THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'THE NEW HUMAN BEING'/《转变的紧迫性》之“新人类”

Sue

THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'THE NEW HUMAN BEING'
《转变的紧迫性》之“新人类”

     Questioner: I am a reformer, a social worker. Seeing the extraordinary injustice there is in the world my whole life has been dedicated to reform. I used to be a Communist but I can't go along with Communism any more, it has ended in tyranny. Nevertheless, I am still dedicated to reforming society so that man can live in dignity, beauty and freedom, and realize the potential which nature seems to have given him, and which he himself seems always to have stolen from his fellow man. In America there is a certain kind of freedom, and yet standardization and propaganda are very strong there - all the mass media exert a tremendous pressure on the mind. It seems that the power of television, this mechanical thing that man has invented, has developed its own personality, its own will, its own momentum; and though probably nobody - perhaps not even any one group - is deliberately using it to influence society, its trend shapes the very souls of our children. And this is the same in varying degrees in all democracies. In China there seems to be no hope at all for the dignity or freedom of man, while in India the government is weak, corrupt and inefficient. It seems to me that all the social injustice in the world absolutely must be changed. I want passionately to do something about it, yet I don't know where to begin to tackle it.

发问者：我是一个改革者，一个社会工作者。看到世界上有极端的不公，我的整个生命都致力于改革。我曾是一个共产主义者，但是我不再追随共产主义了，它以暴政为终结。然而，我依然投身于社会改革，以期人类能够生活在尊严，美和自由中，实现那自然似乎已经赋予人类的潜能，而人类似乎总是从别人那里窃取这种能力。在美国有某种自由，然而标准化和宣传攻势还是很强大——所有的大众媒体都对头脑产生了巨大的压力。似乎电视的能力，这种人类发明的机械事物已经有了它自己的个性，它自己的意志和动量；尽管也许没什么人，甚至或许没有任何一个组织——有意地利用电视来影响社会，但正是它的倾向塑造了我们孩子的灵魂。而所有民主国家里的情况在不同程度上都是如此。在中国，人的尊严或自由似乎完全无望，而印度的政府非常软弱，腐败和低效。在我看来，世界上所有的社会不公绝对必须得到改变。我满怀热情地想为此做点什么，但是我不知道从哪里开始着手解决。

     Krishnamurti: Reform needs further reform, and this is an endless process. So let us look at it differently. Let us put aside the whole thought of reform; let us wipe it out of our blood. Let us completely forget this idea of wanting to reform the world. Then let us see actually what is happening, right throughout the world. Political parties always have a limited programme which, even if fulfilled, invariably brings about mischief, which then has to be corrected once again. We are always talking about political action as being a most important action, but political action is not the way. Let us put it out of our minds. All social and economic reforms come under this category. Then there is the religious formula of action based on belief, idealism, dogmatism, conformity to some so-called divine recipe. In this is involved authority and acceptance, obedience and the utter denial of freedom. Though religions talk of peace on earth they contribute to the disorder because they are a factor of division. Also the churches have always taken some political stand in times of crisis, so they are really political bodies, and we have seen that all political action is divisive. The churches have never really denied war: on the contrary they have waged war. So when one puts aside the religious recipes, as one puts aside the political formulas - what is left, and what is one to do? Naturally civic order must be maintained: you have to have water in the taps. If you destroy civic order you have to start again from the beginning. So, what is one to do?

克：改革需要更进一步的改革，而这是一个永无止境的过程。所以让我们换个角度来看这个问题。让我们把整个改革的想法放在一边；让我们把它从我们的血液中清除。让我们彻底忘掉想要改革这个世界的想法。然后让我们来看看整个世界上到底发生着什么。各派政党总是有某个局限的方案，即使得以实施，也不可避免地会带来伤害，而这些又不得不再一次进行纠正。我们总是把政治活动作为最重要的行动来探讨，但是政治活动不是办法。让我们把它抛在脑后。所有社会和经济改革都属于这个范畴。还有基于信仰、理想主义、教条主义以及遵从某些所谓神圣法则的宗教行为模式。这其中包含了权威和接受，服从和对自由的彻底否定。尽管各个宗教都在谈论世界和平，但是它们却助长了失序，因为它们是分裂的因素之一。教会也总在危机来临的时刻采取某种政治立场，所以它们实际上是政治实体，而我们也看到了所有的政治活动都会导致分裂。各个教派从未真正地否定过战争：相反，它们发动战争。所以当一个人把所有的宗教法则扔在一边时，就像他把政治模式扔在一边一样——那么还剩下什么，他又该怎么办？当然市政秩序必须要维持：你的水龙头里得有水。如果你破坏了市政秩序，你就得从头再来一次。那么，他该怎么办？

     Questioner: That is what I am actually asking you.
     Krishnamurti: Be concerned with radical change, with total revolution. The only revolution is the revolution between man and man, between human beings. That is our only concern. In this revolution there are no blueprints, no ideologies, no conceptual utopias. We must take the fact of the actual relationship between men and change that radically. That is the real thing. And this revolution must be immediate, it must not take time. It is not achieved through evolution, which is time.

发问者：这正是我在问你的。
克：去关注根本的转变，关注彻底的革命。唯一的革命是人与人之间的，人类之间的革命。这是我们唯一关注的。在这革命中，没有蓝图，没有意识形态，没有概念上的乌托邦。我们必须将人们之间的实际关系这个事实，彻底地加以改变。这才是真正有意义的事情。而这革命必须马上进行，决不能假以时日。这革命不能通过进化，也就是时间来完成。

     Questioner: What do you mean? All historical changes have taken place in time; none of them has been immediate. You are proposing something quite inconceivable.

发问者：你是什么意思？历史上的所有改变都是花时间发生的；没有什么是立刻发生的。你在倡议某种实在无法想象的事情。

     Krishnamurti: If you take time to change, do you suppose that life is in suspension during the time it takes to change? It isn't in suspension. Everything you are trying to change is being modified and perpetuated by the environment, by life itself. So there is no end to it. It is like trying to clean the water in a tank which is constantly being refilled with dirty water. So time is out.

克：如果你花时间去改变，那么你认为在改变期间，生活可以暂停吗？生活并没有暂停。你试图改变的一切都在被环境，被生活本身调整着、延续着。所以生活没有停止。这就像试图清洁一个不断装入脏水的罐子里的水一样。所以没有时间了。

     Now, what is to bring about this change? It cannot be will, or determination, or choice, or desire, because all these are part of the entity that has to be changed. So we must ask what actually is possible, without the action of will and assertiveness which is always the action of conflict.

那么，什么才能带来这改变？意志、决心、选择和欲望都不能带来这改变，因为这一切都是必须被改变的实体的一部分。所以我们必须问一问，不通过意志和决断的行为，这些行为始终是冲突的行为，那么到底什么才是可能的。

     Questioner: Is there any action which is not the action of will and assertiveness?

发问者：存在着不属于意志和决断的行为吗？

     Krishnamurti: Instead of asking this question let us go much deeper. Let us see that actually it is only the action of will and assertiveness that needs to be changed at all, because the only mischief in relationship is conflict, between individuals or within individuals, and conflict is will and assertiveness. Living without such action does not mean that we live like vegetables. Conflict is our main concern. All the social maladies you mentioned are the projection of this conflict in the heart of each human being. The only possible change is a radical transformation of yourself in all your relationships, not in some vague future, but now.

克：让我们更深入地探索下去，而不是问出这个问题。让我们看清实际上唯一需要被改变的正是意志和决断的行为，因为关系中唯一的伤害就是个体之间或者个体内在的冲突，而冲突就是意志和决断。生活中没有这样的行为并不意味着我们活得像行尸走肉。冲突是我们主要关注的事情。你提到的所有社会弊病正是每个人内心中这种冲突的投射。唯一可能的改变是在你自己所有的关系中彻底转变自己，不是等到某个模糊的将来，而是现在。

     Questioner: But how can I completely eradicate this conflict in myself, this contradiction, this resistance, this conditioning? I understand what you mean intellectually, but I can only change when I feel it passionately, and I don't feel it passionately. It is merely an idea to me; I don't see it with my heart. If I try to act on this intellectual understanding I am in conflict with another, deeper, part of myself.

发问者：但是我要怎样彻底根除自己身上的这种冲突、这种矛盾、这种抗拒、这种局限？我从道理上明白你的意思，但是只有在我强烈地感受到这点的时候我才能改变，而我并没有强烈地感受到。对我来说这只是个概念而已；我没有用我的心看到这点。如果我试图根据这智识上的理解来行动，那么我就会与我自己更深层的另一面发生冲突。

     Krishnamurti: If you really see this contradiction passionately, then that very perception is the revolution. If you see in yourself this division between the mind and the heart, actually see it, not conceive of it theoretically, but see it, then the problem comes to an end. A man who is passionate about the world and the necessity for change, must be free from political activity, religious conformity and tradition - which means, free from the weight of time, free from the burden of the past, free from all the action of will: this is the new human being. This only is the social, psychological, and even the political revolution.

克：如果你真的强烈地看到了这冲突，那么这觉察本身就是革命。如果你看到了自己内在头脑和心灵之间的这种分裂，真切地看到这点，不是理论上的设想，而是的确看到了这点，那么这个问题就结束了。一个对世界及改变的迫切性满怀热情的人，必须从政治活动，宗教遵从和传统中解脱出来——这就意味着，从时间的重负下解脱出来，从过去的重负、从意志力的所有行为中解脱出来：这就是新人类。这是唯一的社会、心理乃至政治革命。

Sue

以下是不丹在短消息里对第一段的修改和留言：

发问者：我是一个改革者，一个社会工作者。看到世界上存在着极端的不公，我的整个生命都用在了改革上。我曾是一名共产党，但是我不再赞同共产主义了，它以暴政为终结。虽然如此，我依然投身于社会改革，以期人类能够生活在尊严，美好和自由中，认识到自然似乎已经赋予了人类这种潜能，而人类似乎总是从自己的对手那里盗窃这种潜能。在美国有某种程度的自由，但是格式化式的宣传在那里还是非常的强大——所有的大众媒体对思想产生了巨大的压力。似乎电视的力量，这种人类发明的很机械的东西已经形成了它自己的个性，它自己的意愿和动量；尽管也许没有哪一个人，甚至也许没有任何一个组织——故意利用电视来影响社会，但是正是它带来的倾向塑造了我们孩子的心灵。而这种情况不同程度地在所有民主国家里大都存在。在中国，人的尊严或自由似乎毫无希望，然而在印度政府缺乏威信，腐败并且效率低下。在我看来，世界上的所有社会不公绝对必须加以改变。我急切地想为此做点什么，但是我不知道从哪里开始着手解决。

这里有一点要说一下，fellow man是对手，这里的潜能仍是指自然界赋于人类的尊严、美好、自由。而人类自己获取这三项即潜能都是通过战争。对方手那夺取。这一句的英文应该是这样解理。

我是不丹

Sue

回复 2# Sue

这是我的回复：

仔细读了你修改的部分，其中的大部分都很到位，大可照你的版本修改，只是还有几点需要再跟你探讨一下。
standardization and propaganda，这两个词应该不是修饰关系。
mind一般译为头脑或心智，thought译为思想。
fellow man在韦氏词典上的解释是a kindred human being，应该还是同伴、伙伴的意思，从另一个角度说，我们说从同伴那里窃取，从对手那里夺取，而不是窃取。
realize，是实现还是意识到的意思，我再读读看。因为如果人能自己实现天赋的潜能，就不必去别人那里偷窃。

非常感谢，这样的交流真的不多，你肯花时间精力来跟我讲这些，实在难能可贵。

Sue

不丹的回复：

standardization and propaganda，光看这两个词显示不是修饰关系。可是我们要注意到，克的文字除了二个日记是他本人写的，最后的日记是对着录音机口授的，其它都是对话的。对话的英文和书面的英文显然是有区别的。这就是为什么当我们在翻译克的文字是非常吃力的原因，因为他的口语停顿的地方非常多，有时就是几个单词。现在看到的英文都是别人整理，基本照口语过来的。这段的文字不是克说的，是提问者说的，不过按照中文的习惯，如果翻译标准化，显然过于生硬。这里的意思其实就是格式化的宣传。你如果翻译成格式化和宣传，中文阅读还是不易将两个看成是并列的东西。反而感觉很突兀。我想提问者表达的就是千篇一率的宣传口径。所以翻译时是要注意到的。必要的改动都是必要的。

fellow man是指与自己同等的人，对手，或相匹敌的人。因为我已经在偷了，被偷的人也好不到哪去。我不是偷别人的钱，物品，我是偷人家的自由，尊严，美化的东西。因为没有别人白白的等我去偷。也就是说，我是拿着枪炮来实现我的偷的。另外从英文的结构看，这个是和前句的自然赋于相对立的，你要说从同伴那偷点自由，显然构不成对立，太小儿科了。提问者也不用献身于社会改革了。显然这里的fellow man是指结构上的，是指我们人类根本上的，既自相残杀的本质。我们在看原文时要看出完整的表达，而不要被单词的词意所限制。

realized很口语化，就是意识到了，与实现相现太远。是问者看清了这个社会本质。

论坛的翻译印象大致上还跳不出英文单词本身带来的束缚。包括你在内，太在意英文原义。但是翻译克的文字我们得站在克的位置上，也就是他完全空性的基础上。他描写的自然景物，都是空性的流露，我们在处理这方面的文字时，要还原“环境”，也就是你得有画面感。但是这比较难。

哦，似乎还有一个mind的问题。mind可以解释思想，而且是带有倾向的思想。
that which is responsible for one's thoughts and feelings  这是英文解释
21世纪英汉词曲上解释mind为思想，思想倾向。当然也可以解释为精神。

Sue

回复 4# Sue

我的回复：

有一点你也注意到了，这段话不是克说的。
再说standardization and propaganda，这里的标准化是指社会对人们标准化的塑造模式，不是指宣传。
再说realize,这个词最常用的第一个词义是实现，其次才是意识到，作为口语的用法，应该是更常用的那个意思。
而mind, 在这里也可以译为思想，因为说话的不是克。而克常常将mind与heart一起来用，对应的正是头脑和心灵。'that which is responsible for one's thoughts and feelings ', 对思想和感觉负责的，正是头脑。另外克在用mind这个词时，常常会用brain来做同义解释，这也是为什么会把mind译成头脑的原因。
至于fellow man，暂且保留意见吧。

再说英文词义的问题，忠实原文是克译的第一要义，重视英文原义，这不是拘泥，而是一种认真的态度。“翻译克的文字我们得站在克的位置上”，这个说法只是一厢情愿的想象而已，因为你没有克的高度。

另外，你不介意把这里的内容贴到论坛上去吧？

Sue

不丹的回复：

你放在论坛上当然好啊，本来就是大家参与讨论。至于standardization，光从这一段看，很难触类旁通想到社会对人的标准化塑造。这种情况在共产党社会比较常见，在美国意识形态不是非常明显。不过潜移默化，任何社会对人的塑造都存在。从这个意义上说这儿仍该用标准化。
realized词典上的确是完成第1意的。各人理解不同，我只是给予参考。

我们当然无法站在克的高度，但是在翻译过程中，常感到词意达不到克的原意。我们常常是将自己的理解以为是克的意思，而自己的理解有时还是来于词典上对词义的理解，还常出错。尤其在克的笔记前面部分，正值他意识转换时期，文字非常难以表达，这种进入到空性的状态，实非文字能予以胜任。怪不得古人在禅授上要不立文字。

Sue

我的回复：

没错，再精准的译文也难以百分百传达原文的意思，每个人都有自己的局限，译文也就难免有失偏颇，我们只能尽力而为。而且克在不同的讲话里，尤其是在不同时期的文字里，同一个词表达的意思也许相去甚远，mind就是典型的一例，克多数用这个词指的是被局限的头脑、心智，但是在他生命最后的那段时期，mind就变成了universal mind的意思，是个代表终极的名词。在演讲和著作中，克是在通过语言传达某种非语言所能表达的东西，语言本身就有局限，我们又不在聆听和交流的现场，即使在，也很难说能在多大程度上准确理解克的意思。所以才说，读克的时候，即使只有一点可能，也要尽量去读原文，或者起码在读译文的时候参照原文。

Sue

关于译作的一点对话：

Sue: 另，之前听说你有翻译《克氏心灵日记》，是否已经出版？

不丹：心灵日记去年夏天已经完成了，因为书商和出版社在胡茵梦那本书里出了点问题，担心我的心灵日记会撞车，就一直没出，可能会另换出版社，也可能等待时机。手中在翻译的克的笔记，这就二天内可以完稿。约20万字。所以最近会有点时间上来看看。

Sue: 期待你的书早日面世。

Sue

以下是不丹修改的译文：

THE URGENCY OF CHANGE - 'THE NEW HUMAN BEING'
《转变的紧迫性》之“新人类”

     Questioner: I am a reformer, a social worker. Seeing the extraordinary injustice there is in the world my whole life has been dedicated to reform. I used to be a Communist but I can't go along with Communism any more, it has ended in tyranny. Nevertheless, I am still dedicated to reforming society so that man can live in dignity, beauty and freedom, and realize the potential which nature seems to have given him, and which he himself seems always to have stolen from his fellow man. In America there is a certain kind of freedom, and yet standardization and propaganda are very strong there - all the mass media exert a tremendous pressure on the mind. It seems that the power of television, this mechanical thing that man has invented, has developed its own personality, its own will, its own momentum; and though probably nobody - perhaps not even any one group - is deliberately using it to influence society, its trend shapes the very souls of our children. And this is the same in varying degrees in all democracies. In China there seems to be no hope at all for the dignity or freedom of man, while in India the government is weak, corrupt and inefficient. It seems to me that all the social injustice in the world absolutely must be changed. I want passionately to do something about it, yet I don't know where to begin to tackle it.

发问者：我是一个改革者，一个社会工作者。看到世界上存在着极端的不公，我的整个生命都用在了改革上。我曾是一名共产党，但是我不再赞同共产主义了，它以暴政为终结。虽然如此，我依然投身于社会改革，以期人类能够生活在尊严，美好和自由中，认识到自然似乎已经赋予了人类这种潜能，而人类自己似乎总是从自己的对手中盗窃这种潜能。在美国有某种程度的自由，但是格式化式的宣传在那还是非常强大——所有的大众媒体对思想产生了巨大的压力。似乎电视的力量，这种人类发明的很机械的东西已经形成了它自己的个性，它自己的意愿和动量；尽管也许没有哪一个人，甚至也许没有任何一个组织——有意利用电视来影响社会，但是正是它带来的倾向塑造了我们孩子的心灵。而这种情况不同程度地在所有民主国家里大都存在。在中国，人的尊严或自由似乎毫无希望，然而在印度政府缺乏威信，腐败并且效率低下。在我看来，世界上的所有社会不公绝对必须加以改变。我急切地想为此做点什么，但是我不知道从哪里开始着手解决。

     Krishnamurti: Reform needs further reform, and this is an endless process. So let us look at it differently. Let us put aside the whole thought of reform; let us wipe it out of our blood. Let us completely forget this idea of wanting to reform the world. Then let us see actually what is happening, right throughout the world. Political parties always have a limited programme which, even if fulfilled, invariably brings about mischief, which then has to be corrected once again. We are always talking about political action as being a most important action, but political action is not the way. Let us put it out of our minds. All social and economic reforms come under this category. Then there is the religious formula of action based on belief, idealism, dogmatism, conformity to some so-called divine recipe. In this is involved authority and acceptance, obedience and the utter denial of freedom. Though religions talk of peace on earth they contribute to the disorder because they are a factor of division. Also the churches have always taken some political stand in times of crisis, so they are really political bodies, and we have seen that all political action is divisive. The churches have never really denied war: on the contrary they have waged war. So when one puts aside the religious recipes, as one puts aside the political formulas - what is left, and what is one to do? Naturally civic order must be maintained: you have to have water in the taps. If you destroy civic order you have to start again from the beginning. So, what is one to do?

克：改革需要更进一步的改革，而这是一个永无止境的过程。所以让我们换个角度来看待这个问题。让我们先将整个改革的想法放一放，让我们先将自己身上的血液清洗一遍。让我们彻底忘记想要改革这个世界的想法。然后让我们再来看看整个世界到底发生了什么。不同的政党总是有一套受到限制的纲领，即便得以实施，不可避免地会带来伤害，于是又不得不再一次地修订。我们总是将政治行动当作最重要的行动来讨论，但是政治行动不是办法。让我们把它从我们的心里摒除出去。所有社会和经济改革都属于这个范畴。然后还有基于信仰、唯心主义、教条主义和符合某些所谓的拜神用的食品等宗教方面的行为准则。这些都包含了权威、接受、服从和对自由的完全否定。尽管不同的宗教都在高谈和平，但是它们助长了这个失序的世界，因为它们是分裂的因素之一。另外教会总是在危机时刻采取某种政治立场，所以它们实际上是政治实体，而我们已经看清楚了所有的政治活动都是分裂的。不同的教派从来没有真正地否定战争：相反，它们发动了战争。所以当一个人将供奉的食品扔在一边时，就像他将政治信条扔在一边时那样——那么他还剩下什么呢？他又该如何去做呢？自然公民的秩序必须维护：你的水龙头必须放得出水。如果你破坏了公民秩序，你必须从头再来一次。那么，他又该如何怎么去做呢？

     Questioner: That is what I am actually asking you.
     Krishnamurti: Be concerned with radical change, with total revolution. The only revolution is the revolution between man and man, between human beings. That is our only concern. In this revolution there are no blueprints, no ideologies, no conceptual utopias. We must take the fact of the actual relationship between men and change that radically. That is the real thing. And this revolution must be immediate, it must not take time. It is not achieved through evolution, which is time.

发问者：这正是我在问你的。
克：要关注根本的转变，关注彻底的革命。只有一个革命那就是人与人之间的，人类之间的革命。这是我们唯一要去关注的。在这个革命中，没有蓝图，没有意识形态，没有概念上的乌托邦。我们必须把实际中的人际关系，进行彻底地改变。这才是真正意义上的事情。而这个革命必须马上进行，决不能假以时日。完成这个革命不能通过进化，即不能通过时间。

Questioner: What do you mean? All historical changes have taken place in time; none of them has been immediate. You are proposing something quite inconceivable.

发问者：你是什么意思？历史上所有已经发生的变革都是花时间的；没有哪一个是当即进行的。你在倡议一些不能想象的事情。

     Krishnamurti: If you take time to change, do you suppose that life is in suspension during the time it takes to change? It isn't in suspension. Everything you are trying to change is being modified and perpetuated by the environment, by life itself. So there is no end to it. It is like trying to clean the water in a tank which is constantly being refilled with dirty water. So time is out.

克：如果你要花时间去改变，那么你认为在变革期间应当先搁置生活吗？生活当然没有被搁置。你试图改变的一切都随着环境和生活的本身在不断地调整、维持。所以生活没有停止。这就好比想要清洗一个水槽却不断地在往里面灌入脏水一样。所以没有时间了。

     Now, what is to bring about this change? It cannot be will, or determination, or choice, or desire, because all these are part of the entity that has to be changed. So we must ask what actually is possible, without the action of will and assertiveness which is always the action of conflict.

那么，是什么导致这场变革呢？不可能是意志、决心、选择和欲望，因为所有这些都是须要改变的实体部分。于是我们必须问清楚，究竟怎样才是可行的，既不是意志的行动，也不是自信的行动，意志和自信永远都是冲突的行动。

     Questioner: Is there any action which is not the action of will and assertiveness?

发问者：有任何不是意志和自信的行动的吗？

     Krishnamurti: Instead of asking this question let us go much deeper. Let us see that actually it is only the action of will and assertiveness that needs to be changed at all, because the only mischief in relationship is conflict, between individuals or within individuals, and conflict is will and assertiveness. Living without such action does not mean that we live like vegetables. Conflict is our main concern. All the social maladies you mentioned are the projection of this conflict in the heart of each human being. The only possible change is a radical transformation of yourself in all your relationships, not in some vague future, but now.

克：与其问这种问题不如让我们更深入地进行下去。让我们看清楚实际上只有意志和自信的行动才是需要被改变的，因为关系中唯一的伤害就是个体之间或者个体之内的冲突，而冲突就是意志和自信。生活中没有这种行动并不意味着我们活得像蔬菜似的。冲突是我们主要关心的事情。你提到的所有社会弊端都是每一个人内心冲突的投射。唯一可能的改变是在你自己所有的关系中彻底地转变你自己，而不是等到某一个模糊不清的将来，就是现在。

     Questioner: But how can I completely eradicate this conflict in myself, this contradiction, this resistance, this conditioning? I understand what you mean intellectually, but I can only change when I feel it passionately, and I don't feel it passionately. It is merely an idea to me; I don't see it with my heart. If I try to act on this intellectual understanding I am in conflict with another, deeper, part of myself.

发问者：但是我如何彻底根除我身上的这种冲突、这种矛盾、这种反抗和这种现状呢？理性上我明白你的意思，但是只有当我强烈地感受到时我才会去改变它，而我现在并没有强烈的感受到。它对我只是个概念；我内心看不到它。如果我试着按照理性上的理解来行动的话，那么我就会与我自己更深层的另一面发生冲突。

     Krishnamurti: If you really see this contradiction passionately, then that very perception is the revolution. If you see in yourself this division between the mind and the heart, actually see it, not conceive of it theoretically, but see it, then the problem comes to an end. A man who is passionate about the world and the necessity for change, must be free from political activity, religious conformity and tradition - which means, free from the weight of time, free from the burden of the past, free from all the action of will: this is the new human being. This only is the social, psychological, and even the political revolution.

克：如果你真的强烈地观察到这一矛盾，那么这觉察的本身就是革命。如果你观察到自己头脑和心灵之间这种分裂，是真真切切地观察到了，而不是理论上的构想，而是的确观察到了，那么这个问题就结束了。一个热衷于世界而且认为必须改变世界的人，必须从政治活动，遵奉宗教和传统中解脱出来——这就意味着，必须从时间的重负下解脱，必须从过去的负担里解脱，必须从所有意志的行动里解脱：这就是新人类。这是唯一的社会上的，心理上的乃至政治上的革命。