Krishnamurti Subtitles
NY71T2 - 考える事柄が、あなた自身
第二回
ニューヨーク、アメリカ合衆国
1971年4月18日
| 0:25 | Krishnamurti: We were considering yesterday the importance of relationship, and how we always live in the past, and to find out if it is at all possible to radically change one's way of living. | クリシュナムルティ:昨日は人間関係の 重要性を考察しました 私達は常に過去に生きてきました そしてその生き方を根本的に変える事が 可能かどうかについて話ました |
| 1:04 | And we are going to examine together the question of what is hidden in the consciousness, the deeper layers of the mind, which is generally called the unconscious. Because we are concerned with bringing about in ourselves and so in society, a radical revolution. The physical revolution, which one is advocating all over the world at the present time, doesn't bring about a fundamental change in man. | そして今日は意識の中に何が潜んでいるか 隠れた心の深層を皆さんと一緒に 精査していきます つまり一般的には無意識と呼ばれる事です 自分自身の中に また社会に抜本的な変革を 生み出す事を懸念します 身体的な変革は 昨今世界中で支持を得ていますが 人間に根本的な変革を生み出しません |
| 2:12 | And though it is necessary that a corrupt society, such as this and Europe and in India and elsewhere, there must be fundamental changes in the very structure of society. And if man remains corrupt himself, his activity, he will overcome whatever the structure be, however perfect it be, therefore it is imperative, absolutely essential that he change. | 腐敗した社会に変化は必要ですが ここアメリカやヨーロッパインドなどと どこの国でも社会構造の抜本的な変革が必要です 腐敗したままの状態の 人々の活動 どのような社会構造で完璧をな社会を 打開しても 変化は必要不可欠です 私達が変わる事は当然必須なのです |
| 3:01 | And is this change to be brought about through the process of time, through gradual achievement, through gradual change, or does the change take place only in the instant? And that is what we are going to examine together. | そしてこの変化は時間の経過により起こり 徐々に達成するでしょうか 徐々の変化を通して または変化は即効的でしょうか この事を今日皆さんと共に考察して行きます |
| 3:37 | One sees that there must be change in oneself. The more sensitive, the more alert and intelligent one is, one is aware that there must be a deep, abiding, living change. And the content of consciousness is consciousness, the two are not separate. What is implanted, what is in consciousness makes up consciousness. And to bring about a change in consciousness, both the obvious and the hidden, does it depend on analysis, does it depend on time, does it depend on environmental pressure, or is the change to take place totally independent of any pressure, of any strain, of any compulsion? | 自分に変化が必要だとする人 より繊細で 機敏で聡明な人は 深く持続的で活きた 変化があるべきだと気付きます 意識の内容は意識で そのふたつを分離できません 植え付けられた事 植え付けられた意識が意識を構成します 意識に変化をもたらすには 表面的にも裏もどちらにも それは分析によるでしょうか 時間によるのでしょうか 環境的圧力によるでしょうか または変化とは 完全にあらゆる圧力 負担 衝動脅迫から 独立しているでしょうか |
| 5:24 | You know, this is going to be rather difficult, to go into this question because it's quite complex, and I hope both of us will be able to share what is being said. I don't know quite where to begin this whole business, do you? You see, unless one goes into this matter very seriously, really taking trouble, deep interest, with a passion, I'm afraid one will not be able to go very far. Far in the sense not in time or in space but within oneself very deeply. One needs a great deal of passion, a great energy, and most of us waste our energies in conflict, and when we are examining this whole business of existence you need energy. And energy comes with the possibility of change. If there is no possibility of change then energy wastes away. | これは寧ろ難しい議題です 非常に複雑な議題ですから 皆さんと共に 話を共有できればと思っております この難題をどこから始めるべきかわかりません 非常に真剣に議題に向きあうべきです 面倒であっても深い興味と 情熱を持ってです 私があまり先には進めません 時間や空間の先という意味ではなく ご自身の中で非常に深くです 皆さんの強い情熱と 大きなエネルギーを要します 私達は殆どのエネルギーを対立や葛藤で無駄にします 我々の存在について精察するには エネルギーを要します エネルギーには変化の可能性が伴います 変化の可能性が無ければ エネルギーは無駄になります |
| 7:24 | We think we cannot possibly change, we accept things as they are and thereby become rather dispirited, depressed, and uncertain and confused. It is possible to change radically, and that is what we are going to examine. And if you will not follow exactly what the speaker is saying, but using his words and using those words as a mirror to observe yourself and enquire with passion, with interest, with vitality and a great deal of energy, then perhaps we can come to a point where it will be obvious that without any kind of effort, without any kind of motive, the radical change takes place. | 私達は変われないと考えると ただ受入れます すると意気消沈し鬱々しくなり 不安定で混乱します 抜本的に変化は可能です それについて考察していきます 話し手の話が理解できなければ 話し手は言葉を鏡として使いまが 皆さん自身が情熱と 興味と活力そして莫大なエネルギーを持ち 観察し問うのです すると恐らく明らかで どんな努力の必要なく 動機もなく 根本的な変化を遂げる ポイントに到達できます |
| 8:58 | As we were saying yesterday, there is not only the superficial knowledge of ourselves, but also there is the deep, hidden content of our consciousness. And how is one to examine that? How is one to expose the whole content of it? Is it to be done bit by bit, slowly, gradually, or is it to be exposed totally and understood instantly, and thereby the whole analytical process comes to and end? | 昨日お話した通り 自分達について表面的な知識だけでなく 深く隠れた深層の 意識の要素があります それをどう考察しますか 意識の内容をどう露呈しますか 徐々に少しづつでしょうか 徹底的に露出され 速攻で察知し よって分析的過程が終結するでしょうか |
| 10:04 | Now we're going to go into this question of analysis. To me, to the speaker, analysis is the denial of action, action being always in the present, active present. Action means not 'having done', or 'will do', but doing. Analysis prevents that active action in the present, because in analysis there is involved time, a gradual peeling off, as it were, layer after layer, and examining each layer, analysing the content of each layer. And if the analysis is not perfect, complete, true, then that analysis, being incomplete, must leave a knowledge which is not total. And the next analysis springs from that which is not complete. Are we following all this? | ここで分析について話をします 私 話してにとって 分析は行動の否定です 行動は常にアクティブな現在です 行動とは '行った' ' 行うだろう ' ではなく 行っている です 分析は現在のアクティブな活動を妨げます 分析には時間が関与するからです レイヤー事に徐々に剥がす 各レイヤー事の 内容を分析をします その分析が完璧で完全で事実で無ければ その分析は不完全です 完全ではない知識が 残ってしまいます そして次の未完全な分析が沸き起こります お分かりでしょうか |
| 12:06 | Look, I examine myself, analyse myself, and if my analysis is not complete, true, then what I have analysed becomes the knowledge with which I proceed to analyse the next layer. And so, in that process each analysis becomes incomplete and leads to further conflict, and so to inaction. Shall I go on? And in analysis there is the analyser and the analysed, whether the analyser is professional, or yourself, the layman, there is this duality, the analyser analysing, analysing something which he thinks is different from himself. And the analyser, what is he? He is the past, he is the accumulated knowledge of all the things he has analysed. And with that knowledge, which is the past, he analyses the present. | 例えば私が自分を分析します 自分の分析が完全で事実で無ければ 分析した事は知識となり 次のレイヤーの分析に進みます ですから その過程で各々の分析が不完全となるのです そして更なる葛藤へ導き惰性と繋がります 先に進みますが良いですか 分析には 分析する側とされる側があり 分析者が専門家であろうと 素人でもご自身でも 二重性が存在します 分析者が分析し 自身とは異なると考え何かを分析します 分析者とは 何でしょうか 分析者は過去で 分析された事柄が蓄積された知識です その知識は過去でありながら 現在を分析します |
| 14:05 | So, in that process there is conflict, there is the struggle to conform or to force that which he analyses. And in analysis, there is this whole process of dreaming. I don't know if you have gone into all this yourself, or probably you have read other people's books, which is most unfortunate, because then you merely repeat what other people have said, however specialist, however famous they are. But if you don't read all those books, as the speaker doesn't because they're rather boring, then you have to investigate yourself, then it becomes much more fascinating, much more original, much more direct and true. | その過程で葛藤対立があり 分析に順応または 無理強いしもがきます 分析には 夢を見る過程があり ご自身で追求した事がおありでしょうか または誰かの本を読んだり それは非常に不運な事です 誰かの言う事を繰り返すだけですから どんな専門家でも有名人でもです そんな啓発本を読んでなければ 私は読んでいません非常に退屈です 読んでなければご自身で探求してください すると更に興味深くなります オリジナルで直接的で真実です |
| 15:30 | In the process of analysis there is this world of dreams, and we accept dreams as necessary, because the professionals have said, you must dream, otherwise you go mad, and there is some truth in that. And what are dreams? Because all this we are enquiring into, because we are trying to find out whether it is possible to change radically. When there is so much confusion, so much misery, such hatred in the world, and brutality, where there is no compassion, one must, if one is at all serious, enquire into all this. And we are enquiring not merely for intellectual entertainment but actually trying to find out if it is possible to change. And when you see the possibility of change, whatever we are, however shallow, however superficial, repetitive, imitative, if we see that there is a possibility of radical change then we have the energy to change. And if we say it is not possible, then that energy is dissipated. | 分析の過程において 夢という世界が存在します 夢は必要に応じ受入れます 専門家は夢を抱くべきだと さも無ければ取乱すと言います ある部分は事実ですが 夢とは何ですか 私達が考察しているこの事は 根本的な私達の 変化変革の可能性についてです 世界には大変な混乱や惨劇 憎悪と残虐行為が起きており 慈悲心はありません みな大変真剣に問うべきです 単に知的な興行ではなく実際に私達が 変わる事ができるか それを真剣に問うのです 我々が何者であろうと変わる可能性が分る時 どう浅はかで表面的で 反復や模倣であろうと 根本的変革の可能性を理解すれば 変わるエネルギーを持ちます 不可能だと言えばそのエネルギーは消失します |
| 17:34 | So we are enquiring into this question, whether analysis does produce a radical change at all, or is it merely an intellectual entertainment, an avoidance of action? As we were saying, analysis implies entering into the world of dreams. And what are dreams? How do these dreams come into being? I don't know if you have gone into this. If you have, you will see that dreams are the continuation of our daily life. What you are doing during the day, all the mischief, the corruption, the hatred, the passing pleasures, the ambitions, the guilt and so on, all that is continued in the world of dreams, only as in symbols, as pictures and images. And these pictures and images have to be interpreted, and all the fuss and the unreality of all that comes into being. | ですからこの問題について問うのです 分析が抜本的変革を生み出す事ができるのか それとも分析とは単なる知的なエンターテインメント 行動の逃避でしょうか お話した通り 分析は夢の世界への導入を示唆します 夢とは何ですか 夢がどのようにして現実になりますか この事について考察した事がありますか もしそうであれば 夢とは日々の生活の継続です 日中に行う事です 悪さや腐敗 嫌悪や過ぎ去る享楽 野望や罪悪感などとです それは継続します 夢の世界の中で ただ象徴として 映像やイメージとして継続します そのイメージや画像は解釈され そのあらゆる騒動や虚構が生じます |
| 19:58 | One never asks why should one dream at all. One has accepted dreams as essential, as part of life. Now we are asking ourselves, if you are, with me, why you dream at all? Is it possible when you go to sleep to have a mind that is completely quiet? Because it's only in that quiet state that it renews itself, it empties itself of all its content so that it is made fresh, young, decisive, not confused. | なぜ人は夢を抱くべきかと問いません 夢を人生の一部に必須だと受入れます 私と一緒に問いましょう なぜ夢を抱くのか 完全に静かな心で 床につく事が可能でしょうか その静かな心だけがそれ自体を刷新します 全ての内容が空になります 新鮮で幼く 断固とうろたえません |
| 21:03 | And if dreams are the continuation of our daily life, of our daily turmoil, anxiety, the desire for security, the attachments, then inevitably, dreams in their symbolic form must take place. That's clear, isn't it? So, when one asks why should one dream at all, can the brain cells be quiet, not carry on all the business of the day. | 夢が日常の継続であれば 我々の日々は混乱や不安 安定を望み 執着し 象徴的な型に 夢を預ける事が 不可避となります 明確ですよね 私が問うのは 夢を見るべきか 脳細胞は静かになれるでしょうか 日々の問題を持ち越さずにです |
| 22:07 | To find that out, experimentally, not accepting what the speaker says and for goodness sake don't ever do that, please, because we're sharing together, investigating together. To find out experimentally, you can test it out by being aware totally during the day, watching your thoughts, your motives, your speech, the way you walk and talk. When you are so aware, there are the intimations of the unconscious, of the deeper layers, because then you are exposing, inviting the hidden motives, anxieties, all that, the content of the unconscious into the open. So when you do go to sleep, then you will find that your mind, including the brain, is extraordinarily quiet, it is really resting because you have finished what you have been doing during the day. | それを見出すには 実験的に 話の内容を受入れるのではなく お願いですから絶対にそうしないでください 私達は共有しています共に精査しています 実験的にそれを見出すには 試してみてください 一日の中でしっかりと気付く事です ご自身の思考 意図 話 歩き方や話し方にです とても注意深く見るのです 深い層の無意識の胸の内です するとご自身を晒し 隠れた意図を見出します 不安などとです 無意識の中身をさらけ出します 眠りにつく際に ご自身の心 脳内を含めてその時に 非常に静かな休息を見出します 日中に行っていた事を終えるのですから |
| 24:01 | That is, I don't know if you have ever done it, if you take stock of the day as you go to bed, lie down. Don't you do this, go over the day, taking stock? Saying, I should have done this, I should not have done that, it was better said that way, I wish I hadn't said this. That is, when you take stock of the things that have happened during the day, you are trying to put order, please do pay a little attention to this, you are trying to bring about order before you go to sleep. And if you don't put order before you go to sleep, the brain tries to put order when you are asleep. Because the brain functions perfectly only in order, not in disorder. It functions most efficiently when there is complete order, whether that order is neurotic or rational. You are following all this? Because in neurosis, in imbalance, there is order, and the brain accepts that order. | ご自身で試した事がおありでしょうか 寝る時にその日を 振り返る しませんかその日の振り返り こうすべき すべきで無かったなどとです こう言えば良かった言わなければよかったなどと つまり 日に起きた事を棚卸し 順序付けようとします どうか注意を向けてみてください 寝る前に序列を付けています 寝る前にそれをしなければ 脳がそうしようとします 寝ている際にです 脳は完璧に序列を追って機能するからです 無秩序ではなくです 非常に効率的に機能します その完全な序列が在れば 神経過敏でも合理的でもです ご理解していますか 神経症にも 不均衡にも 順序が在り 脳はその序列を受入れます |
| 26:10 | And if you take stock of everything that has been happening during the day, before you go to sleep, then you are trying to bring about order, and therefore the brain hasn't to bring order while you are asleep, you have done it during the day. And if you bring that order every minute during the day, that is, if you are aware of everything that is happening, outwardly and inwardly. You are following? Outwardly in the sense, the disorder about you, the cruelty, the indifference, the callousness, the dirt, the squalor, the quarrels, the politicians and their chicanery, you know, all that is happening. And your relationship with your husband, wife, with your girl or boy, aware of all that during the day, without correcting it, just being aware of it. The moment you try to correct it, you are trying to bring disorder, but if you merely observe actually what is, then what is, is order. | そして その日の出来事を寝る前に 棚卸しすると その序列をもたらす事になります よって睡眠中にその序列を生む事はありません 起きている時に終えるからです 序列を日中の間常に持っていると つまり 何が起きているか全てに気付くと 内向的に外的にもです どうですか ある意味外的にあなたの無秩序 残虐さや無関心無神経さ 腐敗浅ましさや口論 政治家のごまかし 全て起きている事ですよね あなたの夫婦関係においても 子供達でも 日中気付いてみてください 修正するのではなくただ気付くのです 修正しようとする瞬間混乱が起きますが 単にそのままを観察すると その事を それが秩序です |
| 27:52 | It is only when you try to change what is, then there is disorder, because you want to change according to the knowledge which you have acquired. That knowledge is the past and you are trying to change what is, which is not the past, according to what you have learnt. Therefore there is a contradiction, therefore there is a distortion, therefore there is disorder. | その事を変えようとするとそこに無秩序が存在します 過去に得た知識を元に 変えたいと思うのですから 知識は過去です 過去ではないその事を自分が学んだ過去に従って 変えようとします 従って矛盾ねじれ 混乱が生じます |
| 28:31 | I hope you are working as hard as the speaker is. May I take my coat off? | 話し手と同様みなさんも真剣に向き合ってください 上着を脱いでも構いませんか |
| 29:02 | So, during the day, if you are aware of the ways of your thought, your motives, the hypocrisy, the double talk, doing one thing, saying another, thinking another, the deception, the masks that you put on, the varieties of deceptions that one has so readily at hand, if one is aware of all that during the day, you don't have to take stock at all when you go to sleep, you are bringing order each minute. So when you do go to sleep you will find that your brain cells, which have recorded and which hold the past become totally quiet, and your sleep then becomes something entirely different. In that sleep, the mind, when we use the word the mind, we are including in that the brain, the whole nervous organism, the affections, all the human structure is the mind. When we use that word, we mean all that, not something separate. In that is included the intellect, the heart, the whole nervous organism. When you go to sleep then, the analytical process has totally come to an end. Then when you wake up you see things exactly as they are, not your interpretation of them or the desire to change them. | 日々の中で皆さんの思考の動きに 気付けば 動機 偽善 調子のいい事を言う ある事をする別の事を話し考える ごまかし仮面をかぶります 様々な手口です すぐ届く手段は非常に容易です 日常の中でそれに気がつけば 眠りにつく時に日々を’振り返る必要がありません 常に秩序を持つからです すると眠りにつく際 過去を記録し保存する 脳の細胞は完全なる静寂にある事に 気付くでしょう すると睡眠が 全く別のものとなります その眠りの中で 心という単語これは 脳を含めます 全神経組織です 愛情 人間の全構造が心です その単語を使う時それら全てを指します 個別ではありません その単語の中には知性や心臓 神経組織全てを含みます 眠る際に 分析の過程は完全に終わります そして目が覚め 物事をありのまま見ます あなたの解釈ではなく変えたいという欲望でもなくです |
| 31:59 | So analysis, to the speaker, prevents action. And action is absolutely essential, now, in order to bring about this radical change. So analysis is not the way. Don't accept, please, what the speaker is saying, but observe it for yourself, learn about it, not from me, but learn by watching all the implications of analysis: time, the analyser and the analysed, the analyser is the analysed and each analysis must be complete otherwise it distorts the next analysis. So seeing the whole process of analysis, whether it is introspective or intellectual analysis, is totally wrong. It is not the way out. It maybe necessary for those who are somewhat or greatly unbalanced, and perhaps most of us are unbalanced. So, that's not the way out. | 分析とは話し手にとって 活動を阻害します 活動は当然必須です では この抜本的な変化を見出す為には 分析が手法ではありませんね 話し手の言う事を受入れないで下さい ご自身で観察してください 学んでください 私からではなく自身を見て学ぶのです 分析のあらゆる含蓄をです 時間 分析者とされる側 分析者が分析されます 分析は合致すべきです でなければ次の分析を歪曲します 分析の全ての過程を理解する事 内観であろうと知的分析であろうと それは完全な誤りです それが出口ではありません ある意味不均衡な人には分析が必要かもしれません おそらく私達はみな不均衡でしょう つまり分析は逃げ道ではありません |
| 33:56 | So we must find a way of observing the whole content of consciousness without the analyser. You are following this? You know, this is great fun if you go into this, because you have then rejected totally everything that man has said. No, please, don't laugh. Because then you stand alone, then you find out for yourself. It will be authentic, real, true, not dependent on any professor, any psychologist, any analyst, and so on, so on. | 観察をする方法を 見出すべきです 意識の全容を 分析者なく見るのです わかりますか 追求すると非常に興味深いのです 人類が言って来た事全てを 一蹴するからです 笑わないで下さい ご自身で 見い出してください 真の本物の真実です どこかの教授や心理学者分析者などに 依存するのではなくです |
| 35:01 | So one must find a way of observing without analysis. I'm going to go into that. I hope you don't mind my doing all this, do you? | 分析なく観察する方法を見つけるべきです それについて話します 皆さん構いませんでしょうか |
| 35:22 | Audience: No. | 聴衆: 構いません |
| 35:24 | K: This is not a group therapy. This is not an open confessional. This is not that the speaker is analysing you or making you change or you becoming marvellous human beings, you have to do this yourself. And as most of us are second-hand or third-hand human beings, it is going to be very difficult to put away totally all that has been imposed on our minds by the professionals, whether religious professionals or the scientific professionals. We have to find out for ourselves. | K: グループセラピーではありません 公開懺悔でもありません 話し手が皆さんを分析したり変えようとするのでもありません または皆さんが驚異的な人になるのではありません ご自身ですべきです 私達殆んどは使い古した人間ですから 非常に難しい事です 専門家達によって 型を付けられた心を完全に取り払う 宗教家でも科学者でもなく 自身で見出すべきです |
| 36:22 | And if analysis is not the way, and it is not, as far as the speaker is concerned, because he has logically explained it, then how is one to examine or to observe the total content of consciousness? And what is the total content? What is the content of consciousness? Please don't repeat what somebody else has said. What is your total content? Have you ever looked at it, have you ever considered it? If you have, is it not the various recorded incidents, happenings, pleasurable and non-pleasurable, various beliefs, traditions, the various individual recollections, memories, and the racial, family memories, the culture in which one has been brought up, all that is the content, isn't it? Being born in India as a Hindu, Brahmin and so on, with all its traditions and superstitions, with its dogmatism, beliefs, all that culture of thousands of years is stored up. And the incidents that take place every day, the memories, the various pains, the unhappiness, the incidents, the insults, all that is recorded. And the content of all that is my consciousness, as your consciousness. You as a Catholic, Protestant, living in this Western world with the search for more and more and more, the world of great pleasure, entertainment, wealth, incessant noise of the television, the pictures, the brutality, all that is you, that's your content. | 分析は出口ではありません 私が知る限りそうではありません 話し手は合理的に説明致しましたから ではどうやって 意識の全貌を 精査し観察するのでしょうか 全容とは何でしょうか 意識の内容とは何ですか 誰かの言う事を反芻しないでください あなたの全容は何ですか 見た事が考えた事がありますか 考えた事があれば 内容とは記録された事件 出来事 喜びや不快感 様々な信念 伝統 様々な個々人の 追憶や記憶 民族や家族の記憶 育ってきた文化 それが中身ですよね ヒンドゥー教としてインドで生まれ バラモンなどと あらゆる伝統や独断主義の 偶像崇拝や信仰心 何千年も蓄積されたあらゆる文化 そして日々の 出来事記憶 様々な痛み苦しみ 不憫や事件侮辱など全ては 記録されます 私の意識の全容はその全てです あなたの意識の全容です カトリックやプロテスタントこの西洋での生活は 更にもっと何かを求めて 驚喜の世界 娯楽 富 絶え間ないテレビの音 映像 残虐 その全てがあなたであなたの内容です |
| 40:25 | How is all that to be exposed, and in the exposing of it, is each incident to be examined, each happening, each tradition, each hurt, each pain, one by one, or is it to be looked at totally? You are following all this? If it is to be examined bit by bit, one by one, you are entering into the world of analysis, and then there is no end to that, you will die analysing, and giving a great deal of money to those who analyse, if that's your pleasure. Or is it to be looked at totally? | それがどう曝されるか 露呈される中 各出来事は精査され それぞれの出来事や伝統 傷や痛みなどと それ各々を見るのか全体を見るのでしょうか わかりますか ひとつづつ徐々に精査されるならば 分析の世界に突入します そしてそこに終わりはありません分析し死を迎えます 分析者に莫大なお金を払います それがお望みでしたらです もしくは全体を考察しますか |
| 41:40 | We're going to find out how to look at these various fragments, which are the contents of consciousness, totally, not analytically. We are communicating with each other? | この様々な断片の見方についてお話します 断片とは意識の内容で全容です 分析的にではなくです コミュニケーションが図れていますか |
| 42:03 | A: Yes. | 回答 : はい |
| 42:08 | K: So we are going to find out how to observe in which there is no analysis at all. That is, we have looked at everything, at the tree, at the cloud, at your wife and your husband, the girl or the boy, everything as an observer and the observed. Right? Please do give a little attention to this. You have observed your anger, your greed or your jealousy, whatever it is, as an observer looking at greed. The observer is greed, but you have separated the observer because your mind is conditioned to the analytical process, therefore you are always looking at the tree, at the cloud, at everything in life as an observer and the thing observed. Have you noticed it? You look at your wife through the image which you have of her. That image is the observer, that image is the past, that image has been put together through time. And the observer is the time, is the past, is the accumulated knowledge of the various incidents and accidents and happenings, experiences and so on, that observer is the past, and he looks at the thing observed as though he was not of it, but separate from it. | K: 完全に全く分析の無い 考察についてお話して行きます つまり全てを見てきました木や雲 ご自身の奥さんや旦那さん娘息子さんなど 全て観察者として観察される側とです ですよね どうか注意深く見てください 自身の怒りを観察しました 欲や嫉妬何でもです 観察者が欲を見ます 観察者が欲です しかし観察者を分離させます 心は分析のプロセスに条件づいていますから 従って常に木や雲など人生の 全ての事柄を観察者と観察される物として見ます お気づきですか ご自身の奥さんを 自分の持つ奥さんのイメージを通して見ます そのイメージが観察者です そのイメージは過去です そのイメージは時間を通してまとめられました そして観察者は時間で それは過去であり 蓄積された様々な過去の出来事や事件 経験などという事柄です つまり観察者は過去です 観察される事を 観察する事と分離してしまいます |
| 44:42 | Now, can you look without the observer? That is, can you look at the tree - please listen to this - can you look at the tree without the past as the observer? That is, when there is the observer then there is space between the observer and the observed, the tree. That space is time, because there is a distance. That time is the quality of the observer, who is the past, who is the accumulated knowledge, who says, that is the tree, or that is the image of my wife. Now, can you observe without the observer? | では観察者なく観察できますか つまり木を見る事ができますか - お聞きください - 観察者として過去を持たず木を見る事ができますか つまり観察者が存在すると 観察者とされる側の間に空間が生まれます 木との間にです その空間は時間です そこに距離が在りますから その時間とは観察者の属性であり それは過去で 蓄積された知識です それは木だ 自分の奥さんのイメージだと言います では観察者なく観察できますか |
| 46:10 | That is, can you look, not only at the tree but your wife or your husband, without the image? This requires tremendous discipline. I am going to show you something, which is, discipline implies generally a conformity, a drill, imitation, conflict between what is and what should be. And so in discipline there is conflict: suppressing, overcoming, the exercise of will and so on, all that is implied in that word. But that word means to learn, not to conform, not to suppress, but to learn. And the quality of the mind that learns has its own order, which is discipline. We are learning now to observe without the observer, without the past, without the image. When you so observe the 'what is,' the actually what is, is a living thing, not a thing looked upon as a dead thing, as recognisable by the past event, by the past knowledge. | つまり木だけではなく 妻や夫をイメージを持たず 見ることができますか これには大変な自制を要します 規律や統制自制とは 一般的に 服従 訓練 真似 衝突を示唆します その事と在るべき形との間にです 自制の中には葛藤があり 抑圧や克服といった事が起こります その全てが単語の意味です しかし自制心とは学びを意味し 服従でも 抑圧でもなく 学ぶ事です そして学ぶ心の質は それ自体に秩序がありそれが規律です 観察者なく観察する事を学びます 過去なくイメージなくです ' それ自体 ' を観察する際 そのものは実に生きている物で 死んだ物として見なすのではありません 過去の事柄や過去の知識により 認識できます |
| 48:33 | Let's make it much simpler than this. You say something to me which hurts me and that hurt, the pain of that hurt is recorded. That memory of that continues and when there is a further pain it is recorded again. So, the hurt is being strengthened from childhood on. Whereas when there is pain, you say something which is painful to me, to observe it so completely that it is not recorded as a hurt. You are following? The moment you record it as a hurt, that recording is continued, and for the rest of your life you are being hurt, because you are adding to that hurt. Whereas if you observe the pain, and to observe the pain so completely without recording it, is to give your total attention at the moment of the pain. Are you doing all this? | 更にシンプルにしてみましょう 私が傷つく事をあなたが言うとします 心を痛めますその痛みは記録されます その記憶は続き 更なる痛みがあると それをまた記録します よって痛みは幼少期から強化されます 一方で痛みがある際 私にとって苦痛な事をあなたが言うと 完全に観察すると傷として記録されません ご理解できていますか 傷として記録する瞬間から 記録は続き 残りの人生あなたは傷つきます その傷を追加して行くからです これに対し痛みを観察すると 記録せず痛みを完全に観察すると ご自身の注意全てをその痛みの瞬間に注ぎます これを実行していますか |
| 50:50 | Look, when you go out for a walk, when you walk in these streets there is all kinds of noise, all kinds of shouting, the vulgarity, the brutality, this pouring in the noise, that is very destructive. The more sensitive you are the more destructive it becomes, it hurts your organism. And you resist the hurt and therefore you build a wall. And when you build a wall you are isolating yourself, and therefore you are strengthening the isolation, which you will get more and more hurt, whereas if you are observing that noise, being attentive to that noise, then you will see that your organism is never hurt. | 散歩に行く際 様々な騒音が通りを取り囲んでいます 叫び声や 下品や残虐さ この殺到する騒音は非常に破壊的です 繊細であればある程この騒音が破壊的となり あなたを傷つけます そしてその傷に対抗しようと よって壁を造ります 壁を造ると自身を隔離させます よってあなたは隔離を強化しています 更にもっと傷ついてしまいます 一方その騒音を観察すると その音に注意を払うと 組織体が傷つく事がない事に気がつくでしょう |
| 52:12 | Please, if you understand this one radical principle you will have understood something immense, that where there is an observer separating himself from the thing he observes, there must be conflict. Do what you will, as long as there is a division between the observer and the observed there must be conflict. As long as there is division. As long as there is a division between the Muslim and the Hindu there must be conflict. As long as there is a division between the Catholic and the Protestant there must be conflict. You may tolerate each other, which is an intellectual covering of intolerance. As long as there is division between the black and the white and the purple and the blue and the yellow and the black, there must be conflict. | この根本的鉄則をご理解できたら 非常に甚大な事を理解したと言う事です そこに観察者は居いません 自身を観察者とされる側に分離すると そこに対立が生まれます ご自身で見てくださいそこに観察者と 観察される側との分離がある限り対立が葛藤が存在します 分離がある限りです イスラム教とヒンドゥ教と分離がある限り 対立が存在します カトリックとプロテスタント分離が存在すれば 対立が存在します お互い我慢をするかもしれませんが 知性が忍耐をカバーしています 黒人や白人と分離がある限り 紫や青黄色や黒と そこには対立が存在します |
| 53:28 | As long as there is division between you and your wife there must be conflict. This division exists fundamentally, basically, as long as there is the observer separate from the thing observed. As long as I say, anger is different from me, I must control anger, I must change anger, I must control my thought, I must change, do this, that, in that there is division, therefore there is conflict. Conflict implies suppression, conformity, imitation, all that is involved in that. If you really see the beauty of this, that the observer is the observed, the two are not separate, then you can observe the totality of consciousness without analysis. Then you see the whole content of it instantly. | ご自身と奥さんの間に分離がある限り そこには対立が存在します 対立は根本的に観察者と 観察される事が分離する限り存在します 自分の怒りと自分は異なるという限り 怒りをコントロールすべきだと怒りを変えるべきと 自分の考えをコントロールすべき変わるべきだ 何をすべきだと その分離の中に従って葛藤が存在します 葛藤は抑圧服従や模倣を示唆し それら全てが関係します この本来の美を本当に理解すると 観察者が観察され そのふたつに分離はありません すると意識の完全性を分析なく観察できます そして全容を瞬時に把握します |
| 55:14 | That is, the observer is the thinker. And we have given such tremendous importance to the thinker, haven't we? We live by thought, we do things by thought, we plan our life by thought, our action is motivated by thought. And thought is worshipped throughout the world as the most extraordinarily important thing, which is part of the intellect. | つまり観察者が考える人である そして私達は思考に非常大きな重要性を与えてきました そうですよね 思考によって生きます 思考に基づき行動します 思考に基づき人生を計画します 私達の活動は思考に動機づいています 思考は世界中を通して崇拝されています 何より最も重要な事としてです 思考は知性の一部です |
| 56:26 | And thought - again, please follow this a little bit - thought has separated itself as the thinker. The thinker says, these thoughts are no good, these are better. He says, this ideal is better than that ideal, this belief is better than that belief. It is all the product of thought, thought which has made itself separate, fragmented itself as the thinker, as the experiencer. Thought has separated itself as the higher self and the lower self. In India they call it the atman, the higher, here you call it the soul, or this or that, but it is still thought in operation. That's clear, isn't it? This is logical, it is not irrational. | 思考とは - どうかよく聞いてください - 思考は考える人と分離されてきました 考える人が言いますこの考えは良い悪い 彼はこの方がその理想よりもより良いと この信念があの信念よりも良いと これらは全て思考の産物です 思考はそれ自体を考える人と 経験者として分離し断片化します 思考が高尚だ下等だと自分自身を分離させます インドではアートマンと呼ばれます ここでは精神や我などと呼ばれます しかしそれは未だ作動中の思考です 明確ですよね 理論的であり非合理ではありません |
| 57:43 | Now I am going to show you the irrationality of it. We have lived, all our books and all our literature, everything is this, thought. And our relationship is based on thought, just think of it. My wife - I haven't got one - my wife is the image which I have created by thinking. That thinking has been put together by nagging, you know all the things that go on between husband and wife, the pleasure, the sex, the irritations, the exclusions, all that goes on, all the separative instincts that go on. And our thought is the result of our relationship. And what is thought? If you were asked that question, what is thought? Please don't repeat somebody else, find out for yourself. What is thought? Surely thought is the response of memory. Memory as knowledge, memory as experience which has been accumulated, stored up in the brain cells. So the brain cells themselves are the cells of memory. If you didn't think at all, you would be in a state of amnesia, you wouldn't be able to go to your house. | では非合理的な側面をお見せします 本や文学などと私達は生きてきました 全てこれは思考です 私達の人間関係も思考に基づきます 私の妻 - 私には居りません - 私の妻とは考えから造り上げたイメージです その考えは小言などから纏められます 夫婦の間に繰り広げられる事お分かりですよね 喜びや性生活イライラや排除 それら全て 全て分離した強い動機が続きます 私達の思考は 人間関係の結果です では思考は何ですか 思考は何かと聞かれたら皆さんどうですか 誰かの言う事を繰り返さず ご自身で探ってください 思考とは何ですか 思考は疑いなく記憶の反応です 知識としての記憶 蓄積されてきた経験としての記憶 脳細胞の蓄積されています よって脳細胞自体は記憶の細胞です 思考しないのであれば記憶喪失の状態です ご自宅に戻れません |
| 1:00:26 | So, thought is the response of the accumulated memory as knowledge, experience, whether it is yours or the inherited or the communal and so on. So thought is the response of the past, which may project itself into the future, but it is still the past going through the present, modifying it as the future. But it's still the past. Bene? Shall I go on? So, thought is never free. How can it be? It can imagine what is freedom, it can idealise what freedom should be, create a utopia of freedom, but thought itself, in itself, is of the past and therefore it is not free and it is always old. Right? Please, it's not a question of your agreeing with the speaker - that's a fact. And thought organises our life, based on the past. And that thought, based on the past, projects what should be tomorrow, and so there is conflict. | よって思考とは知識や経験として蓄積された 記憶の反応です 自身のものや受継いだり共同のものであったりと つまり思考は過去の反応です それ自体を未来へと反映もするでしょう しかし現在を通りすがり未来として修正しますが 未だそれは過去でしかし過去なのです 続けますか よって思考は自由になる事はありません どうやって可能でしょうか 自由が何かをイメージは出来ます 自由の在るべき姿を理想化出来ます 自由のユートピアを想像できます しかし思考自体が過去のものです よって思考は自由ではなく常に古いものです ですよね これは話し手に賛同するか否かではありません それは事実です 思考が我々の生活を体系化します 過去に基づいてです そしてその過去に基づく思考が明日がどうあるべきかを反映します そこに葛藤が生まれます |
| 1:02:43 | From that arises a question, which is, for most of us thought has given a great deal of pleasure. Right? Pleasure is a guiding principle in our life. We are not saying that it's wrong or right, we are examining it. Pleasure is the thing that we want most - here in this world, in the spiritual world, in the world of heaven, if you have a heaven - pleasure. Pleasure in any form: religious entertainment, going to Mass, all the circus that goes on in the name of religion, and the pleasure of any incident, whether it is of a sunset, sexual, or any sensory pleasure, is recorded and thought over. Right? So thought as pleasure plays a tremendous part in our life. Something happened yesterday which was a lovely thing, a most happy thing, it's recorded, thought comes upon it, chews it and keeps on thinking about it and wants it to be repeated again tomorrow, sexual or otherwise. And so thought gives vitality to an incident that is over. I hope you are following all this. | そこで質問が浮上します それは殆どの人々にとって 思考は非常に大きな喜びを与えてきました ですよね 喜びが私達の人生の最たる主導です その正誤についてではありません 精察しているのです 享楽が私達が最も欲する事です - この世界スピリチュアルな世界 天国があればですが- 喜び享楽 あらゆる形の享楽 : 宗教的な娯楽 ミサに参加するなど宗教の名の下行われます 喜びの為のあらゆる行事 日没でも性的でも 感覚的喜びでも 記録され繰り返し考えます ですよね 喜びとしての思考が私達の人生に絶大な部分を占めます 昨日何かが起ったと 良い出来事でとても幸せだと 記録されます 思考が出てそれを繰り返し考え続けます また明日繰り返したいと 性的でもその他の事でも 終わった出来事に思考が活力を与えます ご理解してるでしょうか |
| 1:05:16 | And so, the very process of recording is knowledge, which is the past. And thought is the past. So, the thought as pleasure is sustained. And if you have noticed, pleasure is always in the past, or the imagined pleasure of tomorrow is still the recollection projected into the future - the past. | 記録のそのプロセスが 知識であり過去です 思考は過去です よって享楽としての思考は持続します お気づきでしょうか喜びは常に過去です または想像した明日の喜びで 未来に反映した回想です - 過去です |
| 1:06:06 | And also you can also observe that where there is pleasure and the pursuit of pleasure, there is also the nourishing of fear. Haven't you noticed it? Fear of the thing I have done yesterday, fear of the pain which I had, physical pain, a week ago. Thinking about it sustains the fear. There is no ending of that pain. When it's over it is finished, but I carry it over by thinking about it. | また喜びの存在する場所喜びの探求について 観察する事が出来 恐怖心を助長します お気づきでしょうか 昨日してしまった事の恐れ 痛みの恐れ 先週あった身体的な痛み それを考える事で恐怖が持続します その痛みに終わりはありません 終わった時が終わりです しかし考える事でそれを持ち越します |
| 1:07:10 | So, thought sustains and gives nourishment to pleasure as well as to fear. Right? Thought is responsible for this. I had pleasure yesterday and I want it repeated again tomorrow. I have done something, or I had pain, physical pain, and I mustn't have it again, it's too awful. I think about it. Fear not only of the present, of the future, fear of death, fear of the unknown - oh, so many fears - fear of not fulfilling, fear of not being loved, wanting to be loved, all the machinery of thought. So there is the rationality of thought and the irrationality of thought. Are you following? | 従って思考は喜びも恐怖心も持続し 助長します ですよね この責任は思考にあります 昨日うれしい事があったと それが明日また起って欲しいと 何かしてしまったり痛みがある 身体的な苦痛 それは望まない酷すぎると 考えてみてください 現在の恐怖心だけでなく未来も 死の恐怖未知の恐怖 - 非常に多くの恐怖心 - 満ち足りない事の恐れ 愛されない事の恐れ愛されたい 全て機械的な思考です したがって思考には合理性も 非合理性も存在します わかりますか |
| 1:08:33 | There must be exercise of thought in doing things, technologically, in the office, when you cook, when you wash dishes, knowledge must function perfectly. There is the rationality, the logic of thought in action, in doing. But also thought becomes totally irrational when it sustains as pleasure or fear. And yet thought says, I cannot let go of my pleasures, and yet thought knows, if it is at all sensitive, aware, that there is pain coming with it. | 行動の中で思考のエクササイズが行われてるはずです 技術的にもオフィスでも 料理中食後の片付けの最中 知識は完璧に機能すべきです 合理性思考の理論は存在します 行動の中でです しかし思考は全くもって非合理的にもなります 享楽や恐怖心を維持する時にです しかし思考は喜びを手放せないと しかし思考は繊細で自覚があれば そこには痛みが共に在る事を知ります |
| 1:09:33 | So, to be aware of all the machinery of thought, the complicated, subtle movement of thought. And this is not difficult. It really is not at all difficult once you say, I must find out a way of living that is totally different, a way of life in which there is no conflict. If that is the real demand, as your demand for pleasure, if that is your insistent, passionate demand, to live a life, inwardly and outwardly, in which there is no conflict whatsoever, then you will see the possibility of it. Because we have explained conflict exists only when there is division, between the me and the not me, when I am a Hindu and you are a Christian, communist, socialist, the racket that goes on in this world. Then if you see that, not verbally or intellectually because that's not seeing, but when you actually realise that there is no division between the observer and the observed, between the thinker and the thought, then you see, observe actually what is. And then when you see actually what is, you have already gone beyond it, you don't stay with what is. You stay with what is only when the observer is different from the what is. You are getting this? A moment, sir. I don't know what the time is, we'll ask. | 従って機械的な思考のあらゆる動き 複雑で微妙な動きに気付く事 これは難しくはありません これはそう難しい事ではありません 全く違う生き方を模索すべきです 葛藤の無い生き方 それが本当に求める事であれば 喜びとしての強い要望 それが断固たる情熱的な欲求であれば 内的にも外的にも人生を送る中で 対立も葛藤も全く無い人生 可能性を見出す事が出来ます 説明した通り 分離があると対立が存在します あなたと私との間 ヒンドゥーとキリスト教 共産主義や社会主義と 世界中でおこる騒動 それを理解すると 言語的や知的だけの理解ではなく あなたが実際に気付くと 観察者と観察される側に分離がないという事実 考える人と思考の間に分離がない するとそのものを実際に観察すると そのもの事の実際を理解すると あなたはその先を超えています その事に留まらず その事に留まるのは 観察者とその事が異なる場合のみです お分かりですか お待ちください 何時か分りません聞いてみます |
| 1:12:21 | But just see this. It's rather complex, but quite simple really. | これを理解してください 寧ろ複雑ですが本当は実に単純です |
| 1:12:27 | A: Could you repeat the last part again? | A: 最後の部分をもう一度話してもらえませんか |
| 1:12:32 | K: Could I repeat the last part again. I don't know what I said. Please don't laugh. I'm not putting this on. I've really forgotten what I said. I'll repeat it differently. I'll say it differently. We have divided life as the me and the not me, we and they, geographically, nationally, religiously, family, division. This division takes place inevitably, basically, as long as there is the observer different from the thing observed. When I look at myself as an observer different from the thing observed, then 'what is' I want to change, I want to suppress it, I want to get over it, make it conform to what I think should be, the ideal which I have projected as the observer. In that there is conflict, but to observe actually what is without the observer, which is the past, which is time, all that, when you so observe actually what is, the what is has undergone a tremendous change, because it's no longer what is, what you thought what is, it is something totally new. I'll show it to you in a minute. Need I give examples? I'm not good at giving examples. You see this, don't you? We understand each other? | K: 最後の部分を繰り返すと 何を言ったのか分りません 笑わないでくださいショーではありません 本当に覚えていません違う表現で繰り返します 異なる言い方をしてみます 私達は自身と他者と分離してきました 私達や彼らなどとです 地理的に国家的に宗教的に家族と 分断です この分断が不可避的に行われてきました 観察者が観察される事と異なる場合です 自身を見ると 自分が観察者として観察される事と異なる その事が私が変えたい事で 抑圧したり乗り越えたいと 自分の考える在るべき姿に順応しようと 観察者として自分の反映する理想の姿にです そこに葛藤があります その事を観察者なく実際に観察すると それは過去であり時間であると 実際にその事を凝視すると その事がとてつもない変化を遂げます なぜならその事はあなたの考えるその事でなく 完全に何か新しい事だからです この後お話します 例が必要ですか例え話が得意ではありません お分かりですよね 互いに理解していますか |
| 1:14:54 | Q: May I ask a question? | Q: 質問があります |
| 1:14:58 | K: Let me finish and then you can ask. I don't know what time it is. What we have talked about this evening is, very simply, how to totally eliminate in oneself, every form of conflict. It is only then you know what love is, and this can only take place when you can observe the total content of yourself, non-analytically. Analysis must come into being when there is an observer, a thinker who is analysing. But the thinker, the analyser, the observer, is the analysed, is the thing that he is going to analyse, is the thought. So when there is this complete cessation of division between the observer and the observed, then what is, is no longer what is, you have gone beyond, the mind has gone beyond it. Now proceed, what's the question? What was the question? | K: 話がまだ在りますその後にご質問をどうぞ 何時でしょうか 今夜話した事は非常にシンプルで 自身の中でどのようにあらゆる 葛藤を取り除くかです そして初めて愛が何かを知ります 自分の完全な中身を 観察する事でしか起りません 分析的でなくです 観察者が存在すると分析が起ります 分析する考える人 しかし考える人分析者観察者が分析されます 分析される事柄が彼が分析する事です それは思考です 従って観察者と される側との間に完全な分断が終結すると その事がその事では無くなり あなたはその先を超え心はその先を超えます ではご質問は何ですか ご質問は何でしたか |
| 1:16:33 | Questioner: I think I follow what you're saying about the separation between the observer and the observed. I was wondering, what do I do when I get up in the morning, realising that I observe, and there is the object that I observe - I am the observer and there's the object that I observe - what do I do to change this? Basically I can understand what you are saying but I don't know what to do. | 質問者 : 仰る事は分るのです 観察者とされる側との間の分離についてです 朝起きて自分のする事を観察していると 自分が気付きそこに 観察される物がある場合 - つまり私が観察者でそこに私が観察する物がある - これを変えるにはどうすれば良いですか 基本的に仰る事が理解できるのですが その点については分りません |
| 1:17:02 | K: I understand the question, is this what you're saying: I wake up in the morning, tired, exhausted - I don't know why you laugh - lazy, and I observe. And I don't want to get up and do all the routine. What am I to do? Is that the question? | K: ご質問は分ります 朝起きて 疲れている - なぜ笑うのですか - 怠いと自分が観察します 起きて準備をする気がしないと どうしますかそれが質問ですか |
| 1:17:39 | Q: That is not exactly the way that I necessarily feel when I wake up in the morning. I see the separation between wanting to observe the object and yet being identified with the situation. I do not know how, I don't understand how do I change this phenomenon of the observer and the observed? Can't I change it? I can't just agree with you and say, yes this is true. Somehow I have to do something. | Q: 必ずしもそう感じているのではなく 朝起きた時に 事を観察したいという気持ちとの分離がみえますが しかしそれは状況で認識されます どうすればいいのか この現象をどう変えるのか解りません 観察者とされる側 変えていいのでしょうか はいそうですと単に賛同できないのです 何かをしなければなりません |
| 1:18:12 | K: Quite right. That is, there is no identification at all. When you identify yourself with the observed, it is still the pattern of thought, isn't it? | K: そうですね そこに認識がないのです 自身を観察されると認識すると それは未だに思考のパターンですよね |
| 1:18:28 | Q: Precisely. How do I get out of that? | Q: まさにどう抜け出しますか |
| 1:18:32 | K: I'm going to show you. You don't get out of it. I'll show it to you in a minute. Do you see the truth that the observer is the observed? The truth of it, the fact of it, the logic of it. Do you see that, the truth of it, or don't you? | K: ご説明しましょう 抜け出すのではありませんこれからお話します 観察者と される側この真実は理解していますね その真実事実で理論です その真実が見えています そうですよね |
| 1:19:15 | Q: It's still only a comment which arises. The truth does not exist. | Q: ただ未だコメントが浮かびます 真実は存在しないと |
| 1:19:24 | K: The fact doesn't exist? | K: 事実は存在しないと |
| 1:19:26 | Q: No. A comment arises. A comment of agreement arises. | Q: そうです賛同するという意見が出てきます |
| 1:19:30 | K: Don't agree. You see that fact, don't you? Please don't agree or disagree, this is a very serious thing. I wish I could talk about meditation, but not now. This is implied in this. Just a minute, let me finish this. See the importance of this. The truth is that I am anger, not I am different from anger, that's the truth, isn't it? That's a fact, isn't it? I am anger, not 'I' separate from anger. When I am jealous, 'I' am jealous, not I am different from jealousy. I make myself separate from jealousy because I want to do something about jealousy, sustain it or get rid of it or rationalise it, or get bored with it, whatever it is. But the fact is, the me is jealous. That's a fact, isn't it? | K: 賛同しないでくださいその事実が見えるのですよね 賛同や反対しないでください これは非常に真面目な問いです 瞑想についてお話したいのですが今ではありません この件を示唆しています お待ちください話を終わらせてください 重要性を見てください 事実は私自身が怒りです 私は怒りと違うのではなく それが真実ですよね それが事実ですよね 私が怒りです怒りと別物ではありません 嫉妬する時私は嫉妬する 嫉妬心と自分が別物ではありません 嫉妬心と自分を別個にするから その嫉妬心をどうにかしたくなり 維持するか除こうと正当化しようとします または飽きてします何であろうとです しかし真実は私が嫉妬です それが事実ですよね |
| 1:21:07 | How am I to act when I am jealous, when 'me' is jealousy? Before, I thought I could act when I separated myself from jealousy, I thought I could do something about it, suppress it, rationalise it, or run away from it, do various things. I thought I was doing something. Here, I feel I am not doing anything. That is, when I say, I am jealousy, I feel I can't move. Isn't that right? I'll show it to you. Look at the two varieties of activity, the action which takes place when you are different from jealousy, which is the non-ending of jealousy. You may run away from it, you may suppress it, you may transcend it, you may escape, etc., but it will come back, it will be there always, because there is the division between you and jealousy. Now, there is a totally different kind of action when there is no division, because in that the observer is the observed, he cannot do anything about it. Before, he was able to do something about it, now he feels he is stumped, he is frustrated, he can't do anything. If the observer is the observed then there is no saying, I can't do anything about it. He is what he is. He is jealousy. Now, when he is jealousy, what takes place? Go on, sir. | 嫉妬する時どう行動するか ' 私 ' が嫉妬である時にです 以前は自分と嫉妬を 分離し行動すると考えました どうにか出来ると考えました 抑圧する正当化する逃避する 様々な事をします 何かをしていると考えました でも何もしてないと感じます つまり私が嫉妬すると言う時 動けないと感じます そうですよね ご説明します ふたつの活動について見てみます 行われる活動 自分が嫉妬心とは異なると認識する時の活動 嫉妬の終わりがありません それを逃避したり抑圧するでしょう 脱却したり逃避したりなどと しかしそれは戻ってきますそこに常に在ります そこにご自身と嫉妬心の間の分断が在るからです では全く別のアクションが存在します そこに分離が存在しません 即ちそこに観察者とされる側 自身は何もできません その前は何かしようとする事ができましたが 当惑し イライラし何もできません 観察者がされる側であれば 何もできないとは言えません 彼がそのものです 彼自身が嫉妬心です では彼が嫉妬するとき何がおきますか どうぞ |
| 1:23:59 | Q: He understands something. | Q: 何かを理解します |
| 1:24:01 | K: Look at it. Do look at it for a minute, take time. When I realise I am different from my jealousy, then I feel I can do something about it. And in the doing of it there is conflict. Here, in the other side, when I realise the truth of it, that 'me' is jealousy, the observer is the observed, then what takes place? | K: 見てください 少ししばらく見てみてください 自分が自分の嫉妬心と 違うと気付く時 どうにか出来ると感じます その中に葛藤が起きます では一方で真実に気付いたら その ' 私 ' が嫉妬で観察者がされる側である 何が行われますか |
| 1:24:41 | Q: There is no conflict. | Q: そこに対立は存在しません |
| 1:24:44 | K: Then what takes place? The element of conflict comes to an end, doesn't it? The element of conflict ceases. Here conflict exists, here conflict doesn't exist. So conflict is jealousy. You've got it? Just see what I've said. Please take time. Why do you clap? | K: すると何が起きますか 対立の要素は終止符を打ちますよね 対立の要素は終止します 葛藤が存在する葛藤は存在しない その葛藤は嫉妬心 分りますか 私の話す事をよく見てください 時間をかけてください なぜ拍手するのですか |
| 1:25:25 | Q: May I ask a question? | Q: 質問して良いでしょうか |
| 1:25:27 | K: Sir, wait a minute, please. There was conflict, and conflict has been part of my life. I've lived with conflict from the moment I am born until I die, I know nothing but conflict. Here, when the observer is the observed, the thinker is the thought, then there is no conflict. When there is no conflict there is no jealousy. Jealousy is conflict, isn't it? | K: 待ってください 葛藤がありました その葛藤は自分の人生の一部であると その葛藤と共に生きて来た 生まれた瞬間から死に至るまで 葛藤しか知らないと 観察者がされる側であれば 考える人がその思考で そこに対立葛藤はありません そこに対立がなければ嫉妬心もありません 嫉妬は葛藤ですよね |
| 1:26:11 | Q: In a way, yes. | Q: はいある意味 |
| 1:26:15 | Q: May I ask a question? | Q: 質問よろしいですか |
| 1:26:17 |
K: Have you got this? Q: Yes. | K: これを理解されましたかQ: はい |
| 1:26:21 | K: There has been complete action here, an action in which there has been no effort at all, therefore it is complete, total, it will never come back. | K: そこには完全なアクションが在ります そこに全くの努力がない活動です 従って完全で完結し二度と戻りません |
| 1:26:42 |
Q: May I ask a question? K: Yes. | Q: 質問ですK: はい |
| 1:26:51 | K: What did you want to ask? | K: 何をお聞きになりたいのですか |
| 1:26:55 | Q: You said analysis is the deadly tool of thought, or consciousness. I perfectly agree with you, and you were about to say that you would develop the argument that there are fragments in the brain, or thought or consciousness which would be anti-analytical. I would grateful if you would continue to develop that thought. | Q: 分析は致命的な思考のもしくは意識の ツールだと仰いました 完全に賛同します脳内に断片があり 議論を発展させると説明されようとしました または思考や意識は反分析的であると その思考の話について展開して頂けますか |
| 1:27:23 | K: Of what? | K: その何ですか |
| 1:27:26 | Q: You mentioned that the fragments would not constitute any conflict or struggle. They will be anti-analytical... | Q: 思考の断片は 対立や葛藤を構成しないとおっしゃいました それは反分析的と ... |
| 1:27:39 | K: You are repeating something. What is the question? | K: 繰り返してます質問は何ですか |
| 1:27:43 | Q: I only request to continue what you mean by fragments that will be anti-analytical. Thank you. | Q: 断片が反分析的という話について 進めてほしいのですありがとうございます |
| 1:27:56 | K: I just explained. There must be fragmentation when there is the observer and the observed as two different things. I've explained it. No? Look, this is not an argument. This is nothing to develop. I have gone into it fairly thoroughly. We can of course spend lots more time because the more deeply you go into it, the more there is. We have broken up our life into many fragments, haven't we. The scientist, the businessman, the artist, the housewife and so on. What is the basis of this fragmentation, what is the root of this fragmentation? The root of this fragmentation is the observer and the observed. He breaks it up, he breaks up life. I am a Hindu and you're a Catholic, I am a communist, you are a bourgeois, so there is this division going on all the time. And I say, why is there this division? What causes this division? Not only the external, economic, social structure, but much more deeply, what causes this division? This division is brought about, this fragmentation, the me and the not me, the me that wants to be superior, more famous, ambitious, the greater, the more, and 'you', different. So, the me is the observer, the me is the past, which divides the present as the past and the future. So, as long as there is the observer, the experiencer, the thinker, there must be division. We explained together that when there is division there is jealousy, conflict with jealousy, and so sustained conflict in jealousy. Where the observer is the observed, conflict ceases, and therefore jealousy ceases, because jealousy is conflict. Jealousy is conflict, isn't it? | K: 先ほど説明しました 観察者と観察される側が 異なるふたつである場合分裂し断片化すると 説明しました 違いますか これは議論ではありません 展開させるものでもありません かなり精密にお話しました 勿論もっと時間を割く事はできますが 更に深く追求する程更に気付きます 多くの断片に人生を別けてきましたよね 科学者ビジネスマンや芸術家 主婦などと この断片の基礎は何ですか この断片のルーツは何ですか この断片のルーツは見られる側と見る側にあります 自身が分断し自身が人生を分割します 自分はヒンドゥー教だあなたはカトリックだと 私は共産主義であなたは資本主義だと 従ってこの分断が常に起っています この分断はなぜなのかと問います 分断の原因は何ですか 外的な経済や社会構造に限らず 更に根深いこの分断の原因は何でしょうか この分断が断片を生み出します 自分と他者 他者より優れているもっと有名にと野心を持ち もっとより良い ' あなた 'とは異なると つまり自己が観察者で その自己とは過去です それが現在を過去と未来に分裂させます よってそこに観察者 経験者や考える人がいる限り必然的に分断が生じます 一緒に見てきました そこに分断が在れば嫉妬があり 嫉妬と葛藤します 嫉妬の中で対立が持続します 観察者が観察されると葛藤が終結します 従って嫉妬も終結します嫉妬は葛藤だからです 嫉妬は葛藤ですよね |
| 1:31:06 | Q: Is it human nature, jealousy? | Q: 嫉妬は人間の摂理ですか |
| 1:31:15 | K: Is jealousy human nature. Is violence human nature? Is greed human nature? | K: 嫉妬は人間の摂理か 暴力は ? 強欲は人間の摂理ですか |
| 1:31:24 | Q: I wanted to ask you another question, if I may. Am I right or wrong, according to what you've been telling us, and to put it succinctly: as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he. So watch our thoughts and profit from experience. | Q: 他の質問をお尋ねしたいのですが 仰った事を元に 簡潔に申し上げると 人は心で考えます 思考をみて経験から利益を得ます |
| 1:31:49 | K: What? I haven't quite understood what you said. What was the question? | K: 何ですか 仰る事がよく理解できません 質問は何ですか |
| 1:32:15 | Q: As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he. We should watch our thoughts, shouldn't we, and profit from our past experience? | Q: 人は心で考えます 思考に注意すべきですよね そして過去の経験から利益を得るべきだと |
| 1:32:25 | K: That's just what I was saying: as you think, you are. That's just it. As you think, what you think, you are. What you think - that you are greater than somebody else, that you are inferior to somebody else, that you are perfect, that you are not beautiful, that you are angry - what you think, you are. That's simple enough, isn't it? And until you find out whether it is possible to live a life where thought has its rational function, where thought becomes irrational. We'll go into that tomorrow. No, next weekend. | K: そう言いました考える通りがあなた自身です それだけです あなたが考える事それがあなたです あなたの考える事あなたは他人より優れていると あなたは他人より劣っていると あなたは完璧だ美しくない 怒っている- 考える内容があなたです シンプルですよね 思考の合理的な機能で 人生を送るれるのか非合理的な思考 これについては 明日話します 来週末ではありません |
| 1:33:27 | Q: To continue in the same vein with the jealousy, when the jealousy is me, and me is the jealousy, the conflict ends because I know it's the jealousy and it disappears. But when I listen to the noises in the street and the me is the noises and the noises are me, how can conflict end when that noise will go on forever? | Q: 嫉妬と同様の筋で続けると 嫉妬が私であれば私が嫉妬で 自分が嫉妬に気がつき嫉妬との葛藤が終結する しかし街の通りの雑音を聞くと 自分が雑音で雑音が自分である 雑音が永遠と続くのにどうこの対立を終えられますか |
| 1:33:53 | K: It's fairly simple. The question is: I walk down the street and that noise is terrible, and when I say that noise is me, the noise doesn't end, it goes on, isn't that the question? I don't say the noise is me. I don't say the cloud is me or the tree is me. Why should I say the noise is me? No, please don't laugh. I don't know why you laugh about this silly thing. We pointed out just now that if you observe, if you say, I listen to that noise, listen completely, not with resistance, then that noise may go on forever, it doesn't effect you. The moment you resist, that is, you as separate from the noise, not identify yourself with the noise. I don't know if you see the difference. The noise goes on. I either can cut myself off from it by resisting it, putting a wall between myself and that noise, then what takes place? When I resist something what takes place? There's conflict, isn't there? Can I listen to that noise without any resistance whatsoever? | K: 非常にシンプルです ご質問は : 道を歩いていると非常に煩い騒音が聞こえます その音が自分であると言う その騒音は終わらず続きます それが質問ですね その音が自分だとは言いません 雲が自分だとはいいません 木もそうです なぜ騒音が自分だと言うのですか 笑わないでください なぜ馬鹿げた事を笑うのか解りません 先ほど指摘した通り観察すると その騒音を聞くと 完全に聞くのです 抵抗せず すると騒音は永遠に続いてもあなたに影響はしません 抵抗する瞬間つまり ご自身を騒音と分離する事です 騒音をもってして自分を認識しない事です 違いがお分かりでしょうか 騒音は続きます 音に抵抗する事で切り捨てたり 自分と音の間に壁を造ると 何が起きますか 抵抗すると何が起きますか 対立 葛藤です そうですよね 抵抗なくその騒音を聞く事はできますか |
| 1:36:01 | Q: Yes, if you know that the noise might stop in an hour. | Q: はい一定の時間内に騒音が終わると知っていれば可能です |
| 1:36:05 | K: No, that's part of your resistance still. | K: いいえ それは未だ抵抗の一部なのです |
| 1:36:11 | Q: That means that I can listen to the noise in the street for the rest of my life, with the possibility I might become deaf... | Q: つまり街の騒音を一生聞き続ける事が 可能という事ですか 難聴になる可能性もあると... |
| 1:36:21 | K: No, I am saying something entirely different. We are saying, as long as there is resistance there must be conflict. Whether I resist my wife or my husband, whether I resist the noise of the dog barking or the noise in the street, there must be conflict. Now, how to listen to the noise without conflict? Not whether it will go on indefinitely, hoping it will come to an end, but how to listen to the noise without any conflict? That's what we are talking about. You can listen to the noise when the mind is completely free of any form of resistance, not only to the noise but to everything in life, to your husband, to your wife, to your children, to the politician, listen. Therefore what takes place? Your listening becomes much more acute. You become much more sensitive. And therefore noise is only a part, it isn't the whole world. So the very act of listening is more important than the noise. So listening becomes the important thing and not the noise. | K: いいえ 全く異なる事を私は申しています 抵抗がある限りそこに葛藤が存在します 妻に夫に抵抗するか 騒音に吠える犬に 街の騒音にとそこに対立が存在します では対立なく音を聞くには 騒音が延々と続くか続かないか問わず 終わると希望を持たず しかしどう騒音を葛藤なく聞くのか それについてを話しています 心が自由である時にその音をいかなる抵抗もなく 聞く事ができます 騒音のみならず人生全てにおいてです ご自身の旦那さんや奥さん子供 政治家に対してもです 何が起きますか 聞く事が更に鋭くなります 更に繊細になります 従って騒音は単なる一部となり それが世界全てではなくなります 騒音より聞くその事自体が更に重要となります 聞く事そのものが重要となります 騒音ではなくです |
| 1:38:10 | I think I better stop, it's ten past seven. | これで終わりにしましょう7 時 10 分を過ぎました |