克：你是问，是否一个人有权夺去自己的生命——不仅仅是当他年迈或者意识到接近了年迈的时候，而且是在任何时候进行自杀，这从道德上讲是不是正确的？Questioner: I hesitate to bring morality into it because that is a conditioned thing. I was attempting to ask the question on a straight issue of intelligence. Fortunately at the moment the issue does not confront me personally so I am able to look at it, I think, fairly dispassionately; but as an exercise in human intelligence, what is the answer?发问者：我不想把道德引进来，因为道德是很局限的一件事。我想把这个问题单纯地看作是智慧的问题。幸运的是，这一刻我自己不需要面对这个问题，所以我能够看着它，我认为，是相当的冷静地看着；而把它仅仅作为人类智慧的一个练习，那答案是什么呢？Krishnamurti: You are saying, can an intelligent man commit suicide? Is that it?克: 你是说，一个智慧的人会自杀吗？是这样吗？Questioner: Or, can suicide be the action of an intelligent man, given certain circumstances?发问者：或者，在特定的环境下，自杀可以成为一个智者的行为吗？Krishnamurti: It is the same thing. Suicide comes, after all, either from complete despair, brought about through deep frustration, or from insoluble fear, or from the awareness of the meaninglessness of a certain way of living.克：那是一回事。毕竟结果都是自杀，或者是由于完全的绝望，由于深受挫折，或者来自无法消融的恐惧，或者因为意识到了某种特定的生活方式是毫无意义的。Questioner: May I interrupt to say that this is generally so, but I am trying to ask the question outside any motivation. When one arrives at the point of despair then there is a tremendous motive involved and it is hard to separate the emotion from the intelligence; I am trying to stay within the realm of pure intelligence, without emotion.发问者：我能插一句吗，情形大多确是如此，但是，我想问的问题是在所有动机之外的。当一个人濒临绝望的那一刻，其中就涉及了巨大的动机，而且很难把情感和智慧分开；我想要待在纯粹智慧的领域内，那里没有情感。Krishnamurti: You are saying, does intelligence allow any form of suicide? Obviously not.克：你是说，智慧会允许任何一种形式的自杀吗？显然不会。Questioner: Why not?发问者：为什么不会？Krishnamurti: Really one has to understand this word intelligence. Is it intelligence to allow the body to deteriorate through custom, through indulgence, through the cultivation of taste, pleasure and so on? Is that intelligence, is that the action of intelligence?克：一个人必须要真正地理解智慧这个词。是智慧允许身体衰退的吗，通过习惯，通过沉溺，通过培养嗜好，快感等等？那是智慧吗，那是智慧的行为吗？Questioner: No; but if one has arrived at a point in life where there may have been a certain amount of unintelligent use of the body which has not yet had any effect on it, one can't go back and re-live one's life.发问者：不是；但是如果一个人的生命已经那样了，他也许对身体有过某些不明智的使用，即使身体还没有感觉到任何的影响，可是他再也无法返回去重活一次了。Krishnamurti: Therefore, become aware of the destructive nature of the way we live and put an end to it immediately, not at some future date. The act of immediacy in front of danger is an act of sanity, of intelligence; and the postponement as well as the pursuit of pleasure indicate lack of intelligence.克：因此，要知道我们生活方式的破坏性，并且立即结束它，而不是在将来的某一天再结束。在危险面前立即行动，是明智的，智慧的行动；推迟以及对快感的追求则显示了缺乏智慧。Questioner: I see that.发问者：我知道了。Krishnamurti: But don't you also see something quite factual and true, that this isolating process of thought with its self-centred activity is a form of suicide? Isolation is suicide, whether it is the isolation of a nation or of a religious organization, of a family or of a community. You are already caught in that trap which will ultimately lead to suicide.克：但是你难道没有同时看到某样特别真实和正确的事情，那就是，伴随着自我中心的行为，思想的孤立过程即是某种形式的自杀？孤立就是自杀，无论它是一个国家还是一个宗教组织的孤立，一个家庭或者一个团体的孤立。你已经落入那陷阱中了，这个陷阱最终会导致自杀。Questioner: Do you mean the individual or the group?发问者：你是说一个个体还是一个团体?Krishnamurti: The individual as well as the group. You are already caught in the pattern.克：是个体和团体。你已经陷入在那个模式中了。Questioner: Which will ultimately lead to suicide? But everybody doesn't commit suicide!发问者：那个模式会最终导致自杀？可是并不是每个人都会自杀呀！Krishnamurti: Quite right, but the element of the desire to escape is already there - to escape from facing facts, from facing ''what is'', and this escape is a form of suicide.克：没错，但是想要逃避的渴望已经作为要素存在了——逃离面对事实，逃离面对“实际状况”，这种逃避就是自杀的一种形式。Questioner: This, I think, is the crux of what I am trying to ask, because it would seem from what you have just said that suicide is an escape. Obviously it is, ninety-nine times out of a hundred, but can there not also be - and this is my question - can there not also be a suicide that is not an escape, that is not an avoidance of what you call the ''what is'', but is on the contrary a response of intelligence to ''what is''? One can say that many kinds of neurosis are forms of suicide; what I am trying to ask is whether suicide can ever be other than a neurotic response? Cannot it also be the response of facing a fact, of human intelligence acting on an untenable human condition?发问者：这个，我想，就是我正设法询问的症结，因为从你刚才所说的看起来，自杀就是逃避。显然是的，99%都是，但是难道就不能有——这即是我的问题——难道就不能有一种自杀不是逃避，不是避免你所谓的“实际状况”，而正相反，是智慧应对“实际状况”的反应？可以说自杀的形式多数都是各种神经症；我想问的是，是否自杀可以不是神经质的反应？它就不能是面对事实的反应吗，不能是人的智慧对一种不堪一击的人类处境所做的反应吗？Krishnamurti: When you use the words ''intelligence'' and "untenable condition" it is a contradiction. The two are in contradiction.克：当你用“智慧”和“不堪一击的处境”这些词的时候，这本身就是一种矛盾。这两者是矛盾的。Questioner: You have said that if one is facing a precipice, or a deadly snake about to strike, intelligence dictates a certain action, which is an action of avoidance.发问者：你已经说过了，当一个人面对一个悬崖，或者一条致命的毒蛇就要攻击的时候，智慧支配了某种行动，那种行动就是躲避。Krishnamurti: Is it an action of avoidance or an act of intelligence?克：这是一个逃避的行为还是一个智慧的行为？Questioner: Can they not be the same sometimes? If a car comes at me on the highway and I avoid it...发问者：难道在某个时候它们就不能一样吗？如果公路上一辆车朝我奔来我就躲开它...Krishnamurti: That is an act of intelligence.克:那是一个智慧的行为。Questioner: But it is also an act of avoiding the car.发问者：但同时也是躲避车的行为。Krishnamurti: But that is the act of intelligence.克：但那是一个智慧的行为。Questioner: Exactly. Therefore, is there not a corollary in living when the thing confronting you is insoluble and deadly?发问者：确实。因此，当你在生活中所面对的某件事情是无法解决以及致命的，就不能有同样的一个结果吗?Krishnamurti: Then you leave it, as you leave the precipice: step away from it.克：那你就离开它，就像离开那个悬崖：远离它。Questioner: In that case the stepping away implies suicide.发问者：如果那样的话远离就意味着自杀。Krishnamurti: No, the suicide is an act of unintelligence.克：不是，自杀是一种不明智的行为。Questioner: Why?发问者：为什么？Krishnamurti: I am showing it to you.克：我正把它展示给你。Questioner: Are you saying that an act of suicide is categorically, inevitably, a neurotic response to life?发问者：你是说自杀的行为毫无例外地、不可避免地是一种对生活的神经质反应?Krishnamurti: Obviously. It is an act of unintelligence; it is an act which obviously means you have come to a point where you are so completely isolated that you don't see any way out.克：显然是。它是一种不明智的行为；这种行为显然意味着你已经走到了完全孤立的境地以至于你看不到任何的出路。Questioner: But I am trying for the purpose of this discussion to assume that there is no way out of the predicament, that one is not acting out of the motive of avoidance of suffering, that it is not stepping aside from reality.发问者：但是我想讨论的目的就是假设没有任何出路摆脱困境，人的行为并不是出于躲避受苦的动机，不是避开事实。Krishnamurti: Is there in life an occurrence, a relationship, an incident from which you cannot step aside?克：生活中有这样的事，有某种关系，某个意外是你无法躲开的吗？Questioner: Of course, there are many.发问者：当然，有很多。Krishnamurti: Many? But why do you insist that suicide is the only way out?克：很多？但是为什么你坚持自杀是唯一的出路？Questioner: If one has a deadly disease there is no escaping it.发问者：如果有人得了绝症就没办法逃避了。Krishnamurti: Be careful now, be careful of what we are saying. If I have cancer, and it is going to finish me, and the doctor says, ''Well, my friend, you have got to live with it'', what am I to do - commit suicide?克：现在注意了，注意你说的话。如果我得了癌症，它将结束我的生命，医生说，“好吧，我的朋友，你必须要和它一起生活了”，那么我会做什么——自杀？Questioner: Possibly.发问者：有可能。Krishnamurti: We are discussing this theoretically. If I personally had terminal cancer, then I would decide, I would consider what to do. It wouldn't be a theoretical question. I would then find out what was the most intelligent thing to do.克：我们是从理论上谈论这件事。如果我个人得了晚期癌症，那么我就会决定，我会考虑一下去做什么。它不会是一个理论问题。我那时会找出最具智慧的事去做。Questioner: Are you saying that I may not ask this question theoretically, but only if I am actually in that position?发问者：你是说我不应该从理论上问这个问题，除非我真的处于那种境地?Krishnamurti: That is right. Then you will act according to your conditioning, according to your intelligence, according to your way of life. If your way of life has been avoidance and escape, a neurotic business, then obviously you take a neurotic attitude and action. But if you have led a life of real intelligence, in the total meaning of that word, then that intelligence will operate when there is terminal cancer. Then I may put up with it; then I may say that I will live the few more months or years left to me.克：没错。那时你就会根据你的局限，依据你的智慧，依据你的生活方式做出反应。如果你的生活方式就是逃避和逃跑，神经质之类的，那么显然你就会采取神经质的态度和行为。但是如果你过着真正智慧的生活，活出了那个词全部含义，那么当得了晚期癌症的时候智慧就会运作。那时我也许会接纳它；那时我也许会说我会在好好度过留给我的最后几个月或者几年。Questioner: Or you may not say that.发问者：或者也许你不会那样说。Krishnamurti: Or I may not say that; but don't let us say that suicide is inevitable.克：也许我不会那样说；但是我们也不要说自杀是不可避免的。Questioner: I never said that; I asked if under certain stringent circumstances, such as terminal cancer, suicide could possibly be an intelligent response to the situation.发问者：我从来没那样说；我是问如果在特定的迫切环境下，例如晚期癌症，自杀也许会是一种针对那种状况的智慧的反应。Krishnamurti: You see, there is something extraordinary in this; life has brought you great happiness, life has brought you extraordinary beauty, life has brought you great benefits, and you went with it all. Equally, when you were unhappy you went with it, which is part of intelligence: now you come to terminal cancer and you say, ''I cannot bear it any longer, I must put an end to life.'' Why don't you move with it, live with it, find out about it as you go along?克：你看，这其中有一种非凡的东西；生活带给你巨大的快乐，生活带给你非凡的美，生活带给你巨大的益处，并且你和这一切共处。同样地，当你不高兴的时候你也和它共处，这即是智慧的一部分：现在你得了晚期癌症，然后你说，“我再也无法忍受了，我必须要结束生命。”为什么你不能和它共进，与它一起生活，并在前进中了解它？Questioner: In other words, there is no reply to this question until you are in the situation.发问者：换言之，你无法回答这个问题，除非你就处在那种状况中。Krishnamurti: Obviously. But you see that is why it is very important, I feel, that we should face the fact, face ''what is'', from moment to moment, not theorize about it. If someone is ill, desperately ill with cancer, or has become completely senile - what is the most intelligent thing to do, not for a mere observer like me, but for the doctor, the wife or the daughter?克：显然如此。但你知道那就是为何这个问题很重要，我觉得，我们应该面对事实，面对“实际状况”，一刻接着一刻地，而不是将它理论化。如果某人病了，绝望地得了癌症，或者已经彻底衰老——什么才是最智慧的行动？这并不是仅仅像我这样的旁观者需要回答的问题，它同样也需要医生、妻子和女儿来面对。Questioner: One cannot really answer that, because it is a problem for another human being.发问者：别人并不能真正回答这个问题，因为这个问题是属于另一个人的。Krishnamurti: That's just it, that is just what I am saying.克：正是如此，这就是我所说的。Questioner: And one hasn't the right, it would seem to me, to decide about the life or death of another human being.发问者：并且别人并没有权力，这其中也包括我，来决定另一个人的生死。Krishnamurti: But we do. All the tyrannies do. And tradition does; tradition says you must live this way, you mustn't live that way.克：但我们却这么做了。所有的暴政都这么做了。传统也这么做；传统总是告诉你们必须如此生活，你们不能那样生活。Questioner: And it is also becoming a tradition to keep people alive beyond the point where nature would have given in. Through medical skill people are kept alive - well, it's hard to define what is a natural condition - but it seems most unnatural to survive for as long as many people do today. But that is a different question.发问者：还有当依循自然规律应该放弃生命时，使人继续活下去也成为了一项传统。通过医学技术让人们继续存活下去——当然，也很难定义什么是自然状态——但现在很多人活了那么久，这看起来似乎也极其不自然。但那是另外一个问题。Krishnamurti: Yes, an entirely different question. The real question is, will intelligence allow suicide - even though doctors have said one has an incurable disease? One cannot possibly tell another what to do in this matter. It is for the human being who has the incurable disease to act according to his intelligence. If he is at all intelligent - which means that he has lived a life in which there has been love, care, sensitivity and gentleness - then such a person, at the moment when it arises, will act according to the intelligence which has operated in the past.克：是的，这是个完全不同的问题。真正的问题是，智慧会允许自杀存在吗——尽管医生说某人得了不治之症？在这件事情上，一个人并不能告诉另一个人该如何做。这需要得了不治之症的当事人自己依智慧去处理。如果他确实是智慧的——这意味着他生活中充满了爱、关怀、敏感以及温柔——那么这样的人，在事情发生的时候，将会根据过去一直运作着的智慧来行动。Questioner: Then this whole conversation is in a way meaningless because that is what would have happened anyway - because people would inevitably act according to what has happened in the past. They will either blow their brains out or sit and suffer until they die, or something in between.发问者：那么这整个谈话从某种意义上说就毫无价值，因为无论怎样，事情还是会照样发生——因为人们必然会根据过去的习性来行动。他们要么用枪把自己脑袋打开花，要么受着苦坐等死亡，要么用个折中的办法。Krishnamurti: No, it hasn't been meaningless. Listen to this; we have discovered several things - primarily that to live with intelligence is the most important thing. To live a way of life which is supremely intelligent demands an extraordinary alertness of mind and body, and we've destroyed the alertness of the body by unnatural ways of living. We are also destroying the mind, the brain, through conflict, through constant repression, constant explosion and violence. So if one lives a way of life that is a negation of all this, then that life, that intelligence, when confronted with incurable disease will act in the moment rightly.克：不，这并非没有意义。听着，我们已经发现了几件事情——首先智慧地生活是最重要的事情。过一种极其智慧的生活，需要对心智和身体都有一种非凡的敏锐，而我们已经用不自然的生活方式，破坏了这种身体的敏锐。我们也正在通过冲突，通过不断的压抑，不断的爆发和暴力，破坏我们的心智和头脑。所以如果一个人能否定这一切，以一种截然不同的方式生活，那么在面对不治之症时，那生活，那智慧，将会马上恰当地运作起来。Questioner: I see that I have asked you a question about suicide and have been given an answer on how to live rightly.发问者：我发现我问了你一个关于自杀的问题，但得到的是一个如何正确生存的答案。Krishnamurti: It is the only way. A man jumping over the bridge doesn't ask, ''Shall I commit suicide? '' He is doing it; it is finished. Whereas we, sitting in a safe house or in a laboratory, asking whether a man should or should not commit suicide, has no meaning.克：这是唯一的出路。当一个人从桥上跳下时他不会问：“我应该自杀吗？”他这么做了；一切都结束了。而我们，坐在安全的房子里或实验室里，问一个人应该还是不应该自杀，这毫无意义。Questioner: So it is a question one cannot ask.发问者：所以不能问这个问题。Krishnamurti: No, it must be asked - whether one should or should not commit suicide. It must be asked, but find out what is behind the question, what is prompting the questioner, what is making him want to commit suicide. We know a man who has never committed suicide, although he is always threatening to do so, because he is completely lazy. He doesn't want to do a thing, he wants everybody to support him; such a man has already committed suicide. The man who is obstinate, suspicious, greedy for power and position, has also inwardly committed suicide. He lives behind a wall of images. So any man who lives with an image of himself, of his environment, his ecology, his political power or religion, is already finished.克：不，必须问这个问题——人应该还是不应该自杀。必须要问，但是要发现问题背后是什么，是什么促使提问者问了这个问题，是什么使他想自杀。我们认识一个人，尽管他一直威胁说要自杀，但是却从来不曾实施过，因为他太懒了。他一件事情都不想做，他只想让所有的人支持他；这样的人已经自杀了。固执的、多疑的、贪求权利和地位的人，也已经在内心中自杀了。他活在意象之墙的背后。所以，任何活在他自己、他的环境、他的领地、他的政治权力和信仰所构筑的意象里的人，已经死了。Questioner: It would seem to me that what you are saying is that any life that is not lived directly...发问者：在我看来你所说的是指，任何没有直接地生活着的生活...Krishnamurti: Directly and intelligently.克：直接地以及智慧地。Questioner: Outside the shadows of images, of conditioning, of thinking.... Unless one lives that way, one's life is a kind of low-key existence.发问者：远离意象、局限、思想阴影地生活...除非一个人如此生活，否则他的生命就是一种压抑的存在。Krishnamurti: Of course it is. Look at most people; they are living behind a wall - the wall of their knowledge, their desires, their ambitious drives. They are already in a state of neurosis and that neurosis gives them a certain security, which is the security of suicide.克：当然如此。看看大多数的人们，他们生活在一堵墙的背后——那是他们的知识、欲望、野心驱使的围墙。他们已然生活在神经质的状态下，这种神经症给他们某种安全感，一种自杀式的安全感。Questioner: The security of suicide!发问者：自杀式的安全感！Krishnamurti: Like a singer, for example; to him the voice is the greatest security, and when that fails he is ready to commit suicide. What is really exciting and true is to find out for oneself a way of life that is highly sensitive and supremely intelligent; and this is not possible if there is fear, anxiety, greed, envy, the building of images or the living in religious isolation. That isolation is what all religions have supplied: the believer is definitely on the threshold of suicide. Because he has put all his faith in a belief, when that belief is questioned he is afraid and is ready to take on another belief, another image, commit another religious suicide. So, can a man live without any image, without any pattern, without any time-sense? I don't mean living in such a way as not to care what happens tomorrow or what happened yesterday, that is not living. There are those who say, ''Take the present and make the best of it"; that is also an act of despair. Really one should not ask whether or not it is right to commit suicide; one should ask what brings about the state of mind that has no hope - though hope is the wrong word because hope implies a future; one should ask rather, how does a life come about that is without time? To live without time is really to have this sense of great love, because love is not of time, love is not something that was or will be; to explore this and live with it is the real question. Whether to commit suicide or not is the question of a man who is already partially dead. Hope is the most dreadful thing. Wasn't it Dante who said, ''Leave hope behind when you enter the Inferno''? To him, paradise was hope, that's horrible.克：举个例子，就像一个歌手；对他来说，嗓音是最大的安全，当失去嗓音他就想去自杀。真正激动人心和真实的事情是，自己去发现一种高度敏感和极其智慧的生活方式；可一旦有恐惧、焦虑、贪婪、嫉妒，建立意象或是生活在宗教孤立中，就不可能发现智慧的生活方式。这种孤立是所有宗教都在提供的：信仰者无疑活在自杀的阴影中。因为他把自己所有的信心投入他的信仰中，当这信仰遭到质疑时，他会害怕并准备接受另一种信仰，另一种意象，进行另一种宗教自杀。所以，一个人能不能没有意象，没有模式，没有时间感地生活？我不是指一种对于昨天和明天发生的事漠不关心的生活，那样不是生活。有些人说，“把握现在，好好珍惜”，那同样是一种绝望的行为。其实我们不该问自杀是对还是错；而应该问是什么导致我们的心智处于一种无望的状态——尽管希望是个错误的词，因为它暗含着未来；我们应该问，如何才能带来一种没有时间的生活？没有时间的生活，就是真正拥有这伟大的爱的感觉，因为爱没有时间，爱不是过去如何和将来如何；探索这点并如此生活，才是真正的问题。是否应该自杀，是已经部分死亡的人才会提出的问题。而希望是最糟糕的事情。但丁不是曾说，“当进入地狱时，请把希望留在身后”？对他来说，天堂就是希望，那太可怕了。Questioner: Yes, hope is its own inferno.发问者：是的，希望就是它自身的地狱。THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'DISCIPLINE'《转变的紧迫性》之“纪律”Questioner: I've been brought up in a very restricted environment, in strict discipline, not only as to outward behaviour but also I was taught to discipline myself, to control my thoughts and appetites and to do certain things regularly. The result is that I find myself so hedged about that I can't do anything easily, freely and happily. When I see what is going on around me in this permissive society - the sloppiness, the dirt, the casual behaviour, the indifference to manners - I'm shocked, although at the same time I secretly desire to do some of these things myself. Discipline imposed certain values though; it brought with it frustrations and distortions, but surely some discipline is necessary - for instance, to sit decently, to eat properly, to speak with care? Without discipline one can't perceive the beauties of music or literature or painting. Good manners and training reveal a great many nuances in daily social commerce. When I observe the modern generation they have the beauty of youth, but without discipline it will soon fade away and they will become rather tiresome old men and women. There is a tragedy in all this. You see a young man, supple, eager, beautiful with clear eyes and a lovely smile, and a few years later you see him again and he is almost unrecognizable - sloppy, callous, indifferent, full of platitudes, highly respectable, hard, ugly, closed and sentimental. Surely discipline would have saved him. I, who have been disciplined almost out of existence, often wonder where the middle way is between this permissive society and the culture in which I was brought up. Isn't there a way to live without the distortion and suppression of discipline, yet to be highly disciplined within oneself?发问者：我在一个限制很多的环境中在严格的纪律中长大，不只有外在的行为约束，我也被教导要约束自己，控制我的思想和欲望，常规地做某些事情。这样做的结果是，我发现自己深受束缚，以致于无法轻松、自由、开心地做任何事。当我看到我周围这个悲观的世界都发生着什么——草率，污秽的言语，轻浮的行为，对礼貌的漠视——我感到震惊，尽管同时我自己私下里也想做些这样的事情。尽管纪律强加了某些价值观；它带来的是挫折和扭曲，但是某些纪律当然是必要的——例如，体面地坐着，得体地进食，关切地谈话？没有纪律，人就无法领会音乐、文学或者绘画的美。良好的教养和训练揭示出日常社会事务中许许多多的细微差别。当我观察年轻一代，他们有青春的美，但是若没有纪律，这种美很快就消退了，他们会变成相当乏味的老男人和老女人。所有这一切之中都是悲剧。你看到一个年轻人，柔韧灵活，热切，美丽，有着清澈的眼睛和可爱的笑容，但是几年后你再次见到他，几乎认不出他——邋遢，麻木，冷漠，充满老生常谈，非常体面，僵硬，丑陋，封闭，以及多愁善感。当然，纪律应该拯救了他。我几乎生来就持戒，我常常会疑惑，这个悲观的社会和我成长起来的文化之间的中间道路在哪里。难道没有一种生活方式之中没有纪律的扭曲和压抑吗，而同时一个人自己内在又非常的有纪律？Krishnamurti: Discipline means to learn, not to conform, not to suppress, not to imitate the pattern of what accepted authority considers noble. This is a very complex question for in it are involved several things: to learn, to be austere, to be free, to be sensitive, and to see the beauty of love.克：纪律意味着学习，而不是遵从，不是压抑，不是仿效公认的权威所认为的高尚模式。这是一个非常复杂的问题，因为其中涉及了几件事情：学习，简朴，自由，敏感，以及看到爱的美。In learning there is no accumulation. Knowledge is different from learning. Knowledge is accumulation, conclusions, formulas, but learning is a constant movement, a movement without a centre, without a beginning or an end. To learn about oneself there must be no accumulation in one's learning: if there is, it is not learning about oneself but merely adding to one's accumulated knowledge of oneself. Learning is the freedom of perception, of seeing. And you cannot learn if you are not free. So this very learning is its own discipline - you don't have to discipline yourself and then learn. Therefore discipline is freedom. This denies all conformity and control, for control is the imitation of a pattern. A pattern is suppression, suppression of "what is", and the learning about "what is" is denied when there is a formula of what is good and what is bad. The learning about "what is" is the freedom from "what is". So learning is the highest form of discipline. Learning demands intelligence and sensitivity.学习中没有积累。知识与学习是不同的。知识是积累，结论，模式，但是学习是一种不停的运动，没有中心的运动，没有开始或者结束。要了解自己，在了解过程中就不能有积累：如果有，那就不是了解自己了，而只是添加积累起来的关于自己的认识。学习是觉察和观看的自由。如果你不自由就无法学习。所以这学习本身就有它自己的纪律——你不用约束自己就能学习。所以纪律就是自由。这否定了所有的遵从和控制，因为控制只是仿效一种模式。模式就是压抑，对“现在如何”的压制，如果有什么是好什么是坏的模式，就对“现在如何”的了解就被否定了。了解“现在如何”，就从“现在如何”中解脱了出来。所以学习是最高形式的纪律。学习需要智慧和敏感。The austerity of the priest and the monk is harsh. They deny certain of their appetites but not others which custom has condoned. The saint is the triumph of harsh violence. Austerity is generally identified with self-denial through the brutality of discipline, drill and conformity. The saint is trying to break a record like the athlete. To see the falseness of this brings about its own austerity. The saint is stupid and shoddy. To see this is intelligence. Such intelligence will not go off the deep end to the opposite extreme. Intelligence is the sensitivity which understands, and therefore avoids, the extremes. But it is not the prudent mediocrity of remaining half-way between the two. To perceive all this clearly is to learn about it. To learn about it there must be freedom from all conclusions and bias. Such conclusions and bias are observation from a centre, the self, which wills and directs.牧师和僧侣的苦行很严苛。他们否定自己的某些欲望，不否定习俗所宽恕的另一些欲望。苦行通常被认为是通过残酷的戒律、训练和遵从进行的自我否定。圣人像运动员一样努力打破记录。看到这些的谬误，就带来了它自身的简朴。圣人是愚蠢的卑劣的。看到这一点，就是智慧。这种智慧不会走到对立的另一个深深的极端。智慧是了解进而避免极端的敏感。但智慧不是停在两个极端中间的审慎的平庸。清晰地看到这一切，就是去了解这些。要了解就必须有从所有结论和偏见中解脱出来的自由。这些结论和偏见是从一个中心，也就是自我进行的观察，自我有意志力以及方向。Questioner: Aren't you simply saying that to look properly you must be objective?发问者：你难道不就是在说要恰当地看你就必须是客观的？Krishnamurti: Yes, but the word objective is not enough. What we are talking about is not the harsh objectiveness of the microscope, but a state in which there is compassion, sensitivity and depth. Discipline, as we said, is learning, and learning about austerity does not bring about violence to oneself or to another. Discipline, as it is generally understood, is the act of will, which is violence.克：是的，但是客观这个词还不够。我们在讨论的不是显微镜这种严苛的客观，而是一种有慈悲、敏感和深度的状态。纪律，正如我们所说，是学习，对苦行的了解，并不会带来对自己或者对别人的暴力。通常所理解的纪律，是意志力的行为，也就是暴力。People throughout the world seem to think that freedom is the fruit of prolonged discipline. To see clearly is its own discipline. To see clearly there must be freedom, not a controlled vision. So freedom is not at the end of discipline, but the understanding of freedom is its own discipline. The two go together inseparably: when you separate them there is conflict. To overcome that conflict, the action of will comes into being and breeds more conflict. This is an endless chain. So freedom is at the beginning and not at the end: the beginning is the end. To learn about all this is its own discipline. Learning itself demands sensitivity. If you are not sensitive to yourself - to your environment, to your relationships - if you are not sensitive to what is happening round you, in the kitchen or in the world, then however much you discipline yourself you only become more and more insensitive, more and more self-centred - and this breeds innumerable problems. To learn is to be sensitive to yourself and to the world outside you, for the world outside is you. If you are sensitive to yourself you are bound to be sensitive to the world. This sensitivity is the highest form of intelligence. It is not the sensitivity of a specialist - the doctor, the scientist or the artist. Such fragmentation does not bring sensitivity.全世界的人们似乎都认为自由是长期守纪律的结果。看到这一点，本身就是纪律。要清楚地看到，就必须有自由，而不是某种受控的视野。所以自由不在纪律的结尾，而是，对自由的了解就是它自身的纪律。这两者不分离地并肩而行：当你把它们分开就有了冲突。要克服这冲突，就形成了意志力的行为，滋生了更多的冲突。这是个无穷无尽的链条。所以开始就要自由，而不是在结束的时候自由：开始就是结束。了解了这一切，就有了它自己的纪律。学习本身需要敏感。如果你对自己——对你的环境，对你的关系不敏感——如果你对自己周围发生的事情不敏感，不管是在厨房里还是在世界上，那么，不管你怎么约束自己，你只会变得越来越不敏感，越来越自我中心——而这滋生了无数的问题。学习就是对你自己，对你周围的世界敏感，因为外部世界就是你。如果你对自己敏感，那么你就必然会对世界敏感。这种敏感是最高形式的智慧。它不是一个专家——医生，科学家或者艺术家的敏感。这种细分无法带来敏感。How can one love if there is no sensitivity? Sentimentality and emotionalism deny sensitivity because they are terribly cruel; they are responsible for wars. So discipline is not the drill of the sergeant - whether in the parade-ground or in yourself - which is the will. Learning all day long, and during sleep, has its own extraordinary discipline which is as gentle as the new spring leaf and as swift as the light. In this there is love. Love has its own discipline, and the beauty of it escapes a mind that is drilled, shaped, controlled, tortured. Without such a discipline the mind cannot go very far.如果没有敏感，一个人要如何去爱？多愁善感和感情用事否定了敏感，因为它们极其残忍；它们对战争负责。所以纪律不是士兵的操练——不管是阅兵场上的还是你自身的——这是意志力。在整个白天和睡眠中都学习，就有它自己不同寻常的纪律，那就像春天的嫩叶一样轻柔，像阳光一样迅捷。其中就有爱。爱有它自身的纪律，它的美是一个受训的、被塑造、控制和折磨的头脑所无法捕捉的。没有这样的纪律，心智永远无法走得太远。THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'WHAT IS'《转变的紧迫性》之“现在如何”Questioner: I have read a great deal of philosophy, psychology, religion and politics, all of which to a greater or lesser degree are concerned with human relationships. I have also read your books which all deal with thought and ideas, and somehow I'm fed up with it all. I have swum in an ocean of words, and wherever I go there are more words - and actions derived from those words are offered to me: advice, exhortations, promises, theories, analyses, remedies. Of course one sets all these aside - you yourself have really done so; but for most of those who have read you, or heard you, what you say is just words. There may be people for whom all this is more than words, for whom it is utterly real, but I'm talking about the rest of us. I'd like to go beyond the word, beyond the idea, and live in total relationship to all things. For after all, that is life. You have said that one has to be a teacher and a pupil to oneself. Can I live in the greatest simplicity, without principles, beliefs, and ideals? Can I live freely, knowing that I am enslaved by the world? Crises don't knock on the door before they appear: challenges of everyday life are there before you are aware of them. Knowing all this, having been involved in many of these things, chasing various phantoms, I ask myself how I can live rightly and with love, clarity and effortless joy. I'm not asking how to live, but to live: the how denies the actual living itself. The nobility of life is not practising nobility.发问者：我读了大量的哲学、心理学、宗教和政治学，这些东西或多或少都在某种程度上关注人类的关系。我也读过你的书，都着眼于思想和观念，从某种程度上说，这些我都受够了。我游弋于语言的海洋，不管我走到哪儿，都是更多的语言——从这些语言里产生的行动被提供给我：建议，规劝，承诺，理论，分析，治疗方法。当然一个人得把这些都搁置一旁——你自己就真的这么做了；但是对于那些读过你的书或者听过你演讲的多数人来说，你所说的不过是语言而已。也许有些人，对他们来说这一切不只是语言，对他们来说这些极其真实，但是我说的是另外一些人。我想要超越文字，超越观念，生活在与所有事物完整的关系中。因为，毕竟这是生活。你说过，一个人必须同时是自己的老师和学生。我能不能生活得极其简单，没有原则、信念和理想？知道我被这个世界奴役了，我能不能自由地活着？危机在出现之前是不会来敲门的：日常生活的挑战在你觉察到它们之前，就已经在那里了。知道了这一切，身处这些事情之中，追寻各种幻象，我问自己我要如何才能正确地生活，带着爱、清晰和不费力的喜悦。我问的不是如何生活，而是生活本身：这个如何就否定了真实的生活本身。生命的高贵并不是练习高贵。Krishnamurti: After stating all this, where are you? Do you really want to live with benediction, with love? If you do, then where is the problem?克：说出这一切之后，你到了哪里？你真的想带着至福带着爱生活吗？如果是的，那么问题在哪里？Questioner: I do want to, but that doesn't get me anywhere. I've wanted to live that way for years, but I can't.发问者：我真的想这样，但是这没有把我带到任何地方。多年来我一直想要这样生活，但是我做不到。Krishnamurti: So though you deny the ideal, the belief, the directive, you are very subtly and deviously asking the same thing which everybody asks: this is the conflict between the "what is" and the "what should be".克：所以尽管你否定了理想、信念、指导，但是你还在很隐蔽地拐弯抹角地问所有人都问的同一件事：这就是“现在如何”与“应当如何”之间的冲突。Questioner: Even without the "what should be", I see that the "what is" is hideous. To deceive myself into not seeing it would be much worse still.发问者：即使没有“应当如何”，我也看到了“现在如何”是丑陋的。欺骗我自己无视这一点，那更要糟糕得多。Krishnamurti: If you see "what is" then you see the universe, and denying "what is" is the origin of conflict. The beauty of the universe is in the "what is; and to live with "what is" without effort is virtue.克：如果你看到了“现在如何”，那么你就看见了宇宙，否认“现在如何”，正是冲突的根源。宇宙的美就在“现在如何”中；不费力地与“现在如何”共处就是美德。Questioner: The "what is" also includes confusion, violence, every form of human aberration. To live with that is what you call virtue. But isn't it callousness and insanity? Perfection doesn't consist simply in dropping all ideals! Life itself demands that I live it beautifully, like the eagle in the sky: to live the miracle of life with anything less than total beauty is unacceptable.发问者：“现在如何”也包含了困惑，暴力，人类各种形式的异常行为。与现在如何共处就是你所说的美德。但是它难道不是冷酷和疯狂吗？完美并不是简简单单地存在于放下所有的理想中！生活本身要求我美丽地活着，就像天空中的鹰一样：不带着完全的美活出生命的奇迹，这是不可接受的。Krishnamurti: Then live it! Questioner: I can't, and I don't.克：那么就活出来！发问者：我不能，我办不到。Krishnamurti: If you can't, then live in confusion; don't battle with it. Knowing the whole misery of it, live with it: that is "what is". And to live with it without conflict frees us from it.克：如果你不能，那就生活在困惑中；不要与它斗争。知道它所有的痛苦所在，与它共处：这就是“现在如何”。没有冲突地与之共处就把我们从中解脱了出来。Questioner: Are you saying that our only fault is to be self-critical?发问者：你是说我们唯一的错就是自我批判吗？Krishnamurti: Not at all. You are not sufficiently critical. You go only so far in your self-criticism. The very entity that criticizes must be criticized, must be examined. If the examination is comparative, examination by yardstick, then that yardstick is the ideal. If there is no yardstick at all - in other words, if there is no mind that is always comparing and measuring - you can observe the "what is", and then the "what is" is no longer the same.克：完全不是。你的批判性还不够。你仅仅止步于你的自我批判。批判的那个实体本身必须被批判，必须被审视。如果这审视是比较性的，用标准来衡量，那么那个标准就是理想。如果完全没有标准——换句话说，如果没有那个一直在比较和衡量的头脑——你就能观察到“现在如何”，那么“现在如何”就不再依然如故了。Questioner: I observe myself without a yardstick, and I'm still ugly.发问者：我不用标准来观察我自己，可我还是丑陋的。Krishnamurti: All examination means there is a yardstick. But is it possible to observe so that there is only observation, seeing, and nothing else - so that there is only perception without a perceiver?克：所有的检验都意味着有个标准。但是否可能有这样一种观察，只有观察和看到，别的什么都没有——这样就只有觉察而没有觉察者？Questioner: What do you mean?发问者：你是什么意思？Krishnamurti: There is looking. The assessment of the looking is interference, distortion in the looking: that is not looking; instead it is evaluation of looking - the two are as different as chalk and cheese. Is there a perception of yourself without distortion, only an absolute perception of yourself as you are?Questioner: Yes.克：存在着观察。对观察的评估是对观察的干扰和扭曲：那不是观察；相反，那是对观察的评价——这两者的区别就像粉笔和奶酪的区别。有没有一种对你自己的觉知，其中没有扭曲，只有对你自己如实而单纯的觉察？发问者：有的。Krishnamurti: In that perception is there ugliness?Questioner: There is no ugliness in the perception, only in what is perceived.克：在那种觉察中有丑陋吗？发问者：在那种觉察中没有丑陋，只有在觉察到的东西中才有丑陋。Krishnamurti: The way you perceive is what you are. Righteousness is in purely looking, which is attention without the distortion of measure and idea. You came to enquire how to live beautifully, with love. To look without distortion is love, and the action of that perception is the action of virtue. That clarity of perception will act all the time in living. That is living like the eagle in the sky; that is living beauty and living love.克：你觉察的方式就是现在的你。正直在单纯的观察中，也就是在没有被衡量和观念扭曲的关注中。你来询问如何美丽地有爱地活着。不扭曲地观察就是爱，那觉察的行动就是美德的行动。觉知的清澈会一直在生活中运作。那就是像天空中的鹰一样的生活；那就是活生生的美和活生生的爱。THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'THE SEEKER'《转变的紧迫性》之“追寻者”Questioner: What is it I'm seeking? I really don't know, but there is a tremendous longing in me for something much more than comfort, pleasure and the satisfaction of fulfilment. I happen to have had all these things, but this is something much more - something at an unfathomable depth that is crying to be released, trying to tell me something. I've had this feeling for many years but when I examine it I don't seem to be able to touch it. Yet it is always there, this longing to go beyond the mountains and the skies to find something. But perhaps this thing is there right in front of me, only I don't see it. Don't tell me how to look: I've read many of your writings and I know what you mean. I want to reach out my hand and take this thing very simply, knowing very well that I cannot hold the wind in my fist. It is said that if you operate on a tumour neatly you can pluck it out in one pocket, intact. In the same way I should like to take this whole earth, the heavens and the skies and the seas in one movement, and come upon that blessedness on the instant. Is this at all possible? How am I to cross to the other shore without taking a boat and rowing across the waters? I feel that's the only way.发问者：我在追寻什么？我真的不知道，但是我内心有一种强烈的渴望，渴望一种远远超出舒适、快乐和成就感的东西。那些东西碰巧我都有，但我渴望的远远不只这些——在深不可测的地方有某种东西急切地想要释放出来，试图告诉我什么。多年来我一直有这种感觉，但是当我审视它时，我似乎无法触及它。但是它始终在那儿，这种想要跨越高山和天空去发现什么的渴望。但是也许这东西就在我面前，只是我看不到它。不要告诉我怎么去看：我读过你写的很多书，我知道你的意思是什么。我想要伸出我的手，轻而易举地拿到这东西，同时又很明白我无法把风握在我的拳头里。听说如果你干净利索地对一个肿瘤动手术，你能一下子就把它摘除下来，而且完好无损。同样，我想把这整个地球，天空和海洋一举拿下，即刻遭遇那天赐的幸福。这究竟可能吗？我要怎样跨到彼岸而不用乘船或者划过水面？我觉得那是唯一的途径。Krishnamurti: Yes, that's the only way - to find oneself strangely and unaccountably on the other shore, and from there to live, act and do everything that one does in daily life.克：是的，那是唯一的途径——发现自己不可思议地莫名其妙地就在彼岸了，从那里开始生活，行动，以及做日常生活中的所有事情。Questioner: Is it only for the few? Is it for me? I really don't know what to do. I've sat silent; I've studied, examined, disciplined myself, rather intelligently I think, and of course I've long ago discarded the temples, the shrines and the priests. I refuse to go from one system to another; it is all too futile. So you see I have come here with complete simplicity.发问者：只有少数人才能这样吗？我可以吗？我真的不知道该怎么办。我静坐过；我研究过，审视过，约束过我自己，我想我用的是相当明智的方式，当然我很早以前就抛弃了寺庙、神龛和牧师。我拒绝从一个体系进入另一个体系；那些都毫无意义。所以你看，我来到了这里，内心有完完全全的简单。Krishnamurti: I wonder if you really are so simple as you think! From what depth are you asking this question, and with what love and beauty? Can your mind and heart receive this? Are they sensitive to the slightest whisper of something that comes unexpectedly?克：我想知道你是否真的如你所想的那么简单！你是从怎样的深度来问出这个问题的，带着怎样的爱和美？你的头脑和心灵能接收到这些吗？它们对不期而来的极其低微的细语都很敏感吗？Questioner: If it is as subtle as all that, how true is it, and how real? Intimations of such subtlety are usually fleeting and unimportant.发问者：如果像所有那些一样微妙，那么它有多真实，多真切？这种微妙的蛛丝马迹通常转瞬即逝，并不重要。Krishnamurti: Are they? Must everything be written out on the blackboard? Please, sir, let us find out whether our minds and hearts are really capable of receiving immensity, and not just the word.克：是吗？每件事都必须写在黑板上吗？先生，请你让我们去发现我们的头脑和心灵是否真的能够接收到无限，而不仅仅是词语。