Krishnamurti - Làm sao học về chính mình?

Krishnamurti Subtitles

SD70T1 - Làm sao học về chính mình?
Buổi nói chuyện thứ nhất
San Diego State College, California, USA
5 tháng tư 1970

0:19	Krishnamurti: I would like to talk about so many things, because wherever one goes – Europe, India, Australia or America, one finds more or less the same human problems. Most human beings in the world are so confused and living a contradictory life; they are thoroughly unhappy, utterly miserable and in great deal of sorrow. And one’s life seems to be a battlefield, from the moment you are born till you die. One finds, right through the world, division, nationalistic, linguistic, religious differences, one sect opposed to another, one way against another, each saying its way is the best and the only one, and so on. There is division, conflict and war. There is division as the business world, the spiritual world, the religious world, the scientific world, or the professorial, college world.	Tôi muốn nói rất nhiều điều, bởi dù bạn đến đâu... - Châu Âu, Ấn độ, Úc hay Mỹ, ít nhiều bạn thấy vấn đề nhân loại như nhau. Hầu hết con người trên thế giới đều rối loạn và sống cuộc đời mâu thuẫn; họ thảy đều bất hạnh, quá nhọc nhằn và đầy dẫy khổ đau. Và đời bạn như bãi chiến trường, từ lúc sinh ra đến khi chết. Bạn thấy, khắp thế giới, phân chia, dân tộc, ngôn ngữ, Khác biệt tôn giáo, đạo này chống đạo kia, đường này nghịch lối nọ, mỗi người đều nói đường họ là duy nhất v.v.. Có phân chia, xung đột, chiến tranh. Có phân chia như giới doanh nhân, giới tâm linh, giới tôn giáo, giới khoa học, hay giới giáo sư, học đường.
2:30	Seeing all this division, this utter chaos, and a great deal of misery, one wonders, and I’m sure you do too – what is one to do, what course of action to be followed: the left, the centre, or the right. Or is it a course of action dictated by some ideology, some belief, some authoritarian dictum. Or must one follow a course of action that doesn’t depend on any authority whatsoever, neither the left, the centre, nor the right, nor any guru, any teacher, any priest, or follow any organised religion – Catholic, Protestant, what you will – but follow one’s own inclination, tendency, or follow one’s own experience and knowledge, self-reliant, confident, and purposeful.	Nhìn mọi phân chia ấy, quá rối loạn ấy, và biết bao khổ sở, bạn tự hỏi và tôi chắc bạn hỏi - bạn phải làm gì, lối hành động nào để theo, tả, hữu hay trung lập. Hay lối hành động theo ý hệ nào, tin tưởng nào, châm ngôn uy quyền nào; hay bạn phải theo lối hành động không lệ thuộc uy quyền gì hết, cũng không tả, hữu hay trung lập gì, không đạo sư, bậc thầy, giáo sĩ, hay theo tôn giáo tổ chức, Cơ đốc, Tin lành, gì bạn muốn, mà theo khuynh hướng, chiều hướng riêng bạn; hay theo kinh nghiệm và kiến thức riêng, tự lực, tự tin và có mục đích.
4:33	There is so much contradiction, not only outwardly but also inwardly. And what is one to do? I’m sure you must have asked this question many times – the more serious one is, the more earnest, and not seeking entertainment, one must have really, deeply asked this question, confronted by a world that is so chaotic, contradictory, divided, knowing very well that one has lost faith, having no trust in anybody, no teacher, no professor, no priest or authoritarian Utopia.	Có rất nhiều mâu thuẫn, không chỉ bên ngoài mà cả bên trong. Và bạn phải làm gì? Tôi chắc bạn đã phải hỏi câu ấy nhiều lần - bạn càng nghiêm túc, càng nhiệt thành, và không tìm giải trí, bạn thực sự đã phải hỏi câu ấy sâu sắc, đối diện với thế giới quá rối loạn, mâu thuẫn, phân chia, biết rất rõ bạn mất niềm tin, không còn tin tưởng ai, không thầy, không giáo sư, không giáo sĩ hay uy quyền không tưởng.
5:56	If you are at all serious, and I hope you are at least for this afternoon, you must have not only asked such a question of yourself, but also have found a responding answer to the challenge: what is one to do? not having faith in another, not be dependent on some saviour, some teacher, some authority, then where are you to look for light, for an understanding?	Và nếu bạn thật nghiêm túc, và tôi hy vọng ít ra là chiều nay, bạn đã phải không chỉ hỏi câu hỏi về mình, mà cả tìm câu trả lời đáp ứng cho thách thức: bạn phải làm gì? không tin tưởng ai khác, không lệ thuộc vào đấng cứu thế, bậc thầy, uy quyền nào, rồi bạn trông vào đâu cho ánh sáng, cho thấu hiểu?
7:08	What we are trying to do is to find out for ourselves, confronted with this extraordinary problem of living, with all its contradictions and complexities, what is the course of action which will not be contradictory, which will be whole, complete, which will not produce more agonies, more mischief, more confusion.	Điều chúng ta cố làm là tìm ra cho chính mình, giáp mặt với vấn đề lạ lùng của đời sống, với mọi xung đột và phức tạp, lối hành động nào sẽ không mâu thuẫn, mà tổng thể, trọn vẹn, không gây thêm quằn quại, thêm sai lầm, rối loạn.
7:56	And to find that out is our problem – and I think that is the only problem in life. An action that is not broken up, that is not contradictory, that is continuous, whole, complete and total, so that it doesn’t bring more sorrow, more confusion. And if you will, we will go together into this question, bearing in mind that the speaker has no authority whatsoever, because both of us are going to examine, observe, this phenomenon called life, living, and find out the truth of the matter, if there is an action, a way of living, not at odd moments or in a great crisis, but every day, every minute, a way of living in which there is joy, there is no violence, no brutality, no contradiction, and obviously no imitation and dependency.	Và để tìm ra nó là vấn đề chúng ta - và tôi nghĩ đó là vấn đề duy nhất trong đời. Hành động không vỡ vụn, không mâu thuẫn, liên tục, tổng thể, trọn vẹn và hoàn toàn, để không đem đến thêm khổ đau, rối loạn. Và nếu bạn muốn, chúng ta sẽ cùng tìm hiểu vấn đề, nhớ rằng người nói không có uy quyền gì hết, bởi chúng ta sẽ cùng xem xét, quan sát, hiện tượng gọi là sống, sự sống, và tìm ra sự thật của vấn đề, xem có hành động, lối sống, không phải lúc rảnh rang hay khủng hoảng lớn mà mỗi ngày, mỗi phút, lối sống trong đó có niềm vui, không có bạo lực, không bạo tàn, không mâu thuẫn, và dĩ nhiên không bắt chước và lệ thuộc.
9:54	Unless we find such a way of living, not an abstract idea, a philosophical concept, a theory, but rather an actual way of living, whether there can be an action so complete, so whole, so completely non-contradictory. And I feel to live that way is the only religious way, none other. We are using the word ‘religion’ not in the accepted sense of that word, which is to believe in something, believe in God or no God, or believe in some conceptual ideation – we are using that word as a way of life in which every action is whole, complete and full of ecstasy. We’re going to go into that.	Trừ khi tìm lối sống ấy, không ý niệm trừu tượng, quan niệm triết lý, lý thuyết, mà là lối sống thực tế, xem có thể có hành động thật trọn vẹn, tổng thể, hoàn toàn không mâu thuẫn. Và tôi thấy sống lối ấy là lối tôn giáo duy nhất, không nào khác. Chúng ta dùng chữ 'tôn giáo' không phải nghĩa thường chấp nhận, nghĩa là tin vào gì, tin Thượng đế hay không, hay tin vào quan niệm duy tâm nào - chúng ta dùng chữ ấy như lối sống trong đó mỗi hành động là toàn thể, trọn vẹn và xuất thần. Chúng ta sẽ tìm hiểu nó.
12:03	First of all, to understand all this, we must establish right relationship between us, between you and the speaker. He is not teaching you in the ordinary sense of that word, telling you what to do. The word ‘teach’ is to give information, to make one understand, to point out, to inform. And one can teach mathematics, give you some scientific information. But here there is no teacher, and we really mean it, because each one of us has to be his own teacher and his own disciple. And this is a very serious matter. So that you are listening with quite a different attitude, you are listening to the speaker, to the words he is using, and understanding those words, watching through those words all your own reactions, and responses, and conditioning, so that you yourself, through your own observation, learn, so the speaker becomes a mirror, in which you are observing yourself.	Trước hết, để hiểu mọi điều này, chúng ta phải xây dựng quan hệ đúng đắn nhau, giữa bạn và người nói. Anh ta không dạy bạn trong nghĩa thông thường của chữ, bảo bạn điều nên làm. Chữ 'dạy' là trao thông tin, làm bạn hiểu, chỉ ra, cho thông tin. Và bạn có thể dạy toán, cho vài thông tin khoa học. Nhưng ở đây không có thầy, và thực sự nói thế, bởi mỗi người phải là thầy họ, và là trò họ. Và đây là vấn đề rất nghiêm túc. Để bạn nghe với thái độ hoàn toàn khác, bạn nghe người nói, chữ anh ta dùng, và hiểu chữ, nhìn thông qua chữ mọi phản ứng, đáp ứng và qui định của bạn, để chính bạn, qua quan sát, học, để người nói thành tấm gương... trong đó bạn quan sát chính mình.
15:02	So our relationship, between you and the speaker, is of a basic communication, communication being sharing together, understanding together, working together – that is what the word ‘communication’ means, to commune.	Vậy quan hệ, giữa bạn và người nói, là trau đổi cơ bản, trau đổi là cùng chia sẻ, cùng hiểu, cùng làm việc - đó là ý nghĩa chữ 'trau đổi', thông cảm.
15:45	So, seeing all that, not as a theory, not something that is extraneous to you, but actually – that is your life, your daily contradiction, your daily battle, your daily irritations, anger, hatred, brutality. And to see if all that can end, so that we can live quite a different kind of life, a life that is free, a life that doesn’t bring through action, misery, a life that is really, completely, totally peaceful. So one asks, observing all this, what is one to do, knowing that you are the society, and the society is you – you are the world, and the world is you, which is not just an idea but a fact. You have created this world, by your greed, anger, ambition, competition, violence, inwardly you are that; and outwardly you’ve wars, you’ve all these divisions: the black, and the white, and the pink, and the blue, and all the rest of it – prejudice, antagonism, brutality. We know this. Either you know it as an idea or you know it actually. You know it through a magazine, through a newspaper, or somebody has told you. Or you have observed it in yourself, you have seen it in yourself, completely, and therefore there is no need for another to tell you what the world is like, you don’t have to read a single newspaper, a magazine or listen to any talk, if you know for yourself what you are.	Nên, thấy hết, không lý thuyết, không phải điều xa lạ với bạn, mà thực tế, là đời bạn, mâu thuẫn hàng ngày, chiến đấu hàng ngày, nổi nóng hàng ngày, giận, ghét, bạo tàn. Và xem tất cả có thể chấm dứt, để chúng ta có thể sống đời hoàn toàn khác, đời sống tự do, đời sống không đem lại khổ sở, qua hành động, đời sống thực sự, trọn vẹn, hoàn toàn bình an. Vậy bạn hỏi, quan sát hết, bạn phải làm gì, biết rằng bạn là xã hội, và xã hội là bạn - bạn là thế giới và thế giới là bạn, không chỉ là ý niệm mà sự kiện. Bạn tạo ra thế giới này, bởi tham, giận, tham vọng, đua tranh, bạo lực, trong bạn là thế; ngoài bạn có chiến tranh, bạn có mọi phân chia, đen và trắng... và đỏ và xanh, và mọi thứ - định kiến, chống đối, bạo tàn. Chúng ta biết thế. Dù bạn biết nó như ý niệm hay bạn biết nó thực. Bạn biết nó qua tạp chí, qua sách báo, hay ai nói bạn nghe. Hay bạn quan sát nó trong chính mình, bạn thấy nó trong chính bạn, hoàn toàn, và vì vậy không cần thiết ai khác nói bạn nghe thế giới giống gì, bạn không cần đọc sách báo, tạp chí hay nghe nói chuyện, nếu bạn biết cho chính bạn bạn là gì.
19:36	Realising what you are, then the question is entirely different, the question ‘what to do?’, because one realises what one is – one is confused, as the world is. One lives in contradiction, in division, as the world is. And without understanding oneself, not only at the conscious level, but also very much deeply, very profoundly, unless there is this understanding, not according to some analyst – Freud, Jung, or your own particular pet analyst, but to understand yourself as you are. And in the understanding of that, the question of what you are to do becomes entirely different, because now you are putting the question in relation to the world as though it were something outside of you – to what political party you should join, to what group, the pacifist, and so on, to what group, to what section.	Nhận ra bạn là gì, rồi câu hỏi hoàn toàn khác, câu hỏi: 'phải làm gì?' bởi bạn nhận ra bạn là gì - bạn rối loạn, thế giới y vậy. Bạn sống trong mâu thuẫn, phân chia, thế giới y vậy. Và không thấu hiểu chính mình, không chỉ mức độ ý thức mà cả rất sâu, rất thẳm sâu, trừ khi có thấu hiểu ấy, không theo nhà phân tích nào - Freud, Jung, hay... nhà phân tích yêu thích riêng, nhưng hiểu chính bạn như bạn là. Và trong thấu hiểu ấy, câu hỏi bạn phải làm gì trở nên hoàn toàn khác, bởi bạn đặt câu hỏi liên quan đến thế giới như nó là điều gì ngoài bạn - đảng chính trị nào bạn sẽ gia nhập, nhóm nào, hoà bình, v.v.., vào nhóm nào, tầng lớp nào.
21:36	So you are putting the world as something outside of you. But when one realises, not verbally, not as an idea, but actually – when one realises that one is the world, and one’s responsibility to the world is the responsibility of understanding yourself so completely. Then your question ‘what to do’ has quite a different meaning.	Vậy bạn đặt thế giới như điều gì ngoài bạn. Nhưng khi nhận ra, không lời, không như ý niệm, mà thực - khi bạn nhận ra bạn là thế giới, và trách nhiệm bạn với thế giới là trách nhiệm thấu hiểu chính mình toàn diện. Rồi câu hỏi 'phải làm gì', có ý nghĩa hoàn toàn khác.
22:35	So the question is, how to observe, how to observe oneself, oneself being the total human being. You are not an American, though you may have the label as the American. And a man coming from India may call himself an Indian, with his particular label, with his particular superstitions and beliefs. But when you scratch or push aside all that, he is an ordinary human being like you and me, like dozen others. So the question is, how do you observe yourself? Because without knowing yourself, who is the world, not an individual – the word ‘individual’ means a total entity, indivisible. And individual means a human being, in whom there is no contradiction, no division, no separation, is a total unit, harmonious unit. That word ‘individual’ means that – indivisible. So you are not individuals, you are all broken up, contradictory in yourself.	Nên vấn đề là, làm sao quan sát, làm sao quan sát chính bạn, chính bạn là con người trọn vẹn. Bạn không phải người Mỹ, tuy bạn có thể có danh hiệu như người Mỹ. Và người đến từ Ấn độ có thể gọi hắn là người Ấn, với danh hiệu riêng, với mê tín và niềm tin riêng. Nhưng khi bạn xóa và dẹp hết chúng, hắn là người bình thường như bạn và tôi, như hàng tá khác. Nên vấn đề là, làm sao bạn quan sát mình? Bởi không biết chính mình, là thế giới, không phải cá nhân - chữ 'cá nhân' nghĩa là thực thể toàn diện, không thể phân chia. Và cá nhân nghĩa là người trong hắn không có mâu thuẫn, không phân chia, tách biệt, là đơn vị toàn thể, đơn vị hài hoà. Chữ 'cá nhân' nghĩa đó, không thể phân chia. Vậy bạn không là cá nhân, bạn vỡ vụn hết, mâu thuẫn trong chính bạn. Vậy làm sao bạn nhìn mình?
24:59	So how are you to look at yourself? Please, do listen to this, it is quite absorbing, this. It demands a great deal of intelligence, it is great fun, much more fun than any book, than any religious entertainment, than any philosophy. As we are broken up human beings in ourselves, contradictory desires, feeling inferior or superior, being afraid, having no love, feeling lonely, fragmented, not only superficially but deeply – how are you to observe? One fragment observes the rest of the fragments? One becoming the censor, the examiner, the observer, watching over the rest of the fragments? And what gives him the authority over the other fragments?	Hãy nghe đây, nó hoàn toàn hấp dẫn, đây. Nó đòi hỏi rất nhiều thông minh, rất vui, vui hơn sách vở nào, vui hơn giải trí tôn giáo nào, triết lý nào. Khi chúng ta là người vỡ vụn bên trong, ước muốn mâu thuẫn, cảm giác cao thấp, sợ hãi, không yêu thương, cảm thấy cô đơn, manh mún, không chỉ ngoài mặt mà sâu thẳm - làm sao bạn quan sát? Một mảnh quan sát những mảnh còn lại ư? Một trở thành kẻ kiểm duyệt, xem xét, quan sát, nhìn các mảnh còn lại? Và cái gì cho nó uy quyền với các mảnh kia?
27:13	So the question is, who is the observer and who is the censor that says, ‘This I will do, this I won’t do, this is right and this is wrong, this path I will take and I won’t tread that path, I’ll be a pacifist with regard to this war, but I’ve other favourite wars, I will follow this leader and not that leader, I believe in this and not in that, I will hold this prejudice and reject that, knowing, if you have observed yourself, that you are a fragmented human being. And therefore, being fragmented, contradictory, living in constant conflict, and knowing this conflict, one fragment of this many, many fragments, takes charge, becomes the authority, the censor, and his observation must inevitably be contradictory. Right? I hope you’re following all this. If one fragment, one part of you, assumes the authority of the analyser over the other fragments, why has he assumed that authority? And can he – one fragment, analyse the rest of the other fragments? You are following all this?	Nên vấn đề là, ai là người quan sát... và ai là kẻ kiểm duyệt nói, 'tôi sẽ làm này, không làm kia,' này đúng và kia sai, đường này tôi sẽ bước và đường kia thì không, tôi sẽ là nhà hòa bình liên quan cuộc chiến này nhưng thích các cuộc chiến khác. tôi sẽ theo lãnh đạo này và không theo lãnh đạo nọ, tôi tin này và không tin kia, tôi sẽ giữ định kiến này và bỏ cái kia, biết rằng, nếu bạn quan sát mình, bạn là người manh mún. và vì vậy, manh mún, mâu thuẫn, sống trong xung đột bất tận, và biết xung đột ấy, một mảnh của nhiều, nhiều mảnh, đảm đương, trở thành uy quyền, kiểm duyệt, và quan sát của nó dĩ nhiên phải mâu thuẫn. Phải không? Mong bạn theo kịp hết. Nếu một mảnh, một phần bạn mang uy quyền của người phân tích đối với các phần kia, tại sao nó có uy quyền ấy? Và nó có thể - một mảnh, phân tích các mảnh còn lại? Bạn theo kịp hết không?
29:56	See how dreadfully complex it has all become. Whether you are analysed by a professional, or you analyse yourself, it is still the same pattern. So it is very important to find out how to observe, how to observe all these many contradictions which make up our life, how to observe the whole of those fragments without another fragment taking place. But this is very important to find out, because as long as there is contradiction, division, in oneself, there must be conflict, there must be violence, which expresses itself in the world, outside, in society. And as long as this fragmentation exists within one, there can be no peace. And a man who really, deeply wants to understand and live a peaceful life, a life of love, must understand this question completely. Therefore it is a very serious matter, not just an afternoon’s listening to a few words – we are dealing with the whole problem of existence. And it is only the mind that can give serious attention to this, that is able to resolve it. So it is very important, imperative that one understands this question.	Thấy nó trở nên quá là phức tạp. Dù bạn được phân tích bởi chuyên gia hay bạn tự phân tích, nó vẫn cùng khuôn mẫu. Vậy quan trọng là tìm ra làm sao quan sát, làm sao quan sát hết các mâu thuẫn tạo nên đời mình, làm sao quan sát toàn bộ các mảnh ấy mà không có mảnh khác xảy ra. Nhưng tìm ra việc này là rất quan trọng, bởi hễ còn mâu thuẫn, phân chia trong chính bạn, tất phải có xung đột, phải có bạo lực, nó tự phơi bày ra thế giới bên ngoài, ra xã hội. Và hễ còn manh mún hiện diện trong bạn, không thể có hoà bình. Và người thực sự, sâu sắc muốn thấu hiểu và sống đời hoà bình, yêu thương, phải thấu hiểu vấn đề này trọn vẹn. Vì vậy là vấn đề rất nghiêm túc, không chỉ nghe vài chữ chiều nay - chúng ta quan tâm đến toàn thể vấn đề sống. Và chỉ trí óc có thể để tâm nghiêm túc đến nó, mới có thể giải quyết nó. Nên nó rất nghiêm túc, khẩn thiết, rằng bạn phải thấu hiểu vấn đề.
32:34	How do you observe? Do you observe yourself as an outsider, as a censor, saying ‘this is right, this is wrong’, justifying, condemning, approving, storing up? And if you do, there is contradiction, and therefore conflict, and therefore violence.	Làm sao bạn quan sát? Bạn quan sát mình như kẻ bên ngoài, như người kiểm duyệt, nói 'này đúng, kia sai' chứng minh, kết án, tán thành, lưu trữ? Và nếu làm thế, là có mâu thuẫn và vì vậy xung đột và bạo lực.
33:17	So how do you observe? Do you observe through an image? When you observe a tree, do you observe with knowledge of that tree, the knowledge that separates you from the tree, divides you, brings about a space between you and the tree?	Vậy làm sao bạn quan sát? Bạn quan sát qua hình ảnh? Khi bạn quan sát cội cây, bạn quan sát với kiến thức về cây, chính kiến thức phân chia bạn với cây, tách bạn, tạo ra khoảng cách giữa bạn với cây?
34:02	How do you observe? How do you observe your wife and your husband, or your girl or boy, how do you observe them? Watch yourself, sir, please, do it as we are talking, don’t make notes, don’t fiddle around with a tape-recorder, but watch it. How do you look at another? Don’t you look at another through the image you have built about the other? The image that you have been building for many years or perhaps two days. And the image becomes the observer. Right? Are you following this? So the image, or through the image you look. So the censor, the observer, is one of the fragments. And that censor has an image of what is right and what is wrong, what should be done and what should not be done, because he is still functioning as a fragment. So the question from this arises, whether one can observe without any fragment, to see you, see oneself, see the world, without fragmentation at all. And what brings about fragmentation? Not only in oneself but also in the world of which one is – what brings it about, why is one fragmented? why are there contradictory desires? Right?	Làm sao bạn quan sát? Làm sao quan sát vợ hay chồng, hay bạn gái hay bạn trai, làm sao quan sát họ? Nhìn chính bạn, hãy làm khi chúng ta nói, đừng ghi chú, đừng vớ vẩn với máy ghi âm, mà nhìn nó. Làm sao bạn nhìn ai khác? Không phải bạn nhìn ai qua hình ảnh bạn dựng lên về họ sao? - hình ảnh bạn dựng lên đã nhiều năm hay có thể hai ngày. Và hình ảnh trở thành người quan sát. Phải không? Theo kịp không? Vậy hình ảnh, hay qua hình ảnh bạn nhìn. Vậy người kiểm duyệt, kẻ quan sát, là một trong các mảnh. Và người kiểm duyệt có hình ảnh về cái đúng cái sai, điều nên làm và điều không nên làm, bởi hắn luôn hoạt động như một mảnh. Nên vấn đề từ đó nổi lên, xem bạn có thể quan sát mà không mảnh nào, để nhìn bạn, nhìn chính bạn, nhìn thế giới, không manh mún gì hết. Và cái gì sinh ra manh mún? Không chỉ trong bạn mà cả thế giới của bạn sống - cái gì sinh ra nó, tại sao bạn bị manh mún? tại sao có ước muốn mâu thuẫn? Phải không?
37:22	Now. Why is one violent? Which is part of contradiction. There are many causes why human beings are violent: lack of physical space; human beings who have evolved from the animals and the animals are very aggressive; and people love being aggressive; feeling inferior and they want to be superior, and so on. There are many causes. And most of us spend our time discussing the causes, explaining the causes; each professor, each specialist, each writer, according to his conditioning, explains the causes – volumes are written why human beings are violent. But at the end of the volume human beings still remain violent.	Bây giờ... Tại sao bạn bạo lực? - là một phần của mâu thuẫn. Có nhiều nguyên nhân tại sao con người bạo lực: thiếu không gian vật lý; con người tiến hóa từ động vật và động vật rất hung hăng; và mọi người thích hung hăng; cảm thấy thấp bé và họ muốn cao cả... và v.v.. Có nhiều nguyên nhân. Và đa số chúng ta dành thì giờ thảo luận nguyên nhân, giải thích nguyên nhân; mỗi giáo sư, mỗi chuyên gia, mỗi cây bút, theo qui định họ, giải thích nguyên nhân - bao sách vở viết tại sao con người bạo lực. Nhưng ở cuối sách con người vẫn còn bạo lực.
39:16	So the description is not the described, and therefore is of very little value. You know why you are violent very well, you haven’t got to spend years trying to find out the cause of your violence, which is such a waste of time. But to observe violence as it is, without the censor, who then separates himself from the fact that he is violent. Are we meeting each other? Are we communicating with each other? I am not sure.	Vậy diễn tả không phải vật diễn tả, và vì vậy rất ít giá trị. Bạn biết rõ tại sao chúng ta bạo lực, bạn chưa dành hàng năm trời cố tìm ra nguyên nhân bạo lực của mình. nó phí thời gian quá. Nhưng quan sát bạo lực như nó là, không kẻ kiểm duyệt, kẻ phân chia hắn với sự kiện hắn bạo lực. Chúng ta gặp nhau chứ? Chúng ta có trau đổi nhau không? Tôi không chắc.
40:31	Look, sirs, this is really very important to understand. So let’s go into it a little more. Let’s suppose I am violent – anger, jealousy, brutality, driving ambition that brings about competition. And I’m always measuring myself against somebody else. And this comparison makes me feel I’m inferior to you who are superior. So there is a battle, violence, I know all that. Then I say to myself, ‘I must get rid of this, I want to live at peace, though I’ve lived for thousands and thousands of years as a human being, there must be a change, there must be change in society, however rotten it is, and it is’. So I’ll plunge into social work and therefore forget myself. And the social work and the society is me. So I am escaping from myself. And realising all the tricks the mind plays upon itself, now, I look at myself – I am violent.	Nhìn đi, việc thực sự rất quan trọng để thấu hiểu. Vậy hãy tìm hiểu thêm chút. Giả sử tôi bạo lực - giận, ghen tị, tạo tàn, tham vọng thôi thúc sinh ra tranh đua. Và tôi luôn so lường tôi với ai đó. Và so sánh ấy làm tôi cảm thấy thấp bé với bạn là người cao cả. Nên có chiến đấu, bạo lực, tôi biết cả. Rồi tôi nói với tôi 'tôi phải bỏ nó, tôi muốn sống bình an, dù tôi sống đã hàng ngàn hàng ngàn năm như con người, phải có thay đổi, phải có thay đổi trong xã hội, dù hỏng thế nào, và nó vậy. Nên tôi sẽ lao vào công tác xã hội và vì vậy quên mình. Và công tác xã hội và xã hội là tôi. Vậy tôi chạy trốn chính tôi. Và nhận ra trò chơi trí óc đùa với chính nó, giờ, tôi nhìn tôi, tôi bạo lực.
42:41	And how do I look at that violence? As a censor who condemns violence? Or justifies violence? Or one who is not capable of dealing with that violence, therefore escapes from it? How do I look at myself, look at that violence? Please, do it. Are you looking at it as an observer who is different from violence? The observer who is separate, who condemns, justifies, and says, this is right, this is... and so on. The observer looks at the violence, separates himself from violence and condemns it. Or is the observer the observed? You are following? The observer recognises violence and separates himself in order to do something about it. But the separation is one of the tricks of thought. So the observer is the observed, is the violence. So long as there is a division between the observer and the observed, there must be violence. Right?	Và làm sao tôi nhìn bạo lực ấy? Như kẻ kiểm duyệt kết án bạo lực? Hay biện minh bạo lực? Hay bạn không thể xử sự với bạo lực ấy, nên chạy trốn nó? Làm sao tôi nhìn chính tôi; nhìn bạo lực ấy? Hãy làm đi. Bạn nhìn nó như người quan sát khác với bạo lực? Người quan sát tách biệt, kẻ lên án, biện minh và nói, này đúng, kia...và v.v.. Người quan sát nhìn bạo lực, tách rời hắn với bạo lực và lên án nó. Hay người quan sát là vật quan sát? Theo kịp không? Người quan sát nhận ra bạo lực và tách mình ra để làm gì đó với nó. Nhưng tách ra là một trò đùa của ý nghĩ. Vậy người quan sát là vật quan sát, là bạo lực. Nên hễ còn phân chia giữa người quan sát và vật quan sát. tất phải có bạo lực. Phải không?
44:47	So when I realise that, not verbally, realise with my heart, with my mind, with my whole being, then what takes place? You understand my question? You know, when you observe anything, there is always not only physical separation, distance, space, there is also the desire to identify yourself with that which is beautiful, noble, and not identify yourself with that which is not. So identification is part of the trick of a mind that has separated itself as the censor, and is now trying to identify. But whereas when the observer becomes aware that he is part of the observed, and he is, and therefore no image between the observer and the observed, then you will find that conflict completely comes to an end.	Nên khi nhận ra nó, không bằng lời, nhận ra với cả tâm hồn, trí óc, cả con người tôi, thì, việc gì xảy ra? Bạn hiểu câu hỏi không? Bạn biết, khi quan sát điều gì, không chỉ luôn có phân chia vật lý, khoảng cách, không gian, mà có cả ước muốn đồng hóa mình với cái gì xinh đẹp, cao quý, và không đồng hóa mình với cái gì không thế. Vậy đồng hóa ấy là một phần trò chơi trí óc tự phân chia nó như kẻ kiểm duyệt, và đang cố đồng hóa. Nhưng ngược lại khi người quan sát ý thức hắn là một phần của vật quan sát, và là thế, và vì vậy không có hình ảnh giữa người quan sát và vật quan sát, rồi bạn sẽ thấy xung đột hoàn toàn chấm dứt.
47:01	This is real meditation, this is not just a trick. Therefore it is very important, imperative, that one understands oneself, deeply, understand all the responses, the conditioning, the various temperaments, characteristics, tendencies – just to watch without the observer. We are meeting now? To observe without the observer. And that is the act of learning. And so that is the action.	Đây là thiền định thật, không phải trò chơi. Vì vậy rất quan trọng, khẩn thiết, rằng bạn thấu hiểu chính mình, sâu sắc, mọi đáp ứng, qui định, tính khí khác nhau, cá tính, khuynh hướng, chỉ nhìn mà không người quan sát. Gặp nhau chứ? Quan sát không người quan sát. Và đó là hành động học hỏi. Và vậy đó là hành động.
48:12	Now there is a difficulty in this. One is observing oneself. One wants to learn about oneself – the more you discover, the more you understand, the greater the freedom. I am using the word ‘more’ purposely for the moment – ‘the more’ is a comparative evaluation. I want to understand myself, learn about myself. In observing myself – please, do this as the speaker is going into it, do it actually, don’t take it home and think about it, do it now. No, this is not a group therapy, or a confessional – all that nonsense, but watch yourself as we are working together. I want to learn about myself. And myself is a living movement – each desire contradicts the other, they are living, moving, they are vital. And I observe and through that observation I’ve learnt. With what I have learnt I am going to look next minute. Right? You follow this? I am going to look, observe with the knowledge which I have gathered through previous observation. Am I learning, is there learning then? Because when the mind observes with an accumulated knowledge from its examination, that knowledge is preventing perception, that knowledge is preventing the freedom to look. See the difficulty.	Giờ thì có khó khăn đây. Bạn quan sát mình. Bạn muốn học hỏi về chính mình - bạn càng khám phá, bạn càng thấu hiểu, tự do càng lớn lao. Tôi dùng chữ 'càng' có chủ ý lúc này - 'càng' là đánh giá tương đối. Tôi muốn hiểu tôi, học chính tôi. quan sát chính tôi - hãy làm đi khi người nói đang tìm hiểu nó, làm thực đi, đừng đem về nhà rồi nghĩ về nó, làm ngay đi. Không, đây không phải trị liệu nhóm hay xưng tội hay mọi thứ vô nghĩa, mà nhìn chính bạn khi chúng ta đang cùng làm việc. Tôi muốn học về mình. Và chính mình là chuyển động sống - muốn này mâu thuẫn muốn kia, nó sống, chuyển động, linh động. Và tôi quan sát... và qua quan sát ấy, tôi học. Với cái tôi học tôi sẽ nhìn phút tiếp theo. Phải không? Kịp không? Tôi sẽ nhìn, quan sát với kiến thức mà tôi thu lượm qua quan sát trước đó. Tôi đang học, vậy có học không? Bởi khi trí óc quan sát với kiến thức tích luỹ từ xem xét, kiến thức ấy ngăn cản nhận thức, kiến thức cản trở tự do để nhìn. Nhìn khó khăn.
51:14	So can the mind observe without accumulating? And the accumulation is the observer, is the censor, is the conditioned entity. Therefore, to look without accumulating. That is, sir, look: someone flatters you, says how nice you are, how beautiful you are, how very intelligent, or how stupid you are. Now, can you listen to what he is saying, that you are stupid, or very clever, or very this or very that, can you listen without accumulation? That is, without accumulating the insult or the flattery, because if you listen with accumulation, then he becomes your enemy, or your friend. Therefore that listening and how you listen creates the image. Right? And that image separates, and that image is the cause of conflict – the image that you have about the Communist and the bourgeois, the image you have about the Catholic, if you are a Protestant. And the Catholic has the image about the Protestant. The image you have about your husband or your wife, or your boy, whatever it is. You believe, and another does not believe, So there is contradiction.	Vậy trí óc có thể quan sát không tích luỹ? Và tích luỹ là người quan sát, là kẻ kiểm duyệt, là thực thể qui định. Vì vậy, nhìn không tích luỹ tức là, nhìn: ai đó khen bạn, nói bạn xinh quá, bạn đẹp quá, bạn thật thông minh, hay bạn quá ngốc. Giờ bạn có thể nghe... lời anh ta nói, rằng bạn ngốc hay rất giỏi hay rất này rất nọ, bạn có thể nghe mà không tích chứa? Tức là, không tích chứa lời mắng hay lời khen, bởi nếu bạn nghe với tích chứa, hắn liền thành kẻ thù, hay bạn. Vì vậy nghe và cách bạn nghe tạo ra hình ảnh. Phải không? Và hình ảnh ấy phân chia, và hình ảnh là nguyên nhân xung đột - hình ảnh mà bạn có về Cộng sản và tư sản, hình ảnh bạn có về Cơ đốc, nếu bạn là Tin lành. Và Cơ đốc có hình ảnh về Tin lành. Hình ảnh mà bạn có về chồng hay vợ... hay bạn trai, hay gì gì. Bạn tin, và người nọ không tin, Nên có mâu thuẫn.
54:07	So can you observe without separation? Can you observe at the moment of violence, at the moment of your anger, without the censor? See how difficult it becomes if you are not aware at that moment. If you are not aware at that moment, you have already created the image.	Vậy bạn có thể nhìn không phân chia? Bạn có thể nhìn lúc bạo lực, lúc nổi giận, mà không người kiểm duyệt? Xem biết bao khó khăn nếu bạn không ý thức lúc đó. Nếu lúc ấy bạn không ý thức bạn đã tạo hình ảnh.
55:01	So to observe the cloud, the beauty of it, the light of it, to observe the lovely hills in this country, to observe the light on the water – just to observe without naming it, because the naming, the knowledge, the experience prevents the mind from observing totally. So when the mind can look without the observer, all fragments come to an end – in oneself. And this is really very important to grasp, to understand. And this cannot be taught by another.	Vậy quan sát mây, vẻ đẹp, ánh sáng của nó, quan sát đồi núi đáng yêu trong vùng, quan sát ánh sáng trên nước - chỉ quan sát không đặt tên, bởi đặt tên, kiến thức, kinh ngiệm ngăn cản trí óc quan sát hoàn toàn. Nên khi trí óc có thể nhìn không người quan sát, mọi manh mún chấm dứt - trong chính bạn. Và việc này thực sự quan trọng để nắm, để hiểu. Và không thể được dạy bởi ai khác.