8 THE BACKWARD FLOWING MOVEMENT 回流运动

P: I would like to ask you about the backward flowing movement, a state in which there is a drawing in of sight, hearing and the energies of sex. In the Yoga-sutra, there is a word 'parivritti', which denotes the state where thought turns back upon itself. Is there such a state as the drawing in of the outward flowing senses and of thought turning back on itself? K: Like a glove taken inside out? Are you saying that thought looking at itself, or swallowing itself, is the backward flowing movement? P: What is meant by the word, the content of the word, is a matter of experience. K: You are asking, is there a state in which hearing, seeing and the sensual energies draw themselves into one and there is a moving backwards? What do you mean by backwards? Are you saying that the hearing, the seeing and the sensual energies are with drawing without outer propelling?

普：我想问你关于回流的运动， 一种视觉、听觉和性能量的回撤状态。 《瑜伽经》里有一个词‘parivritti’，它表示思想转向它自己的这种状态。 有那样一种状态吗，那种使外在感觉和思想往回退的状态？ 克：如同取下手套吗？ 你是说，思想看它自己，或者吞下它自己，这是回流运动吗？ 普：这个词的意思，这个词的内容，是一种体验。 克：你在问，有没有一种状态：听、看，以及感官的能量回退到一个人的里面，有这种回退的运动吗？ 你说的回退是什么意思？ 你是说，这种听，这种看和这种感官的能量在往回流，而没有向前推进吗？

P: The normal movement of the eyes, ears and the sensual energies is an outer movement, linked with object. Can there be a freeing of the senses from object and a drawing-in of the senses? K: I wonder if in the drawing in, the no hearing, no seeing and the sensual energy not expanding, there is not a state where there is the hearing of sound, the seeing everything and yet a state of total quiet, a state of being withdrawn, a state where there is no desire. P: It is not suppression of desire.

普：眼睛、耳朵和感官能量的正常运动是向外的，与对象连接。 能不能把感官从对象中解放出来，将这些感知往回流？ 克：我在想，在这种回流中、这种不听、不看，不释放感官能量的状态中， 没有那种可听到任何声音、可看到任何东西的状态， 而是处于一种完全安静的、内敛的、没有欲望的状态。 普：它不是对欲望的压抑。

K: Is there a state where there is the hearing of sound, the eyes seeing, objects existing, and yet there is no sensuous desire? I think there is such a state. A state where there is sensation, yet there is no desire. Not that one has become old, lost vitality but there is no desire - desire being the seeing, touching, sensation and out of that sensation, the wanting to possess.

克：有没有一种可听、可看、万物皆在而无感官欲望的状态？ 我想有这样一种状态。一种有感官知觉而没有欲望的状态。 不是因为一个人变老了，失去了活力，而是没有欲望 —— 没有这种想看、想摸、想去感受，以及从感受中冒出的、想要占据的欲望。

P: What happens to the process of hearing when there is no naming? K: Do you hear that siren? There is the vibration of sound and the interpretation that takes place when you hear the siren. Now can you listen to it without any movement of memory as thought? Can you hear only the sound? Can there be no image, no naming, no interpretation? Can there be only sound? That is all. And the sound is out of silence. Because the activity of thought has come to an end, there is a hearing of sound out of emptiness. And in the same way can there be a seeing out of emptiness? I see you, I see that bottle; there is no image, no association or movement of thought because there is no image formation. So out of real emptiness, quietness, there is a seeing. Is that what you mean by withdrawing the senses?

普：在听的过程中，不去命名，发生什么呢？ 克：你听到那警笛了吗？ 当你听警笛的时候，有声音的震动和相应的解释。 现在，你能听它，而没有记忆的移动，也就是不引发思想吗？你能只听声音吗？ 能不升起印象、不命名、不解释吗？能只是听这个声音吗？那是一切。 这个声音源于空寂。 因为思想活动走到了尽头，在虚无中听。 同样，能在虚无中看吗？我看你，看那个瓶子； 没有印象，没有联想或思想的活动，因为没有印象的成型。 因此，在真实的虚无、安静中，有一个‘看’。 那就是你所说的感官的回流吗？

P: I am questioning out of the texts. In China and in India, the withdrawing was considered important. K: It is simple. Are you asking, can you look at a woman or a man or a beautiful object without desire, fulfilment or reaction? It is easy. P: It is easy for you. See our difficulty. K: I see a beautiful woman, car, child, furniture and so on. Can it be observed without any movement for acquiring or discarding? It is very simple. It is the same for seeing and listening. I think they are one movement, not separate movements. Though the instruments of perception and hearing are separate, they are all one movement.

普：我的疑问源自于文献。在中国和印度，这种回流被认为非常重要。 克：它是简单的。你难道不是在问， 你能看一个女人或一个男人，或一个美丽的对象，而不带欲望、满足或反应吗？它是简单的。 普：它对你来说是简单的。看看我们的困难吧。 克：我看见一位美女、一辆汽车、一个孩子、家具等等。 在观看的时候，能不做任何的取舍吗？ 它很简单。对于看和听，都是一样的。 我想，它们是同一个运动，而不是分开的两个运动。 尽管看和听的感觉器官是不同的，但它们是同一个运动。

P: Desire existed before God; even before man came into being. The biological urge, the impetus is based on desire. How can you take desire which has its own propelling force and say it has no existence? K: Let us be clear. I see a beautiful car, a really beautiful car - P: Let us say I fall passionately in love. I am torn, ravaged by that desire. Can I see that person without desire operating? K: What is it you are trying to ask?

普：在有上帝之前，欲望就已经存在了；甚至在人出生之前，它就形成了。 这种生理需求，这种冲动，扎根于欲望之上。 你怎么能够拿走那个拥有推动力的欲望，并说它不存在呢？ 克：让我们来清理。我看到一辆漂亮的汽车，一辆真正的靓车 —— 普：让我们来说，我深陷爱河之中。我被那种欲望撕扯、蹂躏。我能没有欲望地看那个人吗？ 克：你想问什么？

P: Is there an actual withdrawal of sensory perception? K: I wonder if we mean the same thing? P: The car and may be even the woman can be looked at without naming. But we are loaded with questions, with problems of naming. It is not simple. K: I wonder if the problem of naming is not related to knowledge. P: Sir, a child is not exposed to knowledge and yet naming is a natural reaction. I am questioning the nature of this inward movement.

普：有没有一种感官知觉上的真实的回撤？ 克：我在想，我们是否在说同一个东西。 普：这辆汽车，甚至这个女人，都能够不被命名地去看。 但是我们却装满了问题，装满了各种名称的问题。它是不简单的。 克：我在想，命名问题是与知识无关的。 普：先生，一个小孩子并不懂多少知识，然而命名却是一种自然反应。 我在问这种内向运动的性质。

K: I am not sure I understand what you are trying to say. There is withdrawing of sensory desires and fulfilment. Why do you use the word "inward"? P: There are practices to delve deep. With eyes and ears closed, you can delve deep inwardly. Is there any validity to delving? K: Yes definitely. What you call delving in is to shut your eyes, to shut your ears; in that state is there a delving or is there a cessation of all movement, which appears as though you were delving in? When you really close your eyes and ears, there is no movement within or without, as desire demanding fulfilment with all its frustrations; when that does not take place, there is complete quietness. The moment you use the word "delving in", that implies duality. P: You hear that horn. To you is there no sound at all in it? K: No.

克：我不确定我理解你在尝试表达什么。 存在着对感官欲望和满足的撤回。为什么你使用‘向内’这个词？ 普：有这种深入探究的训练。闭上双眼，关上耳朵，你能向内深入探究。这种探究有用吗？ 克：当然有。 你所说的向内探究，就是闭上你的眼睛和你的耳朵； 在那种状态下，是一种探究，还是一种所有运动的消逝 —— 一种看起来好像是你在深入探究的消逝？ 而当你真地闭上眼睛和耳朵，内部或外部没有任何运动，没有想去满足的欲望以及它里面所有的折磨； 当那些没有发生的时候，现出完全的安静。 一旦你使用‘探究’这个词语，那就意味着二元性。 普：你听那喇叭。对你来说，它里面没有任何声音吗？ 克：没有。

P: It is quite extraordinary. To you there is no sound. When you close your ears, is there no inner sound, separate from you? We hear an inner sound, a volume of it which is within us. Do you not hear it? (Krishnamurti closes his eyes and ears.) K: No. But one must be clear. When the eyes are closed, one generally sees spots. If one observes those spots, they disappear. P: Is there not an expansion, a contraction? K: Nothing. When I close my eyes, there is absolutely no movement of any kind.

普：那就很奇怪。对你来说没有声音。 当你捂住你的耳朵，没有与你分离的、内在的声音吗？ 我们听到一种内在的声音，有大量的声音。你没有听到它吗？ (克里希那穆提闭上眼睛和耳朵) 克：没有。但是一个人必须要保持清明。当眼镜闭上的时候，一个人通常会看到斑点。 如果一个人观察那些斑点，它们就消失了。 普：没有一种扩张，一种收缩吗？ 克：没有。当我闭上我的眼睛，绝对没有任何的运动。

P: That means your whole consciousness is different. When I close my eyes, so many patterns are there. To you there is no movement of sound or pattern. K: That is why I want to go into this question of knowledge. This person has not read the Yoga-sutras and the religious books, and to him there is only a complete emptiness. P: It is not because he has not read any religious books. K: There is no interference of knowledge. P: The same phenomenon will not happen to anyone who is ignorant of religious literature. It cannot happen to a communist.

普：那意味着你的整个意识是不同的。 当我闭上我的眼睛，有那么多的样式。而你却没有声音的震动，也没有样式。 克：那就是我想要进入关于知识的这个问题的原因。 这个人没有读过《瑜伽经》和宗教书籍，对他而言，只有一种完全的虚无。 普：它不是因为他没有读过任何宗教的书籍。 克：没有知识的干扰。 普：同样的现象不会发生在任何一个对宗教书籍无知的人身上。 它不会发生在一个共产主义者身上。

K: It is knowledge as pattern that interferes. Pattern is created by knowledge, experience. When there is no retention of knowledge, then what is there? There is absolute quietness - eyes, ears and desire - no movement. Why do you make this out as something special? The man who is caught in association, idea, thoughts, in patterns, such a man does not have an empty mind. P: What you say is valid. There are many times when what you say is valid within me.

克：那个被称之为‘样式’的知识在干扰。样式是由知识，由经验创造出来的。 如果不留下知识，那么，发生了什么？ 绝对的安静 —— 眼睛、耳朵和欲望 —— 没有移动。 为什么你把这当成某个特别的东西？ 陷入联想、观念、思想、样式的这个人，这样的人没有一颗虚无的头脑。 普：你说得是。很多次，你所说的都对我有效。

K: My point is, those people who spoke of inward movement, were they aware of its dualistic nature? P: They must have been aware. The Yoga-Sutras say that the seer is nothing more than the instrument of seeing. They make an absolute statement like that. K: Probably the man who saw, perceived the reality said the seer and the seeing are one. Then the followers came along and made theories without experiencing the state. I cannot separate the observer from the observed. When I close my eyes, there is no observer at all. Therefore, there is no inward movement as opposed to the outward movement.

克：我的观点是，那些谈论内向运动的人们，是否意识到它的二元性？ 普：他们肯定意识到了。《瑜伽经》中说，观看者无非就是看的工具。 他们作出像那样绝对的陈述。 克：也许那位看到、感知的真实的人说过，观看者和看是同一个东西。 然后，粉丝们就追随过来，在没有经历过这种状态的情况下制定出了理论。 我不能把观察者与被观察的事物分开。当我闭上我的眼睛，根本就没有观察者。 因此就没有与外在运动相对立的内在运动。

P: Do you see yourself as a person? K: If you mean the body - yes. As an ego, as a person talking on the platform, walking, climbing the hill - no. P: The sense of existence, the sense of "I am; does it operate in you? K: One of the things I have never had is the sense of the "I". Never. P: "I exist" is the central core in all of us. It is the very fabric of our existence.

普：你看你自己是一个人吗？ 克：如果你是指身体 —— 是的。作为一个自我，作为一个在讲台上讲话、走路、爬山的人 —— 则不是。 普：这种存在感，这种‘我’的感觉，在你身上转动吗？ 克：那时我从来没有过的东西之一，从来没有。 普：‘我存在’是我们所有人的核心。它是我们存在的基本质料。

K: The peripheral expressions of Krishnamurti appear to be a person. But at the centre there is no person. I really do not know what it means. You are asking, is there in you a centre, the "I am", the sense of "I am". No. The feeling of "I am" is not true. P: It is not as obvious as that. But the sense of existence, the core of the ego within us, is unexplored. There is something which holds it together and as long as it remains, what you are saying - the no centre - has no validity for us.

克：克里希那穆提的外在表现，看起来是一个人。 但是在核心处却没有人。我真地不知道它是什么意思。 你在问：你有没有一个中心，一种‘我是…’，一种我的感觉。 没有。这种‘我是…’的感觉，是不真实的。 普：那并不明显。但这种存在感，我们里面的这种自我的核心，并未被发现。 有某个东西把它凝聚在一起，只要它存在，你所说的 —— 这种无焦点的 —— 对我们就不适用。

K: There is no movement of the past as the "me" in the centre, in the person. One has to go into this very carefully. As we said the other day, the first step is the last step. The first perception is the last perception and the ending of the first perception is the new perception. Therefore, there is a total gap between the first perception and the second perception. In that interval, there is no movement of thought. There would be the movement of thought when the memory of the first perception remains, not when it is over. Can the mind not empty itself of every perception? Can it not die to every expression, and when it does, where is the root of the "I am"? When the mind is that, is there any movement of pattern taking place? When eyes, ears and desire are non-existent as movement towards or away from something, then why should the mind have any pattern? The seeing is the seer, in that there is no duality, but those who make that statement into an axiom do not experience it and therefore it remains a theory.

克：这个人的里面，没有这个过去，这个位于中心的、被称之为‘我’的运动。一个人必须非常小心地进入这里。 如同我们之前讲的，第一步即最后一步。 第一次感知就是最后一次感知，第一次感知的结束，即是这崭新的感知。 因此，在第一次感知和第二次感知之间，是一段完全的空白。 在那段空白里，没有思想的移动。 当第一次感知的记忆留存下来，就会有思想的运动，如果这个感知结束，则不会有。 在每一次的感知中，这颗头脑能清空它自己吗？ 它不能死于每一次表现吗？如果它这么做，那么‘我是…’的根扎在哪儿呢？ 当这颗头脑是那，会出现任何样式的运动吗？ 当作为靠近或远离运动的眼睛、耳朵和欲望都不存在的时候， 为什么这颗头脑要占据任何一种样式？ 景观即是观者，里面没有二元性， 可是，把那个陈述变成公理的人并没有经历它，因此它停留在理论上。

P: The Sutras say there are many types of liberation. Liberation is by birth. Some men are born that way. That is the highest form of liberation. Then there is liberation by drugs which is part of witchcraft; then liberation through the asanas, then liberation through breath control, then liberation by understanding. I have always felt that you have never been able to explain to us how liberation happened to you. Was your mind like ours and it underwent mutation? If so, then there is a possibility of seeing for oneself and transforming the self. But even that is not relevant. I see that another's seeing cannot help me to see. What I see is my own. One has to leave it there. One cannot probe further.

普：经文上说有很多种类型的解放: 与生俱来的解放 —— 某些人生来就如此，那是最高形式的解放。 有通过药物，一种魔法而实现的解放； 有通过瑜伽姿势而实现的解放，通过呼吸控制而实现的解放；有通过理解而实现的解放。 我总觉得，你从未向我们解释过：你是如何得以解放的。 你的头脑是不是也像我们的头脑一样，需要经历突变吗？ 若是如此，一个人就有可能看见并转化这个自我。 即使那是无关的。我清楚另一个人的看，并不能帮到我。 我所看见的，就是我自己。一个人只好离开那儿，无法进一步地深入。

K: As you said, liberation is divided between those born liberated and those liberated through drugs, through yoga, through breath control and understanding. These are just explanations of a very simple fact. P: Your mind is not like ours, that is a simple fact. K: There are all these categories - drugs, breathing and the enormous effort involved in understanding - but I do not think it works that way at all.

克：正如你所说，解放被划分为两者类型: 天生的解放， 以及通过药物、瑜伽、呼吸控制和理解而实现的解放。 这些只是对一个非常简单的事实的解释。 普：你的头脑不像我们的头脑，那是一个简单的事实。 克：所有那些类型 —— 药物、呼吸，以及理解中涉及到的巨大努力 —— 但我却认为它没有一点用。

P: I am not concerned with what the books say. I am very concerned when my mind chatters. In the moment of perceiving, I see that a certain withering away has taken place in me. But I am not free of the desire to end this chattering. K: Do you really want to end it? P: Yes. K: Why does it not end? You see, it is very interesting. There is no ending to chattering.

普：我不关心书上怎么说。我很在意我的头脑，当我的头脑喋喋不休的时候。 在感知的一刻，我看到我的内在出现了某种枯萎。 但是我没有摆脱这种想要结束杂念的欲望。 克：你真地想结束它吗？ 普：是。 克：那它为什么没有结束？你看，它很有趣。杂念没有停下。

P: That is what my mind refuses to see; that there is no action to end it. K: Why? Do you want to go into it? P: Yes. K: First, why do you object if your mind chatters? If you want to end chattering, then the problem starts. Duality is the desire to end "what is". Why do you object to it? Noises are going on, buses are passing, crows are cawing. Let chattering go on. I am not going to resist it. I am not going to be interested in it. It is there. It means nothing.

普：那就是什么我的头脑拒绝去看；没办法结束它。 克：为什么？你想进入它吗？ 普：是的。 克：首先，如果你的头脑喋喋不休，你为什么要抗拒？如果你结束这种杂念，那么问题就开始了。 二元性是这种想结束‘什么是’的欲望。为什么你要反对它？ 噪因在继续，公交车驶过，乌鸦在聒噪。让杂念继续吧。 我不会去阻拦它。我不会对它产生兴趣。它在那里。它没有意义。

P: This is your magnitude. If you ask me what is the greatest thing in your teaching, it is this. To say to oneself, to the chattering mind, leave it there. No teacher has said this before. K: Which means the peripheral influence has no meaning at the centre. P: All teachers have talked of putting an end to chattering, to the peripheral influence.

普：这就是你的巨大。如果你问我，你教诲中最重要的东西是什么，那就是这。 对自己说，对这颗喋喋不休的头脑说，让它去吧。没有老师曾这样说过。 克：那意味着，对于这个中心，外围的影响是没有意义的。 普：所有的老师都说要去除杂念，除掉外围的影响。

K: Do you not see when chattering does not matter, it is finished? It is strange how it works. I think this is the central thing which the professionals have missed. Would you say from the point of view of the guru that he is concerned only with the peripheral change? P: No. He is concerned with the central change. To you there is no difference between the centre and the periphery. Within the so-called centre there is the first and the last step. The gurus would say get rid of the peripheral chattering.

克：你没有看到吗？当杂念不重要的时候，它就完蛋了。 它的运作机理很奇怪。 我想这就是专家们所忽略的核心之处吧。 从这个视角来看上师，你会说他只关心外围的改变吗？ 普：不会。他关心的是中心的改变。对你而言，中心和外围没有区别。 在所谓的中心里，有第一步和最后一步。 上师们会说: 消除外围的杂念。