A: You were saying the brain cells themselves are conditioned by the past, the biological and historical past, and you said the structure of the brain cells could change. Could we go into that? The brain cells seem to have an activity of their own? K: I was going to ask this morning whether the professionals have ever talked of the brain cells. R: The Indian philosophers do not mention the brain cells. K: Why? Is it because when they speak of the mind, they include the brain cells? A: They say the mind is matter. They do not go further.
阿：你是说脑细胞本身受制于过去，包括了身体上的和历史上的过去， 你说脑细胞的结构可能会改变。我们能谈谈吗？ 脑细胞们似乎有他们自己的活动？ 克：今天早上我正想问专业人士是否曾经谈论过脑细胞。 拉：印度哲学家没有提到脑细胞。 克：为什么？是因为当他们谈到头脑时，他们包括了脑细胞吗？ 阿：他们说头脑就是物质。他们没有进一步深入。
K: Everything is recorded in the brain cells. Every incident, every impression is imprinted in the brain; one can observe the vast number of impressions in oneself. You are asking how it is possible to go beyond, to make the brain cells quiet? A: Normally you would think that the brain would be an instrument of the intellect. K: But is not the intellect the instrument of the brain rather than the other way? A: Is it?
克：一切都记录在脑细胞中。 每一件事、每一个印象都刻在脑子里；一个人可以观察到自己身上的大量印象。 你问怎么才能超越，让脑细胞安静？ 阿：通常你会认为大脑是智力的工具。 克：但是智力难道不是大脑的工具而不是相反吗？ 阿：是吗？
K: Let us investigate it. The capacity to reason, to compare, to weigh, to judge, to understand, to investigate, to rationalize and to act is all part of memory. The intellect formulates ideas and from that there is action. A: The materialistic view is that thought is to the brain what bile is to the liver and that the phenomenal manifestation is the result of the movement of the non-phenomenal. What the traditionalists say is that at death there is the complete cessation of the brain, but the complete cessation of the brain leaves, in a subtle way, a residue. K: A thought?
克：让我们来调查一下。 推理、比较、权衡、判断、理解、调查、合理化和行动的能力都是记忆的一部分。 智力形成观念，从中就有行为。 阿：唯物主义的观点是 思想之于大脑就像胆汁之于肝脏，现象的显露是非现象运动的结果。 传统主义者说的是，在死亡中，大脑完全停止， 以一种微妙的方式留下了一个残余。 克：一个思想？
A: The residue exists independently of the brain which has become dead. Therefore, it creates another focus. Out of its activity, something new emerges. K: The brain cells are the repository of memory. The reaction of memory is thought. Thought can be independent of memory. It is like throwing a stone which is independent of the hand which throws it. Whether that thought incarnates is another matter. A: I have a mug full of water; I pour the water into the bucket and then I take out the water again. It is not the same water I threw in. It is much more than what I put in. K: This is fairly simple. What are you trying to say?
阿：残余物独立于已经死亡的大脑而存在。 因此，它创造了另一个焦点。从它的活动中，出现了一些新的东西。 克：脑细胞是记忆的储存库。 记忆的反应是思想。思想可以独立于记忆。 这就像扔一块石头，而石头与扔它的手无关。 那个思想是否会显化是另一回事。 阿：我有一个装满水的杯子；我把水倒进桶里，然后我又把水倒出来。 它不是我先前倒入的水。它比我先前倒入的要丰富。 克：这很简单。你想说什么？
R: The brain cells and their activity are not the ultimate source of all this false movement. A: You bring us to action. Now, we are all the time involved in activity. In discussing with you, we see activity leads to mischief. To see this is the beginning of action. Are we going to take it at the level of the brain cells or at the level of the residue; the residue which triggers the brain activity?
拉：脑细胞们以及他们的活动，并不是这一切荒谬运动的最终源头。 阿：您让我们采取行动。现在，我们一直在陷入活动。 在与您讨论时，我们看到活动会导致灾难。看到这一点是行动的开始。 我们要在哪个层面上采取行动？ —— 是在脑细胞，还是在触发大脑活动的残余物？
R: The traditional description is: I eat with my hands. There is a smell of food. I wash my hand, the odour remains. So the experience during life leaves a residue impression. The body dies but some kind of odour of experience remains which seeks more experience. A: You were saying the intellect itself is the result of the activity of the brain. But with the intellect I see what effect the accumulations of the past, as memory, have left on me. Even when the intellect sees this, the activity of the brain cells is in motion.
拉：传统的描述是: 我用手拿东西吃。手上有食物的味道。我洗手，气味留下来。 因此，生活中的经历给人留下了残余的印象。 身体死了，但某种体验的气味仍然存在，并寻求更多的体验。 阿：你刚才说智力本身是大脑活动的结果。 但凭借智力，我看到了过去的积累，也就是记忆，残留在我的身上。 即使智力看到这一点，脑细胞的活动也在运动。
K: Are you trying to say that the brain cells are receiving all the time; they are recording all the time, in the state of sleeping and in the state of waking. That recording is an independent movement. That independent movement creates the capacity to think, to rationalize. The intellect can then observe the operation of the movement of thought. It can observe how thought has created itself. And that is again part of the whole structure of the brain cells. What is the question?
克：你是想说脑细胞一直在接收吗？ 他们一直在记录，不论是处于睡眠状态或清醒状态。 这种记录是一个独立的运动。这种独立运动创造了思考和合理化的能力。 然后，智力可以观察思想运动的运作。它可以观察思想是如何创造它自己的。 而这也是脑细胞整个结构的一部分。问题是什么？
A: How is the structure of the brain cells to change? K: That is quite a different matter. The brain cells are recording all the time - perception, design, colour, everything is being registered. One element assumes a tremendous importance. And these brain cells, receiving impressions all the time, consciously or unconsciously, are building the capacity to think, to rationalize. The instrument of this rationalization is the intellect. The two are not separate. A: Without the intellect, would there be rationalization?
阿：脑细胞的结构是如何变化的？ 克：那是另一回事。 脑细胞一直在记录 —— 感受、样式、颜色，一切都在被记录。 一个元素具有极其重要的意义。 这些脑细胞，无时无刻不在有意或无意地接收印象，建立思考和合理化的能力。 这种合理化的工具是智力。两者并没有分开。 阿：没有智力，会有合理化吗？
K: Is the intellect independent of the brain cells? Is the capacity to rationalize independent of the brain cells or being a part of them can it ever be independent? You cannot rationalize independently, because the brain cells and the intellect are part of cause-effect. And can the intellect observe the background of memory, which is the brain?
克：智力是否独立于脑细胞？ 合理化的能力是独立于脑细胞，还是脑细胞的一部分，它能独立吗？ 你不能独立地合理化，因为脑细胞和智力是因果的一部分。 智力能观察记忆的背景，也就是这颗脑袋吗？
I believe modern scientists are trying to isolate the various cells which contain memories and to explore the cells, to investigate biologically. You can do that under the microscope and if the intellect is the product of the brain, the intellect must always be conditioned by memory, by knowledge. It can project very far but it is still tethered. The intellect can seek freedom, it can never find it. It can be free only within the radius of its own tether; in itself it is limited. And freedom must be beyond this intellectual capacity, must be something outside the field.
我相信现代科学家正试图分离出包含记忆的各种细胞，并探索这些细胞，进行生物学研究。 你可以在显微镜下做到这一点 如果智力是大脑的产物，那么智力必定始终受到记忆和知识的制约。 它可以长远规划，但它仍然被拴着。智力可以寻求自由，它却永遠找不到它。 它只能在自己的系绳半径内自由；它本身是有限的。 自由必定超越了这种智力，必定是领域之外的东西。
Now, what is it that is aware of this whole phenomenon that the intellect can never be free? It can think it is free and it can project an idea, but it is not freedom because it is the product of the brain cells which are the residue of memory. What is it that is aware that the intellect cannot go beyond the range of its own radius? I do not know if you understand the question.
现在，是什么意识到智力永远不可能自由的整个现象？ 它可以认为它是自由的，它可以投射一个理想，但它是不自由的。 因为它是脑细胞的产物，脑细胞是记忆的残余物。 是什么意识到智力不能超出其自身半径的范围？ 我不知道你是否理解这个问题。
A: The intellect itself can be aware of this. K: I do not know. I am asking. R: The intellect is a fragment. K: There is no freedom within the field. Therefore the intellect says there must be freedom outside the field. It is still rationalization, and therefore its search outside is still within the field. Then what is it that is aware of the whole field? Is it still rationalization? A: No.
阿：智力本身可以意识到这一点。 克：我不知道。我在问。 拉：智力是一个片段。 克：在这个领域内没有自由。因此，智力说领域之外必定有自由。 它仍然在合理化，因此它向外的探索仍在这个领域内。 那么，是什么意识到这整个领域？它依然是合理化吗？ 阿：不是。
K: Why not? Is it not still rationalization? It was said that the brain cells are the recording machine. They are recording everything. That record has created an instrument which is the capacity to investigate, to explore, to criticize, which you can call the intellect. Then the intellect seeks freedom outside itself. It sees that there can be no freedom within the field and that freedom is outside. So it thinks it moves outside the field of itself. After having stated that, what happens? It sees that whatever movement it makes is within the field. Whatever movement springs from it is within the field; extend the field horizontally or vertically but it is still within the field. Therefore it is always within a prison. The intellect sees that, observes that, explores that. You are now asking how the brain cells are to change? Proceed. This is the movement man has been caught in. And not knowing how to get out of it, he has invented the atman.
克：为什么不是？它不是合理化吗？它说：脑细胞是一台记录的机器。 他们正在记录一切。 这种记录创造了一种工具，它有调查、探索、批评的能力，你可以称之为智力。 然后智力在自身之外寻求自由。它看到这个领域内不可能有自由，自由在领域外。 所以它认为它超越了自己的领域。 说完之后，发生了什么？它看到它所做的任何运动都在这个领域。 无论从哪里产生什么样运动，都在这片区域； 水平或垂直扩张这片区域，但仍在区域内。 因此，它总是在监狱里。 智力看到它，观察它，探索它。 你现在问脑细胞将如何变化？ 前进。正是这种运动使人类沦陷。 不知道如何摆脱它，他发明了‘阿特曼’——真我。
A: The Buddhists say this process which has come into existence with a cause, has an end and the perception of it is a dead-end. Buddhism maintains that the perception of the dead-end (they use the word pudgala) is to see, that in this there is no permanency, and that rebirth is the rebirth of the ignorance of this process. So when you observe this process as impermanent, then it must create absolutely no attachment to this process. All that is given to you is to see the impermanence, and seeing this, there is no attachment to this: and this is the dead-end. Contemplate this. The Buddha saw only once - disease, old age and death. Seeing it once, he never turned back. The boy Krishnamurti also never looked back. The Buddha said, see the impermanency of it, in that, there is no effort at all. Krishnamurti says just "see".
阿：佛教徒说这种伴随着原因而形成的过程是有尽头的，它的感知就是尽头。 他们坚称: 对这个尽头的感知（他们使用pudgala这个词）就是看， 其中不存在永恒，而转世重生是对这个过程无知的产物。 因此，当你观察这个无常的过程，那么，与这个过程不相干的、独立的创造。 能提供给你的一切，就是去看这个无常，看到这，对这没有执着：就是尽头。 斟酌这个。 佛陀自己只看了一眼 —— 疾病、衰老和死亡。看一眼，他就再也没有回头。 这个男孩，克里希那穆提也再没有回头。 佛陀说，看它的无常，在那看之中，根本没有努力。克里希那穆提说只是‘看’。
K: Then what is the question? How are these recording instruments with their own capacity, their own movements, how are they to switch off and enter a different dimension, even for a short period? You cannot go back to the Upanishads. In that is authority. A: We come to the point where the intellect realizes that whatever it does is within the field and therefore, what?
克：那么，问题是什么？ 这些记录工具如何拥有他们的能力，他们的运动， 他们如何切断并进入不同的维度，即使是短时期内？ 你不能回到《奥义书》中。那里有权威。 阿：我们到了这样的地步，智力意识到它所做的一切都在这个领域内，因此，什么？
K: You see, the dead-end man has said that and stops there. But another dead-end man says I must have something more; and so the atman comes in. A: The Buddhists said there is no soul. That which putrefies will end. It will terminate. Do not get attached. That is all that you can do. It leads to the void, or shunyata. R: The Vedantins also said the same thing. A: They invented maya. It absorbed the whole of their reasoning.
克：你看，那个走到尽头的人这么说了，就停在那里， 但是另一个人在尽头说，我必须拥有更多的东西；于是阿特曼进来了。 阿：佛教徒说没有灵魂。腐烂的将会终结，它会终止。不要依恋。 那就是你能做的。它通向空无，或虚无。 拉：吠檀多人也说过同样的话。 阿：他们发明了玛雅（魔幻）。它吸收了他们的全部推理。
K: The distinction between the two is non-existent. The intellect itself says, this movement is within this field. Is there any other movement? It does not say there is or there is not. It cannot rationalize, because if it says there is, it is back in the same field - the positive or negative. The question then is, is there a movement other than this movement? Otherwise there is no freedom. A thing that functions from a centre within its own radius, however wide, is never free. (Pause) What is freedom?
克：两者（指虚无和魔幻）之间没什么区别。 智力自己说，这个运动就在这个领域内。还有其他运动吗？它没有说有或没有。 它不能合理化，因为如果它说有，它又回到了同一个领域 —— 这种积极的或消极的。 那么问题来了，除了这个运动之外，还有别的运动吗？否则就没有自由。 一个在它自己的半径内从一个中心运作的东西，无论多么宽广，都永远不是自由的。（暂停） 什么是自由？
A: When it asks is there another movement, I cannot know. K: I know this is prison. I do not know what freedom is. A: You have taken away one confusion, that all is maya. Tradition has made that a conclusion. K: My question is, is there freedom at all? Tradition would say yes, there is moksha. It is all immature. A: Faced with this question, I have absolutely no instrument now to deal with this. K: No, you have the instrument of rationalization, the intellect. Is there no validity in this enquiry? I am asking, if there is no freedom within this field, then what is freedom?
阿：当它问是否有其他的运动时，我无法知道。 克：我知道这是监狱。我不知道什么是自由。 阿：你消除了一个困惑，那就是一切都是玛雅。传统已经得出了这个结论。 克：我的问题是，有自由吗？传统会说是的，有莫克沙（从轮回中解脱）。这一切都是不成熟的。 阿：面对这个问题，我现在完全没有处理这个问题的工具。 克：不，你有合理化的工具，这个智力。在这个调查中，是否有效？ 我在问，如果这个领域没有自由，那么什么是自由？
A: The intellect can never know. K: Do not say it cannot know. Intellect can only know freedom within the field, like a man knowing freedom within a prison. It then asks what is freedom? If this is not "it", then what is freedom? Is there such a thing at all? And if there is no such thing, let us make the best of this - more toilets, more hangers, more rooms, make the interior perfect. So man can never be free.
阿：智力永远不可能知道。 克：不要说它无法知道。智力只知道这个领域内的自由，就像一个人知道监狱内的自由。 然后它问什么是自由？如果这不是“它”，那么自由是什么？ 有这样的事物吗？ 如果没有这样的东西，让我们把这里做到最好 —— 更多的卫生间，更多的衣架，更多的房间，使内部变得完美。 因此，人永远不可能是自由。
The intellect rejects that there can be no freedom because it is inconceivable that there is no way out of this prison. The clever brains invent maya, atman, brahman. Now, I am asking myself, if there is no freedom, is the mind everlastingly condemned to live within this field? What is the point of it all? The communists, the materialists say you cannot get out. (Pause) I have got it: I am not concerned whether the brain cells change or not. I see that this concern about freedom, freedom which is not a formula, which is not a conclusion, is not freedom. Right?
理智拒绝没有自由，因为它无法想象没有离开这个监狱的出路。 聪明的大脑发明了玛雅，阿特曼，婆罗门。 现在，我问自己，如果没有自由，这颗头脑是否永远注定要生活在这个领域里？ 这一切的意义何在？共产主义者，唯物主义者说你出不去。（暂停） 我明白了：我不关切脑细胞们是否改变。 我看到这种对自由（没有规则和定论的东西）的关切，是不自由的。对吗？
Then the mind says if this is not, then what is freedom? Then it says I do not know. It sees that in that non-knowing, there is an expectation to know. When I say I do not know what freedom is, there is a waiting and an expectation to find out.
于是头脑说，如果这不是，那么什么是自由？ 于是它说: 我不知道。 它看到，在不认识的状态中，有一种对知道的期盼。 当我说我不知道什么是自由时，有一种等待和期盼，想去找出。
That means the mind does not say it does not know, but is waiting for something to happen. I see that and I discard that. (Pause) So I really do not know. I am not waiting, expecting. I am not hoping something will happen, some answer will come from an outside agency. I am not expecting a thing.
这意味着头脑没有说它不知道，而是在等待有某个事情的发生。 我看到那，我抛弃了那。(停顿) 因此，我真的不知道。 我不等待，我不期盼。我不希望某个事情的发生，某个来自于外部机构的答案。 我什么都不期待。
There it is. There is the clue. I know this is not "it". There is no freedom here. There is reformation, but not freedom. Reformation can never bring freedom. Man revolts against the whole idea that he can never be free, that he is condemned to live in this world. It is not intellect that revolts, but the whole organism, the whole perception. Right? Therefore it says that as this is not "it", I do not know what freedom is. I do not expect a thing, I do not hope or try to find what freedom is. I really do not know.
就是这样。线索。 我知道这不是‘它’。这里没有自由。 这里有改革，但没有自由，改革永远无法带来自由。 人反抗他永远不可能自由、注定要活在这个世界上的整个观念。 不是智力在反抗，而是整个有机体，整个感知。对吗？ 因此，它说，由于这不是“它”，我不知道什么是自由。 我不期待任何事情，我不希望，或者试图找到自由。我真的不知道。
That not-knowing is freedom. Knowing is prison. This is logically right. I do not know what is going to happen tomorrow. Therefore I am free of the past, free of this field. The knowing of the field is the prison, the not-knowing of the field is also the prison. Sir, look, I know yesterday. I know what happened yesterday. The knowing of what happened yesterday is the prison. So, the mind that lives in a state of not-knowing is a free mind. Right?
这种不认识就是自由。知道是监狱。这在逻辑上是正确的。 我不知道明天会发生什么。因此，我摆脱了过去，摆脱了这个领域。 知道这个领域是监狱，不认识这个领域也是监狱。 先生，看，我知道昨天。我知道昨天发生了什么。 认出昨天发生了什么，就是监狱。 所以，活在不认识的状态中的头脑，就是自由的头脑。对吗？
The traditionalists went wrong when they said do not be attached. You see, they denied all relationships. They could not solve the problem of relationships, but they said do not be attached and so broke away from all relationships. They said "Be detached", therefore they withdrew into isolation.
当传统主义者说‘不要依恋’的时候，就走错了。 你看，他们拒绝了所有的关系。他们无法解决关系的问题， 但他们说不要依恋，所以脱离了所有的关系。 他们说‘解脱’，因此他们退缩到孤立的状态。
To live with the knowledge of this field is prison. And not to know the prison is also not freedom. And so a mind that lives in the known, is always in prison. That is all. Can the mind say I do not know, which means the yesterday has ended? It is the knowledge of continuity which is the prison.
与这个领域的知识一起生活，就是监狱。不知道这座监狱也是不自由的。 因此，一个生活在已知中的头脑，总在监狱里。仅此而已。 头脑能说我不知道，也就意味着昨天已经结束了吗？ 连续性的知识才是这座监狱。
A: To pursue this requires ruthlessness. K: Do not use the word ruthlessness. It requires tremendous delicacy. When I said I really do not know, I really do not know. Full stop. See what it does. It means a real humility, a sense of austerity. Then, yesterday has ended. So the man who has ended yesterday is really beginning again. Therefore he has to be austere. I really do not know; what a marvellous thing that is. I do not know if I may die tomorrow. Therefore there is no possibility of having any conclusion at any time, which means, never to have any burden. The burden is the knowing.
阿：要追踪这些，需要无情。 克：不要用‘无情’这个词。它需要极大的细致。 当我说我真的不知道时，我真的不知道。句点。看看它有什么作用。 它意味着一种真正的谦卑，一种朴素的感觉。然后，昨天被结束了。 所以结束昨天的那个人，真实地重新开始。因此，他必须朴素。 我真的不知道；那是一件多么了不起的事情。我不知道我明天会不会死。 因此，在任何时候都不可能有任何结论，这意味着永远不要有任何包袱。这个包袱是认识。
A: Can one come to this point and stay there? K: You do not have to stay. A: The mind has a way of switching back. Words take you only to a point. There is no room for switching back.
阿：一个人可以走到这一步并留在那里吗？ 克：你不必留下来。 阿：这颗头脑有办法切换回来。言语只能带你到一个点。没有切换回来的余地。
K: Go slow. Do not put it that way. We see this. We see the man who speaks of detachment, we see the man who invents the atman. We come along and say, look, both are wrong. In this field there is no freedom. Then we ask, is there freedom at all? I say I really do not know. It does not mean I have forgotten the past. In the "I do not know" there is no inclusion of the past nor a discarding of the past, nor a utilization of the past. All that it says is, in the past there is no freedom. The past is knowledge, the past is accumulation, the past is the intellect. In that there is no freedom. In asking is there freedom at all, man says "I really do not know". He is free of the known.
克：慢慢来。不要这样说。我们看到了这一点。 我们看到那个谈论解脱的人，我们看到那位发明真我的人。 我们走过来说，看，两位都错了。在这个领域没有自由。 然后我们问，究竟有没有自由？我说我真的不知道。 这并不意味着我已经忘记了这个过去。 在“我不知道”中，既没有包含过去，也没有抛弃过去，也没有利用过去。 它所说的只是：在这个过去里，没有自由。 这个过去就是知识，是积累，是智力。 那里没有自由。 在问到底有没有自由的时候，人说“我真的不知道”。他从已知中解放了。
R: But the structure of the brain cells remains. K: They become extraordinarily flexible. Being flexible they can reject, accept; there is movement. A: We see something as action. So far we only know activity. We can never reject activity. It goes on. In laying down bare activity, it ceases to be a barrier to action. The normal day to day living is a process which goes on.
拉：但是，脑细胞的结构依旧。 克：它们变得非常灵活。处于灵活状态，他们可以拒绝，可以接受；他们在动。 阿：我们把某个东西看作是行动。到目前为止，我们只知道活动。 我们永远不能拒绝活动。它在持续。在顺从赤裸裸的活动时，它不再是行动的障碍。 普通的日常生活是一个持续的过程。
K: Are you asking what is action? What is action to a man who does not know? The man who knows is acting from knowledge and his action, his activity is always within the prison, projecting that prison into the future. It is always within the field of the known. What is action to the man who says I do not know? He does not even ask, because he is acting.
克：你在问‘什么是行动’吗？对于一个不知道的人来说，什么是行动？ 知道的人是根据知识和他的行为去行动，他的活动总是在监狱里，把监狱投射到未来。 它总是在已知的领域内。 对那个说我不知道的人来说，行动是什么？他甚至不问，因为他行动。
You are missing something, which is, not to know whether tomorrow is there. Can you go into that? I will have my meal in the afternoon, I will go for a walk; apart from that all action to a man who knows is total inaction; his action is always mischievous. The activist is always committed, involved. You see action is relationship in the field of the known. It is there in detachment, in attachment, in dominance, in subservience. Life is relationship. Have the professionals talked about relationship?
你错过了一些东西，那就是，不知道明天是否在那里。你能说说吗？ 我下午吃饭，我去散步；除此之外，对一个知道的人来说，所有的行为都是完全的无所作为； 他的行为总是有害的。活动家总是在承诺，参与。 你看，行为就是已知领域内的关系。 它就在解脱、依恋、支配、屈从等等的关系之中。 生命就是关系。专业人士谈过关系吗？
R: No. K: To them relationship meant attachment and therefore they talked of detachment. But I have to live in this world. Even in the Himalayas, I need food. There is relationship. That may be the reason why the whole Indian movement of detachment has made the mind so stupid, repetitive. A: The Buddha in his first sermon said that both detachment and attachment are ignoble. The two represented the Hindu idea of running away from the world. K: Why did they not consider relationship? When the sannyasi renounces the world he cannot renounce relationship. He may not sleep with a woman but he cannot renounce relationship. I am asking myself, if you deny relationship, action becomes meaningless. What is action without relationship? Is it doing something mechanical? A: Action is relationship.
阿：没有。 克：对他们来说，关系意味着依恋，因此他们谈论解脱。 但我必须活在这个世界上。即使在喜马拉雅山，我也需要食物。这就有关系。 这也许就是为什么整个印度人的解脱运动使头脑变得如此愚蠢、重复化的原因。 阿：佛陀在他第一次布道时说：解脱和依恋都是可耻的。 两者都代表了印度教逃离世俗的观念。 克：为什么他们不考虑关系？当僧人弃世修行时，他不能放弃关系。 他可能不会和一个女人睡觉，但他不能放弃关系。 我在问我自己，如果你拒绝关系，行动就变得毫无意义。 什么是没有关系的行为？它在做一些机械化的事情吗？ 阿：行为就是关系。
K: Relationship is the primary thing. Otherwise what exists? If my father did not sleep with my mother, I would not exist. So relationship is the basic movement of life. Relationship within the field of knowledge is deadly, destructive, corrupt. That is the worldly. So, what is action? We have separated action from relationships: as social action, political action, you follow? We have not solved this problem of relationship. We discard it because it is too deadly to discuss relationship, because I know I have a wife and something may happen. So I do not want to discuss it. All that I say is I must be detached. If you accept all living is relationship, then what is action? There is one kind of action of technology, of mechanical action, but every other action is non-mechanical. Otherwise I reduce relationship into turning the wheel. That is why we have denied love.
克：关系是首要的。否则存在什么？ 如果我的父亲不和我母亲睡觉，我就不会存在。所以关系是生命的基本运动。 知识领域内的关系是致命的、破坏性的、腐败的。那是世俗的。 那么，什么是行动？我们已经把行动与关系分裂了：分成了社会行动，政治行动，你跟上了吗？ 我们还没有解决这个关系问题。 我们丢弃它，因为它太致命了，以至于无法讨论， 因为我知道我有一个妻子，可能会发生一些事情。 所以我不想讨论它。我能说的只有‘我必须解脱’。 如果你接受所有的生活都是关系，那么，什么是行动？ 有一种技术性的行动，机械化的行动，但其余一切行动都是非机械的。 否则，我会把关系简化为‘转动这个轮子’。 这就是为什么我们拒绝了爱。
A: Can we examine our relationship with nature? K: What is my relationship with nature - the birds, sky, trees, flowers, the moving waters? That is my life. It is not just relationship between man and woman, but al1 this is part of my life. I am talking of relationship to everything. How can I be attached to the forest, to the river? I can be attached to the word, but not to the waters. You see, we miss the whole thing because we confuse the word with the thing.
阿：我们能审视我们与自然的关系吗？ 克：我与大自然 —— 鸟儿、天空、树木、花朵、流动的水，有什么关系？那就是我的生命。 它不仅仅是男人和女人之间的关系，所有这一切是我生命的一部分。 我说的是与一切事物的关系。我怎样才能依附于森林，依附于河流？ 我可以依附于这个词，但不能依附于水。 你看，我们错过了这整个东西，因为我们把这个词和这个东西混为一谈了。
A: Is it a question of re-awakening sensitivity? K: No. The is what is relationship? Be related to everything. Relationship means care; care means attention; attention means love. That is why relationship is the basis of everything. If you miss that, you miss the whole thing. Yes, Sir, this is the prison. To know is the prison and to live in the knowing is also the prison.
阿：是重新唤醒敏感度的问题吗？ 克：不是。什么是关系？与一切关联。 关系意味着关怀；关怀意味着关注；关注意味着爱。 这就是为什么关系是一切的基础。如果你错过了，你就错过了整个东西。 是的，先生，这就是监狱。知道是监狱，活在认识之中也是监狱。
B: In Buddhism they mention three categories of people in the world: the ordinary worldly man who has his pleasures, pain, etc; the path-winner, the person who has a glimpse of the direction; then the arhat. The worldly man might perform rituals but he is still a worldly man till he has an experience, a glimpse of the direction. The path-winner wanders away but always comes back, till such time when there is no more going back to the first stage. K: A man who is of the world has a glimpse of the path - how does he have it? And once he is on the path he may wander back and forth, wander and come back to the path and finally settle down and reach the state of being an arhat. Are you asking how the worldly man is to have a glimpse?
芭：在佛教中，他们提到世界上有三类人： 拥有快乐、痛苦等等的普通世俗人； 路途的赢家，瞥见方向的人； 然后是阿罗汉。 世俗的人可能会参加宗教仪式，但他仍然是一个世俗的人，直到他有了体验，瞥见了方向。 道路途的赢家徘徊到远方，但总是又回来，直到再也不回到第一阶段的时刻。 克：一个世俗之人能瞥见这条路 —— 他是如何做到的？ 一旦他走上了这条路，他可能会来回徘徊， 徘徊着又回到小路上，最后安定下来，达到成为阿罗汉的状态。 你在问世俗之人如何瞥见吗？
C: What is sadhana? sadhana means to attain, to prepare that by which you attain siddhi. siddhi means goal. K: That through which you attain a goal - a system, a method, a process; that means time. C: Does it imply time? It does not necessarily imply time. K: If I have to go through the gate to attain, going through the gate to attain is time. That is a process of time. Sadhana implies a process of time. C: Tradition also says sadhanas are useless. K: Most people insist on sadhana, though they say it is not necessary. It has become part of the tradition.
C：什么是修行？修行的意思是达到，你为获得悉地（siddhi）而准备。悉地的意思是目标。 克：你为了实现目标而利用一个系统、一种方法、一个过程；这就意味着时间。 C：这是否意味着时间？它并不一定意味着时间。 克：如果我必须通过大门才能达到，那么通过大门才能达到就是时间。 这是一个时间的过程。修行意味着一个时间的过程。 C：传统也说修行是无用的。 克：大多数人坚持修行，尽管他们说没有必要。它已成为传统的一部分。
B: They say it is better to go through sadhana, but they do not guarantee that you will reach through sadhana. K: The word sadhana implies a process and process means things put together, and the putting together means time. Even the most scientific concept of time is things put together in a horizontal or vertical position. So sadhana means time. Though you may say it is not necessary, the word implies time. So, what is the question, Sir; what does tradition say? B: The Buddhist tradition says that a man in sorrow has a glimpse of this. Then he is the path-winner and then he works out his salvation and becomes an arhat. What kind of operation or movement is involved in the second stage?
芭：他们说修行是更好的选择，却不保证你能达到。 克：修行这个词意味着一个过程，过程意味着事物放在一起，而放在一起意味着时间。 即使是最科学的时间概念，也是将事物放在水平或垂直位置。 所以修行的意思是时间。虽然你可能会说没有必要，但这个词暗示了时间。 那么，先生，问题是什么？传统怎么说？ 芭：佛教传统说，悲伤之中的人能瞥见这一点。 然后他是路途的赢家，然后他解决自己的救赎，成为阿罗汉。 第二阶段涉及什么样的操作或运动？
C: They say when you get into the non-dual state, there is no going back. K: How do you come to it? C: Since it is not a process, they do not say how you come to it. They say you cannot come to it by hearing people, by studying, by rituals and sadhana. They put it negatively. K: It is a question of duality. Being in the world implies duality, then there is a getting a glimpse of a non-dualistic state and the getting back to the dualistic state; is that it? C: They say there is no duality at all, but on account of the intellectual process you create duality. Once you realize the non-duality, then there is no question of worldliness creeping into it. K: Living in a dualistic state as human beings do, by negating rituals, will that get you to a non-dualistic state? You may say that there is no dualistic mould or level; a dimension in which there is no duality at all. The mind caught in the dualistic state, by negating beliefs, rituals, etc., will it come to the "other"? Is that what the tradition says? Shall we approach this problem in a simple way, which is: one lives in a dualistic state. That is a fact. One lives in the dualistic state in which there is pain, sorrow, conflict and all that. And man says, how am I to get out of it? The non-dualistic state is merely a theory. Man does not know it. He does not know in the sense he might have read about it, but it is secondhand information. It has no value. Disregard what others have said about it. I only know a dualistic state in which there is sorrow, pain. That is a fact. That is from where I start.
C：他们说当你进入非二元状态时，就没有回头路了。 克：你是怎么到达的？ C：因为这不是一个过程，他们不会说你是如何到达的。 他们说你不能通过听人们，通过学习，通过仪式和修行来达到它。他们否定这一切。 克：这是一个二元性问题。身处世界意味着二元性， 然后瞥见非二元状态并回到二元状态；是这样吗？ C：他们说根本没有二元性，但是由于智力过程，你创造了二元性。 一旦你意识到非二元性，那么就没有世俗性潜入其中的问题。 克：像人类一样生活在二元状态中，通过否定仪式，这会让你进入非二元状态吗？ 你可能会说，没有二元的模式或水平；一个完全没有二元性的维度。 陷入二元对立状态的头脑，通过否定信仰、仪式等，会不会遇到“异类”？ 这是传统所说的吗？ 我们是否应该用一种简单的方式来解决这个问题，即：一个人生活在二元论的状态中。这是事实。 一个人生活在二元论的状态中，在这种状态中，有痛苦、悲伤、冲突等等。 人说，我该如何摆脱它？非二元论状态只是一种理论。 人不知道它。 也就是说，他可能读过它，但这是二手信息。 它没有价值。无视别人对它的说法。 我只知道一种二元状态，其中有悲伤，痛苦。这是事实。这就是我开始的地方。
C: Some people have conflict and misery and realize that the dualistic state is the cause of the trouble. So they want to get rid of it. Some do not start from this, but they feel discontented and read, and having read, they start imagining the non-dual state. K: It is a theory. The fact is one thing and the idea about the fact is another. We are not concerned with the man who supplies a conclusion derived by a specialist. We are only discussing about a man who is in conflict and is discontented with that conflict. How does he get out of it?
C：有些人有冲突和痛苦，意识到二元状态是麻烦的原因。 所以他们想摆脱它。 有些人不是从这个开始的，而是感到不满，阅读，阅读后，他们开始想象非二元状态。 克：这是一个理论。事实是一回事，关于事实的想法是另一回事。 我们不关心这位支持专家得出的结论的人。 我们只是在讨论一个处于冲突中并对冲突感到不满的人。 他如何摆脱困境？
C: The traditional way is to explore through books. Man attains by negating and resolves by knowledge. K: Proceed step by step. I am in conflict. Now, how do I resolve it? You say by knowledge. What is knowledge? C: The realization of conflict is knowledge. K: I do not have to realize it, I am in conflict. I know I am in conflict, in pain, in sorrow. What do you mean by knowledge and what do you mean by conflict? To know that I am in conflict, is that knowledge? Or do you call knowledge what I should do about that conflict? When you use the word "knowledge", what do you mean by that? What is the sanskrit equivalent of that word? C: Jnana. K: What does that mean? Knowledge about what? Is it the knowledge about the cause of conflict? C: Jnana will also apply to the nature of conflict and how it arises. K: How does it come into being and how does it work? What is the nature and structure of it? To know the cause is to know the structure and the nature of pain. Do you call that knowledge?
C：传统的方式是通过书本探索。人通过否定而获得，通过知识解决。 克：一步一步来。我有冲突。现在，我该如何解决它？你说通过知识。什么是知识？ C：意识到冲突，就是知识。 克：我不必意识到，我处于冲突之中。我知道我处于冲突中，痛苦中，悲伤中。 你说的‘通过知识，通过冲突’是什么意思？ 知道我处于冲突中，这是知识吗？ 或者你把知识称为‘我应该如何处理这种冲突’？ 当你使用“知识”这个词时，你的意思是什么？ 这个词的梵语等价物是什么？ C：Jnana。 克：那是什么意思？知识什么？是关于冲突起因的知识吗？ C：Jnana也适用于冲突的性质及其产生方式。 克：它是如何形成的，它是如何运作的？它的性质和结构是什么？ 知道原因就是知道疼痛的结构和性质。你称之为知识吗？
C: Sir, jnana has been divided as that which pertains to the phenomenal world and that which refers to the non-phenomenal world. K: What do you mean by conflict? C: Conflict is duality. K: We know what the word "knowledge" is. What do you mean by the word "conflict"? C: Dwandva - conflict between the two - hot and cold, pleasure and pain, happiness and sorrow. K: So let us proceed: I am in conflict. I want to go out and I want to stay here; I am unhappy and I want to do something which makes for happiness. I acquire knowledge about it by seeing the cause, the nature, the structure of this conflict. The understanding of the cause, the nature, the structure of this conflict is knowledge: And knowing that, having this knowledge, will it free the mind from conflict? So you are saying knowledge will free the mind from conflict, right, Sir? Now, I know that I am jealous because my wife looks at another man or you have a better job than me. I know why I am jealous. I know the nature and structure of jealousy, which is: I would like to be in your place. I would like my wife not to look at you: I know the cause, I know the effect; the reaction of it is I am jealous. I see the full structure of it as an engineer sees a structure, and the knowing of it, does it free me from it? Obviously it does not.
C：先生，jnana被分为与现象世界有关的，以及与非现象世界有关的。 克：冲突是什么意思？ C：冲突是二元性的。 克：我们知道“知识”这个词是什么。“冲突”这个词是什么意思？ C：Dwandva —— 两者的冲突 —— 冷热、快乐与痛苦、高兴与悲伤。 克：那么让我们继续吧：我在冲突里。我想出去，我想留在这里； 我不快乐，我想做一些能带来快乐的事情。 我通过看到这场冲突的原因、性质和结构来获得有关它的知识。 对这场冲突的原因、性质和结构的理解是知识： 认识到那，有了这种知识，它会把头脑从冲突中解放出来吗？ 所以你是说知识会把头脑从冲突中解放出来，对吧，先生？ 现在，我知道我嫉妒是因为我的妻子看上另一个男人，或者你比我有更好的工作。 我知道我为什么嫉妒。我知道嫉妒的本质和结构，那就是：我想代替你。 我希望我的妻子不要看你：我知道原因，我知道结果；对此的反应是我嫉妒。 我看到它的完整结构，就像工程师看到一个结构一样， 认识到它，它能让我摆脱它吗？显然不能。
C: Knowledge which will resolve conflict is the kind of knowledge in which there is no duality: K: How do you know - because somebody else has said it? C: By looking into why jealousy arises. Why should I be jealous? K: That is analysis. Does analysis free the mind from conflict? C: Analysis alone will not.
C: 能解决冲突的知识是没有二元性的知识。 克：你怎么知道 —— 因为别人说过？ C：通过研究为什么会产生嫉妒。我为什么要嫉妒？ 克：这就是分析。分析能把思想从冲突中解放出来吗？ C：单靠分析是行不通的。
K: Knowledge is the result of analysis. I analyse. I see why I am jealous. I was angry with my wife and so on, and she has left me. Does this knowledge free me from the fear of living alone without her? C: The feeling of jealousy does cease. K: How do you propose to end jealousy? I have analysed myself till I am sick, and the next minute I am jealous again. C: That means by analysis you have not ended jealousy.
克：知识是分析的结果。我分析。我看为什么我嫉妒。 我对我的妻子生气，她离开了我。这些知识是否使我摆脱了没有她独自生活的恐惧？ C：嫉妒的感觉确实停止了。 克：你打算如何结束嫉妒？我分析自己直到我厌烦为止，下一刻我又嫉妒了。 C：这意味着通过分析，你还没有结束嫉妒。
K: Analysis is part of knowledge. I have accumulated knowledge because I have analysed. I am jealous because I have tried to possess her. The realization of this is knowledge; and I possess her because I am afraid to live alone - and this is part of knowledge. And you are saying, through analysis there is accumulation of know1edge, and that knowledge is going to free you from jealousy. Does it?
克：分析是知识的一部分。我积累了知识，因为我已经分析过。 我嫉妒，因为我试图占有她。这种意识，就是知识； 而我占有她，因为我害怕独自生活 —— 这是知识的一部分。 你说，通过分析，就能积累知识，知识会把你从嫉妒中解放出来。是吗？
C: No, Sir. I may analyse jealousy, as she is my wife and she has gone to another man; I may also say that there is no difference at all, what does it matter if she goes? It all depends on the individual. K: That is all intellection. Intellection is part of analysis. As long as there is the intellect, knowledge, you are not free. So all knowledge is intellectual.
C: 不，先生。我可以分析嫉妒；因为她是我的妻子，她跟另一个男人走了； 我也可以说，完全没有区别，她离开又有什么关系？ 这完全取决于个人。 克：这都是智力。智力是分析的一部分。 只要有智力、知识，你就不自由。所以所有的知识都是智力的。
C: Jnana is not that intellectua1 process. The intellectual process ends with manas and buddhi. K: So you are saying there is another factor which is beyond intellect, knowledge. Analysis, accumulation of knowledge through analysis is one kind of knowledge, and there is another, some other factor beyond that. C: Which enables the buddhi to see, to discriminate. B: How is knowledge acquired? Let us take the first step. K: I have been on that road many times and I have acquired knowledge. I have seen that person often and I have talked to him. He has been friendly, non-friendly. All that is knowledge. I have accumulated through experience, through analysis, through incidents, information, which is called knowledge.
C：Jnana不是那个智力过程。智力过程以玛纳斯和佛陀结束。 克：所以你是说还有另一个因素，超越了智力、知识。 分析，通过分析积累知识是一种知识，除此之外还有另一种，其他的因素。 C：使佛陀能够看到，能够辨别。 芭：知识是如何获得的？让我们迈出第一步。 克：我在这条路上走过很多次，我学到了知识。 我经常见到那个人，我和他谈过。他一直很友好，不友好。 所有这些都是知识。我通过体验，通过分析，通过事件，积累信息，这被称为知识。
C: What makes that knowledge possible? What makes experience possible? K: Experience is possible only when there is the experiencer. You hurt me, that is experience. You say something which I do not like, and that hurts me. That is an experience, then that experience becomes knowledge. Will that knowledge end conflict?
C: 是什么使那种知识成为可能？ 是什么让体验成为可能？ 克：只有当有体验者时，体验才有可能。你伤害了我，那是体验。 你说了一些我不喜欢的话，这伤害了我。那是一种体验，然后这种体验就变成了知识。 这种知识会结束冲突吗？
C: No. K: Then what will end conflict? Do they say it is that entity which realizes the experiencer, who has gathered this knowledge that will end conflict? If so then there is a superior entity.
C：不。 克：那么怎样才能结束冲突呢？他们是不是说 意识到这位体验者、这位知识收集者的实体，能结束冲突？ 如果是这样，那么就有一个超级实体。
C: There is a principle through which all these several experiences, all the disparate experiences of the individual are made possible. How do I know I am the experiencer? K: Because I have experienced before. I know I am the experiencer because you have hurt me before. The knowledge, the previous knowledge makes me the experiencer. B: I see sunlight; sunrise, I fee1 that is my experience of having seen the sun...... K: Having seen the sunset once and seeing it day after day, the accumulation of that knowledge makes the experiencer.
C: 有一个原则， 通过这个原则，所有这些体验，所有不同的个人体验都是可能的。 我怎么知道我是体验者？ 克：因为我以前有这样的体验。我知道我是体验者，因为你以前伤害过我。 知识，以前的知识使我成为体验者。 芭：我看到阳光；日出，我感觉那就是自己看到太阳的体验…… 克：看过一次日落，并且日复一日地看到它，那种知识的积累造就了体验者。
C: They postulate an entity which does not experience. K: The postulated entity is another opinion which I have acquired from somebody else. It is fairly simple and clear. First I am aware, I get to know I am in conflict. I analyse it. Through analysis I have acquired knowledge that I am jealous; that is simple. Analysis, observation, watching, have given me information why I am jealous, which is knowledge: And that knowledge apparently cannot get rid of jealousy. Then what will get rid of it? Do not invent another superior seLf: I know nothing about it: I know only conflict, analysis, knowledge and I see knowledge does not get rid of conflict.
C：他们假设一个没有体验的实体。 克：假设的实体是我从别人那里获得的另一种观点。 它相当简单明了。首先，我意识到，我知道我处于冲突之中。我分析它。 通过分析，我获得了知识 —— ‘我嫉妒’；这很简单。 分析、观看、监视，给了我‘为什么嫉妒’的信息，这就是知识： 而这种知识显然无法摆脱嫉妒。那么，什么会摆脱它呢？ 不要发明另一个超级自我：我对它一无所知： 我只知道冲突、分析、知识，我看到知识不能摆脱冲突。
B: What is the sub-stratum of all experience? What is that out of which all experiences arise? What is the matrix? K: Is it an accumulation of experience? The matrix is things put together. The matrix of the carpet is the warp and woof. The matrix of experience is experience. Are you asking, Sir, what is the thread that makes experience or are you asking what the matter is upon which the experience leaves a pattern?
芭：所有体验的底层是什么？所有体验都是从哪里产生的？什么是基质？ 克：它是体验的积累吗？基质是东西堆叠在一起。 地毯的基质是经线和纬线。体验的基质是体验。 先生，你是不是在问，创造体验的线是什么？ 或者，你是在问，体验在什么物质上留下了记号？
C: Traditionalists consider that knowledge as gathering of experience, memory, belongs to the realm of manas and buddhi, and this is made possible by the atman which sheds light, and without atman, the manas cannot function. K: What is the material upon which experience leaves a mark? Is there such material? Now what is it on which any experience leaves a mark? Obviously, it is the brain. The fact is, the brain is the material; the cells are the material on which every incident leaves a mark, every experience, conscious or unconscious. All the time the brain is receiving. I see that flower, it has already registered; I see you, it has already registered. Constant recording is going on. It is there. The racial inheritance, personal inheritance; all this is leaving a mark on the brain.
C：传统认为作为知识、记忆的体验，属于manas和buddhi的领域…… 克：体验在什么物质上留下了记号呢? 存在这样的物质吗? 现在，经验在什么物质上留下了标记？ 很显然，这种物质就是大脑。事实就是，这个大脑就是这种物质； 脑细胞是物质，在这种物质上面，每一件事情，每一次经历都自觉不自觉地留下一个记号。 大脑每时每刻都在接收信息。我看到鲜花，它已经在大脑中记录了下来；我看到你，这已经被记录了下来。 大脑在不停地记录。它就在那里。种族的遗传，个人的遗传，这一切都在大脑上留下了记号。 C：传统主义者认为知识是体验、记忆的集合，属于玛纳斯和佛陀的领域， 这是通过阿特曼的发光而实现的，没有阿特曼，玛纳斯就无法运作。 克：体验在什么材料上留下了印记？有这样的材料吗？ 现在，任何体验留下的印记在什么材料上？ 显然，它是大脑。这个事实是，大脑就是这种材料； 细胞是每个事件留下印记的材料，每个体验，有意识的或无意识的。 大脑一直在接收。 我看到那朵花，它已经被记录了；我看到你了，它已经被记录了。 不断的记录正在进行中。它就在那里。种族继承、个人继承； 这一切都在大脑上留下了印记。
B: The function of the mind is energy. K: The registration of the brain is part of energy. The whole thing is energy. So brain is the repository of all recording - sensory, non-sensory. That is the tape which has been collected for centuries. That is knowledge. If you did not know where you lived, you could not go there. Because you have been there, you know it. Knowledge does not necessarily free the mind from conflict. Right? We see that. Then what will free the mind without the introduction of the atman which is part of the tradition, knowledge which I have acquired? Though I may call it atman, it is the same field of knowledge.
芭：头脑的功能是能量。 克：大脑的记录是能量的一部分。整个事物就是能量。 所以大脑是所有记录的存储库 —— 感官的，非感官的。那就是硬盘，里面装着几个世纪以来的收集品。 这就是知识。如果你不知道你住在哪里，你就不能去那里。因为你去过那里，你知道它。 知识不一定能把头脑从冲突中解放出来。 对吗？我们看到了这一点。 那么，如果没有阿特曼的引入，什么能解放头脑？阿特曼是我所获得的传统和知识的一部分？ 虽然我可以称之为阿特曼，但它是同一个知识领域。
C: How does it come within the field of knowledge? K: Unless I think about it, there is no atman. C: Thinking about it is not realizing it. It is not within the comprehension of thought. K: Thinking about something is still within the field of thought. A man who thinks about atman is still within the field of thought.
C: 它是如何进入知识领域的？ 克：除非我思考它，否则就没有阿特曼。 C：思考它，并不是意识到它。它不在思想的理解范围内。 克：思考某件事仍然在思想领域之内。一个思考阿特曼的人仍然在思想领域内。
C: The man who talked of atman never thought he realized that. The only experience which they cite is that you have a sound deep sleep and you wake up. How do you remember that you had a sound sleep? In deep sleep the mind does not work. K: How do you know when it does not work? The brain cells are working day and night. Only when you get up the next morning do you know that you are tired or you have had a good sleep, etc. They are all the functions of the brain. So atman is within the field of thought. It must be. Otherwise, you would not use that word. We are saying atman is part of the brain. Thought says it cannot solve the problem through thought and, therefore, there must be the atman. C: But they have said the atman is outside experience.
C：那个说阿特曼的人从来没有思考，他意识到那。 他们引用的唯一体验是你有一个良好的深度睡眠，你苏醒。 你怎么记得你睡得很香？在深度睡眠中，这颗头脑没有工作。 克：你怎么知道它什么时候不工作？脑细胞日夜在工作。 只有当你第二天早上起床时，你才知道你累了或者你睡得很好，等等。 它们都是大脑的功能。所以阿特曼在思想领域之内。一定是。 否则，您将不会使用该词。我们说阿特曼是大脑的一部分。 思想说它不能通过思想解决问题，因此，必须有阿特曼。 C：但他们说，阿特曼在体验之外。
B: Explain the material of experience. K: I see the flower, I name it. There is a naming of it, the form, the verbalization; verbalization is the memory, because the brain has seen and says that is a flower. B: Does it operate if I close my eyes? K: Of course, shut your eyes, close your ears, you can still think. The moment I say there is God, the thinking about it is within the field of thought. The man who has not thought at all, to him there is no God. The ancient ones thinking about something superior, wanting something greater, said there was God. That was the product of thought. So that was within the field of knowledge.
芭：解释体验的材料。 克：我看到那朵花，我给它起名字。 它有一个命名，形式，言语化；言语化是记忆，因为大脑已经见过，就说那是一朵花。 芭：如果我闭上眼睛，它会起作用吗？ 克：当然，闭上眼睛，捂住耳朵，你依然可以思考。 当我说有上帝的那一刻，对它的思考就在思想领域内。 一个根本没有思考过的人，对他来说没有上帝。 古代人思考更高级的东西，想要更伟大的东西，说有上帝。 那是思想的产物。所以这是在知识领域之内。
C: Not much importance is given to God in the Upanishads. According to their conception God and brahman are the same. K: You see, someone comes along who is not a Hindu and says God, Jesus. What is the difference? He has been brought up in his culture, and you in this culture say atman. C: We say both. God is personal, atman is not personal. K: They are all the product of thought. Look, how deceptive the mind has become, caught in words. I have accumulated knowledge about suffering and suffering does not end, and not knowing how to end it, thought says there must be some other factor. So it invents the atman. It thinks about it. Otherwise the atman would not have come into existence. So atman does not end it either, because it is part of knowledge. Knowledge about suffering has not ended suffering. The atman does not end suffering either.
C：在奥义书中没有给予上帝太多的重视。根据他们的观念，上帝和婆罗门是相同的。 克：你看，有人不是印度教徒，说上帝，耶稣。区别在是什么？ 他在他的文化中长大，而处于这个文化中的你说阿特曼。 C：我们说两者都有。上帝是私人的，阿特曼不是私人的。 克：它们都是思想的产物。瞧，头脑变得多么具有欺骗性，被言语所困。 我积累了关于受苦的知识，受苦不会结束，不知道如何结束它，思想说一定有其他因素。 所以它发明了阿特曼。它思考它。否则阿特曼就不会出现。 所以阿特曼也没有结束它，因为它是知识的一部分。关于受苦的知识并没有结束受苦。 阿特曼也没有结束受苦。
C: But they themselves have said that thought will not solve the problem. K: But atman is the product of thought. C: But atman is experienced by them. It is their personal experience. K: When they say they experience atman, what does it mean? C: They say it cannot be described. K: Of course it cannot be, but it is part of thought.
C: 但是他们自己也说，思想不会解决问题。 克：但阿特曼是思想的产物。 C：但是阿特曼是他们经历过的。这是他们的亲身经历。 克：当他们说他们体验阿特曼时，这意味着什么？ C：他们说无法描述。 克：当然是不可能的，但这是思想的一部分。
C: To them it was not part of thought. They realized it. K: How do I realize anything? I must recognize it, must I not? What do I recognize? C: Recognition means seeing a thing without the process of thought. K: I recognize you because I have met you yesterday. If I did not, I would not know you. C: That is not the process by which you recognize brahman. K: Be simple. Let us talk logically. I must recognize a new experience. What is the process of recognition? I must have known it already, like the flower, the yellow flower - I could not recognize it if I had not seen it. So recognition of an experience is, that it has already been experienced. Therefore, atman has already been experienced to recognize it. It is, therefore, within the field of experience. So when they say you cannot experience it, what do they mean by it? The fact is, I suffer; I say "I want to end suffering". So, why do I bring in the atman? It has no value at all. It is like a man who is hungry and you describe food to him.
C: 对他们而言，那不是思想的一部分。他们意识到它。 克：我要如何意到任何事情？我必须认出它，难道我不必吗？我能认出什么？ C：认出意味着没有思考过程就能看到一个事物。 克：我认出你，因为我昨天见过你。如果我没有，我就不会认识你。 C：这不是你认识婆罗门的过程。 克：简单一点。让我们从逻辑上讲。我必须认出一种新的体验。识别的过程是什么？ 我一定已经知道了它，就像那朵花，那朵黄花 —— 如果我没有见过它，我就认不出它。 因此，对体验的识别是，它曾经被体验过。 因此，认出了阿特曼，它就已经被体验过。因此，它属于体验领域。 所以当他们说你不能体验它时，他们的意思是什么？ 事实是，我受苦;我说“我想结束受苦”。那么，我为什么要引入阿特曼呢？ 它根本没有价值。这就像一个饥饿的人，而你在他描述食物。
C: I agree that whatever they have said does not help. K: On the contrary, they have destroyed the mind by introducing a factor which does not help. C: Yes. K: See it. Say, I will never talk about the atman, it does not mean a thing. So, how do I face this? How can the mind resolve the factor of sorrow? Not through atman. That is too childish. It can only resolve it, not through knowledge, but by looking at it without knowledge.
C: 我同意他们所说的都无济于事。 克：相反，他们通过引入一个无济于事的因素来摧毁这个头脑。 C: 是的。 克：看它。说，我永远不会谈论阿特曼，它什么也不是。那么，我该如何面对呢？ 头脑如何解决悲伤的因素？不是通过阿特曼。这太幼稚了。 它只能解决它，不是通过知识，而是通过没有知识的看。
C: Is this possible? K: Do not introduce atman. Try it. Test it out. The other you cannot test. Put it away completely. Then what happens? Then how do I look at suffering - with knowledge or without knowledge? Do I look at it with past eyes? Do I look with eyes which are filled with the past, therefore, translate everything in terms of the past? B: We cannot use the past as a means to free ourselves from suffering.
C：这可能吗？ 克：不要介绍阿特曼。试试吧。测试一下。另一个您无法测试。把它完全收起来。然后会发生什么？ 那么我如何看受苦 —— 带着知识还是没有知识？ 我用过去的眼睛看它吗？我是否用充满过去的眼睛去看，因而用过去来翻译每一个东西？ 芭：我们不能用过去作为摆脱受苦的手段。
K: When you say that you see what suffering is, you are directly in relationship with suffering, not the observer observing suffering. I look at suffering without the image and the image is the past. The image of the past may be the atman. Of course, it is. Test it. Test the image as you would test it in the laboratory. In the same way you can test this. The other you cannot. The atman which I see is part of thought. There is no testing there at all.
克：当你说，你看到什么是受苦的时候，你是直接地与受苦有关系， 不是观察受苦的观察者。 我不带任何形象地去观察受苦。形象是过去。过去的形象可能是阿特曼。 当然是。测试它。像在实验室中测试一样测试这个形象。 以同样的方式，您可以对此进行测试。 另一个你不能。我看到阿特曼是思想的一部分。那根本无法测试。
Here there is testing. I am looking at this sorrow with past experience. My past experience divides the past as the past and the present. There is duality. The present is sorrow and I am looking at the present through the past, and translating it in terms of the past. If the mind can look at it without the past, there must be a different meaning altogether. So, I have to test it. Can the mind look without past memory? Can I look at that flower without past knowledge? Test it; you can do it or not do it.
这里有测试。我用过去的体验来看待这种悲伤。 我过去的体验将过去分为过去和现在。存在二元性。 现在就是悲伤，我在利用过去，观看现在，并用过去来翻译它。 如果头脑可以不用过去来看它，那么，一定有完全不同的意义。 所以，我必须测试它。头脑可以不携带过去的记忆吗？ 我可以在没有过去知识的情况下看那朵花吗？ 测试它；你可以做，也可以不做。