MAN IS AN amphibian who lives simultaneously in two worlds - the given and the homemade, the world of matter, life and consciousness and the world of symbols. In our thinking we make use of a great variety of symbol-systems - linguistic, mathematical, pictorial, musical, ritualistic. Without such symbol-systems we should have no art, no science, no law, no philosophy, not so much as the rudiments of civilization: in other words, we should be animals.

人是一种两栖动物，同时生活在两个世界上 —— 给定的和自制的物质世界，生命和意识的符号世界。 在我们的思维中，我们使使用各种各样的符号系统 —— 语言、数学、绘画、音乐、礼仪。 没有这样的符号系统，我们应该没有艺术，没有科学，没有法律，没有哲学， 没有那么多作为文明的雏形：换句话说，我们应该是动物。

Symbols, then, are indispensable. But symbols - as the history of our own and every other age makes so abundantly clear - can also be fatal. Consider, for example, the domain of science on the one hand, the domain of politics and religion on the other. Thinking in terms of, and acting in response to, one set of symbols, we have come, in some small measure, to understand and control the elementary forces of nature. Thinking in terms of and acting in response to, another set of symbols, we use these forces as instruments of mass murder and collective suicide.

因此，符号是不可或缺的。 但是符号 —— 作为我们自己和其他每个时代的历史，都非常清楚 —— 也可能是致命的。 考察如下情景，一种是科学领域，另一种是政治和宗教领域。 根据一组符号进行思考并采取行动， 在某种程度上，我们理解和控制着自然的基本力量。 通过符号来思考，并以行动响应，形成另一组符号， 我们使用这些力量作为大规模谋杀和集体性自杀的工具。

In the first case the explanatory symbols were well chosen, carefully analysed and progressively adapted to the emergent facts of physical existence. in the second case symbols originally ill-chosen were never subjected to thoroughgoing analysis and never re-formulated so as to harmonize with the emergent facts of human existence. Worse still, these misleading symbols were everywhere treated with a wholly unwarranted respect, as though, in some mysterious way, they were more real than the realities to which they referred.

在第一种情景下，解释性符号经过精心挑选，经过仔细分析， 并逐渐适应现实存在中涌现的事实。 在第二种情景下，原先选择不当的符号从未被选出，并进行彻底地分析， 从未重新制定，以便于与人类现存的新兴事实相协调。 尽管如此，更糟的是，这些误导性的符号到处都是，并受到完全没有根据的尊重， 仿佛以某种神秘的方式，使得它们比所代表的东西更真实。

In the contexts of religion and politics, words are not regarded as standing, rather inadequately, for things and events; on the contrary, things and events are regarded as particular illustrations of words. Up to the present symbols have been used realistically only in those fields which we do not feel to be supremely important. In every situation involving our deeper impulses we have insisted on using symbols, not merely unrealistically, but idolatrously, even insanely. The result is that we have been able to commit, in cold blood and over long periods of time, acts of which the brutes are capable only for brief moments and at the frantic height of rage, desire or fear.

在宗教和政治背景中， 言词不被视为长期有效的，对于事物和事件来说，它是相当不足的； 相反，事物和事件被视为用言词描述的特例。 到目前为止， 符号只是被实际地应用于那些我们觉得不是至高无上的领域内。 在涉及我们更深层次冲动的每一种情况下， 我们坚持使用符号，不仅是不切实际，而且搞偶像崇拜，甚至到了疯狂的地步。 其结果就是，在冷兵器时代以及更久远的时期，我们已经犯下了 只有野蛮人在短暂时刻，在愤怒、欲望或恐惧的疯癫时刻才可能作出的行为。

Because they use and worship symbols, men can become idealists; and, being idealists, they can transform the animal's intermittent greed into the grandiose imperialisms of a Rhodes or a J. P. Morgan; the animal's intermittent love of bullying into Stalinism or the Spanish Inquisition; the animal's intermittent attachment to its territory into the calculated frenzies of nationalism.

因为他们使用和崇拜符号，人变成了理想主义者； 而且，作为理想主义者，他们可以 把动物的间歇性贪婪转化为宏伟的帝国主义：如罗德岛或摩根大通； 把动物的间歇性恐吓转化为斯大林主义或西班牙宗教裁判所； 把动物对领地的间歇性依附转化为精心策划的、对民族主义的狂热。

Happily, they can also transform the animal's intermittent kindliness into the lifelong charity of an Elizabeth Fry or a Vincent de Paul; the animal's intermittent devotion to its mate and its young into that reasoned and persistent co-operation which, up to the present, has proved strong enough to save the world from the consequences of the other, the disastrous kind of idealism. Will it go on being able to save the world? The question cannot be answered. All we can say is that, with the idealists of nationalism holding the A-bomb, the odds in favour of the idealists of co-operation and charity have sharply declined.

令人高兴的是，他们也可以 把动物的间歇性善良转化为终生的慈善事业：如伊丽莎白·弗莱或文森特·德·保罗； 把动物的间歇性地对它的伴侣和它的幼崽的奉献转化为理性和持续性的合作 —— 这种合作强大到足以拯救世界 以避免灾难性的理想主义的后果。 它会继续，能够继续拯救世界吗？这个问题无法回答。 我们能说的就是，在民族主义的理想主义者拿着原子弹的情况下， 有利于合作和慈善的理想主义者的可能性，已经急剧下降。

Even the best cookery book is no substitute for even the worst dinner. The fact seems sufficiently obvious. And yet, throughout the ages, the most profound philosophers, the most learned and acute theologians have constantly fallen into the error of identifying their purely verbal constructions with facts, or into the yet more enormous error of imagining that symbols are somehow more real than what they stand for.

即使是最好的烹饪书也不能代替最糟糕的晚餐。 这个事实似乎足够明显。 然而，在整个历史长河中，最深刻的哲学家们、最有学问的和敏锐的神学家们 不断地陷入这种错误中，把他们的纯语言结构与事实等同， 或者犯下更大的错误，想当然地以为：符号在某种程度上比它们所指代的事物更真实。

Their word-worship did not go without protest. "Only the spirit," said St. Paul, "gives life; the letter kills." "And why," asks Eckhart, "why do you prate of God? Whatever you say of God is untrue." At the other end of the world the author of one of the Mahayana sutras affirmed that "the truth was never preached by the Buddha, seeing that you have to realize it within yourself". Such utterances were felt to be profoundly subversive, and respectable people ignored them. The strange idolatrous over-estimation of words and emblems continued unchecked. Religions declined; but the old habit of formulating creeds and imposing belief in dogmas persisted even among the atheists.

他们的言语崇拜没有遇到抗议。 “只有精神，”圣保罗说，“才能赋予生命；这文字杀。” “为什么，”埃克哈特问道，“你为什么赞美上帝？ 无论你说什么，上帝都是不真实的。” 在世界的另一端，其中一部大乘佛经的作者确信： “真理从未被佛陀宣讲过，要看到那，你必须在你的里面意识到它”。 这样的言论让人觉得很深刻和颠覆性，而受人尊敬的人却对此不屑一顾。 奇怪的是，偶像崇拜，对文字和象征的高估仍在继续猖獗。 宗教衰落了； 但它制定的旧习俗、戒条、教条化的强制性信仰，却在延续，甚至，蔓延于无神论者之中。

In recent years logicians and semanticists have carried out a very thorough analysis of the symbols, in terms of which men do their thinking. Linguistics has become a science, and one may even study a subject to which the late Benjamin Whorf gave the name of meta-linguistics. All this is greatly to the good; but it is not enough. Logic and semantics, linguistics and meta-linguistics - these are purely intellectual disciplines. They analyse the various ways, correct and incorrect, meaningful and meaningless, in which words can be related to things, processes and events. But they offer no guidance, in regard to the much more fundamental problem of the relationship of man in his psychophysical totality, on the one hand, and his two worlds, of data and of symbols, on the other.

近年来， 逻辑学家和语义学家对人们赖以思考的符号进行了非常透彻的分析。 语言学已经成为一门科学， 甚至已经研究以本杰明·沃尔夫（Benjamin Whorf）命名的科目：元语言学。 所有这些都是大有好处的；但这还不够。 逻辑和语义学、语言学和元语言学 —— 这些是纯知识的学科。 它们分析了各种方式，正确和不正确的，有意义和无意义的， 在其中，词语可以与事物、过程和事件相关联。 但是，对于人的更根本的问题： 作为身心一体的精神物理状态的人，与他的两个世界，与数据和符号组成的世界的关系。 它们并没有提供指导。

In every region and at every period of history, the problem has been repeatedly solved by individual men and women. Even when they spoke or wrote, these individuals created no systems - for they knew that every system is a standing temptation to take symbols too seriously, to pay more attention to words than to the realities for which the words are supposed to stand. Their aim was never to offer ready-made explanations and panaceas; it was to induce people to diagnose and cure their own ills, to get them to go to the place where man's problem and its solution present themselves directly to experience.

在每一片地区和每一段历史时期， 这个问题都有被个别的男人和女人反复地解决。 即使他们讲话或写作，这些人没有创造出任何的系统 —— 因为他们知道 每个系统都是一个长期性的诱惑，其中的符号被严重高估， 以至于更注重文字而非这些文字应该代表的真实事物。 他们的目标从来都不是提供现成的解释和灵丹妙药； 而是诱导人们去诊断和治愈他们自己的疾病， 让他们得到人的问题及其解决方案，直接地去体会。

In this volume of selections from the writings and recorded talks of Krishnamurti, the reader will find a clear contemporary statement of the fundamental human problem, together with an invitation to solve it in the only way in which it can be solved - for and by himself. The collective solutions, to which so many so desperately pin their faith, are never adequate.

本书内容选自克里希那穆提的著作和录音讲话， 读者会发现他对人类基本问题的一个清晰的、现代的描述， 邀请一起去解决它，以其唯一的解决方式 —— 来自于他，并由他提出。 有一种集体性的解决方案，很多人拼命寄托于他们自己的信仰，它永远是不恰当的。

"To understand the misery and confusion that exist within ourselves, and so in the world, we must first find clarity within ourselves, and that clarity comes about through right thinking. This clarity is not to be organized, for it cannot be exchanged with another. Organized group thought is merely repetitive. Clarity is not the result of verbal assertion, but of intense self-awareness and right thinking. Right thinking is not the outcome of or mere cultivation of the intellect, nor is it conformity to pattern, however worthy and noble. Right thinking comes with self-knowledge. Without understanding yourself you have no basis for thought; without self-knowledge, what you think is not true."

“要理解存在于我们内心的痛苦和困惑，进而理解这个世界， 我们必须首先找到自己内心的清晰，而这种清晰通过正确的思考而来。 这种清晰不是被组织化的，因为它不能与另一个交换。 组织化的群体思维只是重复性的。 清晰不是言语上的主张，而是强烈的‘自我-意识’和正确的思考。 正确的思考不是来自于单纯的智力培养， 也不是来自于遵从准则 —— 无论它多么有价值和高尚。 正确的思考伴随着自我认识。 不理解你自己，你就没有思考的基础； 没有自知之明，你所思考的就不是真的。”

This fundamental theme is developed by Krishnamurti in passage after passage. `'There is hope in men, not in society, not in systems, organized religious systems, but in you and in me." Organized religions, with their mediators, their sacred books, their dogmas, their hierarchies and rituals, offer only a false solution to the basic problem. "When you quote the Bhagavad Gita, or the Bible, or some Chinese Sacred Book, surely you are merely repeating, are you not? And what you are repeating is not the truth. It is a lie, for truth cannot be repeated."

这个基本主题，是由克里希那穆提在一个又一个的时期中被展开的。 “希望在于人，不在于社会，不在于系统、有组织的宗教系统，而是在你我的身上。” 组织化的宗教，有他们的调解人，他们的圣书，他们的教条，他们的等级制度和仪式， 对这个基本问题，只提供一个错误的解决方案。 “当你引用《博伽梵歌》或圣经，或者一些中国的经典书籍， 你肯定只是在重复，不是吗？而你所重复的，不是事实。 它是一個謊言，因為真理不能被重复。”

A lie can be extended, propounded and repeated, but not truth; and when you repeat truth, it ceases to be truth, and therefore sacred books are unimportant. It is through self-knowledge, not through belief in somebody else's symbols, that a man comes to the eternal reality, in which his being is grounded. Belief in the complete adequacy and superlative value of any given symbol system leads not to liberation, but to history, to more of the same old disasters. "Belief inevitably separates. If you have a belief, or when you seek security in your particular belief, you become separated from those who seek security in some other form of belief. All organized beliefs are based on separation, though they may preach brotherhood."

谎言可以延伸， 提出和被重复，但真理不能； 当你重复真理时，它不再是真理，因此神圣的书籍不重要。 它是通过自我认识，而非相信某人的某个符号， 那么，一个人进入这永恒的现实，而他自身的存在，就是这个基底。 对任何给定的符号系统以完全充足和最高价值的信仰，不会导致解放， 而是只能导致历史的重复，导致更多相同的历史灾难。 “信仰不可避免地导致分裂。 如果你有一个信仰，或者当你在你的特定信仰中寻求安全感时， 你就与那些在其它某种形式的信仰中寻求安全感的人分裂了。 所有组织化的信仰都基于这种分裂，虽然他们可能宣扬友爱。”

The man who has successfully solved the problem of his relations with the two worlds of data and symbols, is a man who has no beliefs. With regard to the problems of practical life he entertains a series of working hypotheses, which serve his purposes, but are taken no more seriously than any other kind of tool or instrument. With regard to his fellow beings and to the reality in which they are grounded, he has the direct experiences of love and insight. It is to protect himself from beliefs that Krishnamurti has "not read any sacred literature, neither the Bhagavad Gita nor the Upanishads".

成功解决了他与数据和符号组成的这两个世界之间的关系问题的人， 是一个没有信仰的人。 关于实际生活中的问题，他提出了一系列工作假设，以服务于他的意图， 却没有给予比任何其他类型的工具或仪器更多的重要性。 带着对他的同胞和他们所处的现实情景的尊敬， 他直接地体验着爱和洞察 —— 它保护着他自己不受信仰的影响， 保护着那位“没有读过《博伽梵歌》、《奥义书》或任何经典”的克里希那穆提先生。

The rest of us do not even read sacred literature; we read our favourite newspapers, magazines and detective stories. This means that we approach the crisis of our times, not with love and insight, but "with formulas, with systems" - and pretty poor formulas and systems at that. But "men of good will should not have formulas; for formulas lead, inevitably, only to "blind thinking". Addiction to formulas is almost universal. Inevitably so; for "our system of upbringing is based upon what to think, not on how to think".

我们其他人甚至没有读过神圣的典籍； 我们阅读我们最喜欢的报纸、杂志和侦探小说。 这意味着，我们接近我们时代的危机，没有爱和洞察， 却“带着公式、系统” —— 而且是那些相当糟糕的公式和系统。 但是，“善意的人不应该有公式；因为公式不可避免地只会导致‘盲从的思考’。 沉迷于公式，几乎是世界通病。 那也是没有办法的，因为“我们的教养系统是基于想什么，而不是怎么去想”。

We are brought up as believing and practising members of some organization - the Communist or the Christian, the Moslem, the Hindu, the Buddhist, the Freudian. Consequently "you respond to the challenge, which is always new, according to an old pattern; and therefore your response has no corresponding validity, newness, freshness. If you respond as a Catholic or a Communist, you are responding - are you not? - according to a patterned thought. Therefore your response has no significance. And has not the Hindu, the Mussulman, the Buddhist, the Christian created this problem? As the new religion is the worship of the State, so the old religion was the worship of an idea."

我们被培养成相信组织，并作为组织的一员去践行的人，这个组织可能是 —— 共产主义或基督教徒、穆斯林、印度教、佛教、弗洛伊德教。 因此，“你对挑战的回应，是根据旧的模式，而挑战总是新的； 因此，您的回应没有相应的有效性、时效性、崭新性。 如果你以天主教徒或共产主义者的身份回应， 你在回应 —— 你没有吗？—— 根据格式化的思想。因此，您的回应没有意义。 并且，这个问题难道不是印度教徒、穆斯林、佛教徒、基督徒创造出的？ 然而，新的宗教是对国家的崇拜，因此，旧的宗教已经成了一种对观念的崇拜。”

If you respond to a challenge according to the old conditioning, your response will not enable you to understand the new challenge. Therefore what "one has to do, in order to meet the new challenge, is to strip oneself completely, denude oneself entirely of the background and meet the challenge anew". In other words symbols should never be raised to the rank of dogmas, nor should any system be regarded as more than a provisional convenience. Belief in formulas and action in accordance with these beliefs cannot bring us to a solution of our problem. "It is only through creative understanding of ourselves that there can be a creative world, a happy world, a world in which ideas do not exist." A world in which ideas do not exist would be a happy world, because it would be a world without the powerful conditioning forces which compel men to undertake inappropriate action, a world without the hallowed dogmas in terms of which the worst crimes are justified, the greatest follies elaborately rationalized.

如果您根据旧的条件反射应对一个挑战， 您的响应将无法使你理解这个新的挑战。 因此，“一个人必须要做，为了迎接新的挑战， 就是完全脱光自己，完全剥离自己的背景，并重新面对挑战”。 换句话说，符号永远不应该提升到教条的等级， 也不应将任何系统视为不仅仅是暂时的便利。 对公式的信仰，以及根据这些信仰而采取行动，不能解决我们的问题。 “只有通过对我们自己的创造性理解 才有一个创造性的世界，一个快乐的世界，一个不存在观念的世界。” 一个不存在观念的世界将是一个快乐的世界， 因为那将是一个没有强权去迫使人采取不适当的局限性行为的世界， 一个没有神圣教条的世界 —— 那种把最严重的罪行当作是正当的，把最大的愚蠢被精心设计成合理的世界。

An education that teaches us not how but what to think is an education that calls for a governing class of pastors and masters. But "the very idea of leading somebody is antisocial and anti-spiritual". To the man who exercises it, leadership brings gratification of the craving for power; to those who are led, it brings the gratification of the desire for certainty and security.

一种不教我们怎么去想，而是教我们应该想什么的教育 是一种需要牧师和大师的统治阶级的教育。 但是“去引导某人的想法，这种观念本身就是反社会的、反人性的”。 对于行使它的人来说，领导力带来了对权力的渴望的满意； 对于那些被引导的人，它带来了对确定性和安全性的渴望的满意。

The guru provides a kind of dope. But, it may be asked, "What are you doing? Are you not acting as our guru?" "Surely," Krishnamurti answers, "I am not acting as your guru, because, first of all, I am not giving you any gratification. I am not telling you what you should do from moment to moment, or from day to day, but I am just pointing out something to you; you can take it or leave it, depending on you, not on me. I do not demand a thing from you, neither your worship, nor your flattery, nor your insults, nor your gods. I say," This is a fact; take it or leave it. And most of you will leave it, for the obvious reason that you do not find gratification in it."

这位导师提供了一种兴奋剂。 但是，可能会有人问：“你在做什么？你不是在充当我们的导师吗？” “当然，”克里希那穆提回答说： “我没有充当你的上师，因为，首先，我没有给你任何满意感。 我不是在告诉你，你应该时时刻刻做什么，或者日复一日地做什么， 我只是向你指出一些东西；你可以拿走它，也可以离开它， 你说了算，我不管。 我不要求你做任何事情，既不要你的崇拜，也不要你的奉承，也不要你的侮辱，也不是你的神明。 我说：‘这是一个事实；要就要，不要拉倒。’ 你们中的大多数人都会离开它，原因很明显，你在里面找不到满意感。”

What is it precisely that Krishnamurti offers? What is it that we can take if we wish, but in all probability shall prefer to leave? It is not, as we have seen, a system of belief, a catalogue of dogmas, a set of ready-made notions and ideals. It is not leadership, not mediation, not spiritual direction, not even example. It is not ritual, not a church, not a code, not uplift or any form of inspirational twaddle.

克里希那穆提所提供的究竟是什么？ 如果我们愿意，我们可以拿走什么，还是宁愿离开？ 是的，正如我们所看到的，它不是一个信仰体系，一个教条清单，一套现成的观念和理想。 它不是领导力，不是冥想，不是灵性指导，甚至不是榜样。 它不是仪式，不是教会，不是守则，不是提升灵性或任何形式的鼓舞人心的废话。

Is it, perhaps, self-discipline? No; for self-discipline is not, as a matter of brute fact, the way in which our problem can be solved. In order to find the solution, the mind must open itself to reality, must confront the givenness of the outer and inner worlds without preconceptions or restrictions. (God's service is perfect freedom. Conversely, perfect freedom is the service of God.) In becoming disciplined, the mind undergoes no radical change; it is the old self, but "tethered, held in control".

也许，它是自律？ 不；因为，作为一个残酷的事实，自律不是我们解决问题的方式。 为了找到解决方案，头脑必须向现实敞开胸襟， 必须面对外部世界和内部世界的给予，而没有成见或限制。 （上帝的服务是完全的自由。反过来，完美的自由是上帝的服务） 在变得纪律严明的过程中，这颗头脑没有发生根本性的变化； 它是陈旧的自我，只不过是“被拴着，处于控制之中”。

Self-discipline joins the list of things which Krishnamurti does not offer. Can it be, then, that what he offers is prayer? Again, the reply is in the negative. "Prayer may bring you the answer you seek; but that answer may come from your unconscious, or from the general reservoir, the storehouse of all your demands. The answer is not the still voice of God."

自律加入了克里希那穆提所不提供的清单。 那么，难道他提供的就是祈祷吗？再一次，答复是否定的。 “祈祷可能会给你带来你所寻求的答案； 但这个答案可能来自你的潜意识，或者来自集体潜意识，这个您所有需求的仓库。 这个答案不是来自上帝那宁静的声音。”

Consider, Krishnamurti goes on, "what happens when you pray. By constant repetition of certain phrases, and by controlling your thoughts, the mind becomes quiet, doesn't it? At least, the conscious mind becomes quiet. You kneel as the Christians do, or you sit as the Hindus do, and you repeat and repeat, and through that repetition the mind becomes quiet. In that quietness there is the intimation of something. That intimation of something, for which you have prayed, may be from the unconscious, or it may be the response of your memories. But, surely, it is not the voice of reality; for the voice of reality must come to you; it cannot be appealed to, you cannot pray to it. You cannot entice it into your little cage by doing puja, bhajan and all the rest of it, by offering it flowers, by placating it, by suppressing yourself or emulating others. Once you have learned the trick of quietening the mind, through the repetition of words, and of receiving hints in that quietness, the danger is - unless you are fully alert as to whence those hints come - that you will be caught, and then prayer becomes a substitute for the search for Truth. That which you ask for you get; but it is not the truth. If you want, and if you petition, you will receive, but you will pay for it in the end."

考虑一下，克里希那穆提继续道，“当你祈祷时，发生着什么。 通过不断重复某些短语，通过控制你的思想，头脑变得安静，不是吗？ 至少，显意识层的头脑变得安静。 你跪下，就像基督徒一样，或者你像印度教徒一样坐着， 然后你重复、重复，通过这种重复，头脑变得安静。 在那安静中，有某种东西的暗示。 那个暗示之物，你为之祈祷的东西， 可能来自无意识，也可能是你记忆中的反应。 但是，当然，这不是现实的声音；因为现实的声音必须来找你； 它不能被诉诸，你不能向它祈祷。 你不能通过做法会、唱赞美诗和所有其余的， 通过献花，通过安抚，通过压制自己或模仿他人而引诱它。 一旦你学会了安抚头脑的诀窍， 通过重复词语，在这种安静中接收暗示，其危险就是 —— 除非你完全警惕：这些暗示从何而来 —— 你就会被逮捕，那么，祈祷就变成了寻求真理的替代品。 你所要求的，你得到了；但它不是真理。 如果你愿意，如果你祈求，你会得到，但你最终会为此付出代价。”

From prayer we pass to yoga, and yoga, we find, is another of the things which Krishnamurti does not offer. For yoga is concentration, and concentration is exclusion. "You build a wall of resistance by concentration on a thought which you have chosen, and you try to ward off all the others." What is commonly called meditation is merely "the cultivation of resistance, of exclusive concentration on an idea of our choice". But what makes you choose?

我们从祈祷走向瑜伽，我们发现瑜伽是另一个克里希那穆提所不提供的东西。 因为瑜伽是专注，专注就是排除。 “你筑起一堵抵抗之墙，以便于专注于你所选择的某个思想， 你试图避开所有其余的东西。” 一般来说，所谓的冥想只是 “对抵抗力的培养，排它性的专注于我们所选的某个想法”。 但是，是什么让你去选择？

"What makes you say this is good, true, noble, and the rest is not? Obviously the choice is based on pleasure, reward or achievement; or it is merely a reaction of one's conditioning or tradition. Why do you choose at all? Why not examine every thought? When you are interested in the many, why choose one? Why not examine every interest? Instead of creating resistance, why not go into each interest as it arises, and not merely concentrate on one idea, one interest? After all, you are made up of many interests, you have many masks, consciously and unconsciously. Why choose one and discard all the others, in combating which you spend all your energies, thereby creating resistance, conflict and friction. Whereas if you consider every thought as it arises - every thought, not just a few thoughts - then there is no exclusion. But it is an arduous thing to examine every thought. Because, as you are looking at one thought, another slips in. But if you are aware without domination or justification, you will see that, by merely looking at that thought, no other thought intrudes. It is only when you condemn, compare, approximate, that other thoughts enter in."

“是什么让你说：这是好的，真实的，高尚的，而其余的则不是？ 显然，选择是基于快乐、奖励或成就； 或者它只是一个人的条件反射或传统。 你为什么选择？为什么不检查每一个思想？ 当您对众多感兴趣时，为什么要选择一个？ 为什么不检查每一个兴趣呢？ 为什么要去制造阻力，为什么不在每一种兴趣出现时就进入它，而不仅仅是专注于一个想法，一个兴趣？ 毕竟，你是由很多兴趣组成的，你有很多面具，有意的或无意的。 为什么要选择一个并丢弃其余所有的，在（挑选的）战斗中，你花掉了所有的精力， 从而制造出阻力、冲突和摩擦。 然而，如果你考虑每一个思想，当它出现时 —— 每一个想法，而不仅仅是某些思想 —— 那么，就没必要去排除。 但是，检查每一个思想是艰苦的。 因为，当你看到一个想法时，另一个想法会滑入。 但是，如果你觉察，而不去支配或争辩， 你将看到，仅仅通过看那个思想，没有其余的思想的侵入。 只有当你在谴责、比较、估算的时候，其余的思想才会进入。”

"Judge not that ye be not judged." The gospel precept applies to our dealings with ourselves no less than to our dealings with others. Where there is judgement, where there is comparison and condemnation, openness of mind is absent; there can be no freedom from the tyranny of symbols and systems, no escape from the past and the environment. Introspection with a predetermined purpose, self-examination within the framework of some traditional code, some set of hallowed postulates - these do not, these cannot help us.

“别去审判，你就不被审判。” 福音戒律适用于我们自己的交往不亚于我们与别人的交往。 哪里有判断，哪里就有比较，谴责，哪里就没有头脑的开放性； 也就没有摆脱符号和制度的暴政的自由，也就无法从过去和环境中解脱。 带有预定意图的自省， 在某个传统准则，某个神圣的假设的框架内进行的自我检查 —— 没有用，这些都帮不了我们。

There is a transcendent spontaneity of life, a `creative Reality', as Krishnamurti calls it, which reveals itself as immanent only when the perceiver's mind is in a state of `alert passivity', of `choiceless awareness'. Judgement and comparison commit us irrevocably to duality. Only choiceless awareness can lead to non-duality, to the reconciliation of opposites in a total understanding and a total love. Ama et fac quod vis. If you love, you may do what you will. But if you start by doing what you will, or by doing what you don't will in obedience to some traditional system or notions, ideals and prohibitions, you will never love.

生命有一种超然的自发性，一种克里希那穆提称之为“创造性现实”， 只有当感知者的头脑处于“警觉性的被动”、“无选择地意识”的状态， 它才显露它自己。 判断和比较，导致我们不可逆转地致力于二元性。 只有无选择的意识才能通往非二元性，并在完整的理解和完全的爱之中，对立者产生和解。 Ama et fac quod vis. 如果你爱，你可以做你想做的事。 但是，如果你从做你想做的事开始，或者通过做你不愿意做的事情来服从某些传统的制度或观念，理想与禁忌， 你永远不会爱。

The liberating process must begin with the choiceless awareness of what you will and of your reactions to the symbol-system which tells you that you ought, or ought not, to will it. Through this choiceless awareness, as it penetrates the successive layers of the ego and its associated subconscious, will come love and understanding, but of another order than that with which we are ordinarily familiar. This choiceless awareness - at every moment and in all the circumstances of life - is the only effective meditation.

这个解放过程必须从无选择的意识开始 意识到你的意愿、你对符号系统的反应 —— 符号系统就是‘你应该’，或者‘不应该’，‘想’或‘不想’之类的思想。 通过这种无选择的意识， 因为它穿透了连续的层，自我层面及其相关的潜意识层， 会来爱和理解，但是与我们平时所熟悉的秩序不同。 这种无选择的意识 —— 每时每刻，在生活的所有情况下 —— 是唯一有效的冥想。

All other forms of yoga lead either to the blind thinking which results from self-discipline, or to some kind of self-induced rapture, some form of false samadhi. The true liberation is "an inner freedom of creative Reality". This "is not a gift; it is to be discovered and experienced. It is not an acquisition to be gathered to yourself to glorify yourself. It is a state of being, as silence, in which there is no becoming, in which there is completeness. This creativeness may not necessarily seek expression; it is not a talent that demands outward manifestation. You need not be a great artist or have an audience; if you seek these, you will miss the inward Reality. It is neither a gift, nor is it the outcome of talent; it is to be found, this imperishable treasure, where thought frees itself from lust, ill will and ignorance, where thought frees itself from worldliness and personal craving to be. It is to be experienced through right thinking and meditation."

所有其他形式的瑜伽都会导致盲从的思考， 也就是自律的结果，或者某种自我诱导的结果，某种形式的假三摩地。 真正的解脱是“一种创造性的、真实的内在自由”。 它“不是礼物；它需要去发现和体验。 它不是要去收集的、给自己贴金的猎取物。 它是一种存在状态，就像安静一样，在其中没有成为，而有完整性。 这种创造性不一定寻求表达； 它不是一种需要外在表达的天赋。 你不需要成为一个伟大的艺术家或拥有一个听众； 如果你寻求这些，你将错过内在的真实。 它既不是礼物，也不是天赋的结果； 它需要去发现，这是一个不朽的宝藏，思想从欲望、恶意和无知中解脱， 思想从世俗和个人的渴望中解放。 它通过正确的思考和冥想而体验。

Choiceless self-awareness will bring us to the creative Reality which underlies all our destructive make-believes, to the tranquil wisdom which is always there, in spite of ignorance, in spite of the knowledge which is merely ignorance in another form. Knowledge is an affair of symbols and is, all too often, a hindrance to wisdom, to the uncovering of the self from moment to moment. A mind that has come to the stillness of wisdom "shall know being, shall know what it is to love. Love is neither personal nor impersonal. Love is love, not to be defined or described by the mind as exclusive or inclusive. Love is its own eternity; it is the real, the supreme, the immeasurable."

无选择的自我意识将把我们带到创造性的真实世界， 它是我们所有的破坏性虚妄的基石，它是宁静的智慧， 它永远在那里，尽管我们无知，或者我们有知识，而知识只是另一种形式的无知。 知识是一种从属于符号的东西，它常常是对智慧的一种障碍， 因为对于智慧来说，是时时刻刻地自我揭露。 一个来到智慧的寂静之地的头脑“将会知道生命，将会知道爱是什么。 爱既不是私人的，也不是非私人的。 爱就是爱，不被头脑定义为排它性或包容性的。 爱是它自己的永恒；它是这真实，这至高无上的，这无法估量的。”