加载中…
个人资料
灵视通感冥合元
灵视通感冥合元
  • 博客等级:
  • 博客积分:0
  • 博客访问:446,058
  • 关注人气:442
  • 获赠金笔:0支
  • 赠出金笔:0支
  • 荣誉徽章:
相关博文
推荐博文
谁看过这篇博文
加载中…
正文 字体大小:

[转载][译文] 介绍克里希那穆提

(2011-04-07 10:14:47)
标签:

转载

分类: 网友作品

Introducing Krishnamurti
介绍克里希那穆提

作者:Kata  翻译: Ls  校对:凡夫

 

From the nineteen-twenties I have been saying that there be no interpreters of the teachings, for they distort the teachings and it becomes a means of exploitation. (No interpreters are necessary for each person should observe directly his own activities, not according to any theory or authority.) Unfortunately, interpreters have sprung up, a fact for which we are in no way responsible. In recent years several people have asserted that they are my successors and that they have been especially chosen by me to disseminate the teachings. I have said and I again repeat that there are no representatives of Krishnamurti personally or his teachings during or after his lifetime. I am very sorry that this has to be said again.
From a statement by Krishnamurti, Brockwood Park, Bramdean, England, June 1970

从一九二几年起我一直在说,这个教诲没有解释者,因为他们会歪曲教诲,使它成为剥削的手段。(解释者是不必要的,因为每个人应该直接观察他自己的活动,而不是根据任何理论或权威。——Kata文中无此句,根据凡夫的翻译补充)不幸地,解释者已经冒出来了,这是一个跟我们完全无关的事实。近几年,有几个人宣称他们是我的继承者,被我特别选定来传播这个教诲。我曾经说过,在这里我再重申一次,克里希那穆提个人或他的教诲没有代言人,无论他活着还是死后。很抱歉这些需要被再次说明。
——摘自克里希那穆提的一个声明,英国Bramdean布莱克伍德公园,1970年6月


There is a gentleman I met at a Krishnamurti gathering whom I nicknamed “the Krishnamurti Evangelist”. Later, I happened to see a book on Krishnamurti written by him. In the beginning he said he was not an interpreter of Krishnamurti’s teaching but he became one right after that. I sincerely hope that I am not making the same mistake now. I can imagine why Krishnamurti so insisted on the point just quoted. Inaccurate representating of the holy is the greatest sacrilege against the holy. Even if you repeat exactly, like a parot, some of Krishnamurti’s words, it is still an inaccurate representation because you are far below his level.

我在一次克的聚会上遇见过一位先生,我戏称他为“克里希那穆提传教士”。后来,我偶然看到一本他写的关于克的书。在开头他说,他不是克的教诲的解释者,但后面的话证明,他其实是。现在,我真诚地希望我不是在犯相同的错误。我可以想象为什么克如此强调刚才引用的那点。对神圣的不正确表达是对神圣的最大亵渎。即使你精确重复克的一些话,象一只鹦鹉,那仍然是不正确的表达,因为你远低于他的水平。


The Rish said, “Atman is a Brahman”, and the people listening to it went straight to heaven.
A fool said, “Atman is a Brahman”, and the fools listening to it went straight to hell.
The Buddha said, “Samsara is Nirvana”, and the people listening to it went straight to heaven.
A fool said, “Samsara is Nirvana”, and the fools listening to it went straight to hell.
-From The Lankavatara Story

古印度智者说:“我即梵”,听它的人们直接上了天堂。
一个傻瓜说:“我即梵”,听它的傻瓜们直接下了地狱。
佛陀说:“烦恼即涅槃”, 听它的人们直接上了天堂。
一个傻瓜说:“烦恼即涅槃”, 听它的傻瓜们直接下了地狱。
——摘自《楞伽经故事》


I was aghast when I read the article Meditation Is Not Repetition of Words in a newspaper when I was in Haputale, Sri Lanka. It said:
Why should one accept any authority about the inward movement of life?…We accept authority of a guru who says, “I have realized.” Meditation is not something separate from daily life. Meditation is not the repetition of words. Meditation practiced according to a method becomes the movement of thought…

当我在一张报纸上读到《冥想不是重复字句》这篇文章的时候,我被惊呆了,那时我在斯里兰卡的Haputale。文章说:
为什么一个人应该接受关于生命内在运动的任何权威?……我们接受那个说“我已经解脱了”的古鲁的权威。冥想不是和日常生活分离的某种东西。冥想不是字句的重复。依照一种方法进行的冥想就成了思想的活动……


I thought it was my business to say something about the article, so I sent a letter to the newspaper. I did not have much expectation that it would be published, but it was.

我想我应当对这篇文章说点什么,因此我给那家报纸写了封信。我没太期望它会被发表,但是发表了。


 I found the article Meditation Is Not Repetition of Words which appeared in the Voice of the people on 15th August very snobbish. I respect any opinion which is against my convictions if it is the expression of a person’s own understanding, but what I cannot tolerate is the snobbishness of copying a great man’s words without understanding them. And it is quite clear to that the author of this article copied the content from Krishnamurti’s writings, without really understanding them. Better to speak one’s own nonsense than copy some one else’s “sense”.
-M.Kata, a member of the Krishnamurti Information Centre, Badulla.

我发现发表在8月15号的《人民之声》上的那篇文章《冥想不是重复字句》很自以为是。我尊重任何与我确信的东西相反的观点,如果它是一个人自己理解的表达。但我不能容忍重复一个伟大人物的话却不理解它们这种自以为是。十分明显,文章作者抄袭的内容出自克里希那穆提的作品,却没有真的理解它们。说你自己的废话比重复另一个人的“见识”更好。
——M.Kata,Badulla克里希那穆提信息中心的一员


Let us look at Gurdjieff, for example. He died hardly forty years ago, but there are innumerable books in the shops supposedly his teaching, which actually give quite the wrong idea about it. The only exception I came across was Ouspensky’s In Search of the Miraculous. The various Gurdjieff Study Circles also belong in the same category. The teaching of the Buddha and Christ has been distorted after so many centuries. I agree with Gurdjieff’s evaluation that the Buddha’s teaching was already thoroughly distorted by the end of the second succeeding generation. It is next to impossible to find anyone who knows the real teaching of the Buddha among contemporary Buddhist monks. If someone konwing the real teaching of the Buddha appeared and began teaching it, at least some portion of it, to the public, almost all those Buddhist monks would not recognize it. Many of them would even criticize him, saying, “His teaching is incompatible with the teaching of the Buddha.”

例如,我们来看看葛吉夫。他刚刚死于四十年前,但是商店里有数不清的被认为是他的教诲的书,实际上它们提供了关于它的完全错误的信息。各种各样的葛吉夫研究群体也是一样。我遇到的唯一例外是乌斯宾斯基的《寻找奇迹》。佛陀和耶稣的教诲在那么多世纪之后也被扭曲了。我赞同葛吉夫的评价,佛陀的教诲到了随后的第二代末尾就已经被彻底扭曲了。要在当代佛教僧侣中发现一个知道真正的佛陀教诲的人近乎是不可能的。如果有人知道真正的佛陀教诲——至少它的某个部分——并开始向公众教导它,几乎所有的佛教僧侣都不会认出它。他们中的许多人甚至会批评他说,“他的教诲和佛陀的教诲是矛盾的。”


It is by no means a new idea that Christ, if he had been born on Earth later, not only would not have been the head of the Christian Church, but probably would not have been able even to belong to it, and in the most brilliant period of the might and power of the Church would most certainly have been declared a heretic and burned at the stake.
-Ouspensky

这绝不是一个新的想法,基督如果晚一些出生在地球上,不仅不会成为基督教会的领袖,他甚至恐怕没办法属于它,在教会权威最辉煌的时期必定会被宣布为异端烧死在火刑柱上。
——乌斯宾斯基


I remember when I was in Sri Lanka I read a booklet entitled Buddhism and Mysticism whose author was apparently a Sri Lankan Theravada layman. In it, the author practically said, “If the Buddha was right Krishnamurti is wrong, and if Krishnamurti is right the Buddha was wrong. I know the Buddha was right, so Krishnamurti is wrong.”

我记得在斯里兰卡的时候,曾经读过一个小册子,名字叫《佛教与神秘主义》,作者显然是斯里兰卡南传佛教居士,在书中,作者其实是在说:“如果佛陀是对的,克里希那穆提就是错的;如果克里希那穆提是对的,那么佛陀就是错的;我知道佛陀是对的,因此克里希那穆提是错的。”


Listen, all of you who are supposed to be believers in Krishna, in the Buddha, in Christ, why are you rejecting him now? He is with us now, don’t you know that?
——From The Lankavatara Story

听着,你们这些人被认为是克里希那的信徒、佛陀的信徒、基督的信徒,那么你们为什么要拒绝他?他现在和我们在一起,你们不知道吗?
——引自《楞伽经故事》


I have heard and read about those critics who compare Rajneesh, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Vimala Thakar, U.G.Krishnamurti, Ramana Maharishi, Aurobindo (and God knows who else!) to Krishnamurti. I do not claim that I understand Krishnamurti’s teaching, but what I do understand is that it is like comparing pebbles to a diamond. The people who hold such opinions do not have any power of discrimination, so why not leave the work to the professional “gemologists?” You may have read of people who compare Krishnamurti’s teaching to Theravada Buddhism, Zen Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, etc…When I was in Sri Lanka, I read a newspaper article written by a famous Sri Lankan Theravada monk who said, “Krishnamurti’s teaching is based on the Satipatthana Sutra.” And in the book Zen and Reality the author says, so I was told: “Krishnamurti’s teaching and Zen teaching is essentially the same.” (Krishnamurti rarely used quotations in his public talks, but it is true that a few of his favorites were from Zen stories. Some self-styled practitioners of the Nyingma sect of Tibetan Buddhism may say, “The Dzogchen teaching is comparable to Krishnamurti’s teaching.” These statements may seem comparatively less absurd than comparing the fashionable gurus of the last and present centuries to Krishnamurti, but I cannot endorse them. The major mistake in these statements is that they think that the real teaching of Satipatthana, Zen, Dzogchen are accessible at present to the public----they are not. The teaching of Zen was, I believe, first propagated in the West during the middle of the present century by a Japanese Buddhist scholar, and since then various roshis have followed. Though Vivekananda went to the West earlier than Daisetsu Suzuki, the craze in the West for Hinduism started only when a famous group of “musicians” from England recommended a guru from India, and though they repudiated the guru soon after, the craze continued, with various Indian gurus taking advantage of it. After that came the fashions of Tibetan Buddhism and Theravada Buddhism which were started, most probably, by the young Americans and Europeans who were fed up with the Indian gurus, encouraged by the lamas and theras who were envious of the success of the Indian gurus in the West. The ordinary people of the present century (including the roshis, the lamas, and the theras just mentioned) have no access to the real teachings; what they know are only distortions of the real Zen, Dzogchen, and Satipatthana or any other Buddhist teachings for that matter. Rotten food is but poison. Yet we are, at present, lucky enough to be able to be in direct contact with Krishnamurti’s undistorted teachings through video and audio tapes and books. Beware of those who distort it!

我听过和读过那些拿拉杰尼希、马哈拉吉、Vimala Thakar (克传中提到过的一个被克治疗过的女人——译注)、U.G.克里希那穆提、拉马那马哈希、奥鲁宾多(上帝知道还有其他什么人!)和克里希那穆提进行比较的评论家。我并未声称我理解克里希那穆提的教诲,但是我确实理解,那就像拿卵石与钻石比较。持有那样观点的人没有任何辨别力,所以为什么不把这种工作教给职业“宝石学家”去做呢?你也许读到过有人拿克里希那穆提的教诲和南传佛教、禅宗、藏传佛教等等来比较。在斯里兰卡的时候,我读到一篇一个斯里兰卡著名的南传佛教的出家人写的报纸文章,他说,“克里希那穆提的教诲是建立在大念处经的基础上。” 有人告诉我,在《禅与真实》这本书中作者说:“克里希那穆提的教诲和禅的教诲本质上是一致的。” (克里希那穆提很少在公开演讲中使用引文,但有几个他喜欢引用的东西确实是来自禅宗故事。) 一些自称是藏传佛教宁玛派的修习者可能会说,“大圆满教诲与克里希那穆提的教诲类似。” 相对于拿本世纪和上世纪的流行古鲁和克里希那穆提进行比较,这些陈述可能显得不那么荒谬,但是我不能赞同它们。这些陈述中的主要错误是,他们认为四念处、禅、大圆满的真正教诲在目前是能够被公众获得的——但不是这样。我相信,禅的教诲首先是由一个日本佛教学者于本世纪中叶在西方最先传播的,此后各种日本禅师随之出现。虽然味味克阿南达去西方比铃木大拙要早,印度教在西方的流行还是始于一群著名的英国“音乐家”推荐了一个印度古鲁, 虽然不久之后他们否定了这个古鲁,这种流行延续了其他印度古鲁对它的利用。之后出现的藏传佛教和南传佛教的流行时尚,很可能是由那些厌烦了印度古鲁的欧美年轻人开始,并受到羡慕印度古鲁在西方的成功的喇嘛们和上座部出家人的鼓励。本世纪那些普通人(包括日本禅师、喇嘛、刚刚提到的上座部出家人)无法得到真正的教诲;他们知道的只是对真正的禅、大圆满、四念处或其他佛教教诲的曲解。腐烂的食物只是毒药。然而我们目前相当幸运,通过录像、录音和书籍,能够和克里希那穆提未被曲解的教诲直接接触。小心那些曲解它的人!


One of the latest fashions of the academic world is New Age science and the transpersonal psychology that is a part of it. I am not at all interested in it, but am going to write about it because some of the New Age scientists, especially some of the transpersonal psychologists, often misuse the names of Krishnamurti and Gurdjieff. It is nothing new for some scientists to be interested in Eastern thought. I read somewhere that Einstein got one of the hints, if not the hint for his Theory of Relativity from one of the ideas expressed in Srimad Bhagavatam. Oppenheimer quoted a phrase from Bhagavad Gita when he was commenting on the fact that an atomic bomb had been dropped on Hiroshima. (I would not be surprised even if I found a copy of the Secret Doctrine in their “private” libraries!) The latest craze for Eastern thought was started by the Californian hippies in the sixties, and the scientists who followed in the seventies formed the nucleus of the group of New Age scientists. The New Age scientists’ understanding of Eastern thought (unlike the older generation, I mean Einstein, Oppenheimer etc.) is about as good or as bad as that of the Californian hippies, but the general public rejects the latter and accepts the former as a kind of new gospel because the latter usually consist of dropouts,whereas most of the former have Ph.D.s!

学术界最新的时尚之一是新时代科学,超个人心理学是它的一部分。我对它完全没有兴趣,但是我要写到它,因为一些新时代科学家,特别是一些超个人心理学家,经常滥用克里希那穆提和葛吉夫的名字。一些科学家对东方思想有兴趣,这已经不是什么新鲜的事情了。我在某处读到爱因斯坦得到过的一个启示,是来自《圣典博伽瓦谭》的一个思想,似乎是对他的相对论的启示。奥本海默在对在广岛投放原子弹事件发表看法的时候引用了《薄伽梵歌》中的短句。(即使在他们的私人图书馆发现一份《秘密教义》我也不会感到惊奇!)最新的东方思想的流行始于六十年代加利福尼亚的嬉皮士,紧随其后的七十年代的科学家们形成了新时代科学家群体的核心。新时代科学家对东方思想的理解(不像老一辈人,我指爱因斯坦、奥本海默等人)和加利福尼亚的嬉皮士一样好或坏,社会大众拒绝后者而接受前者为一种新的福音,因为后者通常由辍学者组成,而前者大多数拥有博士头衔!


Krishnamurti was brought up by the Theosophists, and as the Theosophical Society had a very close connection with Tibetan Buddhism and when you talk about Tibetan Buddhism you cannot avoid the topic of Lobsang Rampa, I am going to write about these three things before describing my meetings with Krishnamurti.

克里希那穆提是被神智学者培养的,由于神智学会和藏传佛教有非常密切的联系,而谈论藏传佛教的时候你无法避开洛桑伦巴的话题,因此在描述与克里希那穆提的会面之前,我将要写到这三件事情。


 

0

  • 评论加载中,请稍候...
发评论

    发评论

    以上网友发言只代表其个人观点,不代表新浪网的观点或立场。

      

    新浪BLOG意见反馈留言板 电话:4000520066 提示音后按1键(按当地市话标准计费) 欢迎批评指正

    新浪简介 | About Sina | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站律师 | SINA English | 会员注册 | 产品答疑

    新浪公司 版权所有