IN ALL OUR experiences, there is always the experiencer, the observer, who is gathering to himself more and more or denying himself. Is that not a wrong process and is that not a pursuit which does not bring about the creative state? If it is a wrong process, can we wipe it out completely and put it aside? That can come about only when I experience, not as a thinker experiences, but when I am aware of the false process and see that there is only a state in which the thinker is the thought.
在我们的所有体验中， 總是有这个体驗者，这个觀察者，这谁越來越多地汇聚到他的身上，或者拒绝他自己。 这难道不是一个错误的过程，难道不是一种无法带来创造性状态的追求吗？ 如果这是一个错误的过程，我们能不能把它彻底抹去，放在一边？ 要做到，只有在我体验的时候，而不是作为一个思想家在体验， 但是当我意识到这种错误的过程 并看到只有一种状态：思想家是思想。
So long as I am experiencing, so long as I am becoming, there must be this dualistic action; there must be the thinker and the thought, two separate processes at work; there is no integration, there is always a centre which is operating through the will of action to be or not to be - collectively, individually, nationally and so on. Universally, this is the process.
只要我在体验，只要我在成为，就一定有这种二元性的行动； 必定有思想家和思想，两个分开的过程在运行； 没有融合， 总是有一个中心在运转，被‘成为’或‘不成为’的意志推动着 —— 集体、个人、国家等 普遍而言，就是这个过程。
So long as effort is divided into the experiencer and the experience, there must be deterioration. Integration is only possible when the thinker is no longer the observer. That is, we know at present there are the thinker and the thought, the observer and the observed, the experiencer and the experienced; there are two different states. Our effort is to bridge the two.
只要精力被分散为体验者和体验，就必然出现恶化。 只有当思想家不再是观察者时，融合才有可能。 也就是说，我们目前知道 有思想家和思想，观察者和被观察者，体验者和体验者； 有两种不同的状态。我们的精力是两者的桥梁。
The will of action is always dualistic. Is it possible to go beyond this will which is separative and discover a state in which this dualistic action is not? That can only be found when we directly experience the state in which the thinker is the thought. We now think the thought is separate from the thinker; but is that so? We would like to think it is, because then the thinker can explain matters through his thought. The effort of the thinker is to become more or become less; and therefore, in that struggle, in that action of the will, in `becoming', there is always the deteriorating factor; we are pursuing a false process and not a true process.
意志的行为总是二元性的。 有没有可能超越这种分散的意志，发现一种不是二元性行为的状态？ 只有当我们直接体验到‘思想家是思想’的状态时，才能发现。 我们现在认为思想与思想家是分开的；但事实真是如此吗？ 我们宁愿认为是这样，因为这样思想家就可以通过他的思想来解释事情。 思想家的精力变得更多或更少； 因此，在斗争中，在意志的行动中，在“成为”的过程中，总是有恶化的因素； 我们追求的是一个虚假的过程，而不是一个真实的过程。
Is there a division between the thinker and the thought? So long as they are separate, divided, our effort is wasted; we are pursuing a false process which is destructive and which is the deteriorating factor. We think the thinker is separate from his thought. When I find that I am greedy, possessive, brutal, I think I should not be all this. The thinker then tries to alter his thoughts and therefore effort is made to `become; in that process of effort he pursues the false illusion that there are two separate processes, whereas there is only one process. I think therein lies the fundamental factor of deterioration.
思想家和思想之间有区别吗？ 只要它们是分开的，分裂的，我们的精力就白费了； 我们正在追求一个虚假的进程，它是破坏性的，是恶化的因素。 我们认为思想家与他的思想是分开的。 当我发现自己贪婪、占有欲、残暴时，我想我不应该是这样。 然后，思想家试图改变他的想法，因此花费精力去‘成为’； 在这个努力的过程中 他追求一种虚幻的错觉，认为有两个分离的过程，而其实只有一个过程。 我认为这就是恶化的根本因素。
Is it possible to experience that state when there is only one entity and not two separate processes, the experiencer and the experience? Then perhaps we shall find out what it is to be creative, and what the state is in which there is no deterioration at any time, in whatever relationship man may be.
是否有可能体验到这种状态 当只有一个实体而非两个分离的，即体验者和体验的过程？ 然后，也许我们会发现什么是创造性的， 以及任何时候都没有恶化的状态，无论人是处于什么关系中。
I am greedy. I and greed are not two different states; there is only one thing and that is greed. If I am aware that I am greedy, what happens? I make an effort not to be greedy, either for sociological reasons or for religious reasons; that effort will always be in a small limited circle; I may extend the circle but it is always limited. Therefore the deteriorating factor is there.
我贪婪。 我和贪婪不是两种不同的状态；只有一个状态，那就是贪婪。 如果我知道自己很贪婪，在发生什么？ 我努力不贪婪，无论是出于社会原因，还是出于宗教原因； 这种努力将永远处于一个小小的有限的圈子里； 我可以扩展圆圈，但它总是有限的。 因此，恶化因素是存在的。
But when I look a little more deeply and closely, I see that the maker of effort is the cause of greed and he is greed itself; and I also see that there is no `me' and greed, existing separately, but that there is only greed. If I realize that I am greedy, that there is not the observer who is greedy but I am myself greed, then our whole question is entirely different; our response to it is entirely different; then our effort is not destructive.
但当我更深入、更仔细地观察时， 我看到努力的制造者是贪婪的原因，他就是贪婪本身； 我也看到，“我”和贪婪并不是分开的，存在的只有贪婪。 如果我意识到我是贪婪的，没有那位贪婪的观察者，我自己就是贪婪， 那么，我们的整个问题就完全不同了；我们对它的反应就完全不同； 那么，我们的精力就不是破坏性的。
What will you do when your whole being is greed, when whatever action you do is greed? Unfortunately, we don't think along those lines. There is the `me', the superior entity, the soldier who is controlling, dominating. To me that process is destructive. It is an illusion and we know why we do it. I divide myself into the high and the low in order to continue. If there is only greed, completely, not `I' operating greed, but I am entirely greed, then what happens?
当你的整个存在都是贪婪时，当你所做的任何行为都是贪婪时，你会怎么做？ 不幸的是，我们没有按照这些思路思考。 有这位“我”，这位超级实体，这位控制、支配的军人。 对我来说，那种过程是破坏性的。 它是一种幻觉，我们知道我们为什么要这样做。 我把自己分为高与低，以便继续。 如果只有贪婪，这个整体，不是“我”在操作贪婪，而是我的整体就是贪婪， 那么，会发生什么？
Surely then there is a different process at work altogether, a different problem comes into being. It is that problem which is creative, in which there is no sense of `I' dominating, becoming, positively or negatively. We must come to that state if we would be creative. In that state, there is no maker of effort. It is not a matter of verbalizing or of trying to find out what that state is; if you set about it in that way you will lose and you will never find.
必然有一个完全不同的过程在工作，一个不同的问题出现了。 正是这个问题，是创造性的， 在这个问题中，没有“我”在积极或消极的支配、成为的感觉。 如果我们要有创造力，我们必须处于那种状态。 在那种状态下，没有努力的制造者。 它不是口头表达或试图找出这种状态是什么的问题； 如果你以这种方式着手，你将失去，你将永远找不到。
What is important is to see that the maker of effort and the object towards which he is making effort are the same. That requires enormously great understanding, watchfulness, to see how the mind divides itself into the high and the low - the high being the security, the permanent entity - but still remaining a process of thought and therefore of time. If we can understand this as direct experience, then you will see that quite a different factor comes into being.
重要的是看到努力的制造者和他努力的对象是相同的。 这需要极大的理解、警觉、 看看这颗头脑如何把它自己分成高低 —— 高是安全，是永久的实体。 —— 但仍然是一个思考的过程，因此也是一个时间的过程。 如果我们能理解这，直接地体验， 然后你会看到一个完全不同的因素出现了。