Krishnamurti Subtitles home


SA80Q3 - 第三次问答会
瑞士,萨能
1980年7月25日



0:27 Krishnamurti: May I repeat again what we said the other day about ‘question’? The word derived from Latin which means to seek. Not find an answer but to seek, to seek the answer in the question itself, not away from it. And in answering these questions, we are seeking or exploring together. The speaker may explain, but together we are entering into these questions. Together we are seeking to find out the truth in the question, not away from it. So we are sharing the question together and trying to find a true, correct answer. 我可以再次重申我们那天关于'问题'的解释吗? 这个词起源于拉丁语,意思是去寻求。 不是去找答案,而是去寻求 在问题本身中寻求答案,而不是往外求。 而在回答这些问题时 我们是在一起寻求或一起探索。 发言者可以解释 但我们要一起进入这些问题... 我们一起去寻求去找出 问题中的真相,而不是往外求。 因此,我们是在一起分享问题 并试图去找出一个真正,正确的答案。
2:01 We are a bit – five minutes early, I hope you don’t mind. 我们稍微提早 - 五分钟开始,我希望你门不会介意。
2:14 1st Question: I am dissatisfied with everything. I have read and thought a great deal, but my discontent with the whole universe is still there. What you talk about makes me more discontented, more disturbed, more troubled. I now feel frustrated, antagonistic to you. What is wrong with what you are saying? Or is something wrong with me? 我对一切都不满意。 我阅读和思考了很多 但我不满整个宇宙的情绪依然存在。 你的演说让我变成更加不满 更加不安,更加困扰。 我现在感到沮丧,与你对立。 你的演说到底有什么问题? 或者是问题出在我本身?
3:02 May I read it once more? I am dissatisfied with everything. I have read and thought a great deal, but my discontent with the whole universe is still there. What you talk about makes me more disturbed, more discontented, more troubled. I now feel frustrated, antagonistic to you. What is wrong with what you are saying? Or is something wrong with me? Right? 我可以再念一次吗? 我对一切都不满意。 我阅读和思考了很多,但我不满 整个宇宙的情绪依然存在。 你的演说让我变成更加不安 更加不满,更加困扰。 我现在感到沮丧,与你对立。 你的演说到底有什么问题? 或者是问题出在我本身? 对吗?
3:57 I think the more one observes the world, what is happening – overpopulation, pollution, corruption, violence – and observing all that practically in every country in the world... And one is trying to find an answer to all this. That’s one part of the question. 我想如果我们观察世界越多 世间诸事 - 人口过多,污染 腐败,暴力,而观察到那一切 几乎发生在世界上每一个国家里... 而我们试图去寻找一个答案来解答这一切。 这是问题的一部分。
4:32 And the other is: The questioner says, ‘I am discontented, not only with what you are saying, but with everything around me: with my job, with my wife, with my husband, with my girlfriend and so on, so on, or boy, or whatever it is. I am discontented’. And that is the common lot for most of us. Either it becomes a consuming flame, or it is dampened down by seeking some kind of satisfaction in various activities of life. And discontent, instead of allowing it to become a consuming flame, most of us almost destroy it. We are so easily satisfied. We are so gullible. We are so ready to accept. And so gradually, our discontent withers away, and we become the normal, mediocre human beings without any vitality, without any energy, without any urge to do anything. 另一部分是: 提问者说:'我不满 不仅是你的演说 而是我周围的一切: 我的工作,我的妻子,我的丈夫, 我的女友,等等,等等,或男友,或任何东西' '我不满'。 而这是我们大多数人的共同点。 它或者成为一个烧毁我们的火焰 或者被扑灭下来 通过寻求某种满足感 在生活的各种活动中。 而不满 与其让它成为一个烧毁我们的火焰 我们大多数人几乎都选择摧毁它。 我们也是很容易满足... 我们很容易上当... 我们很愿意去接受... 所以我们的不满逐渐消失 而我们变成正常,平庸 没有任何的活力,没有任何能量的人类 没有任何意愿去做任何事情。
6:40 But the questioner says, ‘I have been through all that. I have read a great deal. I’ve thought about life a great deal, probably have been all over the world, and I have not found an answer to this discontent’. And people who are thoughtful, aware what is happening around them and in themselves, aware that politics, science, religion has not answered any of our deep, human problems. They have technologically evolved, developed, and so on, but inwardly I am discontent. And listening to you as the speaker, I am more disturbed, more discontented and antagonistic to what you are. What is wrong with you and what you are saying? Or there is something wrong with me. 但是提问者说,我已经经历了这一切。 我阅读了很多... 我对生命思考了很多 大概也已走遍了全世界 我却还没找到解决这个不满的答案。 而有思想的人们 知道发生在他们周围和本身的事情 知道政治,科学,宗教 并没有解决任何我们深切的,人类的问题。 他们有技术发展 开发,等等,但在我的内心里,却还是不满。 而听了你的演说,我更加不安 更加不满,而与你的立场对立。 你到底有什么问题,而你是在讲些什么? 或者,是我本身有问题。
8:24 First of all, let us be very clear that when there is discontent, is that discontent per se – you understand? – per se, in itself, or you are discontented with something? Vous avez compris? I may be discontented with the world, with the philosophies, with the various instructions of various religions. But that discontent is with something, towards something or in something. It is not the discontent which has no cause and therefore can be ended. As we said the other day, where there is a cause, there is an end. Has this discontent a cause, and therefore it can be resolved, ended? Or this discontent has no cause? Please, go with the speaker, we are sharing this question together. As we said, one can be discontented with so many things, as human beings are: better house, better this and better that. You understand? The moment there is a measure, there must be discontent. You have understood this? I wonder. I’ll go on, you’ll find. 首先让我们弄清楚 当我们有不满时 是不满本身... 你明白吗? - 本身,它自己 或者是你对什么不满? 你明白吗? 我可能对世界不满 对哲学不满 对各宗教的各种指令不满。 但那是对某样东西的不满 对某件事或针对某些事物的不满。 它不是没有起因的不满 它可以被解决。 正如我们那天所说,哪里有起因,那里就有结束。 这个不满有没有原因 因此它也可以被解决,结束吗? 或者,这个不满并没有原因? 请跟进发言者 我们一起去分享这个问题。 正如我们所说,我们可能对很多事情都不满 人们总是想要,更好的房子,更好的这个,更好的那个... 你明白吗? 当我们有了衡量,就会有不满。 你懂了吗? 我不知道。我会继续,你会发现...
10:45 I am glad you are antagonistic to what is being said. Instead of accepting and sitting quietly and saying: yes, but – I am antagonistic to you, I don’t accept! You are causing me much more disturbance. I feel frustrated, therefore I am urged towards this sense of antagonistic attitude. So we must be very clear whether this discontent has a cause, and if it has a cause, then that discontent is seeking contentment, satisfaction, gratification. So this discontent creates the opposite – to be contented, to be satisfied, to be completely bourgeois, like the Communists are. And if that is this search, desire... If that is what you want, when you are deeply discontented to find something with which you can be completely contented, never to be disturbed, then that discontent will find a way to gather satisfaction, and therefore that discontent is withered, gone. 我很高兴你对我所说的持有相反的意见。 而不是表面接受和安坐在那里,心里却说 是的,但是 - 我与你对立,我不接受! 你使我更加困扰... 我感到沮丧,因此我 呼吁你们对我的这种对立态度。 因此,我们必须非常清楚这个不满是否有一个原因... 如果它有一个原因,这个不满就是 在寻求满意,满足,痛快。 因此,这个不满创造了相对的 去满足,去寻求满意 要成为完全的资产阶级,与共产党一样的。 如果是这样的搜索,渴望... 如果这是当你深感不满时的需求 去寻求这个 能够使你完全满足,永远不再困扰 那不满就会找到一个方法 去收集满意 因此这不满就会干枯,消失了。
13:05 Perhaps that is what most of us are doing. Probably all of you, if I may point out, you are discontented. You have been to this, to that, to that talk, to that person and so on, so on, and you perhaps come here wanting some kind of satisfaction, some kind of certainty, some kind of assurance, some gratifying truth. And if that is so, then you will find satisfaction very easily, which most of us do – in the kitchen, in some aspect of religion, or enter politics – Left, Right, Centre, or Extreme Left, Extreme Right – and carry on. This is what generally happens with all of us. And so you gradually, inevitably, narrow down the mind, make the mind small. And the capacity of the brain is so immense. You have reduced it to mere satisfaction. Vous avez compris? 也许这就是我们大多数人所做的事情。 也许你们全部,如果我可以指出,你们都不满。 你们去听这个,那个,那个讲座 去听那个人,等等,等等 也许你来到这里希望能获得某些满足感 某些确定,某些保证 某些可喜的真相。 如果是这样 那么你会很容易获得满足 这是我们大多数人 - 在厨房... 在某些宗教方面,或进入政界... 左派,右派,中间或极左派,极右派 - 如此类推。 这是我们大家普遍上的所作所为。 所以你渐渐地,不可避免地缩小你的心 让心变得细小。 而大脑的容量本来如此巨大... 你却把它缩小成只剩下满足感。 你明白吗?
15:08 And if you are not satisfied with anything, if you are discontented with the whole universe, as the questioner puts, not be dissatisfied because you haven’t got a house, or you haven’t got money – you know, at that level. So if this discontent has no cause, and therefore it is a discontent in itself. Not because of something. Is that clear? Am I making this... We are getting together, are we making this clear? That is, I am discontent; if I am seeking contentment, that is very simple and very easy. But if I am totally, completely dissatisfied with everything: with the government, with the religion, with science, politics, everything. And such people are rare, such people have this flame of discontent. And perhaps such a person comes here, listens, reads, hears, and that discontent increases, it becomes all-consuming. So what shall we do? You understand the question clearly? What shall we do with a human being who is totally and completely dissatisfied with all the structure of thought? 如果你不满意任何东西... 如果你对整个宇宙都不满 正如提问者所说 不满意不是因为你没有房子 或者你没有钱 - 你知道,在那个水平上。 所以这个不满,因为没有原因 所以它本身就是一个不满... 不是因为别的东西? 清楚了吗? 我有没有说清 我们正在一起,我们对这个清楚了吗? 也就是说,如果我不满,而我要求的是满足 这就很简单,很容易。 但是,如果我完完全全不满意所有一切: 不满意政府,不满意宗教 不满意科学,政治,所有一切。 而这样的人是罕见的 这样的人有这样的不满火焰。 而且,或许这样的人来到这里 聆听,阅读,听闻 而那不满继续增加,终于耗尽一切。 所以,我们该怎么办? 你对这问题清楚吗? 我们应该如何去对待一个 完完全全不满的人 不满所有的思维结构?
17:57 As I said, such a person is a very rare human being. Such a person one can meet because he is – please, listen carefully – he is in an immovable state – right? He is not seeking, he is not wanting, he is not pursuing something or other. He is aflame with this thing. And the speaker is also immovable – right? You understand what I am saying? What he says is so, not because he is dogmatic, superstitious, romantic, or self-assertive. He says that if you know, comprehend your consciousness with its content, and the freeing of that consciousness from its content, there is a totally different dimension. He has said this for sixty years, not because he has invented it, it is so. He has discussed with scientists, philosophers, great scholars, and so on. And they have acknowledged, some of them, that it is so. Scientists seek that which is beyond through matter. And the speaker says, human beings with their brain and heart and mind are matter – process. And instead of looking at matter outside you, enquire into this matter who you are. And you can go much further, and more, he has said, the ending of sorrow, the ending of fear, and so on. And there are these two entities: one – are you following all this? – one completely discontented, nothing satisfies him – words, books, ideas, leaders, politics, scientists – nothing. And so he is in a state of immobility. And the other is equally immovable, will not budge, will not yield. Are you following all this? What happens? 正如我所说,这样的人是一个非常罕见的人。 我们能遇到这样的人 因为他是 - 请仔细听 他是处于一个不能动摇的状态 - 对吗? 他不是在寻求,他不期望 他不追求任何东西... 他因而燃烧自己。 而本发言者也是不可动摇 - 对吗? 你明白我的意思吗? 他所说的是那样 不是因为他教条化 迷信,浪漫,或自我主张。 他说如果你知道 理解你的意识和其内容 并把意识从其内容释放出来 这是一个完全不同的维度。 他说这个已说了六十年 不是因为他发明了它,它本来就是这样。 他曾与科学家,哲学家 伟大的学者等讨论过。 而他们之中有些承认,它是如此。 科学家们通过物质寻求超越。 而发言者说,人类与他们的大脑 和心与思想是物质 - 过程... 与其去观察身外的物质 调查物质关于你是谁... 你还可以走得更远,而他说得更多 忧伤的结束,恐惧的结尾,等等。 而有那么两个实体,一个... 你有跟进这一切吗? - 一个完全不满 什么东西都不能满足他,言词,书籍,思想,领导 政治,科学家 - 没有东西... 所以,他是在一个不动的状态中。 而另一个是同样不能动摇 不会让步,不会屈服。 你有跟进这一切吗? 什么会发生?
21:44 When two human beings – one completely, from his depth of mind and heart, dissatisfied, and the other, from the depth of his mind and the depth of his heart, and so on, says, ‘It is so’. These two entities meet. You understand what I am saying? It is not romantic, it is not something invented, something out of imagination. This is so. One feels antagonistic to the other, which means he has already moved. I don’t know if you follow it. He has not remained completely dissatisfied. The moment he says, ‘I am antagonistic to you or your talk and all that’, he has moved away from what is burning. Therefore he has already softened. I wonder if you understand this. And the other has no antagonism. He says, ‘It is so’. When this person meets the other without antagonism, without wanting something from the speaker, then he is alike. Have you understood this? I wonder! No, I see you don’t understand this. 当两个人 一个心脑完全深度不满的人 和另一个在大脑深处 以及内心深处等都说'就是这样'的人。 这两个实体相遇。 你明白我的意思吗? 这不是浪漫的,它不是某个发明 某个想象出来的东西。 就是这样。 一个人觉得与他人对立 这就意味着他已经动摇。 我不知道你是否跟进着。 他没有保持完全不满意。 当他说... '我与你对立,与你的谈话对立,等等’ 他就乖离了燃烧点。 因此,他已经软化。 我不知道你是否明白这一点。 而另一个人并没有对立。 他说,'就是这样'。 当这个人遇到另一个没有对立的人 没有希望从发言者之处获取任何东西,那么他也是一样的。 你明白吗? 我不知道! 不,我看你们并不明白这一点。
24:10 If this discontent develops antagonism, it is no longer discontent. Right? And so he is aflame with what he calls discontent. It’s a flame. And the other too is aflame. You understand? Then both are the same. Fire is a fire. It is not your fire and my fire, it is fire. When the fire is dampened, then the two are different. Vous avez compris? 如果这种不满 发展成对立 它就不再是不满。 对吗? 因此,他是被他所谓的不满燃烧着。 这是一个火焰。 而另外一个人也正在燃烧。 你明白吗? 那么,他们两者是相同的。 火是火。 它不是你的火,我的火,它是火。 当火被削弱时,那么这两人是不同的。 你明白吗?
25:34 So if the speaker may ask: are you, as a human being, living in this terrible world, and if you have followed, they are saying within 50 years the earth will be almost uninhabitable. What is your condition of discontent? Is it merely puerile, childish, immature? Or if you are a human being totally aflame with discontent, never developing a reaction against that, being frustrated, being antagonistic, but let that flame be alive, then both are the same. 因此,如果发言者可以问: 你,作为一个人,生活在这个可怕的世界里 如果你听闻过,他们说在50年内 地球将几乎无法居住... 什么是你的不满状态? 它是否仅仅是幼稚,儿戏,不成熟? 或者如果你是一个被不满完全燃烧的人 从来没有作出任何举动去应对 被挫败,被对立 只是让那火焰燃烧 那么两者是相同的。
27:24 2nd Question: One realises deeply the importance of awareness of one’s inner and outer actions, yet one slips into inattention so easily. Must there be a Krishnamurti – the books, the cassettes – to keep us alert? Why? Why this gap between understanding and immediate action? 我们深入的认识到察觉的重要性 察觉我们的内在和外在运作 但是我们却那么容易滑入不专注之中。 难道必须有一个克里希那穆提 那些书籍,录音带,来让我们产生警惕? 为什么呢? 为什么会有这理解和立即行动之间的差距?
28:05 I’ll read it again if I may. One realises deeply the importance of awareness of one’s inner and outer actions, yet one slips into inattention so very easily. Must there be a K – the books, the cassettes – to keep us alert? Why? Why this gap between understanding and immediate action? 请让我将再读一遍。 我们深入的认识到察觉的重要性 察觉我们的内在和外在的运作 但是我们却那么容易滑入不专注之中。 难道必须有一个K,那些书籍,录音带,来让我们产生警惕? 为什么呢? 为什么会有这理解和立即行动之间的差距?
28:39 Right? You have understood the question? Why is inattention so easy, so common? It is taking place all the time. And to be aware of what is happening inside the skin and what is happening outside the skin. Sorry to use that word. And must there be somebody to remind you of it? Right? That is the question. 对吗?你理解问题了吗? 为什么不专注是那么容易,那么普遍? 它每时每刻都会发生。 而要去察觉在皮肤内所发生的 以及在皮肤外所发生的。 (笑声)对不起,用了这个词。 难道必须要有人去提醒你吗? 对吗? 就是这个问题。
29:28 Clothes don’t make a man – right? By putting on good clothes you don’t become a man. By putting on robes – monks’, you don’t become a saint. So either – let’s see very carefully – either the clothes remind you that you must be constantly aware, then you depend on the clothes, whether the clothes be some kind of – it is unimportant. Or without this outward garment, can one be aware without slipping into inattention? And why is there a gap between understanding, realizing, comprehending, and immediate action? That is the question – right? 衣装不能成就一个人 - 对吗? 穿上好衣服并不能使你变成一个男人。 穿上长袍 - 和尚的长袍,你也不会变成一个圣人。 无论是 - 让我们非常仔细的去看 无论是衣服在提醒你 提醒你必须不断去察觉 那么你就是依赖衣服 不管是某种形式的衣服...这并不重要。 或没有这外在的衣装 我们能不能去察觉而不滑入不专注呢? 而为何有一个差距处于了解 认识,理解,和立即行动之间呢? 是这个问题 - 对吗?
31:12 What is it to be aware? Is this awareness – whatever it is, we will go into it presently – is it to be cultivated, developed, through practice, say, ‘I must be aware’, and meditate on that awareness, and have some kind of thing to remind you of it constantly, whether a picture, a shirt which is most uncomfortable, a robe that irritates you, so that you are constantly reminded: to be aware. So let’s find out what it means to be aware. We can’t know everything that is happening in the world – right? What the politicians are doing, what the Secret Service is doing, what the army is doing, what the scientists who are helping the army, the government, are doing. We don’t know what your neighbour is doing, nor what your wife or husband is doing inwardly. So we can’t know everything. But we can know, or become aware of this movement inwardly. Now, is that movement different from the outer movement? We must be very clear on this point. Is that which is outside – the pollution, the corruption, the chicanery, the deception, the hypocrisy, the violence – is that very different from us, from each one of us? Or it is a movement out and a movement in? Vous avez compris? Right? It is a constant movement, like the tide going in and out. Can one – please, listen – can one be aware of this movement? Aware being know, recognise, see, observe. Or in the very process of observation, of this flow, this unitary movement, take choice in it, make choice in this movement: I like this, I don’t like that. I am a subject of Britain? and I like to be British, or a Swiss citizen. It gives me a passport, I can travel all over the world etc., etc. So in this movement, is the awareness based on choice, the observation? You are following all this, sirs? Watch it, sir, as you are sitting there, would you if I may suggest, would you watch it, aware. And if you are, your reactions are so quick, you say, ‘I better have that, and not that’. Right? 什么是察觉? 这个察觉 - 无论它是什么,我们将进入讨论它... 它是不是培育 发展,通过实践,说,'我必须察觉' 然后去默想这个察觉 并且让某些东西不断地提醒你关于它 可能是一张图片 一件最不舒适的衬衫 一件令你反感的长袍 让你不断地被提醒,去察觉。 因此,让我们去了解什么是察觉的意思。 我们不可能知道世界上所发生的一切 - 对吗? 政客在做什么 秘密组织在干什么,军队在搞什么 科学家正在帮军队做什么 政府,在做... 我们不知道你的邻居正在做什么 也不知道你的妻子或丈夫的内心在做什么。 因此,我们不可能知道一切。 但是,我们可以知道,或察觉我们内心的运作。 现在,这运作与外在的运作有何不同? 我们必须非常清楚这一点。 那些外在的 污染,腐败,强辩 欺骗,虚伪,暴力 和我们是否很大的不同,和我们每个人不同? 或者它是一个外在和一个内在的运动? 你明白吗? 对吗? 它是一个不断的运动,就象涨涨退退的海潮。 我们能不能 - 请听好 - 我们能不能察觉这个运动? 察觉到存在,知道,识别,观看,观察。 或在观察过程本身中 这流程中,这单一的运动中 作出选择,在运动中选择: 我喜欢这个,我不喜欢那个。 我是英国的一分子,我喜欢作英国人 或瑞士公民。 它给了我一本护照,我可以周游世界,等等,等等。 因此,在这个运动中 察觉是不是建立在选择,观察的基础上? 各位,你们在跟进这一切吗? 各位请看着它,你坐在那里,你能不能 如果我可以建议,你能不能看着它,察觉。 如果你正在做,你的反应是那么快,你说... '我应该拥有那个,而不是那个'。 对吗?
36:02 So can you observe this movement, which is you and the world, and the world is you, this movement, can you observe without any choice? That observation is awareness, which you don’t have to cultivate, which you don’t have to have somebody to remind you of it, books, tapes, and all the rest of the business. Once you see for yourself the truth of this, that this movement out there and the movement in here are essentially similar; they may vary a little bit here and there, but it is the same movement that has created the world, the society, the army, the navy, the scientist, the politician – that movement is you. And can you seriously, not deceive yourself – no fun then. If you want to deceive yourself, you are welcome, but it doesn’t lead anywhere. But if you want to go into it very, very deeply, awareness without choice, and the observation of this movement without any direction. That requires not compulsive, lopsided, neurotic awareness, saying, ‘I am aware, I am fully aware’, and you know jolly well he is not, because you see it by his actions, by his attitude, by his values. He already lives in the illusion that he is aware. One has to be extremely watchful. 所以你能不能观察这个运动 就是你和世界,世界就是你 这个运动,你能不能不作任何选择地观察? 这样的观察就是察觉 你不必去培养它 无需任何人去提醒你 书籍,磁带和所有的其它一切。 一旦你自己看到这个真相 外在的运动和内在的运动 基本相同 它们可能会这里一点不同和那里一点不同 但它是创造了世界的同一运动 社会,陆军,海军,科学家 政客,那些运动都是你。 你能不能认真地,不要欺骗自己 - 那没有什么好玩了... 如果你还要欺骗自己,欢迎你继续下去 但它不会导致任何成果... 但是,如果你想非常,非常深刻地进入它 没有选择的察觉 以及没有任何方向的观察运动。 那就不需要强迫性的 畸形的 神经质的意识 去说:'我察觉,我完全察觉' 你完全知道他并非如此 因为你从他的行动,他的态度可以看出来 从他的价值观看出来... 他已经活在他已察觉的幻想中。 我们必须非常警惕。
38:41 And naturally, that attention, awareness cannot be constant, cannot. But to know it is not constant – you are following this? – to be aware that it’s not constant is to be aware of inattention. I wonder if you understand, sir. You understand what… I don’t know what I have said, but I will come back to it. 当然那专注力,察觉力不可能永远不变 不能。 但是,知道它不是不变的... 你们跟进吗? - 察觉它不是不变的 就是察觉不专注。 我不知道各位明白吗? 你明白我所说的,或不能理解我所说的 但我迟些再来谈它。
39:25 It is... To be aware of inattention is attention. Right? And as one cannot reasonably, sanely say, ‘I am going to be alert from the moment I wake up till the moment I sleep’ – you can’t. Unless you are a neurotic, unless you practise, practise and say, ‘Yes, I am going to be aware, I am going to be aware’, then it becomes words, it has no meaning. But if you see that this attention, awareness cannot be maintained all the time, which is a fact, then inattention, not being attentive, has its value, has its meaning. You understand? Because in attention you discover that you are not attentive. You have got it? Good. 这是... 察觉不专注就是专注... 对吗? 正如我们不能合理,正常地说... '我将在那一刻开始警惕 我醒来直到我睡着那一刻' - 你不能... 除非你是一个神经质的,除非你去练习 练习然后说:'是的,我将要察觉... 我将要察觉...' 之后它变成言词,它没有任何意义。 但如果你看到这个专注 意识不能持久,它是一个事实 那么这个不专注,不能专注,就有其价值,有它的意义。 你明白吗? 因为在专注中你会发现 你没有专注。 你明白了吗?很好。
40:47 And the questioner says, why is there a gap between understanding and immediate action? What do we mean by understanding? I understand that the Communist world, Russia, has entered Afghanistan. I understand that. I understand what terrible thing they have done, not only Russia, but all countries have done this. And the present state in Afghanistan is terrible. I understand it. What has been the cause – the desire to expand, dominate, and so on. I understand it. Somebody explains the nature and the structure of the atom, I listen carefully, I say, ‘Yes, I understand what you are saying’. I listen to some philosopher, and I say, ‘Yes, I understand the structure of your words and theories’. That is, all that is intellectual discernment – right? And that is the function of the intellect – to discern, to evaluate, to analyse. And at that level you say, ‘I understand’. And the questioner asks: why is there a gap between understanding of that kind and immediate action? The word is not the thing – right? K is not the word, or you are not the word. So that is the first thing one has to deeply understand: never the word is the thing, never the explanation is the actuality – right? Now, understanding takes place not merely intellectually only, when the mind is quiet. You are telling me something, something serious, philosophic, – doesn’t matter whatever it is – you are telling me something serious. And if my mind is chattering, wandering away, I can’t fully comprehend what you are saying. Right? So I must listen to you, not translate what you are saying, or interpret what you are saying, or listen partially, because I am frightened of what you might say. Then the mind is disturbed, moving, changing, is volatile, whereas if I really want to listen to what you are saying, the mind must be naturally quiet. I hope it is now. Then there is a depth of understanding which is not merely intellectual, verbal. 而提问者说 为什么在理解和立即行动之间会有差距? 我们所说的理解是什么意思? 据我所知,在共产主义世界 俄罗斯,已进入阿富汗。 我明白那些。 我明白他们做了一件可怕的事情 不只是俄罗斯,所有其他的国家都这样做。 而阿富汗目前的状况很糟糕。 我理解它。 一直以来是什么原因 - 扩张的欲望 在支配,等等。我理解。 有人向我解释原子的性质 和结构,我仔细聆听,我说... ‘是的,我明白你所说的话'。 我聆听某些哲学家,然后我说... ’是的,我理解你的言词和理论的结构‘。 也就是说,所有那些都是知性的识别 - 对吗? 这是智力的功能 去辨别,评价,分析。 而在那个水平,你说,'我明白'。 而提问者问道: 为什么会有一个差距处于那种理解 与立即行动之间? 名词并非实物 - 对吗? K并不是那个名词,或者你并不是那个名词。 所以我们首先必须深刻地认识 名词从来就不是实物 解释从来就不是实事 - 对吗? 现在,理解产生了 不仅是在知性方面,当心是宁静时。 你告诉我某些东西,很重要的事 哲学的,不管它是什么 你告诉我严重的东西。 如果我的心是喋喋不休,向外游走 我就不能完全理解你在说什么。 对吗? 所以,我必须聆听你的话 不翻译你的话 或解释你的话,或只听一部分 因为我害怕听到你可能会说的东西。 然后,我的心不安,移动,改变 不稳定,但如果我真的要聆听 你所说的话,我的头脑必须是自然宁静。 我希望现在是如此。 那么就会有一个深度的理解 它不仅是知性,言语。
45:28 When there is that profound perception of what has been said, false or true, and one can discover the truth in the false – all right? – then in that state of silent observation, action is naturally immediate, there is no gap between the two. 当有了那样深刻的感受 关于所说的话,或真或假 我们可以在虚假中发现真相 - 对不对? 然后在那寂静的观察状态中 行动自然是立即的 没有两者之间的差距。
46:07 Look, sir, when you are standing on a precipice, you don’t argue, your intellect doesn’t say let’s discern, let’s think about it, you jump away from the danger – right? There is immediate action, which is a form of self-protection, which is healthy, natural, normal. You don’t stand in front of a bus which is running you down, or stand looking at a dangerous snake or animal. It is a natural, instinctive response to save yourself, unless you are drugged and say, ‘Well, I am going to stop the tiger’ – then, of course, jump out of the window and show you how strong I am against gravity, and so on. But if perception is complete – you understand? – which can only take place when the mind is quietly listening, not accepting, not denying but listening, then that perception and action are the same. It is not perception and I’ll wait for action. Right? May I move to the next question? 你看,各位,当你站在悬崖上 你不会去争论 你的智力不会说让我们去辨别 让我们想想看,你会跳远离危险 - 对吗? 你立即采取行动 这是一种自我保护的形式 它是健康的,自然的,正常的。 你不会去站在一辆将要撞倒你的公交车前面 或站着观看一只危险的蛇或动物。 这是一种自然的,本能的反应自救 除非你被迷幻而说... ‘好吧,我要去阻止那只老虎' - 那当然就 跳出窗外,让你自己知道 你有多强大的反引力,等等。 但是,如果觉知是完整的 - 你明白吗? 那只能发生于,当心在静静地聆听之时 不去接受,不去否定,只是聆听 那时觉知和行动是同一的。 而不是觉知 - 我等下才行动。 对吗? 我可以进入下一个问题吗?
48:31 3rd Question: I have understood the things we have talked over during these meetings, even if only intellectually. I feel they are true in a deep sense. Now, when I go back to my country, shall I talk about your teachings with friends, etc.? Or since I am still a fragmented human being, will I not produce more confusion and mischief? 我已经明白我们谈过的东西 在这些聚会里,哪怕只是知性的了解。 我觉得它们在深层的意义上是正确的。 现在,当我回到我的国家时 我应该跟朋友以及其他人谈论您的教诲吗? 或者,因为我仍然是一个支离破碎的人 我会不会制造更多的混乱和伤害?
49:12 It’s really a very good question, we will go into it. You understand it? 这真是一个非常好的问题,我们将进入讨论它。 你明白了吗?
49:21 I have understood the things we have talked over during these meetings, even if only intellectually. I feel they are true in a deeper sense. Now I go back home to my country, shall I talk about your teachings with friends, and so on? Or since I am still fragmented, will I not produce more confusion and mischief? I have understood the things that you have talked about, the things. You know the word ‘thing’ comes from Latin, res, which is thought. Go into it. The thing: the statue, the painting, the books, the edicts, the sanctions of the church, and so on – all of it – are things. And thing is the movement of thought which created the things: the statue, the painting, the symbol, the cross – you know, a dozen things. Now, has one understood not the thing but the nature of thought, how it arises, and what is its activity? If that is fully, deeply comprehended, then the questioner says: When I go back to my home, shall I talk about the teachings, your work? Since I am still fragmented, will I not create more mischief and confusion? 我已经明白我们谈过的东西 在这些聚会里,哪怕只是知性的了解。 我觉得它们在深层的意义上是正确的。 现在,当我回到我的国家时 我应该跟朋友以及其他人谈论您的教诲吗? 或者,因为我仍然支离破碎 我会不会制造更多的混乱和伤害? 我已经明白你所谈过的东西 那些东西。 你知道'东西'这个词 是来自拉丁语,水库,就是思想。 进入思量它。 东西,雕像,绘画,书籍 诏书,教会的法令,等等 这一切,都是东西。 而东西都是思想的运动 它创造了东西:雕像,绘画 符号,十字架 - 你知道,很多东西。 现在我们是否明白,不是关于东西 而是关于思想的本质 它怎样生起,它的活动是什么? 如果已经全面地,深刻的理解这些 然后提问者说: 当我回到家乡时 我是否应该谈论你的教诲,你的作业。 由于我仍然是支离破碎 我会不会造成更多的危害和混乱?
51:57 You know, this is really a very good question. All the religious talk – the priests, the gurus, the whole works – are promulgated by fragmented human beings – right? Though they say, ‘We are high up’, they are still fragmented human beings. Right? And we are spreading all that – I don’t know if you realise it. I may say: I am a complete human being. I know heaven, I know illumination, I know – all the rest of it. You understand? The moment you have said, ‘I have attained’, you are a fragmented human being. Right? The priests have said it, only moderately. And we are spreading what they are telling us because we are fragmented human beings like them, therefore we accept another fragment. I wonder if you see this. 你知道,这真的是一个非常好的问题。 所有的宗教演说 祭司,上师,整个作业 都是由分裂的人类所颁布的 - 对不对? 虽然他们说'我们高高在上’, 他们仍然是分裂的人类。 对吗? 而我们正在散播着所有这些... 我不知道你是否意识到这一点。 我可能说我是一个完整的人。 我知道天堂,我知道光明,我知道 - 其他的一切。 你明白吗? 当你说‘我已经获得'之时 你就是一个分裂的人。 对吗? 祭司们曾经这样说,只是温和地说。 而我们去散播他们所说 因为我们也是如同他们一样分裂的人类 因此,我们接受了另一个碎片。 我不知道你是否看到这一点。
53:42 And the questioner says, asks: I have understood what you have said, somewhat, partially, not completely, I am not a transformed human being. I understand. And I want to tell others what I have understood, what I have understood. I don’t say I have understood the whole works, I have understood a part. I know it is fragmented, I know it is not complete, I am not interpreting the teachings, or the work, I am just informing you what I have understood. What is wrong with that? But if you say, ‘I have grasped the whole damn thing, and I am telling you’, then he becomes the authority, the interpreter, the chairman of the committee, and such a person becomes a danger, he corrupts other people. But if I have seen something which is true, – I am not deceived by it – true. I feel in that there is a certain affection, love, compassion, I feel that very strongly. Naturally, I can’t help but go out – I mean, it would be silly to say I won’t. But I warn my friends, I say, ‘Look, be careful, don’t put me on a pedestal’. You haven’t put me on a pedestal. This pedestal is only for convenience, which doesn’t give the speaker authority whatsoever. But as the world is so corrupt, and human beings who are tied to something or other – to a belief, to a person, to an idea, to an illusion, to a dogma – they are corrupt. And that corruption speaks. And we also are somewhat corrupt, so we join the crowd. 而提问者说,问... 我理解你所说的某些,一部分 不完整,我还不是一个蜕变了的人。 我明白。 而我想告诉别人我所理解的 我所理解的。 我不敢说我已经理解了整个作业 我理解了一部分。 我知道它是破碎的,我知道它是不完整的 我不是去解释教义,或其作业... 我只是通知你我懂了。 那有什么不对呢? 但如果你说,'我已掌握了整个该死的东西 我现在告诉你’ - 那么他就成为权威 解释者,委员会主席 而这样的人变成了危患,他会腐化其他人。 但是,如果我看到一些正确的东西... 我不被它所骗,真的。 我感到其中有一种的亲切,爱 慈悲,我强烈地感觉到。 当然,我忍不住想要出去... 我的意思是那将是愚蠢的,如果说我不想。 但我警告我的朋友们,我说... '你看,要小心,不要把我置于一个基座上'。 你还没有把我安在基座上。 这个基座只是为了方便而已 并没有赋予发言者任何权威。 但因为世界这样的腐败 而那些人类被捆绑于各种的 信仰,人物,理念,幻想 教条,他们都是腐败的。 而这腐败操控全局。 而我们也是有点腐败,所以我们也参与其中。
56:41 If you see the beauty of these hills, the river, the extraordinary tranquillity of a fresh morning, the shape of the mountains, the valleys, the shadows, how extraordinarily everything is in proportion, not made by the painter. Seeing that, won’t you write to your friend? You say, ‘Come over here, look at this’. Then you are not concerned about yourself but about the beauty of the mountain. You understand? 如果你看到美丽 这些山之美 河之美,一个清新的早晨之清幽 高山,大谷,阴影的形态 一切都那么异常的比例均衡 不是由画家所造作。 看到那些,你难道不会写信告诉你的朋友吗? 你说,'来这里吧,来看这些'。 那你就不是在关心自己 而是关心这山之美。 你明白吗?
57:49 4th Question: What do you mean when you ask us to think together? Do you intend that everybody who listens to you should think with you at the same time? Don’t you think this is acting as a guru, leading people to follow your ideas, thoughts and conclusions? 当你要我们一同思考时,你是什????么意思呢? 你是否要每个聆听你的人 都必须与你一同思考? 难道你不觉得这是以大师的身份 引导人们去追随你的理念,思想和结论吗?
58:15 This is rather a bore! What do you mean when you ask us to think together? Do you intend that everybody who listens to you should think with you at the same time? Don’t you think this is acting as a guru, leading people to follow your ideas, thoughts and conclusions? I wish you had never heard the word ‘guru’. That is a discredited word. You don’t know what it means. I believe the true meaning is: one who dispels ignorance, not adds the guru’s ignorance to you – you understand? – but one who dispels ignorance, not the ignorance of books, but the man who, unknowing himself, acts. That is the meaning of the word ‘guru’. It has got other meanings too, which we won’t go into. And there have always been western gurus from the ancient times. You understand? The priest, acting between you and whatever he calls God, or the saviour. This has also existed in India. And the questioner says: when the speaker asks to think together, are you not setting up yourself as a guru? So let us examine what it means to think together when the speaker says ‘think together’. 这相当烦人! 当你要我们一同思考时,你是什????么意思呢? 你是否要每个聆听你的人 都必须与你一同思考? 难道你不觉得这是以大师的身份 引导人们去追随你的理念,思想和结论吗? 我希望你从来没有听过'大师'这个词。 这是一个不可信的词语。 你不知道它意味着什么。 我相信其真正的意义是,一个驱散了愚昧的人 不是把大师的愚昧加在你身上 - 你明白吗? 而是一????个驱散了愚昧的人 不是书本的愚昧 而是那个不知自我而运作的人。 这是'大师'这个词的含义。 它也有其他的意义,我们却不再赘述。 自从远古时代以来,也一直有那些西方的大师。 你明白吗? 传教士 作为你和他所说的上帝或救世主之间的桥梁。 这也存在于印度。 而提问者说 当发言者要求大家一起思考时 不也是把自己设立为一个大师吗? 因此,让我们来看看什么是一同思考 当发言者说'一同思考'。
1:00:48 He very carefully explained each time that it is not accepting what the speaker is saying. It is not agreeing. It is not to accept the ideas, the conclusions which he may have. The speaker, in fact, has no conclusions. But he says think together in the sense: let’s both of us observe together. Observe, and let’s find out what it means to observe. That doesn’t give him any authority. You can make him into an authority, which would be unfortunate, but he doesn’t accept any authority, or have any authority, or denies any kind of following, disciples. If he is accepting conclusions, ideals, and so on – have you – and is accepting disciples, then he is in a state of corruption, whoever it is. And for the last sixty years, I have been saying this. 他每次都很仔细地解释 那不是接受发言者的话。 它不是去同意。 它不是去接受理念 结论,这些他可能都有。 发言者其实并没有结论。 但是,他说一起思考是表示 让我们一起去观察。 观察,并让我们去找出什么是观察。 这并没有赋予他任何权力。 你可以把他当成权威 这将是不幸的 但他不接受任何权力,或拥有任何权威 或拒绝任何追随者,弟子。 如果他去接受结论,理想,等等,拥有那些 以及接受弟子,那他已处于在腐败的状况 不管他是谁。 而在过去的60年里,我一直都这样说。
1:02:27 So please don’t make me into a guru, and I won’t accept you as a disciple, because the disciple destroys the guru, the guru destroys the pupil. Yes, swallow that pill! 所以,请不要把我当成一个大师 我也不会接受你为弟子 因为弟子会毁灭大师 大师会毁灭学子。 是的,把那些虚荣吞掉!
1:02:51 So there is no sense of authority in this. And when he says think together, it is very simple: if I am prejudiced, if I have all kinds of nauseating, compulsive, neurotic conclusions, and I say let’s think, which means I want to force it on you. But he says constantly: together, which means share together what we are observing: out there and in here. That’s all. 所以这里没有任何形式的权威。 而当他说一同思考时,它是非常简单: 如果我有偏见,如果我有各种恶心的 逼迫的,神经质的结论,而我说,让我们去思考 那意味着我要把它强加于你。 但是他不断地说,一起 那意味着一起分享,我们所观察到的 外在的,和内在的。 就是这样而已。
1:03:38 And this desire, this longing for somebody to tell us, that is the root of it. Somebody to tell us how to live, how to love, how to think. That is, education has been how to think: You must think this way. And most of us, unfortunately, young and old, long for some shelter, the more romantic, the more pleasurable, the more satisfying, the better it is. Apparently, we seem to be incapable of standing alone. You know that word ‘alone’ means all one. When you are really alone, not contaminated, not corrupt because you are attached to something. Then you are alone because, being free, you are that whole human entity, human world, but we are frightened to be alone. We all want to be with somebody, either with a person, or with an idea, an image. You know what it means to be alone? It is not solitude, which is necessary, it has its own beauty, to walk alone in the woods, to walk alone along the river, not hand in hand with somebody or other, but to be alone – solitude – which is different from aloneness. If you are walking by yourself, you are watching the sky, the trees, the birds, the flowers and all the beauty of the earth, and also perhaps you are also watching yourself. As you casually watch the woods and the trees and the flowers, you are also casually watching yourself as you are walking along. Not having a dialogue with yourself, not carrying your burdens with you, you have left those at your home. 而这个欲望 这渴望有人来告诉我们... 这是它的根。 有人来告诉我们如何去生活 如何去爱,如何去思考。 也就是说,教育是教我们如何去思考: 你必须这样的思考。 而遗憾的是我们大多数人,青年人和老年人 渴望某种庇荫 越浪漫,越爽快 越令人满意,它就越好。 显然,我们似乎无法独自站立。 你知道'独自'这个词是指所有一切。 当你真正孤独时,没有受到污染 不腐败,因为你不执着任何东西。 那么,你孤独是因为你已经解脱 你是整个人类的实体,人的世界 但我们却害怕孤独。 我们都希望能与某些人 无论是一个人或一个想法,一个图像。 你知道孤独意味着什么吗? 它不是独处,那是必要的 它有它自己的美,独自行走在树林中 独自行走在河岸上 不是与某人或其他人携手同行 而是独自一个人 - 独处 它与寂寞不同。 如果你是自己一个人走,你看着天空 树木,飞鸟,花朵 和所有地球的????美 或许你也看着你自己 当你随意观看森林和树木和花朵 你也随意地看着自己 当你正走着时。 并没有与自己对话 没有携带你的负担 你把那些都留在家中。
1:07:23 So solitude reveals your loneliness, your vanity, your sense of depression, and so on, so on. And when you have finished with solitude, there is the other, which is not a conclusion, which is not a belief, which is not doing propaganda, telling you what it means to look. That is not propaganda, that is not pushing you in any direction. Because when you are directed, when you are guided, then you become a slave, and therefore you lose totally freedom from the very beginning. Freedom isn’t at the end, it is at the beginning, contrary to what the Communists say. That freedom can only be given to the disciplined, who know how to live, and so on, they are the dictators to tell us how to live, as the gurus, and so on, do, so we become their slaves. And where there is no freedom, there is no love and truth. 所以独处能揭发你的寂寞 你的虚荣,你的压抑感,等等,等等。 而当你不想再独处,就会有其他 它不是一个结论,它不是一种信仰 它不是做宣传 告诉你观看是什么意思。 那不是宣传 不是把你推往任何方向。 因为当你被定向 当你被引导 你就成为一个奴隶 而你从一开始就完全失去自由。 自由不在终点,它是处于开始之时 这与共产党所说的相反... 他们说自由只能给予有纪律的 懂得如何生活的人,等等 他们是告诉我们如何去生活的独裁者 大师等也是这样,所以我们变成他们的奴隶。 而哪里没有自由,那里就没有爱和真理。
1:09:27 Shall we go on with one more question? You aren’t tired? 我们可以再讨论一个问题吗? 你们不累吗?
1:09:35 5th Question: Why does sex play such an important part in each one’s life in the world? 为什么性爱扮演如此重要的一部分 在世界上每个人的生活中?
1:09:48 Why does sex play such an important part in each one’s life of every day? 为什么性爱扮演如此重要的一部分 在每个人每一天的生活中?
1:10:02 Why do you ask me? Don’t laugh it off. Why does it play such an important part in your life? 你为何问我? (众笑) 不要一笑置之。 它为什么在你生命中扮演一个重要的角色?
1:10:30 You know, there is a particular philosophy, specially in India, called Tantra, part of Tantra, which encourages sex. They say: through sex you reach Nirvana. It is encouraged. I won’t go into all the horrible details of it, so that you go beyond it, and you never do. And sex used to be taboo, keep it quiet, for God’s sake, don’t talk about it. But now... I remember hearing on the television, saying, ‘Sex at any time, at any place, but be careful what you eat’! 你知道有一个特殊的哲学 特别是在印度,称为密宗,密宗的一部分 就是鼓励性爱。 他们说,通过性爱你们能达到涅槃。 它被鼓励。 我不会去讨论它所有的可怕细节 以便你去超越它,而你也永远不会去做。 性爱曾经是禁忌 对于它要保持静默,老天爷,不要去谈论它。 但是现在... 我记得曾在电视上听到... '在任何时间,任何地点做爱 但要小心你所吃的'! (众笑)
1:12:11 Why has sex become so important in our life? All the ads, of naked ladies, half-dressed ladies, and so on, so on. Why has society, not only at the present period, but also always, why has sex been so deeply embedded in man, apart from producing children – I am not talking of that. Why? Probably it is the greatest pleasure a human being has. And in demanding that pleasure, there are all kinds of complications. A volumes have been written about the complications, the explanations, and the psychological, etc, etc. But they have never gone into this question, I have not been told, they may have, they have never asked this question, why human beings have made this thing so colossally important in their life. Why? You could answer it probably better than I can. 为什么性爱在我们的生活中变得如此重要? 所有裸体女人的广告 半裸女人,等等,等等。 为什么社会 不仅在现代,一直以来也是 为什么性爱如此深植于人心呢? 除了生孩子,我不是在谈这一点。 为什么呢? 也许它是一个人最大的乐趣了。 而追求那种乐趣 就会有各种复杂的并发症。 大量的文章记载了其复杂性 相关的解释和心理,等等,等等。 但是他们从来没有深入讨论这个问题 我没有被告知过,他们可能有 他们从来没有问过为什么 人类把这回事 看得如此庞大重要,在他们的生命中。 为什么呢?你们可能回答得比我更好。
1:13:58 Let’s go into it, shall we? I am not telling you about it, you know it better, we are investigating, looking, observing, asking. As we say, it may be one of the greatest pleasures, and freedom in that pleasure. Right? Our life is in a turmoil. Our life is constant struggle, nothing original, nothing creative – I am using that word very carefully. The painter, the architect, the wood carver, he may say: it is creative. The woman who bakes bread in the kitchen, kneading it, they say this is creative also. And sex is also creative, they say. So what is creation, what is it to be creative? You understand? The painters, the musicians, Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, and the Indian singers with their devotion – they say that is the act of creation. Is it? We have accepted it – we have accepted Picasso as a great painter, great creator, putting one nose on three faces, or whatever it is. I am not – please, I am just… I am not denying it or being derogatory, – anything like that – I am just pointing out. This is what is called creation. But if you enquire, doubt, question, is that creativeness? Or creativeness is something totally different. That is, you are seeing the expression of creativeness – right? In the painting, in a poem, in a prose, in a statue, in music – that is expressed. Expressed according to his talent, to his capacity, It may be great capacity or a very small capacity. It may be modern rock or Bach. Sorry to compare the two! They are really quite incomparable, but doesn’t matter. 让我们进入讨论它,好吗? 我不是要告诉你关于它,你知道的比我更好 我们是去调查,寻找,观察,询问。 正如我们说,它可能是最大的乐趣之一 以及获取那乐趣的自由。 对吗? 我们的生命是一团混乱。 我们的生活是不断挣扎奋斗 完全没有特性 完全没有创意 - 我是非常谨慎地使用这个词。 画家,建筑师 木头雕刻师,他可能会说那是创造性的。 那个在厨房烤面包的女人,搓揉它 他们也说那是创造性的。 而性爱也有创意,他们说。 那么,什么是创造,怎样才是创意? 你明白吗? 画家,音乐家,贝多芬,莫扎特,巴赫 以及有奉献精神的印度歌手 他们都说是创造行为。 是吗? 我们已经接受了它 - 我们已经接受毕加索 作为一个伟大的画家,伟大的创造者 把一个鼻子放在三个脸上,或是别的什么。 (众笑) 我不是 - 拜托,我只是提出来,不是去否定它 或者含有贬意,诸如此类 我只是指出而已。 这就是所谓的创造。 但如果你去询问,怀疑,质问,那是创造性吗? 或者创意是完全不同的东西。 也就是说,你看到了创意的表达显示 - 对吗? 在绘画里,在一首诗中 在散文里,在雕像中,音乐里,它被表达显示出来。 根据他的才华,他的能力表达出来... 这可能是一个非常大的容量或小容量。 这可能是现代摇滚或巴赫... 对不起,把它们拿来比较! 他们真的无法相比,但没有关系。
1:17:27 So we human beings accept that as creative because it brings you name, money, position – ah! – you are in the same room as the great artist! Right? So I am asking, is that creativity? Can there be creation in the most profound sense of that word as long as there is egotism, as long as there is the demand for success and money, and the recognition of that? You understand? Then it is supplying the market. Don’t agree with me, please. I am just pointing it out. I am not saying I know creativity and you don’t, I am not saying that. I say we never question these things. There is a state of creativity, you can doubt it, but it doesn’t mean a thing if you doubt it, it doesn’t matter to me. I say there is a state where there is creation, where there is no shadow of selfishness. That is real creation, which does not need expression, It doesn’t need fulfilment, which is myself fulfilling, or that fulfilling – it is creation. You know? I don’t want to go into all this. The origin of the world for the Christians is: God – you know, all the Christian – Genesis: suddenly came into being. The other is evolution. And perhaps sex is felt to be creative, apart from children. And also, has it become important because everything around us is circumscribed. You are following all this? Everything around us – the job, the office, going there every day for 50 years, going to the church for fifty years, following some philosopher, some guru – you follow? All that has deprived us of freedom. And we are not free from our own knowledge. It is always with us – the past. You are following all this? And so sex – perhaps there is freedom there. But also there, too, it is circumscribed. You are following all this? No? 因此,我们人类承认那是创意 因为它带给你名声,金钱,地位 - 啊! 你与伟大的艺术家同处一室! 对吗? 所以我问,那是创意吗? 是否可能有创意 依据这个词最深刻的意义 只要有了自私 只要有成功和金钱的需求 以及某种认同? 你明白吗? 那么,它就是供应市场的需求。 不要认同我,拜托。我只是指出它而已。 我不是说我知道创意而你不知道... 我不是这个意思。 我是说,我们从不去怀疑这些东西。 有一种创意的状态 你可以去怀疑它,但如果你去怀疑它也并不意味着什么 对我来说那并不重要。 我说人类有一种状态,其中就有创造 那儿没有自私的影子。 那才是真正的创造,它并不需要任何表达... 它不需要去实现什么,它是自我完成 或者是履行,它就是创造。 你知道,我不希望深入这一切。 对于基督徒,世界的起源是: 上帝 - 你知道,所有的基督徒 - 创世纪: 突然应运而生。 另一种是进化论。 也许性爱是被认为富有创造性的,除了儿童。 所以也使它变成重要 因为我们周围的一切都被限制。 你跟进这一切吗? 我们周围的一切: 工作,办公室,50年来每一天都去那里 50年来都去教会 跟随某些哲学家,某些大师,你跟进吗? 所有这些都剥夺了我们的自由。 而且我们没有从本身的知识里解放出来。 它总是与我们同在,我们的过去。 你跟进这一切吗? 所以性爱,其中或许也有自由。 但是,它也被限制着。 你跟进这一切吗? 没有?
1:21:45 So, we are deprived of freedom outwardly and inwardly – for generations upon generations we have been told what to do. And the reaction to that: I’ll do what I want. Which is also limited, based on your pleasure, on your desire, on your capacity, and so on, so on. So where there is no freedom all round, both outwardly and inwardly, and specially inwardly, then we have only one source, which is called sex. Is that right? Why do we give it importance? Do you give importance – equal importance – to being free from fear? No. Equal energy, vitality, thought to ending sorrow? No. Why don’t you? Why only this? Because that is the easiest thing to have. The other demands all your energy, which can only come when you are free. So naturally, human beings throughout the world have given this thing such tremendous importance in life. And when you give something, which is a part of life, tremendous importance, then you are destroying yourself. Life is whole, not just one part – right? If you give importance to everything, then this becomes rather, more or less unimportant. And the monks and all those people have denied all this and turned their energy, at least they think they have turned their energy, to God. But the thing is boiling in them, you can’t suppress nature. But when you give that thing only all importance, then you are corrupt! You understand? 因此,外在和内在,我们都被剥夺了自由 一代又一代,我们被告知应该怎么做。 而那反应是:我去做我想做的。 那也是有限的,全根据你的乐趣 你的欲望,你的能力,等等,等等。 那么,在全面没有自由的地方 无论外在或内在的,特别是内在 那么我们只有一个来源,被称为性爱。 是吗? 为什么我们赋予它重要性? 你有没有赋予重要性 - 同等的重要性 去从恐惧解放出来?没有。 同等的能量,活力,思想去结束悲哀? 没有。 你为什么没有? 为什么只有这个? 因为那是最容易拥有的东西。 所有其他的都需要你所有的能源 它只能产生如果你是自由的。 自然地,世界各地的人们 赋予这个东西这样巨大的重要性,在他们的生活中。 当你赋予你的生命中的某个部分 巨大的重要性,那么你就是在摧毁自己。 生命是完整的,不只是其中的一部分而已 - 对吗? 如果你赋给重要性于一切东西 那么这又变得相当 - 或多或少不重要了。 而僧侣和有些人却否定这一切 并把他们的能量 至少他们自以为已经把他们的能量,转赋予神。 但那回事,在他们心中沸腾,你不能压制本性。 但是,当你把所有的重要性,都赋予那回事 那么你又是腐败的!你明白吗?
1:25:18 May I get up? 我可以起身了吗?