P: There must be a way of learning how to die. To know how to die is of tremendous importance to each one of us. K: How do the traditionalists and the professionals - and by the professionals I mean the gurus, the Sankaracharyas, the Adi Sankaracharyas, the yogis - how do they answer this question? P: Tradition divides life into various stages. There is Brahmacharya, a stage of celibacy, when as a student, the boy learns from a guru. The second stage is that of Grihastha, where man gets married, has children, seeks accumulation of wealth and so on. He also supports the sannyasi and the children and thereby supports society. In the third stage, the Vanaprastha, man walks out of the pursuit of worldly things and faces the stage of preparation for the final one which is Sannyasa, in which there is a giving up of name-home identity - a symbolic donning of the saffron robe.
普：必定有一条学习如何死亡的路径。 对我们每个人来说，知道如何去死，是极其重要的。 克：传统主义者和专业人士 —— 我说的专业人士是指上师、诸神、阿谛诸神、瑜伽师 —— 他们是怎么回答这个问题的？ 普：传统把人生分为不同的阶段。 第一阶段是梵行期(Brahmacharya)，这是一个独身生活的阶段，小男孩向一位上师学习。 第二个阶段是格里哈萨期(Grihastha)，在这个阶段，男人结婚、生子、寻求财富的积累等等。他也为桑雅生、孩子们和社会提供支持。 第三阶段是瓦纳普拉斯塔(Vanaprastha)，人脱离对世俗之物的追求，进入这个预备阶段 最后一个阶段是桑纳萨(Sannyasa)，在这期间，放弃姓氏的身份 —— 穿上藏红花长袍，就象征着这个意思。
There is also a belief that at the moment of death, all man's past comes into focus. If his karma as actions within this life have been good, then that which is the last thought which remains with him at the time of death, continues. That is carried over into the next life. They also speak of the essential need for the mind to be quiet at the time of death, for the quenching of karma, for the mind to be fully awake at the moment of death.
还有一种信念，在人死亡的那一刻，他过去的一切都会浮现。 如果他此生的行为，也就是这辈子造的业，做得好， 那么，在他死的时候，他最后一个念头将保留，并延续到下一世。 他们也提到了基本的要求：在死亡的时候，这颗头脑要安静，以便于业火的熄灭， 使头脑在死亡的那一刻完全清醒。
K: Will a traditional man go through all this or is it just a lot of words? P: Generally, Sir, the orthodox Hindu has the Gita chanted at the time of death so that his mind cuts itself away from the immediacy of family, fear, wealth, etc. This does not answer my question. How is the individual to learn how to die?
克: 一个传统的男人会经历这一切吗，还是一堆文字？ 普：一般来说，先生，正统的印度教徒在死亡的时刻会吟诵吉塔， 那么做，是让他的头脑切断它自己，远离家庭、恐惧、财富等的眼下的一切。 这没有回答我的问题。人如何学习怎样去死？
K: Take a leaf in the spring - how delicate it is and yet it has extraordinary strength to stand the wind; in summer it matures and in autumn it turns yellow and then it dies. It is one of the most beautiful things to see. The whole thing is a movement of beauty, of the vulnerable. The leaf that is very very tender, becomes rich, takes shape, meets summer and then when autumn comes it turns gold. There is never any sense of ugliness, never a withering away in mid summer. It is a perpetual movement from beauty to beauty. There is fullness in the spring leaf as well as in the dying leaf. I do not know if you see that. Why cannot man live and die that way? What is the thing that is destroying him from the beginning till the end? Look at a boy of ten or twelve or thirteen - how full of laughter he is. By forty he becomes tough and hard, his whole manner and face change. He is caught in a pattern. How does one learn to live and die, not just learn to die. How does one learn to live a life in which death is a part; in which the ending, the dying, is an innate part of living?
克：以春天的一片叶子为例 —— 它是多么娇嫩，却有非凡的力量，经受风霜； 夏天成熟，秋天变黄，然后它死亡。 它是最美的东西之一。 整个过程是一场美的运动，一种脆弱的运动。 这片叶子非常非常的柔嫩，变得丰盈、成形，遇见夏天，当秋天来临，它转为金黄。 从来没有任何丑陋的感觉，从来没有在仲夏枯萎。 这是一个从美到美的永恒运动。 春天的叶子和消逝的叶子都有一种满足。我不知道你是否看到了。 为什么人不能那样生长和死亡呢？ 是什么东西在从头到尾在摧毁他？ 看看一个十岁、十二岁或十三岁的男孩 —— 他是多么地欢笑。 到了四十岁，他变得坚硬和粗暴，他的整个举止和面孔都变了。他陷入了一种模式。 一个人如何学习生命和死亡，而不仅仅是去学死亡。 一个人如何学习过一种以死亡为一部分的生命 —— 在那生命中，这种结束、这种消逝，是它天然的一部分。
P: How is dying an innate part of life? Dying is something in the future, in time. K: That is just it. We put death beyond the walls, beyond the movement of life. It is something to avoid, to evade, not to think about. The question is what is living and what is dying. The two must be together, not separate. Why have we separated the two? P: Because death is a totally different experience from life. One does not know death. K: Is it? My question is why have we separated the two; why is there this vast gulf between the two? What is the reason why human beings divide the two? P: Because in death, that which is manifest becomes non-manifest. Because both in birth and in death there is an essential mystery; an appearance and a disappearance. K: Is that why we separate the two - the appearance of the child and the disappearance of the old man? Is that the reason why man has separated life from death? The organism biologically comes to an end - birth, adolescence and death - the young appearing and the old disappearing. Is that the reason? You are saying the reason for division is because there is a beginning and an ending; there is birth, childhood, maturity and death. Is that the basic reason for the fear of death? There is obviously a beginning and an ending. I was born, I will die tomorrow - there is a beginning and an ending. Why do I not accept that?
普：消逝怎么会成为生命中天然的一部分？在时间上，死亡是将来发生的事情。 克：没错。我们把死亡放在墙外，排除在生命之外。 它是某个要去避免、躲闪、不要去想的东西。 问题在于: 什么是生活，什么是消逝？ 这两者必须在一起，而不是分开。我们为什么要把它砍成两截？ 普：因为死亡是一种与生命截然不同的体验。一个人并不知道死亡。 克：是吗？我的问题是，为什么我们要把这两者分开；为什么两者之间会有这么大的鸿沟？ 人类把两者分开的原因是什么？ 普：因为在死亡中，现有的变得不复存在； 因为出生与死亡之中，都蕴涵着的一种本质上的玄奥；一个显现，一个消逝。 克：那就我们把两者分开的原因吗 —— 小孩子的显现和老人的消逝？ 那就是人把生命从死亡之中分开的原因吗？ 很显然，存在着开始和结束； 我出生，我会死于明天 —— 出生和结束。为什么我不接受那？
P: In death is involved the cessation of the "me" - of all that I have experienced. The final cessation of the "me" takes place. K: Is that the reason for the inward division? That does not seem to be the entire reason why man has divided life from death. P: Is it because of fear? K: Is it fear that makes me divide the living and the dying? Do I know what living is and what dying is? P: Yes. K: Do I know the joy, the pleasure, that is life and do I regard dying as the ending of that? Is that the reason why we divide a movement called living and the movement called death? The movement which we call living, is it living? Or is it merely a series of sorrows, pleasures, despairs? Is that what we call living?
普：死亡涉及到‘我’的消逝 —— 我所经历的一切。这是我的终结。 克：那就是这种内在划分的原因吗？那似乎并不是人把生命从死亡之中分开的全部原因。 普：是因为恐惧？ 克：是恐惧使我把生活和消逝分开？我知道什么是生活，什么是消逝吗？ 普：是的。 克：我知道喜悦、快乐，那就是生命，我把那些的终结视为消逝吗？ 那就是我们把这一个运动划分为生命与死亡的原因吗？ 我们称之为生活的运动，它是生活吗？或者它仅仅是一系列的悲伤、快乐、绝望？ 那是我们所说的生活吗?
P: Why do you give it special meaning? K: Is there any other form of living? This is the lot of every human being. Man is afraid that this with which he had identified himself will come to an end. So he wants a continuity of this thing called life, never of ending. He wants a continuity of his sorrows, of his pleasures, miseries, confusions, conflicts. He wants the same thing to go on, that there never be an ending. And the ending of all that, he calls death. So now what is the mind doing in this? The mind is confused; it is in conflict, in despair. It is caught in pleasure, in sorrow. The mind calls that living and the mind does not want it to come to an end because it does not know what would happen if it ended. Therefore it is frightened of death. I am asking myself, is this living? Living must have quite a different meaning than this.
普：为什么你要赋予它特别的意思？ 克：还有其他的生活方式吗？这是每个人类的宿命。 人害怕他所认同的这种生活会结束。 因此他想要延续这个叫做生命的东西，让它永远不要结束。 他想要延续他的悲伤、快乐、痛苦、困惑、冲突。 他想继续这样的生活，永远不结束。 那一切的结束，他称之为死亡。那么，现在，这颗头脑在其中做了什么？ 这颗头脑糊涂了；它处于矛盾，处于绝望之中，它陷入快乐和悲伤之中。 这颗头脑把这称之为生活，还不想让它结束， 因为，如果它结束，这颗头脑不知道会发生什么。 因此，它害怕死亡。 我问我自己，这是生活吗？它必定与这有相当不同的意义。
P: Why? Why should it have a different meaning? K: Living is fulfilment, frustration, and all that is going on. My mind is used to that and has never questioned whether that is living. My mind has never said to itself why do I call this living? Is it a habit? P: I really do not understand your question. K: After all I must ask the question. P: Why should I ask? K: My life, from the time I am born till I die is one eternal struggle. P: Living is acting, seeing, being: the whole of that is there. K: I see beauty, the sky, a lovely child. I also see conflict with my child, with my neighbours; life is a movement in conflict and pleasure.
普：为什么？为什么它有不同的意义？ 克：生活是满足、受挫，以及正在发生的那一切。 我的头脑习惯了那些，从不质疑那是不是生活。 我的头脑从未问过它自己‘为什么我要称它为生活？是一种习惯吗？’ 普：我真的无法理解你的问题。 克：毕竟，我必须问这个问题。 普：为什么我要问？ 克：我的生命，从我的出生直到死亡，是一段无尽的挣扎。 普：生活是行动，看，存在：这一切都包含在里面。 克：我看到美，天空，一个可爱的孩子。我也看到与我的孩子、与邻居的冲突； 生命是一场有着冲突与快乐的运动。
P: Why should I question that? The mind questions only when there is sorrow, when there is a lot of pain. K: Why not ask when you have pleasure? When there is no pleasure there is pain. P: Sir, life is not a series of crises. Crises of pain are few. They are rare occasions. K: But I see this is happening in life. I see it happening and therefore question this division of living and dying. P: You do but others do not. We see there is a division; it is a fact to us. K: At what level, at what depth, with what significance are you making this statement? Of course it is a fact. I am born and I will die. Then there is nothing more to be said. P: It is not enough. The very fact we have asked how to learn to die........ K: I say learn also how to live. P: And I have listened. I have not asked that question to myself.
普：为什么我应该询问它？只有当存在着悲伤，存在着很多痛苦的时候，这颗头脑才会询问。 克：当你快乐的时候，为什么你不去询问？当没有了快乐，就是痛苦。 普：先生，生命不是一系列的危机。痛苦的危机是很少的。它们很罕见。 克：但是我看到它确实正在生命中发生。 我看到它正在发生，因此询问生活与消逝的这种划分。 普：你是看到了，但别人不是。我们看到这种划分，对我们而言，它就是一个事实。 克：你是在什么层面，在什么深度，带着怎样的意义，作出了这样的陈述？ 当然，它是一个事实。我出生，我会死亡，然后，再也不需要更多话语了。 普：这还不够。事实上，我们在问怎样去学习死亡…… 克：我说，也要学习怎样去生活。 普：我听到了。我自己没问过那个问题。
K: Learn how to live. Then what happens? If I learn how to live, I also learn how to die. I want to learn how to live. I want to learn about sorrow, pleasure, pain, beauty. I learn. Because I am learning about life I am learning about death. Learning is an act of purification, not the acquiring of knowledge. Learning is purgation. I cannot learn if my mind is full. The mind must purgate itself to learn. Therefore the mind when it wants to learn has to empty itself of everything that it has known, then it can learn.
克：学习怎样去生活。那么，发生了什么？如果我学习怎样去生活，我也在学习怎样去死。 我想要学习生活。我想去学习悲伤、快乐、痛苦和美。 我学。因为我在学习生命的同时，就在学习死亡。 学习是一种净化的行为，不是获取知识。学习就是净化。 如果我的头脑被填满了，我就无法学习。要去学习，这颗头脑必须净化它自己。 因此，当头脑想去学习的时候，它必须清空它自己，清空它所知道的一切，然后它才能学习。
So there is the living which we all know. There has to be first of all a learning about this daily living. Now, is the mind capable of learning, not accumulating? Without understanding what is implied in the first act of learning, can it learn? What is implied? When I do not know, then my mind, not knowing, is capable of learning. Can the mind not know so that it can learn about living - living in which there is sorrow, agony, confusion, struggle? Can it come to it in a state of not knowing and so learn? Such a mind capable of learning about life is also capable of learning about death.
那么，我们大家都知道这种生活。首先得学习这种日常生活。 现在，这颗头脑有能力去学习，而不是去累积吗？ 如果不理解学习的第一步是什么，它有能力去学习吗？学习的第一个动作是什么？ 当我不知道，那么我的头脑，处于不知道的状态，就有能力去学习。 头脑能够不知道吗？ 那样它才有能力去学习这种生活 —— 这种包含了悲伤、痛苦、困惑、矛盾的生活。 它能进入一种‘不知道’的状态并由此而学习吗？ 这样的头脑有能力学习生命，也有能力学习死亡。
What is important is not the learning about something, but the act of learning. The mind can only learn when it does not know. We approach life with knowledge of life - with knowledge of cause, effect, karma. We come to life with the sense of the "I know", with conclusions and formulas and with these we fill the mind. But I do not know about death. So I want to learn about death. But I cannot learn about death. It is only when I know learning that I will understand death. Death is the emptying of the mind, of the knowledge which I have accumulated.
重要的不是学什么东西，而是学习的这种行为。 这颗头脑只有在不知道的时候，才能学习。 我们携带着知识来靠近生命 —— 带着原因、结果、业力等等知识。 我们走进生命，带着‘我知道’的感觉，带着结论、规律和那些塞进头脑里面的东西。 但是我不知道死亡。因此我想去学习什么是死亡，但是我无法学习死亡。 只有当我知道怎样去学习的时候，我才会理解死亡。 死亡就是这颗头脑的清空，清空里面的知识，那些我积攒下来的东西。
P: There can be learning of living in the learning about death. Deep down in human consciousness there is this nameless fear of ceasing to be. K: The nameless fear of not being. The being is the knowing that I am this, that I am happy, that I had a marvellous time. In the same way I want to know death. I do not want to learn, I want to know. I want to know what it means to die. P: So that I am free of fear.
普：在学习死亡的同时，能够学习生活。 在人类的意识深处，有对死亡的莫名恐惧。 克：对不存在的莫名恐惧。 存在就是知道这些：我是这样的人，我很快乐，我有一段奇妙的时光。 以同样的方式，我想知道死亡，我不想学习，我想知道。我想知道死亡的含义。 普：那样我就可以摆脱恐惧了。
K: If I do not know how to drive a car, I am frightened. The moment I know, it is over. Therefore my knowing about death is in terms of the past. Knowledge is the past, so I say I must know what it means to die so that I can live. Do you see the game you are playing upon yourself, the game which the mind is playing upon itself?
克：如果我不知道如何驾驶汽车，我会害怕。一旦我知道，这种害怕就结束了。 因此，我所拥有的关于死亡的知识，属于过去。 知识就是过去，因此我说，我必须知道死亡的含义，那样我就能生活。 你看见了你和你自己玩的这场游戏吗？这场头脑在和它自己玩的游戏？
The act of learning is something different from the act of knowing. You see, knowing is never in the active present. Learning is always in the active present. The learning about death - I really do not know what it means. There is no theory, no speculation that will satisfy me. I am going to find out, I am going to learn in which there is no theory, no conclusion, no hope, no speculation, but only the act of learning; therefore there is no fear of death. To find out what it means to die, learn.
学习的行为与认识的行为是不同的。 你看，认识永远不处于活跃的现在，而学习始终处于活跃的现在。 对死亡的学习 —— 我真地不知道它的含义。没有可以使我满意的理论和推测。 我要去找出，我要去学习， 在学习中，没有理论、没有结论、没有希望、没有推断，只有学习的行为； 因此，没有对死亡的恐惧。 找出什么是死亡，学习。
In the same way I really want to know what living is. So I must come to living with a fresh mind, without the burden of knowledge. The moment the mind acknowledges it knows absolutely nothing, it is free to learn. But there is nothing to learn.
同样，我真地想要知道什么是生活。 因此我必须有一个清新的头脑来生活，不携带知识的包袱。 一旦这颗头脑承认它什么都不知道，它就自由地去学习了。 但是，没有去学习任何东西。
There is absolutely nothing to learn except the technological learning how to go to the moon. Freedom of learning about what - the thing that I have called living, the thing that I have called death. I do not know what it means. Therefore there is living and dying all the time. There is no death when the mind is completely free of the known - the known being the beliefs, the experiences, the conclusions, knowledge, the saying I have suffered and so on.
根本就没有什么东西可学，除了技术上的学习，比如怎么去月球。 自由地学习‘什么’ —— 这个被我唤作生活的东西，这个被我唤作消逝的东西。 我不知道它的含义是什么。因此，总是在生活与消逝。 当这颗头脑完全从已知中解放，就没有死亡。 —— 已知就是信念、经历、结论、知识、‘我受过苦难’等等。
Intellectually we have carved life out beautifully according to our conditioning. To achieve God "I must bc celibate", "I must help the poor," "I must take a vow of poverty." Death says you cannot touch me. But I want to touch death; I want to shape it into my pattern. Death says you cannot touch me, you cannot play tricks upon me. The mind is used to tricks - the carving something out of experience. Death says you cannot experience me.
在理智上，我们根据我们的条件，雕刻出美好的生命； 为了实现上帝，‘我必须独身’，‘我必须帮助穷人’，‘我必须发誓贫穷’。 死亡说，你碰不到我。但是我想摸一下死亡；我想把它塑造成为我的模式。 死亡说，你摸不到我，你无法算计我。 这颗头脑习惯了算计 —— 凭借体验，去雕刻某个东西。 死亡说你没法体验我。
Death is an original experience in the sense that it is a state I really do not know. I can invent formulas about death - the last thought is that which manifests itself - but they are other people's thoughts. I really do not know. So I am starkly frightened. Therefore can I learn of living and therefore of dying? So deny knowing - see what takes place. In that there is real beauty, real love, the real thing takes place.
死亡是一种原始的体验，一种‘我真地不知道’的状态。 我能发明关于死亡的规律 —— 比如人死前最后一个想法显现出它本身 —— 但这些都是别人的思想。 我真地不知道。因此我被吓懵了。 那么，我能够学习生活，学习消逝吗？ 所以，否定已知 —— 看看在发生什么？那里有真实的美，真实的爱，真实的东西在发生。
P: Where is the resting place of beauty? Where does it reside? Obviously, the outer manifestations of beauty are observable; the right relationship between space, form and colour and between human beings. But what is the essence of beauty? In Sanskrit texts three factors are equated - the Truth, the Good, the Beautiful - Satyam, Sivam, Sundaram. K: What are you trying to find out? Do you want to find out the nature of beauty? What do the professionals say? P: Traditionalists would say - Satyam, Sivam, Sundaram. The artist today would not differentiate between the seemingly ugly and the seemingly beautiful, but would regard the creative act as the expression of a moment, of a perception that gets transformed within the individual and finds expression in the action of the artist.
普：美的栖居之地在哪里？它驻留在哪里？ 显然，美的外在表现是可以观察到的； 空间、形式和色彩之间以及人与人之间的正确关系。但美的本质是什么？ 在梵文文本中，有三个因子是等同的 ——真理、善、美 ——萨蒂扬、西瓦姆、桑达拉姆。 克：你在找什么？你想找出美的本质吗？专业人士怎么说？ 普：传统主义者会说 —— 萨蒂扬、西瓦姆、桑达拉姆。 今天的艺术家不会区分看似丑陋和看似美丽的东西， 而是把创造性的行为看作是一瞬间的表达， 一种属于个人的内在转化的感知的表达， 在艺术家的行为中，表达了出来。
K: You are asking what is beauty, what is the expression of beauty, and how does the individual fulfil himself through beauty? What is beauty? If you started as though you knew nothing about it, what would your reaction be? This is a universal problem with the Greeks, the Romans and with modern people. So what is beauty? Does it lie in the sunset, in a lovely morning, in human relationship, in the mother and the child, husband and wife, man and woman? Does it lie in the beauty of an extraordinarily subtle movement of thought and the beauty of clear perception? Is that what you call beauty?
克：你问什么是美， 什么是美的表达，个人如何通过美实现他自己？ 美是什么？如果你一开始好像对它一无所知，你会有什么反应？ 这是一个普遍的问题，希腊人、罗马人和现代人都在问。 那么，什么是美？ 它是否存在于夕阳中，存在于一个美好的早晨， 存在于人类的关系中，存在于母亲和孩子，丈夫和妻子，男人和女人的关系中？ 它是否存在于一种极其微妙的思想运动的美和清晰感知的美？ 这就是你所说的美吗？
P: Can there be beauty also in the terrible, the ugly? K: In murder, in butchery, in throwing bombs, in violence, in mutilation, torture, anger, in the brutal, violent, aggressive pursuit of an idea, in wanting to be greater than somebody - is there beauty in that? P: In all these acts there is no beauty. K: What is beauty if a man hits another?
普：在可怕的、丑陋的事物中，也能有美吗？ 克：在谋杀、屠杀、投掷炸弹、暴力、残害、折磨、愤怒中， 在观念上的野蛮、暴力、攻击性的追求中， 在想要比某个人更伟大的渴望中 —— 这一切之中，有美吗？ 普：所有这些行为都没有美。 克：如果一个人击打另一个人，那有什么美？
P: In the creative act of the artist who interprets the terrible, like the Guernica of Picasso, is there beauty? K: So we have to ask what is expression, what is creativeness. You are asking what is beauty? It lies in a sunset, in the clear light of the morning, the evening, the light on the water, relationship and so on. And does beauty lie in any form of violence, including competitive achievement? Is there beauty per se: and not in how the artist expresses himself? A child tortured can be expressed by the artist, but is it beauty?
普：在艺术家诠释恐怖的创造性行为中，比如毕加索的《格尔尼卡》，有美吗？ 克：所以我们要问什么是表达，什么是创造性。你在问什么是美？ 它躺在夕阳下，在清晨的清光里，在黄昏的光线中，在水面的色彩上，在关系中，等等。 美是否存在于任何形式的暴力中，包括竞争性的成就？ 美有本质吗，而不是艺术家如何表达他自己？ 艺术家可以表达一个被折磨的孩子，但这是美吗？
P: Beauty is a relative thing. K: The "I" which sees is relative, conditioned and is demanding self-fulfilment. First of all, what is beauty? Is it good taste? Or has beauty nothing whatsoever to do with all this? Does beauty lie in expression and therefore fulfilment? Therefore the artist says I must fulfil myself through expression. An artist would be lost without expression which is part of beauty and self-fulfilment.
普：美是一种相对的东西。 克：‘我’所看到的，是相对的、局部的，并要求自我实现。 首先，什么是美？是品味吗？还是美与这一切无关？ 美是否在于表达从而获得满足？ 因此，艺术家说，‘我必需通过表达来实现我自己。’ 当这部分的美和自我实现没有表达出来，一个艺术家可能会迷茫。
So before we go into all that, what is the inwardness, the feeling, the subtlety of the word 'beauty', so that beauty is truth and truth is beauty? Somehow through expression we try to find beauty in architecture, in a marvellous bridge - the San Francisco Golden Bridge or the bridge over the Seine - in the modern buildings of glass and steel and the gentleness of a fountain. We seek beauty in museums, in a symphony. We are always seeking beauty in the expression of other people. What is amiss in a man who is seeking beauty?
因此，在我们进入所有这些之前，得弄清楚什么是这种内在、这种感觉、‘美’这个词语的微妙， 所以美就是真，真就是美？ 不知何故，通过表达，我们试图寻找美，在建筑中，在一座奇妙的桥梁中 —— 在旧金山金桥或塞纳河上的桥上 —— 在玻璃和钢铁的现代建筑中，以及喷泉的温柔中，寻找美。 我们在博物馆中，在交响乐中追求美。我们总是在别人的表达中寻求美。 一个追求美的人有什么不对劲？
P: The expressions of other people are the only sources of beauty that are available to us. K: Which means what? P: In seeing the bridge a certain quality arises within me which we call beauty. It is only in the perception of something beautiful that the quality of beauty arises in many individuals. K: I understand that. I am asking, is beauty in self-expression? P: One has to start with what exists.
普：别人的表达是我们唯一可用的美的源泉。 克：这意味着什么？ 普：在看到这座桥时，我内心产生了某种品质，我们称之为美。 只有在对美的事物的感知中，美的品质才会在许多人的身上产生。 克：我明白，我在问，美存在于自我表达中吗？ 普：一个人必须从存在的事物开始。
K: Which is other people's expression. Not having the perceptive eye, the strange inward feeling of beauty, I say how beautiful that picture is, that poem, that symphony. Remove all that, the individual knows no beauty. Therefore he relies for his appreciation of beauty on expression, on object, on a bridge or a good chair. Does beauty demand expression, especially self-expression? P: Can it exist independent of expression?
克：也就是别人的表达。 因为没有敏锐的双眼，没有那奇特的内在美感，我说‘那幅画，那首诗歌，那支交响乐是多么的美’ 除去这一切，这个人就不知道美。 因此，他对于美的欣赏依赖于表达，对象，一座桥或一把漂亮的椅子。 美需要表达吗，尤其是自我表达？ 普：它能独立于表达而存在吗？
K: Perception of beauty is its expression; the two are not separate. Perception, seeing, acting - perceiving is expressing. In that there is no time interval at all. Seeing is doing, acting. There is no gap between seeing and doing. I want to see the mind that sees, where seeing is acting; I want to observe the nature of the mind that has this quality of seeing and doing. What is this mind? It is essentially not concerned with expression. Expression may come but it is not concerned. Because expression takes time - to build a bridge, to write a poem - but the mind which sees, the mind to which perceiving is doing, to such a mind there is no time at all, and such a mind is a sensitive mind. Such a mind is the most intelligent mind. And without that intelligence there beauty?
克：对美的感知就是它的表达，两者不是分开的。 感知，看，行动 —— 感知就是表达。 那里面根本就没有时间间隔。看就是做，就是行动。看和做之间没有间隙。 我想去看这颗头脑，那个‘看’，看就是行动； 我想去观察这颗头脑的性质，这种有能力去看和做的品质。具有这种品质的头脑是什么？ 在本质上，它与表达无关。表达可能出现，但它并不关心。 因为表达需要花费时间 —— 去搭建一座桥梁，去写一首诗 —— 但是这颗在看的头脑，感知即是行动的头脑， 对于这样的头脑，根本不存在时间。这样的头脑是一颗灵敏的头脑， 这样的头脑是最智慧的头脑。没有那种智慧，还有美吗？
P: What is the place of the heart in this? K: Do you mean the feeling of love? P: The word "love' is a loaded term. If you are still, there is a strange feeling; a movement takes place from this region of the heart. What is this? Is this necessary or is it a hindrance? K: This is the most essential part of it. There is no perception without that. Mere intellectual perception is no perception. Mere action of intellectual perception is fragmentary, whereas intelligence implies affection, the heart. Otherwise you are not sensitive. You cannot possibly perceive. Perceiving is acting. Perceiving, acting without time is beauty. P: Do the eyes, heart, do they operate at the same time in the act of perception? K: Perception implies complete attention - the nerves, the ears, the brain, the heart, everything, is at the highest quality. Otherwise there is no perceiving.
普：心灵在这其中的位置是什么？ 克：你是说爱的感觉吗？ 普：‘爱’这个词是一个沉重的术语。如果你停下来，就有一种奇怪的感觉； 从心脏的这个区域生发。这是什么？它是必要的吗，还是一种阻碍? 克：这是最核心的部分，没有它就没有感知。 仅仅在理智上的认知不是感知。 理智上的认知行为是零碎的，而智慧却意味着感情、心灵。 要是你不敏感，你就不可能感知。感知是行动。 感知，无关于时间地行动，就是美。 普：眼睛和心灵，它们在感知行为中是否同时在起作用？ 克：感知意味着完整的注意力 —— 神经、耳朵、大脑、心脏、一切，都处于最高品质。否则就没有感知。
P: The quality, the fragmentary nature of sensory action is that the whole organism does not operate at the same time. K: The whole thing - the brain, the heart, nerves, eyes, ears, are never completely in attention. If they are not, you cannot perceive. So what is beauty? Does it lie in expression, in fragmentary action? I may be an artist, an engineer, a poet. The poet, engineer, artist, scientist, are fragmentary human beings. One fragment becomes extraordinarily perceptive, sensitive and its action may express something marvellous, but it is still a fragmentary action. P: When the organism perceives violence, terror or ugliness, what is that state? K: Let us take violence in its multifarious forms, but why are you asking that question? P: It is necessary to investigate this.
普：感官行为的零碎性，是由于整个有机体没有同时运作。 克：这个整体 —— 大脑、心脏、神经、眼睛、耳朵，从来没有全然地关注。如果它们不关注，你就无法感知。 那么，什么是美？它在于表达，在于零碎的行动吗？我可能是一个艺术家，一个工程师，一个诗人。 诗人、工程师、艺术家、科学家都是零碎的人类。 一块碎片变得非常敏锐、敏感，它的行动可能表达出一些奇妙的东西，但它仍然是一个破碎的行动。 普：当有机体感知到暴力、恐怖和丑陋的时候，那是什么状况？ 克：在这众多的情形中，让我们来看暴力，但是你为什么要问这个问题？ 普：有必要对此进行调查。
K: Is violence part of beauty, is that what you are asking? P: I will not put it that way. K: You see violence. What is the response of a perceptive mind in the sense in which we are using the word "perceptive" to every form of destruction, which is part of violence? (Pause). I got it. Is violence an act which is totally perceptive, or is it a fragmentary action?
克：暴力是美的一部分吗？这就是你要问的吗？ 普：我不会那样说。 克：你看暴力。 感知每一种形式的破坏， 这颗有感知力的头脑的回应是什么？ 是暴力的一部分？（暂停）。 我抓住它了。暴力是一种完全敏锐的行动，还是一种零碎的行为？
P: It is not clear; it is not that. K: You brought in violence. I want to investigate violence. Is violence the act of a totally harmonious perception? P: No. K: So you are saying it is a fragmentary action, and fragmentary action must deny beauty. P: You have inverted the situation. K: What is the response of a perceptive mind when it sees violence? It looks at it, investigates it and sees it as a fragmentary action, and therefore it is not an act of beauty. What happens to a perceptive mind when it sees a violent act? It sees "what is".
普：不清楚；它不是那。 克：你引入了暴力。我想调查暴力。暴力是完全和谐的感知行动吗？ 普：不是。 克：所以你说它是一种碎片化的行为，碎片化的行为必然否定美。 普：你反转了这个情况。 克：当一颗有感知力的头脑看见暴力的时候，它的回应是什么？ 它看它，调查它，看见它是一种碎片化的行为，因此不是一种美的行动。 当一个有感知力的头脑看到一个暴力行动时，什么在发生？它看见‘什么是’。
P: As such, to you the nature of the mind does not change? K: Why should it change? It sees "what is". Go a step further. P: The seeing of "what is", does it change the nature of "what is"? There is perceiving. There is violence which is fragmentary. The perceiving of that, does it change the nature of violence? K: Wait a minute. You are asking what is the effect of the perceiving mind when it observes violence?
普：因此，对你来说，头脑的性质没有改变？ 克：它为什么要改变？它看见‘什么是’。更进一步。 普：看见‘什么是’，会改变‘什么是’的性质吗？ 存在着感知，存在着作为暴力的碎片。 感知到那，会改变暴力的性质吗？ 克：等一下。你是问: 当有感知力的头脑观察暴力的时候，会产生什么影响？
P: You said it sees "what is". Does it alter "what is"? The perceiving mind, observing violence and seeing "what is", the very act of seeing, does it act on violence, changing its nature? K: Are you asking whether the perceiving mind seeing the act of violence, of "what is" asks what shall I do? Is that it? P: Such a mind does not do, but there must be action from the perceiving mind changing the nature of the act of the other. K: The perceiving mind sees a violent act. Such an act is fragmentary. What action can there be by the perceiving mind? P: The perceiving mind sees violence on the part of X. Seeing is acting.
普：你说它看到‘什么是’。那么它改变‘什么是’吗？ 这颗有感知力的头脑，观察暴力，看到‘什么是’，这种看的行动，会作用于暴力并改变它的性质吗？ 克：你是问，有感知力的头脑看到这个暴力行动，这个‘什么是’时，会不会问我该怎么办？是这样吗？ 普：这样的头脑不这样做，但必定有发源于感知的行为，使得另一种行动的性质发生改变。 克：有感知力的头脑看见一个暴力行动，这个行动是碎片化的。这个有感知力的头脑有什么动作？ 普：这颗有感知力的头脑看到张三的暴力。看就是行动。
K: But what can it do? P: I would say if the perceiving mind acts, it must change the violence in X. K: Let us get this clear. The perceiving mind sees another acting violently. To the perceiving mind, the very seeing is the doing. That is one fact. Perception is doing. This perceiving mind sees X in violence. What is the action involved in that seeing - stop violence? P: All those are peripheral actions. I am saying that when a perceiving mind is confronted with an act of violence, the very act of perceiving will alter the action of violence. K: There are several things involved. The perceiving mind as it walks along sees an act of violence. The man who is acting violently may respond non-violently, because the perceiving mind is near him, close to him, and suddenly this happens.
克：但是它能做什么？ 普：我想说，如果有感知力的头脑在行动，它必定改变张三的暴力。 克：让我们把这一点说清楚白。有感知力的头脑看到另一个人在粗暴地行动。 对于有感知力的头脑来说，看就是做。那是一个事实。感知正在做。 这颗有感知力的头脑看到张三处于暴力状态。在那看的行动中，有什么行为 —— 停止暴力？ 普：这些都是外在行为。我是说，当一个有感知力的头脑面对暴力行动时， 这种感知行动会改变暴力的行为。 克：这其中涉及到几点。有感知力的头脑在行走时看到了一个暴力行动。 行动粗暴的这个人可能会做出非暴力的回应，因为有感知力的头脑就在他附近，靠近他，突然间，这发生了。
P: One comes to you with a problem - jealousy. What happens in an interview with you when a person comes to you who is confused? In the very act of perceiving, the confusion is not. K: Obviously it happens because of contact. You have taken the trouble to discuss violence and something happens because of direct sharing together of the problem. There is communication, sharing. That is simple. You see a man far away acting with violence. What is the action of the perceiving mind there? P: There must be tremendous energy from a perceiving mind. That must have some action.
普：一个人带着一个问题来找你 —— 嫉妒。 当一个困惑的人找到你，在他与你会面时会发生什么？ 在感知的行动中，困惑就不在了。 克：显然，它的发生是因为接触。 你不厌其烦地讨论暴力， 正是因为在直接地分享这个问题，使某些事情发生了。 有交流，有分享。这很简单。 你看到一个远处的人在暴力地行动。那颗有感知力的头脑的行为是什么？ 普：必定有来自于头脑的巨大能量。必定有某些行为。
K: It may act. You cannot be certain of that as you can be closeness. The other may wake up in the middle of the night, he may be aware of the strange response coming later, depending upon his sensitivity. It may be due to the perceiving mind and its impact, whereas this close communication is different. It does change. Let us come back. You were asking what beauty is. I think we can say the mind which is not fragmentary in itself, which is not broken up, has this beauty.
克：它可能行动。你可以做非常接近的推测。但你无法确定。 那个人可能会在半夜时醒来，他或许随后会意识到这种奇怪的回应，这取决于他的敏感程度。 这或许可以归因于有感知力的头脑及其影响，尽管它与这种密切的交流不同， 它确实会带来改变。 让我们回过头来。你在问什么是美。 我想我们可以说，自身没有破碎的、没有分裂的头脑，具有这种美。
P: Has it any relationship to sensory perception if you close your eyes, your ears...... K: It is independent of that. When you close your ears, eyes, there is no fragmentation and so it has this quality of beauty, of sensitivity. It is not dependent on external beauty. Put the instrument of such a mind in the middle of the noisiest city. What takes place? Physically it gets affected but not the quality of the mind, which is not fragmented. It is independent of the surroundings, therefore does not concern itself with expression.
普：这种美与感官知觉有关系吗？如果你闭上眼睛，捂起耳朵…… 克：它与那无关。 当你闭上眼睛，捂起耳朵，没有分裂，所以，它有这种美和敏感的品质。 它不依赖于外在的美。 把这样的头脑放在最嘈杂的城市中，出现什么情况？ 身体上会受到影响，但是头脑的品质不会受到影响，它不是破碎的。 它独立于周围的环境，因此它不关心表达。
P: That is the aloneness of it. K: Therefore beauty is aloneness. Why is there this craving for self-expression? Is that craving part of beauty, whether it is the craving of a woman for a baby, a husband for sexuality in that moment of tenderness, or the artist craving for expression?
普：那就是它的独立。 克：因此，美是独立。为什么会有这种对自我表达的渴望？ 那种渴望 —— 不论是女人对孩子的渴望，丈夫在温存时对性的渴望，或是艺术家对表现的渴望 是美的一部分吗？
Does the perceptive mind demand any form of expression? It does not, because perceiving is expressing, is doing. The artist, the painter, the builder finds self-expression. It is fragmentary and therefore its expression is not beauty. A mind that is conditioned, which is fragmentary, expresses that feeling of beauty, but it is conditioned. Is that beauty? Therefore, the self which is the conditioned mind, can never see beauty, and whatever it expresses must be of its quality.
这颗有感知力的头脑需要任何形式的表达吗？ 它不需要，因为感知就是表达，是行动。 艺术家、画家、建设者寻求自我表达。它是零碎的，因此它的表达不是美。 一颗被制约的头脑是零碎的，所表达出的那种美的感受，也是受限的。那是美吗？ 因此，受限的头脑就是自我，永远看不到美，无论它表达什么，必然带有它的品质。
P: You have still not answered one aspect of the question. There is such a thing as creative talent; the ability to put together things in a manner which gives joy. K: The housewife baking bread, but "not in order to". The moment you do that you are lost. P: Creating joy.
普：你还没有回答这个问题的某个方面。 有一种创造性天赋；这种能力能够以欢乐的方式把东西组合在一起。 克：家庭主妇烘烤面包，但不是‘为了’什么。当你这样做的那一刻，你就迷失了。 普：创造欢乐。
K: Not because of something else. The speaker does not sit on the platform and speak because he gets joy. The source of water is never empty. It is always bubbling, whether there is pollution or the worship of water; it is bubbling, it is there. Most people who are concerned with self-expression have self-interest. It is the self which makes for fragmentation. In the absence of self, there is perception. Perception is doing and that is beauty. I am sure the sculptor who carved the Mahesha Murti at Elephanta created it out of his meditation. Before you put your hand to a stone or a poem, the state must be of meditation. The inspiration must not be from the self.
克：不是为了别的什么。讲话人不会在讲台上说，因为他高兴。 水源永不枯竭，它总在冒泡，无论是污染还是对水的崇拜； 它冒出来，它就在那里。 大多数关心自我表达的人都带着自我利益。 正视自我造成了分裂。 没有自我，就有感知。感知是行动，那就是美。 我敢肯定，雕刻出像岛石窟中的湿婆像的雕刻家，是在他的冥想中创造出它的。 在你雕刻一块石头或者创作一首诗之前，必须在冥想的状态。 灵感一定不会来自于自我。
P：印度雕塑家的传统就是这样。 克：小画家、小画家、大画家都属于这一类——自我表达。 美是完全的自我抛弃，完全没有自我，就有“那个”。P: The tradition of the Indian sculptor was that. K: And the petty, the little, the big painter are all of that category - of self-expression. Beauty is total self-abandonment and with total absence of the self there is "that". We are trying to catch "that" without the absence of the self and creation then becomes a tawdry affair.
普：印度雕塑家的传统就是那样的。 克：那些低微的、不知名的、伟大的艺术家们，都属于那类人 —— 这位自我表达者。 美是完全的自我抛弃，完全没有自我，就有‘那’。 我们试图在没有自我缺失的情况下捕捉‘那’，然后创造就变成了一件粗俗的事情。
S: In physics we have certain unsolved problems. If the world is fully causal, then you cannot change anything. If the world is not fully causal, you cannot find any laws for such a world. Either the world is causal or not. Of course, if you think of cause and effect as one single entity, if all the world is one and there is no separation into pieces, then of course there is no cause and effect.
乔：在物理学中，我们有一些未解决的问题。 如果世界完全遵行因果关系，那么你就无法改变任何事情。 如果世界不是完全遵行因果关系的，那么你就不能在这样的世界找到任何规律。世界要么遵循因果关系，要么不是如此。 当然，如果你把因果看作一个单一的实体， 如果整个世界就是一个整体，没有被分裂成碎片，那么当然就没有因果关系。
If the whole universe is physical and suffers physical laws, then you have no choice. In a purely physical thing, there is no option. Even if the soul or whatever it is, is different from the kind of things that we are talking about, it still has no special significance if it is subject to physical laws. You cannot say that there is no cause-effect relationship because it is not natural. You cannot also accept cause and effect because there is no control over it and so what is the point in saying it? This is the paradox. What is the way out of this paradox? K: Are you talking of karma? S: No. The physical universe is closed. There is no movement here at all.
如果整个宇宙是物理的，并且受物理规律的制约，那么你就别无选择。 在纯粹的物理之中，别无选择。 即使是灵魂，或不管是什么，与我们现在所谈的那种东西不同， 但如果它受物理规律的约束，那么它也没有特殊的意义。 你不能因为它的不自然，就说没有因果关系。 你也不能因为无法控制它，就接受因果关系， 那么为什么还要谈论它呢？ 这就是悖论。摆脱这种悖论的出路是什么？ 克：你是在说业力吗？ 乔：不。物理上的宇宙是封闭的。这里根本不存在运动。
K: All this implies time, does it not? That is, anything put together, horizontal or vertical, is time. Cause and effect are in time. Cause becoming effect and the effect being the cause, are all within the field of time. Whether I move my hand up this way or that, whether the movement is linear or vertical - all these are in within the field of time. Are you asking, Sir, can we move out of time? S: No. The experience of a physical law is within time. One does not ask questions within that law and what option does one have?
克：这一切都意味着时间，不是吗？ 任何水平的或垂直的聚在一起的事物，都是时间。 也就是说，任何拼凑在一起的东西，在水平或垂直方向上，都属于时间。 因果在时间的领域中。原因转化为结果，结果转化为原因。都在时间的范畴之内。 无论我以这样的方式还是以那向上地移动我的手，无论移动是水平的还是垂直的 —— 这一切都在时间的领域内。 先生，你是问我们能不能脱离时间？ 乔：不，对物理规律的经验在时间之内。 一个人不会在那规律内提出问题。那个人有什么选择？
K: None at all. Within the prison you can operate, but it is always within the field of time, cause-effect and effect-cause are within the field of time. Memory, experience, knowledge are within time and thought is the response of all that. If I have no memory, I cannot think; I will be in a state of amnesia. And thought is the response of memory. Thinking is within the field of time because it is put together through experience, knowledge, memory and memory is part of the brain cells.
克：完全没有。 在监狱中你可以操作，但是它总是在时间的领域内，原因和结果之间的转化都在时间的领域内。 记忆、体验、知识都在时间内，思想是对这一切的回应。 如果我没有记忆，我就无法思考，我会陷入一种失忆的状态。 思想是记忆的回应。 思考在时间的领域内，因为它是通过体验、知识、记忆组合在一起的 而记忆是脑细胞的一部分。
So thought can never move out of the field of time, because thought is never free. Thought is always old. Between the intervals of two thoughts, one may come upon something new and translate it in terms of time. There is a gap between two thoughts. In that interval there might be a different perception and the translation of that perception is time, but the perception itself is not of time.
所以思想永远不可能脱离时间的领域，因为思想从来都不自由。思想总是古老的。 在两个想法的空隙中，一个人可能遇到新的东西，并用时间来解读它。 在两个想法之间，存在着间隙。 在那段空白中，可能有一种不同的感知。 对那种感知的解读，就是时间，但是感知本身不是时间。
S: I have several questions to ask here. K: Go slow. Otherwise living in time there is nothing new. Living in time, thought which is put together, when thought tries to investigate something beyond time, it is still thought. So, as long as thought and time are within the field, it is a prison; I can think it is freedom but it would be merely a conception, a formula. It is like a man who is violent and pretends he is non-violent, and the whole ideological conception in this country of being non-violent and violent at the same time is a pretension.
乔：我这里有几个问题。 克：走慢些。要是活在时间里，就没有什么新鲜事了。 活在时间里的、被拼凑起来的思想试图去探索某个超越时间的东西，而那个东西依然是思想。 因此，只要思想和时间在场内，它就是一座监狱； 我可以认为这就是自由，但它仅仅是一个概念，一种规则。 这就像一个暴力的人，假装自己是非暴力的， 在这个国家里，同时存在着非暴力和暴力，这整个意识形态就是一种自负。
So, as far as thought functions, it must function within the field of time. There is no escape from it at all. I can pretend I am thinking outside time, but it is still within time. Thought is old, whether it is the atman, the super ego, it is all part of thought.
因此，就思想功能而言，它必须在时间领域内发挥作用。 根本无法从中逃离。我们可以假装我在时间之外思考，但它仍然在时间之内。 思想是陈旧的，无论是阿特曼、超级自我，都是思想的一部分。
S: Where is the way out of the paradox? K: The intellect, thought functions there. And we are trying to find an answer here as a physicist, biologist, mathematician, as a bourgeois or as a sannyasi. S: But there are laws in physics. K: Of course there are. This is anyhow a madhouse and we are trying to find an answer within this. This is a fact. I have to accept it as it is. Then my question is, is there an action which is not of this? Here all action is fragmentary. You are a religious man, I am a scientist. In this everything is in a state of fragmentation.
乔：摆脱悖论的出路在哪里？ 克：智力和思想在那里发挥作用。 而我们尝试像物理学家、生物学家、数学家、资产阶级印度僧人一样，在这里寻找答案。 乔：但是物理学中存在着规律。 克：当然有。无论如何，这就是一个疯人院，而我们正试图在里面寻找答案。这是一个事实。 我必须接受它。那么我的问题是，有没有一个行动不属于这儿？在这儿，所有行动都是破碎的。 你是一个有宗教信仰的人，我是一个科学家。在这里面，一切都处于一种破裂的状态。
S: Fragmentation carries laws. K: Of course, but these laws have not solved human problems. Apart from physics you are a human being. Take the problem as it is, that human beings live in fragments, that society is broken up. There is fragmentation. And thought is responsible for this. S: Thought is also responsible for all the other things. K: Surely. The priests, the inventions, the discoveries, the Gods, the yogis, everything. So that is what actually is. The problem is how we live here and find something else. You cannot. The question is not how to integrate the various fragments, but how is it possible to live without fragmentation?
乔：分裂是有规律的。 克：当然。但是这些规律并没有解决人类的问题。除了是一名物理学家，你也是一个人。 就拿这个问题来说吧，人类生活在碎片中，社会是破碎的。 存在着碎片化。思想对此负有责任。 乔：思想也对所有其他事情负有责任。 克：当然。思想对发明、发现、神、瑜伽师，对一切负有责任。 那么，那就是实际状况。问题是我们要如何在这里生活并找到另一种东西。你不能。 问题不在于如何整合各种碎片，而在于如何没有碎片化地生活。
S: To the extent to which it is possible, you have no questions. At that point it ceases to be physics. At that level I am no longer a physicist. K: Of course. You are first a human being, a non-fragmentary human being. Your action can then be a non-fragmentary action. S: For the non-fragmented person physics does not exist.
乔：在可能的范围内，你没有问题。 在那一点上，它不再是物理学。在那个层面上，我不再是一名物理学家。 克：当然，你首先是一个人，一个非碎片化的人。你的行为可以是非碎片化的行为。 乔：对于非碎片化的人而言，物理学是不存在的。
K: What is the importance of an artist? S: He transports people into states which they themselves are not able to reach. Still fragmentary, but different. K: Being fragmented, he needs self-expression and the self is part of the fragmentation. So would you deny the artist his function? Now the physicist is important. But he does not come before the universe, the human heart, the human mind. He is as important or not important as the artist.
克：艺术家的重要性是什么？ 乔：他将人们引入到他们自己无法到达的状态。依旧是零碎的，但有所不同。 克：处在破碎中，他需要自我表达，而这个自我就是碎片的一部分。 那么，你会否认艺术家的功能吗？现在，物理学家很重要。 但是他没有领先于宇宙、心灵和头脑。他和艺术家一样重要或者不重要。
S: There is a difference in the quality. The artist is usually non-clear. K: The artist is clear in his feeling, but the expression goes wrong because he is conditioned to objectivism, non-objectivism and all that. So, can I live in this world non-fragmentarily; not as a Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, communist, but as a human being?
乔：在品质是有区别的。艺术家通常是不清晰的。 克：艺术家的感觉是清晰的，但是表达出了问题， 因为它被客观主义、非客观主义等等所限制。 因此，我能不分裂地活在这个世界上，不去做印度教徒、佛教徒、基督教徒、共产主义者，而是做一个人类？
S: Why not just live; why the word "human"? K: The way we live is not human at all. It is a battle - country, wife, children, the boss - we live that way. We are at war with each other. If you call that living, I say that is not it. This perpetual struggle is not living. S: Life is not a perpetual struggle all the time. K: But most of the time it is. The window is closed.
乔: 为什么不这样活着；为什么用‘人类’这个词？ 克：我们的活法根本不是人类的活法。它是一场战斗 —— 国家、妻子、孩子、老板 —— 我们就是这样生活的。 我们彼此在交战。 如果你把它称为生活。我说它不是。它是一种无休止的争斗，不是生活。 乔：生活不总是一场不休的挣扎。 克：但大多数时间是这样，这扇窗被关闭了。
S: But why the word "human"? K: Sir, I did not use the word "individual". You know the meaning of the word "individual" - one who is indivisible. Man is not. So one realizes this fact of fragmentation, time and the constant battle for position, power, prestige, success, domination and the effort to escape from all this to reach enlightenment through the mantra, through yoga. How is this everlasting chattering, that is going on all the time, to come to an end? Is it at all possible not to be fragmented? How is it possible for the brain cells themselves to be quiet, because that is the mechanism of time, because that is being put together slowly over years. That is what we call evolution. That is the central question.
乔：但是为什么要用‘人类’这个词呢？ 克：先生，我没有使用‘个人’这个词。 你知道‘个人’这个词的含义 —— 一个不可分割的人。而人却不是。 因此一个人意识到这种分裂的事实：时间和不断地争夺地位、权力、威望、成功、统治 以及通过咒语、瑜伽去觉悟，努力地去摆脱这一切。 这种永无止歇的喋喋不休，要如何结束？ 有没有可能不支离破碎？ 脑细胞们能安静下来吗？ 因为那是时间的机制， 因为那是多年来慢慢形成的产物。是我们所谓的‘进化’。那就是问题的核心。
S: And that is rightly so. You bring the problem back to physics, because physics talks about the external universe but it does not talk about brain cells. If you had only a fragment of reality, then you do not accept it as consistent. If it is consistent, then it is fiction. Could the fragment be self-consistent? K: I would put it this way. I would suggest, is it possible for a human being to be a physicist and be self-consistent without fragmenting himself? I see time is the central factor. Thought is the response of memory, thought is time.
乔：没错。 你把这个问题又带回到了物理学，因为物理学讨论外部宇宙，但不谈论脑细胞。 如果你只有现实的一个片段，那么你不会接受它是一致的。 如果它是一致的，那么就是伪造。这个片段能自洽吗？ 克：我会这么说。我会这么建议: 一个人有没有可能成为一个物理学家，在不分裂自己的情况下保持自洽？ 我看到时间是核心因素。思想是记忆的这种回应，思想是时间。
S.: For the experiencer... K: The experiencer is the experienced, the observer is the observed. The observer is over there and looks at it. There is space and time. The observer separates himself through conclusions, images, formulas, etc., and so creates space and time, and this is one of the major fragmentations. Can the observer look without the observed who is the maker of time, space, distance? After all, Sir, how do you discover anything, say, as a physicist? S: I am peculiar, I invent them. K: There must be a period in which the inventor is silent. S: Yes.
乔：对于体验者来说…… 克：体验者是被体验者，观察者是被观察者。观察者在那里，看着它。 那就是空间和时间。 观察者通过结论、图象、规则等将自己划分出来，从而创造出空间和时间，这就是一个主要的碎片。 这个时间、空间和距离制造者，能不携带他的制造品去看吗？ 毕竟，先生，作为一名物理学家，你是如何发现任何东西的？ 乔：我很特别，我发明它们。 克：必定有一段时间，在这段时间里，发明者是安静的。 乔：是的。
K: If he is constantly in movement, there is continuity. There must be a break. In that he sees something new. The observer sees through the image and it is continued in time. And so he cannot see anything new. If I look at my wife with the image of years, and I call that relationship, there is nothing new in that. So is it possible to see something new without the observer? The observer is time. Can I look at "what is", the fragmented without the observer that is time? Can there be a perception without the perceiver? S: There is no perception without the perceiver, but the perceived is sort of waiting to be perceived.
克：如果他一直在动，就会有连续性。 必须有一个断点，在里面，他看见某个新的东西。 观察者透过印象去看，在时间之中，这种印象被延续。因此他不能看到任何新东西。 如果我去看我的妻子，携带着岁月雕琢出来的印象，我称之为‘关系’，那里面没有任何新东西。 因此，有可能不携带着观察者去看某个新的东西？ 观察者是时间。我能不携带这位观察家去看‘什么是’，这破裂的东西吗？ 感知者缺席的时候，能感知吗？ 乔：没有感知者就没有感知，但被感知者似乎在等待着被感知。
K: The tree is there all the time without the perceiver, and the perceiver is looking at it through fragmentation, through the censor. Can the censor be absent and yet be observed? S: Certainly not. Perception is a single act. There is no possibility of breaking it up. K: Who is the censor? Who is the perceiver? Who is using the verb "to perceive"?
克：树一直在那里，没有感知者， 感知者正在通过碎片，通过监察员去看它。 这位审查员可以下台，并且被观察吗？ S：当然不能。感知是一个单一的行为。不可能打断它。 克：谁是监察员？谁是感知者？谁在使用‘感知’这个动词？
S: When you are perceiving, you do not talk about the perceiver. K: I look at the tree with knowledge. Can the observer observe without the past? Who is the thinker, the examiner? S: When you perceive, you do not need all this. K: There is the tree. Can I look at it without the observer? S.: Yes. K: There is only that. Then the perceiver comes into operation. So the image-maker can look without the image. Otherwise you cannot invent.
乔：当你在感知时，你不会谈论感知者。 克：我携带着知识去看那棵树。观察者可以不带过去观察吗？谁是这位思想者，这位检察长？ 乔：当你感知时，你不需要这一切。 克：树在那里。我可以在没有观察者的情况下看它吗？ 乔：可以。 克：只有那个。然后感知者才开始运作。 所以，印象的制造者可以不带着印象去看。否则你就无法发明。
S: We were talking about communication. If time itself is the product of thinking, then how can thinking be imprisoned in time? Then what makes time common to all people? M: Different people have the same notion of time. K: I wonder if they do. M: Can it be answered? K: Why do you want a concept of time? You look at the watch, you have no concept about it. S: The idea of time as movement is associated with the watch. K: Within the rising and setting of the sun, there is numerical time, but is there any other psychological, inward time? S: There is another time when you think of action in the future. K: So time is the movement of the past through the present to the future. That is time. S: Time is part of thought. K: Time is thought. Time is sorrow.
乔：我们谈论的是交流。 如果时间本身是思想的产物，那么思想怎么会被禁锢在时间中呢？ 那么，为什么所有人都这种普遍的时间概念呢？ 莫：不同的人对时间有着同样的概念。 克：我想知道他们是不是这样。 莫：能回答吗？ 克：为什么你想拥有一种时间概念？你看手表，而你对它没有任何概念。 乔：作为运动的时间观念与手表有关。 克：在太阳的升起和落下之中，存在着用数字表示的时间，还有心理的、内在的时间吗？ 乔：当你想到未来的行动时，就有另一种时间。 克：因此，时间是过去从现在到未来的运动。这就是时间。 乔：时间是思想的一部分。 克：时间是思想。时间是悲伤。
S: How can thought transcend itself? What is the significance of saying that thought cannot transcend itself? K: But it is all the time trying it. Let me put it this way. What is the validity of time? I have to go from here to there, from this house to the other house, from one continent to another continent; I will be a manager of this factory - all that involves time, which is being put together, in sequence or not in sequence.
乔：思想如何超越自身？声称‘思想不能超越它自己’有什么意义？ 克：但它一直在尝试。让我这样说吧，时间的有效性是什么？ 我必须从这里到那里，从这间屋子到另一间屋子，从一个大陆到另一个大陆； 我会成为这个工厂的经理 —— 所有这一切都涉及时间，这些时间是按顺序或不按顺序排列的。
S: There is a great limitation to this. Time is single but experiences are not single. Time is one dimensional: one string with beads collected on it. Experience connected together gives you an impression of time, but time itself is one dimension, a single string. You can think of different strands and scales of time. They are a string of time. The connectivity of things can be complex. We do not experience the multiple connectivity of it. We can, of course, experience several things together; for example, I am listening to you, part of my mind may be thinking of something else, I may be shaking my toe; because my understanding is functioning, I watch all that. I see a series of pictures but I do not live anything.
乔：这有很大的局限性。时间是单一的，然而体验却不是。 时间是一维的，如一条穿着珠子的线。 串在一起的体验给你一种时间的印象，但是时间本身是一维的，是单独的一条线。 你可以想到不同的时间线和尺度。 它们是一串时间。事物的联系可能很复杂。我们没有体验到它多重的关联性。 当然，我们可以同时体验几种事物， 例如，我在听你说话，我的一部分头脑可能在想别的事情，我可能在晃动我的脚趾； 因为我正在理解，我看到那一切。我看到一系列的画面，可我却没有生活于其中。
K: That means the self is absent. S: There is no single self. K: That is, there is no centre. S: There is no centre which has time in it. K: That means in oneself there is no fragmentation at all. At the very core of one's being, there is no fragmentation. S: Put that way, one sees there is a state in which there is no fragmentation.
克：那意味着自我是缺席的。 乔：没有单一的自我。 克：是的，没有中心。 乔：它里面没有时间。 克：这意味着一个人本身根本没有碎片。一个人存在的核心是没有分裂。 乔：那样的话，一个人看到一种没有碎片的状态。
K: Can one find out a quality in which there is no fragmentation, which means the ending of thought; thought breeds fragmentation, which is time? Look, Sir, when you go through the world there are separate actions - social, political, communal, the hippy action - all fragmented. Is there an action which is not fragmented but which will cover all that? S: When you use the word "action", action is associated with time. K: I mean the active present. S: Yes, it is.
克：一个人能找到一种没有分裂的状态，也就是思想的结束吗？ 思想滋生分裂，也就是时间。 看，先生，当你走过这个世界时，有各种分裂的行为 —— 社会的、政治的、公开的、嬉皮士的行为 —— 都是支离破碎的。 是否有一个行为，不是支离破碎的，却会涵盖所有这些？ 乔：当你使用‘行为’这个词时， 行为与时间有关。 克：我是指处于活动状态的现在。 乔：是的，它是。
K: It means there is a quality of mind in which there is no fragmentation at all. It is active present all the time. What relationship has all this with love? What is the relationship between me, you and the artist? I think that is the core of relationship. Love has been reduced to sex and all the morality round it. If love is not there, fragmentation will go on. You will be a physicist, I will be something and we will communicate, discuss, but they are mere words. S: How do you communicate? There has been some communication after you have talked. How do I understand that? How is it that I understand it? K: What does the word "communication" mean? You and I have something in common. Common implies sharing.
克：那意味着存在一种完全没有分裂的品质。它一直处于活动状态。 这一切与爱有什么关系？我、你和艺术家之间是什么关系？ 我认为这是关系的核心。爱已经沦为性和围绕它的所有道德观念。 如果没有爱，分裂就会继续下去。 你会成为一个物理学家，我会成为别的某个人物，我们会交流、讨论，却仅仅是一些空话。 乔：你是如何交流的？当你说了之后，就有了某些交流。 我怎么理解呢？我理解了它又会如何？ 克：‘交流’这个词是什么意思？你和我有一些共同点。共同意味着分享。
S: How is it possible to share? K: Wait, we are using time to communicate. "Common" implies that both of us want to understand, examine, share an issue together. I am not giving, you are not receiving. We are sharing. So a relationship of sharing is established. You are not sitting on the platform and I on the ground. What really happens when you share a problem like sorrow in human beings? It is tremendous. S: At the time you are sharing sorrow, after a while you do not see the person. I can understand that with deep personal emotions, but with an idea it is not possible.
乔：怎样才能分享？ 克：等一等，我们正在利用时间进行交流。 而‘共同’意味着我们俩想要一起理解、检查、分享一个问题。 我不是在给与，你也不是在接受。我们正在分享。因此建立了一种共享关系。 你不是坐在台上，我不是坐在地上。 当你分享人类的悲伤等问题时，到底在发生什么？它是巨大的。 乔：在你分享悲伤的时候，过了一会儿，你就看不到那个人了。 我能用深刻的个人情感来理解这一点，但是当有了想法后，就不可能理解它了。
K: What is the point of sharing ideas? S: We share insights. K: Which is understanding. But ideas are not understanding. On the contrary, formulas about understanding prevent understanding. Sir, when you share together, what takes place? Both of us have the same intensity, at the same time, at the same level. That is love. Otherwise there is no sharing. After all, Sir, to understand something together, I must forget all my experiences, prejudices, and so must you. Otherwise we cannot share. Have you ever discussed with a Communist, with a Catholic? S: I try to understand him. K: But he will not understand you. That is simple. Take Chardin. He may have travelled extensively, covered a wide canvas, but he was fixed as a Catholic. You cannot share with a man who is fixed. Sharing implies love. Can a man who is fixed in a certain attitude, can he love?
克：分享想法有什么意义？ 乔：我们分享洞察。 克：也就是理解。但想法不是理解。 相反，关于理解的规则阻碍了理解。 先生，当你一起分享时，会发生什么？我们俩的热情相同、时间相同、水平相当。 那就是爱。否则没有共享。 毕竟，先生，要一起理解某个东西，我必须忘记我所有的经历和偏见，你也必须忘记。 否则我们无法分享。 你有没有和共产党员、天主教徒讨论过？ 乔：我试着理解他。 克：但是他不会理解你。这很简单。 以查尔丹为例。他可能旅行过很多地方，游历广泛，但他固守为天主教徒。 你不能和一个固定的人分享。分享意味着爱。 一个固执于某种态度的人，能爱吗？
S: He can have mystical experiences. K: Because he is conditioned. He sees Krishna, Christ. He sees what he wants to. The question is whether the mind can uncondition itself? Not through time, for when the mind uses time to undo time, it is still within time. Real understanding is out of time. There is so little of love, of sharing, but of the other there is plenty. (Pause) Sir, here we ask the question what is meditation? Whether the mind can be free of all its content because consciousness is made up of the content? M: Most often when you talk of understanding you think of one individual. To have communication you must have two minds. Also there are some thoughts which occur to me. I may later on find out it has already occurred to other people, but are there thoughts which arise only when two people are together? S: M says there are situations when two people have ideas together which neither could have got independently.
乔：他可能有神秘的经历。 克：因为他被局限了，所以他看到克利须那，基督，他看到了他想要看到的东西。 问题在于头脑能使自己不受约束？不是通过时间，因为当头脑用时间去消除时间，它依然处于时间之内。 真正的理解脱离了时间。 爱和分享是如此之少，而其它的却有很多。（暂停） 先生，在这里我们问一个问题，什么是冥想？ 头脑是否可以摆脱它的所有内容，因为意识是由内容组成的？ 莫：大多数时候，当你谈到理解时，你会想到一个人。要交流，就必须有两颗头脑。 我自己也有一些思想冒出。 之后，我可能会发现别人已经想到了， 但是，只有当两个人在一起时才会产生思想吗？ 乔：莫里斯说，有些想法只有当两个人一起交流时才会产生，而一个人无法独自获得那个想法。
K: When two people come together, what takes place? You express something verbally. I hear it, translate it and answer it; that is verbal communication. And in that process certain other factors enter. You do not quite know what you are saying. I hear it, partially understand and partially answer. So communication remains broken. If you say something very clearly and I listen to you without any reaction, there is immediate communication.
克：当两个人走到一起，在发生什么？ 你口头上表达出一些东西，我听到它，翻译它并回答它；那就是口头交流。 在那个过程中，某些其他因素进入。 你不太清楚你在说什么。我听到了，部分地理解并部分地回答。 因此，交流依旧是破碎的。 如果你说得很清楚，而我听你，不附带任何的反应，就有直接的交流。
May I put it this way? Because I do not know what love is, I want you to love me. I know what love is and, therefore, I can communicate with you. I do not want anything. But you are asking a further question and that is, is there a necessity at all for communication; necessity in the sense that through communication I uncover something more, I discover something new. Like a man who plays the violin, uses the instrument for himself or uses the instrument and there is nothing beyond it.
我可以这样来说吗？因为我不知道什么是爱？我要你爱我。 我知道什么是爱，因此，我可以与你交流。我什么都不想要。 但是你进一步地问，那就是，交流是否有必要； 从某种意义上说，通过交流，我发现了更多的东西，我发现了新的东西。 就像一个拉小提琴的人，他可以为了他自己而使用这个乐器，或者不为任何原因而只是弹奏乐器。
S: Neither for good nor evil. K: Yes, like a flower - take it or leave it, because through communication we discover something together, and without communication can I discover something without verbalizing? When you and I have a common interest, and intensity at the same level and at the same time, then communion is possible non-verbally. I do not have to tell you "I love you". I think we are caught so much in words, in linguistic, semantic enquiry. The word is not the thing. The description is not the described.
乔：既非为了善，也非为了恶。 克：是的，就像一朵花 —— 要么接受它，要么离开它，因为通过交流，我们一起发现了一些东西， 没有交流，我可以在没有语言的情况下发现一些东西吗？ 当你和我有共同的兴趣，并且处于同一层次和同一时刻，那么非语言的共融是有可能的。 我不必告诉你‘我爱你’。 我认为我们被语言，语义学的探究所困。文字不等于事物。描述不等于被描述的事物。
S: And since this high level of communication is not a technique or a skill, the question arises, how does one learn anything? A child is able to learn. K: Is learning a process of accumulation? That is what we do. I learn Italian, store up the words, then I speak. This is what we call learning. Is there learning which is non-accumulation? The two are totally different actions. S: May I ask something? It may be totally irrelevant, but you will understand. Is there "the other"? Are there "other" people? K: It all depends upon what you mean by "the other", "the other people". S: Most times there is multiplicity - but there is also aloneness. K: Obviously.
乔：既然这种高水平的沟通不是一种技术或技能，那么问题来了，一个人如何学习任何东西？孩子是能够学习的。 克：学习是一个积累的过程吗？那就是我们所做的。我学习意大利语，储存单词，然后我说话。 这就是我们所说的学习。有没有非积累的学习？两者是完全不同的行为。 乔：我可以问一下吗？这个问题可能完全无关紧要，但是你会理解的。有‘另一个’吗？有‘别人’吗？ 克：这完全取决于你所说的‘另一个’、‘别人’的含义。 乔：大多数的时候有相重性，但也有独立性。 克：当然。
S: Since aloneness is real... K: Why do you call aloneness real and the other unreal? We know loneliness, resistance, the dual movement of action, defensive or aggressive action, being caught in thought, and that brings greater isolation - we and they, my party and yours. Now can the mind go beyond isolation, beyond resistance which means can it be completely alone? Not in the sense of isolation. It is only then that I discover something new, that which is real.
乔：因为独立是真实的…… 克：为什么你把独立称为真实的，而说其它的是不真实的？ 我们知道孤独、反抗、行为上的矛盾运动，防卫或攻击性行为，被思想所困， 那带来了更大的孤立 —— 我们和他们，我的党和你的党。 现在，头脑能走出孤立，远离抵抗吗？也就是它可以完全独立吗？不是那种隔离的感觉。 只有在那时，我才发现某些新东西，那真实的东西。
S: I have experience of that state, but you caught me at that point when you asked me, "why do you divide". There are two situations. There are states when I do not see multiplicity and there are states in which I see multiplicity. I have a feeling that the states in which I see multiplicity are falling off.
乔：我经历过那种状态，但当你问我‘为什么要分裂’时，你困住了我。 存在两种情况，一种是我没看到相重性，一种是我看到了相重性。 我有一种感觉，我看到的相重性正在降低。
K: Be careful, Sir. You are caught. Falling off - what do you mean, that is time. Anything that you can get rid of slowly is time, whereas the other does not involve time at all. So do not get caught, Sir. (Pause) So is there a perception and action without time? I see danger, physical, and there is instant action. I do not say I will gradually withdraw from danger. So is there a perception of this sense of loneliness, resistance? Is there a perception, a seeing the danger of it completely, and the very seeing is the getting rid of it? S: If you see the whole thing completely, there is no falling off. It is not there. M: That is, there is no preparing for it.
克：当心，先生。你陷进去了。降低 —— 你是指什么意思？那是时间。 你可以慢慢降低的任何东西都是时间，而另一个则根本不涉及时间。 所以不要被困住，先生。(停顿) 那么，有没有非时间的感知和行动呢？我看到危险，在身体上的，并且立即采取行动。 我不说我会逐渐脱离危险。 那么，有对这种孤独感、抗拒感的感知吗？ 有没有一种感知，一种完全看到它的危险，而看见就是摆脱它？ 乔：如果你完整地看到整个事情，就没有降低。它不存在。 男：也就是说，不存在准备。
S: This statement is at variance with my experience. I have experienced timeless moments. I loved it. I have a memory of it. K: Leave it alone, Sir. S: When I hold it, then it is pleasure. K: That is what it is. Pleasure is the one main ruling principle.
乔：这种说法与我的经历不符。我经历过时间的消失。我爱它。我拥有对它的记忆。 克：别管它，先生。 乔：当我握住它的时候，它就是快乐。 克：那就是它。快乐是一个主要的统治原则。