P: There was something which Krishnaji said in his talk yesterday. I do not know whether it will bear discussion. It was a very startling statement. The question he posed was whether the brain cells could strip themselves of everything except the movement of survival, the pure biological necessity which alone makes the organism exist? Krishnaji seemed to suggest that before any movement in the new dimension could take place, this total stripping to the bare bedrock was essential. In a sense he was totally back to the materialistic position.

普：在昨天的谈话中，克里希那吉说了一些东西。 我不知道它是否值得讨论。它是一个非常令人吃惊的陈述。 他所提出的问题是： 脑细胞能剥离它们所拥有的一切， 而只留下维持这个有机体生存的机能吗？ 克里希那吉似乎暗示： 在新维度的任何运动发生之前， 这种完全剥离，直到剩下裸露的基石，是至关重要的。 从某种意义上说，他完全回到了唯物主义的立场。

D: If you have survival as the dimension of existence, there is no other dimension. Can this bear investigation? Is such stripping of every element of consciousness as we have understood it, possible? We have always claimed that the human being is more than the urge for survival. F: Are the brain cells not the repository of culture? P: If you strip man of every psychological element except the urge for physical survival, how is he different from the animal?

德：如果你把生存作为存在的维度，那就没有别的维度了。 这经得起调查吗？ 剥离我们所理解的意识的每一个因素，可能吗？ 我们一直声称，人类不仅仅只有生存的冲动。 莫：脑细胞不是文化的宝库吗？ 普：如果你把人的所有心理因素都剥光了，只留下生理生存的冲动，他和动物有什么不同？

K: We know both biological and psychological survival. The biological exists on survival, but psychological factors have made that survival almost impossible. F: You are now bringing in other elements. K: There are these two elements - the biological and the psychological. Psychological elements like nationalism are preventing man from surviving. Psychological fragmentation is destroying the beauty of survival. Can one strip man of all the psychological factors?

克：我们知道，有两种生存 —— 生理上的和心理上的。 有机体的存在依赖于生存，但心理因素使那种生存几乎不可能。 莫：你现在引入了其他因素。 克：有这两个因素 —— 有机体的和心理的。 民族主义等心理因素正在阻碍人的生存。 心理上的分裂正在摧毁生存的美。 一个人能剥离所有的心理因素吗？

P: Apart from the biological and psychological, is there anything else? You spoke of stripping yourself of all factors, not psychological. I am asking you is there any other element excepting the biological and the psychological? K: As far as we know these are the only two factors that operate in man.

普：除了有机体和心理，还有别的吗？ 你说的是剥夺你自己的所有因素，而不是心理的。 我问你，除了有机体和心理之外，还有其他因素吗？ 克：据我们所知，这是人仅有的两个因素。

F: Is there not such a factor as psychological survival, apart from the physiological? K: Which means the survival of the psyche. The psyche that is the result of environment, of heritage. Last evening when we used the word "consciousness", we said the whole of consciousness is the content of consciousness. The content of consciousness is conflict, pain; the whole of that is consciousness.

莫：除了生理之外，难道没有心理生存这个因素吗？ 克：这意味着心灵的生存。心灵是环境的结果、遗传的结果。 昨晚当我们使用“意识”这个词时，我们说过，意识全部就是意识的内容。 意识的内容是冲突、痛苦；那一切就是意识。

D: You said also that intelligence is more than consciousness. K: Wait. We said in understanding the fact of consciousness and going beyond it, is intelligence. You cannot come to that intelligence if this consciousness is in conflict. Now all that we know is biological survival and the survival of psychological consciousness. What is the next question? P: You said or implied yesterday that there was a necessity to strip so that nothing existed but biological survival. K: Can you not strip the whole content of consciousness which is psychological? In stripping, that intelligence is in operation. There is the biological and intelligence - there is no other.

德：你也说过，智慧远不止是意识。 克：等一下。我们说过，理解关于意识的这个事实，并且超越它，即是智慧。 要是这个意识处于冲突之中，你就无法来到那个智慧。 现在，我们知道，只有机体的生存和心理意识的生存。 下一个问题是什么？ 普：你昨天说过或暗示过 —— 有必要剥离，这样，除了有机体的生存之外，什么都不存在。 克：你能剥离意识的全部内容，也就是心理内容吗？ 在剥离中，那种智慧就在运转。 这个有机体和智慧 —— 再没有其它的东西。

P: You did not speak of intelligence yesterday. You said when there is this total stripping and no other thing, that operation is the biological movement of survival and that perceives. Is there such a seeing? K: Then the mind is not merely the survival element, but there is another quality in it which perceives. P: What is that quality? K: What did "K" say yesterday? P: He said there is a stripping and there is only the movement of survival and that silence sees

普：你昨天没有提到智慧。 你说，当有了这种完全剥离，什么都不剩的时候， 那种运转是有机体的生存运动，在那运转中，有感知。有那样的看吗？ 克：那么，这颗头脑不仅仅是这种生存的因素，里面还有另一种品质，而这种品质，即是感知。 普：那种品质是什么？ 克：“克”昨天说了些什么？ 普：他说了那是一种剥离，只有生存的运动，那种安静在看。

K: Perfectly true. Now what is silence? What is the nature of silence? P: That seeing is something which we can affirm. But there was this other thing said, so that we cannot help asking if man is stripped of everything which we consider the elements of the human..... K: Which is conflict, pain. P: Not only that, compassion -

克：完全正确。现在，什么是安静？安静的本质是什么？ 普：那种看是某个我们可以肯定的东西。但还有另一个东西要说， 因此，我们不禁要问，人是否被剥离了我们认为是作为的人的一切要素…… 克：也就是冲突，痛苦。 普：不是只有那些，还有慈 ——

B: We consider that man is human as opposed to the animal. What are the things which differentiate man - intelligence, the capacity to analyse, speech - D: Man is a language animal. Language and man are co-related. And that is the mark of man that distinguishes him from the rest of the animal world. What language does to man is to enable him to say "I am I". And the moment he goes beyond it, he speculates, projects; he says "I am I" and in that "I" you can bring in the whole cosmology. There is no language for the other. B: And one more thing. Because of language, man has been able to evolve culture and he cannot go back to the biological stage. D: In twenty-five thousand years of evolution, of thinking, of speaking and so on, there is very little change in man; the environment has changed, but fundamentally there is very little change in man. K: Yes.

芭： 我们认为人是人类，而不是动物。 区分人的东西是什么 —— 智慧、分析能力、言语 —— 德：人是一种语言动物。语言和人是相互关联的。 这就是人类区别于动物世界其他部分的标志。 语言对人的作用是使人能够说“我就是我”。当他超越它的那一刻，他推测，投射； 他说“我是我”，在那个“我”中，你可以引入整个宇宙学。没有语言可以代表另一个。 芭：还有一件事。因为语言，人类已经能够进化出文化，他不能回到有机体阶段。 德：在两万五千年的进化、思考、说话等等中，人几乎没有什么变化； 环境已经改变，但从根本上说，人类几乎没有变化。 克：是的。

P: One says right, or I accept what "B" or "D" says, but still I am aware "I am". That statement is where it is. K: "B" is saying very simply: strip man of all the psychological factors and what is the difference between animal and man? Oh, there is a vast difference. P: The moment you posit a difference, then you are investigating something else. B: Man is aware of himself and the animal is not; that is the only distinction. K: Let us go back. There is psychological survival. We want to survive psychologically and also biologically. D: I say there is something else. K: We will have to find out. Merely to posit that there is something else has no meaning. D: But you say all other aspects of the human being have ended. K: When conflict, misery, pain have ended...... P: As also the fantasy, the wonder, imagination; that which has made man reach out, reach in. K: "K" said both the outer and the inner.

普：一个人说，是的，或者我接受“芭”或“德”所说的，但我仍然知道“我是”。 那句话就是这样。 克：“芭”说的很简单：把人所有的心理因素都剥光了，动物和人有什么区别？ 哦，有一种巨大的不同。 普：当你假设一种不同的那一刻，那么你正在调查别的东西。 芭：人觉察他自己，而动物没有；那是唯一的区别。 克：我们回去。有心理上的生存。我们希望有心理上的和有机体上的生存。 德：我说还有别的。 克：我们必须找出答案。仅仅假设有别的东西是没有意义的。 德：但是，你说人类的所有其他方面都已经结束了。 克：当冲突、苦难、痛苦结束的时候…… 普：还有幻想、奇迹、想象力；使人伸出援手，伸手进去。 克：“K”说了这两者，外在的和内在的。

P: Do you mean to say there is intelligence which manifests itself in stripping? K: Listen carefully. My consciousness is all the time trying to become, change, modify, struggle, etc. That is all I know. Biological survival and that. Everybody operates within these two. And within that struggle we project something beyond consciousness which is still within consciousness because it is projected. The mind that really wants to be free from the wrangle, the back-chattering asks, can the mind strip "itself" of all the content of "itself"? That is all. (Pause.) And in that, intelligence comes to be.

普：你的意思是说，在剥离中，智慧显露？ 克：仔细听。我的意識一直在試圖成為、改變、修改、掙扎等等。 那就是我所知道的。生理生存等等。每个人都在这两者之内运作。 在这场挣扎中，我们投射出超越意识的东西，而这种东西仍然在意识之内，因为它是被投射出来了。 这颗头脑真地想要摆脱这种争吵、喋喋不休，问： 这颗头脑能把“它自己”的所有内容都剥光吗？仅此而已。（暂停。） 在那里，智慧出现了。

P: Is stripping, emptying an endless process? K: Certainly not. Because then I am caught in the same phenomenon. P: Let us pause here. Is it not an endless process? K: It is not an endless process. P: You mean, once it is done, it is done? K: Let us go slowly. You must first understand this verbally. My consciousness is made up of all that we have talked about. P: Is the emptying of it, does it take time or is it free of time? Is it piecemeal? Or is it an emptying of the whole?

普：剥离、清空，是一个无休止的过程吗？ 克：当然不是。因为那样一来，我陷入了同样的现象。 普：让我们在这里暂停一下。它不是一个无休止的过程吗？ 克：它不是一个无休止的过程。 普：你的意思是，一旦完成，就完成了？ 克：我们慢慢来。你必须首先在字面上理解这一点。 我的意识是由我们谈论过的所有内容组成的。 普：清空它，需要时间，或者，不需要时间？ 它是片段，还是整体的清空？

K: Is that the question? The piecemeal and the whole? Is that the question? P: You see, putting the question as the piecemeal and the whole is the query. What is revealed is the whole which contains the piece. B: Stripping has to be a joint process. K: Discuss it. P: What is it that one strips? Or what is it that one perceives? Or is there dissolution of that which emerges? There cannot be dissolution of anything else. What emerges is thought. D: If all these go what remains? P: When you say all goes, what does it mean? B: Only awareness remains. Is complete awareness the whole? P: Yes.

克：是那个问题吗？片段和整体？是那个问题吗？ 普：你看，提出这个片段和整体的问题，就是调查。 就揭示出整体包含着片段。 芭：剥离必须是一个联合的过程。 克：讨论一下。 普：一个人剥离的是什么？或者一个人在感知什么？ 或者，那浮现的东西被溶解，直到只剩下无法溶解的？浮现的东西就是思想。 德：如果所有这些都消失了，还剩下什么？ 普：当你说一切都消逝的时候，是指什么意思？ 芭：只剩下觉察。完全的觉察是整体吗？ 普：是的。

K: She says Yes. What is the question? P: Is the awareness of a point of consciousness - such as jealousy - is the awareness of that one thing, the totality of all consciousness? K: When you use the word "aware", what do you mean by that word "aware"? If you mean aware of the implications - in which there is no choice, no will, no compulsion, no resistance - obviously it is so.

克：她说是。问题是什么? 普：觉察到意识中的一个点 —— 比如嫉妒 —— 对一个东西的觉察，就是对整个意识的觉察吗？ 克：当你使用‘觉察’这个词时，你是什么意思？ 如果你的意思是觉察这些影响 —— 其中不存在选择、意志、强迫、抵抗 —— 显然，它就是如此。

P: So at any point this is possible? K: Of course. P: Yes, because that is the door; the door of dissolution. K: No. Hold it a minute. P: I used that word "door" deliberately. K: Hold on. Let us begin slowly because I want to go step by step. My consciousness is made up of all this. My consciousness is part of the whole, both at the superficial and at the deeper level and you are asking, is there any awareness which is so penetrating that in that very awareness the whole is present? Or is it bit by bit? Is there a search, is there a looking in, an analysing?

普：所以，在任何时候这都是可能的吗？ 克：当然。 普：是的，因为那是门；溶解之门。 克：不，等一下。 普：我故意用了“门”这个词。 克：等等。让我们慢慢开始，因为我想一步一步地走。我的意识是由这一切组成的。 我的意識是整體的一部分，无论是在浅表层和更深层，你在問： 有没有一种觉察，具有如此的穿透力，以至于在这种觉察中，整体就显露了？或者，是一点一点现出的？ （其中，）有搜索，有调查，有分析吗？

D: The yogic position is that nature is a flowing river. In that flow, man's organism comes into being. As soon as it comes into being, it has also the capacity to choose and the moment it chooses, it separates itself from the now, from the river. This is a process of separation from the flow and the only thing which brings this into being is choice. Therefore, they say the dissolution of choice may bring you to total emptiness and in that emptiness you see. K: Right sir, that is one point. "P"s question was, is this awareness, this process of stripping bit by bit? Is this awareness in which there is no choice, the total? Does it empty the whole of consciousness? Does it go beyond consciousness?

德：瑜伽的立场是，大自然是一条流动的河流。在这种流动中，人的有机体应运而生。 它一旦形成，也就有了选择的能力。 当它选择的那一刻，它就把自己与现在、与河流分开。 这是一个与流动分离的过程，唯一能造成这样的就是选择。 因此，他们说，选择的溶解可能会把你带到完全的虚无，在那虚无中，你看。 克：对，先生，这是一点。“普”的问题是，这种觉察，这种剥离是一点一点进行的吗？ 这是一种没有选择的、整体性的觉察吗？ 它是否清空了整个意识？它超越意识了吗？

F: Supposing I cease to choose, is that stripping? P: Is there an end to stripping? K: Or is it a constant process? P: And the second question was where there is intelligence is there stripping? K: Let us start with the first question which is good enough. What do you say? Discuss it. P: It is one of those extraordinary questions where you can neither say "Yes" nor "No". D: It hangs on time or no time. If it is invited, it is time. P: If you say it is not a question of time then it is not a process. five minutes later it will emerge again. So this question cannot be answered.

莫：假设我不再选择，那是剥离吗？ 普：剥离有尽头吗？ 克：还是一个持续的过程？ 普：第二个问题是，哪里有智慧，哪里就有剥离？ 克：让我们从第一个问题开始，这个问题相当好。你怎么说？讨论一下它。 普：这是一个非同寻常的问题，你既不能说“是”，也不能说“否”。 德：它挂断了时间，或者没有时间。如果它被邀请，它就是时间。 普：如果你说这不是时间问题，那么它不是一个过程。 五分钟后，它将再次浮现。所以这个问题无法回答。

A: The word is swarupa shunyata. The observer becomes empty. He is stripped. K: Now is that awareness to be cultivated which implies time? How does this awareness come into being in which there is no observer? Are we meeting each other? How is this awareness to come about? Is it the result of time? If it is, then it is part of consciousness in which choice exists. And you say awareness is not choice. It is observation in which there is no observer. Now how is that to come about without consciousness interfering? Or does it come out of consciousness? Does it flower out of consciousness? Or is it free of consciousness?

阿：这个词是swarupa shunyata。观察者变为空。他被剥光了。 克：现在，这种觉察是要培养的吗，培养意味着时间？ 这种觉察是如何在没有观察者的情况下形成的？我们相互碰面了吗？ 这种觉察是如何产生的？是时间的结果吗？ 如果是，那么它就是意识的一部分，选择存于其中。 你说，觉察不是选择。它是没有观察者的观察。 现在，如何在没有意识干扰的情况下做到这一点？ 或者它来自于意识？它是意识的绽放吗？ 或者，是意识的解放？

D: It is free of consciousness. P: I want to ask two things. Does it come about when I ask the question "who am I? "" K: All the traditionalists have asked that question. P: But it is an essential question. When I really try to investigate the source of the ego itself, that is the one question. Or does awareness come about when one tries to discover the observer? K: No. The moment you try, you are in time. P: It is a question of language, of semantics. You can strip at any point. Where is the observer? We are taking for granted that the observer "is".

德：它是意识的解放。 普：我想问两件事。当我问“我是谁？”这个问题时，它会出现吗？ 克：所有的传统主义者都问过这个问题。 普：但这是一个重要的问题。 当我真正地试图调查自我的本源时，那就是一个问题。 或者，当一个人试图发现观察者时，觉察就会产生？ 克：不是。当你尝试的那一刻，你就在时间中。 普：这是一个语言问题，语义问题。您可以随时剥离。 观察者在哪里？我们理所当然地认为观察者“在”。

K: Let us begin slowly. One sees what consciousness is. Any movement within that field, any movement is still a process of time. It may try to be or not to be, it may try to go beyond, it may try to invent something beyond consciousness, but it is still part of time. So I am stuck. P: I want to use words which are not your words. So I have rejected all your words. I have to use my own instruments. What is the element in me which seems to me the most potent and powerful: It is the sense of the "I". K: Which is the past.

克：让我们慢慢开始。一个人看到意识是什么。 在那个领域内的任何运动，任何的运动，依然是一个时间的过程。 它可能試圖存在或去死，它可能嘗試超越，它可能試圖發明超越意識的東西，但它仍然是時間的一部分。 所以，我被困住了。 普：我想用不是你所用的词来表达。因此，我拒绝了你所有的言词。我必须使用我自己的仪器。 在我看来，我内在最有潜力和最强大的因素是什么：它是“我”的感觉。 克：也就是这个过去。

P: I will not use your language. It is very interesting not to use your language. I say the most potent thing is the sense of the "I"? Now can there be a perception of the "I"? F: That is a wrong question. I will tell you why. You ask can I perceive the "I"? Now the "I" is nothing but an insatiable hunger for experience. K: "P" began by asking "who am I?" Is the "me", the "I" an action of consciousness? P: So I say let us look, let us investigate.

普：我不会用你的语言。不使用您的语言非常有趣。 我说，最有力的是“我”的感觉？ 现在能不能对“我”有感知？ 莫：这是一个错误的问题。我会告诉你为什么。你问我能感知到“我”吗？ 现在的“我”，只不过是对体验的永不满足的渴望。 克：“普”首先问“我是谁？这位“我”、这个“吾”是意识的一种行为吗？ 普：所以，我说让我们看看，让我们调查一下。

K: When I ask myself "who am I?", is that the central factor in consciousness? P: It seems so. And then I say let me see the "I", let me find it, perceive it, touch it. K: So you are asking, is this central factor perceivable sensorily? Is the central factor tactable, to be felt, to be tasted? Or is that central factor, the "I", something which the senses have invented.

克：当我问自己“我是谁？”时，那是意识的中心因素吗？ 普：它好像是。然后，我说让我看这位“我”，让我找出它，感知它，触摸它。 克：所以，你在问，这个中心因素在感官上是可以感知的吗？ 这个核心因子是否可被感知、感受、被品味？ 或者说，那个核心因子，这位“我”，是某个感官发明的东西。

P: That comes later. First of all, I see whether it is tactable. K: When I have asked the question, "who am I?", one must also question who is investigating, who is asking the question "who am I?". P: I do not ask that question. I have asked that question over and over again. I have discussed awareness endlessly. I leave it, because the one thing which you have said is, do not accept one word which is not your own. I start looking. Is this "I" which is the central core of myself, is it tactable? I observe it in the surface layers, in the depth layers of my consciousness, in the hidden darkness and as I unfold it what takes place is a light within, an explosion, an extension within. Another factor that operates is that which has been exclusive becomes inclusive. So far I have been exclusive, now the world movement flows in.

普：那是以后的事。首先，我看它是否可触摸。 克：当我问“我是谁？”这个问题时， 一个人还必须质疑是谁在调查，谁在问“我是谁？” 普：我不问这个问题。我一遍又一遍地问过这个问题。我无休止地讨论意识。 我离开它，因为你说过的一件事是，不要接受一个不是你自己的词语。 我开始寻找。这个“我”，这个我自己的中心，是可触摸的吗？ 我在表层，在我意识的深层，在隐藏的黑暗中观察它。 当我展开它时，发生的是內在的光，爆炸，內在的延伸。 另一个运作的因素是，排它性的东西变得具有包容性。 到目前为止，我一直是排它性的，现在，这个世界的运动流入。

K: We see that. P: And I find this is not something which can be touched, perceived. What can be perceived is that which has been, which is a manifestation of this "I". I see I had a thought of this "I" in action, but it is already over. Then I explore - from where does thought emerge? Can I find the springs of thought? Or where does thought go? Can I pursue a thought? How far can I go with a thought? How far can I hold a thought? Can thought be held in consciousness? These are tangible things which I think the individual has to completely feel for himself.

克：我们看到那。 普：我发现，那不是可触摸和感知的东西。 可感知的是曾经的，是这个“我”的体现。 我看到，我有一个‘我’的思想在活动，但它已经结束了。 然后我探索 —— 思想从哪里浮现？我能找到思想的源泉吗？ 或者思想去哪儿了？我可以追求一个思想吗？我能跟着一个思想走多远？ 我能抓住一个思想吗？思想可以被保持在意识中吗？ 这些是有形的东西，我认为需要本人亲自己去感觉。

K: We have gone through this. I thought we had done all this. F: I say all this is awareness. K: Let us be simple. When I ask "who am I?", who is asking the question? And one finds on investigation that the "I" is not observable, touchable, hearable, and so on. And so, is the "I" within the field of the senses? Or have the senses created the "I"?

克：我们已经经历过这。我以为我们已经完成了这一切。 莫：我说这一切都是觉察。 克：简单一点。当我问“我是谁？”时，谁在问这个问题？ 一个人在调查中发现，这位“我”不是可观察的、可触摸的、可听的等等。 那么，“我”是否在感官领域内？还是感官创造了“我”？

P: The very fact that it is not within the field of the senses...... K: Do not move away from that. Is it not also within the field of the senses? We jump too quickly. Is perceiving a visual perception or something else? D: We are going into the nature of awareness. Now how does awareness arise?

普：事实上，它不在感官领域之内…… 克：不要离开它。它不也在感官的领域之内吗？我们跳得太快了。 感知是视觉感知还是别的什么？ 德：我们正在进入觉察的本质。现在，觉察是如何冒出来呢？

P: I want to put aside everything Krishnaji has said and I find that the very enquiry, that the very investigation into the "I" creates light, intelligence. K: You are saying, the very enquiry brings about awareness. Obviously I did not say it did not. P: And in the enquiry one can only use certain instruments which are the senses. Whether the enquiry is outside or within, the only instruments which can be used are the senses, because that is all we know - the seeing, listening, feeling - and the field is illuminated. The field of the without and the field of the within is illuminated. Now in this state of illumination, you suddenly find that there has been a thought, but that it is already over. K: Thought exists in the field of relationship and observation. It does not exist by itself. It exists in observing relationship - the lamp. P: In this, if you ask is there a partial or total stripping, the question is irrelevant. It has no meaning.

普：我想把克里希那吉所说的一切都放在一边 我发现，正是这种询问，对“我”的调查，创造出光和智慧。 克：你是说，询问本身就带来了觉察。显然我没有说不。 普：在这询问中，一个人只能使用某些仪器，即感官。 无论询问是在外部还是内部，唯一可以使用的仪器是感官， 因为，这就是我们所知道的一切 —— 看、听、感觉 —— 场域被照亮。 外在的场和内在的场被照亮。 現在，在這種光照的狀態中，你突然發現有一个思想，但它已經結束了。 克：思想存在于关系和观察的场域中。 它本身并不存在。它的存在，有赖于去观察关系 —— 这盏灯。 普：在这里，如果你问，是否有部分或完整的剥离，这个问题无关紧要。它没有任何意义。

K: Wait a minute. I am not sure. Is perception partial? I have investigated through the senses, the senses creating the "I", investigating the "I". The activity brings a lightness, clarity. Not entire clarity, but some clarity. P: I will not use the word some clarity, but clarity. K: It brings clarity. We will stick to that. Is that clarity expandable? P: The nature of seeing is such, I can see here, and I can see there, depending on the power of the eye.

克：等一下。我不确定。感知是局部的吗？ 通过感官，我进行调查，感官们创造出“我”，调查这位“我”。 这个活动带来一道光，一种清晰。不是完全的清晰，而是有些清晰。 普：我不会用“有些清晰”这个词，而是“清晰”。 克：它带来了清晰。我们将坚持这一点。这种清晰是可扩展的吗？ 普：看的本质就是这样，我能看到这里，我能看到那里，这取决于眼睛的视力。

K: We said perception is not only visual but also non-visual. We said perception is that which illuminates. P: Here I would like to ask something. You have said that seeing is not only visual but non-visual. What is the nature of this non-visual seeing? K: It is non-visual which is non-thinkable. It does not pertain to the word. It does not pertain to thought. That is all. Is visual perception non-verbal perception? The non-visual perception is the perception without the meaning, the expression, the thought. Is there a perception without thought? Now proceed.

克：我们说感知不仅是视觉的，也是非视觉的。我们说感知是照亮。 普：在这里，我想问一点。你说过，看不仅是视觉的，而且是非视觉的。 这种非视觉看，其本质是什么？ 克：它这种非视觉是不可想象的。它与这个词无关。它与思想无关。仅此而已。 视觉上的感知是非语言的感知吗？ 非视觉的感知是指，这种没有携带意义、表达和思想的感知。 没有思想，还有感知吗？现在，继续。

P: And that also is not such a difficult thing. I see there is such perception. Now that perception can see close, can see far. K: Wait. Perception. We are talking only of perception. Not the duration, length, size or breadth of perception, but perception which is non-visual which is not deep perception or shallow perception. Shallow perception or deep perception comes only when thought interferes. P: Now in that is there partial stripping or total stripping? We started with that. K: When there is non-verbal perception, what are you asking? What are you asking further?

普：那也不是一件困难的事情。我看到，有这样的感知。 现在，这个感知可以看近，可以看远。 克：等等。感知。我们只谈论感知。不是感知的持续时间、长度、大小或广度， 而是非视觉的感知，不是深层的感知或浅表的感知。 浅表的感知或深层的感知只有在思想干扰时才会出现。 普：现在，是部分的剥离，还是完整的剥离？我们是从这个问题开始的。 克：当有了非语言的感知，你在问什么？你还要问什么？

F: She is asking, in every perception, there is the non-verbal element of mere perception. Then there is the psychological superimposition. The stripping refers only to the psychological superimposition. Is there a state of mind in which superimposition does not occur and there is no stripping? P: That is right. Perception is perception. We are asking is there a perception in which stripping is not necessary? K: There is no such thing as an everlasting perception. P: Is it identical with what you call intelligence? K: I do not know. Why are you asking that? P: Because it is timeless.

莫：她在问，在每一次感知中，都有单纯感知的非语言因素。 然后，是心理上的叠加。剥离仅指心理上的叠加。 有没有一种不发生叠加、没有剥离的心理状态？ 普：没错。感知就是感知。我们在问，是否有一种不需要剥离的感知？ 克：没有所谓的永恒的感知。 普：它和你所说的智慧一样吗？ 克：我不知道。你为什么这么问？ 普：因为它是非时间的。

K: Timeless means timeless. Why do you ask? Is perception which is non-verbal, is it not also non-time, non-thought? If you have answered this question you have answered that. F: There is the momentary time of the "now". And there is another timeless in which one moves and lives. K: I do not understand what you say. F: Still, perception can be sensory. K: Now is there perception that is non-verbal and therefore not pertaining to thought? Then what is the question? A mind that is perceiving is not asking this question, it is perceiving. And each perception is perception. It is not carrying over perception. Where does the question of stripping or not stripping arise?

克：非时间意味着没有时间。你为什么这么问？ 感知是非语言的，不也是非时间的，非思想的吗？ 如果你回答这个问题，你也就回答了那一个。 莫：有“现在”的瞬间。还有另一种非时间的，一个人在其中移动和生活。 克：我不明白你所说的。 莫：不过，感知可以是感官化的。 克：现在，有没有一种感知是非语言的，因此与思想无关？ 那么，问题是什么呢？一个正在感知的头脑不是在问这个问题，它在感知（覺察）。 每一次感知都是感知。它没有留下感知到的痕迹。 剥离或不剥离的问题从哪里冒出？

P: I say even in perception which is not linked with thought, perception is never carried into another thought. I see that lamp. The seeing has not been carried. Thought is only being carried. K: That is obvious. My consciousness is my mind, is my brain cells, is the result of my sensory perceptions. That is my consciousness. That is all consciousness. That consciousness is the result of time, evolution, growth. It is expandable, contractable and so on. And thought is part of that. Now somebody comes along and asks "who am I?". Is the "I" the permanent entity in this consciousness? D: It cannot be. K: This "I" - is it consciousness? D: It is not permanent. K: Consciousness is heritage. Of course it is.

普：我说，即使在与思想无关的感知中，感知也永远不会被携带到另一个思想。 我看到那盏灯。这个看没有被携带。只有思想能够被携带。 克：那是显而易见的。我的意识是我的思想，是我的脑细胞，是我感官知觉的结果。 这就是我的意识。这就是所有的意识。这种意识是时间、进化和成长的结果。 它是可扩展的，可收缩的等等。思想是其中的一部分。 现在，有人走过来问“我是谁？“我”是这个意识中的永久实体吗？ 德：不可能。 克：这个“我” —— 是意识吗？ 德：它不是永久性的。 克：意识是遗传。它当然是。

F: We are mixing the concept of consciousness, with the experience of consciousness. K: This is very clear. "I" is that consciousness. P: "I" has a great reality for me till I investigate. K: Of course. The fact is after looking, observing, I see I am the whole of this consciousness. This is not a verbal statement. I am all that. I am the heritage. And is that "I" touchable, observable? Can it be felt, twisted? Is it the result of perception, of heritage? F: It is not the result. It is the inherited.

莫：我们把意识的概念和意识的体验混为一谈。 克：这是非常清楚的。“我”就是那个意识。 普：“我”对我来说有一个巨大的实体，直到我调查。 克：当然。事實上，在看、觀察之後，我看到我就是这个意識的全部。 这不是一个口头上的声明。我就是那一切。我是这个遗传。那个“我”是可以触摸的，可以观察的吗？ 它能被感觉，被扭曲吗？它是感知的结果，是遗传的结果吗？ 莫：它不是这个结果。它是被遗传下来的。

K: And then she asks who is that "I"? Is that "I" part of consciousness, part of thought? I say yes. Thought is part of it. Thought is the "I", except where thought is functioning technologically, where there is no "I". The moment you move away from the scientific field, you come to the "I" which is part of the biological heritage. F: The "I" is the centre of perception, a working centre of perception, an ad hoc centre and the other is an effective centre.

克：然后，她问那个“我”是谁？那个“我”是意识的一部分，思想的一部分吗？我说是的。 思想是其中的一部分。思想是“我”，除非思想在技术上运作，那样就没有“我”。 当你离开科学领域的那一刻，你遇到了这位“我”，这位就是有机体的遗传的一部分。 莫：“我”是感知的中心，是感知的工作中心，是临时设定的中心，另而一个是有效的中心。

K: Be simple. We see consciousness is the "I". The whole of that field is the "I". In the field, the "I" is the centre. P: I want to put aside everything and tackle it in a new way. I see that the most important element in me is the "I". Now what is the "I"? What is its nature? One investigates that and in the very process of observation there is clarity. K: Full stop.

克：简单一点。我们看到意识是这位“我”。 整个领域就是这个“我”。在这个领域内，“我”是中心。 普：我想把一切都放在一边，用一种新的方式来解决它。 我看到我身上最重要的因素是“我”。 现在，什么是“我”？它的性质是什么？ 一个人调查它，在那个观察过程中，出现了清晰。 克：句号。

P: Clarity being not eternal.,.... K: But it can pick it up again. P: I say, maybe. K: Because I have an idea that perception is whole. P: Is it a question which legitimately arises in this state? K: In the state of perception it does not arise. It only arises, exists when I ask, is this process eternal, everlasting?

普：清晰不是永恒的，…… 克：但它可以再次拾起它。 普：我说，也许吧。 克：因为我有一个观念：感知是完整的。 普：在这种状态下，这是一个合法出现的问题吗？ 克：在感知状态下，它不会出现。 它的出现，只是当我问‘这个过程是永恒的，持久的吗？’的时候。

P: And what would you say? K: You are being asked. Answer. Wait. You have to answer this question. At the moment of perception the question does not arise. The next moment I do not perceive so clearly. P: If I am alert to see that I am not perceiving so clearly, I will investigate that. K: So what am I doing? There is perception. That is all.

普：那你会说什么？ 克：有人问你。回答。停下来。你必须回答这个问题。 在感知的那一刻，问题不会出现。到了下一刻，我就没有那么清晰地感知了。 普：如果我警觉地看到，我没有那么清楚地感知，我会调查它。 克：那我在做什么？感知。仅此而已。

P: The doorway is in the question. The "key" of the doorway is in that question. K: Let us be simple about this. There is perception. In that perception there is no question of duration. There is only perception. The next minute I do not see clearly. There is no clear perception. It is muddled. There is investigation of pollution and so clarity. Right? And again perception; move again; cover and uncover - and this goes on. This is going on.

普：门口就在这个问题中。门口的“钥匙”就在那个问题上。 克：让我们简单一点。感知。 在那感知中，不存在持续的问题。只有感知。 下一分钟，我看不清楚了。没有清晰的感知。它是浑浊的。 调查这个浑浊，所以清晰。对吗？ 再次感知；再次移动；掩盖和揭开 —— 这么继续下去。这样进行。

F: Is it a movement of time? P: A very interesting thing takes place. The very nature of this awareness is that it operates on the "other". K: What do you mean by the "other"? P: Inattention. K: Wait. Attention and inattention. Then be aware of inattention which becomes attention. This balancing is going on all the time. P: I observe the very nature of attention. It has its own action on inattention. Now if I make a statement "it lessens inattention" it would be an incorrect thing for me to say. The only thing I can observe is that there is an action of attention on inattention. K: Does that action on inattention wipe away inattention so that inattention does not come again?

莫：它是时间的运动吗? 普：发生了一个很有趣的事情。这种觉察的性质是它作用于‘另一个’。 克：你说的‘另一个’是什么意思? 普：疏忽。 克：等等。注意和疏忽。 然后，觉察到疏忽，这变成了注意。这种平衡一直在进行。 普：我观察到注意的性质。在疏忽上，它有它自己的行为。 现在，我做出了一个论述：“它减少了疏忽”，我这样说是不正确的。 我唯一能观察到的是：在疏忽上，有注意的行为。 克：疏忽上的行为扫除了疏忽，因此它不再出现？

D: It is attentive to the inattentive. P: I am going further than being attentive to the inattentive. I say the nature of this attention is such that it operates on the brain cells. I am very very hesitant when I say this. It is the nature of attention to operate on the brain cells. That which is dormant in the brain-cells - which re-emerges when it is exposed to attention, the very nature of the dormancy undergoes a change. I would like this area to be investigated.

德：它留心于疏忽。 普：我再更进一步。 我说，这种注意的本质是这样的，它作用于脑细胞。 当我说这句话时，我非常非常犹豫。 注意的性质，作用于脑细胞。 作用在脑细胞们的昏沉之处 —— 当它曝露于注意之中时，会再次浮现， 这种昏沉的本质历经了一种变化。我希望对这个领域进行调查。

---