克里希那穆提 - 第一次问答会

Krishnamurti Subtitles

SA81Q1 - 第一次问答会
瑞士，萨能，1981年7月29日

0:40	Krishnamurti: It is a lovely morning, for a change. And I hope you had the pleasure of looking at the long shadows of the morning.	克里希那穆提：上午天气很宜人，让人换了个感觉。我希望你也愉快地看到了晨光中那些长长的阴影。
1:01	We have had many, many questions. We didn't count them, but there must have been over a hundred. And out of those we have chosen some, not because they are easy to answer, or what we like to answer, but we have chosen some that may be representative of some of the questions that have been put. There have been, if I may point out, rather absurd questions, but there are these questions which we have gathered together and putting this morning.	我们有很多很多问题。我们没数过，但肯定有一百多个。我们从中挑选了一些，不是因为这些问题好回答，也不是因为我们喜欢回答这样的问题，而是我们在已经提出的问题当中选择了一些可能具有代表性的问题。如果可以指出的话，有些问题是相当荒谬的，但这些是我们收集起来并准备在今天上午拿出来的问题。
2:02	When one asks a question, is the answer more important than the question itself? When one looks to an answer, one overlooks the question. In the question itself, if we examine it deeply, is the answer. In the question itself. And how one approaches the question is all important, not try to find a rather clever, or not clever, or an answer that is worthwhile or personal. So, please bear in mind that we are together, and I must emphasise again, together, that we are examining the question. And out of that question, in the investigation of that question, the answer is inevitable. There are ten of them this morning. I don't know if we can answer all of them but we will try.	当你提出一个问题时，答案比问题本身更重要吗？着眼于答案，就会忽略问题本身。如果我们深入探究一下，就会发现，答案就在问题自身当中。在问题自身当中。如何对待问题非常重要，而不是试图找到一个巧妙或不巧妙的答案，或者找一个有价值的或者是个人的答案。所以，请记住，我们是在一起，我必须再次强调，要同心协力，这样来探究这个问题。而从这个问题中，在调查这个问题的过程中，必然会找到答案。今天上午有十个问题。我不知道能否回答完，但我们会尽量。
3:45	1st Question: What do you mean by insight? Does it differ from intuition?	问题一：你说的洞见是什么意思？洞见与直觉不同吗？
3:54	What do you mean by insight? Does it differ from intuition?	你说的洞见是什么意思？洞见与直觉不同吗？
4:08	What do we mean by intuition? Having a hunch, having a feeling that is the right thing. And intuition is also, having been sensitive, capturing something which may be conditioned, which may be personal, which may be a desire, wish-fulfilment. And we must be clear and hesitant in using that word 'intuition', because it may be one's own unconscious desire, one's own longing for something to happen, or sudden feeling that it is the right thing to do. But I think insight is different. May we go into it together?	我们说的直觉是什么意思？有一种预感，有一种感觉，认为这是正确的事情。而直觉也是敏感地感觉到了什么，而这可能是受条件影响的，可能包含着个人的因素，可能是一种欲望，想要实现什么愿望。我们使用“直觉”这个词必须清楚、迟疑，因为直觉可能是自己无意识的欲望，是自己在渴望发生某件事情，或者突然感觉到这么做是对的。但我认为洞见是不同的。我们一起了解一下好吗？
5:34	The scientists, the physicists, the technological people have an insight into some invention. They see something new. Is that insight partial or is an insight whole? You understand? We are meeting, I hope, together. I may have an insight, as I am an engineer, into the structure of a bridge. And I operate according to that insight. That insight being more powerful, I adjust all my knowledge to conform, or adjust to that knowledge, to that insight. But is that insight partial? A poet, a painter, a musician, may have an insight, but it is still partial. When we use the word 'insight', we mean insight into the whole movement of life, not one part of it. So let us together find out what we mean by insight, how does it take place – if you are interested in it. Because that may be the solution for our problems, specially psychological issues, that are such a tremendous travail in all our lives. So together let's find out what we mean by insight.	那些科学家、物理学家、技术人员对某些发明会有一种洞见。他们有些新的发现。这种洞见是局部的，还是整体的？你明白吗？我希望我们沟通上了。我是工程师，我可能会对桥梁结构有一种深刻见解。而我根据这个洞见来建造桥梁。这个洞见的指导性更强，我会调整所有的知识以适应这种知识，符合这个洞见。但这种洞见是局部的吗？诗人、画家、音乐家，等等，可能会有某种洞见，但这种洞见仍然是局部的。当我们使用 “洞见”这个词时，我们指的是洞察整个生命运动，而不是其中一部分。因此，我们来一起弄清洞见的含义，弄清洞见是如何发生的——如果你感兴趣的话。因为这可能会解决我们的问题，特别是心理问题，这些问题给我们整个生活造成了巨大的痛苦。因此，我们一起来弄清我们说的洞见是什么意思。
8:14	Is – I am questioning it, so please question it also – is insight an action of memory? One has accumulated a great deal of knowledge, psychologically or physically, and that knowledge may, being limited, see something very clearly. But that knowledge being always in the field of ignorance, because there is no complete knowledge about anything, including oneself, and when there is an insight from that limited knowledge, that insight must also be limited. So 'insight', we mean by that word, It is not the outcome of knowledge, knowledge being you can examine, say for example: all the comparative religions, the various sects, the various rituals and so on, you can examine them, study them, and come to a conclusion. Whereas that conclusion may be rational, sane, logical, but it is based on the activity of thought. And therefore it is limited. And that conclusion, naturally, must be limited. That is clear. Whereas insight has nothing whatever to do with knowledge, it has nothing to do with remembrance, but you have an insight, say into all the comparative religions, with all their rituals, sanctions, dogmas, beliefs and so on, if you have an insight into all that you see they are all similar. Right? They are all based on thought, and therefore all religions are limited. There is an immediate perception of it, not a logical conclusion and action, but the total perception of all the religious activities in the world, having an insight implies you see that they are essentially limited because they are put together, invented by thought.	洞见——我在询问，所以请你也来询问—— 洞见是来自记忆的行动吗？人在心理或生理上积累了大量知识，而这些知识可能是有限的，在某些方面可以看得非常清楚。但是这种知识总是处于无知的领域，因为关于任何事物的知识都是不完整的，包括关于自己的知识，当洞见是来自这种有限的知识时，这种洞见也一定是有限的。所以，“洞见”，我们用这个词是指，它不是知识的结果，因为知识你是可以去检查的，比如，你可以比较所有的宗教、各种教派、各种仪式等等，你可以检查它们，探究它们，并得出结论。尽管这个结论可能是理性的，理智的，符合逻辑的，但它是以思想活动为基础的，因而也是局限的。自然，那个结论一定是局限的。这很清楚。而洞见与知识没有任何关系，与记忆也没有任何关系，但如果你比较并洞见到，比如说，所有的宗教，以及它们那些仪式、规定、教义、信仰等等，如果你洞见到这一切，就会发现它们都是相似的。对吗？都是基于思想的，因此所有宗教都是有局限性的。这是对于宗教的直接认识，这不是逻辑推理得出的结论和行动，而是对全世界所有宗教活动的完整认识，洞见意味着你看到它们在本质上是局限的，因为它们是思想拼凑起来、虚构出来的。
11:49	Similarly, to have an insight into one's relationship, which is much more difficult. Relationship as it is now, based on images, hopes, pleasures, fears and so on, essentially based on the images that thought, during a period of time, it may be a day or ten years, has built it. To have an insight into that – that is, relationship is based on images – to have an insight into that is to dispel the images. I hope you are following some of this.	同样地，要洞察你的关系，而这要困难得多。像现在这样的关系，是建立在形象、希望、快乐、恐惧等等之上的，本质上是基于形象的，这个形象是思想在一个时期里建立起来的 ——也许是一天，也许是十年。要洞见到这一点 ——也就是说，关系是基于形象的—— 洞见到这一点就会消除那些形象。我希望你能理解其中的一些内容。
12:59	Suppose I am married, or have a girlfriend. My relationship actually, is based on my particular like and dislike, my particular attraction, sexual or otherwise, the environmental influences, the biological demands, and I establish a relationship with another person based on that. Obviously. And is it possible to have an insight, into the whole movement of relationship, not come to a conclusion that I have images, I must break them, how to break them and so on, so on, so on, but to have an insight into it, which means to see basically what it is, fundamentally what it is. And if one has that deep insight, the action which comes out of that insight is much more logical, much more sane and has a quality of something original, love. I hope you are following all this. Right?	假设我结婚了，或者我有个女朋友。我建立关系的基础，实际上是我那种特殊的好恶倾向，是我感受到的性吸引或其他方面的吸引，是环境的影响和生理的需求，我是在这个基础上和别人建立某种关系的。显然如此。有没有可能洞察关系的整体运动，而不得出结论，不说我有那些形象，我必须打破它们，我该如何打破它们，等等，等等，而是洞察这种关系，这意味着从根本上看到这是什么关系，这基本上是什么样的关系。如果一个人具有这种深刻的洞见，那么，从这种洞见中产生的行动就会更符合逻辑，更有理智，并具有一种原创的、爱的品质。我希望你能理解这一切。对吗？
14:48	That is, to take a very simple example: all nationalism is glorified tribalism. Right? All nationalities, all nations, whether it is American, Russian, etc. – is glorified tribalism. The moment you see that, that it is a very limited, narrow feeling which divides man, to have an insight into that is to be free from all the tribalism. Right? Are you following all this? Or if you have an insight into the question of obedience and following, whether it is the obedience to a guru, to a priest, to a law and so on, to have a deep insight into this quality of following and obedience, will you obey, follow anybody? Naturally you will obey laws, whether they are good or bad we are not discussing, how far you can go, how far you cannot go, that is not our problem for the moment. But the whole concept of following and obeying. I obey a doctor, I obey a surgeon, and if I am not too neurotic, and the policeman isn't too brutal, I obey. But the whole psychological desire, in which lies the security of following. If I follow somebody I feel safe, whether it is a psychiatrist, or a priest, or my wife or husband, or whatever it is, one feels safe. Right? Now, if you have an insight into that, that is, a mind, a brain that is conditioned to follow, the feeling of following and the urge to follow, completely drops away instantly.	就是说，举个非常简单的例子：所有的民族主义都是美化的部落主义。对吗？所有的民族，所有的国家，不管是美国人、苏联人，等等——都是美化的部落主义。一旦你看到这种民族感非常有限，非常狭隘，会造成分裂，一旦你洞见到这些，你就会摆脱一切部落主义。对吗？这些你都理解吗？或者，如果你洞察了服从和追随的本质，不管是对古鲁的服从，还是对牧师、法律等等的服从，要是你深刻洞察到这种追随和服从的性质，你还会服从、追随任何人吗？你当然得服从法律，我们不是在讲法律好还是不好，你可以走多远，不能走多远，等等，我们目前谈的不是这个。而是整个这个跟随和服从的观念。我会听医生的，听外科医生的，如果我不是太神经质，警察又不是太粗暴，我会听他的。但整个这种心理上的欲望，其中隐藏着服从所带来的安全感。我如果遵从某人，就会感到安全，无论是听从心理医生、牧师，还是听从我的妻子或丈夫，无论听谁的，你都会感到安全。对吗？现在，如果你有这种洞见，即心灵、大脑受到了训练，从而习惯于遵从，那么，那种想要遵从的感觉和冲动，就会一下子彻底消失。
18:26	So, insight is not brought about through will, through desire, through memory. It is immediate perception and therefore action. When we talk about perception, is it possible to observe without the word – please try, do it as we are talking and you will see – is it possible to observe a tree, a person, the speaker, to observe without the word, the word indicating all the memories, the reputation, the remembrances, the word implying all that. Knowing the word is not the thing, can you observe without the word? Right? And when you observe, is the observer different from the observed? One observes that tree. There, the observer, I hope, is different from the tree, Right? The observer is not the tree. That would be rather neurotic to say, I am the tree. But to observe the tree, without calling it the tree, without the name. The name and all the things associated with that name, is the tradition, the memory, the past, which says, 'That is the tree'. To look at it without all that in operation, right? Please do it as we are talking about it. And can one observe oneself without the word, without all the associations connected with that word, to look at it? And when you do observe in such a manner, is the observer different from the observed? Wait, I'll show it to you.	所以，洞见不是通过意志、通过欲望、通过记忆而形成的。它是直接的看见，因此也是直接的行动。当我们谈论看见时，有没有可能无言地观察 ——请试一试，在我们谈话时这样观察一下，你会看到—— 有没有可能不言不语地观察一棵树，观察一个人，观察讲者，词语表示所有的记忆、声誉、回忆，词语暗示着这一切。既然知道这个词并不是这个东西，那么，你能在观察时不诉诸语言吗？对吗？而当你观察时，观察者与被观察者是不同的吗？你观察那棵树。在那里，我希望，观察者与树是不同的，对吗？观察者不是那棵树。如果说我就是那棵树，那就太神经质了。但是观察这棵树，而不称之为树，不说它是什么树。名称和所有与这个名称有关的东西，是传统、记忆、过去，这些东西说，“那就是那棵树”。要在没有这些词语的情况下去看树，对吗？请在我们谈这个问题的时候这样看一看。你能否观察自己，不使用词语，不联想与这个词有关的一切，你能这样看着自己吗？而当你真的以这样的方式观察时，观察者与被观察者是不同的吗？等等，我会告诉你。
21:49	The feeling of anger arises in me: is that anger different from me? Or I am anger? But what thought has done is, a moment later, one says, 'I have been angry', which means, I am separate from that anger, Are you following all this? Whereas the actual fact is, when there is anger there is only anger, that feeling. There is no observer different from the observed. That division arises only after. Out of that division comes all our conflict. Right? So is it possible to observe without the word, without all the memories associated with that word? Then only the observer is the observed, and eliminates altogether the division which brings about conflict. To have an insight into that is to end the division.	我心里升起愤怒的感觉：那个愤怒与我有区别吗？还是说，我就是愤怒？但过了一会儿，思想所做的则是，我说，“我生气了”，这意味着，我与那个愤怒是分开的。这些你都明白吗？而实际情况是，当愤怒发生时，只有愤怒，只有那种感觉。并没有不同于被观察者的观察者。这种分裂只是过后才出现的。我们的冲突全都是从这种分裂中产生的。对吗？那么，有没有可能不使用词语，不回想所有与这个词相关的记忆，这样去观察？只有那时，观察者才是被观察者，并完全消除导致冲突的分裂。洞察这一点就会结束分裂。
23:44	2nd Question: How can the idea, 'You are the world, and you are totally responsible for the whole of mankind', be justified on a rational, objective, sane basis?	问题二：下面这种看法： “你就是世界，你对整个人类负有完全的责任”，如何能在理智客观的基础上得到证明？
24:01	How can the idea of: 'You are the world, and you are totally responsible for the whole world', be justified on a rational, objective, sane basis?	“你就是世界，你对整个世界负有完全的责任”，这种看法如何能在理智客观的基础上得到证明？
24:25	I am not sure, one is not sure it can be rationalised, on a sane, objective basis. But we will examine first before we say is it...	我不能确定是否可以在理智客观的基础上给出合理的解释。但我们可以先调查一下。
25:02	First of all, the earth on which we live is our earth. Right? It is not the British earth, the French earth, or the German, Russian, Indian, Chinese, it is our earth on which we are all living. That is a fact. But thought has divided racially, geographically, culturally, economically. That division is causing havoc in the world, obviously. There is no denial of that. That is rational, objective, sane. Right? And we have been saying, human beings, living on this earth, which is our earth, all ours, not the isolated, divided communities, it is our earth on which we are all living, though politically, economically we have divided it, for security, for various forms of patriotic, illusory reasons which eventually brings about war.	首先，我们生活的这个地球是我们的地球。对吗？不是英国人、法国人的地球，也不是德国人、苏联人、印度人、中国人等等的地球，它是我们的地球，我们都在这个地球上生活。这是事实。但思想在种族、地理、文化、经济等方面造成了分裂。这种分裂正在给世界带来灾难，显然如此。这一点是不容否认的。这是理智客观的看法。对吗？我们一直在说，人类，生活在这个地球上，这是我们的地球，是我们所有人的，而不属于那些孤立、分裂的群体，这是我们的地球，我们都生活在地球上，尽管我们在政治上、经济上把地球四分五裂 ——为了安全，为了最终会导致战争的各种形式的爱国主义和那些虚幻的理由。
26:35	We have also said that human consciousness – please go into this with me, you may disagree, you may say it is all nonsense, but please listen to it – and see if it is not rational, objective, sane. All our human consciousness is similar. We all, wherever, on whatever part of the earth we live, we all go through a great deal of suffering, a great deal of pain, great anxiety, uncertainty, fear. And we have occasionally or perhaps often, pleasure. This is the common ground on which all human beings stand. Right? This is an irrefutable fact. We may try to dodge it, we may try to say it is not, I am an individual and so on, so on, but when you look at it objectively, non-personally, not as British, French and so on, in examination you will find that our consciousness, is like the consciousness of all human beings, psychologically. You may be tall, you may be fair, you may have long hair, I may be black or white, or pink or whatever it is, but inwardly, psychologically we are all having a terrible time. We all have a great sense of desperate loneliness. You may have children, a husband, all the rest of it, but when you are alone you feel this feeling that you have no relationship with anything, totally isolated. I am sure most of us have had that feeling. And we are saying, this is the common ground on which all humanity stands. And whatever happens in the field of this consciousness, we are responsible. That is, if I am violent, I am adding violence to that consciousness, which is common to all of us. If I am not violent, I am not adding to it, I am bringing a totally new factor to that consciousness. So I am profoundly responsible, either to contribute to that violence, to that confusion, to that terrible division, or, as I recognise deeply in my heart, in my blood, in the depth of my being, that I am the rest of the world, I am mankind, I am the world, the world is not separate from me, Then I become totally responsible, obviously, which is rational, objective, sane. The other is insanity, to call oneself a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Christian, and all the rest of it – they are just labels.	我们也说过，人类的意识 ——请和我一起去探究这个问题，你可能会不同意，你可能说这都是胡说，但请先听一听—— 看看它是不是理智客观的。我们所有人的意识都是相似的。我们所有人，无论在哪里，无论生活在地球的哪个角落，都在遭受重重折磨，都在遭受巨大的痛苦，都有着心急如焚、恐惧不安的感觉。我们也有偶尔的，或许还是经常的快乐。这是全人类共同的立足点。对吗？这是个无可辩驳的事实。我们可能想回避它，我们可能想说不是这样，我是一个个体，等等，等等，但是如果你客观地去看，不从个人出发，不是作为英国人、法国人等等去看，那么，在调查中你会发现，在心理上，我们的意识和所有人的意识都是相似的。你可能身材高大，你可能皮肤白皙，你可能头发很长，我皮肤可能是黑色、白色、粉红色或任何颜色，但在内心里，在心理上我们都过得非常糟糕。我们都感到孤独绝望。你可能有孩子，有丈夫，等等，但当你独处时，你就会有这种感觉：自己跟什么都没有联系，是完全孤立的。我相信大部分人都有过这种感觉。我们说的是，这是全人类共同的立脚点。无论这个意识领域里发生什么，我们都是有责任的。也就是说，如果我是暴力的，我就是在给这所有人共有的意识添加暴力成份。如果我不暴力，我就没有添加，而是在给这个意识引入一个全新的因素。因此，我责任重大，我要么是在为暴力推波助澜，加剧混乱，助长这可怕的分裂，要么，当我在内心深处、在骨子里、在我存在的深处认识到，我就是其余的世界，我就是人类，我就是世界，世界与我不是分开的，那么，我就会完全地负起责任来，显然如此，这才是理智客观的认识。另一种做法则很荒唐：称自己为印度教徒、佛教徒、基督徒，等等——那些不过是些标签而已。
31:10	So, when one has that feeling, that reality, the truth of it, that every human being living on this earth, is responsible not only for himself, but responsible for everything that is happening. Now, how will one translate that in daily life? Right? How will you translate it? If you have that feeling, not intellectual conclusion, as an ideal and so on, then it has no reality. But if the truth is that you are standing on the ground which is common to all mankind, and you feel totally responsible, then what is your action towards society, towards the world in which you are actually living? The world as it is now is full of violence. Right? And only a very, very, very few people escape from it, because they are carefully guarded, protected and all the rest of it. One realises, suppose I realise I am totally responsible, what is my action then? Shall I join a group of terrorists? Obviously not. Obviously competitiveness between nations is destroying the world, the most powerful, the less powerful, and the less powerful trying to become more powerful, which is competition. Not only nationally, which is destroying the world, shall I, realizing that I am the rest of mankind, and I am totally responsible, shall I be competitive? Please answer these questions. When I feel responsible for this, naturally I cease to be competitive. And also the world, the religious world as well as the economic world, social world, is based on hierarchical principle. And shall I also have this concept of hierarchical outlook? Right? Obviously not, because that again is the one who says, 'I know', the other says, 'I do not know'. The one who says 'I know' is now taking a superior position, economically, socially, religiously and has a status. And if you want that status, go after it, but you are contributing to the confusion of the world.	因此，当你有了这种感觉，看到这个事实，这种真相，即每一个生活在这个地球上的人，不仅要对自己负责，而且要对正在发生的一切负责，那么，你将如何把这种认识转化到日常生活中去？对吗？你会怎样转化这种认识？如果你有这种感觉，而不是智力上的结论，不是当作一种理想等等——那样就没有真实性可言了。但是，如果事实是你站在全人类共同的立场上，而且你感到负有完全的责任，那么，你会对社会、对你实际生活的这个世界做些什么？现在这个世界是充满暴力的。对吗？而只有非常非常稀少的几个人能够逃脱，因为他们有严密的保护，等等。一个人意识到，假设我意识到我是完全有责任的，那么我会采取什么行动？我会加入一伙恐怖分子吗？显然不会。显然，国家间的竞赛正在毁灭这个世界，有最强大的和不太强大的国家，而不太强大的国家试图变得更强大，这就是竞赛。不仅有正在摧毁世界的国家竞争，当我意识到我就是其他人类，我要对人类负有完全的责任时，我还会去竞争吗？请回答这些问题。当我感到自己对此负有责任时，我自然就不会去竞争了。还有，这个世界，宗教界以及经济界、社会，都是基于等级原则建立起来的。我也应该抱持这种等级观念吗？对吗？显然不是，因为那样的话，就还会有人说， “我知道”，而另一个人说，“我不知道”。说“我知道”的人现在在经济上、社会上、宗教上位高权重。如果你想要那种地位，就去追求吧，但这是在为世界增添混乱。
35:21	So there are actual, objective, sane actions when you perceive, when you realise in your heart of hearts, in the depth of your being that you are the rest of mankind, and that we are all standing on the same ground.	因此，如果你认识到，如果你在内心深处意识到，你就是其他人类，我们全都站在同样的立场上，那么，你就会有理智客观的实际行动。
35:54	3rd Question: You use the term 'psychological time'. This is difficult to comprehend. Why do you say that psychological time is the source of conflict and sorrow?	问题三：你使用 “心理时间”这一术语。这是很难理解的。你为什么说心理时间是冲突和悲伤的根源？
36:14	You use the term 'psychological time'. This is difficult to comprehend. Why do you say that psychological time is the source of conflict and sorrow?	你使用“心理时间”这一术语。这是很难理解的。你为什么说心理时间是冲突和悲伤的根源？
36:42	Let us consider together what is time. Time by the watch, time by the sun setting, sun rising, time as yesterday, today, tomorrow, that tomorrow may be a hundred years, and yesterday may be another hundred years backwards, and the time today is that we are sitting here listening. That is time, physically, in the acquisition of knowledge, in so-called evolution. To learn a language time is necessary, to become a physicist time is necessary, to drive a car time is necessary. Right? That is obvious. Is it that we carry this idea of time, which we have established naturally, logically, because I need time to learn a technique, is it that we have carried over this principle of time into the psychological world? You are meeting my point? You understand? Are we meeting each other? Or am I talking to myself? Right.	我们一起来思考一下，什么是时间。钟表的时间，日出日落的时间，昨天、今天、明天的时间，明天可能会有一百年，昨天可能是以前的另一个百年，而今天的时间是我们坐在这里听讲。这就是外在的获取知识和所谓进化所需的时间。学习语言需要时间，成为物理学家需要时间，学习开车需要时间。对吗？这很明显。是不是我们把这个我们自然而然、合情合理建立起的时间概念 ——因为我需要时间来学一门技术—— 是不是我们把这个时间原则转移到了心理世界？你理解我的意思吗？你明白吗？我们沟通上了吗？还是说，我是在自言自语？对吗？
38:28	I am asking the question: one realises time is necessary in acquiring a skill. Is it that principle we have carried over, into the psychological area? Or psychologically, time exists for itself? Not that we have carried it over, but time as a process of evolution psychologically, time in itself exists. You follow?	我在问这个问题：人们意识到，要习得一项技能，必须得有时间。是不是我们把这个原则引入心理领域了？还是说，在心理上时间本身就是存在的？不是我们引入了心理时间，而是心理时间，作为一个心理进化过程，本身就是存在的。你听懂了吗？
39:34	Please, let's be quite clear on this point: is there psychologically, in itself, intrinsic in itself, time? Or we have carried over from the time element that is necessary in learning a skill to the psychological world? So that there are the two problems. That is, psychologically, does time exist per se or we have introduced it? Because we have been conditioned to that, therefore we react to the psychological world, in the same manner. Clear?	请注意，我们在这一点上要非常清楚：心理时间本身存在吗？存在心理所固有的时间吗？还是说，我们把这个学习技能所必须的时间因素搬到了心理领域？这样，就有了两个问题。也就是说，心理时间本身是存在的，还是我们引入了心理时间？因为我们已经习惯了外在的时间，所以我们会以同样的方式对心理世界做出反应。清楚了吗？
40:36	So, it is obvious that we need time to learn a skill. Clear. Now we are asking: Is time inherent in the psychological structure, psychological nature? Or thought has brought the element of time into it? Are we following each other? Is it too difficult? Questioner: No.	所以，我们显然需要时间来学习技能。清楚了。现在我们要问的是：时间是心理结构、心理本质的固有属性吗？还是说，是思想把时间因素引入心理领域的？我们彼此理解吗？这太难懂吗？提问者：不是。
41:19	K: Right? May I go on?	克：对吗？我可以继续吗？
41:22	Q: There is a question...	问：有个问题
41:24	K: Wait sir, let's go slowly into it. I hope you are also working, not just listening.	克：等等，先生，让我们慢慢说下去。我希望你也在用心思考，而不仅仅是在听。
41:35	Q: (Inaudible)	问：（听不清）
41:44	K: We are coming to that sir, one moment. We will come to that sir, please. It is all right sir, take time. Have patience.	克：我们马上就会讲到，先生，请稍等。我们会讲到那个问题，先生，请耐心些。没关系，先生，慢慢来。要有耐心。
42:08	Patience has no time. Impatience has time. Right? When you are patient you are silent, listening. But if you are impatient and say 'Let's get on with it', time element comes in. Of course, obviously. So please, let's look at this sensitively, not say, 'You are right', 'I am wrong' and so on, but sensitively let's approach this question. Has thought introduced into the psychological realm, the whole idea of time? Or in the very nature of the psyche time is? First of all psychologically, thought, which is part of the psyche, thought has introduced time: I am this, I will be that, I am angry, I will get over it, I am not successful but I will be. All that movement is time. The distance covered from what I am to what I shall be. The space between me as I am and as I will be. So time is what the space is to be covered to achieve that. So the whole process of that is time. I do not know myself, I must learn about myself, educate myself. The same thing is operating as in the world of skill: I am going to learn about myself, which admits time. Right? So we are asking: time is a factor of thought, thought is the response of experience, knowledge, memory stored up in the brain. And that memory responds which is thought. Again, this is an obvious fact. If you had no experience, no knowledge, you would be in a state of amnesia or whatever you like to call it. But because we have accumulated a great deal of knowledge, psychologically, and that is stored up in the brain as memory and thought.	耐心不包含时间。不耐烦才包含时间。对吗？当你有耐心的时候，你是沉默的，在倾听着。但如果你不耐烦，说“我们继续吧”，时间因素就会介入。当然是这样，这不用说。所以，请注意，让我们敏锐地审视这个问题，不要说“你是对的”，“我是错的”等等，而是非常敏感地来处理这个问题。思想将这整套时间的观念引入到心理领域了，是吗？还是说，时间是心理最本质的东西？首先，从心理方面看，思想是心理的一部分，思想引入了时间：我是这样的，我将是那样的，我感到愤怒，我要强压怒火，我没有成就，但我会取得成就。这些运动都是时间。是我现在如何与将要如何之间的距离。是我现在如何与将会如何之间的空间。因此，时间是实现这一目标所要跨越的空间。因此，这整个过程就是时间。我不了解自己，我必须了解自己，教育自己。这与技术领域的运作方式是一样的：我将了解自己，这需要时间。对吗？所以我们要问：时间是思想的一个因素，思想是经验、知识和储存在大脑中的记忆的反应。而这种记忆的反应就是思想。这同样是个明显的事实。如果你没有经验，没有知识，你就会处于一种健忘、失忆状态 ——怎么说都行。但是，因为我们已经在心理上积累了大量知识，这些知识以记忆和思想的形式储存在大脑中。
45:36	So, this whole process of accumulating knowledge about oneself, learning about oneself, and gradually building information about oneself, all that implies time. That is, psychological time and time by the day and by the watch. Chronological time and psychological time. Again, that is a fact. Now, apart from that, is the psyche, is inherent in the psyche this element of time? That is, being and becoming. Right? I am only putting it in different ways. Is there inherent in me, which is the psyche, this question of time at all? Please don't jump to a conclusion. That is, in me there is a timeless state. I am not saying that at all. That is the old tradition. We are not saying that, we are just asking.	所以，这是一整套积累关于自己的知识，了解自己并逐渐建立有关自己的信息的过程，这些都意味着时间。也就是说，有心理时间，也有日夜时间、钟表时间。有计时时间和心理时间。这又是一个事实。那么，除此之外，这种时间元素是心理的固有属性吗？就是说，存在和成为。对吗？我只是在换个方式讲。我，也就是我的心理当中，究竟是不是天生就有这个时间问题？请不要急于下结论。那就是，在我身上有一种永恒的状态。我根本不是在说那件事。那是个古老的传统。我们根本没有讲那个，我们只是在问。
47:13	Is the 'me' free of time? Right? Obviously not. The 'me' – my family, my nation, my character, my capacity, my loneliness, my despair, my whole travail in existence, is me. The me that is going to die, the me that lives. Going to the office, laboratory, factory, whatever you are doing. And all that is the activity of thought, including the 'me'. The 'me' is my form, my name, the image I have about myself, if I have one, the things I have done, the things I want to do, etc. All that is me, which is my consciousness. The content of that consciousness, is put there by thought which is time. Right?	这个“我”是没有时间的吗？对吗？显然不是。 “我”——我的家庭、我的国家、我的性格、我的能力、我的孤独、我的绝望、我生活中的所有苦难，这些都是我。将要死掉的我，活着的我。我去办公室、实验室、工厂，不管你在做什么。而所有这些都是思想的活动，包括这个“我”。这个“我”是我的形体，是我的名字，是我心目中自己的形象，如果我有个形象的话，是我做过的事情，是我想做的事情，等等。所有这些都是我，即我的意识。这个意识内容是由思想——也就是时间——放在那里的。对吗？
48:52	So there is psychological time, which is the movement of thought, fear, pleasure, pain, suffering, joy, so-called love, all that is the movement of thought, thought being memory, space, time, the achievement of it. Now we are saying – please bear with me – we are saying that the psychological time is the factor of conflict and sorrow. That's, the questioner says, why do you say that? As we have been pointing out during the talks, that thought is the root of fear. Thought is the root of pleasure. I have had pleasure yesterday, the remembrance and the desire to continue tomorrow. That is the movement of thought. And sorrow: sorrow, as we said, is the essence of isolation. Sorrow is the outcome of self-centred egotistic activity. We are only putting it differently. So thought is responsible for this. And thought is time itself, of course. So is it possible to be free of psychological time, because that divides. And where there is division there must be conflict, like the Jew and the Arab, like the capitalist and the totalitarian, division between me and another, with my wife and the husband and so on. Wherever there is division there must be conflict, that is law. It is not my law, it is there.	所以有心理时间，这种时间是思想的运动，恐惧、快乐、痛苦、苦难、高兴、所谓的爱，这些都是思想的运动，思想是记忆、空间、时间，及其取得的成就。现在我们在说——请稍耐心些—— 我们说，心理时间是冲突和悲伤的因素。就是说，提问者问，你为什么这么讲？正如我们在谈话中一直指出的：思想是恐惧的根源。思想是快乐的根源。我昨天过得很快乐，我就记住它并渴望明天继续快乐。这就是思想的运动。还有悲伤：正如我们所说，隔离所导致后果的实质就是悲伤。悲伤是自我中心的利己主义行为的结果。我们只是在换一种说法。所以，思想要对悲伤负责。而思想就是时间本身，显然如此。因此，是否有可能摆脱心理时间，因为它会造成分裂。只要有分裂，就一定会有冲突，就像犹太人和阿拉伯人，资本家和极权主义者那样，再比如我和别人之间有分裂，我和妻子或丈夫之间有分裂等等。只要有分裂，就必然会有冲突，这是定律。这不是我的定律，而是明摆着的。
51:52	So thought, time, space, psychologically, is the source of conflict and sorrow. After examining it, is it possible for thought, please listen to this, for thought to realise its own place, which is in the world of technique, and it has no place psychologically? Please don't reject it, just look at it. Psychologically, time exists when I have an image about myself, and you tread on that image, that brings a wound, that hurts. That is the element of time. Now if I have no image about myself it is finished. Is that possible, living in this world, married and all the rest of it? That is to have psychologically no tomorrow. It is not, when Dante talks about all those who enter Inferno, leave all hope – it is not that at all. You know what I am saying? Why do we have hope? I am not saying you shouldn't or should. Why do we have hope? See what happens. I have a hope to be a great man or whatever it is, my hope. And I am working for that. And I may fail – it generally does. Then I get bitter, angry, violent, cynical. And violent, cynical, bitter, I am adding to the confusion of the total consciousness, to that, I am maintaining that. So if I have an insight into this, the image disappears entirely.	因此，思想，心理上的时间、空间，就是冲突和悲伤的根源。思想在审视过这些之后，是否可能 ——请听这句话——意识到它自己的位置，也就是它在技术领域有其位置，而在心理上，则没有任何位置？请不要对此置之不理，要看一看。如果我有个自己的形象，那么，心理时间就会存在，而你去践踏这个形象，就会给我带来伤痛。这就是时间的要素。而如果我没有自己的形象，这事儿就过去了。有没有可能生活在这个世界上，做我该做的事，包括结婚，等等？这就需要没有心理上的明天。这不是像但丁讲的那些下地狱的人感到万念俱灰——根本不是那回事。你知道我在说什么吗？我们为什么会怀有希望？我不是说应不应该，而是我们为什么怀有希望？看看会发生什么情况。我希望成为伟人，或者不论什么，我有个希望。而且我正在为此努力。而我可能会失败——通常都会失败。然后，我会感到痛苦、愤怒、粗暴、愤世嫉俗。而粗暴、痛苦、愤世嫉俗，就是在给这个意识整体增添混乱，就是在维持混乱。因此，如果我洞见到这点，那么，这个形象就会彻底消失。
54:57	You might ask the speaker: are you glibly talking about it, and have your own private, secret image? I know you are terribly interested in that. This question has been asked, I don't know how often, in India, in Europe and in America, and each time that question is asked, I am very aware, not easily answered, which is when I say, there is no image about myself either you say, that is nonsense, or you say, it doesn't matter to me as long as I have an image about myself. It doesn't matter if you have no image about yourself, who cares. But what is important is to find out how to live, not how, to find out if it is possible to live in this terrible world, dangerous world, criminal world, to have no image. Find out. Don't say, it is not possible, or say, it is possible. But to study the image that you have, and have an insight into it, and end it immediately.	你也许会问讲者：你说的轻巧，你私下里有没有自己的形象呢？我知道你们对这个非常感兴趣。这个问题我不知道问过多少次了，在印度、欧洲、美国，每次问到这个问题，我非常清楚，我都没有随便回答，如果我说，我没有自己的形象，要么你会说，胡扯，要么你会说，我有自己的形象，你有没有我无所谓。你没有自己的形象，也没什么大不了的，谁在乎。但重要的是弄清如何生活——不是如何—— 是弄清有没有可能生活在这个可怕的、危险的、不道德的世界上，而不抱任何形象。要弄个明白。不要说，这可能或不可能。而是要研究你怀有的那个形象并深刻地了解它，然后一下子结束那个形象。
56:52	We have only answered three questions in an hour. Oh lord.	我们一个小时只回答了三个问题。哦，上帝。
56:58	4th Question: How does one draw the dividing line, between knowledge which must be retained, and which is to be abandoned? What is it that makes the decision?	问题四：如何在必须保留和应该放弃的知识之间划界？做出这个决定的是什么？
57:15	I will read it again carefully. How does one draw the dividing line between knowledge which must be retained, and that which must be abandoned? What is it that makes this decision? You have understood the question?	我再仔细读一遍。如何在必须保留和应该放弃的知识之间划界？做出这个决定的是什么？你理解这个问题了吗？
58:05	The questioner is asking, where does knowledge, which is necessary, to be a skilful engineer, carpenter, plumber, or if you want to be a politician, I hope none of us do, and the line between that and the recording – please listen – the recording of personal knowledge, personal hurts, personal ambitions, where apparently we have sustained knowledge, and therefore harmful. So where do you draw the line between that and this? Is it clear? And the questioner says, and what is it that makes this decision, to keep that there and not to keep it here?	提问者问的是，应该在哪儿划线：当个熟练的工程师、木匠或水管工，知识都是必要的，或者，你想当政治家 ——我希望没有人这样想—— 需要记录这方面的知识——请听—— 而另一方面，还有关于个人的知识：个人遭受的伤害、个人的野心，等等，显然，我们保留了这方面的知识，因而也深受其害。那么，这二者你应该在哪里划界呢？清楚了吗？而提问者问，又是什么做的这个决定，把那个放在那边，而不是这边？
59:38	Do you see one of the factors in this question: how we all depend on decisions. I will decide to go there. I won't go there. Decide. What is that decision based on? Just look at it carefully, please. My arm, my past knowledge, past pleasure, past pain, past remembrance of things, which says, 'Don't do that anymore', or 'Do it'. That is, in decision there is the element of will. Right? Will is the accumulated, concentrated form of desire. Right? Desire which says, 'I must do that', but I call it will. So will is the accumulated concentration of desire. We have been into the question of desire, I don't want to go into it now because – shall I go into it?	你看没看到这里面所反映的一个问题：我们全都非常依赖决定去行动。我将决定去那里。我不想去那里。决定。这个决定的依据是什么？请仔细看一下。我的手臂，我过去的知识，过去的快乐，过去的痛苦，往事的回忆，这些东西说， “别再那样做了”，或者 “这样做吧”。就是说，在决定中存在着意志因素。对吗？意志是累积起来的欲望的集中体现。对吗？欲望说，“我必须那样做”，但我称之为意志。所以，意志是累积起来的欲望的集中体现。我们已经讨论过欲望的问题，我现在不想再谈这个，因为——需要我去讨论吗？
1:01:27	Q: No. K: No. Thank God.	问：不用。克：不用。谢天谢地。
1:01:38	Q: Why are we sitting here?	问：我们为什么坐在这儿？
1:01:41	K: I don't know why you are sitting here, sir, but we are talking about decision. We are saying there is a great element in decision: will. And on that tradition we are conditioned. I am questioning, the speaker is questioning that action at all. You understand? Because will is a divisive factor, a dividing factor: I will do this, and my wife says I will not do that. Right? So will is essentially desire and has in it, the element of division – me and not me, and so on. I must succeed and so on.	克：我不知道你们为什么坐在这儿，先生，但我们正在谈关于决定的问题。我们说，在决定当中有个重要因素：意志。而我们都受这个传统的影响。我在质疑，讲者在质疑这种出于决定的行动。你明白吗？因为意志是个分裂的因素，是个分裂的因素：我愿意这样做，而我妻子说我不愿那样做。对吗？所以意志本质上是欲望，并且意志当中含有分裂的因素——我和非我，等等。我必须成功，等等。
1:02:55	So, is there a way of living – please listen to this – without the operation of will at all? Right? A way of living in which there is no conflict, and conflict exists as long as I exercise will, obviously. I wonder if you understand – clear? Now let's find out if that is possible.	那么，是否有这样一种生活方式——请听这句话—— 其中根本没有意志的作用？对吗？一种没有冲突的生活方式，只要我动用意志，就会有冲突存在，显然如此。不知你是否明白——清楚了吗？现在我们来看看这是否可能。
1:03:35	The questioner asks: How does one draw the line between, the accumulating factor of knowledge necessary to act skilfully, and the non-recording factor of the psyche? You understand? Not recording my hurts, my insults, the flattery, all the bullying and all that, not recording any of that. How does one draw the line between the two? Right? You don't draw the line. The moment you have drawn the line you have separated, and therefore you are going to cause conflict, between the knowledge and non-recording, then you ask 'How am I not to record?' I am insulted, personally the speaker has been insulted by professionals, so please don't join the professionals. How not to record the insult, or the flattery, it is the same thing. The two are the two sides of the same coin – you understand? Flattery and insult. You insult me, my brain instantly records it. I get hurt. In the field of technology I must record. But here why should I record? You insult me, all right, Why should that insult be carried over, day after day, when I meet you and I say, 'You have insulted me'. And from that insult, I retaliate. Now, is it possible not to record at all, any psychological factors? You understand? You understand my question? My wife – if I have one, thank God I haven't got any – if I have one, she says something brutal, after I have come back from the office, because she has had a tiresome day herself, with rumbustious children, so she says something violently. Instantly because I am tired, I want some kind of peace in the house, so I record it. Now, I am asking myself: I am tired, I have worked, I come into the house, she says something brutal, and is it possible not to record that incident at all? Otherwise, I am building an image about her, and she is building an image about me, so the images have relationship, not us. You understand, sir? Obvious fact.	提问者问道：这种为了娴熟地行动而必需积累的知识要素与那种无须记录的心理要素，二者的界线怎么来划？你明白吗？我不记录伤害、侮辱、奉承，不记录那些欺凌，等等，这些都不记录。如何在这两者之间划清界限？对吗？你不用划线。一旦你划线了，你就造成了分裂，于是，你就会在知识和无须记录的知识之间造成冲突，然后你就会问，“我怎样才能不记录”？我被侮辱了，本人曾经被专业人士侮辱过，所以请不要加入专业人士之列。如何不记录侮辱或奉承，这是一回事。二者是一枚硬币的两面——你明白吗？奉承和侮辱。你侮辱我，我的大脑会立即做记录。我就受伤了。在技术领域，我必须记录。但在这里，我为什么要记录？你侮辱我，没关系，为什么我要日复一日地想起那次侮辱，为什么一遇到你便说，“你侮辱过我”。而且由于这种侮辱的记忆，我会报复你。那么，有没有可能完全不记录任何心理因素？你明白吗？你明白我的问题吗？我的妻子——如果我有的话，感谢上帝，我没有—— 如果我有个妻子，我从办公室回来，她说了些难听的话，因为孩子们吵吵嚷嚷，一天下来，她自己已经厌烦了，所以她说话态度很激烈。而我也很累，希望家里能安静些，所以我立刻就记录了这件事。现在，我问自己：我累了，我忙了一天，我回到家，她说了些粗暴的话，我有可能完全不记录这件事吗？否则，我就是在给她塑造形象，而她也是在给我塑造形象，所以，这是形象和形象，而非我们两人的关系。你明白吗，先生？这是很明显的事实。
1:07:26	So is it possible not to record? The recording process is to strengthen, to give vitality to a centre which is the me. Right? Obviously. So is it possible not to do it? And it is only possible, however tired one is, to be attentive at that moment, when the wife or I am brutal. Because as we explained the other day with regard to meditation, where there is attention there is no recording. It is only when you are self-centred, and that very self-centredness is concentration, then there is recording. Right?	那么，有没有可能不做记录呢？这个记录过程就是在强化一个中心，给它赋予活力，这个中心就是我。对吗？很明显。所以有可能不做记录吗？在我妻子或者我态度粗暴的时候，在那一刻，无论我多么疲惫，我只有留心、注意，才有可能不做记录。正如我们前几天谈冥想问题时说的，当你注意的时候，你就不会做记录。只有当你以自我为中心的时候 ——这种自我中心就是专注—— 才会有记录发生。对吗？
1:08:46	So to see the truth of this. You need knowledge on this level, and here you don't need knowledge at all. See the truth of it, what freedom it brings you. That is real freedom. If you have an insight into it, you don't draw the line, nor decide. There is no recording.	所以要看到这个真相。在这个层面上你需要知识，而在这里你根本不需要知识。看到它的真相，看看它给你带来了怎样的自由。那是真正的自由。如果你对此有所洞见，你就不会去划界、决定。就不会有记录发生。
1:09:23	Do we go on? Audience: Yes.	我们要继续吗？听众们：是的。
1:09:27	K: Enough or no? A: No, no.	克：这些够不够？答：不够，不够。
1:09:49	5th Question: Intellectually, we understand that the observer is the observed. But what is necessary to perceive this, so that it goes beyond the intellectual level?	问题五：在认知上，我们理解观察者就是被观察者。但是，要想使这种理解超越认知的层面，还需要什么？
1:10:06	Intellectually we understand that the observer is the observed. But what is necessary to perceive this, so that it goes beyond the intellectual level?	在认知上，我们理解观察者就是被观察者。但是，要想使这种理解超越认知的层面，还需要什么？
1:10:21	The question is, what is necessary to go beyond this intellectual acceptance that the observer is the observed? Right? First of all, do we even intellectually accept it? Question yourself please. Do you even intellectually, that is verbally, logically, discerning, and saying yes, it is so, logically. Because it has been pointed out, objectively, logically. And you say, 'Yes' – is that so? Do you even intellectually accept that? Or it is just a lot of words floating around? But if you do accept it intellectually, what does that acceptance mean? When you say, 'I intellectually agree with you', what does that mean? It means absolutely nothing. It is just a form of convenient social acceptance, saying, 'Yes, you are quite right but you may be wrong'. So intellectually we don't even accept it. If we do, it is again very superficial, and therefore no value. But the fact is that the observer is the observed. That is the truth. That is, I am lonely, with all the implications... I am lonely, with all its implications of tremendous feeling of isolation, having no relationship with anything. I am completely absorbed with fear, in the sense of detachment from everything. That depresses me tremendously. And my natural instinct is to run away from it, suppress it, run off to meeting people, football, religion and all that. But the escape from the fact brings about the division. I am lonely, I must not be lonely. The escape from 'what is', gives me not only conflict, because it is divisive, it helps me not to understand this thing called loneliness. Right?	问题是，对于观察者即被观察者这个说法，要超越智力上的认同，还需要什么东西？对吗？首先，哪怕是在智力上，我们相信这个说法吗？请问问你自己。哪怕是在认知上，也就是口头上、逻辑上，你能辨别清楚，并说，从逻辑上讲是这样的。因为这点得到了客观合理的指明，于是，你说，“是的”——是这样吗？就算是在理智上，你相信这个说法吗？还是说这只是一堆漂浮不定的言辞？但如果你确实在理智上接受这个说法，这种接受意味着什么？你说，“我在理智上同意你的看法”，那么说是什么意思？没有任何意义。这只是社交上一团和气，说， “对，你非常正确。”但（私下里说）你可能是错的。所以哪怕从智力上讲，我们也是不相信这句话的。即使我们相信，那也是非常肤浅的，因而一文不值。但事实上，观察者就是被观察者。这是事实。就是说，我是孤独的，承受着孤独的所有后果。我是孤独的，这种强烈的与一切失去联系的隔离感影响着我的方方面面。我完全沉浸在这种脱离一切的恐惧之中。这让我非常沮丧。我本能地逃避这种感觉，压制这种感觉，我会用社交、足球、信教等等来逃避。但逃避事实会造成分裂。我孤独，我一定不能孤独。逃避“实情”，不仅带给我冲突——因为它会引起分裂—— 而且还让我不去理解这个叫做孤独的东西。对吗？
1:14:24	Is loneliness separate from me? When I say, 'God, I am lonely', is that feeling of desperate, anxious, fear of loneliness, is that something separate from me? Or I am that? Right? You understand? My self-centred activity, my ambition, my image about myself and so on, all that has brought about this sense of isolation, which I call loneliness. That loneliness is not separate from me. If it is separate from me I can act about it, run away, suppress it and so on. But if it is me – please understand – if it is me that is in the state of loneliness, what is one to do? You understand my question? I am lonely, you know, all the feeling of it. You may be married, have children and so on, but you are basically, terribly lonely. If that loneliness is something separate from me, then I am in conflict with that loneliness. Right? I fight it, I try to fill it by knowledge, by excitement, by this or that, but if it is me I can't do anything about it. You understand? Just stop there for a minute.	孤独是与我分开的吗？当我说，“上帝，我很孤独”的时候，那种绝望、焦虑、害怕孤独的感觉，是与我分开的吗？还是说，我就是孤独？对吗？你明白吗？我的自我中心的行为，我的野心，我心目中自己的形象等等，这些都导致了这种隔离感，我称之为孤独。这种孤独感与我并不是分开的。如果它与我是分开的，我就可以对它采取行动，像逃避、压制，等等。但是如果正是我——请理解—— 如果处于这种孤独状态的就是我，那么，我该怎么办？你明白我的问题吗？我很孤独，你知道，所有孤独的感觉。你可能结了婚，有孩子等等，但从根本上讲，你是非常孤独的。如果这种孤独与我是分开的，那么我就会与这种孤独发生冲突。对吗？我会对抗孤独，试图用知识、用各种刺激，用这样那样的事情来填补，但如果孤独就是我，那我就对它无能为力。你明白吗？在那里稍微停顿一下。
1:16:39	Before, I am accustomed to do something about it. Now I realise I am that. Because I cannot do anything about it, it ends conflict, but the thing remains.	以前，我习惯做些事情来克服孤独。现在我意识到我就是孤独。因为我不能对它做什么，这就结束了冲突，但这个东西还在。
1:17:05	Right?	对吗？
1:17:07	K: Isn't... A: Yes.	克: 是不是……答：是的。
1:17:09	K: I can't do anything about it, so it is there. So can I – please listen to this – can my thought remain with it completely, not run away from it, remain with that loneliness, with all its anxiety, fear, all the complexity of that loneliness, totally without any movement, look at it. When you look at it, if you look at it as an observer looking in, then again the problem arises. But the fact is that loneliness is you, so we have to look at it without the observer, as a whole. When you do that completely, loneliness disappears totally, never to come back. Right sir, I have answered five questions, that is enough.	克：我对它无能为力，所以它就在那儿。那么，我能否——请听这句话—— 我的思想能否完全和孤独待在一起，不逃避它，而是和那个孤独待在一起，和它导致的所有焦虑、恐惧等各种复杂情绪待在一起，完全没有任何思想活动，就是看着它。当你看着它时，如果你作为观察者去看，那么，问题就会再次出现。但事实上，孤独就是你，所以我们必须没有观察者，把它当作一个整体来看。当你完完全全这样看的时候，孤独就会彻底消失，永远不会重现。好了，先生，我回答了五个问题，这就够了。