THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'BELIEF'/《转变的紧迫性》之“信仰”
THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'BELIEF'《转变的紧迫性》之“信仰”
Questioner: I am one of those people who really believe in God. In India I followed one of the great modern saints who, because he believed in God, brought about great political changes there. In India the whole country throbs to the beat of God. I have heard you talk against belief so probably you don't believe in God. But you are a religious person and therefore there must be in you some kind of feeling of the Supreme. I have been all over India and through many parts of Europe, visiting monasteries, churches and mosques, and everywhere I have found this very strong, compelling belief in God whom one hopes shapes one's life. Now since you don't believe in God, although you are a religious person, what exactly is your position with regard to this question? Why don't you believe? Are you an atheist? As you know, in Hinduism you can be an atheist or a theist and yet be equally well a Hindu. Of course it's different with the Christians. If you don't believe in God you can't be a Christian. But that's beside the point. The point is that I have come to ask you to explain your position and demonstrate to me its validity. People follow you and therefore you have a responsibility, and therefore I am challenging you in this way.
发问者：我是真的信神的那些人之一。在印度我追随过一个伟大的现代圣人，他因为信神，在印度实现了巨大的政治变革。印度这整个国家都随着神的节奏跳动。我听说你在讲话里反对信仰，所以也许你不信神。但你是个宗教人物，所以你内在必然对那至高无上者有某种感觉。我走遍了印度，也去过欧洲的很多地方，拜访过修道院、教堂和清真寺，我发现到处都有这种非常强烈的无法抗拒的对神的信仰，人们希望神来塑造他们的生命。那么，尽管你是个宗教人物，既然你不信神，那么对于这个问题来说，你究竟是个什么立场？你为什么没有信仰？你是个无神论者吗？你知道，在印度教里，你可以是个无神论者，也可以是个有神论者，但都同样地还是印度教徒。当然对于基督徒来说，情形是不同的。如果你不信上帝，你就不可能是个基督徒。但那是次要的问题。问题是，我来请你解释一下你的立场，并向我说明一下你立场的正确性。人们追随你，因而你有这个责任，所以我是在用这种方式来挑战你。
Krishnamurti: Let us first of all clear up this last point. There are no followers, and I have no responsibility to you or to the people who listen to my talks. Also I am not a Hindu or anything else, for I don't belong to any group, religious or otherwise. Each one must be a light to himself. Therefore there is no teacher, no disciple. This must be clearly understood from the very beginning otherwise one is influenced, one becomes a slave to propaganda and persuasions. Therefore anything that is being said now is not dogma or creed or persuasion: we either meet together in understanding or we don't. Now, you said most emphatically that you believe in God and you probably want through that belief to experience what one might call the godhead. Belief involves many things. There is belief in facts that you may not have seen but can verify, like the existence of New York or the Eiffel Tower. Then you may believe that your wife is faithful though you don't actually know it. She might be unfaithful in thought yet you believe she is faithful because you don't actually see her going off with someone else; she may deceive you in daily thought, and you most certainly have done the same too. You believe in reincarnation, don't you, though there is no certainty that there is any such thing? However, that belief has no validity in your life, has it? All Christians believe that they must love but they do not love - like everyone else they go about killing, physically or psychologically. There are those who do not believe in God and yet do good. There are those who believe in God and kill for that belief; those who prepare for war because they claim they want peace, and so on. So one has to ask oneself what need there is to believe at all in anything, though this doesn't deny the extraordinary mystery of life. But belief is one thing and "what is" is another. Belief is a word, a thought, and this is not the thing, any more than your name is actually you.
克：让我们首先来澄清一下这最后一点。没什么追随者，我对你没有责任，对那些来听我讲话的人也没有责任。我也不是一个印度教徒或者别的什么身份，因为我不属于任何一个团体，不管是不是宗教性的。每个人都必须做他自己的光。所以没有老师，也没有弟子。从一开始这点就必须明明白白，否则你就会被影响，你就会变成宗教宣传或者说教的奴隶。所以，我说的任何话，都不是教条、信条或者信仰：我们要么在了解中相遇，要么没有。现在，你说最重要的是你信神，你也许希望通过这信仰来体验所谓的神性。信仰涉及到很多事情。有对事实的相信，这事实你不一定亲眼看到，但是可以验证，就像纽约或者埃菲尔铁塔的存在一样。然后你可能相信你的妻子是忠诚的，尽管你并不知道事实是不是这样。她也许在思想上不忠，但是你相信她忠诚，因为你并没有真的看到她跟别人跑掉；她可能在日常思想上欺骗你，而你很可能也做着同样的事情。尽管没法确定确实有转世这回事，但是你相信转世，不是吗？然而，这信仰在你的生活中并没有什么效力，不是吗？所有的基督徒都相信他们必须去爱，但是他们不爱——就跟别人一样，他们四处杀戮，不管是身体上还是心理上的杀戮。有些人不信神但是做着善事。有些人信神，并为这个信仰去杀人；那些备战的人声称那是因为他们想要和平，等等等等。所以一个人得问问自己，到底有什么必要去相信任何事情，尽管这么说并不否定生命那异乎寻常的神秘。但是信仰是一回事，“现实状况”是另一回事。信仰是一个词语，一个想法，那不是事实本身，真实的你远远不只是你的名字而已。
Through experience you hope to touch the truth of your belief, to prove it to yourself, but this belief conditions your experience. It isn't that the experience comes to prove the belief, but rather that the belief begets the experience. Your belief in God will give you the experience of what you call God. You will always experience what you believe and nothing else. And this invalidates your experience. The Christian will see virgins, angels and Christ, and the Hindu will see similar deities in extravagant plurality. The Muslim, the Buddhist, the Jew and the Communist are the same. Belief conditions its own supposed proof. What is important is not what you believe but only why you believe at all. Why do you believe? And what difference does it make to what actually is whether you believe one thing or another? Facts are not influenced by belief or disbelief. So one has to ask why one believes at all in anything; what is the basis of belief? Is it fear, is it the uncertainty of life - the fear of the unknown the lack of security in this everchanging world? Is it the insecurity of relationship, or is it that faced with the immensity of life, and not understanding it, one encloses oneself in the refuge of belief? So, if I may ask you, if you had no fear at all, would you have any belief?
你希望通过体验来触及你的信仰的真实性，向你自己证明这点，但是这信仰局限了你的体验。不是由体验来证明信仰，而是由信仰引发了体验。你对神的信仰会带给你所谓神的体验。你体验到的始终只是你所相信的而已，别的什么也没有。而这就证明了你的体验的错误。基督徒会看见圣母、天使和基督，印度徒会看见不计其数的类似的神祗。穆斯林、佛教徒、犹太教徒和共产主义者也都一样。信仰限定了它自身想要的证明。重要的不是你相信什么，而是你到底为什么要去相信。你为什么相信？你相信这个还是相信那个，对于事实究竟如何，有任何改变吗？相信或者不信影响不了事实。所以一个人必须要问一问，究竟为什么要去相信任何事情；信念的基础是什么？是不是恐惧，是不是生命的不确定性——对未知的恐惧，在这个无时无刻不在改变的世界中缺乏安全感？是不是关系中的不安全感，是不是面对广阔无垠的生命，无法了解它，人就会把自己封闭在信仰的避难所里？所以，如果我可以问你的话，如果你根本没有恐惧，你还需要任何信仰吗？
Questioner: I am not at all sure that I am afraid, but I love God, and it is this love that makes me believe in Him.
Krishnamurti: Do you mean to say you are devoid of fear? And therefore know what love is?
Questioner: I have replaced fear with love and so to me fear is non-existent, and therefore my belief is not based on fear.
发问者：我根本不确定我是不是恐惧，但是我热爱神，是这种爱让我相信他。
克：你的意思是说你没有恐惧了？所以你知道爱是什么？
发问者：我用爱替换掉了恐惧，所以对我来说恐惧是不存在的，所以我的信仰不是基于恐惧的。
Krishnamurti: Can you substitute love for fear? Is that not an act of thought which is afraid and therefore covers up the fear with the word called love, again a belief? You have covered up that fear with a word and you cling to the word, hoping to dissipate fear.
克：你能用爱代替恐惧吗？那不正是恐惧着的思想的行为吗，然后用爱这个词，也就是又一个信仰来掩盖恐惧？你用一个词掩盖起了恐惧，你紧抓着这个词，希望能驱散恐惧。
Questioner: What you are saying disturbs me greatly. I am not at all sure I want to go on with this, because my belief and my love have sustained me and helped me to lead a decent life. This questioning of my belief brings about a sense of disorder of which, quite frankly, I am afraid.
发问者：你说的话让我感到深深不安。我完全不确定我是否愿意继续探讨下去，因为我的信仰和我的爱一直支撑着我，帮我过着一种体面的生活。对我的信仰的这种质疑带来了一种失序感，坦白地说，这点我很害怕。
Krishnamurti: So there is fear, which you are beginning to discover for yourself. This disturbs you. Belief comes from fear and is the most destructive thing. One must be free of fear and of belief. Belief divides people, makes them hard, makes them hate each other and cultivate war. In a roundabout way, unwillingly, you are admitting that fear begets belief. Freedom from belief is necessary to face the fact of fear. Belief like any other ideal is an escape from "what is". When there is no fear then the mind is in quite a different dimension. Only then can you ask the question whether there is a God or not. A mind clouded by fear or belief is incapable of any kind of understanding, any realization of what truth is. Such a mind lives in illusion and can obviously not come upon that which is Supreme. The Supreme has nothing to do with your or anybody else's belief, opinion or conclusion.
克：所以是有恐惧的，你正开始自己去发现这点。这让你不安。信仰来自恐惧，而这是最具破坏力的东西。一个人必须摆脱恐惧，摆脱信仰。信仰将人们分裂，把他们变得冷酷，让他们彼此憎恨，催生战争。你在用一种迂回的方式，不情愿地承认了恐惧产生信仰。从信仰中解脱出来，需要面对恐惧这个事实。只有这时你才能问有没有神这个问题。被恐惧或者信仰笼罩的头脑是无法有任何了解的，完全无法领悟真相是什么。这样的头脑生活在幻象中，显然不可能遭遇那至高无上者。那至高无上者与你的或者别人的信仰、观念或者结论完全无关。
Not knowing, you believe, but to know is not to know. To know is within the tiny field of time and the mind that says, "I know" is bound by time and so cannot possibly understand that which is. After all, when you say, "I know my wife and my friend", you know only the image or the memory, and this is the past. Therefore you can never actually know anybody or anything. You cannot know a living thing, only a dead thing. When you see this you will no longer think of relationship in terms of knowing. So one can never say, "There is no God", or "I know God". Both these are a blasphemy. To understand that which is there must be freedom, not only from the known but also from the fear of the known and from the fear of the unknown.
因为不知道，所以你相信，但是知道就是不知道。知道是在时间这个狭小的范围内的，说“我知道”的头脑受限于时间，所以不可能了解真实状况。毕竟，当你说，“我知道我的妻子和我的朋友”，你知道的只是意象或者记忆，那是过去。所以你永远无法真正知道任何人或者任何事情。你无法知道一个活生生的东西，只能知道死去的东西。当你看到了这点，你就不会再以知道的方式来看待关系了。所以你永远不会说，“没有神”，或者“我知道神”。这两者都是亵渎。要了解真实状况，就必须有自由，不只是从已知中解脱的自由，而且是从对已知的恐惧和对未知的恐惧中解脱出来的自由。
Questioner: You speak of understanding that which "is" and yet you deny the validity of knowing. What is this understanding if it is not knowing?
发问者：你说了解“真实”状况，但是你又否定了知道的正确性。如果不知道，那这种了解又是什么？
Krishnamurti: The two are quite different. Knowing is always related to the past and therefore it binds you to the past. Unlike knowing understanding is not a conclusion, not accumulation. If you have listened you have understood. Understanding is attention. When you attend completely you understand. So the understanding of fear is the ending of fear. Your belief can therefore no longer be the predominant factor; the understanding of fear is predominant. When there is no fear there is freedom. It is only then that one can find what is true. When that which "is" is not distorted by fear then that which "is" is true. It is not the word. You cannot measure truth with words. Love is not a word nor a belief nor something that you can capture and say, "It is mine". Without love and beauty, that which you call God is nothing at all.
克：这两个是非常不同的。知道总是与过去相关，因而它就把你和过去捆绑在一起了。与知道不同，了解不是一个结论，不是积累。如果你刚才聆听了，你就已经明白了。了解是关注。当你全神贯注时，你会了解。所以对恐惧的了解，就是恐惧的终结。你的信仰就不再是主导因素了；对恐惧的了解占了主导。没有了恐惧就有了自由。只有这时你才能发现真实的是什么。当“真实”状况没有被恐惧扭曲的时候，“真实”状况才是实实在在的。那不是词语。你无法用语言衡量真相。爱不是一个词，不是一个信念，也不是你能捕捉到的什么东西，说“这是我的”。没有爱和美，你所谓的神根本什么都不是。 真有效率，拜读了！ [b]回复 [url=http://j-krishnamurti.org.cn/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=980&ptid=363]1#[/url] [i]Sue[/i] [/b]
“没什么追随者，我对你没有责任，对那些来听我讲话的人也没有责任。”
“所以，我说的任何话，都不是教条、信条或者信仰：我们要么在了解中相遇，要么没有。”
把克权威化或者去权威化都还是思想的把戏。
页:
[1]