HE WAS OBVIOUSLY intelligent, active, and given to reading a few select books. Though married, he was not a family man. He called himself an idealist and a social worker; he had been to prison for political reasons, and had many friends. He was not concerned with making a name either for himself or for the party, which he recognised as the same thing. He was really interested in doing social work which might lead to some human happiness. He was what you might call a religious man, but not sentimental or superstitious, nor a believer in any particular doctrine or ritual. He said he had come to talk over the problem of contradiction, not only within himself but in Nature and in the world. It seemed to him that this contradiction was inevitable: the intelligent and the stupid, the conflicting desires within oneself, the word in conflict with the act and the act with the thought. This contradiction he had found everywhere.

他显然很聪明、活跃、读过某些书。 虽然已婚，但他不是一个顾家的男人。 他称自己为理想主义者和社会工作者； 他曾因政治原因入狱，并有许多朋友。 他不关心使自己或政党出名， 他承认这是一回事。 他真的很有兴趣做社会工作，这可能会带来一些人类的幸福。 他是一个你可能称之为宗教的人， 但不是多愁善感或迷信的，也不是任何特定教义或仪式的信徒。 他说，他来这里是为了讨论矛盾的问题， 不仅在他自己内部，而且在自然界和世界上。 在他看来，这种矛盾是不可避免的：聪明人和愚蠢的人， 自己内心相互冲突的欲望， 与行为相冲突的话语，与思想相冲突的行为。 他发现到处都存在这种矛盾。

To be consistent is to be thoughtless. It is easier and safer to follow a pattern of conduct without deviation, to conform to an ideology or a tradition, than to risk the pain of thought. To obey authority, inner or outer, needs no questioning; it obviates thought, with its anxieties and disturbances. To follow our own conclusions, experiences, determinations, creates no contradictions within us; we are being consistent to our own purpose; we choose a particular path and follow it, unyielding and determined. Do not most of us seek a way of life which is not too disturbing, in which at least there is psychological security? And how we respect a man who lives up to his ideal! We make examples of such men, they are to be followed and worshipped, The approximation to an ideal, though it requires a certain amount of exertion and struggle, is on the whole pleasurable and gratifying; for after all, ideals are homemade, self-protected. You choose your hero, religious or worldly, and follow him. The desire to be consistent gives a peculiar strength and satisfaction, for in sincerity there is security. But sincerity is not simplicity, and without simplicity there can be no understanding. To be consistent to a well-thought-out pattern of conduct gratifies the urge for achievement, and in its success there is comfort and security. The setting up of an ideal and the constant approximation to it cultivates resistance, and adaptability is within the limits of the pattern. Consistency offers safety and certainty, and that is why we cling to it with desperation.

坚持就是轻率。 跟随一种行为模式而不偏离，遵循一种意识形态或传统， 比冒着思想痛楚的危险，更容易、更安全。 服从权威，无论是内在的还是外在的，都不需要质疑； 它消除了思想、以及它的焦虑和干扰。 遵循我们自己的结论、经验、决心， 不会在我们内部产生矛盾； 我们始终如一地坚持自己的目标； 我们选择一条特定的道路并遵循它，不屈不挠而坚定。 我们中的多数人，难道不是在寻求一种没有多少烦恼， 至少能带来心理安全的生活方式吗？ 而且，我们多么尊重一个不辜负自己理想的人！ 我们把这样的人作为榜样，他们被追随和崇拜， 接近一个理想，虽然它需要一定程度的努力和斗争， 但总的来说，是令人愉快和使人满意的； 毕竟，理想是自制的，受自我保护的。 你选择你的英雄，宗教的或世俗的，并跟随他。 坚定立场的这种欲望，给人一种奇特的力量和满足感， 因为在真诚中，有安全。 但真诚不是简单，没有简单就不可能有理解。 坚持一种深思熟虑的行为准则，满足了对成就的渴望， 在它的成功中，有舒适和安全。 理想的建立和对它的持续的接近，就是在培养阻力， 适应性受到了准则的限制。 这种一致性，提供了安全和确定，那就是为什么我们歇斯底里地依附于它。

To be in self-contradiction is to live in conflict and sorrow. The self, in its very structure, is contradictory; it is made up of many entities with different masks, each in opposition to the other. The whole fabric of the self is the result of contradictory interests and values, of many varying desires at different levels of its being; and these desires all beget their own opposites. The self, the “me,” is a network of complex desires, each desire having its own impetus and aim, often in opposition to other hopes and pursuits. These masks are taken on according to stimulating circumstances and sensations; so within the structure of the self, contradiction is inevitable. This contradiction within us breeds illusion and pain, and to escape from it we resort to all manner of self-deceptions which only increase our conflict and misery. When the inner contradiction becomes unbearable, consciously or unconsciously we try to escape through death, through insanity; or we give ourselves over to an idea, to a group, to a country, to some activity that will completely absorb our being; or we turn to organized religion, with its dogmas and rituals. So this split in ourselves leads either to further self-expansion or to self-destruction, insanity. Trying to be other than what we are cultivates contradiction; the fear of what is breeds the illusion of its opposite, and in the pursuit of the opposite we hope to escape from fear. Synthesis is not the cultivation of the opposite; synthesis does not come about through opposition, for all opposites contain the elements of their own opposites. The contradiction in ourselves leads to every kind of physical and psychological response whether gentle or violent, respectable or dangerous; and consistency only further confuses and obscures the contradiction. The one-pointed pursuit of a single desire, of a particular interest, leads to sell-enclosing opposition. Contradiction within brings conflict without and conflict indicates contradiction. Only through understanding the ways of desire is there freedom from sell-contradiction.

自我矛盾，就是生活在冲突与悲伤之内。 自我，就其结构而言，是矛盾的； 它由许多具有不同面具的实体组成，每个实体都与另一个相反。 自我的整个结构，是相互矛盾的兴趣和价值观、 在各个层面上的品种繁多的欲望结果； 这些欲望都播撒下自己的对立面。 自我，这个‘我’，是由复杂的欲望织就的一张网， 每个欲望都有自己的动力和目标，往往与其它的希望和追求背道而驰。 这些面具，是依据外部环境的刺激和感觉而选佩； 所以，在自我的框架内，矛盾是不可避免的。 我们内在的这种矛盾，滋生幻觉与痛苦， 为了逃离它， 我们采取各种各样的自我欺骗，却只是增加我们的冲突和痛苦。 当内在的矛盾变得难以忍受时， 有意或无意地，我们试图通过死亡，通过精神错乱来逃离； 或者我们把自己交给一个观念、 一个群体、一个国家、一个能够完全吸收我们存在的活动； 或者我们转向宗教组织，以及它的教规和仪式。 因此，我们自身的这种撕扯 要么导致进一步的自我扩张，要么导致自我毁灭，精神错乱。 试图超越我们自己，就是在培养矛盾； 对现状的恐惧，滋生出与之对立的幻象 —— ‘非现状’， 在追求‘非现状’的过程中，我们希望摆脱恐惧。 合成不是去培养‘非现状’； 合成不是通过对立而出现的， 因为，一切相对性的事物，都包含与之相反的事物。 我们自身的矛盾，导致各种生理和心理反应， 无论是温和的还是暴力的，体面的还是危险的； 而坚持只会导致进一步的混淆和掩饰矛盾。 一味追求一种欲望，一种特定的兴趣，导致封闭的自我的反对。 内在的矛盾引发外在的冲突，冲突指示出矛盾。 只有通过理解欲望的方式，才能摆脱自我矛盾。

Integration can never be limited to the upper layers of the mind; it is not something to be learnt in a school; it does not come into being with knowledge or with self-immolation. Integration alone brings freedom from consistency and contradiction; but integration is not a matter of fusing into one all desires and multiple interests. Integration is not conformity to a pattern, however noble and cunning; it must be approached, not directly, positively, but obliquely, negatively. To have a conception of integration is to conform to a pattern, which only cultivates stupidity and destruction. To pursue integration is to make of it an ideal, a self-projected goal. Since all ideals are self-projected, they inevitably cause conflict and enmity. What the self projects must be of its own nature, and therefore contradictory and confusing. Integration is not an idea, a mere response of memory, and so it cannot be cultivated. The desire for integration comes into being because of conflict; but through cultivating integration, conflict is not transcended. You may cover up, deny contradiction, or be unconscious of it; but it is there, waiting to break out.

整合永远不会被限于头脑的上层； 它不是在学校里学到的东西； 它不是通过知识或自我牺牲而实现的。 自在的整合才能摆脱一致性和矛盾性； 但整合不是熔化所有欲望和各种兴趣。 整合不遵循一种规则，无论这种规则多么高尚和聪明； 它必须接近，不是直接的、主动的，而是间接的、被动的。 抱持一个关于‘整合’的概念， 就是在遵循一种规则，这种规则只会培养愚蠢和破坏。 追求整合，就是使它成为一种理想，一种自我投射的目标。 而所有的理想都是自我投射的，它们不可避免地会引起冲突和敌对。 自我投射出的阴影，必定具有其自身的性质，因此是矛盾和令人困惑的。 整合不是一个想法，想法仅仅是记忆的反应，因此，它不能被培养。 由于感受到冲突，就产生了整合的欲望。 但通过培养整合，冲突并没有被超越。 你可以掩盖，否认矛盾，或者对它视而不见； 但它就在那里，等待着爆发。

Conflict is our concern and not integration. Integration, like peace, is a by-product not an end in itself; it is merely a result, and so of secondary importance. In understanding conflict there will not only be integration and peace, but something infinitely greater. Conflict cannot be suppressed or sublimated, nor is there a substitute for it. Conflict comes with craving, with the desire to continue, to become more – which does not mean that there must be stagnating contentment. “More” is the constant cry of the self; it is the craving for sensation, whether of the past or of the future. Sensation is of the mind, and so the mind is not the instrument for the understanding of conflict. Understanding is not verbal, it is not a mental process, and therefore not a matter of experience. Experience is memory, and without word, symbol, image, there is no memory. You may read volumes about conflicts but it can have nothing to do with the understanding of conflict. To understand conflict, thought must not interfere; there must be an awareness of conflict without the thinker. The thinker is the chooser who invariably takes sides with the pleasant, the gratifying, and thereby sustains conflict; he may get rid of one particular conflict but the soil is there for further conflict. The thinker justifies or condemns, and so prevents understanding. With the thinker absent, there is the direct experiencing of conflict, but not as an experience which an experiencer is undergoing. In the state of experiencing there is neither the experiencer nor the experienced. Experiencing is direct; then relationship it direct, and not through memory. It is this direct relationship that brings understanding. Understanding brings freedom from conflict; and with freedom from conflict there is integration.

冲突是我们关切的问题，而不是整合。 整合，如同和平，是一种副产品，其本身不是一个目的； 它只是一个结果，因此是次要的。 在理解冲突之中， 不仅会有整合与和平，而且会有无限伟大的某些东西。 冲突是无法压制或升华的，也没有替代物。 冲突来自渴望、想延续的欲望、想要更多 —— 这并不意味著一定得有停滞不前的满足感。 ‘更多’是自我不断的呼喊； 这是对感觉的渴望，无论是过去还是未来。 感觉是属于头脑的， 所以头脑不是理解冲突的工具。 理解不是口头上的， 它不是一个智力过程，因此不是一个经验问题。 经验就是记忆，没有文字、符号、形象，就没有记忆。 你可能读了很多卷关于冲突的书， 但它可能与理解冲突无关。 要理解冲突，思想就不能涉足； 必须在没有思想者的状态下，意识到冲突。 思想者是选择者， 他总是站在愉快、令人满意的一边，从而维持着冲突； 他可能会摆脱一场特定的冲突，但是冲突的土壤还在。 思想者在辩护或谴责，因此阻碍了理解。 在思想者缺席的情况下，直接地体验冲突， 而不是作为体验者在体验它。 在体验的状态中，既没有体验者，也没有被体验者。 体验是直接的； 那么，关系是直接的，而不是通过记忆。 正是这种直接的关系，带来理解。 理解带来免于冲突的自由； 有了从冲突中解放的自由，就有了整合。