Krishnamurti Subtitles home


SA84Q1 - 第一次问答会
瑞士，萨嫩，1984年7月22日



0:15 There have been a lot of questions about probably two hundred or more. Out of those some of these questions were chosen. I have not looked at them before. I wonder what we are really interested in, each one of us. Probably health, probably, if you are rather old getting one foot in the grave, fear of death and also while we are very young, sex. And if you have no jobs, no vocation, which is becoming more and more imitation, what are we really interested in profoundly, for which you are willing to give a great deal of one's energy, vitality and serious intention? 我收到了大量的问题， 大概有两百个或者更多。 我们从中挑选出了一些问题。 我并没有事先看过这些问题。 我想知道我们真正感兴趣的是什么？ 我们每一个人。 也许是健康， 或者如果你年事已高，一只脚已经踏进棺材里了， 你可能会害怕死亡， 同样的，当我们还很年轻时，我们会对性感兴趣。 而如果你没有工作，没有职业 ——工作正在变得越来越像是一种模仿， 什么才是我们真正深感兴趣的东西？ 那种我们愿意为此付出大量能量、 精力和真诚意愿的东西？
1:57 How far would we go in carrying out or pursuing something very, very serious in life? 我们会在多大程度上去实践 或者追求生命中那些非常非常严肃的事情？
2:17 Are we all becoming very, very superficial? Never asking any serious demanding questions, what is it all about, the whole world? Why we behave as we do? Why isn't there peace in the world? I am sure we have asked all these questions of ourselves, probably. And we find no answers for them, or if we do, according to some tenet, some philosophy, some kind of acceptance of a system. Apart from all this, what is one really interested in? If we ask ourselves that question, do you ever find an absolute answer? Or is it all relative? If one is unhappy, one wants to be happy. Insecurity physically, biologically, then one seeks a form of security and fighting class differences. You know all that thing that is going on in the world. What is our answer to all this, these very demanding problems? 我们是不是都变得非常非常肤浅了？ 从来不会去问任何严肃费力的问题， 这个世界到底是怎么回事？ 为什么我们会作出现在这样的行为？ 为什么这个世界上没有和平？ 我相信我们都曾经问过自己 这些问题，很可能问过。 然而我们却找不到这些问题的答案， 或者如果我们找到了， 那些答案也是根据某种教义，某种哲学， 某种广为接受的体系而来的。 抛开所有这些东西， 我们真正感兴趣的是什么？ 如果我们问问自己这个问题， 你是否能找到一个绝对的答案呢？ 还是说答案都是相对而言的？ 如果一个人不幸福，他就会想要变得幸福。 如果某人在物质上、生理上不安全的话， 他就会去寻找某种形式的安全， 去和那种阶级差别抗争。 你们都知道所有这些世界上正在发生着的事情。 而我们对于这一切，对这些非常迫切问题的答案是什么？
4:48 Do you ever stick to one thing and pursue it to the very end? We talked about the other day, about health, which is naturally very important. How can a body be healthy if one has abused from one's youth - alcohol, tobacco, drugs - you know the whole medical process of health, keeping the body healthy. Or you do some kind of exercise jogging along for ten miles or five miles, or you do some kind of yoga - may I use that word? And become rather fanatical about yoga. At one time, in India, yoga was taught only to the very, very, few. It was not a moneymaking concern. Now it has become a big business. I hope you don't mind my telling you all this. And one is concerned about one's health. I think health comes when the self is not, when the ego is not tremendously active. It is like beauty - when the self is not the beauty is. When the ego with its self-centred activity is not there is great good health. 你是否曾经紧紧抓住某个事物然后追根究底呢？ 我们前几天谈论了死亡， 这当然是一个很重要的问题了。 如果我们从年轻时起就滥用虐待身体的话， 身体又怎么可能变得健康呢？ 那些酒精、烟草、毒品， 你们都知道保持健康的整个医学上的过程， 如何保持身体的健康。 或者你会进行某种体育锻炼， 慢跑十英里或五英里， 或者你会进行某种瑜伽练习 ——我可以用‘瑜伽’这个词吗？ 然后狂热痴迷于瑜伽。 曾经，在印度， 瑜伽只传授给极少数人。 它并不是一桩用来赚钱的生意。 而现在，它已经变成了一个很大的产业， 我希望你们不介意我对你们说这些东西。 我们关心我们的健康。 而我认为当不再有自我时， 当自我不再无比活跃时，健康才会降临。 它就像是美 ——当自我不在了，美就会存在。 当自我及其自我中心的活动不复存在了， 就会有无比完美的健康。
7:26 And also we have many, many psychological problems, apart from physical problems - we have no houses to live in, only live in a flat, in a town or big cities, living in drawers, as it were. And that too has a great strain on the body and so on. How do all these economic problems which are really devastating the world, each country concerned with its own economic problem, its own security, armaments and all the rest of it, how can each country separate itself from the rest of mankind and the population is increasing by the million. In India every year there are fifteen million people born. That is the population of Holland and Australia - fifteen million people, unemployed, poverty - you understand all this? Surely all these problems - class warfare, ideological warfare - can only end when we all become really civilised. That is, when we are not attached to any particular part of the country, when we are not nationally, religiously divided but treat the whole world as our world, and then there will be no barriers. I am sure, we have talked to some of the scientists, the whole of humanity can be fed properly, housed, clothed and all the rest of it if we can abolish war, all the terrible instruments of war. But we are not civilised, I am afraid. We are too barbarous and so none of the problems, physical problems, are being ever solved. 而同样的，我们也有着无数的心理上的问题， 并且也有外在物质上的问题 ——我们没有房子住， 只能生活在某个小镇或大城市中的公寓里， 就好像是生活在鸽子笼里一样。 而这也会给身体等等造成一种巨大的紧张压力。 所有那些经济上的问题要如何 ——这些问题正在摧毁这个世界， 每一个国家都只关心它自己的经济问题， 它自己的安全、军备武器等等这类东西， 每一个国家都把它自己和其他的人类分隔开来， 而人口正在数百万数百万地增长中。 印度每年有1500万人出生。 这相当于荷兰或澳大利亚的总人口 ——1500万人，他们没有工作、穷困潦倒， 你们明白所有这些吗？ 毫无疑问，所有这些问题——阶级斗争、意识形态的战争—— 只有当我们都变得真正文明以后，这些问题才能结束。 也就是，当我们不再执著于自己国家的任何一个方面， 当我们不再以国家和宗教来划分自己， 而是把整个世界当成是我们自己的世界， 那时就不会有困难障碍了。 我对此确信无疑，我们曾经和一些科学家交谈过， 其实世界上所有的人都可以丰衣足食， 居有定所，等等这些 ——只要我们可以消除掉战争，和所有那些可怕的战争工具的话。 但我恐怕我们并没有那么文明。 我们还太野蛮， 因此没有任何一个问题，外在物质上的问题， 曾经得到过解决。
10:36 And the question arises, if there are half a dozen people in the world, who have really transcended, gone beyond the self, which is the highest form of civilisation culture, what effect will they have on the rest of humanity - right? This is a question that has been asked over and over again. You, perhaps, change radically, fundamentally, utterly free from all the idiocy of mankind - what effect will it have on the rest of the world, on the mass as it is called? Will it have any effect? Don't you ask all these questions? 于是这个问题就出来了： 如果这个世界上有六个人， 他们已经真正地超越和摆脱掉了自我 ——这是文明文化的终极形态， 那么他们将会对其他的人类产生怎样的影响呢？对吗？ 这个问题已经被问了一遍又一遍了。 你也许彻底地改变了，从根本上改变了， 完全摆脱掉了人类所有的愚蠢 ——那么这对世界上其他的人， 对所谓的‘群体大众’会有怎样的影响呢？ 它会产生任何影响吗？ 你们难道不会去问这些问题吗？
11:49 Would it be a right question to ask what effect will it have? Are we changing because of the effect? Or we are changing deeply, profoundly, because per se, for itself, for its own beauty, for its own strength and love and compassion and all that. And if we do, perhaps half a dozen or a dozen people in the world, surely it will affect the whole of consciousness of mankind. As Napoleon affected the whole of the world, and so on, and the religious teachers, the real religious teachers, not the phoney ones, have affected the consciousness of mankind. We should bear all this when we say to ourselves, 'If I do change, how will it affect my neighbour, the mass of people?' I think that is a wrong approach to the question. One loves, not because of something, not because one is going to affect the world or your neighbour, but that very quality of the perfume, the depth of it and the beauty of it, will have its own result without each one wanting a result. 去问：它会产生怎样的影响？这难道不是一个正确合理的问题吗？ 我们是因为这种影响而去改变的吗？ 还是说我们之所以正在强烈而深刻地改变， 是因为这件事本身，是为了它本身， 为了它自身的美，为了它自身的力量， 以及爱与慈悲，等等。 而如果我们这样去做了， 也许这个世界上有六个或者十二个人这么做了， 毫无疑问，它将会影响到全人类的整体意识。 就像拿破仑影响了整个世界一样，等等这些， 而那些宗教导师们——真正的宗教导师， 而不是那些冒牌货—— 他们已经影响了人类的意识。 我们应该把这一点铭记在心——当我们对自己说， ‘如果我真的去改变了， 这又会如何影响到我的邻居和群体大众呢？’ 我认为这是一种错误的处理问题的方式。 一个人去爱，并不是因为什么东西， 并不是因为他将会影响这个世界或者你的邻居， 而是因为那种爱本身的芬芳品质， 它的深度和它的美， 将会带来它自身的结果， 而不是因为想要得到什么结果。
13:49 So we had better tackle these questions. There are seven of them this morning. I don't know if we can answer all of them. Why do we put questions? We should. But to whom are you putting these questions? I know... I mean the speaker knows because he has received a lot of letters from all over the world, they want to talk to somebody. They can't talk to their wives or to their husbands, or to somebody with whom they are familiar, but they want to talk to somebody about their problems, their jobs, their quarrels and all those things that make life so utterly miserable. And so one writes letters, long letters. Not that you shouldn't write letters to the speaker, but as it is not possible to talk over together, each one of us separately, can we not look for another to help us, but have that strength, that quality, which resolves our own problems? I know it is nice to talk to somebody, to tell of our pain, our depressions, our anxieties, our ambitions, and in that talk, in that conversation, it might help one. And when we ask questions, how do we approach a question, not only the questions which we ask for ourselves, but also if you ask these questions, how do you approach a question? How do you approach a problem? The word 'approach' means coming very near, coming as close as possible to a question, or to the problem. In what manner do we approach - you understand the English meaning of that word - to come very, very close: I approach you. How do we approach these questions? Not only the questions that have been put to the speaker, but also to any problems, any questions that we have - how do we come near it? Are we first concerned with the solution of the problem? You understand my questions? Suppose I have a problem. My concern then is to find a solution to the problem - right? But the solution may lie in the question itself. You understand? We will go into this. 所以我们最好还是来处理一下这些问题吧。 今天早上有七个问题， 我不知道我们能否回答完所有的问题。 为什么我们要提问题？ 我们应该提问。 但是，你是在向谁提问？ 我理解……我的意思是演讲者理解你们， 因为他曾经收到过来自于全世界各地的大量信件， 写信的人想要找个人谈心。 他们无法跟他们的妻子或丈夫， 或其他他们熟悉的人谈这些东西， 但他们还是想要找个人谈一下 他们面临的问题，他们的工作，他们的争吵， 以及所有那些让生命变得苦不堪言的东西。 于是他们写信，写了很长的信。 不是说你们不应该写信给演讲者， 而是因为我不可能和每一个人一起谈话， 单独地交谈， 所以我们能否不要指望让别人来帮助我们， 而是去拥有那种力量、那种品质 ——它们就可以解决我们自身的问题？ 我知道能够与某人谈心是很好的事情， 去倾诉我们的痛苦、我们的忧愁、 我们的焦虑、我们的野心， 在那种谈话中，在那种交谈中， 或许会给我们带来一些帮助。 而当我们问问题时， 我们是如何对待那个问题的？ 不仅仅是那些我们问自己的问题， 同样的，如果你问了这些问题，你是如何对待一个问题的？ 你是如何对待那个难题的？ ‘对待（approach）’这个词的意思是‘靠得很近’， 尽可能地接近那个问题或者难题。 那么我们是以何种方式接近它的？ ——你们都了解这个词的英文意思—— 非常非常地靠近某物：我靠近了你（I approach you）。 我们是如何对待这些问题的？ 不仅仅是指那些提交给演讲者的问题， 也包括任何我们所遇到的问题和难题 ——我们是如何接近它的？ 我们首先关心的是不是就是去解决问题？ 你理解我的提问吗？ 假如我有了一个问题。 那时我关心的是去找到问题的解决方案——对吧？ 然而那个解决方案也许存在于问题本身之中。 你理解了吗？我们将会来深入这一点。
18:28 Shouldn't we approach the problem tentatively, hesitantly, and if you have a motive, then the motive directs the problem. Clear? Right? Is this clear? We are discussing this together, the question, how to approach the question. Could we approach it without a motive, first? Because if you have a motive, it has already set a direction to the question - right? You understand? It is clear, isn't it? If we have any kind of direction, which is the solution, then we have already limited it - right? So could we approach a problem without a motive, without seeking a solution for it? Or wanting the problem to be solved according to our pleasure and pain? Could we approach the problem without any reaction? Which is going to be very difficult because when we have a problem we react to it instantly - right? So could we have a gap, a sense of not having any motive, any direction, like or dislike, then you can look at the problem - right? - not project your own wishes, your own desires - right? Then you can look at the problem, study the problem, go into the problem, and in the understanding of the problem the solution is there, not outside the problem - right? I talked - we talked to some of the politicians about this - I know they are the last people - but we talked to them. They said all this takes too long. We have to resolve our problems immediately because they are starving, there are people who are terrorists and so on. They never go to the cause of things - you understand? They want quick - all of us do, not the politicians only - all of us want a quick, immediate, convenient answer. If one has a headache as most people apparently do, we never find out why it arises, what is the cause of it, but what we do is take a pill quickly, but the cause is there. So to investigate the cause, go into it very, very deeply requires a brain that is not reacting all the time - defending, attacking, aggressive - you follow? It must have the quality of pliability, quickness, but the quickness comes when there is patience. Patience is not time. Patience is the quality of a brain that is looking, watching. I wonder if you see all this? Right? 我们难道不应该试探性地、犹豫不定地来对待那个问题吗？ 因为如果你有了一个动机， 那么这个动机就会指挥引导那个问题。清楚了吗？ 对吧？这一点清楚了吗？ 我们正在一起讨论这个， 这个问题，如何去对待问题？ 首先，我们能够没有动机地来对待它吗？ 因为如果你有一个动机的话， 那么这个动机就已经为那个问题设定了一个方向——对吧？ 你理解了吗？这是很显然的，不是吗？ 如果我们有了任何方向——也就是解决方案的话， 那么我们就已经局限了它——对吧？ 所以我们能否这样来对待处理问题——即不带任何动机， 也不寻求问题的解决方案， 或者想要那个问题根据我们自身的快乐痛苦来加以解决？ 我们能否不带任何反应地来对待处理问题？ 而这将会是非常困难的， 因为当我们有了一个问题时，我们就会立即对此作出反应——对吧？ 所以我们能不能有一个间隙？ 那种没有任何动机、任何方向，和任何个人喜好的感觉？ 那时你就可以去观察那个问题了——对吗？—— 而不是去投射出你自己的希望，你自己的欲望——对吧？ 那时你就可以去看那个问题了， 你可以去研究那个问题，深入那个问题， 而就在了解问题的过程中， 解决方案自然就在那里了，而不是在问题之外——对吗？ 我曾经——我们曾经与一些政界人士探讨过这件事 ——我知道最没有必要和政界人士谈这个——但我们还是和他们谈了谈。 他们说这一切需要花费太长的时间。 而我们必须要立刻解决我们的问题， 因为人们正在挨饿， 还有那些恐怖分子，等等。 他们从来不会去追究事情的起因 ——你们理解了吗？ 他们就想要快一点——我们所有人都是如此，而不只是那些政界人士—— 我们所有人都想要一个快速、立即、方便的解答。 如果我们头痛了——大多数人很显然都会头痛， 我们从来不会去发现为什么会有头痛？头痛的原因是什么？ 我们所做的就是赶快吃个药， 但是那个病因仍旧存在着。 而要去调查那个原因，去非常非常深入地探究它， 这需要一个不会一直不停反应的头脑 ——不会去防卫、攻击、咄咄逼人——你明白了吗？ 它必须要有那种柔软灵活和迅捷的品质， 而只有当有了耐心时，那种迅捷才会出现。 耐心并非时间。 耐心是那个在看，在观察着的头脑的品质。 我不知道你们是否看到了这一切？对吗？
22:46 So here are some questions, some friends have chosen these questions. They have shown me all the questions, but they chose these, I haven't seen them, nor have you seen them - right? So let both of us approach it without motive, without any kind of reaction, like or dislike, but just listen to the question first, so that your answer or rather the solution will be real, not just fancy, imaginative, illusory - right? So you and the speaker are going to approach this question hesitantly, without any motive, without any reaction - right? 好了，这里有一些问题， 一些朋友们帮我挑选了这些问题。 他们给了我所有这些问题， 但问题都是他们挑选的，我并没有事先看过这些问题， 你们也都没有看过——对吧？ 所以让我们双方都毫无动机地、 不带任何反应、不带任何喜好厌恶地来处理对待它们， 首先，我们只是聆听那个问题， 由此你的答案，或者更确切地说是问题的解决就是真实的， 而不只是幻想、想象、和虚幻的东西——对吧？ 所以你和演讲者 将会犹豫不定地、 没有任何动机、没有任何反应地来处理这个问题——对吧？
24:13 How do we tell the difference between observing ourselves in the sense you mean and merely thinking about ourselves? 我们要如何分辨 你所指的那种自我观察 和仅仅考虑自己之间的不同？
24:29 How do we tell the difference between observing ourselves in the sense you mean and merely thinking about ourselves? Right? 我们要如何分辨 你所指的那种自我观察 和仅仅考虑自己之间的不同？对吗？
24:51 Have you got the answer? Thinking about ourselves and observing ourselves. They are two different things according to this question. Thinking about oneself which we all do - I am making progress, I am better than yesterday, I have my problems which is thinking, I wish I had better food, better clothing, better housing, or I wish I had more sex - you follow? - money - thinking about oneself all the time which most of us do, even the austere monk, he does think about himself - right? Only in the name of God - right? And the questioner says, what is the difference between that - thinking about yourself - and observing yourself - right? Right, that is the question. 你们有答案了吗？ 考虑我们自己和观察我们自己。 根据这个问题来看，它们是两件不同的事情。 考虑自己的事情，我们都会这么做 ——我正在不断进步，我要比昨天更好， 我有我的问题——这也是一种考虑， 我希望我能有更好的食物，更好的衣服，更好的房子， 或者我希望我能有更多的性体验——你明白了吗？——更多的钱—— 一直考虑着自己的事，这就是我们大多数人做的事情， 即使是苦行的僧侣，他也会考虑他自己——对吧？ 只是以神的名义罢了——对吗？ 而这个提问者说， 这两者之间有什么区别——考虑自己 和观察自己——对吗？ 对吧，就是这个问题。
26:20 Now we know what it means to think about ourselves - right? It is really going round and round in circles. Either expanding the self, the ego, or contracting the ego - right? I am the world, I am God, I must be more kindly, I must love, I must be more intelligent, I must meditate in order to achieve whatever they want to achieve. So we are all caught in that. And observing oneself is something entirely different - right? 现在，我们知道了考虑我们自己是什么意思——对吧？ 它其实是在不停地绕圈子。 要么扩张自己，扩张自我，要么就是收缩自我——对吧？ 我就是全世界，我就是上帝， 我必须要更加善良，我必须有爱， 我必须变得更加智慧， 我必须去冥想，从而去实现——无论他们想要实现的是什么东西。 所以我们都深陷其中。 而观察自己则是某种截然不同的事情——对吗？
27:21 Then let's find out what does it mean to observe. You understand the question? We are together in this? Come on, sirs! 那么就让我们来发现一下观察是什么意思。 你明白这个问题吗？ 我们都明白它了吗？来吧，先生们！
27:39 First of all, do we observe anything without the word? Do we observe the mountain and not call it mountain? Do we observe the evening light on the cloud with its most extraordinary colour, beauty and something immense, can we look at those clouds and the mountain without using a single word? Can we do that? You understand my question? Don't look so paralysed. That is, can we look at anything objectively - the trees, nature, the waters, the sky and the evening star, and the silence of a morning, this extraordinary world we live in, natural world - can we look at anything without a single word? And to find that out we have to find, go into the question why the brain is caught in a network of words? You understand my question? Are we together in this? 首先，我们是不带文字地在观察任何事物吗？ 我们是否观察那座高山却没有把它称为‘高山’？ 当我们观察夜光洒在云朵上， 那种非凡特别的色彩、那种美、和那种无限的东西， 我们能否观察这些云朵和高山， 却不使用哪怕一个字？ 我们能这样做吗？ 你明白我的问题吗？ 不要看起来如此麻痹瘫痪。 也就是说，我们能否客观地去看每一样东西 ——去看树木，看大自然，看河水， 看天空和夜晚的繁星， 以及清晨的寂静， 去看我们所生活的这个非凡的世界，大自然的世界—— 我们能够去看任何事物而没有哪怕一个字吗？ 要发现这一点， 我们就必须去发现，去探究这个问题： 为什么头脑会受困于文字的罗网中？ 你理解我的问题吗？这点我们都理解了吗？
29:47 We are asking, can we look at anything including my wife, my husband, my daughter, the politicians, the various gurus and the priests and all the circus that goes on in the name of religion, can we look at all that without reaction, first? Then find out if we can look at all that without the network of words interfering with our observation. Can we do that? Have you ever tried that? When one looks at one's wife or husband, can you look at her or him without all the images, all the things that you have accumulated about her or him, just to look? Can you? You are exceptionally silent when I talk about the husband and the wife and the girl and the boy. So one has to find out why the brain is so caught up in words. When you say he is a communist or a totalitarian you have wiped it out, you have put him in a category, in a cage, and that is the end of it. Or he is British. Or he is French, or he is an Indian, or he is this or that. See what is happening to our brain. Linguistically the brain has been caught with words, not the significance and the depth of the word, but just the word. This requires careful watching. Watching is to observe. There was a balloon going up this morning, you must have all seen it, and you watched it going up and up and up very, very slowly. The gondola hanging and you saw the whole thing. Then you might say, 'By Jove, I wish I were up there', or you say to yourself, 'How dangerous'. And so on. We never look at anything without words, without reactions - look. 我们在问， 我们能否去看任何东西……——包括我的妻子、我的丈夫、我的女儿、 那些政客，各种古鲁和牧师， 以及所有以宗教的名义而进行着的闹剧， 我们能否看着所有这些东西而不产生反应？这是第一步。 然后去发现我们能否看着所有这些东西 而不让文字的罗网干扰妨碍我们的观察。 我们能这样做吗？ 你是否曾经试着这样做过？ 当我们看着自己的妻子或丈夫时， 你能否看着妻子或丈夫而没有关于他（她）的一切形象， 没有你所积累下来的关于他（她）的一切记忆， 而只是去看？ 你可以吗？ 当我谈到丈夫和妻子，女朋友和男朋友的时候， 你们都变得格外安静了。 所以我们必须要去发现 为什么头脑会如此地陷入于文字之中？ 当你说他是一个共产主义者或极权主义者时， 你就已经彻底摧毁了他， 你已经把他归类了，把他置于某个笼子里了， 然后这件事就结束了。 或者你会说他是个英国人。 或者他是法国人，他是印度人，他是这个或那个。 看看我们的头脑发生了什么？ 头脑已经在语言上陷入于文字中了， 不是文字的意义和深层含义， 而单纯只是文字。 这需要非常仔细小心地去看。 去看就是去观察。 今天早上，有一个热气球升上了天空， 你们一定也都看见了， 你看着它 徐徐上升，非常非常缓慢地上升。 热气球下面悬挂着一条刚朵拉船（gondola），而你看到了这一切。 然后你也许会说，‘天啊，我真希望我也能在那上面’， 或者你会对自己说，‘这也太危险了’。 等等。 我们从来没有看着某个事物而不带着文字，不带着反应——只是去看。
33:21 Now you are all sitting there and you are unfortunately seeing the speaker. And you have already put him into a category. You already have an image about him. You already say he is this, he is that or he is some kind of idiot or whatever you like to say about him. So you never... He has forgotten to whistle! So you never look at him as though for the first time. You understand? Have you ever done this kind of thing? Not just for a minute or for an hour or a day, but the freshness of a mind, brain - you understand? - which is not caught in words, reactions, look at everything as though for the first time you are looking at the world. That observation is to watch oneself, never allowing a single thought to escape without watching it, being aware of it, giving your whole attention to that one thought. And then another thought - keep at it. So that your brain is tremendously attentive. You understand? So that watching is not egocentric movement. Whereas thinking about yourself is egotistic, self-centred activity. It is clear, isn't it? 此刻你们正坐在这里， 你们很不幸地看到了演讲者。 而你早已把他归为某一类人了。 你已经有了一个关于他的形象。 你说他是这个，他是那个，或者他是个傻瓜， 或者无论你想怎么评价他。 所以，你从来没有 他忘记鸣汽笛了！ 所以你从来没有若如初见般地去看他。 你理解了吗？ 你有没有做过这样的事情呢？ 不只是花上一分钟、一个小时或一天的时间去这样做， 而是让头脑和大脑变得焕然一新——你明白了吗？—— 也就是不再陷入于文字和反应之中， 去观察一切事物，就好像你是第一次 看到这个世界一样。 那种观察就是看着自己， 而决不让任何一个念头溜走， 看到每一个念头，觉察到每一个念头， 去全神贯注于那个念头。 然后另一个念头出现了——继续保持这样做。 由此你的头脑就会保持高度的警惕。 你明白了吗？ 由此那种观察就不是自我中心的活动。 然而考虑你自己则是自私自利的、自我中心的活动。 这是显而易见的，不是吗？
35:57 Now, just a minute. How do we move from this to that? Right? You are asking naturally, you must ask that question. Or am I asking the question and you are accepting it? You understand? Suppose one is self-centred, I am self-centred, egocentric, all my outlook is personal - I am not loved, I must love - you know, all that kind of turmoil, silliness that goes on. I am that, one is that. Then how am I... how is it to move to the other? Right? You are asking that question, aren't you? Is that a right question? Moving from here to there. That is a wrong question, obviously. Because if you move from here to that, that is the same as this. Vous avez compris? Move! You understand this? If I say I am selfish, now I must not be selfish, I must observe. The 'must' is still in the same category or the same movement as thinking about oneself. Right? Are we together in all this? Some of us are I hope at least. 现在，等一等。 那么我们要如何从这个转到那个呢？ 对吗？ 你自然会这么问，你必然会问这个问题。 还是说是我在问这个问题，而你只是接受它？ 你明白了吗？ 假如某人是自我中心的，我是自我中心的、利己主义的， 我所有的看法都是自我化的 ——我没有人爱，或者我必须要去爱—— 你知道的，所有这类正在发生着的混乱和愚蠢之事。 我是这样的，某人是这样的。 那么我要如何……我要如何才能转到另一个呢？ 对吧？ 你正在问这个问题，不是吗？ 这是一个正确的问题吗？ 从这里到那里。很显然，这是一个错误的问题。 因为如果你从这里转到那里， 它其实是同一回事。 你明白了吗？（法语） 行动起来！ 你明白这一点吗？ 如果我说我是自私的， 但现在，我决不能再自私了，所以我必须去观察。 然而这个‘必须’，它仍旧是落入于和考虑自己 一样的范畴或运动中的。对吧？ 我们都明白所有这一切了吗？ 我希望至少有一些人在这样做。
38:03 So the question then is answered, not the answer is outside the question, but the answer is in the question. Right? That is observing the question itself, what it reveals. It reveals a tremendous lot. Because, you see, observing, if I can put it differently, observing, perceiving has no time. The other is caught in time, thinking about myself, I will fulfil one day, I have no roots now, but I am going to establish roots some time, I have no identity - you follow? All those are time-binding qualities. Time-binding quality is essentially the self. I don't know if you want to go into all that. I am finding all this as I talk - right? Whereas watching, if you watch that bird, there is no time in that at all, just watching - right? So the word and thought create time. I won't go into all that. Got it? 因此那个问题就得到了解答， 答案并不在问题之外， 答案就存在于问题之中。对吗？ 也就是，去观察问题本身， 看看它揭示透露了什么。 它其实会揭示出很多很多的东西。 因为你瞧，观察，如果我可以换种说法的话， 观察、洞察是没有时间的。 而另一个则是受困于时间中的， 考虑我自己， 有一天我将会实现自己， 我现在无处扎根， 但未来的某个时候，我将会扎根于某处， 我现在没有身份——你们明白了吗？ 所有这些都是受缚于时间的特征。 受缚于时间的特征本质上就是自我。 我不知道你们是否想要探讨所有这些东西。 我正一边演讲一边发现着这些东西——对吧？ 然而观察， 如果你观察那只鸟儿，这其中是完全没有任何时间的， 只是看——对吧？ 因此，文字和思想创造出了时间。 我就不深入这些东西了。明白了吗？
39:55 In relationship with another memory is there. What is the action of not letting memory intrude? Is it to see its presence as it arises and drop it instantly? Or should one be in a state where memory does not raise its head unless it is necessary. 在与他人的关系中，记忆已经在那儿了。 那么那种不让记忆侵入的行动是什么？ 是不是当记忆出现时，看到它的存在， 然后立即丢弃它？ 还是说我们应该处于这样一种状态： 在其中，记忆只会在有必要的时候 才会抬起头来？
40:30 I will read the question again more slowly. In relationship with another - please, we are listening to the question - not reacting to your relationship. Your wife is sitting next to you, don't react. It is very difficult. It is a rummy world, isn't it? In relationship with another memory is there. What is the action of not letting memory intrude? Is it to see its presence as it arises and drop it instantly? Or should one be in a state where memory does not raise its head unless necessary? Right? Have you got the question? Have you got the question? Shall I read it again? Do you want me to read it again? In relationship with another memory is there. What is the action of not letting memory intrude? Is it to see its presence as it arises and drop it instantly? Or should one be in a state where memory does not raise its head unless necessary? 我再来读一遍问题，慢一点地来读一下。 在与他人的关系中 ——请注意，我们正在聆听这个问题—— 请不要联想到你自己的关系从而产生反应。 你的妻子正坐在你旁边，不要有所反应。 这是非常难的。 这是一个危险而又奇妙的世界，不是吗？ 在与他人的关系中，记忆已经在那儿了。 那么那种不让记忆侵入的行动是什么？ 是不是当记忆出现时，看到它的存在， 然后立即丢弃它？ 还是说我们应该处于这样一种状态： 也就是，记忆只会在有必要的时候才会抬起头来？ 对吗？你们明白这个问题了吗？ 你们明白这个问题了吗？需要我再读一遍吗？ 你们想要我再读一遍吗？ 在与他人的关系中，记忆已经在那儿了。 那么那种不让记忆侵入的行动是什么？ 是不是当记忆出现时，看到它的存在， 然后立即丢弃它？ 还是说我们应该处于这样一种状态： 在其中，记忆只会在有必要的时候才会抬起头来？
42:57 What is the question? The question is, in our relationship with each other, intimate or not, memory is there - right? It is always there because one is living with that person - cooking, sex, washing up - the speaker has done a lot of washing up. Wherever he goes he washes up! Except in India - there they won't allow it. 这个问题问的是什么？ 这个问题就是， 在我们彼此间的关系中——不管那种关系亲密与否—— 记忆已经在那里了——对吧？ 记忆永远都在那里， 因为我和那个人生活在一起 ——烧菜做饭，做爱，然后洗碗—— 演讲者已经洗过很多的碗了。 无论他去哪里，他都会自己洗碗！ 除了在印度——那里的人不允许我洗碗。
44:04 Now the actual state in our relationship with another is the activity of memory. There is no refutation of that. That is so. Right? Do you all agree to that - no? You are not sure. Is not our relationship based on recognition, words - my wife, my husband, what she said this morning, he was moody, you only looked at the newspaper, never looked at me, his concern about his job and so on? That is the memory in operation. Nobody can deny that. What is the action, the questioner asks, of not letting memory intrude? Memory is there - right? It is not a question of memory intruding - right? The question is put wrongly. That is, there is another conclusion that memory should not intrude in relationship - you follow? You have already come to that conclusion by listening to the speaker and saying 'Yes, quite right, memory should not intrude'. Then you say to me, ask the question, 'How is it possible?' You have put a wrong question, then you answer it wrongly. Right? Let's get that clear. 你瞧，我们与他人关系中的真实状态 其实是记忆的活动。 这是无可辩驳的。 它就是如此。对吧？ 你们都同意这一点吗？不同意？ 你不确定。 我们的关系难道不是建立在识别和文字之上的吗？ ——我的妻子、我的丈夫， 她今天早上所说的话：你是一个喜怒无常的人， 你只知道看报纸，从来不看看我， 他只关心他的工作，等等？ 这就是记忆的运作了。 没有人可以否认这一点。 提问者问，那种 不让记忆侵入的行动是什么？ 记忆就在那里——对吧？ 这其实并不是一个记忆侵入的问题——对吧？ 这个问题问错了。 也就是说，你有了另外一个结论： 即记忆不应该侵入关系之中——你明白了吗？ 你已经得出了那个结论， 你听了演讲者所说的东西，于是说， ‘是的，很对，记忆不应该侵入进来’。 然后你对我说，你问了这个问题，‘这（记忆不侵入进来）怎么可能呢？’ 你提出了一个错误的问题，然后你又作出了错误的回答。 对吗？让我们先清楚这一点。
46:40 We live with memories, not only with regard to our intimate relationship with another, but also the long series of memories which we have accumulated through time. The racial memory, the linguistic memory, social memory, legislative memory, the memory of having read books - this whole accumulation of memories from childhood and the racial memories which has been impressed upon us and so on. So we have memories. We are memories - right? Be clear, let's be clear on this point. We are past and present memories and also the future memories unless there is something, a catharsis or a crisis and so on arises. So memories of the past, the present and the future is what we are. Traditionally, religiously, socially and so on - class, economics. I won't go into all that, repeat it over and over again. So we are memories. And she adds to that memory, or he adds to that memory, so we are all the time accumulating memories, not that memories intrude. Right? When you say that memories should not intrude it is another form of memory. Have we understood? Because you have heard the speaker say in relationship knowledge is a danger, knowledge is an impediment - that you have accepted, or you see that, and you say, 'Now how am I to prevent that memory intruding?', but you are a bundle of memories. You don't want that particular memory with your wife or husband, to intrude. There you want a good relationship, but elsewhere it doesn't matter - right? 我们都带着记忆而生活， 不仅是关于我们与他人亲密关系的记忆， 也包括那一系列 我们经由时间而积累起来的漫长的记忆。 种族的记忆、语言的记忆、 社会的记忆、立法的记忆， 关于阅读过的书籍的记忆 ——所有这些从小积累起来的记忆， 还有那些印刻在我们身上的 种族的记忆，等等。 所以我们有着这些记忆。 我们就是记忆——对吧？ 这一点要搞清楚，我们要清楚这一点。 我们是过去和现在的记忆， 同样也是未来的记忆， 除非有某种事情发生 ——比如一次净化，或一次危机等等。 所以，过去、现在和未来的记忆 就是我们。 传统的记忆、宗教的记忆，社会的记忆等等 ——阶级的记忆、经济的记忆。 我就不深入所有这些，一遍又一遍地重复它了。 所以我们就是记忆。 而她增加了那种记忆， 或者他增加了那种记忆， 因此我们一直都在不断积累记忆， 而不是那些记忆侵入进来了。对吧？ 当你说那种记忆不应该侵入进来， 这其实是另一种形式的记忆。 我们都理解了吗？ 因为你曾经听演讲者说过： 在关系中，知识是危险的， 知识是一种妨碍——你接受了这一点， 或者说你看到了这一点，于是你说， ‘那么，我要如何才能阻止那种记忆侵入进来呢？’ 但是你自己就是一堆记忆。 你不想让那种特定的 关于你妻子或丈夫的记忆侵入进来。 因为你想要你们之间能有一种良好的关系， 然而在其他地方，你就无所谓了——对吗？
50:01 The questioner asks, is it to see it's present, that is the memory arising, and as it arises, drop it instantly, in relationship? You understand? Have you understood? Come on, sirs. Somebody say yes or no, whether you understand it or not. Or should one be in a state where memory does not raise its head unless necessary? It is a very complicated question - right? And requires not a complicated brain, but a very simple brain can observe this. I am going to show it to you in a minute. 提问者问， 那种行动是不是就是看到它的存在后——也就是当记忆出现时， 当它出现时，立刻就丢弃掉它， 当它出现在关系中时。你们明白了吗？ 你们明白了吗？加油啊，先生们。 有人在问你们是否明白了，你们是否理解了它。 还是说我们应该处于这样一种状态： 在其中，记忆只会在有必要的时候才会抬起头来？ 这是一个非常复杂的问题——对吗？ 这个问题需要的不是一个复杂的头脑， 只有一个非常简单的头脑才能观察它。 我马上就会来向你们说明它。
51:12 I am and you are memories, a bundle of memories. Even if you say there is in me, god, light, a sense of spirituality, it is still memory. So I am the whole structure of the ego, me and all my knowledge is memory. Now I see in my relationship with my wife, or husband, or children, or neighbour, these memories are always included. The memory of my wife who said something nasty or bullied me, or said something pleasant, or exciting, it is still I have gathered that memory. Right? So the question is - are you following all this? - the question is why does the brain retain all these memories - right? Would you ask that question? Right, sir? Why does the brain retain something pleasant she has told me and something unpleasant which she said yesterday that also is recorded, both pleasant and unpleasant are recorded, which becomes memory - right? Why does the brain record? That is the question. You understand? 我是记忆，你也是记忆，一大堆的记忆。 即使你说在我之中存在着上帝、光明、灵性的感受， 它仍旧是记忆。 所以我就是那整个自我的结构， 我和我所有的知识都是记忆。 而现在，我看到在我和我的妻子、 丈夫、孩子或邻居的关系中， 总是包含着这些记忆。 我记得我的妻子曾经对我恶语相向，或者威胁我， 或者她曾说过一些令人愉快或激动的话， 它仍旧是，我已经收集起了那些记忆。对吧？ 所以问题就是——你们明白这一切了吗？—— 问题就是， 为什么头脑要保留所有这些记忆——对吗？ 你会问这个问题吗？对吗？先生？ 为什么头脑会保留她曾经对我说过的那些令人愉快的话， 以及她昨天所说的那些令人不快的话， 这同样也被记录了下来， 令人愉快的和令人不快的，都被记录了下来， 它们变成了记忆——对吧？ 为什么头脑要记录呢？ 这就是问题所在。你明白了吗？
53:10 There has been a war forty years ago, nearly forty years ago, and they write books about it, they are talking about it, they show on the television various exciting scenes about war, the various material for destruction. You know, kept up, keep this going all the time - why? You understand? We will go into it. 四十年前——将近四十年前——曾经有过一次战争， 之后人们写了很多关于这次战争的书籍，人们谈论它， 他们在电视上展示各种战争的刺激场面， 各种用来毁灭世界的材料用具。 你知道的，保持着它，一直维持着这一切——为什么？ 你明白吗？我们将会来探究它。
53:41 So we are asking a much more serious fundamental question: why does the brain record everything? Why should it record the unpleasant and the pleasant - it is in a state of constant recording? Right? We are agreed to this? This is a fact, not the speaker's invention. Now the question is, it is necessary to record how to drive a car - right? - how to write a letter, to be skilful in using instruments, to have knowledge in dismantling a car and putting it together, which the speaker has done - so it is necessary there. Right? Now why does it record psychologically inwardly? You have got the question? We are asking this question. Is it necessary to record the pleasant, the unpleasant, the flattery, the insult, the sense of, you know, all the rest of it, is it necessary? Or the psychological recording gives strength, builds up the ego, the me, the personality - you understand? See that. Recording is necessary, otherwise we couldn't do anything in the physical world. If you are a businessman, you have to know quite a lot, if you are a banker, you have to know a great deal, if you are a surgeon or a doctor, eye specialist - you follow? - or a builder of computers, you must know a great deal. There it is absolutely necessary - right? 所以我们正在问一个更为严肃和根本性的问题： 为什么头脑要记录下每一件事情？ 为什么它要去记录那些不快乐的和快乐的事情 ——它处于一种不断记录的状态中。 对吧？我们都同意这一点吗？ 这是一个事实，而不是演讲者的发明。 而现在，问题就是： 我们有必要去记录如何驾驶汽车——对吧？—— 如何写一封信，如何熟练地使用各种仪器工具， 拥有相关的知识，知道如何拆卸一辆汽车，然后再把它组装起来 ——演讲者就曾经干过这事儿—— 所以这些地方的记录是有必要的。对吧？ 那么，为什么它要在内心、在心理上也去记录呢？ 你们明白这个问题吗？我们正在询问这个问题。 是否有必要去记录那些快乐之事、 不快乐之事、奉承和侮辱， 某种感觉，你知道的，等等这类东西， 有必要吗？ 还是说那种心理上的记录 给予了自我 力量，加强了那个自我， 那个‘我’，那种个体性——你明白了吗？ 请看到这一点。 记录是有必要的， 否则的话，我们就无法在现实世界中做任何事情了。 如果你是一个商人，你必须要知道很多东西， 如果你是一位银行家，你必须学识渊博才行， 如果你是一位外科医师或者医生，或者眼科专家——你明白了吗？—— 或者计算机的制造者， 你必须拥有大量的知识才行。 在这些地方，记录是绝对必要的——对吧？
56:17 Now we are asking inwardly, inside the skin as it were, which is the psyche, the psychological area, why should there be any recording there? Is it an extension of the outer physical necessities into the psychological necessities - is it an extension of that? Is it an extension of that? You understand? Is it a continuity of the outer knowledge which is necessary and we say psychologically also it is necessary? We never question it. You understand what I am saying? Are we somewhat together in this? Surely you are not paralysed, are you? So, please I am not hypnotising. 而现在，我们问，内在上，皮肤里面， 也就是心智领域，心理学的领域中， 为什么那里也要有任何的记录呢？ 是不是外在物质世界中记录的必要性也延伸扩展到了 心理世界记录的必要性 ——它是不是物质世界记录必要性的延伸扩展？ 它是不是物质世界记录必要性的延伸扩展？你明白了吗？ 它是不是外在必要知识的延续， 于是我们说心理上，那种记录也是必要的？ 我们从来没有质疑过它。 你明白我所说的东西吗？ 我们是不是多少有点理解它了？ 毫无疑问，你们还没有麻痹瘫痪吧，对吧？ 所以，请注意，我并不是在催眠你们。
57:38 So we are questioning the whole recording process. When I see that what she has said this morning is not important, it is not necessary, she will say something different tomorrow, I will say something to her, something entirely different. Right? We both play this game. And what does it matter? Is it necessary? Which means I am building an image about her, and she is building an image about me, a picture about me. The picture, the image, the symbol becomes very strong - right? You know all this, don't you? It becomes tremendously strong. Therefore I say, 'She is like that', and she says, 'I am like that', and we keep apart except perhaps in bed. And the division grows wider and wider and wider, and I break or she breaks, and I pursue another woman and start the same old game again there, and she does exactly the same. Right? Do you agree to all this, the much married people? 我们正在质疑这整个记录的过程。 当我明白 她今天早上所说的东西并不重要， 没有必要去记录时， 她明天又会改口说些不同的话了， 而我也会对她说一些话，某些截然不同的话。 对吧？我们都在玩这个游戏。 所以，这又有什么关系呢？有必要去记录吗？ 也就是说，我正在建立起一个关于她的形象， 而她也正在建立起一个关于我的形象，关于我的意象。 而那个意象、那个形象、那个符号变得非常强大了——对吧？ 你们都清楚这一切，不是吗？ 它变得无比的强大。 因此我会说，‘她就是这个样子的’， 而她也会说，‘我就是这样的人’， 所以我们是彼此分离的——除了也许在床上的时候。 而我们彼此之间的分隔变得越来越大， 于是我和她分手了，或者她和我分手了，然后我去追求另一个女人， 然后再次开始同样的老游戏， 而她也会做一样的事情。对吧？ 你们同意这一切吗？你们中那些结婚多次的人士？
59:39 So this is going on. And we are saying, in examining the question the inevitable question arises, is it possible not to record, psychologically? What does it mean? Can this happen? This mechanical process? It is a mechanical process. The brain has become accustomed to it, it is part of its tradition, it is part of its continuation of sustaining itself as the self - right? So we are asking, is it possible? Record there where it is absolutely necessary, not to record at all psychologically? Don't you see the beauty of this, for God's sake? Which means, first of all see the danger of recording psychologically. I am a Hindu, you are a Christian - right? You are a Buddhist or Tibetan or belonging to some potty little guru, he may have a lot of money, a lot of power position, but it is still a very potty little affair. So you see all this. So we are asking, is it possible not to record inwardly? What is your answer? I have put you a question. You have put me several questions, but I am putting you a question. Is it possible not to record psychologically? Which means not to get hurt or flattered - it is the same thing. You may say it is possible, or you might say it is not possible. If you say either of those things, you are blocking yourself - right? If you say, 'I can't walk up that mountain', you stop walking. But if you say, 'Well, I will walk, see what happens', then a totally different action takes place. 所以这样的事情正在发生着。 而我们在说的是， 就在检视这个问题的过程中，一个不可避免的问题就会出现： 我们是否可能在心理上不去记录？ 它意味着什么？ 这件事可能发生吗？ 这个机械化的过程？它是一种机械化的过程。 头脑已经变得习惯于它了， 它是头脑传统的一部分， 它是头脑持续不断维持它自身 ——也就是自我——的一部分？对吗？ 所以我们在问：这可能吗？ 在绝对必要的情况下才去记录， 而心理上则完全不去记录？ 看在上帝的份上，你难道没有看到这其中的美吗？ 这意味着， 首先要看到心理上记录的危险之处。 我是一个印度教徒， 而你是一个基督教徒——对吗？ 你是一个佛教徒或者西藏人， 或者你归属于某个卑微愚蠢古鲁的门下， 他也许有很多的钱，有很大的权力地位， 但那仍旧是一件非常愚蠢卑微的事情。 所以你看到了这一切。 因此我们在问：是否可能内在上不去记录呢？ 你的答案是什么？ 我向你提出了一个问题。 你们问了我好几个问题， 但我也要问你们一个问题： 是否可能在心理上不去记录？ 这意味着不会受到伤害 或者受到奉承——它们是同一回事。 你也许会说这是可能的， 或者你会说这不可能。 可如果你说了其中任何一者，你就封闭阻塞了你自己——对吗？ 如果你说，‘我无法爬上那座高山’， 你就会停止爬山了。 但如果你说，‘好啊，我将会去爬山，看看会发生什么’， 那时就会有截然不同的行动了。
1:02:47 So what is your answer? The questioner's answer is this. 所以，你的回答是什么？ 这就是我对于提问者问题的回答。
1:03:09 Are you aware of anything? Aware of the shape of this tent, how many sections there are in this tent, the printed word of the owner of the tent there, are you aware of all this? The proportions of it, the length of it, not measuring, the length of it, and are you aware of the people sitting around you, the various colours, the faces, different faces - young, old, white-haired, black-haired, and so on - are you aware of all this? Or you have never looked? If you are not aware, then you may not be aware of your own reactions. You may not be aware of your own responses. You may not be aware of your body because you are terribly intellectual, all living up there. Or you are very romantic. Are you aware of all this? Sentimental, attached and so on. If you are aware, aware, not say, 'Well, I am aware, but I don't like that shirt, it is too blue'. So I was told this morning. So are we aware in that sense, without choosing, a choiceless awareness? Then if you are so choicelessly aware, then you are attentive - you understand? Choiceless awareness means attention, not cultivated, say, 'I must attend'. But becoming aware of the trees, the birds, the balloons going up, the mountains, the light on the clouds, the evening, the moonlight and so on, watching, watching. Aware of all this, and your reaction to all this, and by not responding, not choosing - I like this, I don't like that, it is mine, it is yours, you follow? Just to be aware. From this choiceless awareness there is attention, attending with your eyes, with your ears, with your nerves, with all your being. Then when she says something to me, I am fully attentive - right? She says, 'You are a brute', because I am attentive there is no reaction. You understand? It is only when there is inattention there is reaction. Get it? 你是否觉察到了任何事物？ 觉察到了这个帐篷的形状， 这个帐篷里有几个区域？ 某处所印刷着的帐篷所有者的名字， 你们觉察到这一切了吗？ 帐篷的大小，帐篷的长度， 不是要去测量它，而是觉察到它的长度， 你是否觉察到了坐在你周围的人， 各种肤色的人，他们的脸，各种不同的脸 ——年轻的、年老的、白发的、黑发的、等等—— 你觉察到这一切了吗？ 还是说你从来没有去看过？ 如果你没有觉察， 那么你也许就不会意识到你自己的反应了。 你也许不会意识到你自己的响应。 你也许不会意识到自己的身体， 因为你是高度智性的，高高在上。 或者你是非常浪漫多情的。 你是否意识到了所有这些？你的多愁善感，你的执著依赖，等等。 如果你意识到了，觉察到了它， 不是说，‘啊，我在觉察， 但是我不喜欢那件衬衫，它太蓝了’。 所以今天早上就有人对我这样说了。 所以，我们是否有着这种意义上的觉察：没有选择， 一种无选择的觉察？ 那时，如果你是如此无选择地去觉察， 那么你就是留心注意（attentive）的——你明白了吗？ 无选择的觉察意味着留心注意， 不是培养出来的留心注意，说，‘我必须要留心注意’。 而是去觉察到那些树木、鸟儿、缓缓上升的汽球、 觉察那些高山，那些云朵的光彩， 觉察夜晚和月光，等等， 观察再观察。觉察到所有这些东西， 以及你对于所有这些东西的反应， 不要去作出反应，不要去选择 ——我喜欢这个，我不喜欢那个，它是我的，它是你的，你明白了吗？ 只是保持觉察。 从这种无选择的觉察之中就会有留心注意， 用你的眼睛、耳朵、 神经和你全部的存在去留心注意。 然后，当她对我说了某些话时，我就是完全留心注意的——对吧？ 她说，‘你是个畜生’， 因为我保持着留心注意，由此便不会有反应了。你明白了吗？ 只有当有了心不在焉（inattention）时，才会有反应。明白它了吗？
1:06:51 Gosh, it takes a long time to tell all this. Have you got it? When there is complete attention there is no recording. But I must completely attend there, in driving a car, I must be tremendously attentive. Attention is there and here - attention. But the moment that I am inattentive to what she is saying it is recorded, naturally. You have got it? Will you do it? That is the fun, not just listen to a lot of words, but if one actually puts, you know, not into action, see the truth of it. Then there is no recording. But if you record, if you inattentively record, then you can deal with it instantly. But if you are constantly inattentive as we are, in our relationship with another because that is our habit. I have known her for forty years, for God's sake, or ten days. You understand? So the quality of attention and the quality of inattention, not attending, are two different things. Where there is inattention there is choice, unawareness, lack of attention, then the recording process goes on, the old habit is established. But when there is attention the old habit is broken. Got it? How can one reconcile... Oh! Sorry. 天哪，讲清楚这些东西竟花了这么长时间。 你们明白它了吗？ 当有了全神贯注时，那时就不会有记录。 但是我必须在那个时候全神贯注， 在驾驶汽车时，我必须高度留心注意。 在这里和那里都保持留心注意——去留心注意。 然而一旦当我没有留心注意她在说的东西时， 她所说的东西自然就会被记录下来了。 你们明白它了吗？你们会这样做吗？ 这才是乐趣所在，而不只是去听一些长篇大论， 如果我们真正地把它……——你知道的——不是付诸于行动， 而是看到这其中的真相。 那么就不会有记录了。 哪怕你记录了，哪怕你心不在焉地记录了， 那时你也可以立即就处理掉它。 但如果你像我们一样，一直在你和他人的关系中心不在焉的话 ——因为这是我们的习惯。 我已经认识她有四十年了——看在上帝份上——或者认识有十天了。 你理解了吗？ 因此留心注意的品质 和心不在焉的品质——也就是没有留心注意， 它们是两个不同的东西。 当有了心不在焉时，就会有选择， 无知无觉和缺乏注意力了， 那时记录的过程就会发生，旧有的习惯便建立起来了。 然而当有了留心注意时，旧有的习惯就被打破了。 明白它了吗？ 我们要如何才能调和 哦！抱歉。
1:09:20 I understand that inner silence cannot be practised or sought after, but what is the ground on which it may come about? 我明白那种内在的寂静是无法去练习或者加以追求的， 但是那个也许能让它萌发的土壤是什么呢？
1:09:35 I understand that inner silence cannot be practised or sought after, but what is the ground on which it may come about? Clear, the question is clear. 我明白那种内在的寂静是无法去练习或者加以追求的， 但是那个也许能让它萌发的土壤是什么呢？ 清楚了吗，这个问题是很清楚的。
1:09:59 The questioner understands that silence cannot be achieved, cannot be practised through meditation - right? Cannot be controlled. I don't know why you accept it but apparently you accept it. But what is the ground in which it may come about? 这个提问者明白那种寂静是无法通过努力而达到的， 是无法通过冥想而加以练习的——对吧？ 它是无法被控制的。 我不知道为什么你们要接受所谓的‘寂静’，但是很显然，你们接受了它。 那么那个也许能让它在其中萌发土壤是什么呢？
1:10:44 When you observe something - clouds, the mountain, the river, or the tree, or your wife or your neighbour, this low, uneducated person, can you observe all the phenomenon of life silently? Not say, 'Yes, I think so'. That is, to look, to observe without the reaction of opinions, because we are full of opinions about everything - right? Why do we have opinions? Go on, sirs, tell me why human beings have such deep-rooted opinions, or very, very, superficial opinions - I believe. Why? My guru is right, better than yours, I am ready to fight. So these opinions, conclusions, concepts, ideals divide human beings. This is obvious. There is the totalitarian idealisms and the democratic idealisms. Right? They are dividing people, ideals divide people. And the questioner asks, I understand that inner silence cannot be practised. When he uses the word 'I understand', what does he mean by understanding? You understand? I am asking you the question, what do you mean by understanding? I understand how this tent is put together, how it is going to be dismantled, I understand the distance between here and Geneva, I understand what someone has said. Right? I understand the internal combustion machine and so on. Is that understanding intellectual, verbal - right? Is it just understanding - because you have said something, I understand the meaning of the words. Or when does real understanding take place? Which is, I see something instantly, and that very perception of the truth changes my whole existence. Which is it? Because it is important to understand, important to grasp the significance of the word 'understand'. I understand intellectually something or I have grasped it emotionally, sentimentally, romantically, imaginatively, and all that. Or I really not only see the depth and the significance of words, but also in communication with each other. I see the truth of what you are saying. See the truth of it, not conclusion, or the idea of what you are saying, the truth of it, the perfume, the depth? the taste of it. Then that understanding is a revolution. But to say casually, 'Oh, yes, I understand what K is talking about', which is nonsense. The speaker says I understand inner silence cannot be practised or sought after. But don't you all seek some kind of inward quietness, some kind of peace sometimes? You are all seeking. Don't say we are not seeking. We are seeking food, comfort, escape from this terrible turmoil one lives in. But to casually say I understand inner silence cannot be practised or sought after, if you will forgive me, forgive the speaker for saying, you really don't understand what you have said. But what is the ground in which it may come about? That is the real question - right? 当你观察某个东西时 ——云彩、高山、河流或者树木， 或者你的妻子、你的邻居， 这个卑微的、没文化的人时， 你能否安静地观察所有这些生活的现象？ 不要说，‘是的，我认为可以’。 换句话说，去看，去观察，但不会有所反应而产生某些观点意见， 因为我们对每一样事物都充满了观点意见——对吧？ 为什么我们会有那些观点意见呢？ 继续，先生们，请告诉我 为什么人类会有如此根深蒂固的观点意见， 或者那些非常非常肤浅的观点意见——我信仰什么什么。 为什么？ 我的古鲁才是对的，他要比你的古鲁更好， 我准备为之去战斗。 所以，这些观点、结论、 概念、理想， 它们分裂了人类。这是很显然的。 我们有着极权主义者的理想主义，和民主政治的理想主义。 对吧？ 它们正在分裂着人类，各种理想分裂了人类。 而提问者问， 我明白那种内在的寂静是无法去练习的。 当他使用这个词——说‘我明白’时， 他所说的‘明白’是什么意思？ 你们理解了吗？ 我正在问你们这个问题，你们所说的‘明白’是什么意思？ 我明白这个帐篷是如何搭建起来的， 也明白它将要如何被拆除， 我明白这里到日内瓦（瑞士西南部城市）之间的距离路程， 我明白某人曾说过的那些话。对吧？ 我明白了解内燃机，等等。 那么这种‘明白’是不是智力上的、口头上的——对吗？ 它是否仅仅只是表面上的明白——因为你说了一些东西， 而我知道那些文字词语的意思， 或者说，何时才会有真正的明白？ 也就是，我立即就看到了某些东西， 而那种对真相的洞察改变了我整个的存在。 哪一种才是真正的明白？ 因为重要的是要去了解，重要的是要去领会 ‘明白’这个词的意义。 我在思想智力上明白了某个东西， 或者我在情感上、感情上、以浪漫的方式， 想象的方式，等等这些而领会了它。 还是说，我不仅仅看到了那些文字的深刻含义与意义， 同样的，在彼此间交流的过程中。 我也看到了你话语中的真理。 看到了它其中的真理，不是对于你话语的结论或看法， 而是它蕴含的真理、它的芬芳、它的深度、它的滋味。 那时，那种‘明白’就是一场革命。 但随意地说一句，‘噢，是的，我明白克正在说的东西’， 这是很荒谬的。 尽管演讲者说 我明白内在的寂静是无法去练习或者加以追求的。 但你们有时不也都会去寻求某种内在的宁静， 和某种平静吗？ 你们都在寻求这种东西。不要说我们并没有在寻求它。 我们都在寻求食物、慰藉， 逃离我们所生活于其中的这种可怕的混乱。 但是随意地说一句： 我明白内在的寂静是无法去练习或者加以追求的， 如果你可以原谅我，原谅演讲者这么说的话 ——你其实并不明白自己说了些什么。 但是那个也许能让它萌发的土壤是什么呢？ 这才是真正的问题——对吧？
1:17:04 What is necessary for the state of the brain to be utterly silent? Why do you want to be silent? When you observe, perceive something, if you have no reaction to it, response to it - right? - just observe, that observation itself is silence - right? You understand? Naturally. I am watching you and you are watching me. If I, if the speaker has reactions in watching, he is not really responding - right? He is not watching your reactions, your feelings, all the rest of it. And if you are watching the speaker and you have reactions, you are not watching him, you are watching your reactions. Simple. 什么才是彻底寂静的头脑状态所必需的？ 为什么你想要变得寂静？ 当你去观察，去感知某个事物时， 如果你对它没有任何反应，没有任何响应——对吗？—— 只是观察， 那么那种观察本身便是寂静——对吗？ 你明白了吗？这是很自然的事。 我正在看着你，而你也正在看着我。 如果我，如果演讲者在看的时候产生了反应， 那么他就不是真正地在作出回应——对吧？ 他并没有在观察你的反应、你的感受，等等这些东西。 而如果你也在看着演讲者并且产生了反应的话， 那么你就没有真正在看他，你只是在看你自己的反应。 这是很简单的道理。
1:18:25 So the ground in which silence can come about is not through practice, not through determination, not through will or desire, but it comes naturally when there is freedom, freedom from conflict. So you have to understand conflict. Not say, 'I must have silence', which is nonsense. So the ground on which natural, clear, beautiful, the immense depth of silence comes when there is complete freedom. So one should ask not the quality of silence, how it comes about, but can one be free? Free from conflict, free from being hurt, free from fear, anxiety, loneliness - you know - sorrow and all that. Then the house of silence is immense. 所以，那个寂静在其中得以萌发的土壤 并不是经由练习、决心、 意志或欲望而来的， 而是当有了自由的时候，它便会自然地出现了， 摆脱冲突的自由。 所以你必须要去了解冲突。 而不是说，‘我必须要有寂静’——这是很荒谬的。 所以当有了彻底的自由时， 那种萌发自然、清晰、美丽和极具深度的寂静的土壤 才会出现。 所以我们不应该去询问寂静的特征，它是如何出现的， 而是应该问：我们能够自由吗？ 摆脱掉冲突，摆脱掉受伤， 摆脱掉恐惧、焦虑、孤独——你知道的——痛苦，等等这些东西。 那时，那寂静之屋就是广阔无边的。
1:19:57 It is twelve o'clock. Is that enough for this morning? Or do you want one more question? Am I working, or are you working too? Are we together working or you are merely listening to a lot of words? If you are really actively co-operating, actively sharing, going to the very end of it, you would be exhausted. But if you are casually - it is like that river making noise - you get used to it. Anyhow, although it is twelve, we will do the last one. 现在已经十二点了。 今天早上讲这些够了吗？ 还是说你们想要再来一个问题？ 是我一个人在工作，还是说你们也在工作？ 我们是在一起工作吗？ 还是说你仅仅是在聆听一些长篇大论？ 如果你们真正积极主动地合作， 积极主动地分享，去追根究底的话， 你会感到精疲力尽。 但如果你们很随意， 那它就会像是那条发出噪音的河流——你们已经习惯于它了。 无论如何，尽管已经十二点了，我们还是会再来回答最后一个问题。
1:21:00 How can one reconcile the demands of society with a life of total freedom? 我们要如何才能调和 社会的要求和完全自由的生活这两者？
1:21:10 How can one reconcile the demands of society with a life of total freedom? 我们要如何才能调和 社会的要求和完全自由的生活这两者？
1:21:21 What are the demands of society? What are the demands of society? Tell me please. That you go to the office from nine to five, that you go to the factory from nine to five, that you go to the night club after all the boredom of office, there excitement, having a fortnight or three week's holiday in sunny Spain or Italy? What are the demands of society? That you must earn a livelihood, that you must live in that particular part of the country for the rest of your life, practise there as a lawyer, or as a doctor, or a surgeon, or in the factory as a union leader, and so on and so on? Right? Therefore one must also ask the question what is the society that demands so much? What is society? Who created the bally thing? Who is responsible for all this? The church, the temple, the mosque - you follow? - all the circus that goes on inside it, who is responsible for all this? Is the society different from you? Or you have created the society, each one of us, through our ambition, through our greed, through our envy, through our violence, through our corruption, through our fear, wanting our security in the community, in the nation - you follow? We have created this society and then blame the society for what it demands. Therefore you ask can I live in absolute freedom, can I reconcile - that is better - with society and myself seeking freedom? It is such an absurd question. You understand? Sorry, whoever put that question - I am not being rude. Because you are society. If we really see that, not as an idea or as a concept or something you must accept. But you, each one of us on this earth, for the last forty thousand years or more, we have created this society in which we live. The stupidity of religions - right? The stupidity of each nation arming themselves. For God's sake, we have created it, because I insist I am an American or French or Russian. We insist that I am a Catholic, Protestant, Hindu, Buddhist, and so on, Muslim. It gives us security by calling it, and the search for security is being destroyed by our division. It is so clear. I don't know... 什么是社会的要求？ 什么是社会的要求？ 请告诉我。 是不是你朝九晚五地去办公室上班， 或者去工厂上班， 然后在完成了办公室所有的烦人工作后，你会去夜总会， 在那里找点刺激， 在阳光灿烂的西班牙或意大利享受两周或三周的假期？ 什么是社会的要求？ 那就是你必须要赚钱谋生， 你必须要生活在 这个国家的某个角落里度过你的余生， 从事律师、医生、外科医师的工作， 或者在工厂里担任工会领袖，等等？ 对吧？ 因此我们也必须问下这个问题： 那个提出如此多要求的社会是什么？ 社会是什么？ 是谁创造出了这个可恶血腥的东西？ 谁要为这一切负责？ 教堂、寺庙、清真寺——你明白了吗？—— 所有它们里面所发生进行着的闹剧， 谁要为这一切负责呢？ 这个社会与你是不同的吗？ 还是说，是你创造出了这个社会， 是我们每一个人 经由我们的野心、我们的贪婪、 我们的嫉妒，我们的暴力， 我们的腐败堕落，我们的恐惧， 想要在社区团体或者国家之中 获得我们的安全感——你们明白了吗？ 是我们创造出了这个社会， 然后我们又去责备这个社会对我们提出的种种要求。 因此，你问：我能否彻底自由地生活， 我能否调和——这样就更好了—— 社会和我对自由的寻找这两者？ 这真是一个荒谬可笑的问题。你明白了吗？ 对不起，无论是谁提出了这个问题——我说这话并非出于无礼。 因为你就是社会。 如果我们真正看到这一点， 不是作为一种理念、一个概念，或者某种你必须要接受的东西。 而是你，我们每一个生活在地球上的人， 我们在过去的四万年或更多的时间里， 我们创造出了这个我们所生活于其中的社会。 那些愚蠢的宗教——对吧？ 每一个正在武装着自己的愚蠢的国家。 看在上帝的份上，是我们创造出了它， 因为我坚持认为我是一个美国人、法国人或者俄国人。 我们坚持认为我是一个天主教徒、新教徒、印度教徒、 佛教徒，等等，穆斯林。 这样称呼自己带给了我们安全感， 然而经由我们的分裂，我们正在摧毁对安全的寻找。 这是非常清楚的。我不知道
1:25:42 So there is no reconciliation between society and its demands and your demand for freedom. The demand is from your own violence, from your own ugly, limited selfishness. It is one of the most complex things to find out for oneself where selfishness is, where the ego very, very subtly hides itself. It can hide politically - doing good for the country. It can hide in the religious world, most beautifully - 'I believe in God, I serve God'. Or social help - not that I am against social help, don't jump to that conclusion - it can hide there. It can hide in marriage, in love - right? It requires a very attentive, not analytical, but observing brain, to see where the subtleties of the self are hidden - selfishness. Then when there is not, society doesn't exist, you don't have to reconcile to it. It is only the inattentive, the thoughtless, the unaware, that says, 'How am I to respond to society when I am working for freedom?' You understand? 因此，在社会及其要求和你对于自由的诉求之间 并不存在什么调和。 那种要求是来自于你自身的暴力， 来自于你自身的丑陋，你那狭隘的自私。 这是最为复杂的事情之一 ——即亲自去发现自私存在于何处， 自我无比狡猾地藏匿于何处？ 它可以隐藏在政治中——为国家谋福利。 它也可以无比美好地隐藏在宗教世界中 ——‘我信仰上帝，我为上帝服务’。 或者隐藏在社会救助中 ——我并不是在反对社会救助，不要马上就下结论—— 但它是可以隐藏在那里的。 它也可以隐藏在婚姻里面，爱里面——对吗？ 这种发现需要一个非常留心注意的头脑， 不是善于分析，而是善于观察的头脑， 去看到自我的种种微妙隐藏于何处——那种自私自利。 然后，当自我不在了，社会也将不复存在， 所以你也就不需要去与之调和了。 只有不留心注意的人，没有思考的人，没有觉察的人 才会说，‘当我正在为自由而努力奋斗时， 我又要如何去响应这个社会呢？’你明白了吗？
1:28:08 If one may point out, we need to be re-educated, not through college, school and university, which also conditions our brain, or when we work in the factory and so on, but educate ourselves by being aware, seeing how we are caught in words and so on. Can we do this? If we cannot do it, we are going to have wars perpetually, we will be weeping perpetually, always in conflict, misery and all the rest of it. The speaker is not optimistic or pessimistic - these are facts. When one lives with facts as they are, as you observe them, not data given by the computers or the poets, but watching your own activity, your own egotistic pursuits and so on. Out of that grows marvellous freedom with all this great beauty and strength. 如果允许某人指出这一点的话， 我们需要接受再教育， 不是去高校、学校和大学， 它们也会局限我们的头脑， 或者当我们在工厂工作等等这些时候，去接受再教育， 而是要通过觉察来教育我们自己， 看看我们是如何陷入于文字之中的，等等。 我们能这样做吗？ 如果我们无法这么做， 我们将永远会有战争， 我们将永远哭泣着， 永远处于冲突、痛苦，等等这一切之中。 演讲者既没有乐观，也没有悲观——这些都是事实。 当你在观察它们的时候，与事实本来的样子共存， 不是观察电脑或者诗人们所给出的那些资料数据， 而是观察你自己的行为活动， 你自己种种自我中心的追求，等等。 从这之中就会产生出惊人美妙的自由 及其所有伟大的美丽与力量。
1:30:00 Sorry to have talked so long. May I get up please? 很抱歉谈了这么久。 请问我可以起身了吗？