THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'SEEING THE WHOLE'
《转变的紧迫性》之“看到整体”
Questioner: When I listen to you I seem to understand what you are talking about, not only verbally, but at a much deeper level. I am part of it; I fully grasp with my whole being the truth of what you say. My hearing is sharpened, and the very seeing of the flowers, the trees, and those mountains with snow, makes me feel I am part of them. In this awareness I have no conflict, no contradiction. It is as though I could do anything, and that whatever I did would be true, would not bring either conflict or pain. But unfortunately that state doesn't last. Perhaps it lasts for an hour or two while I'm listening to you. When I leave the talks it all seems to evaporate and I'm back where I was. I try to be aware of myself; I keep remembering the state I was in when I listened to your talks, keep trying to reach it, hold on to it, and this becomes a struggle. You have said, "Be aware of your conflict, listen to your conflict, see the causes of your conflict, your conflict is yourself". I am aware of my conflict, my pain, my sorrow, my confusion, but this awareness in no way resolves these things. On the contrary, being aware of them seems to give them vitality and duration. You talk of choiceless awareness, which again breeds another battle in me, for I am full of choice, decisions and opinions. I have applied this awareness to a particular habit I have, and it has not gone. When you are aware of some conflict or strain, this same awareness keeps looking to see if it has already gone. And this seems to remind you of it, and you never shake it off.
发问者：当我听你演讲的时候，我似乎能理解你所说的内容，不只从字面上能理解，而且能在更深的层次上理解。我已经融入其中；我以我的整个存在充分领会了你所说的真相。我的听觉敏锐了，看到花朵、树木与那些积雪的山脉，就让我感觉我是它们的一部分。在这份觉察之中，我没有冲突，没有矛盾。好像我可以做任何事情，我不论做什么，都是正确的，都不会带来冲突与痛苦。但是很不幸，这种状态无法持续。或许在听你演讲的时候，能持续一两个小时。在我离开演讲时，那状态似乎就全都蒸发掉了，我又回到了原来的样子。我努力地觉察自己，不断回想我在听你演讲时的状态，一直努力再进入并保持那种状态，于是这就变成了一种挣扎。你曾经说过，“觉知你的冲突，聆听你的冲突，认清你冲突的原因，你的冲突就是你自己。”我知道自己的冲突、痛苦、悲伤和困惑，但是这份觉察并没有解决这些问题。相反地，这种觉知反而给它们赋予了生命力和持久性。你还谈到毫无选择地觉察，这又滋生了我内心的另一种冲突，因为我的心中充满了选择、决断及观点。我曾把这份觉察应用于自己的某个特殊习惯，可是那习惯并没有因此消失。当你觉察到某种冲突或压力时，那觉察同样会一直注意看它是不是已经消失了。这似乎总在提醒你那冲突的存在，这么一来你就永远无法摆脱它了。
Krishnamurti: Awareness is not a commitment to something. Awareness is an observation, both outer and inner, in which direction has stopped. You are aware, but the thing of which you are aware is not being encouraged or nourished. Awareness is not concentration on something. It is not an action of the will choosing what it will be aware of, and analysing it to bring about a certain result. When awareness is deliberately focused on a particular object, as a conflict, that is the action of will which is concentration. When you concentrate - that is, put all your energy and thought within your chosen frontiers, whether reading a book or watching your anger - then, in this exclusion, the thing you are concentrating upon is strengthened, nourished. So here we have to understand the nature of awareness: We have to understand what we are talking about when we use the word awareness. Now, you can either be aware of a particular thing, or be aware of that particular as part of the total. The particular by itself has very little meaning, but when you see the total, then that particular has a relationship to the whole. Only in this relationship does the particular have its right meaning; it doesn't become all-important, it is not exaggerated. So the real question is: does one see the total process of life or is one concentrated on the particular, thus missing the whole field of life? To be aware of the whole field is to see also the particular, but, at the same time, to understand its relationship to the whole. If you are angry and are concerned with ending that anger, then you focus your attention on the anger and the whole escapes you and the anger is strengthened. But anger is interrelated to the whole. So when we separate the particular from the whole, the particular breeds its own problems.
克：觉察并不是对某件事情的专注。觉察是没有方向的观察，内心和外在所有的事物你都能观察到。你是觉知的，而你觉察到的东西又不会被助长或增强。觉察不是专注于某个特定的事物上。觉察不是意志力的行为，也不拣选任何觉察的对象，更不是通过分析来达到某种结果。如果刻意把觉知集中在某个特定的对象上，譬如某个冲突，那么这时的觉察就变成了意志力的行为，也就是专注。在专心的时候，也就是把你全部的精力和思想都集中在自己所选择的区域中，不管是读书还是观察自己的愤怒，如此一来，在这种排外的行为中，你就增强了、滋养了自己所专注之物。因此我们首先必须了解觉察的本质，我们得了解我们用“觉察”这个词时探讨的究竟是什么。要么你觉察的是某个特定的事物，要么觉察的是作为整体的一部分的某个特定的事物。特定的事物本身并没有什么意义，但是你如果能看到整体，特定事物就和整体产生了关系。只有在这种关系之中，特定的事物才有真正的意义；而同时又不会变得特别重要，不会被夸大。因此真正的问题就在于：我们看到的是人生的整个过程，还是专注于其中的细节，从而错过了生命的整个领域？对整个领域的觉知，也能看到细节，但同时，还能了解细节与整体的关系。假设你发怒了，而你又很想息怒，然后你把所有的注意力集中在愤怒上，这么一来你不但看不清整体，反而助长了怒气。而愤怒是和整体关联在一起的。如果你把细节从整体中分离出来，细节就会自己滋生出问题。
Questioner: What do you mean by seeing the whole? What is this totality you talk about, this extensive awareness in which the particular is a detail? Is it some mysterious, mystical experience? If so then we are lost completely. Or is this perhaps what you are saying, that there is a whole field of existence, of which anger is a part, and that to be concerned with the part is to block out the extensive perception? But what is this extensive perception? I can only see the whole through all its particulars. And what whole do you mean? Are you talking about the whole of the mind, or the whole of existence, or the whole of myself, or the whole of life? What whole do you mean, and how can I see it?
Krishnamurti: The whole field of life: the mind, love, everything which is in life.
发问者：你所谓的看到整体是什么意思？你说的这个整体，在这广泛的觉知中局部只是细节而已，这整体到底是什么东西？它是不是某种神秘的、不可思议的经验？如果是的话，我们就彻底迷失了。或者你也许指的是，存在的整个领域中有个局部是愤怒，如果只关心这一小部分，就会阻碍广泛的觉知？然而广泛的觉知又是什么？只有透过所有的细节，我才能看到整体。你所谓的整体到底是什么意思？你说的是心智的整个领域，存在的整个领域，我自己的全部，还是整个生命？你说的整体是什么意思，我要如何才能看到这点?
克：我指的是生命的整个领域:包括心智、爱与生命中的所有事物。
Questioner: How can I possibly see all that! I can understand that everything I see is partial, and that all my awareness is awareness of the particular, and that this strengthens the particular.
Krishnamurti: Let's put it this way: do you perceive with your mind and your heart separately, or do you see, hear, feel, think, all together, not fragmentarily?
Questioner: I don't know what you mean.
Krishnamurti: You hear a word, your mind tells you it is an insult, your feelings tell you you don't like it, your mind again intervenes to control or justify, and so on. Once again feeling takes over where the mind has concluded. In this way an event unleashes a chain-reaction of different parts of your being. What you hear had been broken up, made fragmentary, and if you concentrate on one of those fragments, you miss the total process of that hearing. Hearing can be fragmentary or it can be done with all your being, totally. So, by perception of the whole we mean perception with your eyes, your ears, your heart, your mind; not perception with each separately. It is giving your complete attention. In that attention, the particular, such as anger, has a different meaning since it is interrelated to many other issues.
发问者：我怎么可能看得到所有的那些！我知道自己看到的都是局部，我所有的觉察也只限于特定的局部，这反而助长了局部的问题。
克：让我们换一种方式来探讨：你在觉知的时候，心智与情感是不是分开的？还是你的听觉、视觉、感觉和思想，不分割地一起并用？
发问者：我不知道你说的是什么意思。 克：假设你听到一句话，你的心智告诉你，这是一句侮辱的话，你的感觉又告诉你，你不喜欢这句话，接着你的心智又插手进来，企图控制自己或为自己辩解，等等。当心智下了一个结论，感觉又一次占了主导。如此一来，一个事件便从你的存在的不同局部引发了一连串的连锁反应。你所听到的变得支离破碎，而你如果只专注于其中的一个碎片，你就错过了整个的聆听过程。聆听可以是支离破碎的，也可以用你的整个存在完整地做到。所以我们所谓的觉察整体指的就是你的视觉、听觉、情感和心智同时并用，而不是各自分开去觉察。你付出全部的注意力。在全神贯注之下，那局部，比如愤怒，就有了不同的意义，因为它和很多其他的问题是相互关联的。
Questioner: So when you say seeing the whole, you mean seeing with the whole of your being; it is a question of quality not quantity. Is that correct?
Krishnamurti: Yes, precisely. But do you see totally in this way or are you merely verbalizing it? Do you see anger with your heart, mind, ears and eyes? Or do you see anger as something unrelated to the rest of you, and therefore of great importance? When you give importance to the whole you do not forget the particular.
Questioner: But what happens to the particular, to anger?
Krishnamurti: You are aware of anger with your whole being. If you are, is there anger? Inattention is anger, not attention. So attention with your entire being is seeing the whole, and inattention is seeing the particular. To be aware of the whole, and of the particular, and of the relationship between the two, is the whole problem. We divide the particular from the rest and try to solve it. And so conflict increases and there is no way out.
发问者：因此你所谓的看到整体，指的就是以你的整个存在去观察；这是质而不是量的问题，对不对？
克：是的，完全正确。但是你真的能这样看到全部吗？还是只说说就算了？在观察自己的愤怒时，你的视觉、听觉、心智与情感，能同时并用吗？还是你看到的愤怒是和你其他的部分无关的，因而显得特别重要？当你赋予整体重要性时，并不表示你就忽略了局部。
发问者：但是局部的愤怒又会怎么样？
克：你以你的整个存在去觉察愤怒。如果是这样，愤怒还会产生吗？粗心大意之下才会产生愤怒，全神贯注之中绝没有愤怒。以你的整个存在全神贯注就是看到整体，粗心大意则只能看到局部。觉察整体和觉察局部，以及两者之间的关系，就是整个问题。我们总是把局部和其他部分分开，然后再企图解决它。于是冲突就加深了，没有解决的出路。
Questioner: When you speak then of seeing only the particular, as anger, do you mean looking at it with only one part of your being?
Krishnamurti: When you look at the particular with a fragment of your being, the division between that particular and the fragment which is looking at it grows, and so conflict increases. When there is no division there is no conflict.
Questioner: Are you saying that there is no division between this anger and me when I look at it with all my being?
Krishnamurti: Exactly. Is this what you actually are doing, or are you merely following the words? What is actually taking place? This is far more important than your question.
发问者：你所谓的只看到局部的愤怒，你的意思是不是仅以生命的某一部分来观察愤怒？
克：如果你仅以生命的某个片段来观察那个特定的问题，那个特定的问题和正在观察它的碎片之间的距离就会拉大，如此一来冲突便增强了。假如根本没有那种距离，就不会有冲突。
发问者：你是说，我能以我的整个存在去观察愤怒，愤怒和我之间就不会产生距离？
克：一点也不错。你是真的做到了这点，还是只听听话语而已？实际发生了什么？这比你的问题重要多了。
Questioner: You ask me what is taking place. I am simply trying to understand you.
Krishnamurti: Are you trying to understand me or are you seeing the truth of what we are talking about, which is independent of me? If you actually see the truth of what we are talking about, then you are your own guru and your own disciple, which is to understand yourself. This understanding cannot be learnt from another.
发问者：你问我实际发生了什么。我只是想明白你的意思罢了。
克：你想弄明白我的意思，还是你看到了我们所讨论的真相？而这真相是独立于我而存在的。如果你真的能认清我们所讨论的真相，也就是了解你自己，那么你不但是自己的老师，同时也是自己的学生。这份自我了解，你无法从别人那里学到。 |
发表于 2010-1-18 18:01
|