加载中…
个人资料
无名
无名
  • 博客等级:
  • 博客积分:0
  • 博客访问:34,458
  • 关注人气:39
  • 获赠金笔:0支
  • 赠出金笔:0支
  • 荣誉徽章:
相关博文
推荐博文
正文 字体大小:

《转变的紧迫性》之“怎样活在这个世界上”(下)

(2010-04-05 10:24:28)
标签:

杂谈

分类: 克里希那穆提
 * * * 
     He came back the next day eagerly, and there was the bright light of enquiry in his eyes. 

第二天他很热切地回来了,他的眼中有着探询的亮光。

     Questioner: I want, if you are willing, to go further into this question of how I am to live in this world. I do now understand, with my heart and my mind, as you explained yesterday, the utter importance of ideals. I had quite a long struggle with it and have come to see the triviality of ideals. You are saying, aren't you, that when there are no ideals or escapes there is only the past, the thousand yesterdays which make up the "me"? So when I ask: "How am I to live in this world?" I have not only put a wrong question, but I have also made a contradictory statement, for I have placed the world and the "me" in opposition to each other. And this contradiction is what I call living. So when I ask the question, "How am I to live in this world?" I am really trying to improve this contradiction, to justify it, to modify it, because that's all I know; I don't know anything else. 

发问者:我想,如果你愿意的话,进一步深入我要怎样活在这个世界上这个问题。现在我确实以我的心灵和我的头脑了解到了,正如你昨天解释的,理想绝对的重要性。我曾与它做过漫长的斗争,已经看到了理想的琐碎。你说,如果没有理想或者逃避,就只有过去,一千个昨天构成的“我”,不是吗?所以当我问:“我要怎样活在这个世界上?”我不仅仅是提出了一个错误的问题,而且我也做了一个自相矛盾的表述,因为我把世界和“我”放在彼此对立的位置上。而这种矛盾,就是我们所谓的生活。所以当我问这个问题,“我要怎样活在这个世界上?”,我实际上是在努力强化这种矛盾,合理化它,调整它,因为这是我知道的所有事情;别的我什么也不知道。

     Krishnamurti: This then is the question we have now: must living always be in the past, must all activity spring from the past, is all relationship the outcome of the past, is living the complex memory of the past? That is all we know - the past modifying the present. And the future is the outcome of this past acting through the present. So the past, the present and the future are all the past. And this past is what we call living. The mind is the past, the brain is the past, the feelings are the past, and action coming from these is the positive activity of the known. This whole process is your life and all the relationship and activity that you know. So when you ask how you are to live in this world you are asking for a change of prisons. 

克:那么这就是我们现在有的问题了:是不是必须总是生活在过去,是不是所有的行为都必须源于过去,是不是所有的关系都是过去的结果,生活是不是过去的复杂记忆?这是我们知道的所有东西——过去调整现在。而未来是这个过去通过现在运作的结果。所以过去,现在和未来都是过去。而这过去我们称之为生活。心智是过去,头脑是过去,感情是过去,从这些而来的行动是来自已知的正向活动。这整个过程就是你所知道的你的生活,所有的关系和活动。所以当你问你要怎样活在这个世界上,你只是想要换换监狱。

     Questioner: I don't mean that. What I mean is: I see very clearly that my process of thinking and doing is the past working through the present to the future. This is all I know, and that's a fact. And I realize that unless there is a change in this structure I am caught in it, I am of it. From this the question inevitably arises: how am I to change? 

发问者:我不是这个意思。我的意思是:我非常清晰地看到,我思考和行为的过程是过去通过现在运作到未来。这是我知道的所有东西,这是个事实。我意识到除非我受困于其中的这个结构有种转变,否则我就是它的一部分。从这个问题必然产生另一个问题:我要怎样转变?

     Krishnamurti: To live in this world sanely there must be a radical change of the mind and of the heart. 

克:要清明健全地活在这个世界上,头脑和心灵必须要有彻底的转变。

     Questioner: Yes, but what do you mean by change? How am I to change if whatever I do is the movement of the past? I can only change myself, nobody else can change me. And I don't see what it means - to change. 

发问者:是对,但是你说的转变是什么意思?如果我无论做什么都是过去的运动,那我要如何转变?我只能改变我自己,别人无法改变我。我不知道这意味着什么——去转变。

     Krishnamurti: So the question "How am I to live in this world?" has now become "How am I to change?" - bearing in mind that the how doesn't mean a method, but is an enquiry to understand. What is change? Is there any change at all? Or can you ask whether there is any change at all only after there has been a total change and revolution? Let's begin again to find out what this word means. Change implies a movement from what is to something different. Is this something different merely an opposite, or does it belong to a different order altogether? If it is merely an opposite then it is not different at all, because all opposites are mutually dependent, like hot and cold, high and low. The opposite is contained within, and determined by, its opposite; it exists only in comparison, and things that are comparative have different measures of the same quality, and therefore they are similar. So change to an opposite is no change at all. Even if this going towards what seems different gives you the feeling that you are really doing something, it is an illusion. 

克:所以“我要怎样活在这个世界上?”这个问题现在变成了“我要如何转变?”——请铭记在心,如何并不意味着一个方法,而是为了了解的一种探询。什么是转变?究竟有任何转变这回事吗?或者你能不能问,是否只有在一场彻底的转变和革命之后,才可能有所改变?让我们还是先来弄清这个词的意思。转变意味着从现实状况向不同的某物的运动。这某物只是个对立面呢,还是它属于一种全然不同的秩序?如果它只是对立面,那么它根本没有任何不同,因为所有的对立面都是相互依存的,像热和冷,高和低。对立面包含在它的对立面中,并且由其决定;它只存在于比较中,比较级的事物具有的是相同品质的不同尺度,因而它们是相似的。所以变成对立面根本不是转变。即使这种似乎在朝着不同方向的行进给你一种你确实在做什么的感觉,那还是个幻觉。

     Questioner: Let me absorb this for a moment. 

发问者:让我先消化一下这些。

     Krishnamurti: So what are we concerned with now? Is it possible to bring about in ourselves the birth of a new order altogether that is not related to the past? The past is irrelevant to this enquiry, and trivial, because it is irrelevant to the new order.

克:那我们现在关注的是什么?是否有可能在我们自己身上诞生一种与过去无关的全然的新秩序?过去与这探询无关,过去是琐碎的,因为它与那新秩序无关。

     Questioner: How can you say it is trivial and irrelevant? We've been saying all along that the past is the issue, and now you say it is irrelevant. 

发问者:你怎么能说它是琐碎的不相干的?我们一直在说过去就是问题所在,现在你说它是不相干的。

     Krishnamurti: The past seems to be the only issue because it is the only thing that holds our minds and hearts. It alone is important to us. But why do we give importance to it? Why is this little space all-important? If you are totally immersed in it, utterly committed to it, then you will never listen to change. The man who is not wholly committed is the only one capable of listening, enquiring and asking. Only then will he be able to see the triviality of this little space. So, are you completely immersed, or is your head above the water? If your head is above the water then you can see that this little thing is trivial. Then you have room to look around. How deeply are you immersed? Nobody can answer this for you except yourself. In the very asking of this question there is already freedom and, therefore, one is not afraid. Then your vision is extensive. When this pattern of the past holds you completely by the throat, then you acquiesce, accept, obey, follow, believe. It is only when you are aware that this is not freedom that you are starting to climb out of it. So we are again asking: what is change, what is revolution? Change is not a movement from the known to the known, and all political revolutions are that. This kind of change is not what we are talking about. To progress from being a sinner to being a saint is to progress from one illusion to another. So now we are free of change as a movement from this to that. 

克:过去似乎是唯一的问题,因为它是唯一掌控我们头脑和心灵的东西。它本身对我们是重要的。但是,我们为什么要赋予它重要性?为什么这个狭小的空间那么重要?如果你完全沉浸其中,彻底禁锢其中,那么你就永远不会去聆听着改变。没有完全禁锢其中的人,是仅有的能够聆听,探究和质询的人。只有这时,他才能看到这个狭小空间的琐碎。所以,你是完全沉浸其中,还是你的头还在水面之上?如果你的头在水面之上,那么你就能看到这个小东西是琐碎的。那么你就有空间去看看周围了。你沉浸其中的程度有多深?没有人能回答这个问题,除了你自己。在提出这个问题本身时,就有了自由,所以你就不会害怕。接着你的视野就宽阔了。当这种过去的模式完全扼住你的喉咙,你就会默认,接受,服从,追随,相信。只有当你意识到这不是自由时,你才能开始爬出来。所以我们再问一次这个问题:什么是转变,什么是革命?转变不是从已知到已知的运动,所有的政治革命都是这样。这种改变不是我们正在讨论的东西。从一个罪人进步为一个圣人,只是从一个幻觉向另一个幻觉前进而已。所以现在我们摆脱了从这到那的运动这样的改变。

     Questioner: Have I really understood this? What am I to do with anger, violence and fear when they arise in me? Am I to give them free reign? How am I to deal with them? There must be change there, otherwise I am what I was before. 

发问者:我真的明白了这点吗?当我内在产生了愤怒、暴力和恐惧,我该拿它们怎么办?我要让它们自由发挥吗?我该怎么处理它们?那里必须得有改变,否则我就会和以前一样。

     Krishnamurti: Is it clear to you that these things cannot be overcome by their opposites? If so, you have only the violence, the envy, the anger, the greed. The feeling arises as the result of a challenge, and then it is named. This naming of the feeling re-establishes it in the old pattern. If you do not name it, which means you do not identify yourself with it, then the feeling is new and it will go away by itself. The naming of it strengthens it and gives it a continuity which is the whole process of thought. 

克:这些事情不能由它们的对立面来克服,这一点对你来说清楚了吗?如果是的话,你就只有暴力,嫉妒,愤怒和贪婪。这感觉作为一种挑战的结果出现,随后它就被命名了。对感觉的命名就把它在旧有的模式里重建了。如果你不给它命名,也就是说你不把自己与它认同在一起,那么这感觉就是新鲜的,它会自己消失掉。对它的命名加强了它,赋予了它延续性,这正是思想的整个过程。

     Questioner: I am being driven into a comer where I see myself actually as I am, and I see how trivial I am. From there what comes next? 

发问者:我被赶到了一个角落里,我如实地看到了自己的样子,我也看到了自己有多么琐碎。从这里接下来会发生什么?

     Krishnamurti: Any movement from what I am strengthens what I am. So change is no movement at all. Change is the denial of change, and now only can I put this question: is there a change at all? This question can be put only when all movement of thought has come to an end, for thought must be denied for the beauty of non-change. In the total negation of all movement of thought away from what is, is the ending of what is.

克:任何离开我的现实状况的运动,都会增强我的这种状况。所以那改变根本不是运动。转变是对改变的否定,只有现在我才能提出这个问题:究竟有转变这回事吗?只有当所有思想运动都停止的时候,才能提出这个问题,因为思想必须因为不变的美而被否定。在对所有离开实际状况的思想运动的全然否定中,就有了现实状况的终结。

0

阅读 评论 收藏 转载 喜欢 打印举报/Report
  • 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