as a whole. Dr. Sheldrake is presently consulting plant physiologist to the International Crops Research Institute in Hyderabad, India.	鲁伯特·谢尔德雷克是一位生物学家，新近发表了一部著作，提出一个物种中部分成员的学习过程将会影响整个物种。谢尔德雷克博士现在担任位于印度海得拉巴的国际农作物研究所的顾问植物生理学家。
1:46	John Hidley is a psychiatrist in private practice, who has been associated with the Krishnamurti school in Ojai, California, for the past six years.	约翰·希德利是一名个人执业的精神病医生，与位于加利福尼亚欧亥的克里希那穆提学校六年来一直联系密切。
1:55	In the culture there are conflicting points of view about the proper approach to dealing with one's own or others' psychological problems. And the underlying principles from which these approaches are drawn are in even greater conflict. Without invoking a narrow or specialised point of view, can the mind, the nature of consciousness, its relationship to human suffering, and the potential for change be understood? These are the issues to be explored in these dialogues.	在我们所处的文化中，关于如何恰当处理自己或他人的心理问题，各种观点互相冲突。而推导出这些方法的基础性原则，冲突得更是厉害。不引述某个狭隘或特别的观点，我们可以了解心、了解意识的本质、了解它跟人类苦难的关系以及转变的可能性吗？这些就是对话中探讨的问题。
2:28	K: Is disorder the very nature of the self?	克：失序即是自我的本质吗？
2:40	H: Why do you say that? Why do you ask that, if it is the nature of the self?	希：为什么这么说？那是不是自我的本质，你为什么这么问？
2:44	K: Isn't the self, the me, the ego, whatever word we like to use, isn't that divisive? Isn't that exclusive, isolating process, the self-centred activity, which causes so much disorder in the world, isn't that the origin, the beginning of all disorder?	克：自我、我、自我意识，不管我们爱用哪个词，它不是分裂的吗？那不是一个排外、孤立的过程吗？自我中心的行为，导致世界那么多的混乱，那难道不正是一切混乱的源头和开端吗？
3:10	H: The origin being selfish activity.	希：根源就是自私的行为。
3:13	K: Yes, self-centred activity, at all levels of life.	克：是的，生活各个层面的自我中心行为。
3:17	H: Yes, and certainly that's the way, in which the patient comes in, he's concerned about his depression.	希：没错，而且情况无疑正是如此，一个病人进来，他关心的是他的忧伤。
3:22	K: Yes. H: Or his fear.	克：是的。希：或是他的恐惧。
3:24	K: His fulfilment, his joy, his suffering, his agony, and so on, it's all self-centred.	克：他的成功、他的欢乐、他的痛苦、他的愤怒等等，这都是自我中心。
3:31	H: Yes. K: So, I am asking, if I may, is not the self the beginning of all disorder? The self - I mean the egotistic attitude towards life, the sense of individual, emphasis on the individual, his salvation, his fulfilment, his happiness, his anxiety, and so on.	希：没错。克：所以，可以的话，我要问自我难道不是一切混乱的源头吗？自我——我指的是自我中心的生活态度，个体感，强调个体，强调他的拯救、他的成就、他的快乐、他的焦虑等等等等。
4:01	H: Well, I don't know that it's the source of the thing. It's certainly the way he experiences it and presents it. He presents it as his.	希：其实，我不知道它是不是事情的源头。当然这是人类所经历和呈现的方式。他把那一切作为“他的”来呈现。
4:11	K: Yes, but I mean, if you go all over the world, it is the same expression, it is the same way of living. They are all living their own personal lives, unrelated to another, though they may be married, they may do all kinds of things, but they're really functioning from an isolated centre.	克：是的，但我的意思是，如果你走遍世界，你会发现都是一样的表达，都是一样的生活方式。他们都活在自己个人的生活里，与他人没有联系，虽然他们可能结婚了，可能做各种各样的事，但他们做事的出发点确实都是那个孤立的中心。
4:39	H: And that centre, that self, is the source of the difficulty in the relationship?	希：那个中心、那个自我也是人际关系困难的源头？
4:46	K: In relationship.	克：人际关系。
4:47	H: And the difficulty that creates the symptoms.	希：导致各种症状的困难。
4:52	K: And I wonder, if the psychologists have tackled that problem, that the self is the origin, the beginning of all contradiction, divisive activity, self-centred activity, and so on.	克：我想知道，心理学家是不是解决了这个问题，即自我就是一切矛盾、一切分裂行为、自我中心行为等等的源头和开端。
5:11	H: No. I think that the way psychiatrists and psychologists look at this is that the problem is to have an adequate self.	希：不是这样的。我认为精神病医生和心理学家看待这件事的方式是，问题在于要有适度的自我。
5:21	K: Adequate self. H: Yes.	克：适度的自我。希：是的。
5:23	K: Which means what?	克：那是什么意思？
5:26	H: Defining normality...	希：给正常下定义
5:28	K: The self that is functioning... H: Sufficiently.	克：那个在起作用的自我…… 希：起到充分的作用。
5:31	K: ...efficiently. H: Yes.	克：……有效率。希：没错。
5:33	K: Which means furthering more misery.	克：这也意味着助长更多的痛苦。
5:41	B: Well, I don't feel that the psychiatrists would necessarily agree with you on that last point, they might feel that a proper, or properly organised self could get together with other properly organised selves and make an orderly society. K: Yes.	博：哦，我感觉精神病医生未必会赞同你最后的那个观点。他们可能觉得一个合理的自我，或者说合理组织的自我，可以与合理组织的其他自我共处，然后形成一个有序的社会。克：是的。
5:54	B: And you are saying, as I understand it, something quite different. K: Yes.	博：而你说的意思，照我的理解，完全是另一回事。克：是的。
5:58	B: Which is that no self can do it. No structure of the self can make order.	博：你的意思是，没有自我能够做到这一点。没有自我的结构可以形成秩序。
6:04	K: That's right. The very nature of the self must intrinsically bring disorder.	克：没错。自我的本质必然会导致混乱。
6:15	B: Yes, but I'm not sure this will be clear. How can that be made clear, evident?	博：是的，但我不确定这一点是很清楚的。怎么能说清楚这一点，让它显而易见呢？
6:27	S: Sorry, it seems to me that the context is even broader than that of psychology, because in the world we have all sorts of things, which are not human beings with selves, there are animals, and plants, and all the forces of nature, and all the stars, and so on. Now, we see disorder in nature too. It may not be consciously experienced - and a cat that's suffering, or a lion that is suffering, or a mouse, or even an earthworm that's suffering may not come into a psychiatrist's office and say so, but the fact is that there seems to be disorder and conflict within nature. There are conflicts between forces of nature, inanimate things, earthquakes and so on; there are conflicts within the animal world, there are even conflicts within the plant world. Plants compete for light, and bigger ones get higher up in the forest, and the smaller ones get shaded out and die. There's conflict between predators and prey - all animals live on other plants or animals. There's every kind of conflict, there's disease, there's suffering, there's parasites - all these things occur in the natural world. So, is the context of psychological suffering and disorder something that's merely something to do with the mind, or is it something to do with the whole of nature, the fact that the world is full of separate things, and that if we have a world which is full of separate things, and these separate things are all interacting with each other, that there's always going to be conflict in such a world.	谢：对不起，在我看来这个背景比心理学的背景还要更加广阔，因为这个世界有着各种各样的东西，不是抱持着自我的人类，这个世界有动物、植物以及所有的自然力量，所有的星辰，等等。而我们看到自然界中也有混乱。也许无法有意识地体验到这种混乱—— 而一只受苦的猫，或者一头受苦的狮子，或者一只受苦的老鼠、甚至一条蚯蚓，它们也不会跑到精神病医生的办公室来诉苦，但实际上自然界中似乎也存在着混乱和冲突。冲突存在于各种自然力、非生物、地震等等事物之间；动物世界也存在冲突，甚至植物世界也有冲突。植物要争夺阳光，森林里越大的植株长得越高，而矮小的植物就被遮蔽而死。猎食者和猎物之间存在冲突 ——所有的动物都靠吃其他植物或动物为生。有各种各样的冲突，有疾病，有痛苦，有寄生虫 ——这些事情都会在自然界发生。那么，心理痛苦和失序的整个背景仅仅是某种跟心有关的东西吗？还是它跟整个自然界有关，跟这样一个事实有关，即世界充满了各自分离的事物，而如果我们的这个世界充满了各自分离的事物，这些分离的事物彼此相互作用，那么这样一个世界就永远会有冲突。
7:57	B: So, I'm wondering, is it clear that there is that disorder in nature. Would we say that disorder is only in human consciousness?	博：那么，我想知道，自然界存在失序，这点是明确的吗？我们可不可以说失序只存在于人类的意识中？
8:06	K: Yes.	克：对。
8:07	B: That is, the phenomena that you have described, are they actually disorder? That's a question we have to go into. Or what is the difference between the disorder in consciousness and whatever is going on in nature?	博：就是说，你所描述的现象，它们确实是失序吗？那是我们要探究的一个问题。或者意识中的失序和自然界发生的事情，有什么不同？
8:18	K: I saw the other night on the television a cheetah chasing a deer, killing it. Would you consider that disorder?	克：那天晚上我在电视上看到一头猎豹在追一只鹿，在猎杀它。你会认为那是失序吗？
8:28	S: Well, I would consider that it involves suffering.	谢：哦，我会认为那跟痛苦有关。
8:30	K: Suffering, yes. So, are we saying that it is natural in nature and in human beings to suffer, to go through agonies, to live in disorder? S: Yes.	克：痛苦，是的。那么，我们的意思是不是在自然界和人类身上，痛苦、遭受苦难、活在失序中是自然的？谢：是的。
8:49	K: So, what do you say to that, sir?	克：那么，先生，对此你怎么认为？
8:51	H: Well, I think that's the way it's looked at by the therapist. To some degree it's felt that this arises in the course of development, and that some people have it more than others - suffering - some people are more fortunate in their upbringing, for example, in their heredity. But it isn't questioned that that may not be necessary in any absolute sense.	希：哦，我认为那是治疗师看这个问题的方式。某种程度上，他们认为这个问题是在发展过程中产生的，有些人比另一些人有着更多的 ——痛苦——有些人在他们的养育过程中更幸运，比如，他们的遗传更好。但人们没有质疑，也许这从任何一个绝对的意义上来说都并非必要。
9:18	T:Well, that's what we're questioning.	哦，那正是我们在质疑的。
9:20	K: That's what I would like to question too.	克：那也是我想要质疑的。
9:22	H: Yes.	希：没错。
9:24	K: Dr. Sheldrake says it is accepted. It's like that. Human condition is to suffer, to struggle, to have anxiety, pain, disorder.	克：谢尔德雷克博士说大家已然接受了这一点。情况似乎就是那样。人类的制约就是受苦、挣扎、经受焦虑、痛苦、混乱。
9:36	H: Well, it's certainly... K: It's human condition.	希：哦，显然…… 克：这是人类的制约。
9:38	H: It's certainly necessary to have physical suffering. People get sick, they die, and we're wondering whether or not psychological suffering is analogous to that, or whether there's something intrinsically different about it.	希：显然身体上有痛苦是必然的。人会生病会死亡，而我们想知道心理痛苦是不是跟那种情况类似，还是有些本质上不同的东西。
9:52	K: No, sir. I do question, seriously, whether human beings must inevitably live in this state, everlastingly suffering, everlastingly going through this agony of life. Is that necessary, is it right that they should?	克：不，先生。我确实质疑，严肃地质疑，人类是不是不可避免要活在这样的境地中，无休止地受苦，无休止地遭受生命之痛。必须这样吗？他们确实应该受苦吗？
10:19	H: It's certainly not desirable that they should.	希：他们应该受苦当然不是我们想要的结果。
10:21	K: No, no. If we accept that it's inevitable, as many people do, then there is no answer to it. H: Yes.	克：不，不是。如果我们接受这是不可避免的，就像很多人认为的那样，那这个问题就无解了。希：是的。
10:35	K: But is it inevitable?	克：但那是不可避免的吗？
10:39	H: Well, physical suffering is inevitable.	希：哦，肉体上的痛苦是不可避免的。
10:42	K: Yes. H: Illness, death.	克：是的。希：疾病、死亡。
10:43	K: Yes, sir, physical sufferings, old age, accidents, disease.	克：是的，先生。肉体上的痛苦、年老、事故、疾病。
10:49	H: Maybe we increase the physical suffering because of our psychological problems.	希：也许我们因为自身的心理问题助长了肉体上的痛苦。
10:53	K: That's it. That's it. Sir, a mother bearing babies, she goes through a terrible time delivering them. Strangely, she forgets that pain. She has the next baby, another baby. In India, as you know, mothers have about seven or eight children. If they remembered the first agony of it, they would never have children. I have talked to several mothers about it. They seem to totally forget it. It's a blank after suffering. So, is there an activity in the psyche that helps the suffering to be wiped away? Recently, personally, I have had an operation, a minor operation, there was plenty of pain; quite a lot. And it went on considerably. It's out of my mind, completely gone. So, is it the psychological nourishing of a remembrance of pain - you follow? - which gives us a sense of continuity in pain?	克：对了！对了！先生，一个母亲怀孕，分娩时她要经受剧痛。奇怪的是，她会忘掉那种痛苦。她会怀上下一个孩子，再生一个。在印度，你们知道，那里的母亲有七八个孩子。如果她们记着头胎生产的剧痛，就永远不想再要孩子了。我曾跟几个母亲谈论过此事。她们看起来完全忘记了。痛苦过后就一片空白了。所以，是不是存在一种心智活动有助于清除痛苦？最近，我个人做了一个手术，一个小手术，够痛苦的；相当痛苦。而且持续了好一阵。但我现在已经记不得了，它完全消失了。所以，对痛苦的记忆是不是一种心理滋养 ——你理解吗？—— 它给我们一种痛苦的持续感？
12:31	H: So you are saying that perhaps the physical suffering in the world is not the source of the psychological suffering, but that the psychological suffering is an action of its own.	希：所以你的意思是这个世界上肉体的痛苦并不是心理痛苦的来源，但心理痛苦是心理自身的活动。
12:43	K: Yes. Right. You have had toothache, I'm sure.	克：是的。没错。你一定牙疼过吧！
12:49	S: Yes. I've forgotten it. K: You have forgotten it. Why? If we accept pain is inevitable, suffering is inevitable, you must continue with it. You must sustain it.	谢：是的。我已经忘了。克：你忘了。为什么？如果我们接受痛苦是不可避免的，受苦是不可避免的，你就一定会继续痛苦。你一定在维持它。
13:12	S: No, we have to accept that it's inevitable, as it happens sometimes. But we can forget physical pain; can we forget the kind of psychological pain that's caused by natural things like loss, death of people?	谢：不，我们不得不接受它是不可避免的，因为它有时会发生。但我们可以忘掉肉体上的痛苦；我们可以忘记那种心理上的痛苦吗？一些很自然的事情引起的，比如人死了，失去了某个人。
13:26	K: Yes, we'll come to that. I come to you. I've a problem with my wife, if I'm married. I am not, but suppose I am married. I come because I can't get on with her.	克：是的，我们会谈到那个。我来找你。我跟妻子出现了问题，如果我结婚了的话。我没结婚，不过假设我结婚了。我找你是因为我无法跟她相处。
13:40	H: Yes.	希：接着说。
13:43	K: And she can't get on with me. And we have a problem in relationship. I come to you. How will you help me? This is a problem that everybody's facing.	克：而她也无法跟我相处。我们之间的关系有问题。我来找你。你要怎么帮我？这是每个人都在面临的问题。
13:57	H: Yes.	希：是的。
14:03	K: Either divorce.	克：要么离婚。
14:05	H: Yes. K: Or adjustment. And is that possible when each one wants to fulfil, wants to go his own way, pursue his own desires, his own ambitions, and so on?	希：是的。克：要么调整。然而那可能吗？当每个人都想要成就，想要走他自己的路，追求他自己的欲望、自己的野心等等？
14:25	H: You are saying that the problem arises out of the fact that they each have their own interests at heart.	希：你是说问题源自这样的事实，即他们内心各有各的兴趣。
14:32	K: No, it's not interest, it's like... Sir, we are all terribly individualistic.	克：不，不是兴趣，它就像先生，我们都极度个人主义。
14:41	H: Yes.	希：是的。
14:43	K: I want my way, and my wife wants her way. Deeply.	克：我想要这样，我妻子想要那样。深层意义上的。
14:49	H: And we see that our needs are in conflict for some reason.	希：而且我们看到由于某些原因我们的欲望互相冲突。
14:52	K: Yes, that's all. Right away you begin. After the first few days or few months of relationship, pleasure and all that, that soon wears off and we are stuck.	克：是的，就是那样。你很快就开始那样了。在关系的最初几天或几个月后，快乐啊，类似的种种，很快就消逝了，然后我们就被困住了。
15:05	H: Okay, that's the same problem then with the mother raising this child and making it her toy. Her needs are in conflict with the needs of the child.	希：好，那跟母亲养育这个孩子，然后把它当做自己的玩具是同样的问题。她的需要跟孩子的需要是冲突的。
15:16	K: Please, perhaps you'll go on, sir. The mother, her mother was also like that.	克：先生，也许你可以继续说下去。母亲，她的母亲也是那样。
15:26	H: Yes.	希：是的。
15:28	K: And the whole world is like that, sir. It's not the mother.	克：整个世界就是那样，先生。不是那个母亲的问题。
15:32	H: Yes.	希：是的。
15:37	K: So, when I come to you with my problem, you say it's the mother.	克：那么，当我带着我的问题来找你，你告诉我是母亲的问题。
15:42	H: No, I wouldn't say it's... K: I object to that.	希：不是的，我不会说是…… 克：我反对那种说法。
15:44	H: I wouldn't say it's the mother. K: Ah, no, I'm pushing it.	希：我不会说是母亲的问题。克：啊，不是，我在推出这个结论。
15:50	H: You are saying that it's a much broader problem.	希：你是说，那是一个大得多的问题。
15:53	K: Much deeper problem than the mother; didn't put the baby on the right pot, or something.	克：问题远比母亲或哥哥没有把孩子放在正确的位置之类深刻得多。（笑声）
16:05	H: Right. Then it appears that the needs are in conflict.	希：没错。那么看起来各种需要是冲突的。
16:14	K: No, I wouldn't say needs are in conflict. Basically, they are divisive; self-centred activity. That inevitably must bring contradiction, you know, the whole business of relationship and conflict.	克：不，我不会说需要是冲突的。基本上，它们是分裂性的、自我中心的行为。那必然会不可避免地引起矛盾，你知道的，关于关系和冲突的这整件事。
16:32	H: Yes.	希：是的。
16:40	K: Because each one wants his pleasure.	克：因为每个人想要自己的快乐。
16:45	H: There's self-centred activity on the part of the person who's raising the child or on the part of the person who is in the relationship, married. The child is the victim of that.	希：那个养育孩子的人，或者处于婚姻关系中的人，也存在自我中心的行为。所以孩子就成了那种行为的牺牲品。
16:59	K: The child... H: The child is the victim of that.	克：孩子…… 希：孩子成了牺牲品。
17:01	K: Of course.	克：当然。
17:03	H: And then grows up to perpetuate it.	希：然后孩子长大后就继续那样。
17:06	K: And the mother's father and mother's fathers were like that too.	克：母亲的父亲和母亲的父亲们也是那样的。
17:11	H: Yes. Now, why does it have to happen that way? Are we saying that's the way it is in nature? Or are we saying that...	希：是的。那么，为什么不得不那样？我们的意思是，那是自然界也有的方式？还是
17:18	K: Oh, no.	克：噢，不是的。
17:21	S: Well, I mean, there are certain conflicts in nature. For example, among troops of gorillas or baboons - take baboons or even chimpanzees - there's a conflict among the males. Often the strongest male... K: Yes, quite.	谢：其实，我的意思是，自然界存在某种冲突。比如在大猩猩或狒狒大军中 ——举狒狒甚或黑猩猩的例子吧—— 雄猩猩之间存在冲突。常常是最强壮的雄猩猩…… 克：是的，当然。
17:45	S: ...wishes to monopolise all the attractive females. Now, some of the younger males want to get in on the act as well. They try going off with these females and this younger male will fight and beat them off. So they'll be kept out of this. This selfish activity of this one male keeps most of the females to himself. The same occurs in red deer, where the stag will monopolise the females. Now, these are examples of conflict in the animal kingdom which are quite needless. There would be enough food for these hens without pecking each other. Now, these are not exceptions, we can find this kind of thing throughout the animal kingdom. So, I don't think that the origin of this kind of selfish conflict is something just to do with human societies and the way they are structured. I think we can see in biological nature this kind of thing.	谢：……想要垄断所有有魅力的雌猩猩。那么，有些年轻的雄猩猩也想凑热闹。它们试图抢走这些雌猩猩，这个年轻的雄猩猩奋起战斗，把它们都击退了。所以它们就被踢出局了。这个雄猩猩的自私行为使得大多数的雌猩猩归他所有。红鹿也有同样的情况，牡鹿会垄断所有的牝鹿。那么，这些是动物世界冲突的例子，实在是没有必要。这些母鸡有足够的食物，不必互相啄来啄去。那么这些并不是例外，在整个动物世界，这类事情我们随处可见。所以，我认为这类自私的冲突的根源不只跟人类社会及其构造方式有关。我认为我们可以在生物本性中看到这类事情。
18:36	K: Are you saying that, as we are the result of the animal, as we human beings evolved from the animal, we have inherited all those pecking order?	克：你是说因为我们是动物的结果，因为我们人类是从动物进化来的，所以我们继承了所有啄斗的规则？
18:48	S: Yes, I think we've inherited a lot of animal tendencies from our animal forbearers. K: Oh, yes, obviously.	谢：是的，我认为从我们的动物祖先那里我们遗传了许多动物倾向。克：噢，是的，是的。
18:54	S: And I think that many of these show up in these psychological problems.	谢：而且我觉得这些倾向很多都在这些心理问题中体现了出来。
18:58	K: Yes, but is it necessary that we should continue that way?	克：是的，但我们该继续那样下去吗？那是必要的？
19:05	S: Ah.	谢：啊！
19:06	K: We are thoughtful, we are ingenious in our inventions, extraordinarily capable in certain directions, why should we not also say, 'We won't have this, the way we live, let's change it.'	克：我们深思熟虑，我们善于发明，在某些特定的方向上相当能干，我们何不也这样说： “我们不要再这样了，我们的生活方式，让我们来改变它。”
19:27	S: Well, we can say that; many people have said it.	谢：哦，我们可以这么说；不少人这么说了。
19:30	K: I know, many people have said it.	克：我知道，不少人这么说了。
19:32	S: But without very much effect.	谢：不过没什么效果。
19:35	K: Why?	克：为什么？
19:37	S: Well, that indeed is a question. Is it that we're so completely trapped in the ancestry of the past?	谢：哦，那确实是个问题。是因为我们被过去的祖先局限得太彻底了吗？
19:43	K: Or so heavily conditioned that it's impossible to be free.	克：还是制约太沉重，不可能自由了。
19:50	S: Well, there are two possible kinds of conditioning: one is the genuine biological conditioning that comes from our animal heritage, which means that we inherit all these tendencies.	谢：哦，有两种可能的制约：一种是真正的生物性制约，来自我们的动物性遗传，这意味着我们遗传了所有这些倾向。
19:59	K: Let's accept that.	克：我们先接受这一点吧。
20:00	S: Now, that is undoubtedly extremely strong. It goes right back into our animal past.	谢：那么，那种制约无疑是极其强大的。它直接回溯到我们动物性的过去。
20:05	K: Right.	克：没错！
20:06	S: The other kind of conditioning is the kind of argument that I'm putting forward, perhaps, the argument: this has always been so; human nature is like this, there have always been wars and conflicts, and all that kind of thing, and therefore there always will be, that the most we can do is try to minimise these, and that there'll always be psychological conflicts within families and between people, and that the most we can do is try and minimise these or at least make them liveable with.	谢：另一种制约是我提出的一个论点，或者一个猜想，这个观点是：一直都是这样；人类的本性如此，一直都有战争和冲突，诸如此类的事情，因此将来也一直都会这样，我们最多能尽量减少这种状况，而且，在家庭和人际关系中，也一直都会存在心理冲突，我们最多能尽量减少这种状况，或者至少让它们变得容易适应。
20:32	K: So, accept the conditioning, modify it, but you cannot fundamentally change it.	克：所以就是接受制约，改善它，但你无法彻底转变它。
20:37	S: Yes. I'm saying this is a possible kind of conditioning, the belief that we can't really change it radically is another kind of conditioning. I'm a victim of it myself. So, I don't know if it's possible to get out of it.	谢：是的。我的意思是，这可能也是一种制约，相信我们无法真正彻底改变，是另一种制约。我本人就是其受害者。所以，我不知道有没有可能摆脱出来。
20:52	K: That is what I want to discuss. Whether it's possible to change the human conditioning. And not accept it, say, as most philosophers, the existentialists and others say, your human nature is conditioned. You cannot change. You can modify it, you can be less selfish, less painful psychological problems, bear up with pain, this is natural, we have inherited from the animals. We'll go on like this for the rest of our lives and for the lives to come. Not reincarnation, other people's lives. It'll be our conditioning, human conditioning. Do we accept that? Or should we enquire into whether it's possible to change this conditioning?	克：这就是我想讨论的。是否可能转变人类的制约。不要接受它，像大多数的哲学家、存在主义者以及其他人说的那样，你的人性就是深受制约的。你改变不了的。你可以改善一点，你可以稍微不那么自私，不那么痛苦，心理上有问题，就忍受痛苦，那是自然的，我们从动物那里遗传来的。我们的余生和来生就要这样过下去。来生不是指转世，而是指其他人的生活。这将是我们的制约，人类的制约。我们接受了这一点？还是我们应该探究一下，看看有没有可能改变这种制约？
21:59	S: Yes. I think we should enquire into that.	谢：是的。我觉得我们应该探究那个问题。
22:02	K: If you say it cannot be changed, then the argument is over.	克：如果你说不可能改变，那么讨论就结束了。
22:06	S: All right, so I'll say... K: No, I'm not saying...	谢：没错，所以我说…… 克：不，我不是那个意思
22:10	S: I'd like it to be changed, I deeply want it to be changed. So I think that this question of enquiring into the possibility is extremely important. But one of my points, to go back to the conditioning point, is that a lot of this conditioning is deep in our biological nature, and people who wish to change it merely by changing the structures of society...	谢：我想让它改变，我很想让它改变。所以我觉得这个探究可能性的问题相当重要。不过我的一个观点是，回到关于制约的观点，就是，这种制约很多深植于生物本性中，那些希望改变它的人，只是想靠改变社会结构
22:35	K: Oh, I'm not talking about that, of course.	克：噢，我说的当然不是那个。
22:37	S: ...are operating at too superficial a level.	谢：……那种做法停留在太肤浅的层面了。
22:39	K: Like the Communists want to change it.	克：就像共产主义者想要改变一样。
22:41	S: But the idea that you can do it by just changing the environment is what the Communists thought and still think, and in a sense the experiment has been tried, and we can see the results in various communist countries. And of course, believers in that would say, well, they haven't tried properly, or they betrayed the revolution, and so on. But nevertheless, the basis of that belief is that the source of all the evils and problems is in society, and by changing society man is perfectible.	谢：但那种只要改变环境就可以实现的观点，是共产主义者过去的想法，他们现在还这么认为。某种意义上，这一实验已经开展了，我们可以看到各个共产主义国家的实验结果如何。当然，信仰这一套的人会说：哦，他们的实验手法不恰当，或者他们背叛了革命，诸如此类。然而，那种信仰的基础是，一切罪恶和问题的根源在于社会，通过改变社会，人类就会变得完美。
23:07	K: But society is formed by us. S: Yes.	克：但社会是我们组成的。谢：是的。
23:11	K: And by us it is going to be changed. So we haven't changed ourselves. We depend on society to change us. And society is what we have made it; so we are caught in that trap.	克：而且只有通过我们，社会才能得到改变。所以我们还没有改变我们自己。我们依赖社会来改变我们。而社会就是我们造就的；因此我们就困在这个陷阱里了。
23:26	S: Yes. Exactly; and if we start off with a heritage, which is built into us, inherited, which comes from our biological past, and if we start with that, and we start with these societies that also have bad effects, some of them, and to varying degrees, and we just try to change the society, the other part, the inherited part, is still there.	谢：是的。确实如此；如果我们从遗传开始，那些深植于我们体内的、遗传的、来自我们的生物性过去的东西，如果我们从那个开始，并且从也有不良影响的这些社会开始，它们有些是这样的，在不同程度上都是如此，然后我们只是试图改变社会，而另一部分，遗传的那部分，依旧存在。
23:51	K: Oh, yes, but cannot those also be transformed?	克：噢，是的，但不能也改变那些吗？
23:57	S: I really...	谢：我真的
23:59	K: I may have inherited - what? - violence from the apes and so on, so on. Can't I change that? The inherited biological... B: Drives.	克：我也许遗传了——什么？——暴力从猿类等等身上遗传来的。我就不能改变那一点吗？遗传的生物性的…… 博：驱动。
24:16	K: ...conditioning. Surely that can be transformed.	克：……制约。当然可以改变。
24:21	S: Well, all societies surely seek to transform these biological drives we have, and all processes of bringing children up in all societies seek to bring these drives within the control of the society. Otherwise you would have complete anarchy. However, these drives are always brought within certain social forms, and individual aggression is obviously discouraged in most societies. But is it really transformed? Doesn't it just come out again in the aggression of the society as a whole - war, and so on. So, we can see that these things are transformed by society, these basic drives that we inherit.	谢：哦，当然所有的社会都力图改变我们具有的这些生物性驱动，并且所有的社会教养孩子的整个过程都力图把这些驱动纳入社会可控的范围内。否则就会是彻底的无政府状态。然而，这些驱动常常被引入特定的社会形式中，而且在大多数社会中，显然也不鼓励个人攻击。但真的转变了吗？它不是以整体性的社会攻击再现了吗——比如战争等等。所以，我们可以看到这些东西被社会改头换面了，这些我们遗传来的基本驱动。
25:03	K: But why do we… sorry, what were you…	克：但为什么我们……对不起，你刚才的意思是
25:05	B: I was going to say they really haven't been transformed, but I think you're meaning by transformed a fundamental change and not just a superficial change or a transfer of the object of aggression from other individuals to other groups. So, if you talk of transformation, you would say really that they would benefit, more or less go away, right? That's as I understand it.	博：我想说其实并没有改变，但我想你的意思是，通过彻底的改变，而不是肤浅的变化或是把攻击的目标从其他个人转换为其他团体。所以，如果你谈到转变，你会说它们确实会带来某些益处，多多少少消失了，是不是？我是这么理解的。
25:29	S: Well, they'd be changed from one form to another.	谢：可是，它们只是从一种形式变到了另一种。
25:31	B: But I meant... S: That's what I mean.	博：但我的意思是…… 谢：那是我的意思。
25:32	B: I don't think that's the meaning which Krishnaji is using for the word 'transform' but essentially can't we be free of them.	博：我认为那不是克里希那吉所指的“转变”的意思，而是我们能不能从根本上从中解脱。
25:38	K: Yes. That's right. Sir, why do you divide, if I may ask, society and me? As though society were something outside, which is influencing me, conditioning me, but my parents, grandparents, so on, past generations, have created that society, so I am part of that society. I am society.	克：是的，没错。先生，请容我问你，为什么你把社会和我分开？好像社会是个外在的东西，是它在影响我，制约我，但是我的父母、祖父母等等，过去的祖祖辈辈创造了那个社会，所以我是那个社会的一部分。我就是社会。
26:05	S: Well, yes. K: Why do we separate it?	谢：哦，是的。克：为什么我们把它分开？
26:08	S: I think the reason why we separate it is that there are different kinds of society. If I'd been born in India instead of in England, I would have grown up in a very different way...	谢：我认为我们分开它的原因是，有各种不同的社会。如果我生在印度而不是英国的话，我的成长道路会非常不一样
26:19	K: Of course. S: ...with different set of attitudes.	克：当然。谢：……会有一套不同的生活态度。
26:21	S: And because we can think of ourselves growing up in different kinds of societies - and we'd be different if we had - that's why in thought, I think, we have the idea that society and me are not exactly the same. We'd always be in one society or another, so society as a whole, all societies taken together, we would only exist within society, but any particular society is in a sense an accident of our birth or upbringing.	谢：因为我们可以想象我们在不同的社会中长大——如果那样我们就会不一样—— 我认为，这就是为什么我们的思想认为社会和我并不是完全相同的东西。我们永远生活在社会中，不是这个就是那个，所以社会作为一个整体，所有的社会合起来，我们只能生存于社会中，但任一特定的社会，在某种意义上，只是我们的出生或成长的一种偶然。
26:49	K: But even that society is part of us.	克：但即使那个社会也是我们的一部分。
26:53	S: Oh, yes. I mean through growing up in it, it becomes part of us, and we become part of it.	谢：噢，是的。我的意思是，因为成长于其中，它变成了我们的一部分，而我们也变成了它的一部分。
26:57	K: But, I want to abolish this idea, in discussion, this separation from me and society. I am society, I am the world! I am the result of all these influences, conditionings, whether in the East or in the West, or in South, or North, it's all part of conditioning. S: Yes.	克：但是，我想在讨论中消除这个观点，这种分开我和社会的观点。我就是社会，我就是世界。我就是这一切影响、制约的结果。不管是在东方还是西方、南方还是北方，都是制约的一部分。谢：是的。
27:21	K: So, we are attacking the conditioning, not where you are born, or East, or West.	克：所以，我们在攻击制约，而不是你出生的地方，东方或者西方。
27:27	S: Oh, yes. The problem would be conditioning of every kind, our biological conditioning, our conditioning from society.	谢：噢，是的。问题在于各种制约，我们的生物性制约，来自社会的制约。
27:33	K: That's right. S: Yes.	克：没错。谢：是的。
27:35	K: So, personally, I don't separate myself from society, I am society. I have created society through my anxiety, through my desire for security, through my desire to have power, and so on, so on, so on. Like the animal. It's all biologically inherited. And also, my own individualistic activity has created this society. So, I am asking, I am conditioned in that way - is it not possible to be free of it? Free of my conditioning. If you say it's not possible, then it's finished.	克：所以，我个人不把我自己和社会分开，我就是社会。我用我的焦虑、我对安全的渴望、我对权力的欲望等等等等，制造了这个社会。就像动物。这些都是生物性遗传。还有，我自身的利己主义活动制造了这个社会。所以，我要问，我被这样制约着—— 可不可能从中解脱？从我的制约中解脱？如果你说不可能，那就结束了。
28:21	S: Well, I would say first that it's not possible to be free of all of the conditioning. I mean, certain of it is necessary biologically, the conditioning that makes my heart beat...	谢：哦，我首先会说要从全部制约中解脱是不可能的。我的意思是，某些制约是生物性上的必然，促使我的心脏跳动的制约
28:30	K: Ah, well... S: ...my lungs operate, and all that.	克：啊，呃…… 谢：……我的肺在运作，等等。
28:32	K: I admit all that.	克：这些我都接受。
28:34	S: Now, then, the question is, how far can you take that? The necessary conditioning.	谢：那么，问题就是，你可以接纳多少？必要的制约。
28:39	K: Dr. Hidley was saying - that's his whole point - I am conditioned to suffer, psychologically. Right, sir?	克：希德利博士说——他的整个观点是—— 心理上，我有受苦的制约。对吗，先生？
28:48	H: Yes.	希：是的。
28:49	K: Or I am conditioned to go through great conflict in my relationship with my wife, or father, whatever it is. And you are saying, either we investigate into that and free ourselves from that, or accept it and modify it.	克：或者在人际关系中，我经受着与妻子、父亲等等之间的剧烈冲突，那也是我的制约。而你说，我们要么探究问题并从中解脱，要么接受它、改善它。
29:10	H: That's right.	希：没错。
29:12	K: Now, which is it? That's what I want - which is it, as a psychologist, you maintain? If I may put such a question to you.	克：那么，是哪一个？那就是我想知道的—— 作为一个心理学家，你主张哪一个？请容我这样问你。
29:23	H: Yes. Well, I think generally the approach is to attempt to modify it, to help the patient to make it work more effectively.	希：好。哦，我认为一般的方法是试图改善它，协助病人使之更有效地运作。
29:36	K: Why? I hope you don't mind my asking these questions.	克：为什么？希望你不介意我问这些问题。
29:45	H: No. I think that part of the reason for that is that it's seen as biological and therefore fixed. A person is born with a certain temperament. His drives are the drives of the animal, and I think also, because it isn't clear to the therapists, that the problem can be dealt with as a whole, it is clear that it can be dealt with as particulars.	希：不介意。我认为那样做的部分原因是，那被看成是生物性的，因此是固定的。人天生带着某种性格气质。他的驱动是动物的驱动，我还认为，因为治疗师并没有认清，可以把问题作为一个整体来着手处理。他们只知道，可以特定问题特定处理。
30:29	K: Is it... I am not asking an impudent question, I hope.	克：是不是……我希望我的问题不是在冒犯。
30:32	H: Okay.	希：尽管问。
30:35	K: Is it the psychologists don't think holistically? Our only concern is solving individual problems.	克：是不是因为心理学家思考问题没有从整体着眼？我们只关心解决个别问题。
30:52	H: Yes, they are concerned with solving individual problems.	希：是的，他们只关心解决个别问题。
30:55	K: So, therefore they are not thinking of human suffering as a whole.	克：因此他们不把人类的痛苦作为一个整体来看待。
30:59	H: Right.	希：没错。
31:01	K: A particular suffering of X who is very depressed.	克：某个人的特定痛苦是心情非常抑郁。
31:07	H: Right. For particular reasons.	希：对。因为某些特定的原因。
31:09	K: For particular reasons. We don't enquire into what is depression, why human beings all over the world are depressed.	克：因为某些特定的原因。我们不探究什么是抑郁，为什么全世界的人都抑郁。
31:21	H: Or we don't try and tackle that as a single problem. We try and tackle it with this particular individual who comes in.	希：或者我们不尝试把它当做单独的一个问题来处理。我们只把它当做进来咨询的那个特定的人的问题来处理。
31:29	K: Therefore you are still really, if I may point out - I may be wrong…	克：因此你确实仍然，如果我可以指出来的话——也许我说错了
31:33	H: Yes.	希：尽管说。
31:35	K: You are emphasising his particular suffering, and so sustaining it.	克：你在强调他特定的痛苦，因此延续了那种痛苦。
31:42	H: Now, can we get clear on that?	希：好，我们能不能把这点说清楚？
31:45	K: I come to you. H: Yes.	克：我来找你看病。希：嗯。
31:47	K: I am depressed. H: Yes.	克：我抑郁。希：嗯。
31:50	K: For various reasons which you know.	克：因为你知道的各种原因。
31:53	H: Yes.	希：嗯。
31:54	K: And you tell me, by talking to me, etc. - you know, the whole business of coming to you, and all that - you tell me my depression is the depression of the world.	克：然后你告诉我，你跟我谈话，诸如此类。 ——你知道的，找你看病的这整件事，诸如此类的事情—— 你告诉我，我的抑郁就是世界的抑郁。
32:13	H: Yes, I don't tell you that. I tell you that your depression…	希：是的，我没有那样告诉你。我告诉你，你的抑郁
32:17	K: When you tell me that, are you not helping me to carry on with this individualistic depression? And therefore my depression, not your depression.	克：如果你那样说，你不是在帮我持续这种个人的抑郁吗？因此我的抑郁，并不是你的抑郁。
32:33	H: Yes.	希：是的。
32:35	K: It's my depression, which I either cherish or want to dissolve.	克：那是我的抑郁，我要么非常看重，要么想要消除它。
32:41	H: Yes.	希：是的。
32:42	K: Which means I am only concerned with myself.	克：这表示我只关心我自己。
32:45	H: Yes. K: Myself - I come back to that.	希：是的。克：我自己——又回到这个话题了。
32:48	H: Yes, it's within the context of yourself.	希：是的，那就在你自己的范畴之内。
32:50	K: Self. H: Yes.	克：自我。希：是的。
32:53	K: So you are helping me to be more selfish, if I may...	克：所以你在帮我变得更自私，如果我可以
32:58	H: Yes.	希：没错。
32:59	K: More self-concerned, more self-committed.	克：更自私自利，更沉溺于自我。
33:06	H: It is approached within the context of the self, but I would think that I am helping you to be less self-concerned, because when you are not depressed, then you don't have to be self-concerned. You feel better and you're able to relate to people more.	希：用自我的背景来处理问题，但我会以为我是在帮你少一点自私，因为当你不抑郁的时候，你就不需要太关注自我了。你感觉好多了，你能跟他人有更多的联系。
33:22	K: But again, on a very superficial level.	克：但还是在一个非常肤浅的层面。
33:26	H: Meaning that I leave the self intact.	希：意味着我让那个自我原封未动。
33:30	K: Intact. H: Yes.	克：原封未动。希：是的。
33:32	B: Yes, well, I feel that people generally wouldn't accept this that the self is not there, which is what you're implying that the self is rather unimportant. But rather the assumption is that the self is really there, and it has to be improved, and if you say...	博：是的，不过，我感觉人们不会接受这一点的，即自我并不存在，你的意思就是这样，你说自我毫不重要。但假设自我确实存在，而且它需要得到改善，而如果你说
33:48	K: That's it, that's it.	克：对，对。
33:49	B: A certain amount of self-centredness people would say is normal. K: Yes, sir.	博：适度的自我中心，人们会说那是正常的。克：是的，先生。
33:53	B: It's only to keep it within reason, right?	博：只要维持在合理的限度内，对吧？
33:55	H: Right.	希：没错。
33:57	K: Modify selfishness, right? Continue with selfishness, but go slow. Piano.	克：对自私做些调整，对吗？继续自私，但走得慢一点。
34:05	B: But I think, you're saying something which is very radical then, because very few people have entertained the notion of no self-centredness.	博：不过我想，你所讲的东西是非常彻底的，因为很少人喜欢完全没有自我中心的概念。
34:15	K: That's it.	克：没错。
34:19	H: That's right; it isn't entertained.	希：是的；那不招人喜欢。
34:22	B: Maybe a few, but... H: Yes. For biological reasons and because of the universality of the phenomenon? Because it isn't even seen as relevant, really.	博：也许有一小部分人，不过…… 希：是的。由于生物性的原因以及这个现象的普遍性？因为看起来甚至没什么大不了的，真的。
34:34	B: I think most people feel that's the way things are, it's the only way. H: Yes.	博：我想大部分人觉得事情就是这样的，没有其他选择。希：是的。
34:39	K: That means status quo, modified status quo.	克：意思是现状，改良现状。
34:42	B: Yes. S: Yes.	博：是的。谢：是的。
34:45	K: To me that seems so irrational.	克：在我看来，那太荒谬了。
34:50	B: But you must feel that it's possible to be different, you see, at least, more than feel, but in some sense there must be some reason why you say this.	博：但是你一定感觉到，不一样的生活是可能的，你看到，至少，不只是感觉到，而是在某种意义上，你这么说一定是有原因的。
34:58	K: I'll tell you…What?	克：我会告诉你……什么？
35:01	B: Why you feel so different from other people about it.	博：为什么你跟其他人的看法如此不同。
35:04	K: It seems so practical, first of all. The way we live is so impractical. The wars, the accumulation of armaments, is totally impractical.	克：首先，那似乎非常实际。我们的生活方式非常不实际—— 战争，囤积军备，这些完全不实际。
35:17	B: But that wouldn't be an argument, because people say, 'We all understand that, but since that's the way we are, nothing else is possible.' You see, you really are challenging the notion that that is the way we are, or we have to be.	博：但那无可争议，因为人们说： “我们都理解，但既然我们是这样的，已经没其他可能了。” 你看，你实际上在挑战这个观念—— 我们就是这样的，或者我们不得不如此。
35:30	K: I don't quite follow this. We are what we are.	克：我不太明白这点。我们就是我们的样子。
35:33	B: People say, we are individual, separate, and we'll just have to fight and make the best of it. But you are saying something different, you're not accepting that.	博：人们说，我们是个体，彼此分离，我们必须争斗，必须尽己所能。但你不是那个意思，你不接受那一点。
35:45	K: All right. Don't accept it, but will you listen? Will the people who don't accept it, will they give their minds to find out? Right? H: Right.	克：好的。不接受，但你会听吗？不接受这一点的人，他们会用心搞清楚这个问题吗？是不是？希：嗯。
36:00	K: Or say, 'Please, we don't want to listen to you.' This is what we think - buzz off. That's what most people do.	克：或者说：“拜托，我们不想听你讲。” 这就是我们脑子里的念头——赶紧走开。（笑）大多数人都那么做。
36:11	H: Well, this question isn't even raised usually.	希：哦，甚至通常都不会提出这个问题。
36:13	K: Of course.	克：当然。
36:20	H: Now why do you think that the self, this selfish activity, isn't necessary?	希：那么为什么你认为这个自我，这个自私的活动是不必要的？
36:29	K: No, sir, first of all, do we accept the condition that we are in? Do we accept it, and say, 'Please, we can only modify it, and it can never be changed'. One can never be free from this anxiety, deep depression; modify it, always, from agony of life. You follow? This process of going through tortures in oneself. That's normal, accepted. Modify it, live little more quietly, and so on, so on. If you accept that, there is no communication between us. But if you say, I know my conditioning, I may perhaps, I may... tell me, let's just talk about whether one can be free from it. Then we have a relationship, then we can communicate with each other. But you say, sorry, shut the door in my face, and it's finished.	克：不是的，先生，首先，我们接受了我们所处的制约吗？我们接受了它并且说：“拜托，我们只能调整它，它永远不可能改变。” 人永远无法从这种焦虑、这种深度的抑郁中解脱出来，总是从生活的痛苦之中调整着它。理解吗？这个内心折磨的过程。那是正常的，被接受了。调整它，生活得稍稍平静些，等等等等。如果你们接受了那一点，我们之间就不存在交流了。但如果你说，我知道我的制约，我可能，我也许告诉我，就让我们谈谈人是不是可能从中解脱。这样我们之间就建立了联系，然后我们彼此之间就可以有交流。但你说，抱歉，在我面前把门摔上，然后就结束了。
37:41	S: So, there are some people who accept it, say, 'We can't change it'. But there are other people, and I would say, some of the most inspiring leaders of the different religions of the world are among them, who have said we can change it; there is a way beyond this.	谢：所以，有些人接受了这一点，他们说：“我们改变不了。” 但另有些人，我会说，世界上那些不同宗派的极其鼓舞人心的领袖，他们就是其中的一群，他们说我们可以改变它，我们有一条出路。
37:56	K: Yes.	克：是的。
37:58	S: Now, since religions have wide followings, and since their doctrines are widely dispersed, there are in fact large numbers of people in our society, and in every society, who do think it can be changed. Because all religions hold out the prospect of change and of going beyond this conditioning.	谢：那么，既然宗教有着广泛的追随者，既然他们的教规广泛传播，实际上我们这个社会有大批人，而且在每个社会当中，都有人认为改变是可能的。因为所有的宗教都提出了改变以及超越制约的愿景。
38:17	K: Yes. But I would like to know, when you use the word 'religion', is it the organised religion, is it the authoritarian religion, is it the religion of belief, dogma, rituals, all that?	克：是的。但我想知道，你用“宗教”这个词，是指组织化的宗教？是指独裁化的宗教？是指跟信仰、教条、仪式等有关的宗教吗？
38:36	S: Well... K: Or religion in the sense: the accumulation of energy to find whether it is possible to be free. You understand my question?	谢：呃…… 克：还是这个意义上的宗教：积累能量去发现自由是不是可能。你理解我的问题吗？
38:55	S: Yes. Well, I think the second, but I think that, if we look into the history of the organised religions and people within them, we see that much of the inspiration for them was in fact that second kind of religion, which still within that framework, still survives, I think. But it's also something which has often been corrupted, and debased, and turned into yet another set of dogmas, conditioning, and so on. But I think within all religious traditions this second kind of religion you talk about has been kept alive, and I think that the impetus in all the great religions of the world has been that vision, it's then been debased and degraded in various ways. But this vision has never left any of these religions, there are still people within them, I think, who still have it. And this is the inner light that keeps them going, over and above the simple political part, and all the rest of it. K: I know, I know. But suppose, a man like me rejects tradition. Rejects anything that has been said about truth, about god, whatever it is, the other side. I don't know; the other people say, 'Yes, we have this and that'. So, how am I, as a human being who has really rejected all this - tradition, the people who have said there is, and the people who have said that's all nonsense, people who have said we have found that it is, and so on, so on. If you wipe all that out and say, 'Look, I must find out - not as an individual - can this truth, or this bliss, this illumination, an come without depending on all that?' You see, if I am anchored, for example, in Hinduism, with all the... - not the superficiality of it, not all the rituals and all the superstitions, if I am anchored in the religious belief of a Hindu, of a real Brahmin, I am always anchored, and I may go very far, but I am anchored there. That is not freedom. Because there must be freedom to discover this, or come upon this.	谢：理解。嗯，我认为是第二个，但是我想如果我们观察组织化宗教的历史和信仰这些宗教的人们，我们看到最鼓舞他们的实际上是第二种宗教，它仍然在那个框架之中，仍然幸存着，我认为。但是它也经常被侵蚀，被败坏，被变成另一种教条和制约，诸如此类。但我认为在所有的宗教传统中，你所讲的这第二种宗教被保留了下来，我认为世界上所有伟大宗教的动力，就是那个愿景，只是后来以各种形式被败坏了，堕落了。但这些宗教中的任何一个，从未放弃过这个愿景，我认为，它们当中仍然有人怀抱着那个愿景。那就是支持他们前行的内心之光，它超越了简单的派别之分，以及诸如此类的东西。克：我知道，我知道。但假设，有一个像我这样摒弃传统的人。拒绝一切关于真理、关于上帝，或者关于不管什么，彼岸的说法。我不知道；另一个人说：“是的，我们有这个有那个”。所以，我要怎样，作为真正摒弃了一切传统的人， ——拒绝了那些说上帝存在的人，也拒绝了那些说那都是一派胡言的人，拒绝了那些说我们已经发现那是什么的人，等等等等。如果你把那一切都清除，你说：“注意，我必须搞清楚 ——不是作为个人—— 这个真理或者这种极乐、光明，若不依赖那一切可不可以实现？” 你看，如果我栖身于，比如，印度教，带着所有那些……——不是肤浅的那些东西，不是所有那些仪式和迷信，如果我固着于一个印度教徒、一个真正的婆罗门的宗教信仰中，我一直栖身其中，也许我会走得很远，但我就是固着在了那里。那不是自由。因为要发现或者邂逅这个东西，必须要有自由。
41:43	S: Yes.	谢：是的。
41:44	K: Sir, we are going little bit too far?	克：先生，我们是不是有点离题了？
41:47	S: No, but I would then go back and say, well, you put forward the question of a man who rejects all his traditions. You said, let us suppose that I am a man who has rejected all these traditions. I would then say, well, what reason do you have for rejecting all these traditions in such a way?	谢：没有，不过我会倒过来说，哦，你提出的问题，指向的是一个摒弃了一切传统的人。你说，让我们假设我是那个摒弃了这一切传统的人。那么我会问，那，你有什么理由这样摒弃一切传统？
42:07	H: Well, that seems to be part of the problem that we've arrived at. We have said that man is conditioned biologically and socially by his family. The tradition is part of that. We've said that that's the problem that we're up against now. Is it possible for him to change his nature, or do we have to deal with each of these problems particularly as they come up?	希：哦，似乎这就是我们遇到的问题的一部分。我们说过，人类具有生物性制约，以及家庭带来的社会性制约，传统就是那种制约的一部分。我们说过，那就是我们现在面临的问题。他可不可能改变自己的天性，还是我们必须个别地处理我们遇到的每一个问题？
42:30	S: Well, what I was saying is that the inner core of all the great religions of the world is a vision of this possibility of a transformation, whether it's called salvation, or liberation, or nirvana, or what. There's this vision. Now, there have always been people within those religions, who've had this vision and lived this vision; now...	谢：哦，我刚才说，世界上一切伟大宗教的内在核心就是这个愿景，就是这个转变的可能性，不管是叫做救赎、解脱、涅槃还是其他什么。有这个愿景存在。那么，在这些宗教中总是有一群人，他们已经实现了这个愿景，已经活在了这个愿景中；那么
42:54	K: Ah! Sorry. Go on, I'm sorry.	克：啊！抱歉。继续，抱歉。
42:58	S: Perhaps part of your radical rejection of all religions involves denying that. But if so, I would say, why? Why should we be so radical as to deny...	谢：也许你彻底拒绝一切宗教也包括否定那一点。但如果是这样，我会问，为什么？为什么我们连这个也这么彻底地否定
43:07	K: I question whether they really - I may be sacrilegious, may be an infidel, non-believer - I wonder, if I am anchored to a certain organised belief, whether I can ever find the other. If I am a Buddhist, for example, I believe that the Buddha is my saviour. Suppose, I believe that, and that has been told to me from childhood, my parents have been Buddhists, and so on, so on, so on. And as long as I have found that security in that idea, or in that belief, in that person, there is no freedom.	克：我质疑他们是不是真的——我也许亵渎神明，我也许是异教徒，怀疑主义者—— 我想知道，如果我固着于某个组织化的信仰中，我是不是还能找到另一个东西。如果我是个佛教徒，举个例子，我相信佛陀是我的救世主。假设我相信那个，我从小就被这样告知，我的父母就是佛教徒，如此等等。而只要我从那个观点或者那个信仰、那个人之中找到了安全感，就不存在自由。
44:10	S: No, but it's possible that you can move beyond that framework, starting from within it, you can move beyond it.	谢：没有自由，但你有可能从那个框架中超越出来，从那里面开始，你可以从中超越。
44:16	K: That means I wipe out everything.	克：那意味着我清除了一切。
44:20	S: It means you wipe it out, but there's a difference between an approach where you wipe it out from the beginning...	谢：它意味着清除一切，但是一开始就清除的方式
44:26	K: From the beginning, I am talking.	克：一开始，我是这么说的。
44:28	S: ...and an approach where you start within it and go beyond it.	谢：……和在其中开始再从中超越的方式是不一样的。
44:33	K: You see - wait, wait. Yes, I know, it's the well-worn argument. Which is important, breaking down all the barriers at the beginning, not at the end. I am a Hindu, I see what Hinduism is - a lot of superstition, you know, all the rest of it - and why should I go through number of years to end it, why can't I finish it the first day?	克：你看——等一下，等一下；是的，我知道，那个老生常谈的说法。重要的是，从一开始就打破一切障碍，而不是在最后。我是个印度教徒，我看到印度教 ——充斥着迷信，你知道的，诸如此类的东西。那我为什么要折腾很多年去结束它，为什么我不在第一天就终结它？
45:15	S: Because I think you'd have to reinvent and rediscover for yourself a great many things that you would be able to get through more quickly if you didn't.	谢：因为我认为，如果你不一开始就结束它，你自己就需要重新发明、重新发现很多事情，而那些事情你本可以更快地消化掉。
45:25	K: No. His question is... I am a living human being in relationship with him or with her. In that relationship I am in conflict. He says, don't go about religion and illumination, and nirvana, and all the rest of it. Transform this, live rightly here, then the door is open.	克：不。他的问题是我是一个活着的人，我跟他或她有某种关系。在那关系中，我身陷冲突。他说，不要去找宗教、启迪、涅槃，诸如此类的东西。改变这种情况，正确地生活，然后那扇门就会打开。
45:53	S: Yes, but surely, isn't that easier said than done?	谢：是的，但显然，说比做容易，不是吗？
45:59	K: I know! I know it's easier said than done, therefore let's find out. Let me find out with him, or with you, or with her, how to live in this world without conflict. Right, sir?	克：我知道！我知道说起来很轻松，因此让我们来搞清楚。让我来跟他、跟你或跟她一起搞清楚怎样活在这个世界上却不陷入冲突。对吗，先生？
46:18	H: That's what we're asking.	希：那就是我们在问的问题。
46:20	K: Can I find out, or is that impossible?	克：我能搞清楚吗，还是那是不可能的？
46:24	H: We don't know.	希：我们不知道。
46:26	K: No. Therefore we start - we don't know.	克：不知道。因此我们从这里开始吧——我们不知道。
46:27	H: Okay.	希：好的。
46:29	K: So let's enquire into that. Because if my relationship with life is not right - right in quotes for the moment - how can I find out something that's immensely beyond all this? Beyond time, beyond thought, beyond measure. I can't. Until we have established right relationship between us, which is order, how can I find that which is supreme order? So I must begin with you, not with that. I don't know if you are meeting me.	克：那么，让我们探究那个问题。因为如果我跟生活的关系不正确 ——正确这个词暂时用引号—— 我怎么能搞清楚完全超越了这一切的东西？超越了时间，超越了思想，超越了衡量。我办不到。 “在我们建立起彼此之间正确的关系，即秩序之前，我怎么能发现什么是终极秩序？所以我必须从你开始，而不是从那个东西开始。不知道你明不明白我的意思。
47:15	S: No, I would have thought that you could easily argue the other way around. K: Of course, of course!	谢：不是的，我在想你可以很容易反过来讲。克：当然，当然！（笑）
47:20	S: Until you have that, you can't get this right, because the whole history of man shows that starting just from...	谢：除非你拥有了那个东西，否则你不可能活得正确，因为整个人类历史显示出那个东西正是开始于
47:25	K: Ah! Therefore you invent that. You invent something illogical, may not be true; may be just invention of thought, and you imagine that to be order and hope that order will filter into you. And it seems so illogical, irrational, whereas this is so rational.	克：啊！因此你发明了那个东西。你发明了不合逻辑的东西，它可能不是真的；可能只是思想的臆造，而你想象那就是秩序，并且希望那个秩序会慢慢渗透你。那似乎很不合逻辑、不合理，然而这个却是那么合理。
47:57	S: But is it possible? K: That is it! Let's find out.	谢：但可能吗？克：对了！我们来搞清楚。
48:05	S: But you've now completely reversed your argument to start with. He started with the patient coming to the psychiatrist's office, who wants to get his relationships right, get the human relationships out of this state of disorder and conflict into something that's more tolerable.	谢：但你现在完全颠倒了你一开始的观点。他开始说的是，一个病人来看精神科医生，他想要有正确的关系，想要让人际关系从混乱和冲突状态中脱离出来，变得更加容易接受。
48:21	K: I'm not sure this way - forgive me, Doctor, if I'm blundering into where the angels fear to tread, I question whether they are doing right.	克：我不确定这种方式——博士，恕我冒昧地胆大妄为（笑），我质疑他们做法的正确性。
48:36	S: But they're doing just what you said now starting with the relationship, not going into these bigger questions.	谢：但他们在做的就是你所说的啊，从关系开始，不去探究这些大问题。
48:41	K: But I question whether they are really concerned with bringing about a right relationship between human beings, fundamentally, not superficially, just to adjust themselves for the day.	克：但我质疑，他们是不是真的有兴趣实现人与人之间的正确关系，从根本上而言的，而不是表面的，不只是暂时调整一下自己。
48:57	H: I don't think that you're denying that larger questions are involved in that, you are just saying that we shouldn't have... invent ideas about what a solution would be like.	希：我认为你并不否认其中涉及到那些大问题，你只是说我们不应该抱有就解决方案发明出一些观念。
49:07	K: Yes. I come to you with my problem : I cannot get on with somebody, or I am terribly depressed, or something dishonest in me, I pretend. I come to you. You are concerned to tell me 'Become more honest.'	克：是的。我带着我的问题来找你—— 我跟某个人处不好，或者我极度抑郁，或者我内心不诚实，我假装。我来找你。你关心的是，告诉我“变得诚实一点”。
49:36	H: Yes.	希：是的。
49:37	K: But not find out what is real honesty.	克：而不是搞清楚什么是真正的诚实。
49:44	H: Don't we get into the problem of creating the idea of real honesty at this point?	希：这样的话，我们不是在制造一个“真正的诚实”的观念吗？
49:48	K: No. It's not an idea. I am dishonest.	克：不是的。这不是一个观念。我不诚实。
49:51	H: Yes.	希：嗯。
49:52	K: You enquire, why are you dishonest? H: Yes.	克：你探询，为什么你不诚实？希：嗯。
49:54	K: Go... penetrate into it, disturb me. Don't pacify me.	克：来……深入进去，触动我。不要安抚我。
49:59	H: Yes.	希：嗯。
50:01	K: Don't help me to say, well, be a little more honest, and a little more this or that, but shake me so that I find out what is real honesty!	克：不要促使我说，哦，我要更诚实一点，或是更这样一点，更那样一点，而是震撼我，让我去弄明白什么是真正的诚实。
50:14	H: Okay, that's...	希：好的，那是
50:16	K: I may break away from my conditioning, from my wife, from my parents - anything. You don't disturb me.	克：我可能会脱离我的制约，脱离跟我妻子、跟我父母的关系——任何东西。你没有触动我。
50:26	H: No, that's... K: That's just my point.	希：不，那是…… 克：那就是我的观点。
50:29	H: I do disturb you. K: Partially.	希：我确实触动你了。克：只是局部地。
50:31	H: Well, what...	希：哦，什么
50:33	K: You disturb me not to conform to little adjustments.	克：你对我的触动不是仅仅稍微调整一下。
50:37	H: Well, let's look at that. K: Sorry.	希：那好，我们来看一下。克：抱歉。
50:43	H: I disturb you to conform to little adjustments.	希：我触动你，作出了一些小小的调整。
50:47	K: Yes.	克：是的。
50:49	K: You don't say to me, 'Look, you are dishonest, let's go into it.'	克：你没有对我说：“看，你不诚实，我们来好好探究一下。”
50:53	H: I do say that.	希：我就是这样说的。
50:55	K: No, but go into it, so that he is totally honest.	克：不够，而是要深入探究，那样他才能彻底诚实。
50:59	H: Well, how deeply do I need to go into it, so that I have disturbed you totally?	希：那么，我需要探究得多深入，才能彻底地触动你？
51:03	K: Yes. So you tell me. Do it now, sir.	克：好。所以由你来告诉我。现在就来，先生。
51:08	H: Okay. You come in, and in our talks we notice that the thing that you are up to is that you are always trying to find some other person to make your life be whole.	希：好吧。你来找我，谈话的过程中我们发现，你的问题在于，你总是想找一个人来让自己的生命完整。
51:22	K: Yes. I depend on somebody. H: Yes, deeply.	克：是的。我依赖某个人。希：是的，依赖很深。
51:26	K: Deeply. H: And you don't even know that.	克：很深。希：你甚至都不知道。
51:28	K: Yes.	克：是的。
51:30	H: So I disturb you. I tell you that that's what's going on, and I show you you're doing it with me.	希：所以我触动你。我告诉你事情的状况，让你看到你正在依赖我。
51:34	K: Yes.	克：是的。
51:35	H: I show you you're doing it with your husband.	希：让你看到你正在依赖你的丈夫。
51:37	K: Yes.	克：是的。
51:38	H: Now, is that sufficiently deep? K: No.	希：那么，这样够深层了吗？克：不够。
51:41	H: Why?	希：为什么？
51:44	K: What have you shown me? A verbal picture...	克：你让我看到了什么？口头的描述
51:51	H: No, not verbal. Not verbal. K: Wait, wait.	希：不，不是口头的；不是口头的。克：等一下，等一下。
51:53	H: Okay.	希：好。
51:55	K: Verbal picture, an argument, a thing which tells me that I am dishonest. Or whatever you tell me. That leaves me where?	克：口头的描述，一个观点，说我不诚实。不管你说我什么。那能让我怎样？
52:07	H: If it's verbal it just gives you more knowledge about yourself.	希：如果只是口头的论点，你只是对自己多知道一点罢了。
52:09	K: That's all. Knowledge about myself.	克：仅此而已。对我自己多了一些认识。
52:13	H: Yes. K: Will knowledge transform me?	希：是的。克：知识会让我改变吗？
52:16	H: No. K: No. Be careful, sir, careful. Then why do I come to you?	希：不会。克：不会。小心，先生，小心。那我为什么来找你？
52:27	H: Well, not so that I can give you knowledge. You come thinking that maybe somehow I have some answers, because other people, because the society is set up...	希：哦，总不是为了让我塞给你一些知识。你来，是因为你以为我总会有些解决的办法吧，因为别人，因为社会的设置
52:38	K: Why don't you tell me, 'Old boy, do it yourself, don't depend on me.' Go into it. Find out, stir.	克：你为什么不说：“老兄，你自己来，不要依赖我。” 探究它，去弄明白，把它钻透。
52:48	H: Okay, I tell you that. I tell you, 'Go into it yourself'. And you say to me... K: I can't do it.	希：好，我就这么说。我说：“你自己去探究。” 然而你跟我说…… 克：我做不到。
52:55	H: I don't know what you're talking about.	希：我不明白你在说些什么。
52:56	K: That's just it. H: Yes.	克：确实如此。希：没错。
52:58	K: So, how will you help me to go into myself and not depend on you? You understand my question? H: Yes.	克：那么，你要怎么帮助我探究我自己，却又不对你产生依赖？了解我的意思吗？希：了解。
53:08	K: Please, I'm not on the stage, the only actor. Sir, this is really a serious question. How will you help me to go into myself so deeply, that I understand and go beyond. You know what I mean?	克：拜托，我不是在表演，不是唯一的演员。先生，这个问题真的非常严肃。你会怎样帮助我深入探究自身，让我了解并超越自我。明白我的意思吗？
53:39	H: No, I don't follow what you mean. I understand how to help you go into it without depending on me.	希：不，不明白你的意思。我明白怎样帮助你探究自身，却不对我产生依赖。
53:45	K: I don't want to depend on you. I don't want to depend on anybody.	克：我不想依赖你。我不想依赖任何人。
53:48	H: Okay. I can help you do that. We can discover together that you are depending on me, but I don't know how deeply this has to go.	希：好。我可以帮你这么做。我们可以一起来发现你在依赖我，不过我不知道这能达到多深的层面。
53:59	K: So you have to enquire into dependence.	克：所以你得研究一下“依赖”。
54:02	H: Okay. K: Why am I depending? Security. H: Yes.	希：好的。克：我为什么依赖？因为安全感。希：没错。
54:08	K: Where is security? Is there such thing as security?	克：哪里有安全？存在“安全”这种东西吗？
54:15	H: Well, I have these experiences as I grew up that taught me what security is.	希：哦，我成长的过程中有一些这样的体验，它们让我知道了什么是安全。
54:21	K: Yes, which is what? A projected idea.	克：是的，那是什么？一个投射出来的观点。
54:24	H: Yes. K: A principle.	希：是的。克：一个原则。
54:26	H: Yes. K: A belief, a faith, a dogma, or an ideal, which are all projected by me, or by you, and I accept those. But they're unreal.	希：是的。克：一个信仰、信念、信条或者一个理想，全都是我的投射，或者你的投射，而我接受了。但它们是虚幻的。
54:41	H: Okay. K: So, can I push those away?	希：好的。克：所以，我可以抛开那些吗？
54:47	H: Yes. And then you are not depressed.	希：是的。然后你就不会抑郁了。
54:50	K: Ah! I am dependent and therefore I get angry, jealousy, all the rest of it. That dependence makes me attached, and in that attachment there is more fear, there is more anxiety, there is more... - you follow? H: Yes.	克：啊！因为依赖外物，所以我生气、嫉妒，如此等等。依赖令我执着，而执着滋生了更多的恐惧、更多的焦虑、更多的……理解吗？希：理解。
55:09	K: So, can you help me to be free or find out what is true security? Is there a deep abiding security? Not in furniture, not in a house, not in my wife, or in some idea - find deeply if there is such thing as complete security. Sorry, I'm taking all this…	克：所以，你可以帮助我从中解脱吗？或者帮我弄明白什么是真正的安全？有没有永恒深远的安全？不在家具中，不在房子中，不在我的妻子身上或者某个观念中 ——去深入探究一下，看看彻底的安全是否存在。抱歉，一直是我在谈
55:44	H: So you're suggesting that if I simply work on this with you, and you come to understand that you're dependent, that that's not sufficient, because you won't have discovered any abiding security.	希：所以你提出的观点是，如果我只是简单地跟你讨论，于是你了解到你在依赖，但那还不够，因为你找不到任何永恒的安全。
55:55	K: No. Because that's all I want. I've sought security in this house, and it doesn't, there's no security. I've sought security in my wife, there isn't any; I change to another woman, but there isn't any either. Then I find security in a church, in a god, in a belief, in a faith, in some other symbol. You see what is happening? You are all externalising, if I can use that word, giving me security in things in which there is no security - in nations, all the rest of it. Could you help us to find out if there is complete security which is unshakeable?	克：不是的。因为我要的就是安全。我在这所房子里寻找安全，但它并无安全可言。我在妻子身上寻找安全，也没有找到；我换另一个女人，但还是没有。然后我就在教堂里寻找安全，在上帝、信念、信仰中，在某些符号中寻找。你看到是怎么一回事了吗？你一直在外求，如果我可以用那个词的话，在从外物中给我安全，而其中并无任何安全可言 ——在国家中，诸如此类。你能不能帮我们搞清楚是否存在一种不可动摇的彻底安全？
56:47	S: Are you suggesting that this is one of our most fundamental needs, driving activities? K: I should think so.	谢：你是不是说，这是我们最根本的需求之一、最根本的驱动行为之一？克：我认为是这样的。
56:58	S: So indeed it's a fundamental question as to whether this sense of abiding unshakeable security is possible. K: Yes. Yes. Because if once you have that there is no problem any more.	谢：那么这确实是一个根本性的问题，即有没有这种不可动摇的永恒的安全感。克：是的。是的。因为一旦你拥有了，就不再有任何问题。
57:15	H: But this isn't clear, because then is it the individual that has that?	希：但这点并不清楚，因为那样的话拥有那种安全感的是个人吗？
57:22	K: No. Individual can never have that security. Because he is in himself divisive.	克：不是。个人永远无法拥有那种安全感。因为他自身是分裂的。