THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'DREAMS'/《转变的紧迫性》之“梦”

Sue

THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'DREAMS'
《转变的紧迫性》之“梦”

     Questioner: I have been told by professionals that dreaming is as vital as daytime thinking and activity, and that I would find my daily living under great stress and strain if I did not dream. They insist, and here I'm using not their jargon but my own words, that during certain periods of sleep the movement of the eyelids indicates refreshing dreams and that these bring a certain clarity to the brain. I am wondering whether the stillness of the mind which you have often spoken about might not bring greater harmony to living than the equilibrium brought about by patterns of dreams. I should also like to ask why the language of dreams is one of symbols.

发问者：有专业人士曾经告诉我，做梦就像白天的思考和行为一样至关重要，如果我不做梦，就会发现自己的日常生活处于巨大的压力和紧张之中。他们坚称，这里我用的不是我自己的话，而是他们的术语，在睡眠的某些阶段中，眼睑的运动标志着梦在更新，而这给大脑带来某种清晰。我想知道，相对于各种形式的梦为心情带来的平静，你经常提到的头脑的寂静，是否并不能给生活带来更多和谐。我也想问问为什么梦的语言是一种象征性的符号。

     Krishnamurti: Language itself is a symbol, and we are used to symbols: we see the tree through the image which is the symbol of the tree, we see our neighbour through the image we have about him. Apparently it is one of the most difficult things for a human being to look at anything directly, not through images, opinions, conclusions, which are all symbols. And so in dreams symbols play a large part and in this there is great deception and danger. The meaning of a dream is not always clear to us, although we realize it is in symbols and try to decipher them. When we see something, we speak of it so spontaneously that we do not recognise that words are also symbols. All this indicates, doesn't it, that there is direct communication in technical matters but seldom in human relationships and understanding? You don't need symbols when somebody hits you. That is a direct communication. This is a very interesting point: the mind refuses to see things directly, to be aware of itself without the word and the symbol. You say the sky is blue. The listener then deciphers this according to his own reference of blueness and transmits it to you in his own cipher. So we live in symbols, and dreams are a part of this symbolic process. We are incapable of direct and immediate perception without the symbols, the words, the prejudices and conclusions. The reason for this is also quite apparent: it is part of the self-centred activity with its defences, resistances, escapes and fears. There is a ciphered response in the activity of the brain, and dreams must naturally be symbolic because during the waking hours we are incapable of direct response or perception.

克：语言本身就是一种符号，而我们都对符号习以为常：我们通过意象观察树，而这意象是树的符号，我们通过对我们的邻居抱有的意象来看他。很显然，不通过意象、观点、结论这些符号，直接地观察事物，对人类来说是最困难的事情之一。同样在梦里，符号也有巨大的影响，其中有巨大的欺骗和危险。梦的含义对我们来说并不总是那么清晰，尽管我们意识到梦里充满符号，并且试图去破解它们。当我们看到了点什么，我们就会不由自主地谈论起来，却没有意识到语言也是符号。这一切都表明，在技术方面可以直接沟通，但是在人类的关系和理解方面，却鲜有直接的交流，不是吗？有人打你的时候，你并不需要符号。那是一种直接的交流。这点非常有趣：头脑拒绝直接看到事物，不带语言和符号地觉察它自己。你说天空是蓝色的。然后听者根据他自己对蓝色的理解来破解你的话，再用他自己的密码传达给你。所以我们生活在符号里，而梦也是这符号化过程的一部分。我们无法不带着符号、语言、偏见和结论即刻直接地去觉察。而造成这点的原因也相当明显：这是带着防御、抵抗和结论的自我中心行为的一部分。在头脑的活动中有一种密码式的反应，而梦必然是符号化的，因为在醒着的时候，我们无法直接地反应或者观察。

     Questioner: It seems to me that this then is an inherent function of the brain.
     Krishnamurti: Inherent means something permanent, inevitable and lasting. Surely any psychological state can be changed. Only the deep, constant demand of the brain for the physical security of the organism is inherent. Symbols are a device of the brain to protect the psyche; this is the whole process of thought. The "me" is a symbol, not an actuality. Having created the symbol of the "me", thought identifies itself with its conclusion, with the formula, and then defends it: all misery and sorrow come from this.

发问者：在我看来，这就是大脑固有的一种功能。
克：固有意味着某种永久的、不可避免的、持续的东西。但任何心理状态都是肯定会改变的。只有大脑对有机体身体上安全的持久需求才是固有的。符号是大脑为了保护心智的一种设置；而这就是整个思想过程。“我”是个符号，不是真实。思想制造出了“我”这个符号，把自己等同于它的结论和模式，然后对其进行捍卫：所有的苦难和悲伤由此而生。

     Questioner: Then how do I get around it?
     Krishnamurti: When you ask how to get around it, you are still holding on to the symbol of the "me", which is fictitious; you become something separate from what you see, and so duality arises.
     Questioner: May I come back another day to continue this?

发问者：那么我要如何避开它？
克：当你问如何避开它时，你还是在紧抓着“我”这个虚幻的符号不放；你就变成了不同于你所见的某种东西，而这就产生了二元性。
发问者：我可以改天再回来继续这个话题吗？

     * * *
     Questioner: You were good enough to let me come back, and I should like to continue where we left off. We were talking about symbols in dreams and you pointed out that we live by symbols, deciphering them according to our gratification. We do this not only in dreams but in everyday life; it is our usual behaviour. Most of our actions are based on the interpretation of the symbols or images that we have. Strangely, after having talked with you the other day, my dreams have taken a peculiar turn. I have had very disturbing dreams and the interpretation of those dreams took place as they were happening within the dreams. It was a simultaneous process; the dream was being interpreted by the dreamer. This has never happened to me before.

发问者：能让我回来，你真好，我想从我们上次说到的地方继续探讨。我们说到了梦里的符号，你指出我们依靠符号生活，并根据我们的喜好来对其进行破解。我们不只是在梦里会这么做，而且在日常生活中也如此；这是我们经常的行为。我们的大部分行为都基于对我们抱有的各种符号或意象的诠释。奇怪的是，那天跟你谈了之后，我的梦发生了一种特别的转变。我做了些非常令人困扰的梦，对那些梦的诠释发生在做梦的同时。这是个同时进行的过程；发梦者在解释着梦。这些以前我从未遇到过。

     Krishnamurti: During our waking hours, there is always the observer, different from the observed, the actor, separate from his action. In the same way there is the dreamer separate from his dream. He thinks it is separate from himself and therefore in need of interpretation. But is the dream separate from the dreamer, and is there any need to interpret it? When the observer is the observed what need is there to interpret, to judge, to evaluate? This need would exist only if the observer were different from the thing observed. This is very important to understand. We have separated the thing observed from the observer and from this arises not only the problem of interpretation but also conflict, and the many problems connected with it. This division is an illusion. This division between groups, races, nationalities, is fictitious. We are beings, undivided by names, by labels. When the labels become all important, division takes place, and then wars and all other struggles come into being.

克：我们在醒着的时候，总是有不同于被观察者的观察者，与他的行为分离的行为者。同样，有与他的梦分离的发梦者。他认为梦是与他分开的，因此需要解释。但是，梦与发梦者是分开的吗，而且有任何必要去解释梦吗？当观察者就是被观察者，还有什么必要去解释、判断和评估呢？只有观察者不同于所观之物的时候，才存在这种需要。理解这一点非常重要。我们把所观之物与观察者分离开来，从中不仅产生了诠释的问题，还产生了冲突，以及与之相关的诸多问题。这种分离是一种幻觉。群体、种族、国家之间的分别是虚幻的。我们是未被名字、标签分割的生命体。当这些标签变得无比重要时，分别就发生了，然后就产生了战争以及其他所有的争斗。

     Questioner: How then do I understand the content of the dream? It must have significance. Is it an accident that I dream of some particular event or person?

发问者：那么我要如何理解梦的内容呢？它必然有它的意义。我梦到某个特别的事件或者人，这难道是一桩意外吗？

     Krishnamurti: We should really look at this quite differently. Is there anything to understand? When the observer thinks he is different from the thing observed there is an attempt to understand that which is outside himself. The same process goes on within him. There is the observer wishing to understand the thing he observes, which is himself. But when the observer is the observed, there is no question of understanding; there is only observation. You say that there is something to understand in the dream, otherwise there would be no dream, you say that the dream is a hint of something unresolved that one should understand. You use the word "understand", and in that very word is the dualistic process. You think there is an "I", and a thing to be understood, whereas in reality these two entities are one and the same. Therefore your search for a meaning in the dream is the action of conflict.

克：我们真应该以相当不同的视角来看这个问题。有什么要理解的吗？当观察者以为他与所观之物不同时，就会试图理解他自身之外的东西。而同样的过程就发生在他的内在。有个观察者希望理解他观察的事物，也就是他自己。但是当观察者就是被观察者时，就没有理解的问题了；只有观察。你说梦里有些东西需要理解，否则就不会有梦，你说梦暗示了人应该去了解但尚未解答的某些事物。你用“理解”这个词，这个词本身就是二元化的过程。你认为有个“我”，有个要被了解的东西，而实际上这两个实体是同一个，是同样的。所以你从梦里寻找意义，这是冲突的行为。

     Questioner: Would you say the dream is an expression of something in the mind?
     Krishnamurti: Obviously it is.
     Questioner: I do not understand how it is possible to regard a dream in the way you are describing it. If it has no significance, why does it exist?

发问者：你说梦是头脑中某些东西的表达吗？
克：显然是的。
发问者：我不知道怎么可能以你描述的方式来看待梦。如果梦没有意义，那它为什么要存在？

     Krishnamurti: The "I" is the dreamer, and the dreamer wants to see significance in the dream which he has invented or projected, so both are dreams, both are unreal. This unreality has become real to the dreamer, to the observer who thinks of himself as separate. The whole problem of dream interpretation arises out of this separation, this division between the actor and the action.

克：“我”是发梦者，这个发梦者想看到他在梦里编造或者投射出来的意义，而这两者都是梦，都是不真实的。这种不真实，对于发梦者，对于认为自己是分离的观察者来说，变得真实起来。从这种分离中，从这种行为者和行为的分裂中，就产生了诠释梦的整个问题。

     Questioner: I am getting more and more confused, so may we go over it again differently? I can see that a dream is the product of my mind and not separate from it, but dreams seem to come from levels of the mind which have not been explored, and so they seem to be intimations of something alive in the mind.

发问者：我越来越困惑了，所以我们可不可以换种方式再来探讨一下？我能明白梦是我头脑的产物，不是分离的，但是梦似乎来自头脑中未被探索的那些层面，所以它们似乎暗示了头脑中某些活跃着的东西。

     Krishnamurti: It is not your particular mind in which there are hidden things. Your mind is the mind of man; your consciousness is the whole of man. But when you particularize it as your mind, you limit its activity, and because of this limitation, dreams arise. During waking hours observe without the observer, who is the expression of limitation. Any division is a limitation. Having divided itself into a "me" and a "not me", the "me", the observer, the dreamer, has many problems - among them dreams and the interpretation of dreams. In any case, you will see the significance or the value of a dream only in a limited way because the observer is always limited. The dreamer perpetuates his own limitation, therefore the dream is always the expression of the incomplete, never of the whole.

克：并不是你那个特别的头脑里才会有隐藏的东西。你的头脑就是整个人类的头脑；你的意识就是整个人类。但是当你把它特殊化为你的头脑时，你就局限了它的活动，因为这种局限，梦就产生了。在醒着的时候，没有观察者地去观察，观察者就是局限的表现。任何分别都是局限。把自己划分为“我”和“非我”，“我”，也就是观察者、发梦者，就有了很多问题——其中就有梦和对梦的诠释。无论如何，你只能以局限的方式看到梦的意义或者价值，因为观察者始终是局限的。发梦者将自己的局限永久化，因此梦始终是不完整的表达，永远不是全部。

     Questioner: Pieces are brought back from the moon in order to understand the composition of the moon. In the same way we try to understand human thinking by bringing back pieces from our dreams, and examining what they express.

发问者：通过从月球上取回碎片，来了解月球的构成。同样，通过从我们的梦里取出碎片并对其表达的含义进行检验，我们试图来了解人类的思维。

     Krishnamurti: The expressions of the mind are the fragments of the mind. Each fragment expresses itself in its own way and contradicts other fragments. A dream may contradict another dream, one action another action, one desire another desire. The mind lives in this confusion. A part of the mind says it must understand another part, such as a dream, an action or a desire. So each fragment has its own observer, its own activity; then a super-observer tries to bring them all into harmony. The super-observer is also a fragment of the mind. It is these contradictions, these divisions, that breed dreams.

克：头脑所表达的，只是头脑的碎片而已。每个碎片以自己的方式表达着自身，并与其他碎片互相矛盾。一个梦可能会与另一个梦矛盾，一个行为与另一个行为，一个欲望与另一欲望也可能是矛盾的。头脑就生活在这种困惑中。头脑的一部分说必须要去理解另一个部分，比如一个梦、一个行为或者欲望。所以每个碎片都有它自己的观察者，它自己的行为；然后一个超观察者试图将它们和谐地组织在一起。这个超观察者也是头脑的一个碎片。是这些矛盾，这些划分，产生了梦。

     So the real question is not the interpretation or the understanding of a particular dream; it is the perception that these many fragments are contained in the whole. Then you see yourself as a whole and not as a fragment of a whole.

所以真正的问题，不是诠释或者理解某个特定的梦；而是看到这许多的碎片都是包含在整体中的。然后你就能将自己作为一个整体看到，而不是整体的一个碎片。

     Questioner: Are you saying, sir, that one should be aware during the day of the whole movement of life, not just one's family life, or business life, or any other individual aspect of life?

发问者：先生，你是不是说，一个人应该在白天对整个生活的运作都知晓，而不是仅仅注意他的家庭生活，事业生活或者生活中其他任何一个单独的方面？

     Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the whole of man and does not belong to a particular man. When there is the consciousness of one particular man there is the complex problem of fragmentation, contradiction and war. When there is awareness of the total movement of life in a human being during the waking hours, what need is there for dreams at all? This total awareness, this attention, puts an end to fragmentation and to division. When there is no conflict whatsoever the mind has no need for dreams.
     Questioner: This certainly opens a door through which I see many things.

克：意识是整个人类的，并不属于一个特定的人。如果有某个特定的人的意识，就会有支离破碎、矛盾和战争这些复杂的问题。如果在醒着的时候觉察到一个人生活的整体运动，那还有什么必要做梦？这种全然的觉察，这种全神贯注，就终结了支离破碎和分别。如果任何冲突都没有了，头脑就不需要梦了。
发问者：当然这开启了一扇门，通过它，我看到了很多。