• 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:
正文 字体大小:

[转载][译文] 介绍克里希那穆提

(2011-04-07 10:14:47)


分类: 网友作品

Introducing Krishnamurti

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


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.


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

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。

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…


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.


 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.


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.”


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.


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.”


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


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!


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.




  • 评论加载中,请稍候...




    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