A: Sir, we have been listening to you with all the attention of which we are capable, with our minds and with all our analytical capacities. We have covered every inch of the ground and we no longer accept anything we do not understand. Between you and us there has been verbal communication and there has been communication beyond words. By ourselves we have not been able to penetrate the verbal barrier and reach that understanding which comes beyond words. When I sit by myself, I find that all communication with myself remains at the verbal level. I wonder whether we could take up for discussion the problem of communication. Tradition has classified communication into four different states vaikhari, madhyama, pashyanti and para. Vaikhari is verbal communication, apprehended through the auditory organ. It is subject to distortion of various kinds. It is dependent on sequence. Madhyama is apprehended through the internal organ (mind), not by an external sense-organ. In madhyama there is the sequence of the mentally conceived. In pashyanti there is no sequence, it does not have the attributes of priority or posteriority; perception and communication are undivided. In pashyanti there is a transcendence of association with the diverse objects of the world, and also of time and space; such a state is free of the distinctions of the cognizer and the cognized. Para is the power of self-revelation of the Absolute, which power is not separable from it. Para is the channel, the true channel of communication.
阿：先生，我们一直在全神贯注地听取你的意见，用我们的头脑和分析能力。 我们已经覆盖了每一寸土地，我们不再接受任何我们不理解的东西。 你和我们之间有口头交流，也有超越言语的交流。 靠我们自己，我们无法穿透语言障碍，达到超越语言的理解。 当我独自坐着时，我发现与自己的所有交流都停留在语言层面。 我想知道我们是否可以讨论交流问题。 传统将通讯分为四种不同的状态vaikhari，madhyama，pashyanti和para。 Vaikhari是口头交流，通过听觉器官而被捕获。 它受到各种扭曲的影响。它取决于顺序。 Madhyama是通过内部器官（思想）而不是外部感觉器官来理解的。 在中央观中，有心理构思的顺序。 在pashyanti中没有序列，它没有优先级或后验的属性；感知和交流是不可分割的。 在pashyanti中，与世界上各种物体的联系以及时间和空间的超越； 这样的状态是没有认知者和认知者的区别的。 帕拉是绝对自我揭示的力量，这种力量是离不开它的。 Para是渠道，真正的交流渠道。
P: "A" is right. In investigating what Krishnaji calls listening and seeing which are the operational part of his teachings, it might be possible to explore communication. I do not think we have gone into the question whether communication is a process or whether it is an instantaneous light. K: Can we start with the verbal level and work it through? P: The question involves not just communication between the speaker and oneself, but the very instrument with which we take in, with which we apprehend.
普：阿克尤特是对的。在调查克里希那吉所谓的倾听和观察，这些在他教诲中可操作的部分时， 也许可以探索交流。 我不认为，我们讨论过交流是一个过程，还是一个瞬间的闪光？ 克：我们可以从语言层面开始，然后完结它吗？ 普：这个问题不仅仅涉及到说话者和自己之间的交流， 还涉及到我们用来接受和理解的仪器。
K: Shall we begin slowly with this? There is verbal communication in which both of us understand the meaning of the word. In that communication, the word is the meaning and the meaning can be understood by me and by you. That is verbal communication. Then communication also means listening, not only to the meaning of the word but the intention of the speaker in using the word. Otherwise communication breaks off.
克：我们能从这里慢慢地开始吗？ 有口头上的交流，我们俩都理解这个词的含义。 在这种交流中，这个词就是意义，我和你都可以理解这个意思。 这就是口头交流。 然后，交流也意味着听，不仅要听这个词的含义，还要听说话者使用该词的意图。 否则，交流中断。
When we use the word, it must have a quality of directness in which there is no double meaning and it must also have the quality of the real urge to communicate something. In that urge there must be affection, care, consideration - the feeling that you must understand; not that I am superior and you are inferior.
当我们使用词语时，它必须具有直接的性质，没有双重的含义 它还必须具有传达某些东西的真正冲动的品质。 在这种冲动中，必须有爱、关心、体贴 —— 这种你必须理解的感觉； 不是说我地位优越，而你低人一等。
And in using the word, there must be the contact of intention conveyed in the quality of the voice. That means both of us at the same time, at the same level, with the same intensity must understand the word; there must be contact of intention and then only is there real communication.
在使用这个词时，必须在声音的质量中，传达出意图的接触。 这意味着我们两个人在同一时间、同一水平，以相同的强度，必须理解这个词； 必须有意图上的接触，然后，才有真正的交流。
A: This is so. Our minds listening to you used to set up so many obstacles. All that is over. Now there are no barriers. K: What is important in communication is not so much the word, although the word and meaning are necessary, but to meet each other at the same time, at the same level, with the same intensity. A: To communicate with oneself is also important. What does communication mean in that context? K: Can one communicate with oneself?
阿：是这样的。我们的头脑在听你，尽管曾经设置了那么多的障碍。一切都结束了。现在没有障碍了。 克：在交流中，重要的不是词语，尽管词语和意义是必要的， 而是在同一时间，同一水平，以相同的强度相遇。 阿：与自己交流也很重要。在这种情况下，交流意味着什么？ 克：一个人可以和自己交流吗？
A: Yes. It is a question of becoming coherent to oneself. K: Communication is generally understood to be between two or more people. A: But it need not even be two people. It can be between a person and a book. All this is implied when we say communication with oneself.
阿：是的。这是一个与自己保持一致的问题。 克：通常的理解是这样的，交流是在两个或两个以上的人之间。 阿：但甚至不必是两个人。它可以是人与书之间。 当我们说与自己交流时，就指的这种情况。
K: I do not think one can communicate with oneself. A: Sir, in Sanskrit they use the word "swasamvada" for "self-communication". K: I question that. A: Why? K: When you use the word "self-communication" I do not think you communicate with yourself. You only observe what is going on. But the moment you use the word "communicate", there is duality; duality in the sense there is the you and the book, you and the me.
克：我不认为一个人可以与自己交流。 阿：先生，在梵文中，他们使用“swasamvada”一词来表示“自我交流”。 克：我对此表示质疑。 阿：为什么？ 克：当你使用“自我交流”这个词时，我认为你不是在和自己交流。 你只是在观察正在发生的。 但是当你使用“交流”这个词的那一刻，就有了二元性； 从某种意义上说，二元性是指你和书、你和我。
A: You said that there must be a certain sense of rapport, even for observing. I wonder if there is anything in that. F: The message is the most important part in communication. K: No, I can say something, and if you are not in a state of rapport you will twist it. You will twist the message. So the important thing is not the message but why at certain levels certain messages seem to be communicated to some people and not to others?
阿：你说，必须有一定的融洽感，即使是观察。我想知道那里面是否有任何东西。 莫：信息，是交流中最重要的部分。 克：不，我可以说某个东西，如果你不处于融洽的状态，你会扭曲它，会扭曲信息。 所以重要的不是信息，而是 为什么在某一种层次上，某个看似能与某人交流的信息，却不能传达给另一个人。
D: Why is the message you want to communicate not received by the other? K: We are talking of the quality of communication and not what you communicate. When that quality is not there, you cannot communicate. A: There is communication of words, there is communication of meaning and there is communication that is beyond word and meaning. F: The human race has developed certain instruments to take in messages through word and meaning, but they have no instruments to take in or to contact that which is beyond word and meaning. After all, the radio, television have special instruments to receive. Do we have special instruments to receive? D: The problem of communication arises only when the message is distorted or incomplete. K: It is also in the meaning. You tell me something and I twist it.
德：为什么对方没有收到你想要传达的信息？ 克：我们谈论的是交流的质量，而不是你所交流的内容。 当这种品质不存在时，你就无法交流。 阿：有文字上的交流，有意义上的交流，也有超越文字和意义的交流。 莫：人类已经开发出某些仪器，通过文字和意义来接收信息， 可是他们没有仪器去吸收或接触超越言语和意义的东西。 毕竟，收音机、电视有特殊的仪器可以接收。 我们有特殊的仪器可以接收吗？ 德：只有当信息失真或不完整时，才会出现交流问题。 克：也是这个意思。你告诉我某个东西，我扭曲了它。
F: No. You tell me something, I listen to it with the instrument I have and then translate it according to the instrument I have. There is no question of twisting it. We find that reception of what you have to say remains at a lower wave length. There is no question of twisting. What you say just does not seem to penetrate. It has nothing to do with the message. P: Either the instruments have not been tuned or they are not there. Krishnaji, you can say what you will, till the instruments are there, the message will not be received. K: This is simple. P: Is the question one of instruments being tuned right or of new instruments coming into being? That is the essential question.
莫：没有。你告诉我一某个东西， 我用我拥有的仪器听它，然后根据我拥有的仪器翻译它。 没有扭曲它的问题。 我们发现，在接收你说的话时，仍然处于较低的波长。 没有扭曲的问题。 你所说的，似乎没有穿透力。它与消息无关。 普：要么仪器不协调，要么没有。 克里希那吉，你可以说你想说什么，除非仪器在那里，否则信息不会被接收。 克：这很简单。 普：问题是仪器需要调整正确，还是得有新的仪器出现？ 这是一个基本问题。
K: "A" said when we began contacting each other, there was a certain resistance, a certain intellectual objection to what was said and now he says he has put all that aside and he listens. Why should there have been resistance in the beginning? A: We met after a gap of nine to ten years. There was conditioning, - social, political, ideological; there was the effort to understand you in terms of that conditioning.
克：阿克尤特说，当我们开始互相接触的时候， 对所说的话有一定的抵制，某种理念上的反对； 现在他说，他已经把所有这些放在一边，他在听。 为什么一开始会有抵制？ 阿：我们相隔九到十年才相遇。 有局限性 —— 社会、政治、意识形态； 我们努力在这种局限性中理解你。
K: "P" asks is there a need for tuning the instrument? P: Take a child and carefully keep it away from all conditioning; it will still react, because it is the instrument of heritage. The instruments I have, operate in a particular way. The instruments are themselves incapable of taking in, in any other way but the known way. K: Therefore, what is the question? Is the question one of taking these very instruments, making them sharp, vulnerable, sensitive? Or is it a question of new instruments coming into being?
克：普普尔问，是否需要对仪器进行调节？ 普：带一个小孩子，小心地照看它，远离一切局限性； 它仍然会做出反应，因为它是遗传的仪器。 我拥有的仪器以特定的方式运作。 这些仪器本身无法以任何其他的方式吸收，除了已知的方式。 克：那么，问题是什么？ 问题是拿出这个仪器，能使它们变得锋利、脆弱、敏感吗？ 还是，要有新的仪器出现？
D: May I say these are the only available instruments we have - our eyes, our ears. They prevent us from understanding. P: The history of man has perfected the instruments. They are trained to operate in one channel alone. Every sense-organ operates singly. When there is hearing there is no seeing. When there is seeing, there is no hearing. The operation of sensory perception is compartmental. I am asking you whether it is these same instruments that are to be used?
德：我可以说吗，这些是我们唯一可用的仪器 —— 我们的眼睛，我们的耳朵。它们在阻止我们理解。 普：人类的历史已经完善了这个仪器。他们接受过培训，可以单独在一个进程中操作。每个感觉器官都在单独运作。 听的时候就看不见。看见的时候，就听不见。感官知觉的运作是分开的。 我在问你，是否要使用这些相同的仪器？
B: "A" referred to two things, a stage where there was resistance and a stage where there was no resistance, but the instruments were the same. A: In the use of the instruments then, man has no choice. There might be an imperfect use of the instruments. P: It may be either an imperfect use of the instrument or it may be that an entirely new instrument is necessary. Let us ask Krishnaji. Let us pose the question to him. Do you say it is the same instrument or do you say it is a new instrument? If I had received what was to be communicated, I would not question. I would not be sitting here, but the very fact that I have not received that which has to be communicated, means that the instruments I have, have failed.
芭：阿克尤特指的是两件事，一个是有抵抗的阶段，一个是没有抵抗的阶段，但仪器是一样的。 阿：那么，在使用仪器时，人是别无选择的。这些仪器的使用可能不完美。 普：可能是对仪器的使用不完善，也可能是需要全新的仪器。 让我们问问克里希那吉。让我们向他提出这个问题。你说它是同一个仪器呢，还是一个新仪器？ 如果我收到了要传达的内容，我不会质疑。 我不会坐在这里， 但是，我没有得到必须传达的东西，这一事实本身就意味着我所拥有的仪器已经失败了。
A: My point is that there is a certain level of communication but when we come to translate it, then it remains at the verbal and meaning level. P: In listening to Krishnaji, there are many things which have been communicated. The instruments can receive. I am certain, however, that the explosion, that which needs to take place, has not happened. In spite of the flexibility of consciousness, the capacity of receiving, the capacity of all the instruments operating together, the understanding of the problem of time; in spite of all these things, the explosion has not taken place.
阿：我的观点是，有一定程度的交流，但当我们来翻译它时，它仍然停留在语言和意义层面。 普：在听克里希那吉时，有很多东西已经传达过来了。仪器是可以接收的。 然而，我确信，需要发生的爆炸没有发生。 尽管有意识上的灵活性，这种接收的能力，所有的仪器一起运作的能力， 对时间问题的理解； 尽管如此，爆炸并没有发生。
A: Can we impersonalize it? Can we understand objectively the problem of communication? P: Up to the pashyanti of yours, we understand; pashyanti is "seeing". A: Can we use the brain which is our instrument so that it does not create obstacles at any level? K: What is the problem?
阿：我们可以将它非个性化吗？我们能客观地理解交流的问题吗？ 普：我们理解，直到你提出pashyanti；pashyanti就是“看”。 阿：我们能使用这颗大脑，我们的这个仪器，这样它就不会在任何层面上造成障碍吗？ 克：问题出在哪里？
P: I am asking: you have seen us through a span of time. Do you think we are able to communicate with you? K: Obviously up to a certain point. P: What is the hitch at that point?
普：我想问的是：你已经看见我们一段时间了。 您认为我们能够与您交流吗？ 克：显然到了一定程度。 普：那么，障碍是什么？
K: Obviously, all communication is up to a point. I cannot go into this unless we begin very simply. I want to understand what is the problem. Communication implies telling you something and you listening to me, and either agreeing or disagreeing. That is, you and I have a common problem and we discuss it and we can only discuss it if we both see the common problem in its entirety and if the meaning, the word, the description tallies between you and me and we say we have understood each other.
克：交流意味着告诉你某个东西，你听，我说，要么同意，要么不同意。 也就是说，你和我有一个共同的问题，我们讨论它 只有当我们都看到整个共同的问题时，我们才能讨论它 如果它的意思、词语、描述在你和我之间是一致的， 那么，我们就说我们已经相互理解了。
Then the next point is, I want to tell you something which you resist. I may be telling you something which is not accurate and you have a right to resist. Then I tell you something which is true, mathematically true, and you say it is not true because you have your own judgements, opinions. At that moment communication stops.
那么，下一点是，我想告诉你某个你抗拒的东西。 我可能会告诉你某个不准确的东西，你有权去反抗。 然后，我告诉你某些真实的，数学般精确的东西，你说它不是真的，因为你有自己的判断，观点。 那一刻，交流停止了。
I want to tell you something as two human beings, not I as the guru and you as the disciple. I want to tell you something, I will express it as well as I can in words, but I know that what I want to say to you is not the word, nor the meaning of the word. I want to tell you something which can partially be described and the rest of the meaning cannot be described. You take the description and not the other. Therefore, there is no communication. You are satisfied with the explanation and say that is enough.
我想以两个人类的身份，来告诉你某个东西，而不是我作为上师，你作为弟子。 我想告诉你某个东西，我会用语言尽可能好地表达出来， 但是，我知道我想对你说的，不是这个词，也不是这个词的含义。 我想告诉你某个些可以被部分描述的东西，其余的含义无法描述。 你拿走了描述而不是另一个。因此，没有了交流。 你对解释感到满意，并说这就足够了。
I want to tell you something through the word, through the meaning, through the description. I want to tell you something which is not the word, which is not the meaning and I want to communicate to you that which is more than the description. I want to tell you something which I feel very strongly, which I feel I must communicate with you. I describe but you refuse to enter into that and our communication comes to an end. Verbally we understand, but the "other" cannot be communicated.
我想通过这个词，通过意义，通过描述来告诉你某个东西。 我想告诉你某个不是这个词，不是这种意思的东西 我想告诉你的，不仅仅是描述。 我想告诉你某个我非常强烈地感受到的东西，我觉得我必须与你交流。 我描述，但你拒绝进入，我们的交流结束了。 口头上我们理解，但“另一个”无法交流。
A: There is no refusal on our part. There is only incapacity. K: I question it. Listen to what I said. I use words which you understand. You listen to the meaning, the word, the description, the explanation. But all that does not cover the thing which I want to convey to you. At first you refused to go beyond. You refused in the sense that you did not know what was being talked about. You felt that what could not be put into words did not exist.
阿：我们没有拒绝。只是无能为力。 克：我对此表示质疑。听我说。 我用你懂的话。你听意思、言词、描述、解释。 但这一切并没有包括我想传达给你们的东西。 起初，你拒绝走出。 你拒绝，也就是你不知道在谈论什么。 你觉得，不能用语言表达的东西，是不存在的。
I am not concerned with the word and the description. I want to tell you something now. How do I communicate that which is not the word, that which is not the meaning, that which is not the description? And yet that is as real as the word, that has as much meaning as the word. Words explanations are not the thing. That is our problem. Now what takes place in me and you, let us discuss that.
我不关心这个词语和描述。我现在想告诉你某个东西。 我要如何去传达那不是词语，不是意义，无法描述的东西； 然而，却和这个词一样真实，和这个词一样有意义？ 言语上的解释，不是这个东西。那就是我们的问题。 在我和你身上，在发生什么，让我们来讨论。
I use the word, the word is common, the meaning is common, the description is within the framework of words, the words have space, they have a referent, a meaning. You accept that. You follow up to that point and you stop there. You all do this in various degrees. Why? Why do you stop there? (Pause.) I think I know.
我用词语，词语是共同的，意思是共同的， 描述是在词语的框架内，词语有空间，它们具有指称，含义。 你接受这一点。你跟进到这一点，然后你停在那里。 你们都在不同程度上这样做。为什么？你为什么止步于此？（暂停。）我想我知道。
A: In this relationship of communication, there has been a very clear understanding that you must never take in something which you do not comprehend. The mind has a capacity to manufacture beliefs, to take in what it would like to believe. I am trying to express the barrier my mind puts up. I say it will not do to take in anything that I do not understand.
阿：在这种交流关系中，已经有了非常清晰的认识。 你绝不能接受你不理解的东西。 头脑有能力製造信念，接受它想要相信的東西。 我试图表达我的头脑所设置的障碍。 我说，我不会接受任何我不理解的东西。
K: Wait. You accept the word, the meaning, the description, the explanation, the analysis. You go as far as that. Now I tell you as two human beings that I want to tell you something else including the word and you do not move. I ask myself, "why"? Either you do not want consciously to understand what I want to say beyond the word, because the understanding might upset you; or you resist because your whole training, heritage, tells you: "Do not go near it, do not touch it."
克：等等。你接受这个词语、意思、描述、解释、分析。 你走了这么远。 现在我告诉你，作为两个人类，我想告诉你某个在这个词语之外的别的东西，你没有移动。 我问我自己，“为什么”？ 要么你不去有意识地去理解我想说的、超出言词的东西， 是因为这种理解可能会让你不高兴吗？ 或者，是因为你的整个训练、遗传，在告诉你：“不要靠近它，不要触摸它。”吗？
A: That is not so. K: I am just questioning. This is generally what happens. You listen to the word, the meaning, and the description and the analysis and you stop there because you sense there is danger to your image. So the image comes in and says, "stop" and communication comes to an end. A: I do not think so. K: I am just being tentative.
阿：不是那样的。 克：我只是在质疑。这是通常发生的情况。 你听这个词、意思、描述和分析，你停在那里。 因为，你感到你的形象有危险。所以图像进来并说，“停下”，交流结束了。 阿：我不这么认为。 克：我只是试探性的。
P: What happens, Krishnaji, is that one can follow you, move with you, move within oneself to the point when thought stops, to a point where there is an ending of thought. At that point when thought ends, there is a total incapacity of moving in this new field. K: I am coming to that "P". Hold to your idea. I want to finish with this. I ask myself consciously or unconsciously "where is he leading me?" Maybe my security is threatened, the breaking down of my image. Therefore, I will not move: I say the description is good enough for me. I agree and stop: The image is important and so I am satisfied with verbal understanding.
普：克里希那吉，发生的事情是，一个人可以跟随你， 与你一起移动，在自己的里面移动，直到思想停止的那一点，到思想结束的那一步。 在思想结束时，完全没有能力在这个新领域移动。 克：我会谈到那一点的，普普尔。保留你的想法。我想结束这个。 我有意或无意地问自己：“他把我引向何方？” 也许我的安全受到了威胁，我的形象被破坏了。因此，我不会移动： 我说这个描述对我来说已经足够好了。我同意并停止： 形象很重要，所以我对言语上的理解感到满意。
F: That is not so: A: In the concrete instances which we are discussing this is not true. P: If you were to pose a question to me or I to myself, which implied that my image was to be destroyed, there would be resistance. Yet by observing, moving step by step, there is no necessity to pose that question: If you pose the question, it is disastrous.
莫：不是那样的： 阿：在我们讨论的具体事例中，这不是真的。 普：如果你向我或我自己提出一个问题， 暗示我的形象将被摧毁，就会有低制。 然而，通过观察，一步一步地前进，就没有必要提出这个问题： 如果你提出这个问题，那就是灾难性的。
K: I am opening up the problem. P: If I pose that question everything rushes to protect the image, whereas if I move, observe step by step, then there is a fluidity that dissolves the image: K: Dissolves only when you and I want to communicate about something which is not merely words. Right? Very few go beyond that point. Very few are willing to break their opinions, their conclusions, their images.
克：我正在打开这个问题。 普：如果我提出这个问题，一切都急于保护形象， 而如果我移动，一步一步地观察，那么有一种溶解形象的流动性： 克：溶解只有在你和我想要交流某个不只是言语上的东西时，才会发生。 对吗？很少有人能走出这一点。 很少有人愿意打破他们的观点、他们的结论、他们的形象。
In talking it over, I discover the image, you throw light on it, and I see. The very seeing is the ending of it. Then what happens - word, meaning, description, analysis, "seeing", no image. Right? That is real communication. The difficulty is when we enter into something which is non-verbal. So can we communicate about something which is beyond the word? What is the quality necessary for both of us to understand something which is not the word? Which means to look at it, not to lie caught in the description, in the explanation, in the meaning, in the word.
在谈论它时，我发现这个形象，你对它投射出光，我看。看见它，就是它的结束。 然后，发生了什么 —— 词语、含义、描述、分析、“看”，没有形象。对吗？那才是真正的交流。 困难在于，当我们进入非语言的东西时。 那么，我们能交流那个超越文字的东西吗？ 要理解某个不是词语的东西，我们俩所需的素质是什么？ 这意味着要看它，而不是沉浸在描述、解释、意义和文字中。
P: Look at what you have just done. You take us up to a point through analysis, thought, word. You sharpen intelligence, rarefy intelligence. You never proceed beyond that, so that there is nothing, no description you give with which I can fill this emptiness.
普：看看你在做什么。你通过分析、思想、文字，把我们带到一个点上。 你锋利智慧，精炼智慧。 你从来都不跨出那里。 因此，这里什么都没有，你没有给出那里的描述，以便于我填补这里的空虚。
K: Listen. To communicate in the sense we are talking about, that is word, meaning, description, analysis and all that and something more, the mind must not be caught in the word, in the meaning, in the description, the analysis. It must not be caught. It must be moving, fluid, but you hold on to the word. The word, the meaning, the description, the analysis, is a process of thought, of memory. The word, cultivated, gathered through years, and the meaning which you and I have given it and the description through the word, all that is thought.
克：听。我们现在所交流的， 是词语、含义、描述、分析等等， 这颗头脑一定不能被困在词语、含义、描述和分析中。 它一定不能被抓住。 它一定是感人的、流动的，但是，你抓住这个词。 这个词语、含义、描述和分析，是一个思想过程，是一种回忆。 这个词语是经过多年的培养、收集， 这个含义是你和我赋予给它的， 这个描述是通过文字所获得的，所有那些都是思想。
Now you come along and tell me something which is not the word. And I think all the time in terms of thought. I move with thought Right? Communication is the word and communication is not the word. So meaning, the description and analysis and all that must be there and the mind must be so.... ( I do not know what word to use) so that you and I see the same thing at the same time, at the same level, with the same intensity. Otherwise our communication is verbal.
现在，你来告诉我某个不是这个词语的东西。 我一直在思想里打转。我在思想中移动，对吧？ 交流是这个词语，交流不是这个词语。 所以意义、描述和分析，以及所有那些必定在这里，而头脑处于，因此…… （我不知道该用什么词） 因此，你和我在同一时间、同一层次、以相同的强度看到同样的东西。 否则，我们的交流是言语上的。
P: Now comes the crucial point. K: Go slow. We have carefully come to this. P: Is that movement in space a question of my feeling the movement of space in you? K: Please, simple words, simple words. P: Is it a question of contacting the movement of emptiness which you are communicating? K: Wait, wait. I am not communicating anything. I am only communicating "this", not "that". Therefore, there is no communication "there". There is only communication "here".
普：现在是关键点。 克：慢慢来。我们仔细地谈到了这一点。 普：空间中的那个运动，就是我感觉到的问题，也在你的里面吗？ 克：拜托，用简单的话，简单的词。 普：你正在交流的，是一个触碰虚无中的运动吗？ 克：等等，等等。我没有交流任何东西。我只是在交流“这”，而不是“那”。 因此，“那里”没有交流。交流只在“这里”。
A: You are saying we have gone through word, meaning, description but all the time we are holding the hand of thought. "This" is something which cannot be held by thought. K: Do look at what is taking place between you two, "A" and "P". You have a meaning, you have the word, the description, the analysis. You have come to a conclusion and she has not come to a conclusion. Communication has stopped. The moment you come to a conclusion and the other man has no conclusion, communication is finished.
阿：你是说我们已经经历了文字、含义、描述 但一直以来，我们都握住思想的手。“这”是思想无法容纳的东西。 克：看看你们两个之间发生了什么，阿克尤特和普普尔。 你有一个意义，你有这个词、这种描述、这种分析。 你已经得出结论，而她还没有得出结论。交流已停止。 当你得出一个结论，而另一个人却没有结论的那一刻，交流就完了。
P: Krishnaji said that he communicates through words up to a point. Then he said in the beginning there is a communication for which no words can be found; how is that to be done? Again I am putting it into my own words. I say up to the point where the mind becomes fluid, rarefied, communication through words is possible because there is a referent. An instant after, I ask him whether the movement in that space has to contact or be contacted by the movement of Krishnaji in silence, or is it then not a problem of Krishnaji and me at all?
普：克里希那吉说，他通过语言到达了一点。 接着他说，存在着一种交流，不能通过语言而发现；那要怎么做？ 我再一次用我的语言来表述。 我说，在这一点上，头脑变得流畅、稀薄，通过语言进行交流是可能的，因为有一个参照物。 片刻之后，我问他，那个空间中的运动是否必须触及，或者通过处于安静中的克里希那吉的运动而被触及， 或者，这根本不是克里希那吉和我的问题？
K: None at all. There are no two. What you have said is simple. Have you got it? (Pause) Two things have taken place. The word, description, meaning, analysis and a conclusion; word, meaning, description, analysis, no conclusion. The man who has got a conclusion stops there and he cannot communicate with a man who has no conclusion. They cannot meet. You can go on discussing endlessly, but these two cannot meet.
克：完全无关。不存在两者。你所说的，是很简单的。你抓住了吗？（暂停） 发生了两种情况： 词语、描述，含义，分析和结论； 词语、描述、含义、分析，没有结论。 得出结论的人停在那里，他无法和一个没有结论的人交流。他们无法碰面。 你可以无休止地讨论，但是这两者不能碰面。
Now we are asking, is there the "other", and is the "other" communicable? Communicable implies two. When you have no conclusion and I have a conclusion, there is an ending of communication. Then there is a state of my having no conclusion and you having no conclusion; we both are moving and we both smell the flower. Right? What is there to communicate? We both are smelling the flower. (Pause)
现在我们问: 是否存在‘另一个’？‘另一个’是否可以交流？交流意味着两者。 当你没有结论而我有结论时，交流就结束了。 然后，有一种状态，我没有结论，你没有结论； 我们都在移动，我们都闻到了花香。对吗？ 有什么要交流的？我们都在闻花香。（暂停）
F: Now I want to ask something. Is there such a thing as co-experience, co-state? K: There is no such thing as co-experience when there is experiencing. F: I am talking about communication. Communication implies two. K: Up to a point. F: Co-experience? K: When you and I are experiencing the sunset or sex, there is no two F: The instruments are two. K: Of course. F: The perceiver is not there. A: Are these valid questions with regard to what we have talked of just now? K: About what?
莫：现在，我想问一点。有没有共同体验，共同状态这样的东西？ 克：在体验的时候，没有共同体验这样的东西。 莫：我说的是交流。交流意味着两个。 克：在一定程度上。 莫：共同体验？ 克：当你和我在体验日落或者性爱的时候，没有两个。 莫：仪器有两个。 克：当然。 莫：感知者不在那里。 阿：这些问题与我们刚刚谈到的事情有关？ 克：什么事情？
A: No conclusion, and then moving together. Are there any valid questions in that? K: But we have not gone beyond the fact of coming to a conclusion. Take a little more time in that. We are slurring over. F: I see that there is also the threat to the image. K: I am committed to a certain activity and what you are saying I am going to translate in terms of my activity. I say I have understood you, but I am going to translate what I have understood in terms of my activity. I am committed.
阿：没有结论，然后一起移动。那是一个有效的问题吗？ 克：但是，我们还没有超越得出结论的事实。 多花一点时间。我们还没有说清楚。 莫：我还看到形象受到了威胁。 克：我投身于某种活动，对于你所说的话，我将根据我的活动进行翻译。 我说，我已经理解了你，但我要把我所理解的，翻译成与我的活动相关的东西。我被抓住了。
P: If there is a frontal attack on the image and you ask me, "Have you an image?" I would say, "Of course I have an image." But it is a peripheral thing. There can be a stripping, a denudation, a breaking of the image without the confrontation with the image. You can strip, denude the image, but do not ask me a frontal question about the image. K: I want to go a little more into this image-making. P: Every movement of thought is adding to the image and every negation is a denudation of the image.
普：如果形象遭遇正面攻击，你问我，“你有形象吗？”我会说，“我当然有形象。” 但这是一个外围的东西。 它可以被撕开，剥光，破坏形象而没有抵抗。 你可以撕掉、剥离形象，但不要问我关于形象的正面问题。 克：我想更多地介绍一下这个形象的制作工艺。 普：思想的每一个动作都是在增添形象，每一个否定都是对形象的否定。
D: The motivations which have built the image consist in our sticking to a certain modus of operation and so long as the mind refuses to let go, we are preventing communication. P: I think that approach is totally wrong. I say, if you are going to be caught in trying to be free of the image, you will never be free of it. K: You are right, "P". P: You said image and conclusion end communication, but you have to be confronted with this.
德：塑造形象的动机在于我们坚持一定的运作方式 只要头脑拒絕放手，我们就在阻挠交流。 普：我认为这种做法是完全错误的。 我说，如果你想要摆脱形象，就会被困，你将永远不能摆脱它。 克：你是对的，普普尔。 普：你说过，形象和结论使交流终结，但是你不得不面对这。
K: What is going on all the time consciously or unconsciously is that I am committed or I shall be committed or am being committed, therefore, communication is only up to a point and not beyond. This is what is happening all the time. P: The image is built up of a lot of little things. The image is what it is. I have tried to tackle it for twenty-two years and now I say let me leave it alone. Let me move, let me see whether what is static can be freed. Then it will do what it will.
克：不论是有意地还是无意识地，总在发生这种情况： 我曾经投入，或者我将会投入，或者我正在投入， 因此，交流只是达到一个点，而没有超出。 这是一直在发生的。 普：形象是由很多小东西建立起来的。形象就是它本来的样子。 二十二年来，我一直试图解决这个问题，现在，我说，别管它。 让我动一下，让我看看静态的东西能不能解脱。然后，它会做它想做的事。
A: But these million years of the past, how am I going to tackle that? F: Can two brains with different pasts, different histories, experience, feel the same thing at the same level? How is it possible? K: The way you put the question is wrong. P: I cannot break the image which has taken a million years to build. Can I break this instrument and make it flexible, moving? That is all. A: There is one point which needs to be taken into account. There are certain accretions and they can be dropped as they are pointed out in communication. This kind of thing happens effortlessly. P: All of us who have participated these thirty days, know, understand up to the point when thought ends. I am certain that what has to happen has to happen there.
阿：但是这百万年的过去，我将如何解决这个问题？ 莫：两个有着不同过去、不同历史、体验的大脑，能在同一层次上，感受到同一个东西吗？怎么可能呢？ 克：你提出问题的方式是错误的。 普：我无法打破花了一百万年时间建立起来的形象。我可以打破这个仪器并使其灵活、移动吗？仅此而已。 阿：有一点需要考虑。 有一定的吸积，在交流中，当它们被指出时，可以丢弃它们。这种行为可以毫不费力地发生。 普：我们所有参加过这三十天的人都知道，理解已经达到当思想结束的那一刻。 我确信，必须发生的事情必须在那里发生。
K: Let us put the question, the same thing, in a different way. Is there a possibility of communication or experiencing that which is not verbal? The whole implication of experiencing is wrong. P: Let me understand that. It is a very important statement; the whole of experiencing is wrong. K: The conclusion or the idea that a state can be experienced by two is wrong. It can never be experienced. A: That is right.
克：让我们用不同的方式提出同样的问题。 有可能去交流或体验那种非语言的东西吗？ 体验的整个含义是错误的。 普：让我理解一下。这是一个非常重要的声明；整个体验都是错误的。 阿：存在着一种可以被两个人所体验的状态 —— 这个结论或观念是错误的。它永远无法被体验。 阿：没错。
K: You know what that means? It can never be experienced, what does it mean? Any man who says I have experienced has not experienced. Right, Sir? You see how extraordinarily subtle it is. P: The "enough" of it. It also brings out the extent to which man is caught in "the more". K: When you and I are looking at the sunset, there is only the sunset. I believe it is the same with sex. It is the same with two people who are at the height of anger. There are no two people. They do not say we are experiencing anger. F: What about the registering that goes on in the brain? K: Which is what - the memory? F: In the present the memory is not. K: But it acts in the present.
克：你知道这意味着什么吗？它永远无法被体验，这意味着什么？ 任何说我体验过的人，都没有体验过。对吧，先生？你看它是多么的微妙。 普：“够了”。它还揭示了人类陷入“更多”的深度。 克：当你和我看着日落时，只有日落。我相信性也是如此。 两个处于愤怒高峰的人也是如此。没有两个人。他们没有说我们正在体验愤怒。 莫：大脑在持续地作记录吗？ 克：记录什么 —— 这段记忆？ 莫：当时，记忆是不存在的。 克：但它在运转。
F: The memory is not yet created. K: Do not theorize. Watch. You and I see the sunset. When it is in front of us, both of us see it, both of us are silent because it is glorious. We do not stop all movement. All movement stops. There are no two people there. F: Are there not two separate "I consciousnesses"? K: Both of us experience that state of the sunset, with its fullness; you and I do not talk about experiencing at that minute. P: I would like to ask one question of you now, Sir, because I feel it is important that your mind is also open to us. You took us through the state of the verbal. Your mind was registering and at one point the verbal ceased. K: That means you and I were not forming any image.
莫：记忆尚未创建。 克：不要理论化。看。你和我看到日落。 当它在我们面前时，我们俩都看到了，我们俩都安静，因为它是壮美的。 我们没有停止一切运动。一切运动停下了。那里没有两个人。 莫：没有两个独立的“自我意识”吗？ 克：我们俩都在体验日落的状态，它的整个情景；在那一刻，你和我没有谈论关于体验的话题。 普：先生，我现在想问你一个问题， 因为，我觉得你的头脑也向我们敞开，这是很重要的。 你带我们经历了言语上的状态。 你的头脑在记录，而在一个点上，言语消逝了。 克：这意味着你和我没有形成任何形象。
P: Yes. At any moment of time, was there in you a registration of this? K: I do not quite follow. P: You moved in thought. You went through the whole process of communication through word, meaning, analysis. The point came of flexibility and the ending of the analysis. Before the next analysis started, there was a gap. Has the brain any registration at all in this gap? K: No.
普：是的。在任何时候，你都在记录这些吗？ 克：我不太明白。 普：你曾在思想中移动。你经历了利用文字、意义、分析进行交流的整个过程。 然后出现了灵活点，这个分析过程走到了尽头。 在下一次分析开始之前，存在一个空白。大脑在这个空白中有任何记录吗？ 克：没有。
P: There is no part of your brain cells which bears the impact of this gap? K: I wonder what you are talking about. I said "no". D: Is that because you are always in the gap? K: But what are you trying to say? P: How do you know that there was no registration of the experiencing?
普：在你脑细胞的任何部分，都没有记录下这段空白的印象吗? 克：我想，我知道你在说什么。我说‘没有’。 德：是因为你总是在那段空白之中吗? 克：但是，你想说什么？ 普：你怎么知道没有对体验的记录？
K: That is the next question. First there is seeing, and then the question which is, in experiencing anything, the most trifling thing to the greatest thing, is there no recording as thought, as memory? Do you understand? There is the word, meaning, description, analysis. That is one necessary process. The unnecessary, irrelevant thing is conclusion. That is gone. Then we are asking, is experiencing of something which is non-verbal ever turned into thought, into description, analysis, meaning, word?
克：那是下一个问题。 首先，看，然后是这个问题， 在体验任何事物的时候，从最微不足道的到最伟大的事物，没有记录像思想、记忆之类的东西吗？ 你理解吗？词语、意义、描述、分析。 那是一个必要的进程。 而不必要的、无关的东西就是结论。那不见了。 那么，我们问， 对非语言事物的体验，是否变成了思想，变成了描述、分析、意义、文字？
A: The reverse process. K: See the subtlety of it. I started out with communication. Then there was an ending of thought. Then feel that. Then it comes through the reverse process. Now wait a minute, am I right? (Pause) Now the next thing is, do the brain cells register that thing which then becomes memory which then says "I have experienced"? Do you follow? Does that seeing, perceiving, listening of something which is non-verbal, which cannot be experienced, does it register in the brain cells? A: No. K: Of course not.
阿：这是一个反转过程。 克：看它的微妙。我从交流开始。然后是思想的结束。 然后，感觉那，来到这个反转的过程。现在等一下，我说的对吗？（暂停） 接下来是，脑细胞是否记录了那个东西。 然后变成记忆，然后说“我已经体验过”？你跟上了吗？ 看、感知、听某个非语言的、无法被体验的东西，它是否被记录到了脑细胞中？ 阿：没有。 克：当然没有。
P: You are saying the other. I would ask, does seeing operate on the brain cells? K: Therefore, it does not register on the brain cells. See what happens. It is curious. The brain is registering noise. it is registering impressions; everything is being registered. The brain is completely used to this. It accepts it, and that is a healthy, normal, rational state. Right? So it says, a strange phenomenon has happened. I have registered it. Of course I have experienced it because it has registered, memorized it and says yes, You see what happens? A: I could not get it.
普：你说的是另一个。我想问，这种看，是脑细胞的操作吗？ 克：因此，它没有记录在脑细胞上。看看发生了什么。 它很好奇。这颗大脑正在记录噪音。它正在记录印象；一切都被记录。 大脑完全习惯了这一点。它接受它，这是一种健康的、正常的、理性的状态。对吗？ 所以它说，一个奇怪的现象发生了。我已经记录在册了。 当然，我体验过它，因为它已经被记录，回忆它并说是的，你看，发生了什么？ 阿：我还没明白。
D: The moment it says that, it ceases to be. K: Hold on a minute. Does any experience, not a specific experience, does any experience, except the survival experience register at all? I know I am asking the most absurd thing; I realize what I am asking. You insult me or flatter me. It is registered. Why should it? The brain registers what is important. Why should it register when it is not important at all? Why should the brain carry all the superficial impacts?
德：在它这样说的那一刻，它就已经消逝了。 克：等一下。 任何一个体验，不单指某个特定的体验，排除生存的体验，任何一个体验都有必要去记录吗？ 我知道，我在问最荒谬的事情；我意识到我在问什么。 你侮辱我或奉承我。它被记录。为什么要记录它？ 这颗大脑记录那种重要的东西。当它根本不重要时，为什么要记录？ 为什么大脑要记载所有肤浅的印象？
P: How can you ask why? K: I am going to show it to you. You insult me. You flatter me. Why should I hold it? What is the point of it? Can you push it off and only hold, the brain cells only hold things which will help them to survive? F: You have introduced the word "survival" K: Why should I hold your insult or flattery? I am saying why should it register? Because if I do, then there is the effort to cut it off; there is like and dislike. F: How can I cut it off? K: Freedom is the emptiness of all this, not the carrying of a burden of insults, regrets, happiness, fears, miseries. A: May I ask you one question? Am I capable of living within the groove of not registering.... K: No.
普：你怎么能问为什么？ 克：我要向你展示它。你侮辱我。你奉承我。我为什么要抓住它？它的意义何在？ 你能把它推开，只抓取，这个脑细胞只抓取有助于它们的生存的东西吗？ 莫：你引入了“生存”这个词。 克：我为什么要抓住你的侮辱或奉承？ 我在说，为什么要记录它？ 因为如果我这样做，那么就得努力去删掉它；那种喜欢和不喜欢。 莫：我怎样才能删掉它？ 克：自由是这一切的清空，而不是背负着侮辱、遗憾、快乐、恐惧、痛苦的负担。 阿：我可以问你一个问题吗？我有能力活在凹槽中而不去记录吗？ 克：不可能。
A: Living in the groove, it will register. There is nothing I can do to stop registering. K: If you see this, there is a state of intelligence which refuses to register. P: We went up to the point of analysis and to a state of fluidity - it is the operation of this on the brain cells and the operation of nothing else, and there also it is beyond my control. in both, they are beyond my control. K: Agreed. The active present can help here, not there, not the past or the future; only the active present can help. P: When there is attention, not only does it not register, but it wipes out. K: That is good enough, if the brain cells realize that they need not carry all the burdens of everyday incidents - that is enough.
阿：活在这凹槽中，它就会记录。我无法停止记录。 克：如果你看到这，就会有一种智慧的状态，拒绝去记录。 普：我们从分析出发，上升到一种流动性的状态 —— 脑细胞的这种操作，而不是别的东西，因而，它超出了我的控制范围。 在这两个方面，它们都超出了我的控制范围。 克：同意。活跃的现在可以在这里提供帮助，而不是那里，不是在过去或未来； 只有活跃的现在，才能提供帮助。 普：在注意的时候，它不仅没有记录，而且它在清除。 克：那已经足够好了， 如果脑细胞们意识到它们不需要承担每天所发生的事件的所有负担 —— 那就足够了。
P: There was something which Krishnaji said in his talk yesterday. I do not know whether it will bear discussion. It was a very startling statement. The question he posed was whether the brain cells could strip themselves of everything except the movement of survival, the pure biological necessity which alone makes the organism exist? Krishnaji seemed to suggest that before any movement in the new dimension could take place, this total stripping to the bare bedrock was essential. In a sense he was totally back to the materialistic position.
普：克里希那吉在昨天的谈话中说了一些话。 我不知道它是否值得讨论。它是一个非常令人吃惊的陈述。 他所提出的问题是： 脑细胞们是否可以剥夺它们拥有的一切， 除了这种生存运动，这种使有机体存活的纯粹的生物需求？ 克里希那吉似乎暗示，在新维度的任何运动发生之前， 这种完全剥离直到剩下裸露的基石，是至关重要的。 从某种意义上说，他完全回到了唯物主义的立场。
D: If you have survival as the dimension of existence, there is no other dimension. Can this bear investigation? Is such stripping of every element of consciousness as we have understood it, possible? We have always claimed that the human being is more than the urge for survival. F: Are the brain cells not the repository of culture? P: If you strip man of every psychological element except the urge for physical survival, how is he different from the animal?
德：如果你把生存作为存在的维度，那就没有别的维度了。 这经得起调查吗？ 这种剥夺我们所理解的意识的每一个元素，可能吗？ 我们一直声称，人类不仅仅是生存的冲动。 莫：脑细胞不是文化的宝库吗？ 普：如果你把人除了生理生存的冲动的所有心理因素都剥光了，他和动物有什么不同？
K: We know both biological and psychological survival. The biological exists on survival, but psychological factors have made that survival almost impossible. F: You are now bringing in other elements. K: There are these two elements - the biological and the psychological. Psychological elements like nationalism are preventing man from surviving. Psychological fragmentation is destroying the beauty of survival. Can one strip man of all the psychological factors?
克：我们知道生理和心理生存。 有机体的存在依赖于生存，但心理因素使那种生存几乎不可能。 莫：你现在引入了其他元素。 克：有这两个因素 —— 有机体的的和心理的。 民族主义等心理因素正在阻止人类的生存。 心理上的碎片正在摧毁生存的美。 一个人能剥夺人类所有的心理因素吗？
P: Apart from the biological and psychological, is there anything else? You spoke of stripping yourself of all factors, not psychological. I am asking you is there any other element excepting the biological and the psychological? K: As far as we know these are the only two factors that operate in man.
普：除了有机体和心理，还有别的吗？ 你说的是剥夺自己的所有因素，而不是心理因素。 我问你，除了有机体和心理之外，还有其他因素吗？ 克：据我们所知，这是人类仅有的两个因素。
F: Is there not such a factor as psychological survival, apart from the physiological? K: Which means the survival of the psyche. The psyche that is the result of environment, of heritage. Last evening when we used the word "consciousness", we said the whole of consciousness is the content of consciousness. The content of consciousness is conflict, pain; the whole of that is consciousness.
莫：除了生理之外，难道没有心理生存这样的因素吗？ 克：这意味着心灵的生存。心灵是环境的结果，是遗传的结果。 昨晚当我们使用“意识”这个词时，我们说整个意识就是意识的内容。 意识的内容是冲突、痛苦；那个整体就是意识。
D: You said also that intelligence is more than consciousness. K: Wait. We said in understanding the fact of consciousness and going beyond it, is intelligence. You cannot come to that intelligence if this consciousness is in conflict. Now all that we know is biological survival and the survival of psychological consciousness. What is the next question? P: You said or implied yesterday that there was a necessity to strip so that nothing existed but biological survival. K: Can you not strip the whole content of consciousness which is psychological? In stripping, that intelligence is in operation. There is the biological and intelligence - there is no other.
德：你也说过，智慧远不止是意识。 克：等一下。我们说过，理解意识这个事实，并且超越它时，就是智慧。 如果这个意识处于冲突中，你就无法获得那个智慧。 现在，我们所知道的只是有机体的生存和心理意识的生存。下一个问题是什么？ 普：你昨天说过或暗示了：有必要剥离，这样，除了有机体生存之外，什么都不存在。 克：你不能剥离意识的全部内容，也就是心理上的内容吗？ 在剥离中，那种智慧正在操作。那就是有机体和智慧 —— 没有其它东西。
P: You did not speak of intelligence yesterday. You said when there is this total stripping and no other thing, that operation is the biological movement of survival and that perceives. Is there such a seeing? K: Then the mind is not merely the survival element, but there is another quality in it which perceives. P: What is that quality? K: What did "K" say yesterday? P: He said there is a stripping and there is only the movement of survival and that silence sees
普：你昨天没有说智慧。 你说，当有这种完全剥离而没有其他时， 那种操作是生存的有机体的运动，以及那种感知。有那样的看吗？ 克：那么，这颗头脑不仅仅是这种生存的元素，还有另一种品质，而这种品质，即是感知。 普：这种品质是什么？ 克：“K”昨天说了什么？ 普：他说了那是一种剥离，只有生存的运动，那种安静在看。
K: Perfectly true. Now what is silence? What is the nature of silence? P: That seeing is something which we can affirm. But there was this other thing said, so that we cannot help asking if man is stripped of everything which we consider the elements of the human..... K: Which is conflict, pain. P: Not only that, compassion -
克：完全正确。现在，什么是安静？安静的本质是什么？ 普：那种看是我们可以肯定的某个东西。但还有另一个东西要说， 因此，我们不禁要问，人是否被剥夺了我们认为是人类要素的一切…… 克：也就是冲突，痛苦。 普：不仅如此，慈 ——
B: We consider that man is human as opposed to the animal. What are the things which differentiate man - intelligence, the capacity to analyse, speech - D: Man is a language animal. Language and man are co-related. And that is the mark of man that distinguishes him from the rest of the animal world. What language does to man is to enable him to say "I am I". And the moment he goes beyond it, he speculates, projects; he says "I am I" and in that "I" you can bring in the whole cosmology. There is no language for the other. B: And one more thing. Because of language, man has been able to evolve culture and he cannot go back to the biological stage. D: In twenty-five thousand years of evolution, of thinking, of speaking and so on, there is very little change in man; the environment has changed, but fundamentally there is very little change in man. K: Yes.
芭： 我们认为人是人类，而不是动物。 区分人的东西是什么 —— 智慧、分析能力、言语 —— 德：人是一种语言动物。语言和人是相互关联的。 这就是人类区别于动物世界其他部分的标志。 语言对人的作用是使人能够说“我就是我”。当他超越它的那一刻，他推测，投射； 他说“我是我”，在那个“我”中，你可以引入整个宇宙学。没有语言可以代表另一个。 芭：还有一件事。因为语言，人类已经能够进化出文化，他不能回到有机体阶段。 德：在两万五千年的进化、思考、说话等等中，人几乎没有什么变化； 环境已经改变，但从根本上说，人类几乎没有变化。 克：是的。
P: One says right, or I accept what "B" or "D" says, but still I am aware "I am". That statement is where it is. K: "B" is saying very simply: strip man of all the psychological factors and what is the difference between animal and man? Oh, there is a vast difference. P: The moment you posit a difference, then you are investigating something else. B: Man is aware of himself and the animal is not; that is the only distinction. K: Let us go back. There is psychological survival. We want to survive psychologically and also biologically. D: I say there is something else. K: We will have to find out. Merely to posit that there is something else has no meaning. D: But you say all other aspects of the human being have ended. K: When conflict, misery, pain have ended...... P: As also the fantasy, the wonder, imagination; that which has made man reach out, reach in. K: "K" said both the outer and the inner.
普：一个人说，是的，或者我接受“芭”或“德”所说的，但我仍然知道“我是”。 那句话就是这样。 克：“芭”说的很简单：把人所有的心理因素都剥光了，动物和人有什么区别？ 哦，有一种巨大的不同。 普：当你假设一种不同的那一刻，那么你正在调查别的东西。 芭：人觉察他自己，而动物没有；那是唯一的区别。 克：我们回去。有心理上的生存。我们希望有心理上的和有机体上的生存。 德：我说还有别的。 克：我们必须找出答案。仅仅假设有别的东西是没有意义的。 德：但是，你说人类的所有其他方面都已经结束了。 克：当冲突、苦难、痛苦结束的时候…… 普：还有幻想、奇迹、想象力；使人伸出援手，伸手进去。 克：“K”说了这两者，外在的和内在的。
P: It is the same movement. When you say all this is to be stripped, what happens? Is that legitimate to ask? Can we, in discussion, can we in going through this, get the feeling of that stripping, that seeing? K: We have said intelligence is beyond consciousness and when the mind is stripped of the psychological elements, in the very stripping there is the uncovering of this intelligence. Or intelligence comes into being in the very stripping. There is the biological survival and intelligence. That is all.
普：它是同一个运动。当你说这一切都被剥离时，发生了什么？ 问这个合理吗？ 在讨论中，我们能不能在经历这个过程中，得到那种剥离的感觉，那种看的感觉？ 克：我们说过，智慧超越了意识，当头脑被剥夺了心理因素时， 在剥离中，发现了这种智慧。 或者智慧在剥离中产生。 存在有机体的生存和智慧。仅此而已。
Intelligence has no heritage. Consciousness has heritage. We are caught in the becoming within the field of consciousness. Within the field of consciousness we are trying to become. Strip all that. Empty all that. Let the mind empty itself of all that. In the very emptying comes intelligence. Therefore there are only two things left: the highest form of intelligence and survival which is entirely different from animal survival. Man is not merely the animal because he is able to think, design, construct.
智慧没有遗传。意识有遗传。 我们深陷在成为的意识领域中。 在意识的领域内，我们正在试图去成为（某个人物）。剥离所有这些。清空所有这些。 让这颗头脑亲自清空那一切。在清除中，智慧出来。 因此，只剩下两个东西： 最高形式的智慧和生存，与动物的生存完全不同。 人不仅仅是动物，因为他能够思考、设计、构建。
P: Do you mean to say there is intelligence which manifests itself in stripping? K: Listen carefully. My consciousness is all the time trying to become, change, modify, struggle, etc. That is all I know. Biological survival and that. Everybody operates within these two. And within that struggle we project something beyond consciousness which is still within consciousness because it is projected. The mind that really wants to be free from the wrangle, the back-chattering asks, can the mind strip "itself" of all the content of "itself"? That is all. (Pause.) And in that, intelligence comes to be.
普：你的意思是说，在剥离中，智慧显露？ 克：仔细听。我的意識一直在試圖成為、改變、修改、掙扎等等。 那就是我所知道的。生理生存等等。每个人都在这两者之内运作。 在这场挣扎中，我们投射出超越意识的东西，而这种东西仍然在意识之内，因为它是被投射出来了。 这颗头脑真地想要摆脱这种争吵、喋喋不休，问： 这颗头脑能把“它自己”的所有内容都剥光吗？仅此而已。（暂停。） 在那里，智慧出现了。
P: Is stripping, emptying an endless process? K: Certainly not. Because then I am caught in the same phenomenon. P: Let us pause here. Is it not an endless process? K: It is not an endless process. P: You mean, once it is done, it is done? K: Let us go slowly. You must first understand this verbally. My consciousness is made up of all that we have talked about. P: Is the emptying of it, does it take time or is it free of time? Is it piecemeal? Or is it an emptying of the whole?
普：剥离、清空，是一个无休止的过程吗？ 克：当然不是。因为那样一来，我陷入了同样的现象。 普：让我们在这里暂停一下。它不是一个无休止的过程吗？ 克：它不是一个无休止的过程。 普：你的意思是，一旦完成，就完成了？ 克：我们慢慢来。你必须首先在字面上理解这一点。 我的意识是由我们谈论过的所有内容组成的。 普：清空它，需要时间，或者，不需要时间？ 它是片段，还是整体的清空？
K: Is that the question? The piecemeal and the whole? Is that the question? P: You see, putting the question as the piecemeal and the whole is the query. What is revealed is the whole which contains the piece. B: Stripping has to be a joint process. K: Discuss it. P: What is it that one strips? Or what is it that one perceives? Or is there dissolution of that which emerges? There cannot be dissolution of anything else. What emerges is thought. D: If all these go what remains? P: When you say all goes, what does it mean? B: Only awareness remains. Is complete awareness the whole? P: Yes.
克：是那个问题吗？片段和整体？是那个问题吗？ 普：你看，提出这个片段和整体的问题，就是调查。 就揭示出整体包含着片段。 芭：剥离必须是一个联合的过程。 克：讨论一下。 普：一个人剥离的是什么？或者一个人在感知什么？ 或者，那浮现的东西被溶解，直到只剩下无法溶解的？浮现的东西就是思想。 德：如果所有这些都消失了，还剩下什么？ 普：当你说一切都消逝的时候，是指什么意思？ 芭：只剩下觉察。完全的觉察是整体吗？ 普：是的。
K: She says Yes. What is the question? P: Is the awareness of a point of consciousness - such as jealousy - is the awareness of that one thing, the totality of all consciousness? K: When you use the word "aware", what do you mean by that word "aware"? If you mean aware of the implications - in which there is no choice, no will, no compulsion, no resistance - obviously it is so.
克：她说是。问题是什么? 普：觉察到意识中的一个点 —— 比如嫉妒 —— 对一个东西的觉察，就是对整个意识的觉察吗？ 克：当你使用‘觉察’这个词时，你是什么意思？ 如果你的意思是觉察这些影响 —— 其中不存在选择、意志、强迫、抵抗 —— 显然，它就是如此。
P: So at any point this is possible? K: Of course. P: Yes, because that is the door; the door of dissolution. K: No. Hold it a minute. P: I used that word "door" deliberately. K: Hold on. Let us begin slowly because I want to go step by step. My consciousness is made up of all this. My consciousness is part of the whole, both at the superficial and at the deeper level and you are asking, is there any awareness which is so penetrating that in that very awareness the whole is present? Or is it bit by bit? Is there a search, is there a looking in, an analysing?
普：所以，在任何时候这都是可能的吗？ 克：当然。 普：是的，因为那是门；溶解之门。 克：不，等一下。 普：我故意用了“门”这个词。 克：等等。让我们慢慢开始，因为我想一步一步地走。我的意识是由这一切组成的。 我的意識是整體的一部分，无论是在浅表层和更深层，你在問： 有没有一种觉察，具有如此的穿透力，以至于在这种觉察中，整体就显露了？或者，是一点一点现出的？ （其中，）有搜索，有调查，有分析吗？
D: The yogic position is that nature is a flowing river. In that flow, man's organism comes into being. As soon as it comes into being, it has also the capacity to choose and the moment it chooses, it separates itself from the now, from the river. This is a process of separation from the flow and the only thing which brings this into being is choice. Therefore, they say the dissolution of choice may bring you to total emptiness and in that emptiness you see. K: Right sir, that is one point. "P"s question was, is this awareness, this process of stripping bit by bit? Is this awareness in which there is no choice, the total? Does it empty the whole of consciousness? Does it go beyond consciousness?
德：瑜伽的立场是，大自然是一条流动的河流。在这种流动中，人的有机体应运而生。 它一旦形成，也就有了选择的能力。 当它选择的那一刻，它就把自己与现在、与河流分开。 这是一个与流动分离的过程，唯一能造成这样的就是选择。 因此，他们说，选择的溶解可能会把你带到完全的虚无，在那虚无中，你看。 克：对，先生，这是一点。“普”的问题是，这种觉察，这种剥离是一点一点进行的吗？ 这是一种没有选择的、整体性的觉察吗？ 它是否清空了整个意识？它超越意识了吗？
F: Supposing I cease to choose, is that stripping? P: Is there an end to stripping? K: Or is it a constant process? P: And the second question was where there is intelligence is there stripping? K: Let us start with the first question which is good enough. What do you say? Discuss it. P: It is one of those extraordinary questions where you can neither say "Yes" nor "No". D: It hangs on time or no time. If it is invited, it is time. P: If you say it is not a question of time then it is not a process. five minutes later it will emerge again. So this question cannot be answered.
莫：假设我不再选择，那是剥离吗？ 普：剥离有尽头吗？ 克：还是一个持续的过程？ 普：第二个问题是，哪里有智慧，哪里就有剥离？ 克：让我们从第一个问题开始，这个问题相当好。你怎么说？讨论一下它。 普：这是一个非同寻常的问题，你既不能说“是”，也不能说“否”。 德：它挂断了时间，或者没有时间。如果它被邀请，它就是时间。 普：如果你说这不是时间问题，那么它不是一个过程。 五分钟后，它将再次浮现。所以这个问题无法回答。
K: I am not sure. Let us begin again. My consciousness is made up of all this. My consciousness is used to the process of time, my consciousness thinks in terms of gradualness, my consciousness is practice and through practice to achieve, which is time. My consciousness is a process of time.
克：我不确定。让我们重新开始。 我的意识是由这一切组成的。 我的意识习惯了时间的过程， 我的意识以渐进的方式思考， 我的意识是实践，通过实践去获得，也就是时间。 我的意识是一个时间的过程。
Now I am asking that consciousness, can it go beyond this? Can we, who are caught in the movement of time, go beyond time? That question, consciousness cannot answer. Consciousness does not know what it means, because it can only think in terms of time and when questioned whether this process can end in which there is no time, it cannot answer, can it?
现在我问：那个意识，它能超越这吗？ 陷入时间运动的我们，能超越时间吗？ 那个问题，意识无法回答。 意识不知道它意味着什么，因为它只能用时间来思考 当被问及这个过程是否可以在没有时间的情况下结束时，它无法回答，它能吗？
Now as consciousness cannot answer the question, we say let us see what is awareness and investigate whether that awareness can bring about a timeless state? But this brings in new elements. What is awareness? Is it within the field of time, is it outside the field of time? Now what is awareness? Is there in awareness any choice, explanation, justification, or condemnation? Or is there the observer, the chooser? And if there is, is that awareness? So is there an awareness in which there is no observer at all? Obviously.
现在，由于意识无法回答这个问题， 我们说，让我们看看什么是觉察，并调查这种觉察是否可以带来一种非时间的状态？ 但这带来了新的元素。 什么是觉察？在时间的领域之内，还是在时间的领域之外？ 现在，什么是觉察？在觉察中，是否有任何选择、解释、辩解或谴责？ 或者，有观察者，选择者吗？如果有，那是觉察吗？ 那么，是否存在一种完全没有观察者的觉察呢？明显地。
I am aware of that lamp and I do not have to choose when I am aware of that lamp. Is there an awareness in which the observer is totally absent? Not a continuous state of awareness in which the observer is absent, which again is a fallacious statement.
我觉察到那盏灯，当我觉察到它时，我不必选择。 是否存在一个观察者完全不存在的觉察？ 不是观察者缺席的持续的觉察状态，它又是一个错误的陈述。
A: The word is swarupa shunyata. The observer becomes empty. He is stripped. K: Now is that awareness to be cultivated which implies time? How does this awareness come into being in which there is no observer? Are we meeting each other? How is this awareness to come about? Is it the result of time? If it is, then it is part of consciousness in which choice exists. And you say awareness is not choice. It is observation in which there is no observer. Now how is that to come about without consciousness interfering? Or does it come out of consciousness? Does it flower out of consciousness? Or is it free of consciousness?
阿：这个词是swarupa shunyata。观察者变为空。他被剥光了。 克：现在，这种觉察是要培养的吗，培养意味着时间？ 这种觉察是如何在没有观察者的情况下形成的？我们相互碰面了吗？ 这种觉察是如何产生的？是时间的结果吗？ 如果是，那么它就是意识的一部分，选择存于其中。 你说，觉察不是选择。它是没有观察者的观察。 现在，如何在没有意识干扰的情况下做到这一点？ 或者它来自于意识？它是意识的绽放吗？ 或者，是意识的解放？
D: It is free of consciousness. P: I want to ask two things. Does it come about when I ask the question "who am I? "" K: All the traditionalists have asked that question. P: But it is an essential question. When I really try to investigate the source of the ego itself, that is the one question. Or does awareness come about when one tries to discover the observer? K: No. The moment you try, you are in time. P: It is a question of language, of semantics. You can strip at any point. Where is the observer? We are taking for granted that the observer "is".
德：它是意识的解放。 普：我想问两件事。当我问“我是谁？”这个问题时，它会出现吗？ 克：所有的传统主义者都问过这个问题。 普：但这是一个重要的问题。 当我真正地试图调查自我的本源时，那就是一个问题。 或者，当一个人试图发现观察者时，觉察就会产生？ 克：不是。当你尝试的那一刻，你就在时间中。 普：这是一个语言问题，语义问题。您可以随时剥离。 观察者在哪里？我们理所当然地认为观察者“在”。
K: Let us begin slowly. One sees what consciousness is. Any movement within that field, any movement is still a process of time. It may try to be or not to be, it may try to go beyond, it may try to invent something beyond consciousness, but it is still part of time. So I am stuck. P: I want to use words which are not your words. So I have rejected all your words. I have to use my own instruments. What is the element in me which seems to me the most potent and powerful: It is the sense of the "I". K: Which is the past.
克：让我们慢慢开始。一个人看到意识是什么。 在那个领域内的任何运动，任何的运动，依然是一个时间的过程。 它可能試圖存在或去死，它可能嘗試超越，它可能試圖發明超越意識的東西，但它仍然是時間的一部分。 所以，我被困住了。 普：我想用不是你所用的词来表达。因此，我拒绝了你所有的言词。我必须使用我自己的仪器。 在我看来，我内在最有潜力和最强大的元素是什么：它是“我”的感觉。 克：也就是这个过去。
P: I will not use your language. It is very interesting not to use your language. I say the most potent thing is the sense of the "I"? Now can there be a perception of the "I"? F: That is a wrong question. I will tell you why. You ask can I perceive the "I"? Now the "I" is nothing but an insatiable hunger for experience. K: "P" began by asking "who am I?" Is the "me", the "I" an action of consciousness? P: So I say let us look, let us investigate.
普：我不会用你的语言。不使用您的语言非常有趣。 我说，最有力的是“我”的感觉？ 现在能不能对“我”有感知？ 莫：这是一个错误的问题。我会告诉你为什么。你问我能感知到“我”吗？ 现在的“我”，只不过是对体验的永不满足的渴望。 克：“普”首先问“我是谁？这位“我”、这个“吾”是意识的一种行为吗？ 普：所以，我说让我们看看，让我们调查一下。
K: When I ask myself "who am I?", is that the central factor in consciousness? P: It seems so. And then I say let me see the "I", let me find it, perceive it, touch it. K: So you are asking, is this central factor perceivable sensorily? Is the central factor tactable, to be felt, to be tasted? Or is that central factor, the "I", something which the senses have invented.
克：当我问自己“我是谁？”时，那是意识的中心因素吗？ 普：它好像是。然后，我说让我看这位“我”，让我找出它，感知它，触摸它。 克：所以，你在问，这个中心因素在感官上是可以感知的吗？ 这个核心因子是否可被感知、感受、被品味？ 或者说，那个核心因子，这位“我”，是某个感官发明的东西。
P: That comes later. First of all, I see whether it is tactable. K: When I have asked the question, "who am I?", one must also question who is investigating, who is asking the question "who am I?". P: I do not ask that question. I have asked that question over and over again. I have discussed awareness endlessly. I leave it, because the one thing which you have said is, do not accept one word which is not your own. I start looking. Is this "I" which is the central core of myself, is it tactable? I observe it in the surface layers, in the depth layers of my consciousness, in the hidden darkness and as I unfold it what takes place is a light within, an explosion, an extension within. Another factor that operates is that which has been exclusive becomes inclusive. So far I have been exclusive, now the world movement flows in.
普：那是以后的事。首先，我看它是否可触摸。 克：当我问“我是谁？”这个问题时， 一个人还必须质疑是谁在调查，谁在问“我是谁？” 普：我不问这个问题。我一遍又一遍地问过这个问题。我无休止地讨论意识。 我离开它，因为你说过的一件事是，不要接受一个不是你自己的词语。 我开始寻找。这个“我”，这个我自己的中心，是可触摸的吗？ 我在表层，在我意识的深层，在隐藏的黑暗中观察它。 当我展开它时，发生的是內在的光，爆炸，內在的延伸。 另一个运作的因素是，排它性的东西变得具有包容性。 到目前为止，我一直是排它性的，现在，这个世界的运动流入。
K: We see that. P: And I find this is not something which can be touched, perceived. What can be perceived is that which has been, which is a manifestation of this "I". I see I had a thought of this "I" in action, but it is already over. Then I explore - from where does thought emerge? Can I find the springs of thought? Or where does thought go? Can I pursue a thought? How far can I go with a thought? How far can I hold a thought? Can thought be held in consciousness? These are tangible things which I think the individual has to completely feel for himself.
克：我们看到那。 普：我发现，那不是可触摸和感知的东西。 可感知的是曾经的，是这个“我”的体现。 我看到，我有一个‘我’的思想在活动，但它已经结束了。 然后我探索 —— 思想从哪里浮现？我能找到思想的源泉吗？ 或者思想去哪儿了？我可以追求一个思想吗？我能跟着一个思想走多远？ 我能抓住一个思想吗？思想可以被保持在意识中吗？ 这些是有形的东西，我认为需要本人亲自己去感觉。
K: We have gone through this. I thought we had done all this. F: I say all this is awareness. K: Let us be simple. When I ask "who am I?", who is asking the question? And one finds on investigation that the "I" is not observable, touchable, hearable, and so on. And so, is the "I" within the field of the senses? Or have the senses created the "I"?
克：我们已经经历过这。我以为我们已经完成了这一切。 莫：我说这一切都是觉察。 克：简单一点。当我问“我是谁？”时，谁在问这个问题？ 一个人在调查中发现，这位“我”不是可观察的、可触摸的、可听的等等。 那么，“我”是否在感官领域内？还是感官创造了“我”？
P: The very fact that it is not within the field of the senses...... K: Do not move away from that. Is it not also within the field of the senses? We jump too quickly. Is perceiving a visual perception or something else? D: We are going into the nature of awareness. Now how does awareness arise?
普：事实上，它不在感官领域之内…… 克：不要离开它。它不也在感官的领域之内吗？我们跳得太快了。 感知是视觉感知还是别的什么？ 德：我们正在进入觉察的本质。现在，觉察是如何冒出来呢？
P: I want to put aside everything Krishnaji has said and I find that the very enquiry, that the very investigation into the "I" creates light, intelligence. K: You are saying, the very enquiry brings about awareness. Obviously I did not say it did not. P: And in the enquiry one can only use certain instruments which are the senses. Whether the enquiry is outside or within, the only instruments which can be used are the senses, because that is all we know - the seeing, listening, feeling - and the field is illuminated. The field of the without and the field of the within is illuminated. Now in this state of illumination, you suddenly find that there has been a thought, but that it is already over. K: Thought exists in the field of relationship and observation. It does not exist by itself. It exists in observing relationship - the lamp. P: In this, if you ask is there a partial or total stripping, the question is irrelevant. It has no meaning.
普：我想把克里希那吉所说的一切都放在一边 我发现，正是这种询问，对“我”的调查，创造出光和智慧。 克：你是说，询问本身就带来了觉察。显然我没有说不。 普：在这询问中，一个人只能使用某些仪器，即感官。 无论询问是在外部还是内部，唯一可以使用的仪器是感官， 因为，这就是我们所知道的一切 —— 看、听、感觉 —— 场域被照亮。 外在的场和内在的场被照亮。 現在，在這種光照的狀態中，你突然發現有一个思想，但它已經結束了。 克：思想存在于关系和观察的场域中。 它本身并不存在。它的存在，有赖于去观察关系 —— 这盏灯。 普：在这里，如果你问，是否有部分或完整的剥离，这个问题无关紧要。它没有任何意义。
K: Wait a minute. I am not sure. Is perception partial? I have investigated through the senses, the senses creating the "I", investigating the "I". The activity brings a lightness, clarity. Not entire clarity, but some clarity. P: I will not use the word some clarity, but clarity. K: It brings clarity. We will stick to that. Is that clarity expandable? P: The nature of seeing is such, I can see here, and I can see there, depending on the power of the eye.
克：等一下。我不确定。感知是局部的吗？ 通过感官，我进行调查，感官们创造出“我”，调查这位“我”。 这个活动带来一道光，一种清晰。不是完全的清晰，而是有些清晰。 普：我不会用“有些清晰”这个词，而是“清晰”。 克：它带来了清晰。我们将坚持这一点。这种清晰是可扩展的吗？ 普：看的本质就是这样，我能看到这里，我能看到那里，这取决于眼睛的视力。
K: We said perception is not only visual but also non-visual. We said perception is that which illuminates. P: Here I would like to ask something. You have said that seeing is not only visual but non-visual. What is the nature of this non-visual seeing? K: It is non-visual which is non-thinkable. It does not pertain to the word. It does not pertain to thought. That is all. Is visual perception non-verbal perception? The non-visual perception is the perception without the meaning, the expression, the thought. Is there a perception without thought? Now proceed.
克：我们说感知不仅是视觉的，也是非视觉的。我们说感知是照亮。 普：在这里，我想问一点。你说过，看不仅是视觉的，而且是非视觉的。 这种非视觉看，其本质是什么？ 克：它这种非视觉是不可想象的。它与这个词无关。它与思想无关。仅此而已。 视觉上的感知是非语言的感知吗？ 非视觉的感知是指，这种没有携带意义、表达和思想的感知。 没有思想，还有感知吗？现在，继续。
P: And that also is not such a difficult thing. I see there is such perception. Now that perception can see close, can see far. K: Wait. Perception. We are talking only of perception. Not the duration, length, size or breadth of perception, but perception which is non-visual which is not deep perception or shallow perception. Shallow perception or deep perception comes only when thought interferes. P: Now in that is there partial stripping or total stripping? We started with that. K: When there is non-verbal perception, what are you asking? What are you asking further?
普：那也不是一件困难的事情。我看到，有这样的感知。 现在，这个感知可以看近，可以看远。 克：等等。感知。我们只谈论感知。不是感知的持续时间、长度、大小或广度， 而是非视觉的感知，不是深层的感知或浅表的感知。 浅表的感知或深层的感知只有在思想干扰时才会出现。 普：现在，是部分的剥离，还是完整的剥离？我们是从这个问题开始的。 克：当有了非语言的感知，你在问什么？你还要问什么？
F: She is asking, in every perception, there is the non-verbal element of mere perception. Then there is the psychological superimposition. The stripping refers only to the psychological superimposition. Is there a state of mind in which superimposition does not occur and there is no stripping? P: That is right. Perception is perception. We are asking is there a perception in which stripping is not necessary? K: There is no such thing as an everlasting perception. P: Is it identical with what you call intelligence? K: I do not know. Why are you asking that? P: Because it is timeless.
莫：她在问，在每一次感知中，都有单纯感知的非语言元素。 然后，是心理上的叠加。剥离仅指心理上的叠加。 有没有一种不发生叠加、没有剥离的心理状态？ 普：没错。感知就是感知。我们在问，是否有一种不需要剥离的感知？ 克：没有所谓的永恒的感知。 普：它和你所说的智慧一样吗？ 克：我不知道。你为什么这么问？ 普：因为它是非时间的。
K: Timeless means timeless. Why do you ask? Is perception which is non-verbal, is it not also non-time, non-thought? If you have answered this question you have answered that. F: There is the momentary time of the "now". And there is another timeless in which one moves and lives. K: I do not understand what you say. F: Still, perception can be sensory. K: Now is there perception that is non-verbal and therefore not pertaining to thought? Then what is the question? A mind that is perceiving is not asking this question, it is perceiving. And each perception is perception. It is not carrying over perception. Where does the question of stripping or not stripping arise?
克：非时间意味着没有时间。你为什么这么问？ 感知是非语言的，不也是非时间的，非思想的吗？ 如果你回答这个问题，你也就回答了那一个。 莫：有“现在”的瞬间。还有另一种非时间的，一个人在其中移动和生活。 克：我不明白你所说的。 莫：不过，感知可以是感官化的。 克：现在，有没有一种感知是非语言的，因此与思想无关？ 那么，问题是什么呢？一个正在感知的头脑不是在问这个问题，它在感知（覺察）。 每一次感知都是感知。它没有留下感知到的痕迹。 剥离或不剥离的问题从哪里冒出？
P: I say even in perception which is not linked with thought, perception is never carried into another thought. I see that lamp. The seeing has not been carried. Thought is only being carried. K: That is obvious. My consciousness is my mind, is my brain cells, is the result of my sensory perceptions. That is my consciousness. That is all consciousness. That consciousness is the result of time, evolution, growth. It is expandable, contractable and so on. And thought is part of that. Now somebody comes along and asks "who am I?". Is the "I" the permanent entity in this consciousness? D: It cannot be. K: This "I" - is it consciousness? D: It is not permanent. K: Consciousness is heritage. Of course it is.
普：我说，即使在与思想无关的感知中，感知也永远不会被携带到另一个思想。 我看到那盏灯。这个看没有被携带。只有思想能够被携带。 克：那是显而易见的。我的意识是我的思想，是我的脑细胞，是我感官知觉的结果。 这就是我的意识。这就是所有的意识。这种意识是时间、进化和成长的结果。 它是可扩展的，可收缩的等等。思想是其中的一部分。 现在，有人走过来问“我是谁？“我”是这个意识中的永久实体吗？ 德：不可能。 克：这个“我” —— 是意识吗？ 德：它不是永久性的。 克：意识是遗传。它当然是。
F: We are mixing the concept of consciousness, with the experience of consciousness. K: This is very clear. "I" is that consciousness. P: "I" has a great reality for me till I investigate. K: Of course. The fact is after looking, observing, I see I am the whole of this consciousness. This is not a verbal statement. I am all that. I am the heritage. And is that "I" touchable, observable? Can it be felt, twisted? Is it the result of perception, of heritage? F: It is not the result. It is the inherited.
莫：我们把意识的概念和意识的体验混为一谈。 克：这是非常清楚的。“我”就是那个意识。 普：“我”对我来说有一个巨大的实体，直到我调查。 克：当然。事實上，在看、觀察之後，我看到我就是这个意識的全部。 这不是一个口头上的声明。我就是那一切。我是这个遗传。那个“我”是可以触摸的，可以观察的吗？ 它能被感觉，被扭曲吗？它是感知的结果，是遗传的结果吗？ 莫：它不是这个结果。它是被遗传下来的。
K: And then she asks who is that "I"? Is that "I" part of consciousness, part of thought? I say yes. Thought is part of it. Thought is the "I", except where thought is functioning technologically, where there is no "I". The moment you move away from the scientific field, you come to the "I" which is part of the biological heritage. F: The "I" is the centre of perception, a working centre of perception, an ad hoc centre and the other is an effective centre.
克：然后，她问那个“我”是谁？那个“我”是意识的一部分，思想的一部分吗？我说是的。 思想是其中的一部分。思想是“我”，除非思想在技术上运作，那样就没有“我”。 当你离开科学领域的那一刻，你遇到了这位“我”，这位就是有机体的遗传的一部分。 莫：“我”是感知的中心，是感知的工作中心，是临时设定的中心，另而一个是有效的中心。
K: Be simple. We see consciousness is the "I". The whole of that field is the "I". In the field, the "I" is the centre. P: I want to put aside everything and tackle it in a new way. I see that the most important element in me is the "I". Now what is the "I"? What is its nature? One investigates that and in the very process of observation there is clarity. K: Full stop.
克：简单一点。我们看到意识是这位“我”。 整个领域就是这个“我”。在这个领域内，“我”是中心。 普：我想把一切都放在一边，用一种新的方式来解决它。 我看到我身上最重要的元素是“我”。 现在，什么是“我”？它的性质是什么？ 一个人调查它，在那个观察过程中，出现了清晰。 克：句号。
P: Clarity being not eternal.,.... K: But it can pick it up again. P: I say, maybe. K: Because I have an idea that perception is whole. P: Is it a question which legitimately arises in this state? K: In the state of perception it does not arise. It only arises, exists when I ask, is this process eternal, everlasting?
普：清晰不是永恒的，…… 克：但它可以再次拾起它。 普：我说，也许吧。 克：因为我有一个观念：感知是完整的。 普：在这种状态下，这是一个合法出现的问题吗？ 克：在感知状态下，它不会出现。 它的出现，只是当我问‘这个过程是永恒的，持久的吗？’的时候。
P: And what would you say? K: You are being asked. Answer. Wait. You have to answer this question. At the moment of perception the question does not arise. The next moment I do not perceive so clearly. P: If I am alert to see that I am not perceiving so clearly, I will investigate that. K: So what am I doing? There is perception. That is all.
普：那你会说什么？ 克：有人问你。回答。停下来。你必须回答这个问题。 在感知的那一刻，问题不会出现。到了下一刻，我就没有那么清晰地感知了。 普：如果我警觉地看到，我没有那么清楚地感知，我会调查它。 克：那我在做什么？感知。仅此而已。
P: The doorway is in the question. The "key" of the doorway is in that question. K: Let us be simple about this. There is perception. In that perception there is no question of duration. There is only perception. The next minute I do not see clearly. There is no clear perception. It is muddled. There is investigation of pollution and so clarity. Right? And again perception; move again; cover and uncover - and this goes on. This is going on.
普：门口就在这个问题中。门口的“钥匙”就在那个问题上。 克：让我们简单一点。感知。 在那感知中，不存在持续的问题。只有感知。 下一分钟，我看不清楚了。没有清晰的感知。它是浑浊的。 调查这个浑浊，所以清晰。对吗？ 再次感知；再次移动；掩盖和揭开 —— 这么继续下去。这样进行。
F: Is it a movement of time? P: A very interesting thing takes place. The very nature of this awareness is that it operates on the "other". K: What do you mean by the "other"? P: Inattention. K: Wait. Attention and inattention. Then be aware of inattention which becomes attention. This balancing is going on all the time. P: I observe the very nature of attention. It has its own action on inattention. Now if I make a statement "it lessens inattention" it would be an incorrect thing for me to say. The only thing I can observe is that there is an action of attention on inattention. K: Does that action on inattention wipe away inattention so that inattention does not come again?
莫：它是时间的运动吗? 普：发生了一个很有趣的事情。这种觉察的性质是它作用于‘另一个’。 克：你说的‘另一个’是什么意思? 普：疏忽。 克：等等。注意和疏忽。 然后，觉察到疏忽，这变成了注意。这种平衡一直在进行。 普：我观察到注意的性质。在疏忽上，它有它自己的行为。 现在，我做出了一个论述：“它减少了疏忽”，我这样说是不正确的。 我唯一能观察到的是：在疏忽上，有注意的行为。 克：疏忽上的行为扫除了疏忽，因此它不再出现？
D: It is attentive to the inattentive. P: I am going further than being attentive to the inattentive. I say the nature of this attention is such that it operates on the brain cells. I am very very hesitant when I say this. It is the nature of attention to operate on the brain cells. That which is dormant in the brain-cells - which re-emerges when it is exposed to attention, the very nature of the dormancy undergoes a change. I would like this area to be investigated.
德：它留心于疏忽。 普：我再更进一步。 我说，这种注意的本质是这样的，它作用于脑细胞。 当我说这句话时，我非常非常犹豫。 注意的性质，作用于脑细胞。 作用在脑细胞们的昏沉之处 —— 当它曝露于注意之中时，会再次浮现， 这种昏沉的本质历经了一种变化。我希望对这个领域进行调查。
K: Let us begin again. Awareness - if there is choice in that awareness we are back again in consciousness. Awareness is non-verbal. Awareness has no relationship to thought. That awareness we call attention. What takes place when there is inattention: there is inattention. Why do you mix the two? I am inattentive; there is no attention; that is all.
克：让我们重新开始。觉察 —— 如果其中有选择，我們又回到了意識中。 觉察是非言语的。觉察与思想无关。那种觉察我们称之为注意。 当出现了疏忽，在发生什么：那里有疏忽。为什么要将两者混为一谈？ 我疏忽了，没注意到；仅此而已。
In that inattention there are certain actions going on. And those activities bring further misery, confusion, trouble. So I say to myself, I must be attentive all the time so as to prevent this disturbance taking place and I say I have to cultivate attention and therefore that very cultivation becomes inattention. The seeing of that inattention brings attention.
在那种疏忽中，有某些行为正在发生，那些活动带来了进一步的痛苦、混乱和麻烦。 所以我对自己说，我必须时刻注意，以防止这种干扰发生。 我說我必須培养注意力，因此这种培养就变成了疏忽。 看那个疏忽，带来了注意。
Attention affects the brain cells. Look what has happened. There is attention, and then inattention. In inattention there is confusion, misery, and all the rest of it. Now what takes place?
注意会影响脑细胞。 看看在发生什么。有注意，然后疏忽。 在疏忽中有困惑、痛苦，以及其余一切。那么，在发生什么？
D: Dispelling of inattention has gone down in the unconscious. P: Is it not really that you can do nothing about it? K: I agree "P; hold on a minute. Do not say there is nothing. We will find out. We are investigating. There is attention and there is inattention. in inattention everything is confusion. Why do I want to put the two together? When there is the urge to put the two together, then there is an action of will which is choice. I prefer attention; I do not prefer inattention - so I am back again in the field of consciousness.
德：疏忽的消除，在无意识中进行。 普：你真的对它什么都没做吗？ 克：我同意普普尔，等一下。不要说什么都没做。 我们会找到答案。我们正在调查。有注意，也有疏忽。在疏忽中，一切都是混乱的。 我为什么要把两者放在一起？ 当有把两者放在一起的冲动时，就会有一种意志的行为，也就是选择。 我更喜欢注意力；我不喜欢疏忽 —— 所以我又回到了意识的领域。
So what is the action where the two are never brought together? I want to explore it a little bit. When there is attention, thought as memory does not operate. There is no thinking process in attention. There is only attention. I am only aware that I have been inattentive when the action produces discomfort, misery or danger. Then I say to myself, I have been inattentive and as attention has left a mark on the brain I am concerned with the misery which inattention has brought about.
那么，让两者从不出现的行为是什么？ 我想稍微探索一下。 当有注意时，作为记忆的思想不起作用。 在注意中，没有思考的过程。只有注意。 我只是觉察到，当行为产生不适、痛苦或危险时，我处于疏忽的状态。 然后，我对自己说，我疏忽了。 由于注意力在大脑上留下了一个痕迹，这种由疏忽带来的痛苦引起了我的注意。
Then in investigating that misery, attention comes again leaving no mark. So what is taking place? Actually what is taking place? Each time there is inattention there is quick, instant perception of inattention. Therefore perception is not of duration, of time. Perception and attention leave no mark. The immediacy of perception is always taking place.
那么，在调查这种痛苦时，注意力再次出现，没有留下任何痕迹。那么，在发生什么？ 到底在发生什么？每次疏忽，都有迅速、即时地感知。 因此，感知不是持续，不是时间。 感知和注意，没留下任何的痕迹。感知的这种即时性，总是在发生。
P: We have talked several times, and so far the discussions have been related to the mind and its problems. What we have not discussed is the movement of the heart. K: I am glad you have raised that. P: Is the movement of the heart a different movement from the movement of the mind? Are they one movement or two movements? And if they are two movements, what are the elements which make these two movements different? I use the words mind and heart, because these are the two focal points around which certain sensory responses appear to focus. Are the two movements in fact one movement?
普：到目前为止，我们所讨论的话题都是关于头脑和与它相关的问题。 我们还没有讨论过心灵的运动。 克：我很高兴你提出这个问题。 普：心灵的运动与头脑的运动是不同的吗？它们是同一个运动还是两个运动？ 如果它们是两个运动，那么，是什么因素使这两个运动不同？ 我之所以使用‘头脑’和‘心灵’这两个词， 因为，它们似乎是某些感官反应汇聚的两个焦点。 这两个运动实际上是一个运动吗？
K: Let us begin. What do you mean by movement? P: Any kind of emotional response which we call love, affection, goodwill, compassion, seems to ripple, to move from a focal point which we identify as the region of the heart. These ripples affect the heart, make it physically beat faster. K: Which is the physical, the physiological movement of the brain cells? D: Or is it the nerves which have an impact on the heart?
克：让我们开始吧。运动是什么意思？ 普：任何一个我们称之为爱、亲情、善意、同情的情感反应， 如同涟漪，从一个焦点处散开，我们把这个焦点称之为心脏。 这些涟漪会影响心脏，使其身体跳动更快。 克：脑细胞的生理运动是什么？ 德：是神经在影响心脏吗？
K: It is a response of the nerves, the heart, the brain, the whole organism, the psychosomatic organism. Now, is the movement of the mind separate from the movement which is generally called the heart? We are not speaking of the physical heart, but of the emotions, the sentiments, the angers, the jealousy, the feeling of guilt - all the emotions that make the heart throb and beat faster. Are the movements of the mind and heart separate? Let us discuss it. P: What we have been saying all along is that if one can strip oneself till nothing remains but the movement of survival, the only factor which distinguishes man is this strange movement of the heart. K: I think this division is artificial. First of all, we should not start that way.
克：它是神经、心脏、大脑、整个有机体、心身有机体的一种回应。 现在，头脑的运动与通常称为心灵的运动，这两者是分开的吗？ 我们不是在谈论肉体的心脏，而是在谈论感情、情绪、愤怒、嫉妒、内疚感。 —— 所有使心脏悸动和跳动更快的情感。 头脑和心灵的运动是分开的吗？让我们讨论一下。 普：我们一直在说， 如果一个人可以剥离自己，直到只剩下生存的运动， 区分人的唯一因素是心灵的这种奇怪的运动。 克：我认为这种划分是人为的。首先，我们不应该以这种方式开始。
P: While we have been discussing with you, there has been a silencing of the brain cells, there has been tremendous clarity, yet there has been no response from the heart; there have been no ripples. K: So you are separating the two. There is the movement of the mind and the movement of the heart: let us question whether they are separate? And if they are not separate, then when the mind is empty of consciousness in the sense in which we have used that word, what is the quality of the mind that is compassion - that is love, empathy? Let us begin by asking whether the movement of the heart is separate. Is any movement separate? P: What identity has anger with the movement of affection?
普：当我们和你讨论的时候， 脑细胞安静了，极为清澈， 然而，却不是发自心灵的；那么没有涟漪。 克：所以你把两者分开了。有头脑的运动和心灵的运动： 让我们质疑：它们是不是分开的？如果它们不分开， 那么，当头脑中清空了意识，就像我们曾经使用这个词一样， 那个头脑的品质，慈是什么意思 —— 那是爱、共鸣吗？ 让我们先问一下心灵的运动是否是分开的。任何运动都是分开的吗？ 普：愤怒与感情有什么相同之处？
K: I am asking, is any movement separate? P: Separate from what? K: Is all movement unitary, like all energy is unitary, though we may divide it up, fragment it? All movement is one; a unitary movement. One has broken movement up as the movement of the heart, the movement of different categories; but we are asking, "Is the movement of the heart separate from the movement of the mind?" Is there such a movement of the heart separate from the mind, mind being the brain? I do not know if I can verbalize this - the mind, the heart, the brain, are they one unit? And from that unit, movement flows; a movement which is unitary. But we divide emotions, sentiments, devotion, tenderness, compassion, enthusiasm from their opposites.
克：我在问，任何运动都是分开的吗？ 普：与什么分开？ 克：所有的运动都是单一的，就像所有的能量都是单一的，尽管我们可以把它割开、分裂？ 所有的运动都是一体的；一个单一的运动。 一个人是把运动分解为心灵的运动，不同类别的运动； 但是我们要问的是，“心灵的运动与头脑的运动是分开的吗？” 有没有这样一种与头脑分离的心灵运动？这里的头脑是大脑。 我不知道我是否可以用语言表达 —— 头脑、心脏、大脑，它们是一个统一的单元吗？ 从那个单元，运动流转；一个单一的运动。 但是，我们划分出情感、情绪、奉献、温柔、同情、热情与它们的对立面。
P: As also evil, cruelty, vanity. There is a pure intellectual movement which is neither one nor the other; the pure technological movement. K: Is the technological movement different from the movement of the mind? P: I think thought has its own technology. It has its own momentum, it has its own reason for existence, its own direction, its own speed at which it operates, its own motives and its own energy. F: You cannot measure thought. Do not call it technology. D: Thought-waves have been measured. Technology means measurable.
普：还有邪恶、残忍、虚荣。 有一种纯粹的智力运动，它既不是其中之一，也不是另一个；纯技术运动。 克：技术运动与思想运动不同吗？ 普：我认为思想有自己的技术。它有自己的动力，它有自己的存在的理由， 它自己的方向，它自己的运作速度，它自己的动机和它自己的能量。 莫：你无法衡量思想。不要称之为技术。 德：思想波已经被测量了。技术意味着可衡量。
K: We said just now that compassion, love, tenderness, care, consideration and politeness are one movement. The opposite movement is contrary to that - it is violence and all that. So there is the movement of the mind, the movement of affection, love and compassion; and the movement of violence. So there are now three movements. Then there is another movement which says this must be or this must not be; has the assertion that this must be or this must not be, anything whatsoever to do with the mental movement? D: Then there is the movement of the coordinator apart from the three.
克：我们刚才说过，同情、爱、温柔、关怀、体贴和礼貌是一个动作。 相反的运动与此相反 —— 它是暴力等等。 因此，有头脑的运动，感情、爱和慈的运动；以及暴力运动。 所以现在有三个运动。然后，还有另一个运动，它说‘这必定是’或者‘这一定不是’； 断言这必定是或一定不是，与心理运动有任何关系吗？ 德：然后，是除了三个运动之外的协调者的运动。
K: Now we have the fourth movement - the coordinator. The movement of affection as the movement of the heart, then the movement of violence, callousness, depression, vulgarity and all that; then the mental, intellectual movement and the movement of the coordinator. So there are now four movements and every one of these movements has its own subdivisions. See how complex it becomes, and each subdivision is in contradiction with its opposite. So it becomes multiple. This psychosomatic organism has got dozens of con- tradictions, not just mental movements, intellectual movements, emotional movements, etc. There are simultaneous and contradictory movements, multitudinous movements and there is the coordinator trying to arrange things so that he can operate.
克：现在我们有第四个运动 —— 协调者的运动。 感情的运动作为心灵的运动，然后是暴力、冷酷、沮丧、粗俗等等的运动； 然后是精神、智力运动和协调者的运动。 所以现在有四个运动，每个运动都有自己的细分。 看看它变得多么复杂，每个细分都与其相反的矛盾。 所以它变成了多重。 这个心身有机体有几十种结构，不仅仅是心理运动、智力运动、情感运动等。 有同时和矛盾的运动，众多的运动 还有协调者试图去安排事物，以便于他能操作。
F: Is there not a selective mechanism, which picks up and calls it thought, mind, heart and so on? Is that not the coordinator? K: Coordinator, chooser, integrater, selecter, call it what you will, they are all in contradiction with each other. F: Why do you say they are in contradiction, because each one is an independent movement? D: But as one lives they seem to be in contradiction. F: But each one is moving in its own. P: As "F" says, at any given point if one is, the other is not. F: Then there cannot be contradiction.
莫：难道没有一种选择性机制，它拾取并称之为思想、头脑、心灵等等吗？那不是协调者吗？ 克：协调者、选择器、集成者、选择器，随便你怎么称呼，它们都是相互矛盾的。 莫：你为什么说它们是矛盾的，因为每一个都是一个独立的运动？ 德：但是作为一个人的生活，它们似乎是矛盾的。 莫：但是每个人都在他自身内移动。 普：正如“莫”所说，在任何给定的点上，如果一种（运动）在，另一种就不在。 莫：那就不会有矛盾了。
K: When one is, the other is not. But the coordinator weighs these two - I want this and I do not want that. F: That is the whole movement of life. P: We started by saying that so far we have gone into the movement of the mind. Is there such a thing as the movement of the heart? B: Is it a nourishing movement? Is it a movement of sustenance - this which we call the movement of the heart? Is this not necessary in order to see that the movement of the brain does not remain sterile? D: We are not in the field of contradiction at all. K: Contradiction is not when one is, and the other is not, but when the coordinator says I would rather not have this but have that; then begins the contradiction, the opposition as choice.
克：当一个在，另一个不在的时候。但是协调者权衡了这两个 —— 我想要这个，我不想要那个。 莫：那就是生命的整个运动。 普：我们一开始就说，到目前为止，我们已经进入了头脑的运动。有心灵运动这样的东西吗？ 芭：它是一种滋养的运动吗？它是一种营运的运动 —— 我们称之为心灵的运动吗？ 为了看见大脑的运动不会保持枯燥，它不是必需的吗？ 德：我们根本不在矛盾的领域。 克：矛盾不是‘一个在，另一个不在’，而是当协调者说我宁愿没有这个，而是拥有那个； 然后，矛盾开始，这种对抗就是选择。
A: If I am full of hate, etc., I cannot take two steps beyond. The question is, is the movement of the heart distinct from that of the mind? Or does it have its own quality? K: That is what "P" is saying. There is the movement of the mind, the intellectual, technological movement; there is the movement of the heart and there is the movement of violence. Then there are several multitudinous movements in us and the coordinator selects one or two to sustain himself. From there what is the next question?
阿：如果我充满仇恨，我无法再多走两步。 问题是: 心灵运动与头脑运动是不同的吗？或者它有它自己的品质？ 克：那就是普普尔所说的。有头脑的运动，智力的，技术的运动； 有心灵运动，还有暴力运动。 那么，在我们身上有多个运动，协调者选择一两个来维持他自己。 从那里开始，下一个问题是什么?
P: Are these movements parallel to each other? Ultimately they are either the one movement or the other. K: I am not sure. P: Is the movement of the brain basically that which excites emotions? A: Though one may not have personal hate or anger, when I read about Bengal, certain emotions come and they are social responses. I do not do a thing about it, whereas to have love, affection is a definite quality of enrichment; a sustenance; which the mind cannot give you.
普：这些运动是平行的吗？最终，它们要么是一个运动，要么是另一个运动。 克：我不确定。 普：大脑的运动基本上是激发情感的运动吗？ 阿：虽然一个人可能没有个人的仇恨或愤怒， 当我读到孟加拉时，某些情感来了，它们是社会性的回应。我对此无能为力， 然而，要有爱，感情是一种确切的、丰饶的品质；它是一种滋养物；是头脑无法提供的。
D: We have already agreed that the perception of the brain is thought. K: Let us get the meaning of the words clear. The response to various forms of stimuli we call emotion. Is perception an emotion? Now what is the next question? You ask, are there two movements with their subdivisions; are they parallel? P: Parallel means separate; they never meet. K: Or are they really one which we do not know?
德：我们已经一致同意大脑的感知是思想。 克：让我们把这些词的含义弄清楚。 对各种形式的刺激的回应，我们称之为情感。 感知是一种情感吗？ 现在，下一个问题是什么？你问，它们的细分有两种运动吗？它们是平行的吗？ 普：平行表示分离；它们从不相遇。 克：或者，它们真的是同一个运动，而我们却不知道？
P: Take desire. Which category would you put it in - emotion or thought? B: Desire is from the heart. P: Take the arising of desire. After a while it becomes thought. Where will you put it? A: It arises only as a thought. F: The arising of desire as an immediate emotional response of the heart, is not separate from thought. With the word "anger", the heart beats faster. All that is one movement.
普：以欲望为例。你会把它归入哪一类 —— 情感还是思想？ 芭：欲望是发自内心的。 普：以欲望的生起为例。过了一会儿，它变成了思想。你会把它放在哪里？ 阿：它只是作为一种思想而生起的。 莫：欲望的产生是心灵的直接情感反应，与思想是分不开的。 ‘愤怒’这个词的刺激，使心跳加快。所有这一切，都是一个运动。
K: Desire, hate, love, we say, are emotive and mental movements. Therefore there are these two movements. You ask, are they parallel and therefore separate or is it all one movement? I am not saying it is or it is not so. P: I think that is not a valid question. The valid question is if they are two separate movements, is it impossible for them ever to come together? Or is it the very cause of the misfortune that we have kept them separate? F: That which perceives the pattern is thought. That which perceives without the pattern is emotion. P: The moment you make such a statement either this is so to us and therefore the duality has ceased, or otherwise it is a theory.
克：欲望、恨、爱，我们说，是情感和心理的运动。因此，有这两个运动。 你问，它们是平行的，因此是分开的，还是都是一个运动？我不是说‘是’或‘不是’。 普：我认为这不是一个有效的问题。 有效的问题是，如果它们是两个独立的运动，它们是否永远不可能走到一起？ 或者，正是由于我们把它们分开，造成了它们的不幸？ 莫：带着模式去感知，就是思想。不通过模式去感知，就是情感。 普：当你做出这样的声明的那一刻，要么对我们来说就是这样，因此，二元性已经停止，要么它是一个理论。
K: It is a theory. Conclusions, formulas mean nothing. I say I do not know. I know only these two movements the one the thinking, the intellectual, the rational movement; the second the feeling of kindliness, gentleness, that is all. Are they two separate movements? Or because we have treated them as two separate movements, our whole misfortune, our confusion arises. You see, "P", you can see we have till now divided the body and the soul. The whole religious tendency in the west as well as in the east has been this division of the soul and the body and we have maintained that and the scriptures have maintained that.
克：它是一个理论。结论，公式，是毫无意义的。我说我不知道。 我只知道这两种运动，一种思想运动，这种智力上的、理性的运动； 第二种是善良、温柔的感觉，仅此而已。 它们是两个独立的运动吗？ 或者，因为我们把它们当作两个独立的运动来对待，我们的整个不幸，我们的困惑就出现了。 你看，普普尔，你可以看到，到现在为止，我们已经把身体和灵魂分开了。 西方和东方的整个宗教倾向都是灵魂和肉体的分裂。 我们一直坚持这一点，圣经上，也坚持这一点。
It is really a psychosomatic state, not one or the other, but it is a psychosomatic movement which invents the soul, etc. And so the question is, are they two movements or have we accustomed ourselves to the thought that the two are separate - the body and the soul - till somebody says it is a psychosomatic state and I say "yes", I understand.
它实际上是一种心身状态，不是非此即彼，而是一种身心的运动，被发明出灵魂等等概念。 所以问题是，它们是两个运动吗？ 还是我们已经习惯性的认为两者是分开的 —— 身体和灵魂 —— 直到有人说这是一种身心状态，然后我说“是的”，我理解。
P: But how can you neglect the fact that an emotional intensity brings a new quality of being, a complete experience of what the other person feels; a sense of unspoken understanding? K: Do not bring that in yet. We are asking, are these two movements separate? Or because we are so habit-ridden we have accepted that they are two separate movements? If they are not, what is the one unitary movement that includes thought as the movement of the brain and the movement of the heart? How do you investigate this question?
普：但是，你怎么能忽视这样一个事实呢？ 一种情感的强度，带来了新的存在品质，对他人的一种完全感觉的体验；一种心照不宣的理解？ 克：先别带那个东西进来。我们在问，这两个运动是分开的吗？ 还是因为我们习惯性太深，我们已经接受了它们是两个独立的运动？ 如果不是， 什么是单一的运动，包含了作为大脑运动的思想和心灵的运动？ 你如何调查这个问题？
I can only investigate it from fact to fact. I can have no theories about it. I see the fact of perception. I see the fact of the movement of thought. And I ask when there is no movement of thought, is there a movement which is nonverbal? Have I explained myself?
我只能从一个事实到另一个事实进行调查。我对此没有任何理论。 我看到了感知的事实。我看到了思想运动的事实。 我问，当没有思想的运动时，有没有一种运动是非语言的？我解释清楚了吗？
If there is complete cessation of thinking which is movement, is there a movement which is an emotive movement as love, devotion, tenderness, care? Is there a movement separate from thought; thought being verbal meaning, explanation, description, etc? Or when the movement of thought comes to an end without any compulsion, is there not a totally different movement which is not that or this?
如果思想完全停止，就是这种运动， 有没有一种运动，一种爱、奉献、温柔、关怀的情感运动？ 有没有与思想分离的运动；思想就是言语上的意义、解释、描述等等？ 或者，当思想运动在没有任何强迫的情况下结束时， 难道没有一个完全不同的、非彼非此的运动吗？
P: That is so, Sir, and I am saying this very very hesitantly. There is a state when it is as if an elixir is released, when one is overflowing; a state in which the heart is the only thing that is there - I am using metaphors - and there can be action in that state, doing in it, thinking in it, and everything in it, and there is a state when thought has ceased and the mind is very clear and alert, but the elixir is not present. K: Let us stick to one thing. Just what is the factor of division?
普：是那样的，先生，我说这句话时，非常非常地犹豫。 有一种状态，好像释放了一剂丹药，当药效溢出时； 一种心灵唯一存在的状态 —— 我在用隐喻 —— 在那种状态下可以有行为，在其中运作，在其中思考，以及其中的一切， 有一种状态是当思想消逝，这颗头脑非常清晰和警觉，但丹药却不存在。 克：让我们坚持一样东西。分裂的因子到底是什么？
P: What divides is an actual tactile sense. Here it is not something which is mental. There is a certain ripple; a ripple is very real. K: I am not talking about that. What is the factor in us that divides one as the emotive movement and the other as the intellectual-thought movement? Why is there the soul and the body? D: Would you admit that the very faculty of intellect sees that there is a movement which emerges from thought and another that emerges from the heart. It is observable.
普：在进行划分的，是实际的触觉。在这里，它不是精神上的东西。 有一定的涟漪；涟漪是非常真实的。 克：我不是在谈论那个。 我们里面的哪一个因素，将一个划分为情感运动，另一个划分为智力-思想运动？ 为什么存在着灵魂和身体？ 德：你会承认这个吗， 智力本身就看到，有一种运动是从思想中产生的，另一种运动是从内心产生的？ 它是可观察的。
K: I say, why is there a division? D: The hand is different from the leg. K: They have different functions. D: There is the function of the brain and there is the function of the heart. A: As far as my experience goes, when the verbal movement ceases, there is an awareness of the entire body in which emotional content is and it is pure feeling. It is no more thinking, but pure feeling.
克：我说，为什么会有分界？ 德：手和脚不同。 克：它们有不同的功能。 德：有大脑的功能，也有心灵的功能。 阿：就我的体验而言，当言语运动停止时， 有一种对整个身体的觉察，其中有情感内容，它是一种纯粹的感觉。 它不再是思想的运动，而是纯粹的感觉。
P: In the tradition there is a word called Rasa. It is very close to what Krishnaji says. But rasa is a word which needs to be investigated. Rasa is essence, it is that which fills. The tradition differentiates different types of rasa but rasa is essence; that which fills, that which permeates. D: It is emotion.
普：在传统中有一个词叫Rasa。 这与克里希那吉所说的非常接近。但rasa是一个需要调查的词。 拉萨是精髓，能充实。 传统区分不同类型的拉萨，但拉萨是精髓；充满，渗透。 德：它是情感。
P: It is much more; rasa is essence. K: Keep to that word essence, perfume. Essence means what it is. Now what happens? In observing the whole movement of thought, in observing the content of consciousness, the essence comes out of it. And in observing the movement of the heart, in that perception, there is the essence. Essence is the same whether it is this or that. A: That is what the Buddhists also say.
普：它远不止于此；拉萨是精髓。 克：保持“精髓”这个词，香水。精髓意味着它是什么。现在，在发生什么？ 在观察整个思想运动中，在观察意识的内容时，精髓从中产生。 在观察心灵的运动中，在这种感知中，有精髓。无论是这还是那，精髓都是一样的。 阿：佛教徒也是这么说的。
K: When you use the word "essence", it is the essence of all the flowers that makes the perfume and the quality. In perceiving the whole movement of thought as consciousness - consciousness with its content which is consciousness - and in observing that, in that very observation is the external refinement which is the essence. Right? In the same way there is the perception of the whole movement of the body, love, joy. When you perceive all that, there is the essence and in that there are no two essences. Essence has to come into being. Now how do you produce it? Distil it? When the flowers are distilled, the essence of the flowers is the perfume.
克：当你使用“精髓”这个词时，它是所有花朵的精髓，造就了香水和品质。 感知整个思想运动，也就是意识 —— 意识及其内容就是意识 —— 在那观察中，正是这种观察，这种外在的精炼，就是精髓。对吗？ 同样，还有对身体、爱、喜悦的整个运动的感知。 當你感知到所有這些時，就有精髓，其中没有两种精髓。 精髓必须产生。现在你如何生产它？ 提炼出来？当花被蒸馏时，花的精髓是香水。
D: When the pollution goes, it is essence. F: There is the essence of friendship, of affection. K: No, no, I would not use essence of friendship, essence of jealousy. No, no. F: What do you mean by essence? K: Just look. I have watched what we have been doing during these discussions. We have observed the movement of thought as consciousness; the whole of it and the content of the movement is consciousness. There is perception of that. The perception is the distillation of that and that we call essence which is pure intelligence. It is not my intelligence or your intelligence but it is intelligence, it is essence. And when we observe the movement of love, hate, pleasure, fear, which are all emotive, there is perception and, as you perceive, the essence comes out of that. There are no two essences. D: Here comes my question. What is the relationship between essence as you perceive it and uniqueness? I think they are interchangeable. K: I think I would rather use the word essence.
德：当污染消失了，就是精髓。 莫：有友谊的精髓，感情的精髓。 克：不，不，我不会用友谊的精髓，嫉妒的精髓。不，不。 莫：你说的精髓是什么意思？ 克：去看。在这些讨论中，我看到了我们一直在做的事情。 我们观察到作为意识的思想运动； 它的全部和运动的内容是意识。那是对它的感知。 感知就是对它的提炼，我们称之为精髓，它是纯粹的智慧。 它不是我的智慧或你的智慧，而是智慧，它是精髓。 我们在观察爱、恨、快乐、恐惧的运动，这些都是情感上的， 那里有感知，在你的感知中，精髓从中而出。没有两种精髓。 德：我的问题来了。 在你的感知中，出现的精髓和唯一性，两者之间有什么关系？ 我认为它们是可以互换的。 克：我想我宁愿用“精髓”这个词。
P: The great masters of alchemy were called rasa-siddhas. D: They who are established in rasa, that is, those who have attained, who have their being in that. K: During these days and before, one has watched the movement of thought. One has watched it, and watched it without any choice and in that is the essence; out of that choiceless observation comes the essence of the one and the essence of the other. Therefore what is this essence? Is it a refinement of emotions, or is it totally unrelated? And yet it is related because it has been observed. Right? P: So energy which is attention.... K: Energy is essence.
普：伟大的炼金大师被称为rasa-siddhas（精髓的大师）。 德：他们在精髓中建立，即那些已经达到的人，他们在其中存在。 克：在这些日子里和以前，一个人一直在观察思想的运动。 一个人观察了它，而且毫无选择地观察它，其中就有精髓； 从这种无选择的观察中，产生了一个的精髓和另一个的精髓。 那么，精髓是什么？ 是情感的提炼，还是与它完全无关？然而，它是相关的，因为它已经被观察到了。对吗？ 普：所以能量是注意…… 克：能量是精髓。
P: Though operating on matter, essence is unrelated to both. K: Let us begin again slowly with essence. Is it unrelated to consciousness? I am taking it that one has observed consciousness. There has been a perception of movement as consciousness, as thought and the content of that consciousness which is time and the very observation of that, the flame of observation distils. Right? In the same way the flame of perception brings the essence of emotive movement. Now having this essence, what relationship has it to that and to this? I do not know if you see this. That was your question. Right? None whatsoever. Essence has nothing to do with the flower. Right. Though it is part of the flower, the essence is not of it.
普：虽然它对物质起作用，但精髓与这两者无关。 克：让我们慢慢地从精髓重新开始。它与意识无关吗？ 我拿它来说，一个人已经观察到了意识。 对意识，对其中的思想及其内容，也就是对时间的感知。 那个观察的动作，观察的火焰在提炼。对吗？ 同样，感知的火焰带来了情感运动的精髓。 现在有了这个精髓，它与那个，它与这个有什么关系？ 我不知道你是否看到这点。那是你的问题。对吗？ 都无关。精髓与花无关。对。 虽然它是花的一部分，但精髓不属于它。
F: Even grammatically it is not all right: although it is part of the flower it is not of the flower. K: Look, Sir, the other day I saw they were taking the bark of a tree to produce some kind of alcohol; that essence is not the bark. F: But it is in the bark. D: It is realized because of the heat. K: Heat of perception produces essence. So what is the question? Is essence related to consciousness? Obviously not. So the whole point in this is the flame of perception and the flame of perception is the essence.
D: It creates the essence and it is the essence. K: It is the essence. P: Is perception creation, the moment of creation? D: Do we create what we perceive? P: Is perception creation? K: I do not know what you mean by creation. P: Bringing into being something which is not there.
德：它创造精髓，它就是精髓。 克：它是精髓。 普：感知创造，创造的时刻吗？ 德：我们创造我们感知的东西吗？ 普：感知是创造吗？ 克：我不知道你说的创造是什么意思。 普：带来不存在的东西。
K: Is perception creation? What do you mean by creation? I know what perception means. Let us stick to that word. I do not know what the meaning of creation is. Producing a baby? Baking bread? D: No, I would not say that. Moving from here to there is also producing. K: Do not reduce everything to creation. Going to office is not creation. You are asking what is creation? To create, to produce, to create something which has not existed before. When we use the word "creation', to create something different, to create a statue, to bring into being, what does that mean? Is it essence? To bring into being what? It can bring into being only two things: thought or emotion. D: Bringing into being means, essence manifest.
克：感知是创造吗？你说的创造是什么意思？我知道感知意味着什么。让我们坚持这个词。 我不知道创造是什么意义。生孩子？烤面包？ 德：不，我不会这么说。从这里搬到那里也是生产。 克：不要把一切都归结为创造。上班不是创造。 你在问什么是创造？创造，生产，创造以前不存在的东西。 当我们使用“创造”这个词，创造不同的东西，创造雕像，创造，这意味着什么？ 是精髓吗？带来了什么？它只能带来两样东西：思想或情感。 德：带来意义，精髓显现。
K: I ask of you what is meant by creation? I do not know. Bringing into being something new or bringing into being in the mould of the known. P: Creation must be bringing into being the new, not the old. K: Therefore let us be clear. Bringing into being something totally new. At what level? Watch it. At the sensory level, at the intellectual level, at the memory level; where? Bringing into being something new; where? So that you see it, so that you can visualize it? The man who produced the jet because he was familiar with the piston, the internal combustion engine, was that totally new? So when you say bringing into being something totally new, at what level? P: At the sensory level. K: At the sensory? Can you paint a new picture which is non-verbal? Can you paint something that is totally new? Which is, can you bring into being something which is not self-expression? It is not new if it is self-expression.
克：我问你，创造是什么意思？我不知道。 把新的或现存的事物带入已知的模式中。 普：创造必须带来新的，而不是旧的。 克：所以，让我们明确一点。带来全新的东西。在什么级别？小心。 在感官层面，在智力层面，在记忆层面；在哪里？ 带来新事物；哪里？这样，你就能看到它，就可以想象它？ 生产喷气式飞机的人，因为他熟悉活塞，内燃机，那是全新的东西吗？ 所以，当你说带来一个全新的东西时，是在什么层面上？ 普：在感官层面。 克：在感官上？你能画一幅非语言的新图画吗？你能画一些全新的东西吗？ 也就是说，你能带来一些不属于自我表达的东西吗？如果是自我的表达，它并不新鲜。
P: If creation is something entirely new which is unrelated to any self-expression, then probably all self-expression ceases, all manifestation ceases. K: Wait, wait. P: I will say that because there does not exist anything which is not self-expression........ K: That is what I want to get at. The man who discovered the jet - at the moment when he discovered it, there was no self-expression. He translated it into self-expression. It is something discovered, then it is put into a formula. I only know that the flame of perception has brought about the essence, and now the question is, has that essence any expression? Does it create anything new?
普：如果创造是与任何自我表达无关的全新事物， 那么，可能所有的自我表达都停止了，所有的显现都停止了。 克：等等，等等。 普：我会这么说，因为不存在任何不是自我表达的东西…… 克：这就是我想说的。发现喷气式飞机的人 —— 在他发现它的那一刻，没有自我表达。 他把它翻译成自我表达。某个东西被发现了，然后，被放入一个公式中。 我只知道，感知的火焰带来了精髓， 现在的问题是，这个精髓有什么表达吗？它创造出什么新东西？
D: It creates a new perception. K: No. There is no new perception. The flame is the perception. Flame is flame all the time. One moment pure flame of perception, then forgotten, and again pure flame of perception, then forgotten. Each time the flame is new. D: Perception touches matter, and there is an explosion and there is mutation. Now that which emerges out of it, you cannot postulate. It is the discovery of the jet engine. K: Let us put it this way. In that essence when there is action, that essence is not concerned with self-expression. It is concerned with action. Action then is total, not partial. P: I want to ask one more question. The manifestation of this...... K: Which is action. P: It has contact with matter. K: There is action.
德：它创造了一种新的感知。 克：没有。没有新的感知。火焰就是感知。火焰一直都是火焰。 那一刻，纯粹的感知之火，然后被遗忘，再一次是纯粹的感知之火，然后被遗忘。每一次，火焰都是新的。 德：感知触及物质，有爆炸，有突变。 现在，从中浮现出来的东西，你不能假设。这就是喷气发动机的发现。 克：这么说吧。在那个精髓中，当有行动时，那个精髓与自我表达无关。 它与行动相关。因此，行动是完全的，而不是局部的。 普：我想再问一个问题。这种表现形式…… 克：也就是行为。 普：它与物质有接触。 克：那是行为。
A: Up to perception we go with you. K: No, Sir. You have gone further. There is a perception which is flame, which has distilled the essence. You cannot say I have got it. There is only essence. Now that essence acts or may not act. If it acts, it has no frontiers at all. There is no "me" acting. Obviously. P: That itself is creation. Creation is not something apart from that. K: The very expression of that essence is creation in action, not new action or old action. The essence is expression.
阿：到达感知，我们与您同行。 克：不，先生。你走得更远。有一种感知，它是火焰，它提炼出精髓。 你不能说我抓住它了。只有精髓。现在精髓在行动，或者没有行动。 如果它采取行动，它根本没有边界。没有“我”在演戏。明显地。 普：这本身就是创造。创造不是除此之外的东西。 克：这种精髓的表达是行为中的创造，而不是新的行为或旧的行为。精髓是表达。
P: Then is perception also action? K: Of course. See the beauty of it. Forget action. See what has taken place in you. Perception without any qualification is a flame. It distils whatever it perceives. Whatever it perceives it distils because it is the flame. It is not a sensory perception. When there is that perception which distils at every minute, when you say I am a fool, to perceive that - and in that perception there is the essence - that essence acts or it does not act, depending upon the environment, depending upon where it is; but in that action there is no "me", there is no motive at all. BOMBAY 19th February, l971
普：那么感知也是行为吗？ 克：当然。看它的美。忘记行为。看看你在发生什么。 没有任何限定的感知是火焰。它提炼出它所感知到的任何东西。 无论它感知到什么，它都会提炼，因为它是火焰。 它不是一种感官知觉。 当有那种感知，每时每刻都在提炼，当你说我是个傻瓜时，感知它 —— 在这种感知中，有精髓 —— 精髓行动或不行动，取决于环境，取决于它在哪里； 但在那个行动中没有“我”，根本没有动机。 孟买 1971.2.19