Krishnamurti - Gốc của Rối loạn Tâm lý

Krishnamurti Subtitles

OJ82CNM1 - Gốc của Rối loạn Tâm lý
Buổi Thảo Luận thứ nhất với Tiến Sĩ Bohm, Hidley & Sheldrake
Ojai, USA
16 tháng Tư 1982

0:05	The Nature of the Mind	H: Bản chất của Trí óc
0:19	Part One	Phần Một
0:23	The Roots of Psychological Disorder	Gốc của Rối loạn Tâm lý
0:37	This is one of a series of dialogues between J Krishnamurti, David Bohm, Rupert Sheldrake, and John Hidley. The purpose of these discussions is to explore essential questions about the mind, what is psychological disorder, and what is required for fundamental psychological change?	Phần một của loạt đối thoại giữa J Krishnamurti, David Bohm, Rupert Sheldrake, và John Hidley. Mục đích các buổi thảo luận này là thám sát những vấn đề cơ bản về trí óc, rối loạn tâm lý là gì, và cái gì cần thiết để thay đổi tâm lý cơ bản?
0:57	J Krishnamurti is a religious philosopher, author, and educator, who has written and given lectures on these subjects for many years. He has founded elementary and secondary schools in the United States, England, and India.	J Krishnamurti là nhà triết học tôn giáo, tác giả, và nhà giáo dục đã viết và nói về các chủ đề này nhiều năm. Ông đã lập nhiều trường tiểu và trung học ở Mỹ, Anh và Ấn độ.
1:10	David Bohm is professor of theoretical physics at Birkbeck College, London University in England. He has written numerous books concerning theoretical physics and the nature of consciousness. Professor Bohm and Mr. Krishnamurti have held previous dialogues on many subjects.	David Bohm là giáo sư vật lý lý thuyết tại trường Birkbeck, Đại học London ở Anh. Ông đã viết nhiều sách về lý thuyết vật lý và bản chất của nhận thức. Giáo sư Bohm và Ngài Krishnamurti đã từng đối thoại về nhiều chủ đề.
1:27	Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist, whose recently published book proposes that learning in some members of a species affects the species as a whole. Dr. Sheldrake is presently consulting plant physiologist to the International Crops Research Institute in Hyderabad, India.	Rupert Sheldrake là nhà sinh vật, vừa ấn bản quyển sách đề ra rằng học hỏi ở vài thành viên của loài ảnh hưởng toàn thể loài ấy. Dr. Sheldrake hiện là cố vấn sinh lý thực vật cho Viện Nghiên cứu Trồng trọt Quốc tế ở Hyderabad, Ấn độ.
1:46	John Hidley is a psychiatrist in private practice, who has been associated with the Krishnamurti school in Ojai, California, for the past six years.	John Hidley là bác sĩ tâm thần hành nghề tư, cộng tác với trường học Krishnamurti ở Ojai, California sáu năm qua.
1:55	In the culture there are conflicting points of view about the proper approach to dealing with one's own or others' psychological problems. And the underlying principles from which these approaches are drawn are in even greater conflict. Without invoking a narrow or specialised point of view, can the mind, the nature of consciousness, its relationship to human suffering, and the potential for change be understood? These are the issues to be explored in these dialogues.	Trong văn hóa có nhiều quan điểm xung đột về lối tiếp cận thích hợp để xử sự với các vấn đề tâm lý riêng hay ai khác. Và nguyên lý cơ bản từ đó các tiếp cận này được vẽ ra làm xung đột còn lớn hơn. Không dẫn chứng quan điểm chuyên gia hay cạn cợt, trí óc, bản chất của nhận thức, quan hệ nó với đau khổ con người, và tiềm năng cho thay đổi, có thể được hiểu? Các vấn đề sẽ được thám sát trong những đối thoại.
2:28	K: Is disorder the very nature of the self?	K: Vô trật tự có phải là bản chất của ngã?
2:40	H: Why do you say that? Why do you ask that, if it is the nature of the self?	H: Tại sao ngài nói thế? Tại sao ngài hỏi vậy, liệu đó có là bản chất của ngã?
2:44	K: Isn't the self, the me, the ego, whatever word we like to use, isn't that divisive? Isn't that exclusive, isolating process, the self-centred activity, which causes so much disorder in the world, isn't that the origin, the beginning of all disorder?	K: Ngã, tôi, bản ngã, hay chữ gì bạn thích dùng, nó không phân chia sao? Nó không là tiến trình loại trừ, cô lập, hoạt động vị ngã, gây biết bao vô trật tự trên thế giới, nó không phải nguồn gốc, khởi đầu của mọi lộn xộn ư?
3:10	H: The origin being selfish activity.	H: Nguồn gốc là hoạt động vị ngã.
3:13	K: Yes, self-centred activity, at all levels of life.	K: Vâng, hoạt động vị ngã, ở mọi mức độ đời sống.
3:17	H: Yes, and certainly that's the way, in which the patient comes in, he's concerned about his depression.	H: Vâng, và chắc chắn là vậy, vậy đó người bệnh bước vào, hắn quan tâm đến chán nản.
3:22	K: Yes. H: Or his fear.	K: Vâng. H: Hay sợ hãi.
3:24	K: His fulfilment, his joy, his suffering, his agony, and so on, it's all self-centred.	K: Thoả mãn, niềm vui, đau khổ, quằn quại, v.v.., đều là vị ngã.
3:31	H: Yes. K: So, I am asking, if I may, is not the self the beginning of all disorder? The self - I mean the egotistic attitude towards life, the sense of individual, emphasis on the individual, his salvation, his fulfilment, his happiness, his anxiety, and so on.	H: Vâng. K: Vậy, tôi hỏi, nếu có thể, ngã không là khởi đầu mọi rối loạn ư? Ngã - tôi nói thái độ vị ngã đối với đời sống, cảm giác cá nhân, nhấn mạnh vào cá nhân, giải thoát, thoả mãn của hắn, hạnh phúc, lo âu của hắn, v.v..
4:01	H: Well, I don't know that it's the source of the thing. It's certainly the way he experiences it and presents it. He presents it as his.	H: Ồ, tôi không biết nó là nguồn gốc sự việc. Chắc chắn đó là cách hắn kinh nghiệm và bày tỏ nó. Hắn bày tỏ nó như của hắn.
4:11	K: Yes, but I mean, if you go all over the world, it is the same expression, it is the same way of living. They are all living their own personal lives, unrelated to another, though they may be married, they may do all kinds of things, but they're really functioning from an isolated centre.	K: Vâng, nhưng ý tôi, nếu bạn đi khắp thế giới, nó biểu lộ như nhau, lối sống như nhau. Họ đều sống đời sống riêng, không liên quan ai khác, dù họ có thể kết hôn, họ có thể làm mọi việc, nhưng họ thực sự hoạt động từ trung tâm cô lập.
4:39	H: And that centre, that self, is the source of the difficulty in the relationship?	H: Và trung tâm ấy, cái ngã, là nguồn gốc của khó khăn trong quan hệ?
4:46	K: In relationship.	K: Trong quan hệ.
4:47	H: And the difficulty that creates the symptoms.	H: Và khó khăn tạo ra triệu chứng.
4:52	K: And I wonder, if the psychologists have tackled that problem, that the self is the origin, the beginning of all contradiction, divisive activity, self-centred activity, and so on.	K: Và tôi tự hỏi, nhà tâm lý có giải quyết vấn đề ấy, rằng ngã là nguồn gốc, khởi đầu của mọi mâu thuẫn, hoạt động phân chia, hoạt động vị ngã, v.v..
5:11	H: No. I think that the way psychiatrists and psychologists look at this is that the problem is to have an adequate self.	H: Không. Tôi nghĩ cách mà bác sĩ tâm thần và nhà tâm lý nhìn nó là vấn đề phải có cái ngã tương xứng.
5:21	K: Adequate self. H: Yes.	K: Ngã tương xứng. H: Vâng.
5:23	K: Which means what?	K: Nghĩa là gì?
5:26	H: Defining normality...	H: Định nghĩa bình thường...
5:28	K: The self that is functioning... H: Sufficiently.	K: Ngã hoạt động... H: Đầy đủ.
5:31	K: ...efficiently. H: Yes.	K: ...đầy đủ. H: Vâng.
5:33	K: Which means furthering more misery.	K: Nghĩa là đau khổ nhiều thêm.
5:41	B: Well, I don't feel that the psychiatrists would necessarily agree with you on that last point, they might feel that a proper, or properly organised self could get together with other properly organised selves and make an orderly society. K: Yes.	B: Nào, tôi không cảm thấy bác sĩ tâm thần cần thiết đồng ý với ngài ở điểm cuối, họ có thể thấy ngã thích hợp hay được tổ chức thích hợp có thể giao tiếp với ngã được tổ chức thích hợp khác và tạo xã hội trật tự. K: Vâng.
5:54	B: And you are saying, as I understand it, something quite different. K: Yes.	B: Và ngài nói, như tôi hiểu, điều hoàn toàn khác. K: Vâng.
5:58	B: Which is that no self can do it. No structure of the self can make order.	B: Cái mà vô ngã có thể làm. Không cấu trúc của ngã nào có thể làm trật tự.
6:04	K: That's right. The very nature of the self must intrinsically bring disorder.	K: Đúng vậy. Chính bản chất của ngã phải là đem đến vô trật tự.
6:15	B: Yes, but I'm not sure this will be clear. How can that be made clear, evident?	B: Vâng, nhưng tôi không chắc việc này rõ ràng. Làm sao nó được làm rõ, hiển nhiên?
6:27	S: Sorry, it seems to me that the context is even broader than that of psychology, because in the world we have all sorts of things, which are not human beings with selves, there are animals, and plants, and all the forces of nature, and all the stars, and so on. Now, we see disorder in nature too. It may not be consciously experienced - and a cat that's suffering, or a lion that is suffering, or a mouse, or even an earthworm that's suffering may not come into a psychiatrist's office and say so, but the fact is that there seems to be disorder and conflict within nature. There are conflicts between forces of nature, inanimate things, earthquakes and so on; there are conflicts within the animal world, there are even conflicts within the plant world. Plants compete for light, and bigger ones get higher up in the forest, and the smaller ones get shaded out and die. There's conflict between predators and prey - all animals live on other plants or animals. There's every kind of conflict, there's disease, there's suffering, there's parasites - all these things occur in the natural world. So, is the context of psychological suffering and disorder something that's merely something to do with the mind, or is it something to do with the whole of nature, the fact that the world is full of separate things, and that if we have a world which is full of separate things, and these separate things are all interacting with each other, that there's always going to be conflict in such a world.	S: Xin lỗi, hình như phạm vi đã rộng hơn vấn đề tâm lý, bởi trên thế giới chúng ta có nhiều việc, nó không là con người với ngã, có loài vật, cỏ cây và các sức mạnh tự nhiên, và trăng sao, v.v.. Giờ, chúng ta cũng thấy rối loạn trong tự nhiên. Nó có thể không được kinh nghiệm hữu thức- và mèo đau đớn, hay sư tử đau khổ, hay chuột, hay thậm chí giun đất đau khổ có thể không đến văn phòng bác sĩ tâm lý và nói thế, nhưng thực tế hình như có rối loạn và xung đột trong tự nhiên. Có xung đột giữa sức mạnh tự nhiên, các vật vô tri, động đất, v.v..; có xung đột trong thế giới động vật, ngay cả có xung đột trong thế giới cỏ cây. Cây cỏ tranh giành ánh sáng, và cây lớn hơn vươn cao hơn trong rừng, và cây nhỏ hơn bị che khuất và chết. Có xung đột giữa thú ăn thịt và con mồi - mọi động vật sống bằng thực hay động vật khác. Có mọi cách xung đột, có bịnh tật, có đau khổ, có ký sinh - mọi việc ấy xảy ra trong thế giới tự nhiên. Vậy, đó là vấn đề đau khổ và rối loạn tâm lý điều gì đó chỉ liên quan đến trí óc, hay đó là việc liên quan đến toàn bộ tự nhiên, thực tế rằng thế giới đầy sự vật phân chia, và rằng nếu chúng ta có thế giới đầy việc phân chia, và những vật phân chia ấy đều tương tác lẫn nhau, rằng luôn sẽ có xung đột trong thế giới như thế.
7:57	B: So, I'm wondering, is it clear that there is that disorder in nature. Would we say that disorder is only in human consciousness?	B: Vậy, tôi tự hỏi, có rõ ràng là có vô trật tự trong tự nhiên. Chúng ta nói vô trật tự chỉ trong nhận thức con người?
8:06	K: Yes.	K: Vâng.
8:07	B: That is, the phenomena that you have described, are they actually disorder? That's a question we have to go into. Or what is the difference between the disorder in consciousness and whatever is going on in nature?	B: Tức là, hiện tượng mà bạn mô tả, chúng thực là rối loạn? Đó là vấn đề phải tìm hiểu. Hay có gì khác nhau giữa rối loạn trong nhận thức và điều gì đó xảy ra trong tự nhiên?
8:18	K: I saw the other night on the television a cheetah chasing a deer, killing it. Would you consider that disorder?	K: Tôi xem tối nọ trên TV con báo đuổi con nai, giết nó. Bạn có xem đó vô trật tự?
8:28	S: Well, I would consider that it involves suffering.	S: Ồ, tôi xem đó có dính đau khổ.
8:30	K: Suffering, yes. So, are we saying that it is natural in nature and in human beings to suffer, to go through agonies, to live in disorder? S: Yes.	K: Đau khổ, vâng. Vậy, chúng ta có nói nó tự nhiên trong thiên nhiên và ở con người thì đau khổ, thống khổ, sống vô trật tự? S: Vâng.
8:49	K: So, what do you say to that, sir?	K: Vậy thì bạn nói sao?
8:51	H: Well, I think that's the way it's looked at by the therapist. To some degree it's felt that this arises in the course of development, and that some people have it more than others - suffering - some people are more fortunate in their upbringing, for example, in their heredity. But it isn't questioned that that may not be necessary in any absolute sense.	H: Nào, tôi nghĩ đó là cách nhìn của người trị bịnh. Ở độ nào được cảm nhận nó nổi lên trong dòng tiến triển, và người này có nó nhiều hơn người khác - đau khổ - vài người may mắn khi lớn lên, ví dụ, trong di truyền của họ. Nhưng không được hỏi lại rằng có thể không cần thiết trong nghĩa tuyệt đối.
9:18	T:Well, that's what we're questioning.	T:À, chúng ta đang hỏi đó.
9:20	K: That's what I would like to question too.	K: Việc đó tôi cũng muốn hỏi.
9:22	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
9:24	K: Dr. Sheldrake says it is accepted. It's like that. Human condition is to suffer, to struggle, to have anxiety, pain, disorder.	K: Dr. Sheldrake nói nó được chấp nhận. Nó như vậy. Qui định con người là đau khổ, tranh đấu, có lo âu, đau đớn, rối loạn.
9:36	H: Well, it's certainly... K: It's human condition.	H: Ồ, chắc rồi... K: Là qui định con người.
9:38	H: It's certainly necessary to have physical suffering. People get sick, they die, and we're wondering whether or not psychological suffering is analogous to that, or whether there's something intrinsically different about it.	H: Chắc chắn cần thiết có đau khổ vật lý. Mọi người bị bịnh, chết, và chúng ta tự hỏi xem coi đau khổ tâm lý có giống vậy không, hay xem có gì đó thực sự khác với nó.
9:52	K: No, sir. I do question, seriously, whether human beings must inevitably live in this state, everlastingly suffering, everlastingly going through this agony of life. Is that necessary, is it right that they should?	K: Không. Tôi hỏi, nghiêm túc, phải chăng con người phải sống trong tình trạng này, đau khổ triền miên, luôn trải qua cuộc đời thống khổ này. Đó có cần thiết, đúng, rằng họ phải vậy?
10:19	H: It's certainly not desirable that they should.	H: Chắc không muốn rằng họ phải vậy.
10:21	K: No, no. If we accept that it's inevitable, as many people do, then there is no answer to it. H: Yes.	K: Không, không. Nếu chúng ta chấp nhận nó dĩ nhiên, như bao người, thì không có câu trả lời. H: Vâng.
10:35	K: But is it inevitable?	K: Nhưng không thể tránh ư?
10:39	H: Well, physical suffering is inevitable.	H: À, đau khổ vật lý là dĩ nhiên.
10:42	K: Yes. H: Illness, death.	K: Vâng. H: Bịnh tật, chết.
10:43	K: Yes, sir, physical sufferings, old age, accidents, disease.	K: Vâng, đau khổ vật lý, tuổi già, tai nạn, bịnh tật.
10:49	H: Maybe we increase the physical suffering because of our psychological problems.	H: Có lẽ chúng ta làm tăng đau khổ vật lý bởi các vấn đề tâm lý.
10:53	K: That's it. That's it. Sir, a mother bearing babies, she goes through a terrible time delivering them. Strangely, she forgets that pain. She has the next baby, another baby. In India, as you know, mothers have about seven or eight children. If they remembered the first agony of it, they would never have children. I have talked to several mothers about it. They seem to totally forget it. It's a blank after suffering. So, is there an activity in the psyche that helps the suffering to be wiped away? Recently, personally, I have had an operation, a minor operation, there was plenty of pain; quite a lot. And it went on considerably. It's out of my mind, completely gone. So, is it the psychological nourishing of a remembrance of pain - you follow? - which gives us a sense of continuity in pain?	K: Đúng vậy. Đúng vậy. Người mẹ mang bé, trải qua thời gian khủng khiếp sinh ra chúng. Lạ lùng, bà quên hết đớn đau. Bà lại có bé kế, bé khác. Ở Ấn, bạn biết đó, có bà mẹ có đến bảy hay tám đứa con. Nếu họ nhớ nổi thống khổ ban đầu, họ không hề có con cái. Tôi đã nói với vài bà mẹ. Họ hình như quên hoàn toàn. Nó phủi sạch sau đớn đau. Vậy, có hoạt động gì trong tâm trí giúp đau khổ được quét đi? Gần đây, cá nhân tôi có một giải phẩu, giải phẩu nhỏ, có đau đớn; rất nhiều. Và nó tiếp tục đáng kể. Nó đã rời khỏi trí óc tôi rồi. Vậy, có phải nuôi nấng tâm lý về ghi nhớ đau đớn - theo kịp không? - cho chúng ta cảm giác tiếp nối đau đớn?
12:31	H: So you are saying that perhaps the physical suffering in the world is not the source of the psychological suffering, but that the psychological suffering is an action of its own.	H: Vậy ngài nói có thể đau đớn vật lý trên thế giới không phải nguồn cội đau đớn tâm lý, mà đau đớn tâm lý là hành động của chính nó.
12:43	K: Yes. Right. You have had toothache, I'm sure.	K: Vâng. Đúng. Bạn có đau răng, tôi chắc vậy.
12:49	S: Yes. I've forgotten it. K: You have forgotten it. Why? If we accept pain is inevitable, suffering is inevitable, you must continue with it. You must sustain it.	S: Vâng. Tôi đã quên rồi. K: Bạn quên nó rồi. Tại sao? Nếu tôi chấp nhận đau là dĩ nhiên, đau khổ là dĩ nhiên, bạn phải tiếp tục với nó. Bạn phải duy trì nó.
13:12	S: No, we have to accept that it's inevitable, as it happens sometimes. But we can forget physical pain; can we forget the kind of psychological pain that's caused by natural things like loss, death of people?	S: Không, chúng ta phải chấp nhận nó dĩ nhiên, như đôi khi nó xảy ra. Nhưng có thể quên đau vật lý; chúng ta có thể quên loại đau đớn tâm lý được gây ra bởi tự nhiên như mất, chết người?
13:26	K: Yes, we'll come to that. I come to you. I've a problem with my wife, if I'm married. I am not, but suppose I am married. I come because I can't get on with her.	K: Vâng, chúng ta sẽ đến đó. Tôi đến với bạn. Tôi có vấn đề với vợ, nếu tôi kết hôn. Không thế, nhưng giả sử tôi kết hôn. Tôi đến bởi tôi không thể hòa với cô ta.
13:40	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
13:43	K: And she can't get on with me. And we have a problem in relationship. I come to you. How will you help me? This is a problem that everybody's facing.	K: Và cô ta không hòa với tôi. Và chúng tôi có vấn đề trong quan hệ. Tôi đến với bạn. Bạn sẽ giúp tôi cách nào? Đây là vấn đề mọi người đối mặt.
13:57	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
14:03	K: Either divorce.	K: Kể cả ly dị.
14:05	H: Yes. K: Or adjustment. And is that possible when each one wants to fulfil, wants to go his own way, pursue his own desires, his own ambitions, and so on?	H: Vâng. K: Hay hòa giải. Và có thể chăng khi mỗi người muốn thoả mãn, muốn đi đường riêng, theo đuổi dục vọng riêng, tham vọng riêng, v.v..?
14:25	H: You are saying that the problem arises out of the fact that they each have their own interests at heart.	H: Ngài nói rằng vấn đề nổi lên từ sự kiện mỗi người họ có quan tâm riêng trong lòng.
14:32	K: No, it's not interest, it's like... Sir, we are all terribly individualistic.	K: Không, không phải quan tâm, thích... Chúng ta đều quá sức chủ nghĩa cá nhân.
14:41	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
14:43	K: I want my way, and my wife wants her way. Deeply.	K: Tôi muốn đường này, và vợ muốn lối nọ. Sâu thẳm.
14:49	H: And we see that our needs are in conflict for some reason.	H: Và chúng ta thấy nhu cầu mình xung đột vì vài lý do.
14:52	K: Yes, that's all. Right away you begin. After the first few days or few months of relationship, pleasure and all that, that soon wears off and we are stuck.	K: Vâng, vậy đó. Bạn bắt đầu liền. Sau vài ngày hay vài tháng đầu quan hệ, thú vui và v.v.., nó sớm lụn tàn và chúng ta bị kẹt.
15:05	H: Okay, that's the same problem then with the mother raising this child and making it her toy. Her needs are in conflict with the needs of the child.	H: Đúng, vấn đề cũng vậy với người mẹ nuôi bé lớn và thành món đồ chơi. Nhu cầu bà ta xung đột với nhu cầu của bé.
15:16	K: Please, perhaps you'll go on, sir. The mother, her mother was also like that.	K: Nào, có lẽ bạn sẽ tiếp tục. Bà mẹ, mẹ của bà mẹ cũng như vậy.
15:26	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
15:28	K: And the whole world is like that, sir. It's not the mother.	K: Và cả thế giới như thế. Không chỉ bà mẹ.
15:32	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
15:37	K: So, when I come to you with my problem, you say it's the mother.	K: Vậy, khi tôi đến với vấn đề của tôi, bạn nói là người mẹ.
15:42	H: No, I wouldn't say it's... K: I object to that.	H: Không, tôi không nói... K: Tôi phản đối.
15:44	H: I wouldn't say it's the mother. K: Ah, no, I'm pushing it.	H: Tôi không nói là người mẹ. K: À, không, tôi đẩy tới.
15:50	H: You are saying that it's a much broader problem.	H: Ngài nói rằng là vấn đề rộng hơn nhiều.
15:53	K: Much deeper problem than the mother; didn't put the baby on the right pot, or something.	K: Vấn đề sâu hơn người mẹ hay anh em không đặt trẻ lên đúng bô, hay gì đó. (Cười)
16:05	H: Right. Then it appears that the needs are in conflict.	H: Đúng. Rồi có vẻ nhu cầu xung đột.
16:14	K: No, I wouldn't say needs are in conflict. Basically, they are divisive; self-centred activity. That inevitably must bring contradiction, you know, the whole business of relationship and conflict.	K: Không, tôi không nói nhu cầu xung đột. Cơ bản, chúng chia rẻ; hoạt động vị ngã. Tất nhiên phải đem đến mâu thuẫn, bạn biết, cả vấn đề quan hệ và xung đột.
16:32	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
16:40	K: Because each one wants his pleasure.	K: Bởi mọi người muốn thú vui.
16:45	H: There's self-centred activity on the part of the person who's raising the child or on the part of the person who is in the relationship, married. The child is the victim of that.	H: Có hoạt động vị ngã ở người nuôi con trẻ hay ở người trong quan hệ, hôn nhân. Con trẻ là nạn nhân việc ấy.
16:59	K: The child... H: The child is the victim of that.	K: Con trẻ... H: Con trẻ là nạn nhân việc ấy.
17:01	K: Of course.	K: Dĩ nhiên.
17:03	H: And then grows up to perpetuate it.	H: Và rồi lớn lên lại tiếp tục nó.
17:06	K: And the mother's father and mother's fathers were like that too.	K: Và ông ngoại hay ông cố ngoại cũng như vậy.
17:11	H: Yes. Now, why does it have to happen that way? Are we saying that's the way it is in nature? Or are we saying that...	H: Vâng. Giờ, tại sao phải xảy ra như thế? Chúng ta nói thế là tự nhiên sao? Hay chúng ta nói...
17:18	K: Oh, no.	K: Ồ, không.
17:21	S: Well, I mean, there are certain conflicts in nature. For example, among troops of gorillas or baboons - take baboons or even chimpanzees - there's a conflict among the males. Often the strongest male... K: Yes, quite.	S: Này, ý tôi, có vài xung đột trong tự nhiên. Ví dụ, trong nhóm khỉ đột hay khỉ đầu chó - ví dụ khỉ đầu chó hay vượn - có xung đột trong mấy con đực. Thường thì con đực mạnh nhất... K: Vâng, đúng.
17:45	S: ...wishes to monopolise all the attractive females. Now, some of the younger males want to get in on the act as well. They try going off with these females and this younger male will fight and beat them off. So they'll be kept out of this. This selfish activity of this one male keeps most of the females to himself. The same occurs in red deer, where the stag will monopolise the females. Now, these are examples of conflict in the animal kingdom which are quite needless. There would be enough food for these hens without pecking each other. Now, these are not exceptions, we can find this kind of thing throughout the animal kingdom. So, I don't think that the origin of this kind of selfish conflict is something just to do with human societies and the way they are structured. I think we can see in biological nature this kind of thing.	S: ...muốn độc quyền với mọi con cái. Giờ, vài con đực trẻ hơn cũng muốn thế. Chúng thử đi với mấy con cái và con đực trẻ này sẽ đánh nhau và hạ hết chúng. Vậy chúng sẽ tránh xa. Hoạt động vị ngã của con đực này giữ đa số con cái cho nó. Việc cũng thế xảy ra ở nai đỏ, nai đực độc quyền nai cái. Đó là những ví dụ xung đột trong giới động vật mà thật không cần thiết. Có thể đủ thức ăn cho gà mái mà không phải cắn nhau. Không có ngoại lệ nào, chúng ta có thể thấy việc ấy ở mọi loài động vật. Nên, tôi không nghĩ rằng nguồn gốc của loại xung đôt vị ngã là điều chỉ liên quan đến xã hội con người và cách chúng được dựng lên. Tôi nghĩ có thể thấy bản chất sinh học của việc này.
18:36	K: Are you saying that, as we are the result of the animal, as we human beings evolved from the animal, we have inherited all those pecking order?	K: Bạn nói chúng ta là kết quả của động vật, con người chúng ta tiến hóa từ động vật, chúng ta thừa kế mọi trật tự loài chim?
18:48	S: Yes, I think we've inherited a lot of animal tendencies from our animal forbearers. K: Oh, yes, obviously.	S: Vâng, tôi nghĩ chúng ta thừa kế nhiều khuynh hướng động vật từ tổ tiên động vật. K: Ồ, vâng, vâng.
18:54	S: And I think that many of these show up in these psychological problems.	S: Và tôi nghĩ nhiều cái đó biểu hiện trong các vấn đề tâm lý.
18:58	K: Yes, but is it necessary that we should continue that way?	K: Vâng, nhưng có cần thiết chúng ta tiếp tục lối ấy?
19:05	S: Ah.	S: À.
19:06	K: We are thoughtful, we are ingenious in our inventions, extraordinarily capable in certain directions, why should we not also say, 'We won't have this, the way we live, let's change it.'	K: Chúng ta có suy tư, khéo léo trong sáng chế, khả năng lạ lùng trong nhiều hướng, tại sao chúng ta cũng không nói, 'Chúng ta sẽ không có này, lối sống này, hãy thay đổi nó.'
19:27	S: Well, we can say that; many people have said it.	S: Nào, chúng ta có thể nói thế; nhiều người đã nói.
19:30	K: I know, many people have said it.	K: Tôi biết, nhiều người đã nói.
19:32	S: But without very much effect.	S: Nhưng không tác dụng gì nhiều.
19:35	K: Why?	K: Tại sao?
19:37	S: Well, that indeed is a question. Is it that we're so completely trapped in the ancestry of the past?	S: À, đó thực là vấn đề. Có phải chúng ta hoàn toàn bị bẫy trong tổ tiên xưa?
19:43	K: Or so heavily conditioned that it's impossible to be free.	K: Hay quá nặng qui định đến không thể tự do.
19:50	S: Well, there are two possible kinds of conditioning: one is the genuine biological conditioning that comes from our animal heritage, which means that we inherit all these tendencies.	S: Này, có hai loại có thể về qui định: một là qui định sinh học chính gốc đến từ thừa kế động vật, tức là chúng ta thừa kế mọi khuynh hướng ấy.
19:59	K: Let's accept that.	K: Hãy chấp nhận vậy.
20:00	S: Now, that is undoubtedly extremely strong. It goes right back into our animal past.	S: À, nó cực kỳ mạnh mẽ rồi. Đi ngược về quá khứ động vật.
20:05	K: Right.	K: Đúng.
20:06	S: The other kind of conditioning is the kind of argument that I'm putting forward, perhaps, the argument: this has always been so; human nature is like this, there have always been wars and conflicts, and all that kind of thing, and therefore there always will be, that the most we can do is try to minimise these, and that there'll always be psychological conflicts within families and between people, and that the most we can do is try and minimise these or at least make them liveable with.	S: Loại qui định kia là loại tranh chấp tôi nói, có lẽ, tranh chấp: nó đã luôn thế; bản chất con người là vậy, luôn có chiến tranh và xung đột, và mọi loại ấy, và vì vậy sẽ luôn thế, điều có thể làm là cố gắng giảm thiểu nó, và sẽ luôn có xung đột tâm lý trong gia đình và mọi người, và điều có thể làm là cố giảm thiểu nó hay ít ra có thể sống với nó.
20:32	K: So, accept the conditioning, modify it, but you cannot fundamentally change it.	K: Vậy, chấp nhận qui định, canh cải nó, nhưng bạn không thể thay đổi nó tận gốc.
20:37	S: Yes. I'm saying this is a possible kind of conditioning, the belief that we can't really change it radically is another kind of conditioning. I'm a victim of it myself. So, I don't know if it's possible to get out of it.	S: Vâng. Tôi nói đó là loại có thể về qui định, tin rằng thực không thể thay đổi nó tận gốc là loại qui định khác. Tôi là nạn nhân của chính tôi. Nên, tôi không biết có thể thoát ra không.
20:52	K: That is what I want to discuss. Whether it's possible to change the human conditioning. And not accept it, say, as most philosophers, the existentialists and others say, your human nature is conditioned. You cannot change. You can modify it, you can be less selfish, less painful psychological problems, bear up with pain, this is natural, we have inherited from the animals. We'll go on like this for the rest of our lives and for the lives to come. Not reincarnation, other people's lives. It'll be our conditioning, human conditioning. Do we accept that? Or should we enquire into whether it's possible to change this conditioning?	K: Đó là điều tôi muốn thảo luận. Xem có thể nào thay đổi qui định con người. Và không chấp nhận nó, ví dụ, như đa số triết gia, người theo hiện sinh và số khác nói, bản chất con người bị qui định. Bạn không thể thay đổi. Bạn có thể canh cải, bạn có thể ít vị ngã hơn, ít đau khổ hơn, tâm lý có vấn đề, chịu đựng đau khổ, đó là tự nhiên, chúng ta thừa kế từ động vật. Chúng ta sẽ tiếp tục vậy đến hết đời mình và cả đời vị lai. Không phải tái sinh, đời của người khác. Nó là qui định, qui định con người. Chúng ta chấp nhận vậy? Hay là chúng ta tìm hiểu xem có thể thay đổi qui định ấy?
21:59	S: Yes. I think we should enquire into that.	S: Vâng. Tôi nghĩ chúng ta nên tìm hiểu.
22:02	K: If you say it cannot be changed, then the argument is over.	K: Nếu bạn nói không thể thay đổi, thì tranh luận đã xong.
22:06	S: All right, so I'll say... K: No, I'm not saying...	S: Được, tôi sẽ nói... K: Không, tôi không nói...
22:10	S: I'd like it to be changed, I deeply want it to be changed. So I think that this question of enquiring into the possibility is extremely important. But one of my points, to go back to the conditioning point, is that a lot of this conditioning is deep in our biological nature, and people who wish to change it merely by changing the structures of society...	S: Tôi muốn nó thay đổi. Sâu thẳm tôi muốn nó thay đổi. Nên tôi nghĩ vấn đề tìm hiểu tính có thể là cực kỳ quan trọng. Nhưng vấn đề của tôi, trở lại vấn đề qui định, là nhiều qui định này ở sâu trong bản chất sinh học, và người muốn thay đổi nó chỉ bằng thay đổi cấu trúc xã hội...
22:35	K: Oh, I'm not talking about that, of course.	K: Ồ, tôi không nói về nó, dĩ nhiên.
22:37	S: ...are operating at too superficial a level.	S: ...hoạt động ở mức độ quá hời hợt.
22:39	K: Like the Communists want to change it.	K: Như cộng sản muốn thay đổi nó.
22:41	S: But the idea that you can do it by just changing the environment is what the Communists thought and still think, and in a sense the experiment has been tried, and we can see the results in various communist countries. And of course, believers in that would say, well, they haven't tried properly, or they betrayed the revolution, and so on. But nevertheless, the basis of that belief is that the source of all the evils and problems is in society, and by changing society man is perfectible.	S: Nhưng ý niệm bạn có thể làm chỉ bởi thay đổi chung quanh là điều mà cộng sản nghĩ và vẫn nghĩ, và trong nghĩa thí nghiệm đã thử, và chúng ta có thể thấy kết quả ở nhiều nước cộng sản. Và dĩ nhiên, người tin vào đó thì nói, nào, họ chưa thử đúng, hay họ phản cách mạng, v.v.. Nhưng tuy vậy, cơ bản của niềm tin đó là nguồn gốc của mọi sai quấy và vấn đề là ở xã hội, và bằng thay đổi xã hội con người sẽ hoàn thiện.
23:07	K: But society is formed by us. S: Yes.	K: Nhưng xã hội do chúng ta tạo. S: Vâng.
23:11	K: And by us it is going to be changed. So we haven't changed ourselves. We depend on society to change us. And society is what we have made it; so we are caught in that trap.	K: Và do chúng ta nó sẽ thay đổi. Vậy chúng ta chưa thay đổi mình. Chúng ta lệ thuộc xã hội để thay đổi mình. Và xã hội là chúng ta tạo; nên chúng ta kẹt trong bẫy ấy.
23:26	S: Yes. Exactly; and if we start off with a heritage, which is built into us, inherited, which comes from our biological past, and if we start with that, and we start with these societies that also have bad effects, some of them, and to varying degrees, and we just try to change the society, the other part, the inherited part, is still there.	S: Vâng. Chính xác; và nếu bắt đầu với thừa kế, nó được xây lên, thừa hưởng, nó đến từ quá khứ sinh học, và nếu chúng ta khởi đầu với nó, và khởi đầu với xã hội mà vài cái, có tác động xấu, và đến nhiều mức độ, và chúng ta chỉ cố thay đổi xã hội, mặt khác, mặt thừa kế, vẫn còn đó.
23:51	K: Oh, yes, but cannot those also be transformed?	K: Ồ, vâng, nhưng cũng không thể thay đổi chúng sao?
23:57	S: I really...	S: Tôi thực...
23:59	K: I may have inherited - what? - violence from the apes and so on, so on. Can't I change that? The inherited biological... B: Drives.	K: Tôi có thể thừa hưởng - gì nào? - bạo lực từ tổ tiên, v.v.. Tôi không thể thay đổi nó ư? Thừa kế sinh học... B: Thôi thúc.
24:16	K: ...conditioning. Surely that can be transformed.	K: ...qui định. Chắc chắn có thể thay đổi.
24:21	S: Well, all societies surely seek to transform these biological drives we have, and all processes of bringing children up in all societies seek to bring these drives within the control of the society. Otherwise you would have complete anarchy. However, these drives are always brought within certain social forms, and individual aggression is obviously discouraged in most societies. But is it really transformed? Doesn't it just come out again in the aggression of the society as a whole - war, and so on. So, we can see that these things are transformed by society, these basic drives that we inherit.	S: À, mọi xã hội chắc chắn tìm cách thay đổi thôi thúc sinh học chúng ta, và mọi tiến trình nuôi lớn trẻ ở mọi xã hội tìm cách đem những thôi thúc ấy vào vòng kiểm soát của xã hội. Ngược lại là hoàn toàn vô chính phủ. Tuy nhiên, các thôi thúc ấy luôn được đem vào hình thức xã hội nào, và hung hăng cá nhân dĩ nhiên bị ngăn cản ở đa số xã hội. Nhưng nó thực bị thay đổi? Nó không lại xuất hiện trong hung hăng của toàn xã hội - chiến tranh, v.v.. Vậy, có thể thấy những việc này bị xã hội thay đổi, những thôi thúc cơ bản chúng ta thừa kế.
25:03	K: But why do we… sorry, what were you…	K: Nhưng tại sao... xin lỗi, gì nào...
25:05	B: I was going to say they really haven't been transformed, but I think you're meaning by transformed a fundamental change and not just a superficial change or a transfer of the object of aggression from other individuals to other groups. So, if you talk of transformation, you would say really that they would benefit, more or less go away, right? That's as I understand it.	B: Tôi đã nói rằng họ thực sự chưa thay đổi, nhưng tôi nghĩ ý ngài thay đổi là thay đổi cơ bản chứ không phải thay đổi hời hợt hay chuyển mục tiêu hung hăng từ các cá nhân này sang nhóm nọ. Vậy, nếu ngài nói về thay đổi, ngài thực sự nói nó làm lợi ích, ít nhiều bỏ đi, phải không? Đó là theo tôi hiểu.
25:29	S: Well, they'd be changed from one form to another.	S: Này, nó thay đổi từ hình thức này sang nọ.
25:31	B: But I meant... S: That's what I mean.	B: Nhưng ý tôi... S: Đó là theo ý tôi.
25:32	B: I don't think that's the meaning which Krishnaji is using for the word 'transform' but essentially can't we be free of them.	B: Tôi không nghĩ đó theo nghĩa Krishnaji dùng cho chữ 'thay đổi,' nhưng cơ bản chúng ta không thể thoát chúng.
25:38	K: Yes. That's right. Sir, why do you divide, if I may ask, society and me? As though society were something outside, which is influencing me, conditioning me, but my parents, grandparents, so on, past generations, have created that society, so I am part of that society. I am society.	K: Vâng. Đúng vậy. Tại sao bạn phân chia, xin hỏi nhé, xã hội và tôi? Như xã hội là gì đó ngoài kia ảnh hưởng tôi, qui định tôi, nhưng cha mẹ, ông bà tôi, v.v.. các thế hệ cũ, tạo ra xã hội đó, nên tôi là một phần của xã hội. Tôi là xã hội.
26:05	S: Well, yes. K: Why do we separate it?	S: À, vâng. K: Tại sao chúng ta phân chia nó?
26:08	S: I think the reason why we separate it is that there are different kinds of society. If I'd been born in India instead of in England, I would have grown up in a very different way...	S: Tôi nghĩ lý do chúng ta phân chia nó là có nhiều loại xã hội khác nhau. Nếu tôi sinh ở Ấn thay vì Anh, tôi đã lớn lên cách rất khác...
26:19	K: Of course. S: ...with different set of attitudes.	K: Dĩ nhiên. S: ...với thái độ khác.
26:21	S: And because we can think of ourselves growing up in different kinds of societies - and we'd be different if we had - that's why in thought, I think, we have the idea that society and me are not exactly the same. We'd always be in one society or another, so society as a whole, all societies taken together, we would only exist within society, but any particular society is in a sense an accident of our birth or upbringing.	S: Và bởi chúng ta có thể nghĩ mình lớn lên trong loại xã hội khác - và nếu thế chúng ta sẽ khác - tôi nghĩ, đó là tại sao trong suy nghĩ có ý niệm xã hội và tôi khác nhau. Chúng ta luôn vậy trong xã hội này hay nọ, mà xã hội như toàn thể, mọi xã hội kết nhau, chúng ta chỉ hiện hữu trong xã hội, nhưng xã hội riêng nào là trong nghĩa vô tình sinh ra hay lớn lên.
26:49	K: But even that society is part of us.	K: Dù vậy xã hội là một phần chúng ta.
26:53	S: Oh, yes. I mean through growing up in it, it becomes part of us, and we become part of it.	S: Ồ, vâng. Ý tôi là lớn lên ở đó, nó thành một phần chúng ta, và chúng ta thành một phần nó.
26:57	K: But, I want to abolish this idea, in discussion, this separation from me and society. I am society, I am the world! I am the result of all these influences, conditionings, whether in the East or in the West, or in South, or North, it's all part of conditioning. S: Yes.	K: Nhưng, tôi muốn xóa ý niệm này khi thảo luận, sự phân chia tôi và xã hội. Tôi là xã hội, tôi là thế giới. Tôi là kết quả của mọi ảnh hưởng, qui định này, dù ở Đông hay Tây, Nam hay Bắc, nó là tất cả của qui định. S: Vâng.
27:21	K: So, we are attacking the conditioning, not where you are born, or East, or West.	K: Vậy, chúng ta tấn công qui định chứ không phải nơi bạn sinh ra, Đông hay Tây.
27:27	S: Oh, yes. The problem would be conditioning of every kind, our biological conditioning, our conditioning from society.	S: Ồ, vâng. Vấn đề là qui định ở mọi loại, qui định sinh học, qui định từ xã hội.
27:33	K: That's right. S: Yes.	K: Đúng vậy. S: Vâng.
27:35	K: So, personally, I don't separate myself from society, I am society. I have created society through my anxiety, through my desire for security, through my desire to have power, and so on, so on, so on. Like the animal. It's all biologically inherited. And also, my own individualistic activity has created this society. So, I am asking, I am conditioned in that way - is it not possible to be free of it? Free of my conditioning. If you say it's not possible, then it's finished.	K: Vậy, cá nhân, tôi không chia tôi với xã hội, tôi là xã hội. Tôi tạo ra xã hội qua âu lo, qua ước muốn an toàn, qua ước muốn quyền lực, v.v.. Như động vật. Đó đều là thừa kế sinh học. Và cả, hoạt động cá nhân tôi tạo ra xã hội này. Vậy, tôi hỏi, tôi bị qui định trong lối ấy - có thể nào thoát nó? Thoát khỏi qui định? Nếu bạn nói không thể, thì là chấm hết.
28:21	S: Well, I would say first that it's not possible to be free of all of the conditioning. I mean, certain of it is necessary biologically, the conditioning that makes my heart beat...	S: À, trước hết tôi nói không thể thoát mọi qui định. Ý tôi là vài cái cần thiết về sinh học, qui định làm tim đập...
28:30	K: Ah, well... S: ...my lungs operate, and all that.	K: À, này... S: ...phổi hoạt động, mọi thứ.
28:32	K: I admit all that.	K: Tôi thừa nhận.
28:34	S: Now, then, the question is, how far can you take that? The necessary conditioning.	S: Giờ, thì, câu hỏi là, bạn có thể nắm nó bao xa? Qui định cần thiết.
28:39	K: Dr. Hidley was saying - that's his whole point - I am conditioned to suffer, psychologically. Right, sir?	K: Dr. Hidley nói - đó là toàn bộ vấn đề - Tôi bị qui định để đau đớn, tâm lý. Phải không?
28:48	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
28:49	K: Or I am conditioned to go through great conflict in my relationship with my wife, or father, whatever it is. And you are saying, either we investigate into that and free ourselves from that, or accept it and modify it.	K: Hay tôi bị qui định để trải qua xung đột lớn trong quan hệ với vợ, hay cha, gì gì khác. Và bạn nói, cả tôi tìm tòi và thoát khỏi nó, hay chấp nhận và canh cải nó.
29:10	H: That's right.	H: Đúng vậy.
29:12	K: Now, which is it? That's what I want - which is it, as a psychologist, you maintain? If I may put such a question to you.	K: Giờ thì, cái nào? Tôi muốn vậy - cái nào, như nhà phân tâm, bạn bảo vệ? Nếu có thể đặt câu hỏi với bạn.
29:23	H: Yes. Well, I think generally the approach is to attempt to modify it, to help the patient to make it work more effectively.	H: Vâng. Nào, nói chung, tôi nghĩ lối tiếp cận là cố canh cải nó, để giúp người bịnh làm nó hoạt động hữu hiệu hơn.
29:36	K: Why? I hope you don't mind my asking these questions.	K: Tại sao? Mong bạn không phiền tôi hỏi mấy câu này.
29:45	H: No. I think that part of the reason for that is that it's seen as biological and therefore fixed. A person is born with a certain temperament. His drives are the drives of the animal, and I think also, because it isn't clear to the therapists, that the problem can be dealt with as a whole, it is clear that it can be dealt with as particulars.	H: Không. Tôi nghĩ một phần lý do cho việc đó là nó được coi như sinh học nên cố định. Một người được sinh ra với tính khí nào. Thôi thúc là thôi thúc động vật, và tôi cũng nghĩ, bởi nó không rõ ràng cho người điều trị, rằng vấn đề có thể được giải quyết toàn thể, rõ ràng nó có thể được giải quyết riêng biệt.
30:29	K: Is it... I am not asking an impudent question, I hope.	K: Có phải...mong là tôi không hỏi mất lịch sự.
30:32	H: Okay.	H: Vâng.
30:35	K: Is it the psychologists don't think holistically? Our only concern is solving individual problems.	K: Có phải nhà tâm lý không suy nghĩ cách toàn thể? Quan tâm duy nhất là giải quyết vấn đề cá nhân.
30:52	H: Yes, they are concerned with solving individual problems.	H: Vâng, họ quan tâm giải quyết vấn đề cá nhân.
30:55	K: So, therefore they are not thinking of human suffering as a whole.	k:Vậy là họ không nghĩ về đau khổ nhân loại như toàn thể.
30:59	H: Right.	H: Đúng.
31:01	K: A particular suffering of X who is very depressed.	K: Đau khổ riêng của X kẻ quá chán nản.
31:07	H: Right. For particular reasons.	H: Đúng. Vì lý do riêng biệt.
31:09	K: For particular reasons. We don't enquire into what is depression, why human beings all over the world are depressed.	K: Vì lý do riêng. Chúng ta không tìm hiểu chán nản là gì, tại sao con người khắp thế giới chán nản.
31:21	H: Or we don't try and tackle that as a single problem. We try and tackle it with this particular individual who comes in.	H: Hay chúng ta không cố giải quyết nó như vấn đề duy nhất. Chúng ta cố giải quyết nó với riêng cá nhân đến.
31:29	K: Therefore you are still really, if I may point out - I may be wrong…	K: Vì vậy bạn vẫn thực sự, nếu có thể nói - có thể tôi sai...
31:33	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
31:35	K: You are emphasising his particular suffering, and so sustaining it.	K: Bạn nhấn mạnh đau khổ riêng và duy trì nó.
31:42	H: Now, can we get clear on that?	H: Giờ, có thể nói rõ về nó chứ?
31:45	K: I come to you. H: Yes.	K: Tôi đến với bạn. H: Vâng.
31:47	K: I am depressed. H: Yes.	K: Tôi chán nản. H: Vâng.
31:50	K: For various reasons which you know.	K: Vì nhiều lý do mà bạn biết.
31:53	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
31:54	K: And you tell me, by talking to me, etc. - you know, the whole business of coming to you, and all that - you tell me my depression is the depression of the world.	K: Và bạn bảo, bạn nói với tôi, v.v.. - bạn biết đó, cả công việc đến với bạn, và mọi thứ - bạn nói chán nản của tôi là chán nản của thế giới.
32:13	H: Yes, I don't tell you that. I tell you that your depression…	H: Vâng, tôi không nói vậy. Tôi nói chán nản ngài...
32:17	K: When you tell me that, are you not helping me to carry on with this individualistic depression? And therefore my depression, not your depression.	K: Khi bạn nói thế, bạn không giúp tôi tiếp tục chán nản cá nhân ấy sao? Và vì vậy, chán nản của tôi, không của bạn.
32:33	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
32:35	K: It's my depression, which I either cherish or want to dissolve.	K: Là chán nản của tôi, dù tôi nâng niu hay muốn giải quyết.
32:41	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
32:42	K: Which means I am only concerned with myself.	K: Nghĩa là tôi chỉ quan tâm chính mình.
32:45	H: Yes. K: Myself - I come back to that.	H: Vâng. K: Chính tôi - trở lại việc này.
32:48	H: Yes, it's within the context of yourself.	H: Vâng, trong phạm vi của chính tôi.
32:50	K: Self. H: Yes.	K: Ngã. H: Vâng.
32:53	K: So you are helping me to be more selfish, if I may...	K: Vậy bạn giúp tôi vị ngã hơn, nếu có thể...
32:58	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
32:59	K: More self-concerned, more self-committed.	K: Quan tâm mình hơn, tận tuỵ với mình hơn.
33:06	H: It is approached within the context of the self, but I would think that I am helping you to be less self-concerned, because when you are not depressed, then you don't have to be self-concerned. You feel better and you're able to relate to people more.	H: Nó được tiếp cận trong phạm vi của ngã, nhưng tôi nghĩ tôi giúp ngài ít quan tâm mình hơn, bởi khi ngài không chán nản, thì ngài không cần quan tâm mình. Ngài cảm thấy tốt hơn và có thể liên hệ nhiều người.
33:22	K: But again, on a very superficial level.	K: Nhưng lại ở mức độ rất hời hợt.
33:26	H: Meaning that I leave the self intact.	H: Nghĩa là tôi bỏ mặc cái ngã.
33:30	K: Intact. H: Yes.	K: Bỏ mặc. H: Vâng.
33:32	B: Yes, well, I feel that people generally wouldn't accept this that the self is not there, which is what you're implying that the self is rather unimportant. But rather the assumption is that the self is really there, and it has to be improved, and if you say...	B: Vâng, này, tôi thấy nói chung mọi người không chấp nhận thế rằng ngã không ở đó, cái mà ngài nhấn mạnh cái ngã không quan trọng gì. Nhưng cứ chấp nhận rằng cái ngã thực sự ở đó, và nó phải được cải thiện, và nếu ngài nói...
33:48	K: That's it, that's it.	K: Đúng vậy, đúng vậy.
33:49	B: A certain amount of self-centredness people would say is normal. K: Yes, sir.	B: Một số người vị ngã nói nó bình thường. K: Vâng.
33:53	B: It's only to keep it within reason, right?	B: Đó chỉ giữ lý lẽ, phải không?
33:55	H: Right.	H: Đúng.
33:57	K: Modify selfishness, right? Continue with selfishness, but go slow. Piano.	K: Canh cải vị ngã, phải không? Tiếp tục vị ngã, nhưng đi chậm thôi.
34:05	B: But I think, you're saying something which is very radical then, because very few people have entertained the notion of no self-centredness.	B: Tôi nghĩ, ngài nói điều gì rất cơ bản, bởi rất ít người tán thành khái niệm vô ngã.
34:15	K: That's it.	K: Đúng vậy.
34:19	H: That's right; it isn't entertained.	H: Đúng vậy; không tán thành.
34:22	B: Maybe a few, but... H: Yes. For biological reasons and because of the universality of the phenomenon? Because it isn't even seen as relevant, really.	B: Có lẽ số ít, nhưng... H: Vâng. Bởi lý do sinh học và do tính phổ quát của hiện tượng? Bởi thực sự nó không được coi là xác đáng.
34:34	B: I think most people feel that's the way things are, it's the only way. H: Yes.	B: Tôi nghĩ đa số người cảm thấy đó là lối đi của sự vật, lối duy nhất. H: Vâng.
34:39	K: That means status quo, modified status quo.	K: Nghĩa là hiện trạng, hiện trạng được canh cải.
34:42	B: Yes. S: Yes.	B: Vâng. S: Vâng.
34:45	K: To me that seems so irrational.	K: Với tôi dường như quá vô lý.
34:50	B: But you must feel that it's possible to be different, you see, at least, more than feel, but in some sense there must be some reason why you say this.	B: Nhưng ngài phải cảm thấy rằng có thể khác, ngài xem, ít ra, hơn là cảm thấy, nhưng trong nghĩa nào phải có lý do tại sao ngài nói thế.
34:58	K: I'll tell you…What?	K: Tôi sẽ nói...Gì nào?
35:01	B: Why you feel so different from other people about it.	B: Tại sao ngài cảm thấy quá khác với người khác về nó.
35:04	K: It seems so practical, first of all. The way we live is so impractical. The wars, the accumulation of armaments, is totally impractical.	K: Hình như quá thực tế, trước hết. Lối sống chúng ta phi thực tế - chiến tranh, tích chứa vũ khí, là hết sức phi thực tế.
35:17	B: But that wouldn't be an argument, because people say, 'We all understand that, but since that's the way we are, nothing else is possible.' You see, you really are challenging the notion that that is the way we are, or we have to be.	B: Nhưng đó không tranh cãi, bởi mọi người nói, 'Chúng tôi đều hiểu, nhưng bởi đó là cách chúng tôi tồn tại không thể khác hơn.' Ngài xem, ngài thực sự thách thức khái niệm rằng đó là cách chúng tôi tồn tại, hay phải sống.
35:30	K: I don't quite follow this. We are what we are.	K: Tôi thực không theo kịp. Chúng ta là chúng ta hiện là.
35:33	B: People say, we are individual, separate, and we'll just have to fight and make the best of it. But you are saying something different, you're not accepting that.	B: Mọi người nói, chúng tôi là cá nhân, riêng biệt, và chúng tôi sẽ phải tranh đấu và làm hết sức. Nhưng ngài nói việc khác, ngài không chấp nhận nó.
35:45	K: All right. Don't accept it, but will you listen? Will the people who don't accept it, will they give their minds to find out? Right? H: Right.	K: Được rồi. Đừng chấp nhận, nhưng bạn nghe chứ? Những người không chấp nhận, họ sẽ không để tâm tìm kiếm sao? Phải không? H: Đúng vậy.
36:00	K: Or say, 'Please, we don't want to listen to you.' This is what we think - buzz off. That's what most people do.	K: Hay nói, 'Nào, chúng tôi không muốn nghe ngài.' Điều chúng tôi nghĩ là - bỏ đi. (Cười) Đó là việc nhiều người làm.
36:11	H: Well, this question isn't even raised usually.	H: À, vấn đề này cũng không thường được nêu.
36:13	K: Of course.	K: Dĩ nhiên.
36:20	H: Now why do you think that the self, this selfish activity, isn't necessary?	H: Giờ tại sao ngài nghĩ cái ngã, hoạt động vị ngã không cần thiết?
36:29	K: No, sir, first of all, do we accept the condition that we are in? Do we accept it, and say, 'Please, we can only modify it, and it can never be changed'. One can never be free from this anxiety, deep depression; modify it, always, from agony of life. You follow? This process of going through tortures in oneself. That's normal, accepted. Modify it, live little more quietly, and so on, so on. If you accept that, there is no communication between us. But if you say, I know my conditioning, I may perhaps, I may... tell me, let's just talk about whether one can be free from it. Then we have a relationship, then we can communicate with each other. But you say, sorry, shut the door in my face, and it's finished.	K: Không, trước hết, có chấp nhận qui định chúng ta ở trong đó? Chúng ta chấp nhận nó và nói, 'Này, chỉ có thể canh cải, và nó không hề được thay đổi.' Bạn không thể thoát khỏi lo âu, chán nản; luôn canh cải nó, từ đau đớn cuộc đời. Theo kịp không? Tiến trình trải qua ấy hành hạ trong bạn. Đó bình thường, được chấp nhận. Canh cải nó, sống đôi chút yên ổn hơn, v.v.. Nếu bạn chấp nhận nó, không có trau đổi giữa chúng ta. Nhưng nếu bạn nói, tôi biết qui định tôi, tôi có thể, tôi... nói đi, hãy nói xem có thể thoát khỏi nó không. Rồi thì chúng ta có quan hệ, chúng ta có thể trau đổi nhau. Nhưng nếu bạn nói, xin lỗi, đóng cửa đi, và chấm hết.
37:41	S: So, there are some people who accept it, say, 'We can't change it'. But there are other people, and I would say, some of the most inspiring leaders of the different religions of the world are among them, who have said we can change it; there is a way beyond this.	S: Vậy, vài người chấp nhận nói, 'Chúng ta không thể thay đổi.' Nhưng người khác, và tôi nói, vài lãnh đạo linh cảm nhất của nhiều tôn giáo trên thế giới trong số họ, nói chúng ta có thể thay đổi; có cách vượt qua nó.
37:56	K: Yes.	K: Vâng.
37:58	S: Now, since religions have wide followings, and since their doctrines are widely dispersed, there are in fact large numbers of people in our society, and in every society, who do think it can be changed. Because all religions hold out the prospect of change and of going beyond this conditioning.	S: Giờ, bởi tôn giáo có nhiều người theo, và bởi học thuyết họ truyền lan rộng rãi, thực tế có rất nhiều người trong xã hội chúng ta, và trong mọi xã hội, họ nghĩ nó có thể thay đổi. Bởi mọi tôn giáo đưa ra viễn cảnh thay đổi và vượt qua qui định này.
38:17	K: Yes. But I would like to know, when you use the word 'religion', is it the organised religion, is it the authoritarian religion, is it the religion of belief, dogma, rituals, all that?	K: Vâng. Nhưng tôi muốn biết, khi bạn dùng chữ 'tôn giáo,' nó là tôn giáo tổ chức, tôn giáo uy quyền, tôn giáo của niềm tin, giáo lý, lễ lạy, mọi thứ đó?
38:36	S: Well... K: Or religion in the sense: the accumulation of energy to find whether it is possible to be free. You understand my question?	S: À... K: Hay tôn giáo trong nghĩa: tích chứa năng lực để tìm xem có thể tự do chăng. Bạn hiểu câu hỏi không?
38:55	S: Yes. Well, I think the second, but I think that, if we look into the history of the organised religions and people within them, we see that much of the inspiration for them was in fact that second kind of religion, which still within that framework, still survives, I think. But it's also something which has often been corrupted, and debased, and turned into yet another set of dogmas, conditioning, and so on. But I think within all religious traditions this second kind of religion you talk about has been kept alive, and I think that the impetus in all the great religions of the world has been that vision, it's then been debased and degraded in various ways. But this vision has never left any of these religions, there are still people within them, I think, who still have it. And this is the inner light that keeps them going, over and above the simple political part, and all the rest of it. K: I know, I know. But suppose, a man like me rejects tradition. Rejects anything that has been said about truth, about god, whatever it is, the other side. I don't know; the other people say, 'Yes, we have this and that'. So, how am I, as a human being who has really rejected all this - tradition, the people who have said there is, and the people who have said that's all nonsense, people who have said we have found that it is, and so on, so on. If you wipe all that out and say, 'Look, I must find out - not as an individual - can this truth, or this bliss, this illumination, an come without depending on all that?' You see, if I am anchored, for example, in Hinduism, with all the... - not the superficiality of it, not all the rituals and all the superstitions, if I am anchored in the religious belief of a Hindu, of a real Brahmin, I am always anchored, and I may go very far, but I am anchored there. That is not freedom. Because there must be freedom to discover this, or come upon this.	S: Vâng. À, tôi nghĩ thứ hai, nhưng tôi nghĩ nếu chúng ta nhìn lịch sử tôn giáo tổ chức và mọi người trong đó, chúng ta thấy rất nhiều linh cảm cho họ, thực tế là loại tôn giáo thứ hai, nó vẫn nằm trong khung, vẫn còn sống, tôi nghĩ. Nhưng cũng là điều gì thường bị hư hỏng, giảm giá trị, và biến thành giáo lý, qui định khác, v.v.. Nhưng tôi nghĩ trong mọi truyền thống tôn giáo loại tôn giáo thứ hai mà ngài nói vẫn còn sống, và tôi nghĩ sức đẩy của mọi tôn giáo lớn trên thế giới là cái nhìn ấy, rồi nó bị giảm giá trị và xuống cấp trong nhiều cách. Nhưng tầm nhìn này không hề rời bỏ tôn giáo nào, vẫn còn nhiều người trong đó, tôi nghĩ, họ vẫn có nó. Và ánh sáng bên trong ấy giữ họ tiếp tục, vượt qua phần chính trị tầm thường, và mọi thứ. K: Tôi biết, tôi biết. Nhưng giả sử, người như tôi từ bỏ truyền thống. Loại bỏ điều gì đã nói về chân lý, về thượng đế, hay gì gì, bờ bên kia. Tôi không biết; người khác nói, 'Vâng, chúng ta có này nọ.' Vậy, làm sao tôi, như người thực sự đã loại bỏ hết - truyền thống, những người đã nói có, và những người đã nói rằng nó vô nghĩa, người nói rằng chúng ta đã tìm ra nó, v.v.. Nếu bạn quét hết chúng và nói, 'Nào, tôi phải tìm - không như cá nhân - có thể nào chân lý, hay phúc lạc, tỏ ngộ, đến mà không lệ thuộc mọi cái đó? Bạn xem, nếu tôi vướng kẹt, trong Hinđu, với mọi thứ... - không phải bề ngoài nó, không phải lễ lạy và mọi mê tín, nếu tôi vướng kẹt trong niềm tin tôn giáo Hinđu, Bà la môn thực sự, tôi luôn dính kẹt, và có thể đi rất xa, nhưng tôi dính kẹt đó. Đó không phải tự do. Bởi phải có tự do để khám phá, hay thấu hiểu.
41:43	S: Yes.	S: Vâng.
41:44	K: Sir, we are going little bit too far?	K: Chúng ta đi hơi xa quá à?
41:47	S: No, but I would then go back and say, well, you put forward the question of a man who rejects all his traditions. You said, let us suppose that I am a man who has rejected all these traditions. I would then say, well, what reason do you have for rejecting all these traditions in such a way?	S: Không, nhưng tôi quay lại và nói, này, ngài đưa ra vấn đề một người loại bỏ hết truyền thống. Ngài nói, hãy giả sử tôi là người loại bỏ hết truyền thống này. Tôi nói, nào, lý do gì ngài loại bỏ hết truyền thống trong lối ấy?
42:07	H: Well, that seems to be part of the problem that we've arrived at. We have said that man is conditioned biologically and socially by his family. The tradition is part of that. We've said that that's the problem that we're up against now. Is it possible for him to change his nature, or do we have to deal with each of these problems particularly as they come up?	H: Này, hình như đó là một phần vấn đề chúng ta sẽ đến. Chúng ta đã nói con người bị qui định sinh học và xã hội bởi gia đình. Truyền thống là một phần đó. Chúng ta đã nói đó là vấn đề chúng ta đang chống lại. Có thể nào họ thay đổi bản chất, hay chúng ta phải xử sự với mỗi vấn đề riêng khi chúng đến?
42:30	S: Well, what I was saying is that the inner core of all the great religions of the world is a vision of this possibility of a transformation, whether it's called salvation, or liberation, or nirvana, or what. There's this vision. Now, there have always been people within those religions, who've had this vision and lived this vision; now...	S: Này, tôi nói cái cốt lõi bên trong của mọi tôn giáo lớn trên thế giới là cái thấy về tính có thể thay đổi này, dù gọi là cứu chuộc, hay giải thoát, hay niết bàn, gì gì. Có cái thấy này. Giờ thì, luôn có những người trong tôn giáo ấy, họ có cái thấy ấy và sống với nó; giờ...
42:54	K: Ah! Sorry. Go on, I'm sorry.	K: À! Xin lỗi. Tiếp đi, xin lỗi.
42:58	S: Perhaps part of your radical rejection of all religions involves denying that. But if so, I would say, why? Why should we be so radical as to deny...	S: Có lẽ một phần loại bỏ hết tôn giáo của ngài liên quan chối từ nó. Nhưng nếu thế, tôi nói, tại sao? Tại sao chúng ta loại bỏ tận gốc...
43:07	K: I question whether they really - I may be sacrilegious, may be an infidel, non-believer - I wonder, if I am anchored to a certain organised belief, whether I can ever find the other. If I am a Buddhist, for example, I believe that the Buddha is my saviour. Suppose, I believe that, and that has been told to me from childhood, my parents have been Buddhists, and so on, so on, so on. And as long as I have found that security in that idea, or in that belief, in that person, there is no freedom.	K: Tôi hỏi họ có thực sự - có thể tôi phạm thượng, có thể ngoại giáo, bất tín - Tôi tự hỏi nếu dính kẹt niềm tin có tổ chức nào, tôi có thể tìm gì khác không. Nếu tôi là Phật tử, ví dụ, Tôi tin Phật là Đấng cứu độ. Giả sử, tôi tin thế, và điều ấy được nói với tôi từ nhỏ, cha mẹ tôi là Phật tử, v.v.., v.v.. Và bao lâu tôi còn tìm an toàn trong ý niệm ấy, hay trong niềm tin ấy, đấng ấy, thì không có tự do.
44:10	S: No, but it's possible that you can move beyond that framework, starting from within it, you can move beyond it.	S: Không, nhưng có lẽ ngài có thể vượt qua khung ấy, khởi đầu từ trong đó, ngài có thể vượt qua nó.
44:16	K: That means I wipe out everything.	K: Thế nghĩa là tôi quét sạch mọi thứ.
44:20	S: It means you wipe it out, but there's a difference between an approach where you wipe it out from the beginning...	S: Nghĩa là ngài quét hết nó, nhưng có sự khác nhau giữa cách tiếp cận nơi ngài quét hết nó từ khởi đầu...
44:26	K: From the beginning, I am talking.	K: Từ khởi đầu, tôi nói thế.
44:28	S: ...and an approach where you start within it and go beyond it.	S: ...và cách tiếp cận ngài bắt đầu trong nó và vượt qua nó.
44:33	K: You see - wait, wait. Yes, I know, it's the well-worn argument. Which is important, breaking down all the barriers at the beginning, not at the end. I am a Hindu, I see what Hinduism is - a lot of superstition, you know, all the rest of it - and why should I go through number of years to end it, why can't I finish it the first day?	K: Bạn thấy rằng - khoan đã; vâng, tôi hiểu, tranh cãi cũ rích. Điều quan trọng là, phá vỡ mọi rào cản ngay từ đầu, không phải sau cùng. Tôi là Hinđu, tôi hiểu Hinđu là gì - quá nhiều mê tín, bạn biết đó, v.v.. - và tại sao tôi phải trải qua nhiều năm để chấm dứt, tại sao không thể chấm dứt ngay khởi đầu?
45:15	S: Because I think you'd have to reinvent and rediscover for yourself a great many things that you would be able to get through more quickly if you didn't.	S: Bởi tôi nghĩ ngài phải chế tạo lại và khám phá lại cho chính mình rất nhiều việc để ngài có thể trải qua nhanh chóng nếu ngài đã không làm.
45:25	K: No. His question is... I am a living human being in relationship with him or with her. In that relationship I am in conflict. He says, don't go about religion and illumination, and nirvana, and all the rest of it. Transform this, live rightly here, then the door is open.	K: Không. Câu hỏi là... tôi là con người có quan hệ với anh nọ cô kia. Trong quan hệ ấy tôi xung đột. Anh ta nói, đừng lo việc tôn giáo và tỏ ngộ, và niết bàn, v.v.. Thay đổi đi, sống đàng hoàng ngay đây, rồi cửa sẽ mở.
45:53	S: Yes, but surely, isn't that easier said than done?	S: Vâng, nhưng chắc là, nói thì dễ hơn làm?
45:59	K: I know! I know it's easier said than done, therefore let's find out. Let me find out with him, or with you, or with her, how to live in this world without conflict. Right, sir?	K: Tôi biết! Tôi biết nói dễ hơn làm, vậy thì hãy tìm đi. Hãy để tôi tìm với anh ta, hay với bạn, hay cô kia, làm sao sống trên thế giới này mà không xung đột. Phải không?
46:18	H: That's what we're asking.	H: Chúng ta hỏi vậy.
46:20	K: Can I find out, or is that impossible?	K: Tôi có thể tìm ra, hay là không thể?
46:24	H: We don't know.	H: Chúng tôi không biết.
46:26	K: No. Therefore we start - we don't know.	K: Không. Vậy thì bắt đầu - chúng ta không biết.
46:27	H: Okay.	H: Vâng.
46:29	K: So let's enquire into that. Because if my relationship with life is not right - right in quotes for the moment - how can I find out something that's immensely beyond all this? Beyond time, beyond thought, beyond measure. I can't. Until we have established right relationship between us, which is order, how can I find that which is supreme order? So I must begin with you, not with that. I don't know if you are meeting me.	K: Vậy hãy tìm hiểu xem. Bởi nếu quan hệ với đời sống không đúng - "đúng" trong ngoặc - làm sao tôi có thể tìm ra điều gì vượt lên mọi thứ? Vượt thời gian, vượt suy tư, vượt đo lường. Không thể. 'Cho đến khi chúng ta xây dựng quan hệ đúng với nhau, là trật tự, làm sao có thể tìm ra cái trật tự tối cao? Vậy phải bắt đầu với bạn, không phải với nó. Không biết bạn hiểu không.
47:15	S: No, I would have thought that you could easily argue the other way around. K: Of course, of course!	S: Không, tôi nghĩ ngài dễ dàng tranh luận lòng vòng. K: Dĩ nhiên, dĩ nhiên! (Cười)
47:20	S: Until you have that, you can't get this right, because the whole history of man shows that starting just from...	S: Cho đến khi có nó, ngài không thể có cái này đúng, bởi cả lịch sử con người chỉ ra nó mới bắt đầu từ...
47:25	K: Ah! Therefore you invent that. You invent something illogical, may not be true; may be just invention of thought, and you imagine that to be order and hope that order will filter into you. And it seems so illogical, irrational, whereas this is so rational.	K: À! vậy nên bạn đặt ra nó. Bạn đặt ra điều phi lý, có thể không thật; có thể do suy nghĩ bày đặt, và bạn tưởng tượng nó trật tự và hy vọng trật tự ấy sẽ thấm vào bạn. Và nó dường như phi lý, vô lý, trong khi nó rất hợp lý.
47:57	S: But is it possible? K: That is it! Let's find out.	S: Nhưng có thể sao? K: Vậy đó! Tìm xem.
48:05	S: But you've now completely reversed your argument to start with. He started with the patient coming to the psychiatrist's office, who wants to get his relationships right, get the human relationships out of this state of disorder and conflict into something that's more tolerable.	S: Nhưng ngài vừa lật ngược hết tranh cãi thành khởi đầu. Anh ta bắt đầu với bịnh nhân đến văn phòng bác sĩ tâm lý, người muốn có quan hệ đúng, có quan hệ con người từ trạng thái rối loạn và xung đột này đến điều gì có thể chịu được.
48:21	K: I'm not sure this way - forgive me, Doctor, if I'm blundering into where the angels fear to tread, I question whether they are doing right.	K: Tôi không chắc vậy - thứ lỗi, Bác sĩ, nếu tôi mò mẫm vào nơi thiên thần ngại đến (cười), tôi hỏi phải chăng họ làm đúng.
48:36	S: But they're doing just what you said now starting with the relationship, not going into these bigger questions.	S: Nhưng họ làm đúng điều ngài đang nói bắt đầu với quan hệ, không phải tìm hiểu vấn đề lớn hơn.
48:41	K: But I question whether they are really concerned with bringing about a right relationship between human beings, fundamentally, not superficially, just to adjust themselves for the day.	K: Nhưng tôi hỏi phải chăng họ thực sự quan tâm việc tạo ra quan hệ đúng giữa loài người, cơ bản, chứ không phải hời hợt, chỉ chỉnh đốn qua ngày.
48:57	H: I don't think that you're denying that larger questions are involved in that, you are just saying that we shouldn't have... invent ideas about what a solution would be like.	H: Tôi không nghĩ ngài từ chối vấn đề rộng hơn dính trong đó, ngài vừa nói chúng ta không nên... tạo ý niệm về giải pháp nên như thế nào.
49:07	K: Yes. I come to you with my problem : I cannot get on with somebody, or I am terribly depressed, or something dishonest in me, I pretend. I come to you. You are concerned to tell me 'Become more honest.'	K: Vâng. Tôi đến với vấn đề của tôi - Tôi không thể hoà hợp với ai đó, hay tôi quá chán nản, hay điều không thành thật trong tôi, tôi giả vờ. Tôi đến. Bạn quan tâm bảo tôi 'Hãy thành thật hơn.'
49:36	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
49:37	K: But not find out what is real honesty.	K: Nhưng không tìm xem thành thật thực là gì.
49:44	H: Don't we get into the problem of creating the idea of real honesty at this point?	H: Không phải chúng ta kẹt vấn đề tạo ý niệm thành thật thực chỗ này sao?
49:48	K: No. It's not an idea. I am dishonest.	K: Không. Không phải ý niệm. Tôi không thành thật.
49:51	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
49:52	K: You enquire, why are you dishonest? H: Yes.	K: Bạn tìm hiểu, tại sao bạn không thành thật? H: Vâng.
49:54	K: Go... penetrate into it, disturb me. Don't pacify me.	K: Đi... xâm nhập nó, quấy rối tôi. Đừng xoa dịu tôi.
49:59	H: Yes.	H: Vâng.
50:01	K: Don't help me to say, well, be a little more honest, and a little more this or that, but shake me so that I find out what is real honesty!	K: Đừng giúp tôi nói, nào, thành thật hơn chút đi, và thêm tí này nọ, mà lay tôi để tôi tìm xem thành thật là gì.
50:14	H: Okay, that's...	H: Vâng, vậy...
50:16	K: I may break away from my conditioning, from my wife, from my parents - anything. You don't disturb me.	K: Tôi có thể bứt khỏi qui định, vợ con, thân thuộc - gì gì. Bạn không làm rộn tôi.
50:26	H: No, that's... K: That's just my point.	H: Không, vậy... K: Đó là mấu chốt.
50:29	H: I do disturb you. K: Partially.	H: Tôi làm rộn ngài. K: Một phần thôi.
50:31	H: Well, what...	H: Nào, cái gì...
50:33	K: You disturb me not to conform to little adjustments.	K: Bạn làm rộn tôi không theo điều chỉnh chút ít.
50:37	H: Well, let's look at that. K: Sorry.	H: Nào, hãy nhìn đó đi. K: Xin lỗi.
50:43	H: I disturb you to conform to little adjustments.	H: Tôi làm rộn ngài theo điều chỉnh chút ít.
50:47	K: Yes.	K: Vâng.
50:49	K: You don't say to me, 'Look, you are dishonest, let's go into it.'	K: Bạn không nói, 'Này, ông không thành thực, tìm hiểu nó đi.'
50:53	H: I do say that.	H: Tôi nói thế.
50:55	K: No, but go into it, so that he is totally honest.	K: Không, nhưng tìm hiểu nó, để anh ta hoàn toàn thành thực.
50:59	H: Well, how deeply do I need to go into it, so that I have disturbed you totally?	H: Được, bao sâu tôi cần tìm hiểu nó, để tôi làm rộn ngài hoàn toàn?
51:03	K: Yes. So you tell me. Do it now, sir.	K: Vâng. Vậy bạn nói đi. Làm liền nào.
51:08	H: Okay. You come in, and in our talks we notice that the thing that you are up to is that you are always trying to find some other person to make your life be whole.	H: Vâng. Ngài đến, và khi nói chuyện chúng ta để ý rằng điều ngài phải làm là luôn cố gắng tìm gì đó nơi người khác để làm đời ngài trọn vẹn.
51:22	K: Yes. I depend on somebody. H: Yes, deeply.	K: Vâng. Tôi tuỳ thuộc ai đó. H: Vâng, rất sâu.
51:26	K: Deeply. H: And you don't even know that.	K: Sâu. H: Và dù ngài không biết thế.
51:28	K: Yes.	K: Vâng.
51:30	H: So I disturb you. I tell you that that's what's going on, and I show you you're doing it with me.	H: Vậy tôi làm rộn ngài. Tôi nói với ngài việc xảy ra, và tôi chỉ ra ngài làm nó với tôi.
51:34	K: Yes.	K: Vâng.
51:35	H: I show you you're doing it with your husband.	H: Tôi chỉ ra ngài làm nó với chồng mình.
51:37	K: Yes.	K: Vâng.
51:38	H: Now, is that sufficiently deep? K: No.	H: Giờ, vậy đủ sâu chưa? K: Chưa.
51:41	H: Why?	H: Tại sao?
51:44	K: What have you shown me? A verbal picture...	K: Bạn chỉ tôi cái gì? Hình ảnh bằng lời...
51:51	H: No, not verbal. Not verbal. K: Wait, wait.	H: Không, không bằng lời. K: Khoan đã.
51:53	H: Okay.	H: Vâng.
51:55	K: Verbal picture, an argument, a thing which tells me that I am dishonest. Or whatever you tell me. That leaves me where?	K: Hình ảnh bằng lời, tranh cãi, điều gì đó bảo tôi không thành thực. Hay bạn nói gì khác. Nó bỏ tôi ở đâu?
52:07	H: If it's verbal it just gives you more knowledge about yourself.	H: Nếu bằng lời nó sẽ thêm ngài kiến thức về mình.
52:09	K: That's all. Knowledge about myself.	K: Đúng thế. Kiến thức về tôi.
52:13	H: Yes. K: Will knowledge transform me?	H: Vâng. H: Kiến thức làm thay đổi tôi?
52:16	H: No. K: No. Be careful, sir, careful. Then why do I come to you?	H: Không. K: Không. Cẩn thận đó. Rồi tại sao tôi đến bạn?
52:27	H: Well, not so that I can give you knowledge. You come thinking that maybe somehow I have some answers, because other people, because the society is set up...	H: Nào, không để tôi cho ngài kiến thức. Ngài đến và nghĩ có lẽ tôi có câu trả lời, bởi vì người khác, bởi xã hội được dựng lên...
52:38	K: Why don't you tell me, 'Old boy, do it yourself, don't depend on me.' Go into it. Find out, stir.	K: Tại sao không bảo, 'Ông bạn, tự làm đi, đừng lệ thuộc vào tôi.' Tìm hiểu nó.Tìm, khuấy động đi.
52:48	H: Okay, I tell you that. I tell you, 'Go into it yourself'. And you say to me... K: I can't do it.	H: Vâng, tôi bảo vậy. Tôi nói, 'Tự tìm hiểu đi.' Và ngài nói... K: Tôi không thể.
52:55	H: I don't know what you're talking about.	H: Tôi không hiểu ngài nói về gì.
52:56	K: That's just it. H: Yes.	K: Đúng vậy. H: Vâng.
52:58	K: So, how will you help me to go into myself and not depend on you? You understand my question? H: Yes.	K: Vậy, làm sao bạn giúp tôi tìm hiểu tôi và không lệ thuộc bạn? Bạn hiểu câu hỏi không? H: Vâng.
53:08	K: Please, I'm not on the stage, the only actor. Sir, this is really a serious question. How will you help me to go into myself so deeply, that I understand and go beyond. You know what I mean?	K: Nào, tôi không phải độc diễn trên sân khấu. Đây là vấn đề thực nghiêm túc. Làm sao bạn giúp tôi tìm hiểu tôi thật sâu, để tôi thấu hiểu và vượt lên. Bạn hiểu ý tôi chứ?
53:39	H: No, I don't follow what you mean. I understand how to help you go into it without depending on me.	H: Không, tôi không theo kịp ý ngài. Tôi biết làm sao giúp ngài tìm hiểu mà không lệ thuộc tôi.
53:45	K: I don't want to depend on you. I don't want to depend on anybody.	K: Tôi không muốn lệ thuộc bạn. Tôi không muốn lệ thuộc ai hết.
53:48	H: Okay. I can help you do that. We can discover together that you are depending on me, but I don't know how deeply this has to go.	H: Vâng. Tôi có thể giúp ngài. Chúng ta có thể cùng khám phá rằng ngài lệ thuộc tôi, nhưng tôi không biết nó sẽ đi bao sâu.
53:59	K: So you have to enquire into dependence.	K: Vậy bạn phải tìm hiểu sự lệ thuộc.
54:02	H: Okay. K: Why am I depending? Security. H: Yes.	H: Vâng. K: Tại sao chúng ta lệ thuộc? An toàn. H: Vâng.
54:08	K: Where is security? Is there such thing as security?	K: An toàn ở đâu? Có cái gì là an toàn?
54:15	H: Well, I have these experiences as I grew up that taught me what security is.	H: À, tôi có những kinh nghiệm khi lớn lên nó dạy tôi an toàn là gì.
54:21	K: Yes, which is what? A projected idea.	K: Vâng, là gì nào? Một ý niệm được phóng ra?
54:24	H: Yes. K: A principle.	H: Vâng. K: Một nguyên tắc.
54:26	H: Yes. K: A belief, a faith, a dogma, or an ideal, which are all projected by me, or by you, and I accept those. But they're unreal.	H: Vâng. K: Niềm tin, tín ngưỡng, giáo điều, hay lý tưởng, đều được phóng ra do tôi, hay bạn, và tôi chấp nhận. Nhưng chúng không thực.
54:41	H: Okay. K: So, can I push those away?	H: Vâng. K: Vậy, tôi có thể đẩy chúng đi?
54:47	H: Yes. And then you are not depressed.	H: Vâng. Và rồi ngài sẽ không thất vọng.
54:50	K: Ah! I am dependent and therefore I get angry, jealousy, all the rest of it. That dependence makes me attached, and in that attachment there is more fear, there is more anxiety, there is more... - you follow? H: Yes.	K: À! Tôi lệ thuộc vì vậy tôi nổi giận, ghen tị, mọi thứ. Lệ thuộc ấy làm tôi bám víu, và trong bám víu ấy có thêm sợ hãi, thêm lo âu, thêm... - kịp không? H: Vâng.
55:09	K: So, can you help me to be free or find out what is true security? Is there a deep abiding security? Not in furniture, not in a house, not in my wife, or in some idea - find deeply if there is such thing as complete security. Sorry, I'm taking all this…	K: Vậy, bạn có thể giúp tôi thoát hay tìm ra an toàn thực là gì? Có an toàn mãi mãi chăng? Không phải trong nội thất, nhà cửa, vợ con, hay ý niệm nào - tìm kỹ xem có chăng cái gì an toàn trọn vẹn. Xin lỗi, tôi lấy mấy cái này...
55:44	H: So you're suggesting that if I simply work on this with you, and you come to understand that you're dependent, that that's not sufficient, because you won't have discovered any abiding security.	H: Vậy ngài gợi ý nếu tôi đơn giản làm việc này với ngài, và ngài đến để hiểu rằng ngài lệ thuộc, vậy là chưa đủ, bởi ngài chưa khám phá cái an toàn mãi mãi.
55:55	K: No. Because that's all I want. I've sought security in this house, and it doesn't, there's no security. I've sought security in my wife, there isn't any; I change to another woman, but there isn't any either. Then I find security in a church, in a god, in a belief, in a faith, in some other symbol. You see what is happening? You are all externalising, if I can use that word, giving me security in things in which there is no security - in nations, all the rest of it. Could you help us to find out if there is complete security which is unshakeable?	K: Không. Bởi tôi muốn vậy. Tôi tìm an toàn trong nhà cửa, nhưng không phải, không có an toàn. Tôi tìm an toàn trong vợ con, không có an toàn gì; tôi thay người khác, nhưng cũng không an toàn. Rồi tôi tìm an toàn trong nhà thờ, thượng đế, niềm tin, tín ngưỡng, hay biểu tượng khác. Bạn biết điều gì xảy ra? Bạn luôn hướng ngoại, nếu có thể dùng chữ ấy, cho tôi an toàn trong những gì không có an toàn - trong quốc gia, v.v.. Bạn có thể giúp tôi tìm xem có chăng an toàn tuyệt đối không thể lung lay?
56:47	S: Are you suggesting that this is one of our most fundamental needs, driving activities? K: I should think so.	S: Ngài gợi ý đó là cái cần thiết tối hậu của chúng ta, thôi thúc mọi hoạt động? K: Tôi nghĩ vậy.
56:58	S: So indeed it's a fundamental question as to whether this sense of abiding unshakeable security is possible. K: Yes. Yes. Because if once you have that there is no problem any more.	S: Vậy thực ra vấn đề cơ bản là xem ý nghĩa an toàn mãi mãi không lay chuyển là có thể chăng. K: Vâng. Vâng. Bởi nếu bạn có nó thì không còn vấn đề gì nữa.
57:15	H: But this isn't clear, because then is it the individual that has that?	H: Nhưng vậy chưa rõ, bởi cá nhân có nó ư?
57:22	K: No. Individual can never have that security. Because he is in himself divisive.	K: Không. Cá nhân không thể có an toàn ấy. Bởi chính hắn phân chia.