P: The problem of duality and its ending cannot be understood unless we go into the nature of the thinker and thought. Can we discuss this? K: How do the Hindu thinkers, the Advaita philosophers deal with this problem? P: Patanjali's Yoga-sutras postulate a state of liberation which has anchors, and a state of liberation which is without anchors. In the one, the thinker is the prop; it is a state where the thinker has not ceased. In the other, there is a state where everything including the thinker has ceased. The Buddhist talk of kshana vada, time as instant, total and complete in itself where the thinker has no continuity. The Advaita philosophers talk of the cessation of duality and the attainment of non-duality. They go through a dualistic process to attain this non-dual state. Sankara approaches this state of non-duality through negation (neti, neti). Nagarjuna, the Buddhist philosopher's negation is absolute; if you say there is God, he negates it; if you say there is no God, he negates it. Every statement is negated.
普：二元性问题和它的终结，不能被理解， 除非我们深入到思想者和思想的性质。我们能讨论这一点吗？ 克：印度的思想家，这些不二论的哲学家们是如何处理这个问题的？ 普：帕坦伽利的《瑜伽经》假设了一种有锚定的自由状态和一种无锚的自由状态。 在前一种假设中，思想者是支撑者，在这种状态下，思想者没有消亡； 在后一种假设中，是一种任何事物，包括思想者都消亡的状态。 佛教徒讲‘刹那灭论’，时间是刹那的、完整的、自身圆满的，在那里思想者没有延续性。 不二论的哲学家们讲二元性的消亡和非二元性的实现。 他们通过二元性的过程，去实现非二元的状态。 商羯罗通过否定来达到这种非二元的状态。 龙树，这位佛教哲学家的否定是绝对的； 如果你说上帝存在，他会否定它；如果你说上帝不存在，他也会否定它。 每个说法都被否定。
B: Buddha says what exists is the "Solitude of Reality". You are the result of your thoughts. P: They have all talked about non-duality - the Buddha, Sankara, Nagarjuna. But non-duality has become a concept. It has not affected the structure of the mind itself. In India for centuries the negative approach has been discussed, but it has not affected the human mind. The brain cells have remained dualistic; they operate in time and are caught in time. Though negation and the non-dual have been posited, there is no clue to apprehend these states. Why has non-duality not affected the mind of man? Can we go into it to see whether we can discover that which will trigger the non-dual state? B: All other developments - scientific, technological - have affected the minds of people. Man has discovered the non-dualistic state but it has not affected his mind nor his life.
芭：佛陀说存在就是‘现实的孤独’。你是你思想的结果。 普：他们都谈过非二元性 —— 佛陀、商羯罗、龙树。 但非二元性已经成了一个概念。 它对头脑本身的结构没有产生影响。 在印度，几个世纪以来，这种否定方式已经被讨论，它却并没有影响人的头脑。 这些脑细胞依然是二元性的；他们在时间中运转，并困于其中。 尽管提出否定和非二元性的假设，却没有领悟那些状态的线索。 为什么非二元性没有影响人的头脑？ 我们能深入其中，去看看我们是否能够发现非二元性的状态的关键？ 芭：其它所有的发展 —— 科学的、技术的 —— 已经影响了人们的头脑。 人已经发现了非二元性的状态，但它并没有影响他的头脑或他的生活。
S: If every experience leaves a mark on the brain cells, what is the impact of the state of non-duality, of oneness? Why is a mutation not taking place in the relationship between the thinker and the thought? P: Is the mechanism which records the technological, the same mechanism which "sees, perceives"? K: The technological cell, the recording cell and the perceptive cell - P: And they seem to form the "ego".
苏: 如果每一个体验都在脑细胞中留下记号， 那么，这种非二元性的、独立的状态留下了什么？ 在思想者和思想之间的关系中，为什么没有发生一场突变？ 普：记录技艺的机制与‘观看、感知’的机制，相同吗？ 克：这种用于技艺的细胞，这种用于记录的细胞，与这种用于感知的细胞 —— 普：它们似乎构成了这个‘自我’。
K: The technological and the recording fragment - these two make up the ego. Not the perceptive. P: I am including "perceiving" also. The recording is concerned with both - the technological and perception. K: It may be a verbal explanation. P: The core of man never seems to get affected. The basic essential duality between the thinker and thought continues.
克：这种技艺和记录的碎片 —— 这两者构造出这个自我。而不是那用于感知的。 普：我把‘感知’那一部分也包括在里面。记录功能包括了两者 —— 技艺和感知。 克：这可能是一个文字化的表述。 普：人的核心似乎从未受到影响。这种基本的二元性 —— 思想者和思想的对立，还是存在。
K: Do you think there is basically a duality or only "what is", the fact? P: When you, Sir, ask a question like that, the mind stands still and one says "yes, it is so". Then the query starts - am I not separate from S, from B? Though the mind says "yes", it also queries a split second later. The moment you asked the question, my mind became still. K: Why not stay there?
克：你觉得究竟有没有二元性？或者只存在‘什么是’，也就是存在本身？ 普：当你提出那样的问题，先生，这颗头脑是静止的，一个人说‘是的，它确实是如此’。 接着就开始询问 —— 我和苏纳达、我和芭拉，难道不是分开的吗？尽管这颗头脑说‘是’，之后，它也会询问这种划分。 你提出问题的那一刻，我的头脑变得静止。 克：为什么不待在那里？
P: The query arises. K: Why? Is it habit, tradition, the very nature of the operation of the self, the conditioning? All that may be due to the cultural imposition to survive, to function and so on. Why bring that in when we are looking at the fact - whether there is duality which is basic? P: You say it may be a reflex action of the brain cells?
普：这种询问升起了。 克：为什么？它是一种习惯、传统吗？是这个自我、这个囚犯的运转特性吗？ 那一切可能是出于他的生存、意义等等的需求而被风俗所强迫。 当我们在观察这个事实‘究竟有没有二元性’的时候，为什么会出现这种询问？ 普：你说，它可能是脑细胞的一种条件反射？
K: We are the result of our environment, of our society, We are the result of all our interactions. That is a fact also. I am asking myself is there a basic duality at the very core, or does duality arise when I move away from "what is"? When I do not move away from the basic non-dualistic quality of the mind, the thinker there, has he a duality? He thinks. Does the thinker create a duality when he is completely with "what is"?
克：我们是环境和社会的产物；我们是我们交互的产物，那也是事实。 我问我自己，在核心之处，究竟有没有二元性，或者，在我远离‘什么是’的时候，二元性就冒了出来？ 当我不远离头脑的这种非二元性的特征，这位思想者，它有二元性吗？他思考。 当他完全处于‘什么是’，他创造二元性吗？
I never think when I look at a tree. When I look at you, there is no division as the "me" and "you". Words are used for linguistic and communicative purposes. The "me" and "you" are somehow not rooted in me. So, where does the thinker arise separate from thought? Mind remains in "what is". It remains with pain. There is no thinking of non-pain. There is the sense of suffering. That is "what is".
当我看一棵树，我从来不思考。当我看你，没有‘我’和‘你’的区分。 文字的使用，是出于语言学和交流的意图。这个‘我’和这个‘你’，并没有在我的里面扎根。 因此，从思想中分离出来的思想者在哪儿？头脑居于‘什么是’之中。 它与痛苦相伴。没有无痛的想法。有的是痛苦的感觉。那就是‘什么是’。
There is no feeling of wanting to be out of it. Where does duality arise? Duality arises when the mind says, "I must be rid of pain. I have known states of non-pain and I want to be in a state of non-pain" (Pause). You are a man and I am a woman. That is a biological fact. But is there a psychological dualism? Is there a basically dualistic state or only when the mind moves away from "what is"?
没有想离开它的感觉。二元性从哪里冒出？ 二元性的冒出，是由于这颗头脑说：“我必须根除痛苦。我已经知道无痛的状态，我想处于无痛的状态”。(停顿) 你是一个男人，我是一个女人。那是一个生理上的事实。但是，有心理上的二元论吗？ 究竟有没有二元性的状态，或者，当这颗头脑远离‘什么是’的时候，才出现？
There is sorrow. My son is dead. I do not move away. Where is the duality? It is only when I say I have lost my companion, my son, that duality comes into being. I wonder if this is right? I have pain - physical or psychological grief. They are all included in pain. A movement away from it, is duality. The thinker is the movement away. The thinker then says this should not be; he also says there should not be duality.
那里有悲伤。我的儿子死了。我不远离。二元性在哪里？ 只有当我说‘我失去了伴侣，我的儿子’，那种二元性才出现。我在想是不是这样？ 我痛苦 —— 身体上或心理上的悲痛。它们都属于痛苦。远离它的行为，就是二元性。 这个思考者，就是这种远离。 这位思想者说，不应该这样；他也说，不应该有二元性。
First see the fact that the movement away from "what is", is the movement of the thinker who brings in duality. In observing the fact of pain, why should there be a thinker in that observation? The thinker arises when there is a movement, either backwards or forwards. The thought that I had no pain yesterday - in that duality arises.
首先看这个事实：远离‘什么是’，思想者的这种行为，带来了二元性。 看痛苦，看这个事实，在看的时候，为什么有一个思想者？ 当有一个移动，不论是向前或向后的移动，思想者就冒了出来。 ‘昨天我没有痛苦’ —— 这样一来，冒出了二元性。
Can the mind remain with the pain, without any movement away from it, which brings in the thinker? The mind is asking itself how this dualistic attitude towards life arises? It is not asking for an explanation of how to go beyond it. I have had pleasure yesterday. It is finished. (Pause). Is it not as simple as that?
头脑能与痛苦作伴吗，能够不离开它，也就是不引来思想者吗？ 这颗头脑问它自己: 这种对生命的二元性观念是如何产生的？ 它并不是在寻求一个解释，一个如何超越它的解释。 我有一个快乐的昨天，它结束了。(停顿)。就这么简单，难道不是吗？
P: Not really. K: I think it is. You see, this implies non-comparative observation. Comparison is dualistic. Measurement is dualistic. There is pain today, there is the comparison with the non-pain of tomorrow. But there is only one fact: the pain which the mind is going through now. Nothing else exists. Why have we complicated this? Why have we built tremendous philosophies round al1 this? Are we missing something?
普：真的不是。 克：我想它是。 你看，这意味着没有比较的观察。比较是二元性的，衡量是二元性的。 今天有痛苦，与没有痛苦的明天作比较。 但是只有一个事实： 头脑正在经历的这种痛苦。其它的，都不存在。 为什么我们把这复杂化？ 为什么我们围绕着这一切建立庞大的哲学？ 我们丢失了什么东西？
Is it that the mind does not know what to do and therefore moves away from the fact and brings duality into being? If it knew, would it bring about duality? Is the "what to do" itself a dualistic process? Do you understand? Let us look at it again. There is pain - physical or psychological. When the mind does not know what to do in the non-dualistic sense, it escapes.
是因为头脑不知道要做什么，因此远离这个事实，并催生出二元性吗？ 如果它知道，它会引入二元性吗？ 这个问题‘做什么’，不就是一个二元性的过程吗？你理解吗？ 让我们再来看一下它。有痛苦 —— 身体上的或者心理的。 在这种非二元性的感觉中，这颗头脑不知道做什么，它就逃跑了。
Can the mind caught in the trap, the backward and the forward movement, can it deal with "what is" in a non-dualistic way? Do you understand? So we are asking, can pain, the "what is", be transformed without dualistic activity? Can there be a state of non-thinking, in which the thinker does not come into being at all; the thinker who says "I had no pain yesterday and I will not have it tomorrow"?
这颗被困于陷阱中的、摇摆不定的头脑，能在非二元性的道路上处理‘什么是’吗？ 你理解吗？所以我们问：痛苦，这个‘什么是’，能够在没有二元性活动情况下被转化吗？ 能不能处于一种无思想的状态，其中根本没有思想者； 那位思想者说：‘我昨天没有痛苦，我明天也不会有痛苦’？
P: See what happens to us. What you say is right. But there is a lack of something within us; it may be strength, energy. When there is a crisis, the weight of that crisis is sufficient to plunge us into a state where there is no movement away from the crisis; but in everyday life, we have "little" challenges. K: If you really understood this, you would meet these little challenges. P: In everyday life, we have the chattering, erratic movement of the thinker operating with its demands. What does one do with that? K: I do not think you can do anything with it. That is the denial. It is irrelevant.
普：看看我们的样子。你说得对。但我们缺少了什么；它可能是力量、能量。 当出现危机，这危机的重量足以使我们陷入一种无法远离危机的状态； 但是在日常生活中，我们有的只是‘细微’的挑战。 克：如果你真地理解这一点，你就会面对这些细微的挑战。 普：在日常生活中，我们在闲聊，思绪在莫名地游荡。我们该做什么？ 克：我想，你不能对它下手。那就是否定。它无关紧要。
P: But that is very very important. That is what our minds are - the erratic part. One does not have the capacity to negate that. K: Listen, there is noise outside. I cannot do anything about it. P: When there is a crisis, there is contact. In normal living there is no contact. I go out. I can look at a tree and there is no duality. I can see colour without duality. But there is the other, the non-stopping, erratic no-sense part that is continuously chattering. The thinker starts operating on it when it sees it functioning. The great negation is to let it alone.
普：但那是非常非常重要的。那就是我们的现状 —— 这个流浪者。一个人无法否定它。 克：听，外面的噪音。对于它，我什么都做不了。 普：当有危机的时候，就会产生联系。 在正常的生活中，没有联系。 我走出去，看见一棵树，那时没有二元性。我能看见色泽而不带二元性。 但是还有另一个，一个躁动的、游移不定的、非感知的、在喋喋不休的部分。 这位思想者在上面运转，当它看见它的功能。这巨大的否定就是：随它去吧。
K: Settle the primary factor - to observe pain without moving away from it - that is the only non-dualistic state. P: Let us speak of the chattering mind instead of pain, because that is the fact at this moment. The noise of that horn, the chattering mind, that is "what is". K: You prefer this and do not prefer that and thereby begins the whole circle. P: The central point is the observation of "what is" without moving away. The moving away creates the thinker.
克：处理主要因素 —— 观察痛苦而不远离它 —— 那是唯一的、非二元性的状态。 普：让我们抛弃痛苦，来说说这颗喋喋不休的头脑，因为那就是此时此刻的写照。 那个喇叭的噪音，这个喋喋不休的头脑，就是 ‘什么是’。 克：你倾向于这，而不喜欢那，因此，引发了这整个循环。 普：重点在于观察‘什么是’而不走开。走开的行为，创造出这位思想者。
K: Because the noise, the chattering which was the "what is", has gone, has faded away but the pain remains. Pain has not gone. To go beyond pain non-dualistically; that is the question. How is it to be done? Any movement away from "what is", is dualistic because in that there is the thinker operating on "what is", which is the dualistic. Now can one observe "what is", which is the dualistic? To observe "what is", without the dualistic movement taking place, will that transform "what is"? Do you understand my question?
克：因为这噪音，这喋喋不休，也就是这‘什么是’，已经消逝，已经褪色，而痛苦却还在。 痛苦没有消逝。非二元性地走出痛苦，就是问题之所在。要怎么去做？ 任何远离‘什么是’的动作都是二元性的，因为思想者在上面动手脚，在对‘什么是’，也就是对这个二元性动手脚。 现在，一个人能观察‘什么是’，也就是这个二元性吗？ 观察‘什么是’，不让这个二元性移动，会转变‘什么是’吗？ 你理解我的问题吗？
P: Is it not really a dissolution of "what is"? That which was created? K: I know only "what is", nothing else. Not the cause. P: That is so. One can see that when there is no movement away from pain, there is a dissolution of pain.
普：它不正是在消除‘什么是’吗？那是怎么创造的？ 克：我只知道 ‘什么是’，没有了。不知道这原因。 普：就是如此。一个人能看到，当没有远离痛苦的动作，就有痛苦的消除。
K: How does this happen? Why has man not come to this? Why has he fought pain with a dualistic movement? Why has he never understood or delved into pain without the dualistic movement? What happens when there is no movement away from pain? Not what happens to the dissolution of pain but what happens to the mechanism that operates? It is simple. Pain is the movement away. There is no pain where there is only listening. There is pain only when I move from the fact and say this is pleasurable, this is not pleasurable. My son dies. That is an absolute, irrevocable fact. Why is there pain?
克：这是怎样出现的？人为什么没有踏进这里？他为什么要通过二元性的动作来对抗痛苦？ 为什么他不停下二元性的方式，去理解或深入探究痛苦？ 当没有远离痛苦的动作，什么出现了？ 不是痛苦的消除，而是所呈现出的运作机制是什么？ 它是简单的。痛苦就是这种远离。只有听，没有痛苦。 只有当我远离这个事实，说‘这令人快乐，这令人不快’的时候，才有痛苦。 我的儿子死了。那是绝对的、无法更改的事实。为什么有痛苦？
P: Because I loved him. K: Look what has already happened unconsciously. I loved him. He has gone. The pain is the remembrance of my love for him. And he is no more. But the absolute fact is he is gone. Remain with that fact. There is pain only when I say he is no more, which is when the thinker comes into being and says, "my son is no longer there, he was my companion," and all the rest of it.
普：因为我爱过他。 克：看，在这不知不觉中，发生了什么。 我爱过他。他去世了。这痛苦就是我回忆起对他的爱。 他已经不复存在。这确凿的事实是他去世了。停留在那个事实上。 痛苦之所以出现，恰好是因为我说他已经不复存在了，也就是当思想者出现并说， "我的儿子再也回不来了，他曾经是我的伴侣" 等等。
S: It is not merely the memory of my son who is dead which is pain. There is loneliness now. K: My son is dead. That is a fact. Then there is the thought of loneliness. Then there is my identification with him. All that is a process of thought and the thinker. But I have only one fact. My son is gone, loneliness, the lack of companionship, despair, are all the result of thought, which creates duality;a movement away from "what is".
苏: 它不仅有我对死去的儿子的痛苦的回忆，还有现实的孤独。 克：我儿子去世了，那是一个事实。 接着有这种孤独的思想，然后勾起我对他的认同。 那一切都是一种思想和思想者的过程。 但是我只有一个事实， 我的儿子离开了，孤独，缺乏陪伴，绝望，这一切都是思想的产物， 并创造出二元性；一种远离‘什么是’的移动。
It does not need strength or determination not to move. The determination is dualistic. There is only one thing, which is the fact and my movement away from the fact, from "what is". It is this that breeds bitterness, callousness, lack of love, indifference, which are all the product of thinking. The fact is my son is gone.
不移动，是不需要力量或者决心的。决心是二元性的。 只有一个东西，也就是这个事实和我的移动 —— 远离这个事实、这个‘什么是’的移动。 正是它滋生出苦涩、绝情、爱的匮乏、冷漠，这一切都是思想的产物。 这个事实是我的儿子去世了。
The complete non-perception of "what is" breeds the thinker, which is dualistic action; and when the mind falls again into the trap of dualistic action, that is "what is"; remain with that - for any movement away from that is another dualistic action. The mind is always dealing with "what is" as noise, no noise. And "what is", the fact, needs no transformation because it is already "the beyond".
对‘什么是’的麻木滋生出思想者，也就是二元性的行为。 当这颗头脑再次陷入二元性的行为中，那就是‘什么是’； 留在那里 —— 因为任何远离那的移动，就是另一个二元性的行为。 这颗头脑总是在处理作为噪音的‘什么是’，没有噪音。 而‘什么是’，这个事实，不需要转化，因为它已经‘脱离’。
Anger is "what is". The dualistic movement of non-anger is away from "what is". The non-movement from "what is", is no longer anger. Therefore, the mind - once it has perceived, once it has had non-dualistic perception - when anger arises again, does not act from memory. The next time anger arises, that is "what is". Mind is always dealing with "what is". Therefore, the dualistic concept is totally wrong, fallacious.
愤怒就是‘什么是’。不要愤怒 —— 这种二元性的移动，就是在远离‘什么是’。 不离开‘什么是’，就不再是愤怒。 因此，这颗头脑 —— 一旦它感知到，一旦它有非二元性的感知 —— 当愤怒再次升起，不根据记忆来行动。 接下来愤怒升起，那就是‘什么是’。 头脑总是在处理‘什么是’。因此，二元性的概念是完全错误的，是骗人的。
P: This is tremendous action. The dualistic action is non-action. K: You have to be simple. It is the mind that is not clever, that is not cunning, that is not trying to find substitutes for dualistic action, that can understand. Our minds are not simple enough. Though we all talk of simplicity, that simplicity is of the loincloth. The non-dual means really the art of listening. You hear that dog barking - listen to it, without a movement away from it. Remain with "what is". (Pause) The man who remains with "what is" and never moves away from it, has no marks. P: And when marks take place, to see that they take place. One act of perception removes the mark. K: Quite right. That is the way to live.
普：这是巨大的行动。二元性的行动是不作为。 克：你必须简单。 它是指，这颗头脑不聪明，不狡猾， 没有尝试去寻找二元性行为的替代品，那种头脑能理解。 我们的头脑不够简单。虽然我们都在谈论简单，那个简单只是缠腰布罢了。 这种非二元性，实际上意味着听的艺术。 你听到狗在叫 —— 听它，不离开它。留在‘什么是’。(停顿) 一个留在‘什么是’，而从不远离它的人，没有痕迹。 普：当出现痕迹，看着它们的发生。一个感知的行为擦除这个痕迹。 克：相当正确。那就是生活之路。
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。
K: When the sun is shining, you cannot do anything about it. When it is not there, what are we to do? (Pause) We do not see. (Pause) What will man make of the statement "let it chatter"? The fact is there is no duality and the observer is the observed at all times. The noise of the periphery is the noise of the observer. When the observer is not, the noise is not. When there is resistance, the observer comes into existence. Can one really see that the seer is the seeing and not accept that statement as an axiom, as an interpretation? But we see that the professionals have made that into a slogan.
克：当阳光普照，你不能对它做任何事。 当它不在的时候，我们做什么呢？(停顿) 我们不看。(停顿) 这个陈述：‘让它喋喋不休吧’，人会做什么？ 这个事实就是，没有二元性，在任何时候，观者即被观者。 外围的噪音就是观者的噪音。当观者不在，噪音即不在。 有抗拒的时候，观者就出现了。 一个人能真正看见: 观者即观，而不把那个陈述当为一个公理，一种解释而接受吗？ 但是我们看到，专家们把它变成了一个口号。
Is there liberation for the man who takes drugs, who takes to breathing in and out, for years? It may lead to a distorted mind. And the man who analyses and wants to understand, do you think he will find liberation? So if you deny all that, it is there on a silver platter. It is offered. Never repeat anything. Never say anything you do not know, which you have not lived. That brings a tremendous aloneness which is pure, crystal clear.
那些服用药物，多年练习呼吸吐纳的人们，获得解放了吗？ 它可能导致一颗扭曲的头脑。 而这个人，他分析，并想去理解，你认为他能找到自由吗？ 因此，如果你否定那一切，它就在那里，唾手可得。 它被供应。绝不重复任何的东西。 绝不说你所不知道的，没有经历过的任何事物。 那带来一种巨大的独立，纯粹的、水晶般的清明。
P: The key to your teachings appears to be in the understanding of time. The human mind, the structure of the brain cells have come to their present state with an in-built sense of time - as the yesterday, the today and the tomorrow. It is along this axis that the mind sustains itself. You appear to explode this process, to break through and therefore give the mind a new state of time. How is the time cycle to end? (Pause) What is your concept of time? The Buddha talks of the endless cycle of births and deaths, which is the yesterday, the today and the tomorrow, and the liberation from this cycle.
普；你教诲的关键，似乎在时间的理解之中。 人类的头脑、脑细胞的这种结构，它们的现状具有一种内建的时间感 —— 被称之为昨天、今天和明天。沿着这根时间轴，这颗头脑维系着它自己。 你似乎在爆破这个过程，打断，从而给这颗头脑以一种新的状态。 如何结束时间的轮回？(停顿) 你关于时间的概念是什么？ 佛陀讲生与死的不断的轮回， 也就是昨天、今天和明天，以及从轮回中解脱。
K: What is time to you? Is it the movement of the past through the present to the future; not only in space and time, but also inwardly from the yesterday, to today and tomorrow? Or is time that which is invo1ved in covering physical or psychological distance; the time to achieve, to fulfil, to arrive? Or is time an ending as death? Or is time the memory of a pleasant or unpleasant happening; time to learn a technique or time to forget? All these involve time. Time is not a concept. P: We know time as a sense of duration, as clock time.
克：对你来说，什么是时间？ 它是从过去，经过现在，抵达未来的这种移动吗；不只是外在的时空，也包含内在的昨天、今天、明天？ 或者，时间涉及到覆盖物理上的或心理上的距离；用以获取、完成和抵达？ 或者，时间是一种结束，像死亡一样？ 或者，时间是回忆那曾经的悲喜；用以学习一种技能或忘却？ 这些都是涉及到时间。时间不是一个概念。 普：我们知道时间是一种延续感，像钟表上的时间。
K: Time as duration, a process, a continuity and an ending. There is not only physical time by the watch but also the psychological inward time. Time by the watch is very clear - going to the moon requires clock time. Is there any other time?
克：时间作为延续，一种过程，一种连续和一种结束。 不仅有钟表上的物理时间，还有内在的心理时间。 钟表上显示的时间是很清楚的 —— 登月需要钟表上的时间。还有其他的时间吗？
P: We see time by the clock, the sun setting and rising. Psychological time is not different from that. If physical time has validity, my stating that I shall be tomorrow also has validity, not only physically but psychologically. All becoming is related to the tomorrow. K: All becoming is not only clock time but also the desire to become. P: The latter is possible only because there is tomorrow.
普：我们通过钟表，日出和日落看到时间。心理的时间与那并没有什么不同。 如果物理上的时间有效，那么，明天我还在的说法同样也有效，不仅是在物理上，也在心理上有效。 所有的成为，都与明天相关。 克：所有的成为，不仅属于钟表上的时间，也归属于想要成为的欲望。 普：后者之所以有可能实现，是因为明天的存在。
K: That means, you think if there was no physical time, there would be no psychological time. P: I question the distinction you draw between the two - the physical and psychological time. K: I go to Madras; that needs time as today and the tomorrow. We can also see that because there is time - as yesterday, today and tomorrow - one will be different, one will change one's character, one will become so-called perfect. P: It is easy to see that time does not bring perfection. But the nature of the movement of thought, the sprouting, is a projection in time. I question the distinction you make.
克：那意味着，你认为如果没有物理上的时间，就没有心理上的时间吗？ 普：我质疑你对物理时间与心理时间的区分。 克：我去马德拉斯；那需要像今天和明天这样的时间。 我们也可以看到，因为存在像昨天、今天和明天这样的时间， —— 一个人会变得不同，一个人会改变自己的性格，一个人会变得所谓的完美。 普：很容易看到，时间并不能带来完美。 但是思想活动的这种性质，这种萌发，是时间中的一个投影。 我质疑你所做出的这种区分。
K: I know that physical time exists. Even if I do not think about tomorrow, there would be tomorrow. Why am I sure that there will be a tomorrow apart from the chronological time? It is fairly clear. This evening I will be going for a walk and between now and the walk there is an interval of ten hours. In the same way I am something and I want to be something else. In that also there is time involved. I am asking myself if there is such time at all. If I do not think about the walk, or about my becoming something else, is there time?
克：我知道物理上的时间存在。即使我不去思考明天，明天还是存在。 为什么我确信，除了钟表上的时间之外，还会有一个明天呢？ 它很清楚。我今晚要去散步，现在距离散步的时间有十小时的间隔。 同样，我现在是这样，我想要变成另一种样子。那也涉及到时间。 我问我自己：究竟有没有那种时间？ 如果我不去考虑散步，或者不去想我要成为的另一种样子，还有那种时间吗？
P: Certain measurements have to be made. K: I need only physical measurement, no psychological measurement. I do not have to say I will become that; I will fulfil; I will achieve my ideal. All that involves time. If it does not enter my consciousness, where is time? It is only when I want to change this into that, there is time. I have no such desire. P: So long as there is desire for improvement, a change for the better, which to me is a fact, there is validity to the sense of time.
普：某一些衡量是需要的。 克：我需要的只是物理上的衡量，不是心理上的衡量。 我不需要说‘我会成为那样’；‘我会完成’；‘我会达到我的理想’。那一切都涉及到时间。 如果它不进入我的意识，那么时间在哪里？ 当我想要把‘这’改变成‘那’，就出现了时间。我没有那样的欲望。 普：只要存在改进的欲望，为了更好而改变，这对我来说是个事实。那么这种时间感就是有效的。
K: That is, two years ago, I did not do my exercises properly. In two years, I have learnt, improved. I apply the same kind of argument to an inward process, which is, I say I am this and I will improve in two years time. I know only physical time and I do not know any other time. And why do you have any other time except the physical; any other time except the chronological? Why?
克：是的，两年前，我自己没有恰当地练习。在这两年里，我在学习，并有所改善。 我把同样的说法应用到内在的过程中，也就是，我说: 我是这样，我会用两年的时间来改善。 我只知道物理上的时间，不知道任何其它的时间。 除了物理上的时间，为什么你还有其它的时间？除了顺序上的时间，为什么你还有其它的时间？
You see, what is really involved is movement - the movement of improvement; the putting together involves time, both physical and psychological. Is there any other movement except the movement of thought? And thought is time - thought which says I have been and I will become. If thought functioned only in the movement of the physical, is there any other time?
你看，这里涉及的问题其实是运动 —— 改善的运动， 这种聚合需要时间，包含了物理上和心理上的时间。 除了思想运动之外，还有其它运动吗？ 思想就是时间 —— 思想说，我是这个样子，我会成为那样的。 如果思想只在物理运动中发挥功能，那么还存在其它的时间吗？
If there is no psychological being, psychological ending, is there time? We always associate physical time with psychological time, and therefore say: "I will be". The verb "to be" is time. Now what happens when you do not want to do anything, one way or the other?
如果没有心理上的存在，心理上的结束，还有时间吗？ 我们总是把物理时间和心理时间联系在一起，因此说‘我将要实现’。这个动词‘去实现’，就是时间。 现在，当你不想做任何事情的时候，发生了什么？
P: What would have happened if man did not have this movement of becoming as time? K: He would have been destroyed. So the movement of becoming was a movement of protection. P: Then the movement of protection as time is necessary. K: Agreed, protection against fire. But is there any other form of protection? P: Once you admit protection against fire, the other protection is of the same nature. K: If the psychological is non-existent, is there need for protection?
普：如果人没有这种成为的运动，会发生什么？ 克：他会被摧毁。因此这个成为的运动是一种保护性的运动。 普：那么，这种被称之为‘时间’的保护性运动就是必需的。 克：没错，防火保护是必需的。但是，还有其它种类的保护吗？ 普：一旦你承认了防火保护，那么其他的保护就具有类似的性质。 克：如果心理是不存在的，还需要保护吗？
P: What you say is true. If the other is non-existent there is nothing to protect. But we see that there is the other. K: You accept that there is the other. You take it for granted that there is. But is there the "other"? I need only physical protection - food, clothes and shelter. Physical protection is absolutely necessary. And nothing else. Physical protection involves time. But why should there be protection about something which may not exist at all? How can you protect me psychologically? And that is what we are doing. We are doing something to protect that which does not exist and we therefore invent time. So, psychologically there is no tomorrow but there is tomorrow because I need food.
普：你所说的没错。如果另一个不存在的话，就没有可保护的东西。但是我们看到另一个是存在的。 克：你接受有另一个。你理所当然地认为它存在。但是，有‘另一个’吗？ 我需要物理上的保护 —— 食物、衣服和住处。物理上的保护是绝对必要的； 除此之外什么都没有。物理上的保护涉及到时间。 但是，为什么要对某个可能根本不存在的东西进行保护呢？ 你能在心理上保护我吗？而那就是我们正在做的事。 我们在保护那个不存在的东西，因此，我们发明了时间。 所以，在并没有心理上的明天，但明天是存在的，因为我需要食物。
P: If one sees that, in that is there the ending of time? K: This is it. (Pause.) Shall we investigate further? Consciousness is made up of content. Content makes consciousness. They are not separate. The content is made up of time. Consciousness is time and that we are trying to protect. And we are using time to shield time as a conditioned state. We are trying to protect that which has no existence.
普：如果一个人看见那一点，那是时间的终结吗？ 克：这就是。(停顿) 我们要深入下去吗？ 意识由内容组成。内容制造出意识。它们分不开。 内容由时间构成。意识是时间，是我们在试图保护的。 而我们用时间来保护时间 —— 一种受限状态的时间。 我们在试图保护那种不存在的东西。
If we look at the content of consciousness, we find memories, fears, anxieties, the "I believe", the "I do not believe`', which are all the product of time. And thought says this is the only thing I have, I must protect it, shield it against every possible danger. What is it that thought is trying to protect? Is it words? Dead memories? Is it a formula or a movement; the formula which encourages movement; which makes it move from here to there? Is there such movement except as an invention of thought? The movement of thought which is born of memory, though it thinks of freedom is still of the past. Therefore, it cannot bring about radical change. Therefore, it is deceiving itself all the time. When you see that, is there time at all which needs self-protection?
如果我们看意识的这个内容， 我们找到记忆、恐惧、焦虑、我所相信的、我所不相信的，这一切都是时间的产物。 而思想说：‘这是我唯一所拥有的，我必须保护它，保卫它，远离每种可能存在的危险。’ 思想要保护的是什么？是言词？是死去的记忆？ 是一种准则，或者一种运动；一种鼓舞运动的准则；一种把它从‘这’搬到‘那’的运动模式？ 除了思想的发明，有这样的运动吗？ 思想运动诞生于记忆，尽管它思考自由，它依然属于过去。 因此，它无法带来根本的改变。因此，它总是在欺骗它自己。 当你看到那一点，究竟有没有‘需要自我保护’的时间？
If one really understood this, then one's whole activity would be entirely different. Then I would protect only the physical and not the psychological. P: Would that not mean a state of emptiness inside; a meaningless emptiness inside? K: If I only protect the physical and nothing else, obviously it is like a glass which is being protected. Therefore, one is frightened of being empty, of meaningless emptiness. But if one sees the whole thing, there is an emptiness which is tremendously significant.
如果一个人真的理解这，那么，一个人的整个行为会全然地不同。 那么，我会只保护物体，而不是心理。 普：那岂不意味着一种内在的虚无，一种内在的无意义的空虚吗？ 克：如果我只保护物理上的，不去管其余的，显然，它就如同在保护一个玻璃杯。 因此，一个人害怕虚无，一种没有意义的空无。 但是，如果一个人看到这整个东西，就有一种虚无，这种虚无有巨大的意义。
S: Does time have a point at all, at which there is an impact? How does one know the texture of time? K: We live between regret and hope. If there is no movement, psychological movement backwards or forwards, then what is time? Is it height, which again means measurement? If there is no measurement, no movement, no backward or forward movement, no height and depth, actually no movement at all, is there time? And also, why do we give such extraordinary importance to time?
苏: 究竟有没有一个时间点，在那一刻能产生一种影响？一个人如何认识时间的纹理？ 克：我们活在后悔与希望之间。如果不移动，没有心理上的反复，那么，什么是时间？ 它有高度吗，有可衡量的高度吗？ 如果没有衡量，没有移动，没有往复运动，没有高度和深度，真正地完整的不动，还有时间吗？ 同样，为什么我们赋予时间如此非凡的重要性？
P: Because time is age, decay, deterioration. K: Follow it up. Time is decay. I see this body, young and healthy, getting older, dying, the whole mechanism unwinding. That is all I know. Nothing else. P: The mind also deteriorates. K: Why not? It is part of the decaying process. I brutalize the mind to achieve, to succeed, which are all factors of unnatural deterioration. Then what have I left? The body grows old. I have regrets - I cannot walk up the hill any more. The whole psychological struggle comes to an end and I am frightened. So I say "I must have a next life."
普：因为时间是年龄，衰败，恶化。 克：接着追问。时间是衰败。 我看到这个年轻的、健康的身体在变老，死亡，整个机能在松弛。 那就是我所知道的一切。没有其它的。 普：这颗头脑也再恶化。 克：为什么不呢？它是这个衰败过程的一部分。 我把这颗头脑变得残酷，以便于获取，成功，这一切都是非自然衰败的因素。 那么，我剩下什么？身体变老。我后悔了 —— 我再也不能爬山了。 整个心理上的挣扎来到了终点，我感到恐惧。所以我说：“我必定有另一条命。”
P: Does age diminish the capacity to see, to perceive? K: No, if you have not spoilt it by scars, memories, quarrels. P: If not? K: Then you are going to pay for it.
普：年龄的增长会减弱看和感知的能力吗？ 克：不会，如果你没有被伤疤、记忆、争吵所损坏。 普：如果损坏了？ 克：那么你就得为它付出代价。
P: Then there is no redemption. K: At any point the first step is the last step. P: So time can be wiped out at any point. K: Anyone who says let me be aware of this whole movement and perceives totally for one second, the mind becomes young again for that second. Then the mind carries that over and again deteriorates. P: The carrying over is karma, karma is also time.
普：那就没办法补救了。 克：在任何一点上，这第一步即是这最后一步。 普：因此时间可以在任何一点上被清除。 克：任何一个人说 "让我意识这整个运动，在这一秒种彻底地感知"，在那一秒种，这颗头脑就变得年轻。 当这个头脑把那个经历保留起来，它就再一次衰败。 普：这种包袱就是‘业’，‘业’也是时间。
K: There is past action, present action and future action. Cause is never a static thing. There are so many things happening. The effect becomes the cause. So there is a constant movement undergoing change all the time. P: Karma in itself has validity. K: I plant the seed, it will grow up. I plant the seed in the woman and the child grows. P: So psychological time has existed as karma. It has reality. K: No. Is it the real? When you look, it ceases. Let us look at this question of cause and effect. I plant a seed in the earth and it grows. If I plant an acorn, it cannot grow to be anything but the oak. P: I do a certain action. The seed is already planted. That will have its effect. K: There I can change the effect. I plant the seed. What the seed is, the bush will be, or the tree will be. I cannot change that.
克：有过去的行为，现在的行为和将来的行为。原因从不是一个静态的东西。 有如此众多的事物在发生。结果变成原因。 因此，一直在经历一种持续的变动。 普：‘业’本身具有有效性。 克：我种下种子，它会成长。我在女人的体内播下种子，孩子就会成长。 普：因此，心理上的时间作为‘业’而存在。它有真实性。 克：不。它是真实的吗？当你看的时候，它消亡。让我们来看因果问题。 我在土壤中播下一颗种子，它成长。如果我种的是橡子，那么它只能长出橡树。 普：我做了某种动作。种子就被播下。将会收获它的结果。 克：我能改变这个结果。我播下这颗种子。有什么样的种子，就会长出什么样的树。我无法改变它。
S: Can the effect be changed in psychological action? K: Yes, of course. You have hit me for whatever reason - either hit physically or used words. Now, what is the response from me? If I hit you back, the movement continues. But if I do not react when you hit me, then what happens? Because there is observing, watching, I am out of it. P: I understand at that level. I set a movement in motion. I observe. The process has ended. That act affects another. It is going to affect others.
苏: 在心理行为中，结果能够被改变吗？ 克：当然可以。不管出于什么原因，你打了我 —— 不管是身体上的还是言语上的。 现在，我的回应是什么？如果我还击你，这个运动就在持续。 但是，如果在你打我的时候，我没有反应，那么，发生了什么？因为这种观察，这种看，我从中出来了。 普：我理解那个层面。我开启一个运动过程。我观察，这个过程被结束。 那个行为影响另一个人。它会影响其他人。
K: It will affect your family, the world around you, and others. P: The causation, action and reaction arising out of that action are in a sense independent of my action. K: The wave goes on. P: If that is so, that is karma. A certain energy has been released. It will work itself out unless it meets other minds which quench it. K: The wave can only end when both of us see it at the same level at the same time with the same intensity. This means love. Otherwise you cannot end it.
克：它会影响你的家人，你周围的世界，以及他人。 普：那个行为所引发的原因、动作和反应，在某种感觉上，独立于我的行为。 克：这个波动会传递。 普：如果是那样，那就是‘业’。一种能量被释放出来。它自己会产生结果，直到遇见平息它的另一个头脑。 克：这个波动的结束，只有当我们两个人在同样的层面，同样的时间，带着同样的强度看见它。 这意味着爱。否则你不能结束它。