克里希那穆提 - 思想的局限性

Krishnamurti Subtitles

SA78T3 - 思想的局限性第三次公开演讲瑞士萨嫩 1978年7月13日
0:21 Society there becomes all important, according to the few. We ought to be in the woods.	0:21 克里希那穆提（以下简称“克”）：我很高兴今天天气不错。早知道我们应该在树林里进行演讲。
0:45 We were saying, weren’t we, the last two times that we met, here, that this identification with our bodies, with our experiences, with the house, with the family, with the nation, with a particular ideology or belief has brought about the emphasis on the self, the ‘me,’ the ego. And that has cultivated this idea – and I’m using the word ‘idea’ in its proper sense – the idea of an individual, that we human beings are separate, distinct individuals apart from everybody else. 2:00 This emphasis on individuality, has created a lot of mischief. It has destroyed families – I don’t know if you’re aware of it – it has brought about excellence in achievement, in technology, a sense of highest endeavour on the part of a particular human being, the individual, the individual enterprise. Opposed to that, there is this whole ideology of the totalitarianism. So, we have these two opposites. On the one side, freedom – so-called freedom, on the other, no freedom at all, except for the few. 3:26 And, as one observes, throughout the world, the excellence of the individual, has brought about certain beneficial results, not only in the technological world, but also, in the artistic world. And though the individual thinks he’s free, is he free, actually? And, on the other side of the coin, is the totalitarianism where there’s no freedom at all, except for the few.	0:45 前两次当我们在这个地方相聚的时候，我们说了一些东西，对吧？那就是：这种与我们身体的认同、与我们的经验、房子、家庭的认同与国家，以及某种意识形态或信仰的认同，它们已经造成了对我自己、对“我”、对自我的强调。而这培养出了一个概念 ——我是在正确的意义上使用“概念”这个词—— 那就是“个体”的概念，也就是：我们人类是彼此分离的、互不相同的个人，我们和其他人是分开的。 2:00 而这种对个体的强调制造出了大量的灾祸。它已经摧毁了家庭 ——我不知道你们是否意识到了这点—— 它带来了杰出卓越的成就、科技，一种某一个人的至高努力成就的感觉，也就是个人，个人的事业。而与之相对立的是，我们有着整个关于极权主义的意识形态。所以我们有着这两个对立面。一方面是「自由」——所谓的“自由”，另一方面则完全没有自由 ——除了极少数人有自由之外。 3:26 而就如我们所观察到的：纵观全世界，个体的杰出卓越已经带来了某些有益的结果 ——不只是在科学技术的领域，也包括在艺术领域。然而尽管个体认为他是自由的，可他真的是自由的吗？而这枚硬币的另一面则是极权主义，在其中没有任何自由可言 ——除了极少数人有自由之外。
4:37 Now, what is the truth of this? It is obvious there must be freedom. What do we mean by that word ‘freedom’? Again, let us be very clear that we are asking this question of ourselves, that the speaker isn’t asking, you are asking. As we said, there is no speaker, here. You and I are the speakers. You and I – this person, talking – are enquiring, together, into this question: on the one side, the enormous importance given to individuality with all its identifications: nation, house, family, capitalism and socialism, whatever it is, and the other, identification with the ideological society. 6:15 Society there becomes all important, according to the few. And in enquiring into this, we must first ask, if I may suggest, what is it we human beings are trying to do? What is it that we human beings, not Mr So-and-so, Mrs So-and-so, as human beings, without labels, without nationalities, without all the rubbish that has been pushed down our throats by other people, as well as by us, over other people, what is it that we human beings are trying to do in this world? What is it that we are seeking, that we are searching, that we are longing for? 7:28 And one of the questions involved in this is, what is freedom? We think we are free because we can travel, go to America, go anywhere you like if you have the money and the inclination. And on the other side, you can’t travel, you can’t leave the borders, they are controlled.	4:37 那么，这件事情的真相是什么呢？很显然，我们必须要有「自由」。然而我们所说的“自由”这个词是什么意思呢？同样的，我们要非常清楚这点：那就是：我们是在问自己这个问题，并不是演讲者在问它，是你们在问它。就如我们所说的，这里并没有什么“演讲者”。你和我就是“演讲者”。你和我——你和这个人，正在交谈—— 正在一起探询这个问题：一方面，我们赋予了个体及其所有的「认同」以巨大的重要性：和国家的认同、和房子的认同、和家庭的认同，和资本主义与社会主义，或者无论和什么认同，而另一方面，又要认同于意识形态化的社会。 6:15 根据少数人的理念，从这方面来讲，社会就变得无比重要了。而在探询它的过程中，我们首先必须要问一下 ——如果允许我建议一下的话—— 我们人类在试图做些什么呢？我们人类——不是某某先生或某某夫人—— 我们只是作为「人」——没有标签、没有国籍、没有所有那些别人所强加给我们的、以及我们所强加给别人的垃圾玩意儿—— 我们人类试图在这个世界上做些什么呢？我们在追寻的是什么？我们在寻找的是什么？我们在渴望的是什么？ 7:28 而这其中所涉及到的问题之一就是：什么是「自由」？我们认为自己是自由的，因为我们可以四处旅行，去美国旅游，去任何你喜欢的地方 ——如果你有钱，并且也有这种意愿的话。而另一方面，有些人是无法旅行的，你不能离开国家边境，那里的人是受到控制的。
8:02 So, what is freedom? Perhaps most of us, at least, those who are serious and thoughtful, aware, must, inevitably, ask this question, what is freedom? Is freedom to do what you like, as an individual? Is freedom a permissive activity? That is, each one wants to do what he wants to do. If he wants to believe in God, he believes in God. If he wants to pursue, take drugs, sex and all the rest of it, he is free, if he has the money and if he has the inclination and all the rest of it, to go with it. And we have considered this kind of activity, freedom, to do what one likes to do, what one wants to do, what one wants to fulfil. 9:41 Or, trying to find, in freedom, identity. You know all this. So, is this freedom? Or, is freedom something entirely different? We think of freedom as being free from something, from poverty, from a person you have married, you don’t want any more and you are free to divorce and all the rest of it. Free to choose your activity in the business world, or in the psychological world, or free to believe what you want to believe and so on, so on. One is free, one thinks, in our choice to become a Catholic, or a Protestant, or not to believe in anything, at all. You know all this.	8:02 那么，什么是「自由」呢？也许我们大多数人 ——至少我们中那些认真的、有思考的、有所觉察的人—— 必然会问这个问题：什么是「自由」？「自由」是你作为个体，能够随心所欲地做自己喜欢的事吗？「自由」是自我放纵的活动吗？换句话说：每个人都渴望做自己想做的事。如果他想要去信仰上帝，他就会信仰上帝。如果他想要去追求…… 嗑药、性爱，等等此类东西，那他也是自由的 ——如果他有钱、也有此类意愿等等，他就可以去做它。而我们把这种活动视为“自由” ——也就是能够去做自己喜欢的事、去做自己想要做的事、去做自己想要实现的事。 9:41 或者试图在自由中找到“身份”。你们都知道所有这些。那么，这是「自由」吗？还是说，「自由」是某种完全不同的东西？我们认为自由就是“能摆脱某个东西”，摆脱贫穷，摆脱和你结婚的那个人 ——因为你不想要他（她）了，而你们可以自由地离婚，等等这些。你们可以在商业世界 ——或者在心理世界——自由地选择你们的活动，或者可以自由地去信仰你想要信仰的东西，等等，等等。我们认为自己是自由的，因为我们可以自主选择而成为一名天主教徒或新教徒，或者完全不信仰任何东西。你们都知道这些。
11:14 So, is that freedom? Please, ask yourself this question, not me. You are facing the mirror, looking at yourself, investigating into the whole psychological structure of yourself. And our conditioning has been to do what we want to do. And we have never enquired into what it is that urges us to do, either to go left, right, or whatever it is. And as long as there is identity with a nation, with a family, with a husband, with a girl, with this belief or with that dogma, ritual, tradition, is there freedom? 12:32 You’re following all this? You’re asking these questions. I’m only voicing your enquiry. As we may point out, again, we are not authoritarian, here, there is nobody, as far as the speaker is concerned with any sense of authority, any sense of superiority. There is no dogmatism, there is no belief. And if the speaker is rather emphatic, it is not an assertive, aggressive expression, it is his natural self.	11:14 那么，这是「自由」吗？拜托了，请问问你自己这个问题，而不是问我。你正面对着这面镜子，在看着你自己，探究这整个你自己心理世界的结构。而我们的局限之处在于要去做我们想要做的事。但我们却从没有去探询过驱使我们去做事的冲动是什么 ——不管是做左派的事、右派的事，还是任何什么事。而只要还是存在着与国家、与家庭、与丈夫、与女朋友、与这个信仰或那个教条、与仪式、与传统的认同，那时会有「自由」吗？ 12:32 你们理解所有这些了吗？是你们在问这些问题。我只是将你们的询问说出来罢了。再重申一遍，就如我们所指出的：我们在这里并不是什么权威人士，对演讲者来说，这里没有人有任何的权威感和优越感。这里并没有什么教条主义、也没有什么信仰。而如果演讲者语气过重的话，它也并不是一种独断的、咄咄逼人的表达，这只是他很自然的「自我」呈现。
13:32 So, we are enquiring if there is freedom, in its total sense, not from something to something else, or from something else to something else. We are enquiring into this whole feeling of freedom, if there is such a thing. And as long as the mind, thought, sensations, emotions identify themselves with a particular object, a piece of furniture, a human being or a belief, is there freedom? Obviously, not. The moment you identify yourself with something you are denying freedom. Bene? If I, because I like the idea of some supreme being and all the rest of it and I identify myself with that and pray to that, worship that, is there freedom at all? So, we are discovering that there is no freedom as long as there is an identifying process going on. Right?	13:32 所以我们正在探询是否存在着完全意义上的「自由」，不是从某个东西到另一个东西的“自由”，或者从另一个东西再到其他东西的“自由”。我们正在探询「自由」的整体感受，是否存在着这样的东西。而只要头脑、思想、感官、情绪还是在将它们自己认同于某个特定对象 ——比如一件家具、一个人、一种信仰，那时还会有「自由」吗？很显然没有了。一旦你让自己认同于某个东西，你便是否定了「自由」。（意大利语）懂了吗？如果我……因为我喜欢那种 “某个至高存在者”等等诸如此类的概念，于是我便让自己认同于这种概念，然后去向它祈祷，去崇拜它，这其中真的有任何「自由」吗？所以，我们发现了，那就是只要「认同的过程」还是在发生进行着，那就不会有「自由」。对吧？
15:46 Please, words are dangerous. Don’t, if I may suggest, don’t translate what is being said into your own words, into your own language, into your own opinion, but actually listen to the words we are using, because then we are in direct communication. All right, let me put it this way: language, that is, the usage of words, the meaning, the verbs, the syntax – language, drives most of us. Right? When you say, ‘I’m a Frenchman’ – the word is active and forces us in a certain pattern. So, language uses us – right? 17:08 I do not know if you have not noticed it. When you use the word ‘Communism,’ ‘Socialism’ or ‘Capitalism’ or a Catholic, a Protestant, a Hindu, a Jew and so on, these are the words which act upon us and force us to think in a certain way. Right? So, language is driving us, using us. I don’t know if you’re aware of this. And if you use language, not language drive you, then we are using words without any emotional content. Then there’s a possibility of exact communication. Are we getting somewhere, together? 18:12 Please understand this because we are going to go into something which I think, which I’m not sure, yet, which will come out of all this in our enquiry into freedom, in our awareness that identity destroys freedom, curtails freedom, limits freedom. And if you’re satisfied with that limitation of freedom then you must also be aware of its consequences, which is separation, which is continual lack of relationship, effort, war, violence and all the rest of it follow.	15:46 请注意，词语文字是危险的。所以请不要……如果我可以建议下的话，请不要将我所说的东西翻译成你自己的话语、你自己的语言、你自己的观点，而是切实地聆听我们正在使用的这些词语，因为这样我们便是直接地在交流。好吧，让我这样来解释一下它吧：语言——换句话说，也就是词语文字的用法，那些词义、那些动词、那些句法 ——语言驱动了我们大多数人。对吧？当你说，“我是一个法国人”的时候 ——词语文字便活跃起来了，然后迫使我们进入到某种模式中。所以语言文字“利用了”我们——没错吧？ 17:08 我不知道你们是否注意到了这点。当你使用“共产主义”、“社会主义” 或“资本主义”这样的词语或者诸如天主教徒、新教徒、印度教徒、犹太教徒等等这些词时，这些词语就会对我们产生作用，迫使我们以特定的方式去思考。对吧？所以，语言文字在驱动着我们、“利用”着我们。我不知道你们是否察觉到了这一点。而如果是你使用语言，而不是让语言来驱动你的话那我们所使用的词语，它们就不会有任何感情色彩。那时我们才有可能进行准确无误的沟通交流。我们是否达成某种共识了？ 18:12 请理解这一点，因为我们将要来探究的那个东西我认为…… 虽然我现在还不敢确定，它将会从所有这一切中产生出来，在我们探询「自由」的过程中，在我们觉察到「身份认同」摧毁了自由、削减了自由、限制了自由时。而如果你满足于这种限制性的自由，你就必须同样意识到它的后果 ——也就是「分离」，也就是持续不断的「关系」的缺失，努力、战争、暴力，所有这些东西都随之而来了。
19:14 And, in enquiring into ourselves we must also be very clearly aware that language is not driving us. That when we use the word ‘Communism,’ we kind of withdraw from it, emotionally. Or, if you are socially inclined, the Capitalist world of America and so on – again. So, one must be aware, very seriously, if you at all want to go into all this, which I’m not urging you to do, then, being aware that language is not driving us, then we can use words in their simplicity, in their meaning, without any emotional content. Then you and I are in constant communication. Right? Can you do this? Not tomorrow, now. Then we can proceed, together, not at a slow… but galloping along.	19:14 而在探询我们自己的过程中，我们同样必须非常清楚地明白：语言文字并没有在推动驱使我们。这样的话，当我们使用“共产主义”这个词时，在感情上，我们多多少少就能够置身事外了。或者如果你有社会主义的倾向，那么遇到美国的资本主义世界等等时，你也要这么做。所以我们必须非常认真严肃地保持觉察，如果你真的想要探究所有这些的话 ——我并没有在催促你们这样去做，然后，在知道语言文字并没有在推动驱使着我们以后，我们便可以来使用这些词语了 ——在很简单的层面上、在纯粹词义的层面上来使用它们，而不带有任何感情色彩。那时你和我就可以持续不断地沟通交流。对吧？你们能够这么做吗？不是在明天，而就是在「现在」。然后我们便可以一起前进了，不是缓慢地前行……而是疾驰向前。
20:56 So, if freedom is not all that, that is, there is only freedom when there is absolute non-identification with anything, with the church, with the gods, with beliefs, with the statue – you follow? – with nothing, then what are we, as human beings? Do you follow my question? I will go into it.	20:56 因此，如果「自由」并不是所有这些，换句话说，只有当完全不和任何事物相认同，不和教会、神明、信仰、神像所认同，那时才会有「自由」。你们明白了吗？不与任何事物相认同，那时我们作为「人类」又是什么呢？你们理解我的问题吗？我将会来探究一下它。
21:42 Caldo, hot!	21:42 （西班牙语）好热，太热了吧！
21:57 If we are not attached to anything at all and, therefore, under no influence – right? – under no pressure, then what is the whole meaning of existence? I wonder if you follow all this? Do you understand? Does somebody understand what I’m talking about? I’m sorry if you’re Spanish, or Italian, or French, that you can’t understand what is spoken in English, but, perhaps, this afternoon or tomorrow it’ll be translated in your own language, so please, have patience.	21:57 如果我们完全不执著于任何事物，从而不再受到任何影响——对吧？ —— 不再受到任何压力，那么我们存在的全部意义又是什么呢？我不知道你们是否跟上了所有这些？你们明白了吗？有人理解我在说什么吗？我很抱歉，如果你是西班牙人、意大利人或是法国人的话，那你就无法理解这些用英语说的东西了，但也许今天下午或者明天，它们会被翻译成你们国家的语言，所以请你们保持耐心。
23:04 We have filled our minds with all kinds of ideas of what we are – you are noble, ignoble, we are divine, we are experts – you know – filled ourselves. And this acceptance of what we are, is the result of the movement of thought. Right? I will have to go into this, again.	23:04 我们已经在头脑中塞满了各种关于“我们是什么”的观点 ——你是高尚的、你是卑鄙的、我们是神圣的、我们是专家——你知道的——塞满各种想法。而这种对于“我们是什么”的接受认可，它是思想活动的结果。对吧？看起来我得再来解释一下它。
23:50 If you have observed, whatever we do, act, emotionally or non-emotionally, all our activities are based on thought. Now, thought is limited. I do not know if you accept that, or if you’re aware of it. Why is it limited? We think it can do everything: climb the Everest, go to the Moon, go to the depths of the sea – thought is the most active, most important, vital thing in our life. All our education is to cultivate knowledge and encourage thinking clearly, if you can, and act from thought. 25:42 And thought has created not only the technological world, but also it has created wars, not only marvellous surgery but also, thought has created conflict between two human beings. Follow, these are facts. Thought has created the quick transportation. Thought, also, has created the destruction of all human relationships. And one must, if you’re at all serious, go into this question: why thought has become so urgently important? As we are talking together, you’re thinking. Right? You’re following, verbally. 27:03 So, the activity of thought is going on, trying to understand what’s being said, trying to judge whether it’s right or wrong, what value has it in daily life – you’re, all the time, enquiring with the instrument of thought. And thought has created heaven and hell, not only the Christian world of Hell and Heaven, but also, actual hell and heaven: the enormous poverty, the misery, the confusion, the uncertainty of existence.	23:50 如果你曾经观察过，你就会发现…… 无论我们做什么事，采取什么样的行动——不管是带着情绪还是不带情绪的，我们所有的活动都是基于「思想」的。然而，「思想」是局限的。我不知道你是否接受这一点，或者说你是否察觉到了这一点。为什么思想是局限的呢？我们觉得思想可以做任何事情：登上珠穆朗玛峰，登陆月球，潜入海洋的深处 ——思想是我们生活中最为活跃的、最为重要的、最有活力的事物。我们所有的教育都是在培养知识，鼓励人们去清晰有条理地思考 ——如果你能够做到的话，然后经由「思想」来行动。 25:42 「思想」不仅创造出了科学技术的世界，它同样也造成了「战争」，它不仅创造出了绝妙惊人的外科手术，思想同样也制造出了两个人之间的冲突。请跟上我的话，这些都是事实。思想发明出了那些快速便捷的交通工具。但思想也摧毁了所有的人类关系。而我们必须——如果你们真的很认真的话—— 我们必须去探究这个问题：为什么「思想」已经变得如此紧迫重要？当我们在一起交谈时，你也在思考着。对吧？你正在从口头文字上理解这些东西。 27:03 所以，思想的活动正在进行着，它试图去理解对方所说的东西，试图去判断它是否正确，以及它在日常生活中有什么价值 ——一直以来，你都是利用思想这个工具去询问探究。而思想也创造出了“天堂”和“地狱” ——不只是基督教世界中的天堂和地狱，也包括现实中的「天堂」和「地狱」 ——这个世界有着惊人的贫穷、苦难和混乱，对于生活的不确定感。
28:03 So, how is it that thought has created these problems, and thought thinks it can solve these problems. Right? And all the politicians are trying to solve our human problems through thought, either cunning, stupid, devious, dishonest, but still thought. Can thought solve these problems, which thought has created? Right? You understand my question? So, one must ask, what is the meaning of thinking? What is the source of all thought, not only yours, mine, or somebody else’s, the root of thought? If the root is limited, the outcome of that must also be limited. 29:40 Right? You can’t think thought will do something extraordinary, if the root is limited, all its activities must be limited. Right? So, what is the root, the very, very source of thought? Find out, sirs. I have asked the question, don’t wait for me to answer it. Then you accept what I’m saying, that would be disastrous. But whereas, if you’re really, passionately, urgently demanding to find out, you will find out what is the essence, the beginning of thought. I’ll point it out, don’t accept it.	28:03 那么，思想是怎么会制造出这些问题的呢？然后思想会认为自己可以去解决这些问题。是吧？所有的政客都在试图解决我们人类的问题 ——通过狡猾的、愚蠢的、歪门邪道的或是不诚实的思想来解决问题，但都仍旧是用「思想」来解决。那么思想能够解决这些它自己制造出来的问题吗？对吧？你们理解我的问题吗？所以，我们必须问一下：「思考」的意义是什么？所有思想的源头是什么？不只是你的思想、我的思想，或者某个其他人的思想，而是「思想」的根源是什么？如果那个“根源”是局限的，那它的产物必定也是局限的。 29:40 是吧？你不可能指望「思想」能够做出某些 “非凡惊人”的事情来 ——如果它（思想）的根源是局限的，它所有的活动必然也会是局限的。是这样吧？那么，「思想」的根源、它的源头是什么呢？先生们，请你们去发现它。我已经问了这个问题，请不要等我来回答它。这样的话你就会接受我所说的东西 ——而这将会是一场灾难。然而，如果你是真的、非常有热情的，急切地要求找到答案，那你就会找到它。「思想」的本质、「思想」的起源是什么。我将会来指出它，但请不要接受同意它。
31:05 The beginning of thought is the brain registering, danger or not danger, the pleasure and the fear. Right? The original man or the ape from which we have come, or some source from which we have come, that brain which is very, very old, ancient beyond words, it must have registered danger, death, fear, security. Right? So, the beginning of thought is the process of registration, which is memory. Right? We’re not saying anything extraordinary, these are facts. 32:43 And what has been registered is knowledge, knowledge of danger, knowledge of pleasure, knowledge of the fear between the two. And this accumulating process of knowledge, which is constant registration, day after day, centuries upon centuries, registration, which is the accumulation of knowledge, that knowledge is in the brain, and that knowledge, which is memory, and from that memory, thought is born.	31:05 「思想」的起源就是「大脑的记录」，大脑会记录危险的事物或不危险的事物，记录快乐和恐惧。对吧？我们人类是从原始人或猿人进化而来的，或者是从某个源头那里产生出来的，所以那个大脑是非常非常古老的，它古老得难以形容，它必定已经记录下了那些危险、死亡、恐惧、安全。对吧？所以，「思想」的起源就是这种「记录的过程」 ——也就是「记忆」。是吧？我们并没有在说什么很离奇的东西，这些都是事实。 32:43 而那些被记录下来的东西就是「知识」，关于危险事物的知识，关于快乐事物的知识，关于两者之间恐惧的知识。而这种知识的积累过程 ——也就是日复一日持续不断的记录，世世代代以来的记录，它就是在积累「知识」，这些知识就存在于大脑之中，而知识——它就是「记忆」，从这种记忆中，便产生出了「思想」。
33:41 Right? One moment. Sir, if you’re disagreeing with me, it’s all right. Don’t agree or disagree. We’re not arguing – show off who is clever, who is less clever. But we’re just enquiring, not asserting anything.	33:41 对吧？请稍等一下。先生，如果你不同意我的看法，这没有什么问题。不要表示同意或不同意。我们并不是在进行辩论 ——来炫耀谁更加聪明一点，或者谁不是那么聪明。我们只是在探询，而没有在断言任何事情。
34:24 So, memory, knowledge, is the outcome of the past. Right? So, the past is limited, knowledge is limited. You may have more, more, more but it’s always limited. And there have been people who say man can ascend only through knowledge, rise higher and higher and higher. The philosophers, the speculative, intellectual romanticists, say that knowledge is the essence of growth. Which is, the past will always remain. 35:48 The past, by accumulation, is evolution. As an acorn, a little thing grows into a marvellous, huge oak tree, so that same attitude, or that same example, is transferred to this accumulative knowledge, growing, growing, growing. We have never asked whether knowledge is limited and therefore can knowledge end and something begin? You understand my question?	34:24 所以，记忆、知识，它们都是「过去」的产物。对吧？而由于「过去」是局限的，所以「知识」也是局限的。你也许会拥有更多、更多、更多（的知识），但它永远都是局限的。曾经有一些人说：人类可以只通过「知识」来提升进化，提升至越来越高的层次。那些哲学家、思辨家、理性浪漫主义者，他们说「知识」就是成长的本质。也就是说：「过去」将会一直存在着。 35:48 「过去」在通过积累之后，就成了“进化”。就像一颗橡子，这么一个小小的东西，它却可以成长为一棵令人惊叹的巨大的橡树，所以同样的态度，或者说同样的例子，也被转移到了「知识的积累」上，知识不断增长、增长再增长。但我们从来没有问过：「知识」是否是局限的？「知识」是否能够结束，从而某种（新的）事物可以开启？你们理解我的问题吗？
36:42 So, thought born of memory, knowledge, is always, everlastingly limited. And our activities, therefore, are always limited – based on thought. Right? It’s not my argument. It’s not what I posit and start from there. But if you go into this yourself, not according to some professor, not according to some theoretician, psychologist, then if you do, you become second-hand human beings, which we are. But, whereas, if you look into yourself and go at it, surgically, not emotionally, then you will find out that thought because of its very limitation has created all the problems. 38:08 Right? Is this clear, between us or is this clear to yourself, not between you and me? All the scriptures, all the poems, all the literature, all the rituals, the gods, the images, everything, is the product of thought. Horrible idea, isn’t it, when you realise it.	36:42 因此，由于「思想」是源自于记忆和知识的，所以「思想」一直都是、并且永远都会是局限的。由此我们的行为活动也永远是局限的 ——因为它们是基于「思想」的。是吧？我并没有在争论什么。这并不是我假想出来的东西，然后从这种假想出发去争论。而是，如果你可以自己去探究它，不是根据某个教授的观点，也不是根据某个理论家、某个心理学家的观点 ——因为如果你这么做的话，你就变成了“二手人类”，而我们都是“二手人类”。然而，如果你可以去探究自己并且全力深入下去，如外科手术般精准，且不带情绪地去探究，那你就会发现：是「思想」因为其自身的局限性而制造出了所有那些问题。 38:08 对吧？这点清楚了吗？我们都清楚了吗？或者说，你自己清楚它了吗？而不是你和我有没有清楚它。所有的圣典、所有的诗歌、所有的文献、所有的宗教仪式、神明、神像，所有这一切都是思想的产物。当你意识到这点，这是一种很可怕的观点，不是吗？
38:46 So, when there is identification with something, thought is the process of identification, therefore, that identification limits, limits the energy, and that energy is used as an individual. Therefore, the individual becomes more and more limited, and his action then will be limited, obviously. Which is what is happening. England on one side, Europe on the other, America, Russia – racially, politically, religiously, in every way – all that is based on thought. 39:55 And is there an action please, we are enquiring, is there an action which is not based on thought? Therefore, an action which is not limited, confined, which means is there an action which is not based on knowledge, on memory, on remembrance? Don’t say, ‘That’s impossible,’ or ‘It is possible’ – we don’t know, we are enquiring, we are asking. Because in limited action, there is regret, mischief, pain, anxiety, whether you’ve done the right thing or the wrong thing – all that follows from limited activity, which is called ‘the individual.’ 41:18 And the individual, limited, he’s seeking the infinite. Theoretically, they can assert there is the infinite, but to find out, to come upon that infinite, that thing which is not measurable, one must go into the very, very depths of thought. And is there a possibility of action without registration? Got it?	38:46 所以，当有了与某个事物的认同，「思想」就是认同的过程，因此这种「认同」就会造成制约，限制能量，这种能量被加以利用而成为了“个体”。由此个体就变得越来越局限了，于是个体的行动也变得局限了 ——这是很显然的。这也是正在发生的事情。一边是英国、另一边是欧洲，一边是美国、另一边是俄罗斯 ——种族之间、政治上、宗教上，方方面面——所有这些都是基于「思想」的。 39:55 那么，是否存在着一种行动请注意，我们正在探询：是否存在着一种行动 ——它并不是基于「思想」的？由此这种行动便不会是局限的、受制约的，而它的意思就是：是否存在一种行动 ——它并不是基于「知识」、基于「记忆」、基于「回忆」的？不要说，“它不可能存在” 或者“它可能存在”，因为我们并不知道，我们只是在探询、我们只是在询问。因为在局限的行动中，存在着懊悔、伤害、痛苦、焦虑，无论你所做的是正确的事还是错误的事 ——所有这些东西都会从局限性的行为活动中产生出来，而我们把它称为“个体”。 41:18 而这个局限的“个体”，他却在寻找“无限之物”。人们可以从理论上声称存在着“无限之物”，然而要找到、要邂逅这个「无限之物」、这个「不可度量之物」，我们就必须去探究「思想」的最深处。所以是否可能存在一种没有「记录」的行动呢？明白了吗？
42:00 You understand? You tell me something, you use cruel words and you call me a name. I’m hurt. And most human beings in the world are hurt, not only physiologically but much more psychologically. You’re hurt, aren’t you? And from that hurt, we do all kinds of things – resist, withdrawal, fear, violence, bitterness and so on, so on, so on. This hurt is, if you examine it, very closely, is the movement of thought in the formation of the image. Right? Thought has created an image about oneself, that you’re beautiful, that you’re intellectually marvellous, that you are, etc., etc. And when you use an ugly word, angrily, point it out, that image gets hurt, which is, thought – please, follow all this – that thought, which has created an image about itself, that image gets hurt. 44:01 Which is, can one live, right throughout life, without a single hurt? Then, only, there’s freedom, then there is only sanity. Let me finish, first, and you’ll have next week or week after, you can discuss with me. During these talks, and there are four more talks, if you don’t mind, let the speaker… let us talk, together. But when the talks are over, there’ll be discussions or dialogues. Then we can bombard each other.	42:00 你们理解了吗？你对我说了一些话，你说了非常恶毒的话语，还辱骂我我受到了伤害。这个世界上绝大多数人都是伤痕累累的，不只是外在生理上的伤害，而更多的是心理上的伤害。你也受到过伤害，不是吗？而由于受到了伤害，我们便做出了各种各样的事情 ——抗拒、退缩、恐惧、暴力、怨恨等等等等。而如果你非常密切地检视一下这种伤害，（你会发现）这种伤害是构建意象过程中的思想活动。对吧？思想已经创造出了关于某人自己的意象：比如：你是美丽的、你智力超群、你是什么、你是什么……等等。而当你使用恶毒的话语愤怒地指出真相后，那个意象便受到了伤害，也就是说：思想…… ——请跟上所有这些—— 思想已经创造出了关于它自己的意象，是那个意象受到了伤害。 44:01 也就是说，我们是否能够活一辈子，而不受到丝毫的伤害？只有那样，才会有「自由」，只有那样，才会有「健全」。让我先讲讲完吧，在下周或者下下周的时候，你们可以和我讨论。而在这几次演讲中…… 这样的演讲还有四场，在这些演讲中，如果你们不介意的话，请让演讲者让我们一起来交谈。而在这几次演讲结束以后，我们会举行讨论会或进行对话。那时我们就可以互相“轰炸”了。
45:19 So, is it possible not to register the hurt? You understand my question? Because all our brain is in constant registration, and when you say something ugly to another, that is registered, that’s called ‘hurt.’ And is there a possibility of not registering, at all? Do you follow my question? Therefore, we have to go into the question, why the brain registers certain things and avoids other registration? And it never avoids the individual concepts, images, structures, ideas. 46:52 One must obviously register when you want to drive a car, to do certain kinds of skills, you must register. If you want to be a good technician, you have to have a great deal of technological knowledge stored up in the brain, which is a process of registration. Right? So, knowledge as a process of registration is, in certain fields, absolutely necessary. Right? That’s clear.	45:19 所以，我们是否可能不去记录伤害？你们理解我的问题吗？因为我们全部的大脑都在不断地记录着，你们理解了吗？当你对另一个人恶语相向，那些话语便被记录下来了，它被称为“伤害”。那么，我们是否可能完全不去记录呢？你们理解我的问题了吗？因此，我们必须要来探究一下这个问题，那就是：为什么大脑要去记录某些事情，而避免记录另外一些事情呢？它总是会去记录那些个人的概念、意象、结构、观点。 46:52 当你想要驾驶一辆汽车的时候，很显然你必须要有「记录」，当你想要做某种“技术活”时，你必须去记录。如果你想要成为一名优秀的技术人员，你就必须拥有大量的技术知识，这些技术知识被储存在大脑里 ——而这就是一个记录的过程。对吧？所以「知识」作为一个「记录的过程」它在某些特定领域中是绝对必要的。对吧？这点是很清楚的。
47:44 Then, why should there be any other form of registration? Do you understand my question? I have identified with myself, with my image. That image is put together by thought: the thought of another, parents, education, whatever it is, society, culture. That image has been put together by thought, which is a continuous process of registration. And is that necessary? You follow my question? It’s your question. Why is there, psychologically, inwardly, this constant activity of accumulating round the centre, which is the self? Right? 49:16 Which is, obviously, limited, which has been cultivated by thought and, therefore, essentially limited. When I think about my own occupation, how I must be happy, how I must be a success, I must be this, I must be that – it’s all the movement of thought, which is bringing about constant limitation, throttling, narrowing down, which we call ‘individual.’ And that individual has activities, naturally. Those activities are essentially mischievous because they’re limited.	47:44 然而，为什么还要有其他形式的记录呢？你们理解我的问题吗？我已经把自己认同于我的自我形象（意象）了。而这个意象是由思想所拼凑起来的：别人对我的看法、父母对我的看法、教育，无论什么东西——社会、文化。这个「意象」是由思想所拼凑起来的 ——而它就是一个持续不断的记录的过程。然而它是必需的吗？你们理解我的问题吗？它是你们的问题。为什么在心理上、在内心，我们会有这种围绕着这个中心 ——也就是「自我」——的持续不断的积累活动？对吧？ 49:16 因为它很显然是局限的，它是由思想所培育起来的 ——因此从本质上来说，它是局限的。当我想着我自己的工作，我要如何才能稳获幸福，我要如何才能稳获成功，我必须成为这样的人，我必须成为那样的人 ——这些全都是思想的活动，而这种活动造成了持续不断的制约、限制、狭隘化——而我们将其称为“个体”。这个“个体”会有各种活动——这是很自然的。而那些活动本质上来说是有害的 ——因为它们是局限的。
50:10 Now, we’re asking, knowing logically, sequentially, reasonably, that any form of registration, apart from the registration of necessities, technological knowledge and so on, every other form of registration, limits action, and from that limited action, comes all our misery. And that limited thought says, ‘I’m going to meditate, I’m going to practise, I’m going to find God,’ or whatever you like to call it. You might just as well call it ‘dog’ – as good. So, thought is the registration of an incident, accident. 51:27 Anything that is registered must be limited, and that limitation, in its action, will create a great deal of mischief. So, we’re asking whether it is possible not to register, except in certain fields, not to register at all? This is real meditation, you understand? Nothing else is meditation. Because when there’s no registration, the whole brain cells themselves have become transformed. It’s not the same old brain cells, there’s new things taking place, because there’s no need for registration. You understand?	50:10 而现在，我们在问：在逻辑地、循序地、理性地知晓了这一点后：即任何形式的记录 ——除了记录那些必需的事物之外：比如技术知识，等等—— 除此之外，任何其他形式的记录都会制约行动，而从那种局限的行动中，便产生出了我们所有的苦难。而这个局限的思想在说： “我要去冥想，我要去修炼，我要去找到上帝，” 或者无论你喜欢把它（上帝）称为什么。你或许也可以把它称为“狗” ——这也是一样的。所以，「思想」就是对事件和意外的「记录」。 51:27 而任何被记录下来的东西都必然是局限的，而那种「局限」在其活动过程中，就会造成大量的伤害。所以我们正在问的是：我们是否可能不去记录 ——除了在特定领域中记录一下，其他情况下则完全不去记录？这才是真正的「冥想」，你们理解了吗？其他任何事情都不是「冥想」。因为当没有了「记录」，全部的脑细胞就会发生「转变」。它将不再是之前那些陈旧的脑细胞，某些新的事物发生了，因为「记录」是不需要的。你们理解了吗？
52:34 That is, thought is measure. Right? Thought is the outcome of time, which is the accumulated memory of five, ten million years, centuries – whatever you like to… It is the result of time. Right? So, thought is time. Time is limited, obviously. That is, there has been yesterday, today, and tomorrow. But thought can say, ‘There is still further,’ but it’s still the movement of thought, in time. Right?	52:34 换句话说，思想就是「度量」。对吧？思想就是「时间」的产物，也就是五百万年、一千万年以来所积累起来的记忆，或者无数世纪积累起来的记忆 ——无论你喜欢怎么说它就是「时间」的结果。对吧？所以，思想就是「时间」。而「时间」很显然是局限的。换句话说，存在着昨天、今天和明天。但思想可以说，“还存在着更遥远的未来”，但这仍旧是思想在「时间」之内的活动。是吧？
53:38 So, we’re asking, is there a possibility of no registration at all, except there? What’s your answer to that question? You understand? This is a tremendously important question. Don’t, kind of, brush it aside as an intellectual something or other or this or that. Because, so far, we have lived in action which is always bringing sorrow, misery, confusion, uncertainty and fear, regrets. Right? We have lived that way. It is our heredity, it’s in our genes, it’s our conditioning. And is it possible never to register at all and, therefore, no identity with anything? 55:05 You understand? The moment thought identifies with something, with a piece of furniture, with a shirt, with a blouse, with a house, with a wife, with a husband, girl, or whatever it is, that limits thought and, therefore, that limitation is born out of registration. That is, as long as you remain a Catholic, you are limited. As long as you say, ‘Well, I’m an Indian,’ or ‘I’m this, I’m that,’ you’re limited, and any action, action of love, any action, must be limited.	53:38 所以，我们正在问：是否有可能完全不去记录 ——除了在特定领域？你对于这个问题的回答是什么？你们明白了吗？这是一个无比重要的问题。请不要有点儿……不把它当回事儿，把它当成某种思维智力层面的玩意儿，当成这个或那个。因为迄今为止，我们都是活在「行动」中的 ——这种行动总是会带来痛苦、苦难、困惑、不确定、恐惧与后悔。对吧？我们就是这样子生活的。这是我们的遗传，这是刻在我们基因里的东西，这是我们的「局限」。那么，我们是否可能永远都不去记录，从而不与任何事物相认同吗？ 55:05 你们懂了吗？一旦思想与某个事物相认同 ——与一件家具、与一件衬衫、与一件短上衣、与一幢房子、与妻子、与丈夫、与女朋友，或者任何事物相认同的话—— 它便会制约思想，因此，那种「局限」是源自于「记录」的。换句话说，只要你仍旧还是一名天主教徒，那你就是局限的。只要你还是说，“嗯，我是一个印度人”，或者“我是这个，我是那个”，那么你就是局限的，而任何行动——包括“爱的行动”—— 任何行动都必然是局限的。
55:55 So, if you’re serious, you’re asking this basic question, a fundamental question, which you must answer: is there a possibility of not registering at all? That is, is there an action not born of thought? Do you understand my question? All our action is based on thought, with all its consequences. Now, we’re asking, is there an action, is there a way of living in daily life, in which thought doesn’t operate? You understand? This is a very serious... It isn’t a question that you just play around with and discuss and all the rest of it, one has to find out. 57:15 That means you must put passion into it, vitality, energy to find out. Those who do research, scientific research, or technological research, they love it, it’s their life, their blood, their bread-and-butter, everything is first. Then their wife, their family, comes second. In the same way, we’re asking, passionately, is it possible? I say it is. I’ll show it to you. Please don’t accept it because you don’t know what it means, so don’t come to any conclusions, don’t translate what is going to be said into your own terminology – then you’re lost! 58:28 Then you are driven by the language, which you know. Therefore, you become a slave to language. But we are using language, not your conclusion, my conclusion or his – just words, without any circus round it. Then we can communicate, happily and easily.	55:55 所以，如果你很认真严肃，你就会问一下这个很基本的问题、这个根本性的问题——而你必须要回答它：那就是：我们是否可能完全不去记录呢？换句话说：是否存在着一种并非源自于「思想」的行动？你们理解我的问题吗？我们所有的行动都是建立在「思想」及其所有的影响之上的，而现在，我们要问：是否存在一种行动、是否存在一种日常生活中的生活方式，在其中是没有「思想」的运作的？你们理解了吗？这是一个非常严肃的这并不是一个你可以随便糊弄一下、讨论一下等等的问题，我们必须把它搞清楚。 57:15 这意味着你必须为此付出你的热情、活力、能量，以此去发现它。那些做研究的人——做科学研究或者技术研究的人，他们热爱这件事，这是他们的生活、他们的血液、他们的生计，它是头等重要的事。那时他们的妻子、他们的家庭就排到第二位去了。而我们也是以同样的方式，充满热情地在问：它可能吗？我说它是可能的。我将会向你们来展示它。但请不要接受这种说法，因为你并不知道它意味着什么，所以不要妄下定论，也不要把我即将要说的东西翻译成你自己那套术语 ——这样的话你就迷失了！ 58:28 这样的话，你就会被你所熟知的那些语言文字所推动驱使。由此你就变成了语言文字的奴隶。而我们正在使用的语言文字，它并不是你的结论、我的结论或者他的结论 ——它们只是词语文字，而没有任何花哨的噱头。这样我们便能够愉快地、轻松容易地交流了。
59:00 There is an action, a total, complete, holistic, whole action, in which thought doesn’t interfere, at all. Are you waiting for me to tell you? That’s rather cheap! I do all the work, the speaker does all the work and you just listen and say, ‘Yes, I agree with that.’ What’s the point of that? But, whereas, if you really, you know, desperately want to find out, like an unhappy man, a drowning man – you know, there’s desperation to find some kind of thing to hang on to, so he can be saved. There, he exerts all energy. And that’s what we’re doing.	59:00 存在着一种「行动」—— 一种完全的、彻底的、整体性的、完整的行动，在其中完全没有任何思想的干扰。你们在等着我来告诉你们吗？那样就太廉价了！我做了所有的工作 ——演讲者做了所有的工作，而你们只是随便听听，然后说，“是的，我同意它”。这又有什么意义呢？然而，如果你是真的……你瞧，如果你是拼命地想要去搞清楚它，就像一个不幸福的人、一个溺水之人—— 你知道的，他会拼命地想要找到某个可以抓住的东西，这样他才能得救。他会为此而倾尽全力。而这就是我们正在做的事。
1:00:30 First of all, do we see very clearly, each one of us, wherever we are, whatever our situation whatever our conditioning, however neurotic we are – most of us are – do we see, very clearly, that thought, under all circumstances, is limited? Not a verbal acceptance of it, but an actual fact, which you, in your blood, see it, irrevocably? Then, if you see that, not as an idea, not as a conclusion, not a thing reasoned out and therefore it is, if you do, it’s still thought. So, when you realise that thought is completely, totally, wholly limited, and from that limitation all activity, whatever type it is, must be limited and therefore, in human relationship it creates havoc, misery, from there, you ask the question. You understand? 1:02:18 Not if you haven’t done all this. And you can do all this, instantly, not take time, years, months. Then you can ask, is there a perception, devoid of memory, devoid of remembrances, totally divorced from the past, is there an observation and, therefore, out of that observation action? Do you follow what I am saying? You look all puzzled. All right, I’ll take it up, again.	1:00:30 首先，我们是否非常清楚地看到了 ——我们每一个人，无论我们是哪里的人，无论我们境况如何，无论我们条件如何，无论我们是多么神经质 ——我们大多数人都是神经质的—— 我们是否非常清楚地看到了这一点：那就是「思想」在任何情况下都是局限的？这不是一件口头文字上接受它的事情，而是一个真切的事实，而你已经从骨子里明白了这一点，它是不可更改的。那时，如果你看到了这一点 ——不是作为一个观点，不是作为一种结论，也不是推论出来的东西，因为这样它还是如果你这么做了，它仍旧是「思想」。所以，当你意识到「思想」是完全地、彻底地、全然地受限的，而从这种「局限」中产生出来的所有行为活动 ——不管是什么类型的活动——必然也都是局限的，所以它便会在人类关系中制造出灾难混乱与痛苦不幸，由此你才会问上面这个问题。你们理解了吗？ 1:02:18 但如果你还没有做过所有这些事，那你就不会问了。而你可以立即就去做所有这些事，而不用花费时间，花费数年、数月的时间去做它。那时你就会问：是否存在着一种剥离了记忆、剥离了回忆、并且完全脱离了「过去」的洞察？是否存在着这样一种观察，因此从这种观察中便会产生出行动？你们跟上我在说的东西了吗？你们看起来都很困惑。好吧，让我再来解释一下它吧。
1:03:25 You understand? Our action is based on memory. Either ideological memory, a Utopian memory, or memories of past actions which have left certain marks on the brain, and all such activity must be continuously destructive in human relationship. If I love you because you have been pleasant to me, which is, you have given me something, sexually or this way, or that, which is from memory, with the pleasure of it, I say, ‘I love you.’ So, is there a love, which is not born of memory, which is not the result of give and take, which is not sensation? 1:04:53 Obviously, there must be. There should be. Or this is all we know? Let’s put it that way. This thing that we call love, is all this. And that love breeds jealousy, anxiety, possessiveness, attachment, you follow? And out of all that, there is great misery. And is that misery love? Don’t. Don’t say, ‘No’ or ‘Yes.’ If that is not love, and you have totally abandoned jealousy, anger, all that, that which is left, completely, that is love. Right? 1:05:54 So, in the same way, if one understands the whole movement of thought, as measure and time, and born out of the past and, therefore, endlessly curtailed, limited, narrow. If you see that, very clearly, and, therefore, abandon it, then you have what one may call insight. I’m going to go into this, very slowly.	1:03:25 你们能理解吧？我们的行动都是基于「记忆」的。要么是意识形态的记忆，某种乌托邦的记忆，要么就是过去行为的记忆 ——这些行为在大脑中留下了某些印记，而所有这类活动必定会不断地破坏人类关系。如果我爱你是因为你一直对我很好，也就是：你给了我某些东西，性方面的满足，这样或那样的东西，所以经由这种记忆，经由快乐的回忆，我便会说，“我爱你”。那么，是否存在着一种并非源自于记忆的「爱」呢？这种「爱」并不是给予和索取的结果，这种「爱」并不是感官感觉。 1:04:53 很显然，这种「爱」必然存在，它应该存在。还是说，我们所知道的“爱”就只是这些东西？让我们这么来说吧。我们所谓的“爱”，它就是上述这些东西。而这种“爱”滋生了嫉妒、焦虑、占有、执著，你们跟上了吗？而经由所有这一切，便产生出了巨大的「苦」。但这种「苦」，它是「爱」吗？请别……请不要回答说“不是”或者“是”。如果那不是「爱」的话，你就会彻底抛弃嫉妒、愤怒，所有这些东西了，而那时所有剩下来的东西，它就是「爱」了。对吧？ 1:05:54 所以，同样的，如果我们理解了思想的全部运动 ——思想就是「度量」和「时间」，它是从「过去」之中诞生出来的，因此它会永远不断地带来缩减、制约和狭隘化。如果你非常清楚地看到了这点，从而抛弃了它（思想），那么你就会拥有我们所说的「洞察」了。我会慢慢地来深入探讨它，
1:06:45 Insight: insight, we mean by that word, according to the dictionary, to have a sight in something, an immediate perception of truth in that which is being talked about. That is, you have talked to me about the limitation of thought. You have talked to me. I’ve listened to you with all my energy because, perhaps, there is a new way of living, a new way of action, and I’ve realised my actions have always been bringing such sorrow, confusion and misery. 1:07:45 And I’ve listened to you. And you say to me, ‘Have you really seen the truth that thought is limited?’ the truth of it, not the idea of it. Seeing the truth of it, is to have insight. Have you got it? That insight is not memory, is not idea, is not something out of the past. You see directly the truth of it and from that there is action, which is complete.	1:06:45 洞察：我们所说的“洞察”这个词的意思，根据词典的解释，它是指“能够看到某个事物”，能立即洞见到真相 ——也就是正在谈论的东西的真相。也就是说：你和我谈论了「思想的局限性」。你和我谈论了它。而我付出了全部的能量在聆听你，因为也许存在着一种全新的生活方式、一种全新的行为方式，我意识到我的行动一直以来都只是带来了痛苦、困惑和不幸。 1:07:45 我聆听了你的话语。你对我说， “你是否真的看到了这个事实真相 ——即思想是局限的”？是关于它的事实真相，而不是关于它的观点理念。看到它的事实真相——这就是「洞察」你们明白它了吗？这种「洞察」并不是记忆、也不是观点理念，它不是某种来自于「过去」的东西。而是你直接看到了它的真相，从这之中就会产生出行动了 ——这种行动是完整的。
1:08:44 So, do you, as a human being, and you who are the representative of all humanity – so you are the world. If you see the truth of this, then that truth will act in the world. You don’t act.	1:08:44 那么，你是否……你是人类的一员，你也代表了全人类 ——因此你就是这个世界。如果你看到了这个事实真相，那这个真相就会在世界上“行动”起来。而不需要你去做出什么行动。
1:09:19 Quelle heure est-il?	1:09:19 （法语）现在几点了？
1:09:24 Q: Twelve.	1:09:24 提问者：十二点了。
1:09:35 K: So, we have seen the mischief of thought which is limited, which has created the individual, and the opposite of non-individuality which is totalitarianism, authority and all the rest of it. We have also seen that thought, stored up in the brain as memory, knowledge, those very brain cells have become limited. For God’s sake, see this. Of course, obviously. But when you have an insight into all this, the very brain cells are no longer limited. The brain cells are functioning totally differently. 1:10:35 Do this, please, do it! Don’t say, ‘Yes, how marvellous,’ ‘What a wonderful speech that was’ – which is all romantic nonsense, emotionalism. That has nothing to do with actuality. Can you see the truth that knowledge has its place, technologically, and has no other place, psychologically, which is to register? So, if you see the truth that registration, like hurt, brings narrow action, limited action, from which hate, violence and all the rest of it. If you see the truth of it, then you’ll have an insight, you’ll have an insight into the whole movement of thought. 1:11:59 Therefore, thought then limits, naturally, itself and remains there. You don’t have to say, ‘I must stop thinking’ – that’s too silly. When you understand thought as measure, measure being comparison and the whole – it isn’t time, now. I must stop. So, if this is clear then we’ll talk about other things, on Sunday.	1:09:35 克：所以我们已经看到了「思想」所造成的灾祸伤害 ——思想是局限的，它已经创造出了“个体性”，以及它的对立面“无个体性” ——也就是极权主义、权威，等等这些东西。我们同样也看到了：「思想」以记忆和知识的形式储存在了大脑中，因此大脑细胞本身已经变得局限了。看在上帝的份上，请看到这一点吧。当然了，这是显而易见的。然而当你洞察到了这一切后，那时脑细胞本身就不再受限了。脑细胞会以截然不同的方式运作。 1:10:35 请你们这样去做吧，去做它！不要说，“是的，这是多么奇妙”， “这是一场多么精彩的演讲” ——这全都是毫无意义的浪漫空想和感情主义，它和「现实」毫无关系。你们能够看到这个真相吗 ——那就是「知识」在技术领域有其地位，但在其他领域则没有它的位置 ——比如心理领域，也就是那种「心理上的记录」。所以，如果你看到了这个真相：那就是「记录」——比如记录伤害—— 它带来了狭隘化的行动、局限性的行动，从这些行动中便产生出了仇恨、暴力等等这类东西。如果你看到了这个真相，你就拥有了「洞察」，你洞察到了思想的全部运动。 1:11:59 因此，那时思想自然就会约束自己，然后待在属于它的地方了。你不用说什么“我必须停止思考” ——那就太蠢了。当你明白了“思想就是度量”，而「度量」就是「比较」，以及所有那些……现在并不是讲它的时候。我必须就此打住了。所以，如果这点已经清楚了，那么周日我们就可以来谈点别的东西了。

🢁