Krishnamurti - Có́ chăng lối ra khỏi khủng hoảng thế giới?

Krishnamurti Subtitles

SA79T1 - Có́ chăng lối ra khỏi khủng hoảng thế giới?
Buổi nói chuyện thứ nhất
Saanen, Thuỵ sĩ
8 tháng Bảy 1979

0:33	Krishnamurti: I didn’t expect so many people. I wonder what we shall talk about.	Tôi không mong nhiều người vậy. Tôi tự hỏi chúng ta sẽ nói gì!
1:25	It seems to me that our self-centred problems and the problems that lie beyond our own personal crises, disturbances and miseries, the world about us is more or less in chaos, in great confusion. I think everybody will admit that without a great deal of trouble, with a great deal of investigation. And nobody apparently sees a solution for this, neither politically, nor religiously, nor economically. That again is an obvious fact. And nobody asks if there is a way out of all this, the trap in which human beings have been caught for millennia, if there is any way out of this mess, confusion, turmoil, terror. Not finding an answer, many people resort to the old traditions, join old religions, or form a small community hoping thereby to solve their own particular problems. And I may suggest that there is a way out of all this, out of our present continuous misery, conflict, strife, various forms of terror and the threatening wars, not only near but far. So to investigate all this and find out if there is a solution, a way out, without suppression, without escape, without any kind of illusion. And if you will have the patience, energy and the serious responsibility that is involved, we can think together. I hope you are prepared for that – thinking together.	Với tôi có vẻ là vấn đề vị ngã và vấn đề vượt ngoài cơn khủng hoảng cá nhân, phiền toái và đau khổ thế giới quanh ta ít nhiều đang hổn độn, quá rối loạn. Tôi nghĩ mọi người đồng ý là không quá bận tâm với vô số tìm kiếm. Và hình như không ai thấy giải pháp cả chính trị, cả tôn giáo, cả kinh tế. Đó là sự kiện hiển nhiên. Và không ai hỏi xem có chăng đường ra khỏi bẫy rập con người đã kẹt trong đó bao thiên niên kỷ đường nào ra khỏi rối rắm, hổn loạn, khổ đau, khủng bố. Không tìm trả lời mà nhiều người cứ theo truyền thống cũ vào tôn giáo cũ, hay lập cộng đồng nhỏ hy vọng nhờ đó giải quyết những vấn đề riêng. Và tôi xin đề nghị có một đường ra khỏi đau khổ bất tận, xung đột, đấu tranh nhiều kiểu khủng bố và chiến tranh đáng sợ, cả gần lẫn xa. Vậy tìm kiếm hết và xem có chăng giải pháp, đường ra mà không loại bỏ, chạy trốn, không có loại ảo tưởng nào. Và nếu bạn có kiên nhẫn, nghị lực và trách nhiệm nghiêm túc, chúng ta có thể cùng suy nghĩ. Tôi nghĩ bạn chuẩn bị cho việc đó - cùng suy nghĩ.
5:13	There are two different kinds of thinking: one, thinking about something – about a problem, about a personal issue, or about the world, and so on. That is, thinking about something. And is there another kind of thinking which is not about something? Please, carefully, I will go into this widely and deeply if I may.	Có hai loại suy nghĩ khác nhau: một, nghĩ về điều gì về vấn đề, về giải pháp cá nhân, hay về thế giới, v.v.. Tức là nghĩ về việc gì. Và có chăng loại suy nghĩ khác, tức không về điều gì? Nào, tôi sẽ tìm hiểu kỹ điều này, rộng và sâu nếu có thể.
6:05	So we are asking: our minds are accustomed to think about something – about a problem, out of our personal desires, fulfilments, sorrow, anxiety, and so on – about something. And we are accustomed to that, ‘thinking about’. We are asking, not about something but thinking itself. If this issue is clear, not about something which will come later on, but thinking together. Please, see the difference: thinking together does not mean that you agree or disagree, accept or reject, defend or offend, but together find out if it is possible by thinking together we can act together, not about something – please, apply your minds to this a little bit – not about something, which we can more or less do. We can agree to act in a certain way, we can put our minds together to investigate a certain problem, but we are not going into that for the present. But we are asking: thinking together without any barriers, without any inhibitions, without any prejudice, letting go your personal experiences, your personal urge to fulfil. Which means you and the speaker, together, be free to think. Is this somewhat clear?	Vậy chúng ta hỏi: trí óc quen với nghĩ về điều gì về vấn đề, do ước muốn cá nhân thoả mãn, đau khổ, lo âu, v.v.., về việc gì. Và chúng ta quen thế đó, 'nghĩ về'. Chúng ta hỏi, không về điều gì mà chính suy nghĩ. Nếu vấn đề rõ ràng không về điều gì sẽ xảy ra, mà cùng suy nghĩ. Xem khác nhau: cùng suy nghĩ không nghĩa là bạn đồng ý hay không, chấp nhận hay không, chịu hay không, mà cùng nhau tìm xem có thể do cùng suy nghĩ nên có thể cùng hành động, không về điều gì - để tâm vào xem - không phải về điều gì ít nhiều chúng ta có thể làm. Chúng ta đồng ý hành động lối nào đó chúng ta có thể cùng để trí óc mình tìm hiểu vấn đề gì nhưng lúc này chúng ta không làm vậy. Mà chúng ta hỏi: cùng suy nghĩ mà không rào cản không kìm chế, không định kiến bỏ qua kinh nghiệm riêng, thôi thúc thoả mãn riêng. Nghĩa là bạn và người nói, cùng nhau, tự do để suy nghĩ. Vậy là khá rõ chưa?
9:24	Please, this needs a great deal of investigation because we are conditioned to think together about certain ideas, about certain conclusions, philosophical, historical, and so on. Then there are those who agree, and those who disagree. They form two camps, each opposing the other, which is what is happening in the world. The Totalitarian, the so-called Democratic, the Capitalists and the Marxists, and so on, agreeing and disagreeing, opposing and defending. Whereas we are asking, if we could think together freely, you letting go all your experiences, your conclusions, your desires, prejudices, and so on, putting them aside, so that together we can think. Will you do that? You and the speaker putting aside his beliefs, his opinions and judgements and evaluations, his hopes, and so on, and together think, not about something, but think. Shall we do it? Which means that being free of our own personal problems, urges, demands, fulfilments, and so on, being free to investigate together, not investigate into something, but the capacity, the spirit of investigation. Is this somewhat clear? Which requires not only that you listen, not to what is being said, but to listen to the quality of a mind that is thinking, not with regard to something, but listening to the whole quality of thinking, which requires certain awareness and attention. Right?	Nào, việc này cần rất nhiều tìm kiếm bởi chúng ta bị qui định để cùng suy nghĩ về ý niệm nào về kết luận nào, triết học, lịch sử, v.v.. Rồi có những người đồng ý, và những người không. Họ lập ra hai phe hai bên chống nhau, việc này xảy ra khắp thế giới. Độc tài, cái gọi là Dân chủ, Tư bản và Mác xít, v.v.., đồng ý hoặc không, chống đối hay ủng hộ. Trong khi chúng ta hỏi xem có thể cùng suy nghĩ tự do bạn bỏ đi mọi kinh nghiệm, kết luận, ước muốn, định kiến v.v.., dẹp hết sang bên để chúng ta có thể cùng suy nghĩ. Bạn làm chứ? Bạn và người nói dẹp hết niềm tin quan niệm và phán đoán và đánh giá hy vọng, v.v.., và cùng suy nghĩ, không về gì, chỉ suy nghĩ. Chúng ta sẽ làm? Nghĩa là thoát mọi vấn đề cá nhân, thôi thúc, đòi hỏi thoả mãn, v.v.., tự do để cùng tìm tòi, không tìm điều gì, mà là khả năng tìm tòi, tinh thần tìm tòi. Vậy là khá rõ chưa? Nó đòi hỏi không chỉ bạn nghe, không phải lời được nói mà nghe đặc tính trí óc suy tư không phải về điều gì mà là nghe toàn bộ đặc tính suy nghĩ, nó đòi hỏi ý thức và chú tâm. Phải không?
13:58	Where there is attention there is no centre from which you are attending. I wonder if you are doing it as we are talking. That is, when you attend, in which there is no division, then in that attention thought is not your thought or my thought, it is thinking. Can we proceed along these lines? Are we following each other?	Ở đâu có chú tâm nơi đó không có trung tâm từ đó bạn để ý. Không biết bạn có làm khi chúng ta đang nói. Tức là, khi bạn chú tâm, trong đó không có phân chia, rồi trong chú tâm ấy ý nghĩ không phải của bạn hay tôi, chỉ suy nghĩ. Chúng ta có thể đi tiếp? Theo kịp nhau không?
15:08	When you give your attention, which means to give all your mind, your heart, your nerves, to completely give attention, do you find that there is a centre from which you are attending? So in that attention, there is not your thinking and the speaker thinking, there is only a quality of total attention. Right? Don’t look so mystified, it is really quite simple.	Khi bạn chú tâm, nghĩa là toàn thể trí óc bạn tâm hồn bạn, thần kinh, hoàn toàn chú tâm bạn có tìm xem có chăng trung tâm từ đó bạn chú tâm? Vậy trong chú tâm không có suy nghĩ của bạn hay người nói chỉ có đặc tính chú tâm hoàn toàn. Phải không? Đừng có vẻ quá bối rối (cười), đơn giản lắm.
16:22	You see, our thinking, ordinary everyday thinking, is with regard to a certain subject, to a certain action, to a certain problem – thinking about something. Right? Right? That thinking is from an experience, from a memory, from a knowledge, therefore it is your experience opposed to another’s experience. So there is always division. Right? Please, follow this. You have your opinion and another has his opinion, and the two divisive opinions, dividing opinions can never come together. If you believe in something and another believes in something else strongly, then there is wide cleavage. To that way of thinking we are accustomed. Right? Now we are asking: that thinking can never be ‘together’ because it is always either opposing, defending or accepting. Whereas we are saying something entirely different. Thinking together implies that you and the other have let go all their prejudices, and all that – thinking together – because in that thinking together there is no your thinking and my thinking separate, it is together thinking. Right? Have you understood this?	Bạn thấy suy nghĩ mình, suy nghĩ thường ngày liên quan đến chủ đề nào đó đến hành động nào, vấn đề nào - nghĩ về điều gì. Phải không? Đúng không? Suy nghĩ ấy từ kinh nghiệm, từ ký ức, kiến thức vì vậy kinh nghiệm bạn đối nghịch kinh nghiệm ai khác. Nên luôn có phân chia. Phải không? Hãy theo dõi. Bạn có quan niệm và ai khác cũng có quan niệm và hai quan niệm, quan niệm riêng không bao giờ có thể đi cùng. Nếu bạn tin gì đó và ai khác tin gì khác mạnh mẽ, liền có khoảng cách lớn. Chúng ta đã quen với lối suy nghĩ ấy. Phải không? Giờ chúng ta hỏi: suy nghĩ ấy không bao giờ có thể 'cùng nhau', bởi nó luôn đối nghịch, thuận hoặc chống. Trái lại chúng ta nói điều hoàn toàn khác. Cùng suy nghĩ hàm ý bạn và người khác bỏ qua mọi định kiến và mọi thứ cùng suy nghĩ - bởi khi cùng suy nghĩ không có phân chia suy nghĩ của bạn và của tôi, đó là cùng suy nghĩ. Phải không? Bạn hiểu vậy chưa?
19:03	No, please, this is very serious because it is either you accept it as an intellectual concept, which then becomes your concept and his concept. If you merely accept the verbal explanation and draw from that explanation a conclusion according to your experience, knowledge, prejudices, and the other does the same, there is no coming together. You are following all this? It is important that we come together in our thinking so that there is no barrier between your thinking and my thinking, his or hers. Can we do this together? Because from this we can proceed, because your mind then has a totally different quality. It is entirely objective, nothing personal. The self-centred problems with which we are burdened can never be solved unless there is a different quality of thinking or a different quality of perception, a different quality of insight into the problem. Right? I wonder if you are following all this.	Không, việc này rất nghiêm túc, bởi dù bạn chấp nhận như quan niệm trí óc, liền thành quan niệm của bạn, của hắn. Nếu chỉ chấp nhận lời giải thích và rút ra từ giải thích một kết luận theo kinh nghiệm, kiến thức định kiến, và ai khác cũng làm vậy, là không cùng đi. Bạn theo kịp không? Quan trọng là chúng ta cùng đi trong suy nghĩ để không có rào cản giữa suy nghĩ của bạn và tôi, anh kia chị nọ. Chúng ta có thể cùng làm? Bởi từ đó chúng ta có thể tiếp tục vì trí óc bạn liền có đặc tính hoàn toàn khác. Nó hoàn toàn khách quan, không cá nhân. Vấn đề vị ngã mà chúng ta đeo mang không thể giải quyết trừ khi có đặc tính khác của suy nghĩ hay đặc tính khác của nhận thức, đặc tính khác của sáng tỏ soi vào vấn đề. Phải không? Không biết bạn theo kịp không? Nên câu hỏi là: có thể nào hai người
21:34	So our question then is: is it possible that two people, a group of people, undertake this responsibility? That putting aside your anxiety, attachment, and so on, and the other – meet, so that there is never a question of division, opinion opposing opinion, knowledge opposing knowledge, experience contradicting another experience – you are following this? So that our minds are together. The totalitarian states want this. They are the authority and they lay down what people should think, act, and so on. That is what is happening. If you disagree, you are either shot, sent to a concentration camp, or exiled. We are not saying that at all. On the contrary. Two minds educated, concerned with the world and are committed to find out whether there is a way out of this, out of the trap, out of this terrible mess that man has created for himself and for others. Can we do this together? Hai capito? You understand the question now? Together – our minds are equal, so the speaker is not telling you what to do, and you obey, or disregard, or accept, but our minds are together, being free to solve our problems. Right? Can we do this? Will you give up your Zen meditation, give up your particular guru? Give up your belief, your own experience to which you cling to, your own personal self-interested problems, let go and then meet together.	một nhóm người, nhận trách nhiệm này? Nó dẹp sang bên lo âu, bám víu, v.v.. và người kia giáp mặt để không hề có vấn đề phân chia quan niệm chống quan niệm, kiến thức chống kiến thức, kinh nghiệm mâu thuẫn kinh nghiệm khác - kịp không? Vậy là trí óc chúng ta cùng nhau. Các xứ độc tài muốn thế. Họ là uy quyền và họ đặt ra điều mọi người phải nghĩ, hành động, v.v.. Việc đó đang xảy ra. Nếu bạn không đồng ý bạn bị bắn đưa vào trại tập trung, hay lưu đày. Chúng ta không nói mọi việc đó. Ngược lại. Hai trí óc có học, quan tâm đến thế giới và đồng ý tìm xem có chăng đường ra khỏi đó, khỏi bẩy rập, khỏi lộn xộn đáng sợ con người đã tạo ra cho mình và người khác. Chúng ta có thể cùng làm? Làm chứ? Bạn hiểu câu hỏi không? Cùng nhau - trí óc bằng nhau, nên người nói không nói với bạn điều nên làm và bạn vâng lời, hay coi nhẹ, hay chấp nhận mà là trí óc, cùng nhau, tự do để giải quyết vấn đề. Phải không? Chúng ta có thể làm? Bạn sẽ bỏ thiền Zen, bỏ đạo sư? Bỏ niềm tin, kinh nghiệm mà bạn bám vào, vấn đề thích thú riêng, bỏ qua và cùng gặp nhau.
25:19	Do you see what takes place if you can do this? Then we can investigate together every problem very simply and clearly and directly, and act. That is clarity. To observe, to see without any distortion, to listen completely without making an abstraction of what you are listening to into an idea. Therefore there is only listening, there is only then seeing, not you see and I see differently, there is only seeing together. Right?	Bạn thấy gì xảy ra nếu bạn có thể làm thế? Rồi thì chúng ta có thể cùng tìm tòi mọi vấn đề thật đơn giản, rõ ràng, trực tiếp và hành động. Đó là sáng suốt. Quan sát, nhìn mà không có méo mó nào, nghe trọn vẹn không làm trừu tượng lời bạn nghe thành ý niệm. Vậy là chỉ có nghe, chỉ có nhìn không phải bạn và tôi nhìn khác nhau, chỉ có cùng nhìn. Phải không?
26:44	You see, we have instantly moved away from our own little sphere, from our own backyard, from our own self-concerned innumerable problems. Have you? Please, this is serious if we want to talk together, this is really important. Or do you carry the burden of all the troubles, anxieties, griefs and sorrows, and try to listen to another fellow, to what he is talking about? If you do that, then you are trying to conform to the pattern set by another, obviously, and so there is always division. Right?	Bạn xem chúng ta vừa rời tức thì quả cầu nhỏ của mình rời sân sau nhà mình, vô số vấn đề riêng mình quan tâm. Phải không? Nào, rất nghiêm túc nếu chúng ta cùng nói chuyện, việc này rất quan trọng. Hay bạn cứ mang gánh nặng của mọi vấn đề, âu lo, đau đớn khổ sở, và cố gắng nghe ai khác, nghe hắn nói gì đó? Nếu làm thế là bạn đang cố gắng theo khuôn mẫu của ai khác dĩ nhiên vậy là luôn có phân chia. Phải không?
28:08	So we are asking something very serious, and as you have taken the trouble to come into this tent – expenditure, energy, petrol, and all the rest of it – are we together thinking? Not you think and I think – thinking together. Then we can go into this question of time, – thinking together – not your time, my time. It is very important because we are going to find out if we think together, whether there is psychologically tomorrow at all, because that may be either an illusion or a reality: that there is psychologically tomorrow – tomorrow means many, many tomorrows. Either that may be an illusion, and so, being an illusion, we can put that aside and face this question whether there is psychologically a progressive evolutionary movement, which is time. I wonder if you follow all this?	Nên chúng ta hỏi điều gì rất nghiêm túc và khi bạn mang theo vấn đề vào lều này, tiêu xài, năng lượng xăng dầu, v.v.., chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ chứ? Không phải bạn nghĩ và tôi nghĩ, cùng suy nghĩ. Rồi chúng ta có thể tìm hiểu vấn đề thời gian cùng suy nghĩ, không phải thời gian của bạn, của tôi. Rất quan trọng bởi sẽ tìm coi chúng ta có cùng suy nghĩ xem có chăng ngày mai tâm lý vì đó có thể là ảo tưởng, hay thực tại: có ngày mai tâm lý - ngày mai nghĩa là rất nhiều, nhiều ngày mai. Nó có thể là ảo tưởng và vì là ảo tưởng chúng ta có thể dẹp hết và giáp mặt vấn đề xem có chăng chuyển động tiếp tục tiến hóa, tức là thời gian. Không biết bạn theo kịp không?
30:35	Are you used to my language and therefore you can go to sleep? You might say, ‘Oh, yes, I have heard all this before’. If you so think, then you are not discovering for yourself, you are not thinking together. You have already stopped thinking together and say, ‘I’ve heard it before’. Because we are going very, very deeply into this therefore it is the first time you hear it. The speaker has been talking in this tent for the last 19 years, next year it will be 20 years. And probably you will all turn up and say, ‘Oh, lord, he is back again, caught in a rut’. We are not caught in a rut. We are free to listen, to observe, and that very observation, listening reveals the truth, not the idea about truth. So we are asking a very serious question, because all our conditioning, all our education, both religious, personal and worldly, is allowing or giving time to achieve something. One needs time to learn a language, one needs time to learn how to drive a car, time is necessary for acquiring skill, technological skill. To be a good carpenter, you need time. But we are asking something entirely different. There time is necessary. Psychologically – please, bear in mind we are thinking together, not what you think, time is necessary or not. We are investigating together, therefore you are free to look, to question, ask. You cannot enquire, demand, be sceptical if you just say, ‘I’ll hold on to my knowledge, I think time is necessary’, and so on – then we don’t meet together. We are thinking together about the whole question of psychological evolution. Because man throughout the millennia, has been accustomed, is used, conditioned to think that he will evolve. ‘I am this today’. ‘Give me time to change’. ‘I am envious, frightened, burdened with enormous sorrow and I must have time to get over it, to go beyond it’. This is what we are used to. So the speaker is saying whether such psychological evolution exists at all. Or it is the invention of thought because it says, ‘I cannot change today, give me time, for god’s sake, tomorrow’. The everlasting becoming. ‘I will be successful as an executive, as a first-class engineer, or a first-class carpenter’. All this needs skill and you need time. But we are asking: is there psychological evolution at all – the ‘me’ becoming something? You understand? We are thinking together, not about whether time exists psychologically or not. We are thinking together, therefore there is no opposition. Right?	Bạn quen với ngôn ngữ của tôi và vì vậy có thể đi ngủ? Bạn có thể nói, 'Ồ vâng, tôi đã nghe hết rồi.' Nếu nghĩ vậy thì bạn không khám phá cho mình bạn không cùng suy nghĩ. Bạn đã dừng cùng suy nghĩ lại và nói 'Tôi đã nghe rồi.' Bởi vì chúng ta sẽ tìm hiểu thật sâu vậy nên đây là lần đầu bạn nghe. Người nói đã nói trong lều này suốt 19 năm năm tới sẽ là 20 năm. Và có lẽ bạn sẽ ngẫng lên và nói 'Ôi trời, ông ta lại cứ theo lối mòn.' Chúng ta không theo lối mòn. Chúng ta tự do nghe, quan sát và chính quan sát, nghe ấy hiển lộ sự thật, không phải ý niệm về sự thật. Vậy chúng ta hỏi câu hỏi nghiêm túc bởi tất cả qui định tất cả giáo dục, tôn giáo, cá nhân và thế tục đều cho phép hay lấy thời gian để đạt điều gì. Bạn cần thời gian học ngôn ngữ, cần thời gian học lái xe thời gian cần thiết để đạt kỹ năng, kỹ năng kỹ thuật. Để làm thợ mộc giỏi bạn cần thời gian. Nhưng chúng ta hỏi điều hoàn toàn khác. Thời gian cần thiết ở đó. Về tâm lý, hãy ghi nhớ chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ không phải bạn nghĩ thời gian cần thiết hay không. Chúng ta cùng tìm hiểu vì vậy bạn tự do để nhìn, để tìm, hỏi. Bạn không thể tìm kiếm, đòi hỏi, nghi ngờ nếu chỉ nói 'Tôi giữ kiến thức, tôi nghĩ thời gian cần thiết' v.v.. - vậy là chúng ta không gặp nhau. Chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ về toàn bộ vấn đề tiến hóa tâm lý. Bởi con người qua bao thiên niên kỷ đã quen thuộc chấp nhận, qui định để nghĩ họ sẽ tiến hóa. 'Hôm nay tôi thế này.' 'Cho thời gian để tôi thay đổi.' 'Tôi ganh tị, sợ hãi, quá nặng gánh khổ đau và tôi phải có thời gian để thoát, vượt qua nó.' Đó là điều chúng ta đã quen. Nên người nói hỏi xem tiến hoá tâm lý ấy có chăng. Hay chỉ là suy nghĩ tạo ra bởi nó nói, 'hôm nay tôi không thể thay đổi, lạy trời cho ít thời gian, mai đi.' Trở thành mãi mãi. 'Tôi sẽ thành công như quản trị viên như kỹ sư hạng nhất, hay thợ mộc hạng nhất.' Mọi cái đó cần tài nghệ và bạn cần thời gian. Nhưng chúng ta hỏi: có chăng tiến hoá tâm lý, cái 'tôi' trở thành gì đó? Hiểu không? Chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ không phải về thời gian tâm lý có hay không. Chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ, vậy nên không có đối nghịch. Phải không?
36:35	So let us examine the whole conditioning of becoming – together, you understand? – don’t come to any conclusion. Or if you have conclusions, let go and find out. You see the problem? If one’s conditioning allows time, then you are caught in the whole movement of becoming. That is, I am angry, one is angry, allow time to dissolve that anger. That is one’s conditioning, that’s one’s habit. And if you cling to that, we cannot think together. Therefore it is important to find out if you are clinging to something and at the same time trying to think together. Right? If I cling to my belief, to my experience according to that belief, and you likewise, we can never think together, we can never co-operate together, there is no action which is not divisive. You are following? So are we prepared to investigate together – investigate implies looking, observing, thinking – rationally, sanely, patiently, deeply. Is one free to enquire into this question: the me, the self-centred activity, the constant movement, whether you are asleep, awake, walking, dreaming, talking, it is this constant central activity of me. Has that a tomorrow, a progressive ending of it? Or a progressive continuity of it, a refinement of it? All that demands tomorrow.	Vậy hãy xem xét toàn bộ qui định về trở thành cùng nhau, hiểu không? - đừng kết luận. Hay, nếu có kết luận, bỏ đi và tìm tòi xem. Bạn thấy vấn đề không? Nếu qui định bạn cho phép thời gian bạn liền kẹt trong toàn bộ chuyển động của trở thành. Tức là, tôi giận, bạn giận, cho thời gian để tan cơn giận ấy. Đó là qui định, thói quen bạn. Và nếu bám chặc nó chúng ta không thể cùng suy nghĩ. Vì vậy quan trọng là tìm xem bạn có bám gì không và đồng thời cố gắng cùng suy nghĩ. Phải không? Nếu tôi bám vào niềm tin, vào kinh nghiệm theo niềm tin ấy và bạn ngược lại, chúng ta không bao giờ có thể cùng suy nghĩ, hợp tác, không hành động nào mà không phân chia. Theo kịp không? Vậy chúng ta sửa soạn cùng tìm hiểu - tìm hiểu hàm ý nhìn quan sát, nghĩ - hợp lý, tỉnh táo, nhẫn nại, sâu sắc. Bạn có tự do tìm hiểu vấn đề này: cái tôi, hành động vị ngã, chuyển động không ngừng, dù bạn ngủ hay thức, tản bộ mơ mộng, nói năng, là hành động bền bỉ chủ yếu của ngã. Có chăng ngày mai, chấm dứt kéo dài của nó? Hay nối tiếp kéo dài, tinh xảo của nó? Tất cả đòi hỏi ngày mai.
39:51	Now, psychologically, is there a tomorrow? Please, this is a very serious question. The speaker put this question to somebody some time ago, and the person said, ‘Oh, lord, I am going to meet my husband tomorrow’. You understand? Oh, come on, there is nothing difficult, don’t be puzzled. All her hope, pleasure – you follow? – the whole memory of the husband, and if there is no tomorrow, what is my husband? Right? Please, together. We are free together to enquire into this question. The speaker is not imposing a thing on you. But it is very important to find out if there is a tomorrow. If there is no tomorrow, what takes place? We know what takes place when we have allowed multiple tomorrows: postponement, laziness, indolence, gradually achieving something, enlightenment – you understand? – Nirvana, all the rest of it. Through many lives, progress – you follow? I wonder if you follow all this, the seriousness of this investigation? If there is no tomorrow psychologically, then what happens to the quality of your mind? The mind that is thinking together, what is the quality of the mind – the mind, not your mind, my mind – but the mind that has seen the whole progressive movement of the ‘me’ becoming, that has seen what is involved in this self-achieving, self-becoming and what is involved when psychologically there is no tomorrow, no future. Do you understand, sir?	Về tâm lý, có ngày mai không? Đây là vấn đề rất nghiêm túc. Có dạo người nói đặt câu hỏi với một người và người đó nói, 'Ồ, lạy chúa, mai tôi sẽ gặp chồng tôi.' Hiểu không? Nào, không có gì khó, đừng bối rối. Mọi hy vọng cô ta là niềm vui - kịp không? - cả ký ức về chồng, và nếu không có ngày mai chồng tôi là gì? (Cười) Phải không? Nào, cùng nhau. Chúng ta tự do cùng nhau tìm hiểu vấn đề. Người nói không áp đặt điều gì lên bạn. Nhưng rất quan trọng tìm hiểu xem có ngày mai không. Nếu không có ngày mai việc gì xảy ra? Chúng ta biết điều gì xảy ra khi cho phép nhiều ngày mai: triển hạn, lười biếng, đạt điều gì đó dần dà tỏ ngộ - hiểu không? - niết bàn, và v.v.. Qua nhiều kiếp sống - kịp không? Không biết bạn theo kịp không, sự nghiêm túc của tìm hiểu? Nếu không có ngày mai tâm lý thì điều gì xảy ra cho đặc tính của trí óc? Trí óc cùng suy nghĩ, đặc tính trí óc là gì trí óc, không của tôi hay bạn, mà là trí óc thấy cả chuyển động tiếp tục của cái 'tôi' trở thành thấy mọi vướng víu trong cái tôi-đạt được, tôi-trở thành và vướng víu gì khi tâm lý không có ngày mai, không tương lai. Bạn hiểu không?
44:00	Psychologically then there is a tremendous revolution. Right? Is this taking place with you, that is what is important, not the words, not the speaker what is stating, but actually, actual means that which is happening now, the actuality, is the actuality that in investigating together the mind has discovered the truth that there is no tomorrow, psychologically? Then what takes place with the quality of one’s mind? You understand what I am saying?	Liền có cách mạng tâm lý lớn lao. Phải không? Có xảy ra với bạn không, đó là điều quan trọng, không lời không phải điều người nói nói, mà thực sự thực sự điều đó đang xảy ra, thực tế là thực tế khi cùng tìm hiểu trí óc khám phá sự thật là không có ngày mai tâm lý? Rồi thì điều gì xảy ra với đặc tính trí óc bạn? Bạn hiểu lời tôi không?
45:04	All religions, Christian, Catholic, and all the rest of it, have all said tomorrow is important. Tomorrow in the Christian world, one life. When you die, one life only. The Asiatic world says multiple lives. Probably you neither believe or accept either of those two – I don’t know. But when you begin to investigate the whole psychological movement, the ‘me’, the ‘X’ becoming, becoming – you follow? – what is involved? Gradually you suffer and go on gradually lessening suffering till ultimately you are free, either in this life or in successive lives. The Christians accept this life, one life, and the Asiatics accept many, many lives – you follow? That is psychologically one life and psychologically multiple lives. And together, you and I, have looked at it without any prejudice, without any conclusion, we are observing the fact, how people are caught in this.	Mọi tôn giáo, Cơ đốc, Thiên chúa và v.v.., đều nói ngày mai là quan trọng. Ngày mai trong thế giới Ky tô, một kiếp sống. Khi bạn chết chỉ một kiếp sống. Người Á châu nói có nhiều kiếp sống. Có thể bạn không tin hoặc chấp nhận cả hai - tôi không biết. Nhưng khi bắt đầu tìm hiểu cả chuyển động tâm lý, 'tôi' 'X' trở thành, trở thành - kịp không? - cái gì dính trong đó? Bạn đau khổ từ từ và tiếp tục, giảm đau khổ từ từ đến khi bạn thoát hẳn, cả kiếp sống này hay những kiếp sau. Người Ky tô chấp nhận đời này, một kiếp sống và người Á châu chấp nhận nhiều kiếp sống - kịp không? Nghĩa là tâm lý một kiếp sống hay nhiều kiếp sống. Và cùng nhau bạn và tôi nhìn nó không định kiến, không kết luận, quan sát sự kiện, làm sao mọi người kẹt trong đó.
47:00	And also we are asking: if there is no tomorrow psychologically, what has happened to your mind, to your action, to your behaviour, to your responsibility? Do you understand my question? Have you understood my question – the question? What is your conduct if there is no tomorrow? Conduct implying responsibility with regard to another in action. Do you understand, sir? Then what is your relationship to another? Please, together we are investigating, don’t look at me and say, ‘Please, tell me’. Because there is no you and I in this thinking, in this observation, in this quality of listening. What is your relationship with another when there is no tomorrow psychologically? Either you despair, because this is a shock to one, do you understand? Either you despair or you give up and say, ‘I don’t know’ – throw it out. But if you are committed to this thinking together and enquiring into the progressive business, and ending of today psychologically, then what takes place actually – actually in the sense that which is happening now in your relationship with another? Relationship being not only physical contact, sex, and all the rest of it, but also the psychological relationship of dependence, attachment, comfort, loneliness, all the rest of it, what takes place? Would you tell me? Or is this totally new to you? You are listening for the first time and therefore there is no immediate response. Right? And why not? You are following all this? I wonder if you are.	Và chúng ta cũng hỏi: nếu không có ngày mai tâm lý điều gì xảy ra với trí óc với hành động, với ứng xử, với trách nhiệm của bạn? bạn hiểu câu hỏi không? Bạn hiểu câu hỏi không - câu hỏi? Bạn hành xử thế nào nếu không có ngày mai? Hành xử hàm ý trách nhiệm với người khác khi hành động. Hiểu không? Rồi thì quan hệ bạn với người khác thế nào? Hãy cùng nhau tìm hiểu đừng nhìn tôi và nói 'Xin nói tôi nghe'. Bởi không có bạn và tôi trong suy nghĩ ấy trong quan sát ấy, trong đặc tính nghe ấy. Quan hệ bạn với người khác thế nào khi không có ngày mai tâm lý? Dù bạn thất vọng, bởi đây là cú sốc, hiểu không? Dù bạn thất vọng hay bỏ hết và nói 'Không biết,' - ném hết. Nhưng nếu bạn đồng ý cùng suy nghĩ và tìm hiểu sự việc tiếp diễn và chấm dứt của hôm nay tâm lý rồi điều gì thực sự xảy ra - thực sự trong nghĩa điều gì đang xảy ra trong quan hệ bạn với người khác? Quan hệ không chỉ là liên hệ vật lý, tình dục và v.v.. mà cả quan hệ tâm lý của lệ thuộc, bám víu dễ chịu, cô đơn, v.v.., điều gì xảy ra? Bạn nói tôi nghe không? Hay việc này quá mới với bạn? Bạn nghe lần đầu tiên và vì vậy không có trả lời ngay. Phải không? Và tại sao không? Bạn theo kịp cả chứ? Không biết bạn kịp không?
51:51	If there is no future, no future, the future to which you are accustomed to, we know very well: the picture, the image, the pleasure, desire for success, spiritual and worldly, the priest wanting to become bishop, bishop wanting to become the cardinal, the cardinal becoming the pope – the whole racket of it, and in the world too, then, if you see that implies constant strife, constant battle, a ruthless sense of me aggressively pushing, pushing, pushing. And so in that aggressive achievement there is security, hoping to have security. And in relationship also – security in another, with all its implications: anxiety, jealousy, displeasure, tears – we know all that very well. But if there is no progressive tomorrows, what is one’s relationship to another, intimate or not? Go on, sirs, find out.	Nếu không có tương lai không tương lai, tương lai bạn quá quen với nó, chúng ta biết rõ: hình, ảnh, thú vui, ước muốn thành công tâm linh hay thế tục, giáo sĩ muốn thành giám mục giám mục muốn thành hồng y, hồng y trở thành giáo hoàng cả sân chơi ấy, và cả thế giới, rồi nếu bạn thấy đó hàm chứa tranh đấu mãi, đánh nhau mãi cảm giác tàn nhẫn của cái tôi hung hăng xô đẩy mãi. Và trong cái đạt được hung hãn ấy có an toàn hy vọng có an toàn. Và trong quan hệ cũng an toàn trong người khác, với cả hàm ý: lo âu, ganh tị, bực mình, nước mắt - chúng ta biết rõ hết. Nhưng nếu không có tiếp tục ngày mai quan hệ bạn với người khác, thân hay sơ, là gì? Tiếp tục, tìm xem.
54:34	You see, if you have understood the quality of thinking together, thinking together, not about something, but thinking together, you and I, then where does that thinking together lead in my relationship to another? You are following? The other doesn’t know anything about all this, suppose. The other is attached, and all the rest of it, what is your relationship to the other if there is this quality of thinking which is absolutely together, this is not divisive? Do you want me to tell you?	Bạn thấy nếu bạn hiểu đặc tính của cùng suy nghĩ, cùng suy nghĩ, không về điều gì, mà cùng suy nghĩ, bạn và tôi rồi trong quan hệ với ai khác, cùng suy nghĩ ấy đưa đến đâu? Theo kịp không? Giả sử người khác không biết gì hết. Người khác bám víu, và v.v.., quan hệ bạn với ai khác nếu có đặc tính suy nghĩ tuyệt đối cùng nhau, không phân chia, là gì? Bạn có muốn tôi nói cho nghe?
55:55	Questioner: No, sir. K: Quite right, sir. When you said, ‘No, sir’, then we are together.	Q: Không. Krishnamurti: Đúng thế. Khi bạn nói 'Không', là chúng ta cùng nhau.
56:11	Q: Not quite, sir. K: You see, that is our difficulty. You want to think together with me, and I can’t let go my ambition, my vanity, my prejudice. I can’t let go because you say, ‘Look, let’s think together, so that we have this quality, this spirit of actual co-operation in thinking’. And I can’t, because I am attached to my thinking, to my memories, to my experience, to my accumulated knowledge. So it is I who have created the division, not you. You understand? You understand this? Are you doing that? Because if you are thinking having that spirit, then if there is no tomorrow, what? You are missing the whole thing, come on, sir!	Q: Không vậy đâu. K: (Cười) Bạn xem, đó là khó khăn. Bạn muốn cùng suy nghĩ với tôi và tôi không thể bỏ tham vọng, kiêu ngạo, định kiến. Tôi không thể bỏ bởi tôi nói, 'Nào, hãy cùng suy nghĩ để mình có đặc tính này, tinh thần hợp tác thực khi suy nghĩ'. Và tôi không thể, bởi tôi bám suy nghĩ tôi ký ức tôi, kinh nghiệm, kiến thức tích luỹ của tôi. Vậy chính tôi tạo ra phân chia, không phải bạn. Hiểu không? Bạn hiểu không? Bạn đang làm chứ? Bởi nếu bạn suy nghĩ với tinh thần ấy, rồi nếu không có ngày mai, thì sao? Bạn trượt mất vấn đề, tiếp đi!
57:43	This is exactly what is going on between you and the speaker. The speaker says, ‘I have no personal problems’, which is a fact. ‘I have no belief’, which is a fact. ‘I have no experience’. I have had a great many but I don’t carry them, they have gone. I am not entrenched in my particular opinion, prejudice, evaluations. Right? Which is a fact. I would be a hypocrite if I said something else. So I say let’s think together and see the beauty of thinking together. And you say, ‘How can I let go my knowledge, my experience, I can’t, I love them’. ‘This is my life’. So you create a division in the world – German, national – you follow? Both outwardly and inwardly. And where there is division, there must be conflict, that is a law: the Catholic, the Protestant, the Communist, the Totalitarian. So the speaker says, ‘Please, my friend, let’s think together’. You understand, sir, what has happened? When we think together, you have lost all your personality. Ah, you don’t see it. You follow? You are no longer Mr. Smith and Mr. K. Oh, come on, sirs! What time is it, sir?	Chính xác đó là điều xảy ra giữa (cười) bạn và người nói. Người nói nói, 'Tôi không có vấn đề riêng', đó là thực tế. 'Tôi không có niềm tin', là thực tế. 'Tôi không có kinh nghiệm.' Tôi có rất nhiều nhưng không mang theo, chúng đi hết rồi. Tôi không bám vào quan điểm, định kiến, đánh giá riêng. Phải không? Đó là thực tế. Nếu nói khác vậy thì tôi là đạo đức giả. Nên nói hãy cùng suy nghĩ và nhìn vẻ đẹp của cùng suy nghĩ. Và bạn nói, 'làm sao có thể bỏ kiến thức, kinh nghiệm, không thể, tôi yêu chúng.' 'Đó là đời tôi.' Vậy nên bạn phân chia thế giới - Đức, quốc gia, kịp không? Cả bên trong lẫn bên ngoài. Và nơi đâu có phân chia tất phải có xung đột, đó là luật: Thiên chúa, Tin lành, Cộng sản, Độc tài. Nên người nói nói, 'Này bạn, hãy cùng suy nghĩ'. Hiểu không, điều gì xảy ra? Khi chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ bạn mất cá tính. À, bạn không thấy thế. Kịp không? Bạn không còn là Ông Smith hay K. Ồ, tiếp đi! Mấy giờ rồi?
1:00:41	This is the purpose of these talks and dialogues that we together dissolve all our problems because the self-centred problem is greater than the problems of the world – political, energy, various countries divided, that is nothing compared to this. Because once you have resolved this, you are master of the world. You understand? Master. Don’t go off into some...	Mục đích của các buổi nói và trò chuyện là chúng ta cùng giải quyết vấn đề mình bởi vấn đề vị ngã còn lớn hơn vấn đề thế giới - chính trị, năng lượng, nhiều xứ bị phân chia, không gì so được với việc này. Bởi một lần giải quyết nó bạn là chủ thế giới. Hiểu không? Chủ. Đừng lảng sang gì khác...(Cười)
1:01:48	I think that is enough for this morning, isn’t it?	Tôi nghĩ sáng nay thế là đủ, phải không?
1:01:52	Basta? Bene.	Được chứ? Tốt.