Krishnamurti - Chúng ta có thể cùng nhau tạo ra xã hội tốt?

Krishnamurti Subtitles

SA79T2 - Chúng ta có thể cùng nhau tạo ra xã hội tốt?
Buổi nói chuyện thứ nhì
Saanen, Thuỵ sĩ
10 tháng Bảy 1979

0:57	Krishnamurti: May we continue with what we were talking about on Sunday morning? Will that be all right?	Có thể tiếp những gì chúng ta nói sáng chủ nhật không? Được chứ?
1:17	I wonder if you have thought any more about what we were talking on Sunday morning. Whether you have gone into it deeply by yourselves and have come to a certain point, beyond perhaps which you may not be able to go, and if so, we could go into it much further. What we were saying on Sunday morning was that we must have the capacity to think together. The capacity comes naturally and inevitably if one sees the importance and the necessity, in a corrupting world, that to think together does not imply agreement or disagreement, but putting aside one’s own particular point of view, one’s own particular prejudice, opinion, judgement, and having the capacity thus to think together. Because when we think together, there is no division, you are not thinking separately from the speaker. Sorry, I’ve got slight hay fever. Don’t give me medicines. If we are able to think together, the division between you and another comes to an end. There is only thinking, not your way of thinking or another way of thinking, just the capacity to think together. But that is not possible if you don’t put aside your own particular conclusions, your own vanity, your own personal demands, otherwise there is no coming together.	Tôi tự hỏi bạn có nghĩ thêm về điều đã nói hôm sáng chủ nhật. Bạn có tự tìm hiểu sâu sắc chăng và đến vấn đề nào đó, có thể vượt qua, hay không thể vượt qua, và nếu vậy chúng ta có thể tìm hiểu thêm. Những gì nói sáng chủ nhật là chúng ta phải có khả năng cùng suy nghĩ. Khả năng đến tự nhiên và dĩ nhiên nếu bạn thấy quan trọng và cần thiết trong thế giới hư hỏng, cùng suy nghĩ không nghĩa là đồng ý hay không, mà là dẹp hết quan điểm riêng của bạn, định kiến riêng quan niệm, phán đoán và thế là có khả năng cùng suy nghĩ. Bởi khi chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ thì không phân chia bạn không suy nghĩ tách rời với người nói. Xin lỗi tôi có hơi sốt. Đừng cho thuốc. Nếu có thể cùng suy nghĩ phân chia giữa bạn và người khác chấm dứt. Chỉ có suy nghĩ, không phải lối suy nghĩ bạn hay lối suy nghĩ ai đó, chỉ là khả năng cùng suy nghĩ. Nhưng không thể nếu bạn không dẹp hết kết luận riêng, tự cao yêu cầu riêng, ngược lại thì không cùng đến.
4:46	The word ‘together’ means walking together, being together all the time, not you walk ahead and the other walks behind, but walking together means we are both going along the same way, not thinking different things, observing the same thing, not translating what you observed in your own particular inclination or prejudice, but observing together, listening together, walking together.	Chữ 'cùng nhau' nghĩa là cùng đi, luôn luôn cùng nhau không phải bạn đi trước và ai đó đi sau, mà cùng đi tức là chúng ta cùng đi chung đường không nghĩ điều khác nhau, quan sát cùng một việc không diễn dịch điều bạn quan sát theo khuynh hướng riêng hay định kiến riêng, mà cùng quan sát, cùng nghe, cùng đi.
5:31	I wonder if you realise – when that takes place, what happens between two human beings? There is great demand, a great urge in this present permissive society that each one of us must fulfil, sexually, emotionally, and so on – the desire to fulfil. And with it goes naturally the whole problem of frustration. Please, listen carefully to what I am pointing out. Don’t accept or deny what we are talking about, but we are thinking together, and I mean thinking together.	Không biết bạn có hiểu khi việc đó xảy ra điều gì xảy ra giữa hai người? Có yêu cầu lớn lao khẩn thiết trong xã hội buông thả hiện nay mà mỗi người cần thoả mãn, tình dục, cảm xúc, v.v.. - muốn thoả mãn. Và dĩ nhiên đi cùng với nó là cả vấn đề thất vọng. Xin hãy nghe kỹ điều tôi nói ra. Đừng chấp nhận hay từ chối điều chúng ta nói nhưng chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ, và tôi nói cùng suy nghĩ.
6:33	When one is seeking fulfilment in another or desiring to be and become and therefore act, which is a form of fulfilment, then in that movement there is frustration, all kinds of neurotic ideas, neurosis, and so on, so on. But when we think together, that is, you have dropped your particular opinion, judgement, and so on, and the other has also dropped his, there is no division and therefore there is no sense of fulfilment – I wonder if you get this – and therefore no sense of frustration. Please, this is not a verbal conclusion, an idealistic concept, something to be achieved, but the realisation of the actual fact that as long as we are not thinking together about everything – politics, religion, economics, personal relationships, and so on – thinking together, there must be division, and out of that division there arises the desire to fulfil, and inevitable sequence of that is frustration with all its neurosis and all the inevitable reactions. When we think together, all that comes to an end. I wonder if you are following this.	Khi bạn tìm kiếm thoả mãn nơi kẻ khác hay muốn là gì hay thành gì và rồi hành động, là kiểu thoả mãn rồi trong chuyển động ấy có thất vọng mọi thứ ý niệm điên rồ, loạn thần kinh, v.v.. Nhưng khi cùng suy nghĩ, tức là bạn bỏ quan niệm, phán đoán riêng, v.v.. và người khác cũng bỏ không có phân chia và vì vậy không có cảm giác thoả mãn không biết bạn hiểu không - và vì vậy không thấy bất mãn. Đây không phải lời kết luận, quan niệm ý hệ điều gì để đạt, nhưng nhận thức về sự kiện thực là hễ chúng ta không cùng suy nghĩ về mọi thứ chính trị, tôn giáo, kinh tế, quan hệ cá nhân, v.v.. cùng suy nghĩ, phải có phân chia, và do phân chia ấy khởi lên ước muốn thoả mãn và hậu quả tất yếu là chán nãn với mọi điên rồ và phản ứng không tránh khỏi. Khi cùng suy nghĩ mọi cái đó chấm dứt. Không rõ bạn theo kịp không.
8:54	If one may ask, you have, perhaps some of you, listened to Sunday morning’s talk and have you inwardly dropped your personal opinion, your conclusion, your experience? Or you hold on to them, consciously or unconsciously, and make an effort to think together? And of course, that is rather childish, which only maintains a certain verbal communication, but in actuality there is division and therefore there is conflict. When we think together, conflict comes to an end. I wonder if you see this? Please, you must get this. Because we human beings for millennia upon millennia have lived with conflict – struggle, strife of various kinds: physical, psychological, emotional, exploiting each other – the whole human relationship is based on that. And in thinking together, relationship undergoes a fundamental change, because there is no division. If you are ambitious and another is not ambitious, there is division. If you believe in God or in Jesus or Krishna, whatever it is, and the other doesn’t, there is division and therefore there is conflict. You may tolerate each other, that is what is happening now, but division exists – nationalism, and so on. So if we could during these talks, – I don’t know how many of them, I believe ten or so – if we could, a group of us, all of us if we can, at least a few of us, apply our minds to find out if we can absolutely think together. Therefore when we do that, the relationship between us completely undergoes a change. Right? I wonder if you see this?	Xin được hỏi, bạn, vài bạn nghe nói chuyện hôm sáng chủ nhật và bên trong có bỏ quan niệm riêng, kết luận, kinh nghiệm? Hay bạn ôm nó theo, ý thức hoặc không và cố gắng cùng suy nghĩ? Và dĩ nhiên vậy là khá trẻ con, chỉ giữ ở mức độ truyền thông, nhưng thực tế có phân chia và vì vậy có xung đột. Khi chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ xung đột chấm dứt. Không rõ bạn có thấy vậy? Bạn phải hiểu điều này. Bởi con người chúng ta qua bao thiên niên kỷ đã sống trong xung đột - đấu tranh giành giựt mọi thứ vật lý, tâm lý, cảm xúc, lợi dụng nhau quan hệ toàn nhân loại dựa trên đó. Và khi cùng suy nghĩ quan hệ trải qua thay đổi cơ bản bởi không còn phân chia. Nếu bạn tham vọng và ai khác thì không, là có phân chia. Nếu bạn tin Thượng đế hay Giê su hay Krishna, hay gì gì và người khác thì không tức có phân chia nên có xung đột. Bạn có thể tha thứ nhau, việc đó đang xảy ra nhưng phân chia còn đó - yêu nước, v.v.. Vậy nếu có thể qua các buổi nói chuyện không biết bao nhiêu, chắc là mười - nếu có thể nhóm mình, hay cả chúng ta nếu được, ít ra vài người để tâm tìm xem chúng ta có thể tuyệt đối cùng suy nghĩ. Bởi vì khi chúng ta làm vậy quan hệ giữa chúng ta hoàn toàn thay đổi. Phải không? Bạn thấy vậy không?
12:09	And also we were saying on Sunday, psychologically thought has accepted the progressive evolutionary process, and therefore it is always trying to become something, or be something. And we talked about time, if there is – please listen, play with it – if there is psychological time at all tomorrow, if there is psychologically the future. If there is not, then what is the relationship between two human beings who have no future? You understand? You are following my question? Not my question, it is your question. You may not have put it to yourself, but it is being put forward. So you have to look at it.	Và cũng đã nói hôm chủ nhật, về tâm lý suy nghĩ chấp nhận tiến trình tiến hoá liên tục, và vì vậy nó luôn cố gắng trở thành gì đó, là gì đó... Và đã nói về thời gian, nếu có - nghe nhé, chơi với nó xem có thời gian tâm lý ngày mai xem có tương lai tâm lý. Nếu không có thì quan hệ là gì đây giữa hai con người không có tương lai? Bạn hiểu không? Theo kịp câu hỏi không? Không phải tôi hỏi, là bạn. Bạn có thể không tự hỏi mình nhưng nó được đặt tiếp. Nên bạn phải nhìn nó.
13:39	We have, throughout the centuries, religiously, politically, and in different ways, have accepted this idea of gradualness. Right? That is obvious. Gradually I will become perfect, gradually I will be less this and more that. In this gradational conclusion and evolution, measurement has become important. Naturally. You follow all this? That is, measurement – what one was, what one is and what one will be – which is a measurement. Measurement is time, and we are questioning, questioning together, if there is psychological time at all. There is chronological time, obviously, because we are going to meet if you want to, the day after tomorrow morning – that is obvious. If you want to go and play golf or go to the cinema or whatever it is, there is the day after tomorrow. But psychologically, inwardly, is there time? Or thought has invented time, psychologically, because it is too lazy, indolent and also because it doesn’t know how to deal with what is actually happening. Therefore it says: give me time. One does not know how to be free of envy, but I’ll think about it, I’ll work at it and gradually get rid of it – if you want. But if you like to keep it, that’s all right.	Chúng ta, qua bao thế kỷ, về tôn giáo, chính trị và nhiều lối khác, đã chấp nhận ý niệm tiến dần. Phải không? Dĩ nhiên thôi. Tôi sẽ hoàn hảo dần, từ từ tôi sẽ giảm cái này tăng cái nọ. Trong kết luận tiến dần ấy và đo lường tiến hoá trở thành quan trọng. Tự nhiên thôi. Kịp không? Đó là đo lường bạn đã là gì, đang là gì, sẽ là gì - là đo lường. Đo lường là thời gian và chúng ta hỏi cùng hỏi, có chăng thời gian tâm lý. Dĩ nhiên có thời gian niên đại, vì chúng ta sẽ gặp nhau nếu bạn muốn, vào sáng mốt, dĩ nhiên thôi. Nếu bạn muốn đi chơi gôn hay xem phim hay gì gì, có ngày mốt. Nhưng bên trong, tâm lý, có thời gian chăng? Hay suy nghĩ tạo ra thời gian tâm lý bởi nó quá lười biếng, và cũng bởi không biết làm sao xử sự với việc đang xảy ra. Nên nó nói cho tôi thời gian. Không biết làm sao thoát ganh tị, nhưng tôi nghĩ về nó tôi sẽ khắc phục và bỏ dần dần - nếu bạn muốn. Nhưng nếu bạn thích giữ lại cũng tốt.
16:09	So this has been our conditioning. Right? You are following this? Not verbally, please, watch it in your own self. This has been your conditioning, and somebody comes along like the speaker and says, ‘Is this so?’ You have accepted it, this has been the tradition, educated tradition, not a superstition, because all people have – scientists and others have talked about the ascent of man through accumulation of knowledge, which is time, and so on – you have accepted it. And the speaker comes along and says, ‘Look, you may be all wrong, question it’. So he says, perhaps there is no psychologically tomorrow. You understand it? No, see the importance of this question. What happens to you if you put that question very seriously, not as an idea, but as an actuality? Actuality means that which is happening now. Right? If you put that question to yourself, then what is the quality of the mind that does not think of tomorrow psychologically? You follow? You have got my question? Right? What happens if there is no future psychologically – there is a future: you have to go and have your lunch, you have to sleep, you have to do this and that – but psychologically, if there is no future, what is your relationship with another? You have got this? You have understood this? Have you solved this question which was put forward yesterday? What is your relationship with your wife or girlfriend, or with your... etc., if there is no tomorrow? If you have tomorrow, psychologically, then you create the image, you pursue that image about her or him, you have the memory cultivated in relation to that person, and you act according to that memory, to that experience. You pursue that. Right? So, when there is psychologically a future, then it becomes mechanistic. You follow what I mean by mechanistic – routine, repetition, acting on remembrance. Now, if there is no psychologically tomorrow, what has taken place in your relationship? In your relationship, not as an idea, in your actual relationship to your wife, to your husband, to your friend, to your boy, to your girl, what actually takes place? You understand this? Are you interested in this? Which means you have not only investigated the concept, the conditioning of psychological future and have understood the whole significance of it, rationally, sanely, logically, and said, ‘That may not be’. So you have hesitantly moved away from your conditioning. And when you put this question, your mind is free to observe, is no longer tethered to your conditioning that there is a future. You have got it? What is your relationship to another when tomorrow psychologically is not there?	Nên đó là qui định của chúng ta. Phải không? Theo kịp không? Đừng nói, hãy xem trong chính bạn. Nó là qui định của bạn và ai đó như người nói đây, đến và nói, 'Là nó sao?' Bạn chấp nhận, đó là truyền thống, truyền thống giáo dục không phải mê tín, bởi mọi người - nhà khoa học, v.v.. đã nói về tiến lên của con người qua tích luỹ kiến thức là thời gian, v.v.. - bạn chấp nhận nó. Và người nói đến và nói 'Này, bạn có thể sai hết, coi lại đi'. Nên hắn nói có thể không có ngày mai tâm lý. Hiểu không? Không, nhìn sự quan trọng của vấn đề. Điều gì xảy ra nếu bạn đặt vấn đề thật nghiêm túc không ý niệm mà là thực tế? Thực tế tức là việc đang xảy ra. Phải không? Nếu bạn tự đặt câu hỏi ấy rồi thì đặc tính tâm trí là gì khi không nghĩ về ngày mai tâm lý? Kịp không? Bạn hiểu câu hỏi không? Phải không? Điều gì xảy ra nếu không có tương lai tâm lý - có tương lai: bạn phải đi ăn trưa, bạn phải đi ngủ bạn phải làm này nọ - nhưng về tâm lý nếu không có tương lai, quan hệ bạn với ai khác là gì? Bạn hiểu không? Bạn hiểu điều này không? Bạn đã giải quyết vấn đề được đưa đến từ hôm qua chưa? Quan hệ bạn với vợ, hay bạn gái, hay ai khác, thế nào nếu không có ngày mai? Nếu có tương lai, về tâm lý, bạn liền tạo ra hình ảnh bạn theo đuổi hình ảnh về người đó bạn có ký ức được vun đắp trong quan hệ với người đó và bạn hành động theo ký ức ấy, kinh nghiệm ấy. Bạn theo đuổi nó. Phải không? Vậy, khi có tương lai tâm lý nó liền trở thành máy móc. Bạn theo kịp tôi nói về máy móc lối mòn, lặp lại, hành động theo ghi nhớ. Hiện giờ nếu không có ngày mai tâm lý điều gì xảy ra trong quan hệ bạn? Quan hệ bạn, không phải ý niệm quan hệ thực với vợ hay chồng với bạn bè, bạn trai hay gái, điều gì thực sự xảy ra? Bạn hiểu không? Bạn có thích việc này? Nghĩa là bạn không chỉ tìm hiểu quan niệm qui định của tương lai tâm lý và thấu hiểu toàn bộ ý nghĩa của nó, hợp lý tỉnh táo, phải lẽ và nói, 'Không thể thế'. Vậy bạn chần chừ rời bỏ qui định. Và khi bạn đặt câu hỏi ấy, trí óc tự do để quan sát không còn dính vào qui định rằng có tương lai. Bạn hiểu không? Quan hệ bạn với ai khác thế nào khi ngày mai tâm lý không có?
21:58	Perhaps we could approach – I don’t want to answer this question, we’ll find out for ourselves as we go along. I know you are waiting for me to answer it, which would be – there is no point, it would become verbal, rather silly. But if you could pursue that thing in a different direction, perhaps we will catch the inward significance and the beauty and the truth of it.	Chúng ta có thể tiếp cận - tôi không muốn trả lời câu hỏi chúng ta sẽ tìm ra cho chính mình khi cùng đi. Tôi biết bạn đợi tôi trả lời, có thể là, không mấu chốt, thành ra lời nói, khá ngốc nghếch. Nhưng nếu theo đuổi điều ấy trong hướng khác, có lẽ chúng ta sẽ nắm ý nghĩa bên trong, vẻ đẹp và sự thật.
22:42	The ancient Hindus and the Greeks formulated a concept of a good society. Don’t get bored with this. They said a good society is this, this, this. The Greeks said a good society is justice, and so on, so on. The ancient Hindus said a good society is only possible if there are a group of people who have renounced the world – please, careful, I am not asking you to do it, anything, I am pointing out – who do not own property, who are outside society, and being outside society, they are responsible to the activities of the society. You follow? Not that they withdraw, but being outside society, they are morally incorruptible, because they didn’t own property of any kind. And they were morally, ethically, religiously clear. They would not kill, and so on, so on. And for a certain time, probably, that existed. Then it, like everything else, it degenerated into what the world knows as a Brahmin.	Người Hinđu cổ và Hy lạp đưa ra quan niệm về xã hội tốt. Đừng chán nản việc này. Họ nói xã hội tốt là thế này, nọ. Hy lạp nói xã hội tốt là công bằng, v.v.. Hinđu cổ nói xã hội tốt chỉ có thể nếu có một nhóm người từ bỏ thế gian - nào cẩn thận, tôi không yêu cầu bạn làm gì hết, tôi chỉ ra kẻ không có của cải, kẻ ở ngoài xã hội, và ở ngoài xã hội họ trách nhiệm với hoạt động xã hội. Kịp không? Không phải họ ở ẩn, nhưng ở ngoài xã hội họ không hư hỏng đạo đức, bởi họ không sở hữu gì hết. Và họ đạo đức, luân lý, tôn giáo rõ ràng. Họ không giết chóc, v.v.. Và thời điểm nào đó, có lẽ, việc đó hiện hữu. Rồi thì, như mọi việc khác nó thoái hóa như thế giới biết về Bà la môn.
25:23	The Greeks had the same idea: that a good society must exist in the world. And it was an idealistic, formulated, ideological society. Ideas – you understand? – ideals, and according to them, they formulated very carefully, the Aristotelian, and so on, society, but never existed.	Hy lạp có cùng ý niệm: là xã hội tốt phải có trên thế gian. Và đó là một xã hội ý niệm, định hình, ý hệ. Ý niệm - hiểu không? - lý tưởng, và theo đó họ vẽ mẫu rất kỹ, xã hội kiểu Aristote, v.v.., nhưng không bao giờ có.
26:11	Now we are saying – please, listen – can we bring about a good society, not ideologically, not as a utopia, as something to be done, achieved, but a society, which means a relationship between two people is society. You are following all this? Can we as a group create such a good society? Now wait a minute. The Greeks formulated, the Hindus formulated and probably the Chinese, but we are not formulating anything. We are not saying the ideal – society must be this, this, this. We are not saying that because that becomes a utopia, an ideal to be pursued – you are following all this? – something to be done. We are talking about a good society which can only come into being when you as a human being, representative of all mankind – I’m coming to that, hold on to it – are responsible to another human being. When we say you are the whole of mankind, psychologically you are. Right? You may have a different shape of head, lighter skin or darker skin, better food – therefore you are taller, in a temperate climate, your name may be different, but psychologically we live at the same level – sorrow, pain, anxiety, frustration, a sense of hopeless loneliness, great sorrow. You follow? This exists right through the world. This is a fact, it is not an idea which you accept. If you go to India, you see the same phenomena there as here. They are darker people, over-populated, poverty, but psychologically they are anxious, insecure, confused, miserable, worship something which they imagine, just like here. So there is great similarity. And psychologically it is the same movement, varied, modified, but the source of this movement is the same for all mankind – right? You see this? Not as an idea but as an actuality, that is, what is happening. Right? So you are the rest of mankind. If you see that, you won’t give such tremendous importance to yourself, your personal anxieties, your personal fulfilment, you know, all the self-centred egotistic problems, because you are like everybody else. But you have to solve it. Right?	Chúng ta đang nói - nghe nhé - có thể tạo ra xã hội tốt không ý hệ, không ảo tưởng, như điều gì phải được làm mà là xã hội, nghĩa là quan hệ giữa hai người là xã hội. Bạn theo kịp không? Có thể tạo một nhóm như xã hội tốt? Nào, đợi chút. Hy lạp vẽ khuôn, Hinđu vẽ khuôn và có lẽ Trung hoa nhưng chúng ta không vẽ vời gì cả. Chúng ta không nói lý tưởng - xã hội phải thế này thế nọ. Chúng ta không nói thế bởi sẽ thành ảo tưởng, lý tưởng để theo - bạn theo kịp không? - điều phải được làm. Chúng ta nói về xã hội tốt chỉ có thể hiện hữu khi bạn là con người, đại diện cho cả nhân loại - Tôi đến đó, giữ nó - có trách nhiệm với ngươì khác. Khi nói bạn là cả nhân loại, là về tâm lý. Phải không? Bạn có thế có kiểu đầu khác nhau, da sáng hoặc sậm hơn thức ăn tốt hơn nên bạn cao hơn, khí hậu điều hoà tên họ khác nhau nhưng tâm lý sống ở cùng mức độ - khổ sở, đớn đau lo âu, chán nản, cảm giác cô đơn vô vọng, quá khổ sở. Theo kịp không? Việc này hiện diện khắp thế giới. Là sự kiện, không phải ý niệm cho bạn chấp nhận. Nếu đến Ấn độ bạn sẽ thấy hiện tượng giống ở đây. Họ là dân da sậm, quá đông đúc nghèo, nhưng tâm lý họ lo âu, bất an, rối loạn khổ sở, tôn thờ điều gì họ tưởng tượng ra, như ở đây. Nên tính giống nhau rất lớn. Và tâm lý là cùng chuyển động, biến đổi, cải sửa nhưng gốc chuyển động cả nhân loại như nhau - phải không? Bạn thấy không? Không phải ý niệm mà thực tế, việc đó đang xảy ra. Phải không? Nên bạn là cả nhân loại. Nếu thấy thế bạn sẽ không cho mình là quá quan trọng cả lo âu riêng, thoả mãn riêng, bạn biết tất cả vấn đề vị ngã, vị kỹ, bởi bạn giống như mọi người. Nhưng bạn phải giải quyết. Phải không?
30:59	So, we are saying – I am getting rather tired, are you? – we are saying a good society can come into being immediately, not something to be achieved in the future. That good society can come into being only when we think together, which means no division between you and another. Then our whole conduct changes. Right, do you see that? Then one does not exploit the other, either sexually or in various psychological subtle ways. Right? At least verbally follow this. But verbally means nothing, like following empty air, holding empty ashes in your empty hand.	Nên chúng ta nói - tôi khá mệt, còn bạn? chúng ta nói xã hội tốt có thể hiện hữu tức thì không phải điều sẽ đạt trong tương lai. Xã hội tốt ấy chỉ hiện hữu khi chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ tức là không phân chia giữa bạn và người khác. Rồi thì toàn bộ tư cách chúng ta thay đổi. Phải, bạn có thấy vậy? Rồi thì không lợi dụng kẻ khác, cả tình dục hay những kiểu cách tâm lý tinh tế khác. Phải không? Ít ra hãy theo dõi lời này. Nhưng lời thì vô nghĩa như theo không khí, giữ nắm tro không trong nắm tay không.
32:31	So, we are saying a good society, which must exist in this terrible world, in this murderous world, immoral society, if a group of us can think together, therefore I asked: what is the relationship of you to another if there is no psychological future? You see, you understand what has happened? Do you… What has happened to a mind – please, listen – what has happened to a mind that has been accustomed, trained, educated, conditioned to accept the whole pattern of a life which is based on the future? That has been your way of life. In that is involved the constant effort to become, to achieve – competition, comparison, imitation, the struggle. If intelligently you don’t accept that way of living, which means that you do not accept in your relationship with another future, then what takes place in your mind, what has happened to your mind?	Vậy, xã hội tốt, phải có trong thế giới khủng khiếp này trong thế giới giết chóc, xã hội vô đạo đức, xem nhóm chúng ta có thể cùng suy nghĩ, nên tôi hỏi: quan hệ bạn với kẻ khác là gì nếu không có tương lai tâm lý? Bạn thấy, hiểu việc đã xảy ra không? Bạn... Điều gì đã xảy ra với trí óc - nghe nhé - việc gì xảy ra với trí óc đã quen, được tập luyện, dạy, qui định để chấp nhận toàn bộ khuôn cuộc sống dựa vào tương lai? Đó là cách bạn sống. Trong đó dính cả nổ lực triền miên để trở thành để đạt, hơn thua, so sánh, bắt chước - tranh đấu. Nếu khôn ngoan bạn không chấp nhận lối sống ấy nghĩa là bạn không chấp nhận tương lai trong quan hệ với người khác, rồi điều gì xảy ra trong trí bạn, cho trí bạn?
35:09	This is an important question if you can solve it for yourself – not solve it. If your mind has that quality that is not acting – please, listen – from an ideological point of view, having an ideal and acting according to that ideal, which means division therefore no ideals whatever, and therefore no attempt to achieve something other than understand what is actually happening. Have you understood this? Are you all asleep?	Đây là vấn đề quan trọng xem có thể giải quyết cho chính bạn - không giải quyết. Nếu trí óc bạn có đặc tính không hành động - nghe nhé - theo quan điểm ý hệ, có lý tưởng và hành động theo lý tưởng nghĩa là phân chia nên không lý tưởng gì cả, và vì vậy không cố gắng đạt điều gì ngoài việc thấu hiểu việc đang xảy ra. Bạn hiểu không? Bạn ngủ cả à?
36:36	Q: No.	Q:Không ạ.
36:46	K: You come and tell me that there is no tomorrow. I listen very carefully to what you say because perhaps you have something, a way of living in which there is no conflict. You come and tell me that. First, I ask myself: am I listening to you? Am I actually absorbing what you are saying? Or am I translating what you’re saying into an idea and accepting the idea – follow it carefully! – and rejecting or accepting that idea and then say – how am I to live according to that idea? You follow? That is what you are all doing. Whereas the man says: don’t do that, but just listen. Listen to the fact that you have lived this way, see all the consequences of living that way, what are the implications, logically, step by step. You have lived that way and therefore you have become, your mind has become completely mechanistic – routine, repeat, repetition, following. If you see that very carefully, he says to me, find out for yourself what happens if you do not think in terms of the future. What happens to you in your relationship with another? With the other is equally thinking with you. You understand? He also says, ‘Yes, I see that’. So let both of us think together. I drop my opinions, drop my prejudices, so on, so we are together thinking. Do you follow? Then what happens? Because we have… all of us want, desire, long for a good society where we don’t hurt each other, kill each other, maim each other, go to war against each other, live in perpetual insecurity, frightened. We all want a society of a different kind. Some have said – please, listen – some have said you can have such a good society if you alter the circumstances, the environment. The Communists, the Socialists, all the rest of the world, says change all that through law, democratically if you can, if you cannot – totalitarian – suppress, conform, force, but change the environment. They have tried it in ten different ways – that has never happened. Man has not changed. Either as a Christian human being, or a Hindu, he has not changed radically. Why? Is it an economic reason? Is it a matter of belief? You believe in Jesus, another doesn’t. Why? Why has there been in the world thousands and thousands of years this constant division? The Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Persians, you know, the whole division – why? Is it because no two human beings have ever found out how to think together? You understand my point? You and I can’t think together. I want to. The speaker says, ‘For god’s sake, let’s think together because we will create a different world altogether’. But you say, ‘Sorry, I want my opinions, I like my opinions, I cannot let go my experiences, my pleasures’. So it keeps that division going.	K:Bạn đến và nói với tôi không có ngày mai. Tôi nghe rất kỹ lời bạn bởi lẽ bạn có gì đó một lối sống không có xung đột. Bạn đến và nói như thế. Trước hết tôi hỏi: tôi có nghe bạn không? Tôi có thực hòa tan vào lời bạn không? Hay diễn dịch lời bạn thành ý niệm và chấp nhận ý niệm theo dõi kỹ nhé - và chống hoặc theo ý niệm ấy rồi nói làm sao tôi sống theo ý niệm ấy? Kịp không? Tất cả bạn đều làm vậy. Trái lại anh kia nói đừng làm thế, chỉ nghe thôi. Nghe sự kiện rằng bạn sống lối ấy, thấy mọi hậu quả của lối sống ấy, mọi ẩn chứa, hợp lý, từng bước. Bạn đã sống lối ấy và vì thế bạn trở thành, trí bạn thành máy móc - lối mòn, lặp đi lặp lại, chạy theo. Nếu bạn thấy kỹ càng, hắn nói với tôi, tìm cho bạn xem điều gì xảy ra nếu bạn không nghĩ bằng tương lai. Điều gì xảy ra cho bạn trong quan hệ với ai khác? Với ai khác cũng suy nghĩ như bạn. Hiểu không? Hắn cũng nói, 'Vâng, tôi hiểu.' Vậy hãy cùng suy nghĩ. Tôi bỏ quan điểm, bỏ định kiến, v.v.., vậy chúng ta cùng nghĩ. Theo kịp không? Rồi việc gì xảy ra? Bởi chúng ta... thảy đều muốn, ước ao một xã hội tốt nơi không ai tổn thương nhau, giết nhau, hại nhau gây chiến nhau, sống trong bất an, lo sợ triền miên. Chúng ta muốn một xã hội kiểu khác. Vài người nói - nghe nhé - vài người nói có thể có xã hội như vậy nếu bạn sửa đổi hoàn cảnh, môi trường. Cộng sản, Xã hội, cả thế giới, nói thay đổi mọi cái đó nhờ luật pháp, dân chủ nếu có thể, nếu không thể độc tài - loại bỏ, bắt chước, ép, chỉ thay hoàn cảnh. Họ thử mười kiểu khác nhau - nó không bao giờ xảy ra. Con người không thay đổi. Kể cả người Ky tô, Hinđu, hắn không thay đổi tận gốc. Tại sao? Là lý do kinh tế? Là vấn đề niềm tin? Bạn tin Giê su, kẻ khác thì không. Tại sao? Tại sao trên thế giới có hàng ngàn hàng ngàn năm phân chia bất tận? Ai cập, Hy lạp, La mã, Ba tư bạn biết đó, phân chia hết - tại sao? Phải chăng bởi không có hai người tìm xem làm sao cùng nghĩ? Bạn hiểu không? Bạn và tôi không thể cùng nghĩ. Tôi muốn. Người nói nói, 'Lạy trời hãy cùng suy nghĩ bởi chúng ta sẽ tạo ra thế giới hoàn toàn khác. Nhưng bạn nói, 'Xin lỗi, tôi muốn quan điểm tôi thích quan điểm tôi, không thể bỏ kinh nghiệm, thú vui tôi.' Vậy là cứ phân chia.
42:45	Now we are saying: can you put aside all your stupid, you know, worthless things – opinions, experiences; they are dead, gone, finished, and say, ‘Let’s think together’. So our minds, not your mind is different from mine, there is only one mind when we are together – you understand this? – then what is the relationship of that mind to another mind in daily life? Go on, sirs.	Giờ chúng ta hỏi: bạn có thể dẹp hết ngu ngốc, bạn biết thứ vô dụng - quan điểm, kinh nghiệm chúng đã chết, ra đi, chấm hết, và nói, 'Hãy cùng nghĩ.' Nên trí óc, không phải trí óc bạn khác tôi chỉ có một trí óc khi chúng ta cùng nhau - hiểu không? rồi hàng ngày trí óc ấy quan hệ với trí óc khác thế nào? Tiếp tục.
43:35	Q: Is that a rhetorical question, sir? Because if not I would like to reply but I don’t want to interrupt your talk.	Q:Vấn đề nói khéo phải không? Bởi nếu không, tôi muốn đáp nhưng không muốn ngắt lời ngài.
43:49	K: I can’t hear, sir – somebody, have you heard?	K:Không thể nghe - ai đó, bạn nghe không? Q:Hắn nói, phải là vấn đề nói khéo.
43:54	Q: He says, is it a rhetorical question.	K:Không, không phải vấn đề nói khéo.
43:56	K: No, it is not a rhetorical question.	Q:Có thể nói ngài muốn thính giả trả lời chứ
43:59	Q: Can you say you want to get an answer from the audience, not from yourself?	không phải ngài?
44:04	K: That is why I am waiting, sir. Q: I am giving you one now, sir.	K:Vậy nên tôi mới chờ. Q:Tôi đáp ngài một câu.
44:07	K: Oh, no, not one answer.	K:Ồ không, không phải một. Q:Tôi chỉ có thể đáp một câu.
44:09	Q: I can only give you my answer. I can’t answer for anybody else?	Tôi không thể trả lời dùm ai khác...
44:12	K: Ah! Then we are not thinking together. No, no, that is the whole point, sir. Please, forgive me. There is no your point of view and my point of view.	K:À! Vậy chúng ta không cùng suy nghĩ. Không, không, đó không phải mấu chốt. Xin thứ lỗi. Không có quan điểm của bạn hay của tôi.
44:27	Q: I never said point of view, sir.	Q:Tôi không hề nói quan điểm. K:Cách diễn bày là thế.
44:32	K: Your way of expressing it.	Q:Không, tôi chỉ muốn nói là: ngài nói nếu không có
44:35	Q: No, sir, what I wanted to say was just this: you said, if there was no psychological time, what is your relationship with another? My answer to that is: wait till Thursday and I can tell you because right now I cannot tell you. I have quarrelled with my wife for twenty years.	thời gian tâm lý quan hệ bạn với ai khác thế nào? Tôi trả lời là: đợi đến ngày Thứ năm tôi sẽ trả lời bởi ngay bây giờ tôi không thể nói. Tôi gây gỗ với vợ tôi đã hai mươi năm...
44:54	K: So, are you saying, sir, that I cannot tell you about it now. I have done this for twenty years, I cannot tell you now but perhaps later on in the future?	K:Vậy, bạn bảo bạn không thể nói bây giờ. Tôi đã làm thế hai mươi năm không thể nói bây giờ nhưng có lẽ trong tương lai?
45:09	Q: On Thursday, sir. In the past, I have listened to you in the way that is not listening at all. Right now I feel maybe I am on your wavelength, but I need a little bit of time to experiment with this. I cannot give you the answer immediately and tell you what is my relationship with another when I have not had the opportunity to observe what is happening in daily life. Sitting here... K: That is what I am saying, sir. Yes, sir, I have understood your question. I haven’t had the opportunity to put this question to myself, I must have time and then I will answer you. I say you are off. I say you are then not meeting. I love you. And what happens to such a mind that says, I have no division? Now, not I will think it over, I will work at it – then you are...	Q:Vào Thứ năm. Trước kia tôi đã từng nghe ngài với cách không nghe gì cả. Hiện tôi thấy có lẽ ở trong làn sóng của ngài nhưng tôi cần ít thời gian để thể nghiệm nó. Tôi không thể trả lời ngài ngay và nói với ngài quan hệ tôi với ai khác là gì khi tôi không có cơ hội quan sát việc xảy ra hàng ngày. Ngồi đây... K:Tôi đang nói điều đó. Vâng, tôi hiểu vấn đề. Tôi không có cơ hội đặt câu hỏi với chính mình tôi phải có thời gian rồi sẽ trả lời ngài. Tôi nói bạn đi rồi. Tôi nói bạn sẽ không gặp. Tôi yêu mến bạn. Và điều gì xảy ra với trí óc nói, tôi không phân chia? Bây giờ, không phải tôi sẽ nghĩ lại, sẽ làm - rồi ngài... Q:Nó mở mà. K:Không, bạn không hiểu mấu chốt.
46:19	Q: It’s open.	Q:Ngài không thể hiểu điều gì xảy ra.
46:24	K: No, you are not meeting my point, sir.	K:Chị giải thích ư?
46:27	Q: Well, you cannot possibly know what happens.	Q:Tôi nghĩ nếu cùng nghĩ ngài không thể biết việc xảy ra.
46:30	K: Comment, madame?	K:Bạn có biết quan hệ bạn với ai khác thế nào?
46:31	Q: I think, if you are thinking together, you can’t know what happens.	Q:Không.
46:41	K: Do you know what your relationship is with another now?	K:Hiện bạn không biết quan hệ mình với ai khác là gì
46:46	Q: No.	với vợ, với bạn, trai hay gái, bạn biết nó là gì không?
46:51	K: You don’t know what your relationship with another is now, with your wife, your friend, your girl or boy, do you know what it is now?	Q:Không. K:Bạn không biết à?
47:00	Q: No.	Q:Biết, nhưng... (không nghe) K:Tôi hỏi bạn. Bạn biết à?
47:02	K: You don’t know?	Q:Dĩ nhiên.
47:06	Q: We know but...	Q:Tôi không biết.
47:10	K: I am asking you. So you know?	K:Chị nói chị không biết.
47:12	Q: Of course.	Bạn trai hay chồng bạn chấp nhận thế? (Cười)
47:13	Q: I don’t know.	Bạn đang đùa.
47:19	K: The lady says she doesn’t know. Will your boyfriend and husband accept that? You are playing games.	Hãy đặt vấn đề kiểu khác.
47:44	Let’s put the question differently. What shall we do together to bring about a change in the world? We all say change is necessary. We see things are degenerating, you know what is happening in the world, terrible things are happening in the world. And what shall we do together – please, listen – to change this?	Chúng ta sẽ cùng làm gì để tạo ra thay đổi thế giới? Chúng ta đều nói thay đổi là cần thiết. Chúng ta thấy mọi việc thoái hóa, bạn biết việc đang xảy ra những việc khủng khiếp xảy ra trên thế giới. Và chúng ta sẽ cùng làm gì - nghe nhé - để thay đổi nó?
48:21	Q: We have to change ourselves. K: No, wait, wait. I am coming to that. Don’t say change ourselves. You have had 50 years.	Q:Phải thay đổi chính mình... K:Không, đợi đã. Sẽ tới đó. Đừng nói thay đổi chính mình. Bạn đã có 50 năm.
48:29	Q: 52. K: 52! You have had 52 years, why in the name of heavens haven’t you changed? So it means you are accepting the future. Something will happen to make you change. My question then, ask, sir: what shall we do together? – please, listen. Though you have listened to the speaker for 52 years or 10 years or 5 years, what shall we do together to bring about a new society?	Q:52. K:52! (Cười) Bạn đã có 52 năm, lạy trời tại sao bạn không thay đổi? Vậy tức là bạn chấp nhận tương lai. Điều gì xảy ra để làm bạn thay đổi. Rồi câu hỏi là: chúng ta sẽ cùng làm gì? - nghe nhé. Dù bạn nghe người nói đã 52 năm hay 10 năm hay 5 năm, chúng ta sẽ cùng làm gì để tạo ra xã hội tốt?
49:28	The Catholics at one time in history, they were terribly united. Anybody who disagreed were tortured, inquisitioned, burnt. But for a time they held it, because they had the same belief, same – you know, all the rest of it. Now all that is gone – nobody believes in anything. And we see the society as it is. What shall we do together? When one is put that question, each one has different plans – right? different ideas, different concepts: do this, don’t do that, we must all join together to elect a new president, a new politician – you follow?	Cơ đốc trong lịch sử có lần thống nhất cách khủng khiếp. Ai không đồng ý bị tra tấn, điều tra, thiêu. Nhưng đã có lần họ giữ nó, bởi họ cùng niềm tin, cùng bạn biết cả. Giờ thì đã qua rồi - không ai tin gì hết. Và chúng ta thấy xã hội vậy đó. Chúng ta sẽ cùng làm gì? Khi hỏi vậy, mỗi người có kế hoạch khác nhau - phải không? khác ý niệm, quan điểm: làm này, không làm nọ, phải họp lại bầu chủ tịch mới, chính trị gia mới - kịp không?
50:41	So I am asking: will a belief bring us together? Right?	Vậy hỏi: niềm tin sẽ đem chúng ta lại nhau? Phải không?
50:49	Q: No. K: It can’t. Wait. Will authority bring us together? Q: No.	Q:Không. K:Không thể. Khoan. Uy quyền đem chúng ta lại nhau? Q:Không.
51:03	K: I promise you a reward. Q: No.	K:Tôi hứa cho bạn phần thưởng. Q:Không
51:09	K: You will reach Nirvana if you do this.	K:Bạn sẽ đạt Niết bàn nếu chịu làm. Q:Không.
51:14	Q: No.	K:Hay nếu không làm bạn sẽ vào địa ngục.
51:16	K: Or if you don’t do this, you will go to hell. Reward and punishment, on which we have lived.	Thưởng và phạt, chúng ta sống với nó.
51:27	So what will bring us together? Belief won’t, authority of any kind is rejected, the reward by another as a means for you to change is also rejected. And if you say you are going to be punished in heaven for not obeying, you say, ‘Go away, don’t be silly’, and you pass him. So what will make us come together?	Vậy điều gì đem chúng ta lại nhau? Niềm tin không, uy quyền loại nào cũng bị loại phần thưởng như phương tiện cho bạn thay đổi cũng bị loại. Và nếu nói bạn sẽ bị phạt ở thiên đàng vì không vâng lời bạn nói 'Đi đi, đừng ngốc thế', và bạn bỏ qua. Vậy điều gì đem chúng ta lại nhau?
52:03	Q: Try to listen.	Q:Cố gắng nghe.
52:12	K: But you won’t listen if you are prejudiced. Right? So will you drop your prejudice? We come back to the same thing. Will you drop your personal desire for some extraordinary evolutionary utopia, enlightenment? Drop your idea of what meditation must be? Can you let go all that? And will it take another 52 years, you say, ‘Yes, at the end of it, I am dying, but I hope I will give it up’. You follow? So what will bring us together? You put that question.	K:Nhưng bạn không nghe nếu có định kiến. Phải không? Vậy bạn sẽ bỏ định kiến chứ? Chúng ta quay lại cũng việc này. Bạn sẽ bỏ ước muốn riêng cho ảo tưởng tiến hóa cực kỳ nào, tỏ ngộ nào? Bỏ ý niệm thiền định phải là gì? Bạn có thể bỏ hết? Và sẽ mất 52 năm nữa, bạn nói 'Vâng, cuối cùng, tôi chết nhưng mong là tôi sẽ bỏ hết.' Theo kịp không? Vậy điều gì đem chúng ta lại nhau? Bạn hỏi đi.
53:10	Q: We have not asked, I don’t know why.	Q:Chúng tôi không hỏi. Tôi không biết tại sao.
53:13	K: Only when we are able to think together. Right, sir? When you and I see the same thing. Not you see the thing differently and I see it differently. When both of us see something actually happening as it is, then we can both look at it. But if you say that is not happening, only it is imagination, or it is this, that or the other – you follow what I am saying? So what will make us come together? I am not talking sexually, in this permissive world that is the most silly obvious thing, and we think that is being together.	K:Chỉ khi chúng ta có thể cùng suy nghĩ. Phải không? Khi bạn và tôi thấy cùng một việc. Không phải bạn thấy nó kiểu này tôi thấy kiểu kia. Khi cả chúng ta thấy điều gì thực sự xảy ra y vậy thì chúng ta có thể nhìn nó. Nhưng nếu bạn nói nó không xảy ra, chỉ tưởng tượng hay nó vầy, kia, nọ - theo kịp lời tôi không? Vậy điều gì đẩy chúng ta lại nhau? Tôi không nói tình dục, trong thế giới buông thả, đó là điều ngu ngốc nhất, và chúng ta nghĩ nó là cùng nhau.
54:22	Let’s put the question differently: if there is no tomorrow psychologically, the future, what is my action towards another? The future implies no ideals, and no past either. You understand this? If the future you deny psychologically, you also must deny the past. I don’t know if you follow this? Gosh! Will you let your past go? Your hurts, the wounds that you have received, the unfulfilled desires, the anxieties – which is the past. Psychologically, if there is no future, it implies psychologically there is no past. I wonder if you see this! You can’t have one and reject the other, they are the same movement. And that is our difficulty. Our difficulty is to let go, either the past or the future, because we are frightened. I won’t go into that now, but look at it, what we are doing. We want to change the world. It is necessary for our grandchildren. You know, sir, if you love somebody with your heart, with your blood with your whole being, love somebody, and you have a small child whom you love, do you want him to enter into this world? So what shall we do? But you are not interested in this.	Hãy đặt câu hỏi kiểu khác: nếu không có ngày mai tâm lý, tương lai, hành động tôi với kẻ khác là gì? Tương lai hàm ý không lý tưởng, cũng không quá khứ. Hiểu không? Về tâm lý, nếu bỏ tương lai, bạn cũng phải bỏ quá khứ. Không biết bạn theo kịp không? Ái chà! Bạn để quá khứ trôi đi chứ? Tổn thương, vết thương bạn đã chịu ước vọng không được, lo âu - quá khứ. Tâm lý, nếu không có tương lai hàm ý tâm lý không có quá khứ. Bạn có thấy vậy không? Bạn không thể có này mà bỏ kia, chúng cùng chuyển động. Và đó là khó khăn của chúng ta. Khó khăn là phải bỏ nó đi, cả quá khứ lẫn tương lai bởi vì chúng ta sợ. Tôi sẽ không đi sâu mà chỉ nhìn, chúng ta đang làm. Chúng ta muốn thay đổi thế giới. Cần thiết cho cháu chắt chúng ta. Bạn biết, nếu bạn yêu thương ai với cả tấm lòng, với cả con người bạn, yêu thương ai và bạn có cháu bé bạn yêu mến, bạn có muốn nó vào đời? Vậy chúng ta sẽ làm gì? Nhưng bạn không thích việc này.
57:03	Q: But do you think it is really possible to do it totally? Is someone that you know that has done it?	Q:Nhưng ngài cho là có thể làm trọn vẹn ư? Ngài biết ai đã làm?
57:11	K: Is this possible to do it totally, the gentleman asks, who has heard me 52 years. And do you know anybody who has done this. It would be impudent on my part – please, listen – impudent, impolite, incorrect, to say I know somebody. What is important is: are you now? Not do you know somebody. That is escaping from yourself when you say, ‘Well show me somebody, a result’. The speaker is not interested in results. If he is, then he will be disappointed, he will be exploiting, he will enter into quite a different world.	K:Có thể tới đó trọn vẹn anh bạn hỏi, người đã nghe tôi 52 năm. Và bạn có biết ai đó đã làm. Có lẽ trơ trẽn về phía tôi - xin nghe nhé trơ trẽn, thiếu lịch sự, không đúng khi nói về ai đó. Điều quan trọng: là bạn đây? Chứ không phải bạn biết ai đó. Là chạy trốn chính mình khi bạn nói 'Nào, cho tôi biết ai đó, kết quả,' Người nói không thích kết quả. Nếu vậy hắn sẽ chán hắn sẽ lợi dụng, hắn sẽ bước vào thế giới khác.
58:17	So what shall we do together? You see, if you understood that word ‘together’. You know, when you hold your hand with another whom you like, you may be holding hands and each person thinking differently. Right? But they are not together. Together means having the same quality of mind. When they love each other, it is the same quality. You understand? To love somebody so completely – oh, you don’t... In that there is no future, is there? You don’t say, ‘I will love you tomorrow’.	Vậy chúng ta sẽ cùng làm gì? Bạn xem, nếu bạn hiểu chữ 'cùng nhau'. Bạn biết khi bạn nắm tay người bạn thích bạn có thể nắm tay và mỗi người suy nghĩ khác nhau. Phải không? Nhưng họ không cùng nhau. Cùng nhau nghĩa là có cùng đặc tính trí óc. Khi bạn yêu mến nhau nó cùng đặc tính. Hiểu không? Yêu thương ai đó hoàn toàn - ồ, bạn không... Trong đó không có tương lai, phải không? Bạn không nói 'Mai tôi sẽ yêu anh'.
59:32	So what shall we do to bring about a feeling that we are not separate, we are together, the feeling, quality, the feeling of it – you understand?	Vậy chúng ta sẽ làm gì để tạo cảm nhận không phân chia cùng nhau, cảm nhận, đặc tính, cảm nhận nó - hiểu không?
1:00:06	It is quite phenomenal that this gentleman has heard me 52 years, another gentleman over there for 20 years, and some of you have heard me for 10, 5, or for the first time – what will make you change? Being hit on the head? Offering you a reward? What will make you change so that you say, ‘Look, it is the greatest importance in life to be together’?	Chính hiện tượng đó mà anh này đã nghe tôi 52 năm anh kia hơn 20 năm và vài bạn đây đã nghe 5, 10 năm, hoặc lần đầu - điều gì sẽ thay đổi bạn? Gõ vào đầu ư? Cho bạn phần thưởng? Điều gì sẽ làm thay đổi để bạn nói 'Nào, điều quan trọng nhất trên đời là cùng nhau'?
1:01:23	Q: Letting go of fear.	Q:Bỏ sợ hãi. K:Không có sợ hãi. Là gì?
1:01:26	K: No fear. Is that it? Or is it – please, listen – or is it we think we are secure in our separateness?	Hay là - nghe nhé - hay là chúng ta nghĩ chúng ta an toàn khi phân chia? Q:Vâng.
1:01:51	Q: Yes, sir.	Q:Phải bắt đầu... (không nghe)
1:01:52	Q: It must start...	K:Hãy nghe tôi nói thôi, chị à.
1:01:54	K: Just listen, madame, to what I have said. Each one of us thinks, because we have a particular name, a form, a job, a bank account, belong to a particular nation, particular group, we are safe, secure. And I say: are you secure? Obviously you are not. So you follow? You want to be secure completely in your isolation, and the moment you are isolated you cannot be secure. That is what each nation is saying. We must be secure, we must build up arms, we must protect ourselves against you. So each human being wants to be secure in his isolation. Oh, for god’s sake! And when you are isolated, you can never be secure.	Mỗi chúng ta nghĩ, bởi chúng ta có tên riêng hình dáng, công việc, tài khoản ngân hàng thuộc về quốc gia nào, nhóm nào, chúng ta an ổn, an toàn. Và tôi hỏi: bạn an toàn không? Dĩ nhiên không. Bạn theo kịp không? Bạn muốn an toàn tuyệt đối trong cô lập và lúc mà bạn cô lập bạn không thể an toàn. Mỗi quốc gia nói điều đó. Chúng tôi phải an toàn, phải vũ trang phải bảo vệ chúng tôi chống lại bạn. Vậy là mỗi người muốn an toàn trong cô lập. Lạy trời! Và khi cô lập bạn không bao giờ có thể an toàn.
1:03:34	Isn’t that a fact? Q: Yes.	Đúng vậy không? Q:Vâng.
1:03:37	K: Therefore, if it is a fact, don’t be isolated. You see, you won’t accept the fact and say it is so, and yet you keep to the fact, hold on. It is a hopeless generation, is that it? No, sir.	K:Vậy nếu đó là thực tế, đừng cô lập. Bạn xem bạn không chấp nhận thực tế và nói nó vậy và tuy vậy bạn bám thực tế, giữ đi. Thế hệ vô hy vọng, phải không? Không.
1:04:05	So we are pointing out – there is complete total security when we are together. You understand? When we are thinking together. And only out of that can come a good society, which is righteous, which is moral, which will have peace – you know. In that there is security, not in what you have now.	Vậy chúng ta chỉ ra có an toàn tuyệt đối khi chúng ta cùng nhau. Bạn hiểu không? Khi chúng ta cùng suy nghĩ. Và chỉ từ đó mới có thể có xã hội tốt đúng mực, đạo đức, sẽ có hoà bình - bạn biết thế. Trong đó có an toàn, chứ không phải cái bạn đang sống.
1:04:57	Basta. We will meet the day after tomorrow, I believe, don’t we?	Tốt. Sẽ gặp lại ngày mốt, chắc thế, phải không?