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.
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。
"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.
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？
Can we start with the verbal level and work it through?
我们可以从语言层面开始，然后完结它吗？
The question involves not just communication between the speaker and oneself, but the very instrument with which we take in, with which we apprehend.
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。
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.
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。
This is so. Our minds listening to you used to set up so many obstacles. All that is over. Now there are no barriers.
确实如此。我们的头脑在听你讲话时曾经设置了许多障碍。这一切都过去了。现在没有屏障了。
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.
沟通中重要的与其说是词语——尽管词语和意义是必要的——不如说是在同一时间、同一层面、以同样的强度相遇。
To communicate with oneself is also important. What does communication mean in that context?
与自己沟通也很重要。在这种语境下，沟通是什么意思？
Can one communicate with oneself?
一个人能和自己沟通吗？
Yes. It is a question of becoming coherent to oneself.
是的。这是一个让自己变得连贯一致的问题。
Communication is generally understood to be between two or more people.
沟通通常被理解为两个或更多人之间的事情。
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.
但甚至不必是两个人。它可以是一个人和一本书之间。当我们说与自己沟通时，所有这些都隐含在内。
I do not think one can communicate with oneself.
我不认为一个人能和自己沟通。
Sir, in Sanskrit they use the word "swasamvada" for "self-communication".
先生，在梵文中，他们用“swasamvada”这个词来表示“自我沟通”。
I question that.
我质疑这一点。
Why?
为什么？
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.
当你使用“自我沟通”这个词时，我不认为你在和自己沟通。 你只是在观察正在发生的事情。 但一旦你使用“沟通”这个词，就有了二元性； 二元性意味着有你和书、你和我。
You said that there must be a certain sense of rapport, even for observing. I wonder if there is anything in that.
你说过，即使是观察，也必须有一种融洽感。我想知道这其中是否有什么道理。
The message is the most important part in communication.
信息是沟通中最重要的部分。
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?
不，我可以说些什么，如果你不处于融洽的状态，你就会扭曲它。你会扭曲信息。 所以重要的不是信息， 而是在某些层面上，为什么某些信息似乎能传达给某些人，却不能传达给另一些人？
Why is the message you want to communicate not received by the other?
D：你想传达的信息为什么没有被对方接收？
We are talking of the quality of communication and not what you communicate. When that quality is not there, you cannot communicate.
我们在谈论沟通的品质，而不是你沟通的内容。 当那种品质不存在时，你就无法沟通。
There is communication of words, there is communication of meaning and there is communication that is beyond word and meaning.
有词语的沟通，有意义的沟通，还有超越词语和意义的沟通。
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?
人类已经发展出某些工具，通过词语和意义来接收信息， 但他们没有工具来接收或接触超越词语和意义的东西。 毕竟，收音机、电视有特殊的接收工具。 我们有特殊的接收工具吗？
The problem of communication arises only when the message is distorted or incomplete.
只有当信息被扭曲或不完整时，沟通问题才会出现。
It is also in the meaning. You tell me something and I twist it.
也在意义之中。你告诉我一些事情，而我扭曲了它。
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.
F：不。你告诉我一些事情， 我用我所拥有的工具去听，然后根据我的工具去翻译。 不存在扭曲的问题。 我们发现对你所说内容的接收停留在较低的波长上。 不存在扭曲的问题。 你所说的似乎就是无法穿透。这与信息无关。
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.
要么工具没有被调好，要么它们根本不存在。 克里希那吉，你可以说任何你想说的，但除非工具到位，否则信息不会被接收。
This is simple.
这很简单。
Is the question one of instruments being tuned right or of new instruments coming into being? That is the essential question.
问题是工具被调好呢，还是新的工具出现？这是根本问题。
"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”说，当我们开始接触时， 对所说的话存在某种抗拒、某种理智上的反对， 而现在他说他已经把这一切都放在一边，他只是倾听。 为什么一开始会有抗拒？
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.
我们是在相隔九到十年之后见面的。 存在制约——社会的、政治的、意识形态的； 曾经试图用那种制约来理解你。
"P" asks is there a need for tuning the instrument?
“P”问，是否有必要调谐工具？
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.
拿一个孩子来说，小心地让他远离所有制约； 他仍然会有反应，因为他是传承的工具。 我所拥有的工具，以特定的方式运作。 这些工具本身无法以任何其他方式接收，只能以已知的方式接收。
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?
那么，问题是什么？ 问题是利用这些工具本身，让它们变得锋利、脆弱、敏感？ 还是新工具出现的问题？
May I say these are the only available instruments we have - our eyes, our ears. They prevent us from understanding.
D：我可以说这是我们拥有的唯一可用的工具——我们的眼睛、耳朵。它们阻碍我们理解。
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?
人类的历史已经完善了这些工具。它们被训练成只在单一通道上运作。每个感觉器官单独运作。 当听的时候，就没有看。当看的时候，就没有听。感官知觉的运作是分隔的。 我问你，是要使用同样的这些工具吗？
"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”提到了两件事，一个有抗拒的阶段和一个没有抗拒的阶段，但工具是一样的。
In the use of the instruments then, man has no choice. There might be an imperfect use of the instruments.
那么，在使用工具时，人没有其他选择。可能存在工具使用不当的情况。
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.
可能是工具使用不当，也可能是需要全新的工具。 让我们问克里希那吉。让我们把问题摆在他面前。你说它是同样的工具，还是新的工具？ 如果我接收到了需要传达的东西，我就不会质疑。 我就不会坐在这里了， 但我没有接收到必须传达的东西这一事实本身，意味着我所拥有的工具已经失败了。
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.
我的观点是，存在某种层面的沟通，但当我们去翻译它时，它就停留在词语和意义的层面。
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.
在听克里希那吉讲话时，有很多东西已经被传达了。这些工具能够接收。 但我确信，那需要发生的爆炸还没有发生。 尽管有意识的灵活性、接收的能力、所有工具协同运作的能力、 对时间问题的理解； 尽管有所有这些，爆炸尚未发生。
Can we impersonalize it? Can we understand objectively the problem of communication?
我们能把它非个人化吗？我们能客观地理解沟通的问题吗？
Up to the pashyanti of yours, we understand; pashyanti is "seeing".
直到你所谓的“pashyanti”，我们理解；pashyanti就是“看”。
Can we use the brain which is our instrument so that it does not create obstacles at any level?
我们能否使用作为我们工具的大脑，使其在任何层面都不制造障碍？
What is the problem?
问题是什么？
I am asking: you have seen us through a span of time. Do you think we are able to communicate with you?
我在问：你通过一段时间观察了我们。你认为我们能够与你沟通吗？
Obviously up to a certain point.
显然，到某个程度为止。
What is the hitch at that point?
在那个点上，障碍是什么？
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.
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。
There is no refusal on our part. There is only incapacity.
我们没有拒绝。只是无能为力。
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.
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。
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.
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。
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."
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？
That is not so.
不是那样的。
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.
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。
I do not think so.
我不这么认为。
I am just being tentative.
我只是试探性的。
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.
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。
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.
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。
That is not so:
不是那样的：
In the concrete instances which we are discussing this is not true.
在我们讨论的具体事例中，这不是真的。
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.
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。
I am opening up the problem.
我正在打开这个问题。
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:
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：
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.
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。
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.
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。
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.
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。
Now comes the crucial point.
现在是关键点。
Go slow. We have carefully come to this.
慢慢来。我们仔细地谈到了这一点。
Is that movement in space a question of my feeling the movement of space in you?
空间中的那个运动，就是我感觉到的问题，也在你的里面吗？
Please, simple words, simple words.
拜托，用简单的话，简单的词。
Is it a question of contacting the movement of emptiness which you are communicating?
你正在交流的，是一个触碰虚无中的运动吗？
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".
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”。
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.
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。
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.
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。
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?
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？
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.
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）
Now I want to ask something. Is there such a thing as co-experience, co-state?
现在，我想问一点。有没有共同体验，共同状态这样的东西？
There is no such thing as co-experience when there is experiencing.
在体验的时候，没有共同体验这样的东西。
I am talking about communication. Communication implies two.
我说的是交流。交流意味着两个。
Up to a point.
在一定程度上。
Co-experience?
共同体验？
When you and I are experiencing the sunset or sex, there is no two
当你和我在体验日落或者性爱的时候，没有两个。
The instruments are two.
仪器有两个。
Of course.
当然。
The perceiver is not there.
感知者不在那里。
Are these valid questions with regard to what we have talked of just now?
这些问题与我们刚刚谈到的事情有关？
About what?
什么事情？
No conclusion, and then moving together. Are there any valid questions in that?
没有结论，然后一起移动。那是一个有效的问题吗？
But we have not gone beyond the fact of coming to a conclusion. Take a little more time in that. We are slurring over.
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。
I see that there is also the threat to the image.
我还看到形象受到了威胁。
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.
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。
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.
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。
I want to go a little more into this image-making.
我想更多地介绍一下这个形象的制作工艺。
Every movement of thought is adding to the image and every negation is a denudation of the image.
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。
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.
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。
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.
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。
You are right, "P".
你是对的，普普尔。
You said image and conclusion end communication, but you have to be confronted with this.
你说过，形象和结论使交流终结，但是你不得不面对这。
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.
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。
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.
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。
But these million years of the past, how am I going to tackle that?
但这数百万年的过去，我该如何应对呢？
Can two brains with different pasts, different histories, experience, feel the same thing at the same level? How is it possible?
两个有着不同过去、不同历史、不同经验的头脑，能在同一层面上感受同一件事吗？这怎么可能？
The way you put the question is wrong.
你提问题的方式是错的。
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.
我无法打破那个花了一百万年建立起来的形象。我能打破这个工具，让它变得灵活、流动吗？仅此而已。
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.
有一点需要考虑。 存在着某些堆积物，当它们在沟通中被指出来时，就可以被放下。这种事情毫不费力地发生。
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.
我们所有这三十天里参与的人，都知道、都理解到思想结束的那个点。 我确信，必须发生的事情必须在那里发生。
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.
让我们用不同的方式来提出这个问题。 是否存在沟通或经验那非言语之物的可能性？ “经验”的整个含义都是错误的。
Let me understand that. It is a very important statement; the whole of experiencing is wrong.
让我理解这一点。这是一个非常重要的陈述；“经验”的整个概念都是错误的。
The conclusion or the idea that a state can be experienced by two is wrong. It can never be experienced.
认为一种状态可以被两个人共同经验的结论或观念是错误的。它永远无法被经验。
That is right.
没错。
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.
你知道那意味着什么吗？“它永远无法被经验”，这是什么意思？ 任何说“我经验过了”的人都没有经验过。对吗，先生？你看这有多么异常微妙。
The "enough" of it. It also brings out the extent to which man is caught in "the more".
它的“足够了”。它也揭示了人类陷入“更多”的程度。
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.
当你我看着日落时，只有日落。我相信性也是如此。 两个正在极度愤怒中的人也是如此。没有两个人。他们不说“我们在经验愤怒”。
What about the registering that goes on in the brain?
那大脑中进行的记录呢？
Which is what - the memory?
那是什么——记忆？
In the present the memory is not.
在当下，记忆不存在。
But it acts in the present.
但它在当下运作。
The memory is not yet created.
F：记忆尚未被创造。
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.
不要理论化。观察。你和我看到日落。 当它在我们面前时，我们都看到了它，我们都沉默了，因为它是壮丽的。 我们并没有停止所有的运动。所有的运动都停止了。那里没有两个人。
Are there not two separate "I consciousnesses"?
难道没有两个分离的“我之意识”吗？
Both of us experience that state of the sunset, with its fullness; you and I do not talk about experiencing at that minute.
我们两个都经验到了那日落的状态及其丰盈；你我在那一刻都不谈论经验。
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.
先生，我现在想问您一个问题， 因为我觉得让您的思想也对我们敞开很重要。 您带我们经历了语言的状态。 您的头脑一直在记录，而在某个点上，语言停止了。
That means you and I were not forming any image.
这意味着你和我没有在形成任何形象。
Yes. At any moment of time, was there in you a registration of this?
是的。在任何时刻，您内心对此有记录吗？
I do not quite follow.
我不太明白。
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?
您在思想中移动。您经历了通过词语、意义、分析进行沟通的整个过程。 到了灵活性和分析结束的点。 在下一次分析开始之前，有一个间隙。大脑在这个间隙中有任何记录吗？
No.
没有。
There is no part of your brain cells which bears the impact of this gap?
您的脑细胞中没有哪一部分承载着这个间隙的影响吗？
I wonder what you are talking about. I said "no".
我不知道你在说什么。我说了“没有”。
Is that because you are always in the gap?
那是因为您总是在那个间隙中吗？
But what are you trying to say?
但你想说什么呢？
How do you know that there was no registration of the experiencing?
您怎么知道没有任何经验的记录？
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?
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？
The reverse process.
这是一个反转过程。
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?
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？
No.
没有。
Of course not.
当然没有。
You are saying the other. I would ask, does seeing operate on the brain cells?
你说的是另一个。我想问，这种看，是脑细胞的操作吗？
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?
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？
I could not get it.
我还没明白。
The moment it says that, it ceases to be.
在它这样说的那一刻，它就已经消逝了。
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?
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？
How can you ask why?
你怎么能问为什么？
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?
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？
You have introduced the word "survival"
你引入了“生存”这个词。
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.
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。
How can I cut it off?
我怎样才能删掉它？
Freedom is the emptiness of all this, not the carrying of a burden of insults, regrets, happiness, fears, miseries.
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。
May I ask you one question? Am I capable of living within the groove of not registering....
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？
No.
不可能。
Living in the groove, it will register. There is nothing I can do to stop registering.
活在这凹槽中，它就会记录。我无法停止记录。
If you see this, there is a state of intelligence which refuses to register.
如果你看到这，就会有一种智慧的状态，拒绝去记录。
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.
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。
Agreed. The active present can help here, not there, not the past or the future; only the active present can help.
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。
When there is attention, not only does it not register, but it wipes out.
在注意的时候，它不仅没有记录，而且它在清除。
That is good enough, if the brain cells realize that they need not carry all the burdens of everyday incidents - that is enough.
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。