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

Sue

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

     Questioner: You have often talked about learning. I don't quite know what you mean by it. We are taught to learn at school and at the University, and life also teaches us many things - to adjust ourselves to environment and to our neighbours, to our wife or husband, to our children. We seem to learn from almost everything, but I am sure that when you speak about learning this isn't quite what you mean because you also seem to deny experience as a teacher. But when you deny experience aren't you denying all learning? After all, through experience, both in technology and in human everyday living, we learn everything we know. So could we go into this question?

发问者：你常常谈到学习。我不太知道你说的学习是什么意思。我们在学校里、大学里接受教育、学习，生活也教会我们很多东西——根据环境和我们的邻居、妻子或者丈夫、我们的孩子来调整自己。我们似乎在从所有事情中学习，但是我相信你说学习的时候，并不是这个意思，因为你似乎也否定了作为老师的经验。但是当你否定经验时，你不就是在否定一切学习吗？毕竟，通过技术上和人们每日生活中的经验，我们学到了我们所知的一切。所以我们能深入探讨一下这个问题吗？

     Krishnamurti: Learning through experience is one thing - it is the accumulation of conditioning - and learning all the time, not only about objective things but also about oneself, is something quite different. There is the accumulation which brings about conditioning - this we know - and there is the learning which we speak about. This learning is observation - to observe without accumulation, to observe in freedom. This observation is not directed from the past. Let us keep those two things clear.

克：从经验中学习是一回事——这是局限的积累——而始终在学习，不仅学习客观事物而且也对一个人自己进行了解，这完全是另一回事。存在着导致局限的积累——这点我们都知道——也存在着我们说的那种学习。这种学习是观察——不积累地观察，在自由中观察。这种观察不受过去控制。让我们把这两件事弄清楚。

     What do we learn from experience? We learn things like languages, agriculture, manners, going to the moon, medicine, mathematics. But have we learnt about war through making war? We have learnt to make war more deadly, more efficient, but we haven't learnt not to make war. Our experience in warfare endangers the survival of the human race. Is this learning? You may build a better house, but has experience taught you how to live more nobly inside it? We have learnt through experience that fire burns and that has become our conditioning but we have also learnt through our conditioning that nationalism is good. Yet experience should also teach us that nationalism is deadly. All the evidence is there. The religious experience, as based on our conditioning, has separated man from man. Experience has taught us to have better food, clothes and shelter, but it has not taught us that social injustice prevents the right relationship between man and man. So experience conditions and strengthens our prejudices, our peculiar tendencies and our particular dogmas and beliefs. We do not learn what stupid nonsense all this is; we do not learn to live in the right relationship with other men. This right relationship is love. Experience teaches me to strengthen the family as a unit opposed to society and to other families. This brings about strife and division, which makes it ever more important to strengthen the family protectively, and so the vicious circle continues. We accumulate, and call this "learning through experience", but more and more this learning brings about fragmentation, narrowness and specialization.

我们从经验里学到了什么？我们学习诸如语言、农业、礼仪、登月、医药、数学之类的东西。但是我们是不是通过发动战争也学会了战争？我们学会了使战争变得更致命、更有效率，但是我们没有学会不去发动战争。我们的战争经验使人类的生存濒临危险。这是学习吗？你能造一座更好的房子，但是这经验教会了你如何更高尚地住在这房子里吗？我们从经验中学到了火会燃烧，这变成了我们的局限，但是我们也从我们的局限里学到了国家主义很好。而经验也应该告诉我们国家主义是致命的。所有的证据都在那儿。以我们的局限为基础的宗教经验，把人与人分割开来。经验教会我们获取更好的食物、衣服和住所，但是它没有教我们认识到社会不公妨碍了人与人之间正确的关系。所以经验决定了加强了我们的偏见，我们特定的倾向和我们特定的教条和信仰。我们没有学到这一切是多么愚蠢的无稽之谈；我们没有学会与他人一起生活在正确的关系中。这正确的关系就是爱。经验告诉我把家庭作为对立于社会和其他家庭的一个单元来巩固。这造成了冲突和分裂，使得保护性地巩固家庭变得更为重要，于是继续恶性循环下去。我们积累，称之为“从经验中学习”，但是这种学习带来了越来越多的分裂、狭隘和限制。

     Questioner: Are you making out a case against technological learning and experience, against science and all accumulated knowledge? If we turn our backs on that we shall go back to savagery.

发问者：你是在提出论据反对技术上的学习和经验，反对科学和积累的所有知识吗？如果我们反对这些，那么我们就会回到蛮夷状态。

     Krishnamurti: No, I am not making out such a case at all. I think we are misunderstanding each other. We said that there are two kinds of learning: accumulation through experience, and acting from that accumulation, which is the past, and which is absolutely necessary wherever the action of knowledge is necessary. We are not against this; that would be too absurd!

克：不，我根本不是在反对这些。我想我们误会对方了。我们说有两种学习：一种是通过经验来积累并根据这积累，也就是根据过去进行反应，而需要知识来行动的时候，这些是绝对必要的。我们并不反对这些；那就太荒唐了！

     Questioner: Gandhi tried to keep the machine out of life and started all that business which they call "Home industries" or "Cottage industries" in India. Yet he used modern mechanized transport. This shows the inconsistency and hypocrisy of his position.

发问者：甘地试图把机器赶出生活，并在印度发起了那场他们称为“居家产业”或者“家庭手工业”的运动。然而他却使用现代机械化的交通工具。这表明了他的主张的矛盾和虚伪。

     Krishnamurti: Let's leave other people out of this. We are saying that there are two kinds of learning - one, acting through the accumulation of knowledge and experience, and the other, learning without accumulation, but learning all the time in the very act of living. The former is absolutely necessary in all technical matters, but relationship, behaviour, are not technical matters, they are living things and you have to learn about them all the time. If you act from what you have learnt about behaviour, then it becomes mechanical and therefore relationship becomes routine.

克：让我们把其他的人排除讨论之外。我们说有两种学习——一种是，通过积累的知识和经验来行动，另一种是，不积累地学习，始终在生活这个行为本身中学习。前者在所有的技术事务中都是绝对必要的，而关系和行为，不是技术性事务，它们是活生生的事情，你必须始终从中学习。如果你根据之前学到的关于行为的知识来行动，那么就会变得机械化，进而关系就变成了例行公事。

     Then there is another very important point: in all the learning which is accumulation and experience, profit is the criterion that determines the efficiency of the learning. And when the motive of profit operates in human relationships then it destroys those relationships because it brings about isolation and division. When the learning of experience and accumulation enters the domain of human behaviour, the psychological domain, then it must inevitably destroy. Enlightened self-interest on the one hand is advancement, but on the other hand it is the very seat of mischief, misery and confusion. Relationship cannot flower where there is self-interest of any kind, and that is why relationship cannot flower where it is guided by experience or memory.

接下来还有非常重要的一点：在所有积累和经验的学习中，利益是决定学习效率的标准。当获益的动机在人际关系中运作时，就破坏了这些关系，因为这带来了孤立和分离。当经验和积累的学习进入到人类行为的领域，心理领域中时，就必然会产生破坏。公开的利己主义一方面是进步，但是另一方面正是不幸、痛苦和混乱的根源。如果有任何形式的利己主义，关系就无法绽放，这就是为什么有经验或者记忆指导的地方关系就不能绽放。

     Questioner: I see this, but isn't religious experience something different? I am talking about the experience gathered and passed on in religious matters - the experiences of the saints and gurus, the experience of the philosophers. Isn't this kind of experience beneficial to us in our ignorance?

发问者：我看到了这点，但是难道宗教体验不是不同的吗？我说的是在宗教事务方面积累和传承下来的经验——圣人和古鲁的经验，哲人的经验。难道这种经验对于对治我们的无知不是有益的吗？

     Krishnamurti: Not at all! The saint must be recognised by society and always conforms to society's notions of sainthood - otherwise he wouldn't be called a saint. Equally the guru must be recognised as such by his followers who are conditioned by tradition. So both the guru and the disciple are part of the cultural and religious conditioning of the particular society in which they live. When they assert that they have come into contact with reality, that they know, then you may be quite sure that what they know is not reality. What they know is their own projection from the past. So the man who says he knows, does not know. in all these so-called religious experiences a cognitive process of recognition is inherent. You can only recognise something you have known before, therefore it is of the past, therefore it is time-binding and not timeless. So-called religious experience does not bring benefit but merely conditions you according to your particular tradition, inclination, tendency and desire, and therefore encourages every form of illusion and isolation.

克：根本毫无益处！圣人必须为社会所认可，并始终遵守社会对圣徒抱持的信条——否则他就不能被称为圣人。同样古鲁也必须被他的追随者所认可，而这些追随者被传统所局限。所以古鲁和弟子都是他们所处的特定社会的文化和宗教局限的一部分。当他们声称他们接上了真相，声称他们知道，那么你就可以肯定他们知道的不是真相。他们知道的是他们自己来自过去的投射。所以说自己知道的人，并不知道。在所有这些所谓的宗教体验中，必然会有一个认知的过程。你只能认出你以前知道的东西，所以那是来自过去的，因而是受限于时间的，不是永恒的。所谓的宗教体验不会带来任何益处，而是只会把你局限于你特定的传统、倾向、好恶和欲望中，因而助长了各种形式的幻觉和孤立。

     Questioner: Do you mean to say that you cannot experience reality?
     Krishnamurti: To experience implies that there must be an experiencer and the experiencer is the essence of all conditioning. What he experiences is the already-known.
     Questioner: What do you mean when you talk about the experiencer? If there is no experiencer do you mean you disappear?

发问者：你的意思是说你无法体验真相？
克：去体验意味着必须有个体验者，而体验者正是所有局限的核心。他体验到的是已知。
发问者：你说的体验者是什么意思？如果没有体验者，你的意思是不是你消失了？

     Krishnamurti: Of course. The "you" is the past and as long as the "you" remains or the "me" remains, that which is immense cannot be. The "me" with his shallow little mind, experience and knowledge, with his heart burdened with jealousies and anxieties - how can such an entity understand that which has no beginning and no ending, that which is ecstasy? So the beginning of wisdom is to understand yourself. Begin understanding yourself.
     Questioner: Is the experiencer different from that which he experiences, is the challenge different from the reaction to the challenge?

克：当然是的。“你”就是过去，只要“你”还在，那无限就不可能在。“我”带着他狭隘的头脑、经验和知识，带着他被嫉妒和焦虑所负累的心——这样一个实体怎么可能了解那无始无终之物，也就是至乐？所以智慧的开端就是了解你自己。开始了解你自己吧。
发问者：体验者与他的体验是不同的吗，挑战与应对挑战的反应是不同的吗？

     Krishnamurti: The experiencer is the experienced, otherwise he could not recognise the experience and would not call it an experience; the experience is already in him before he recognises it. So the past is always operating and recognising itself; the new becomes swallowed up by the old. Similarly it is the reaction which determines the challenge; the challenge is the reaction, the two are not separate; without a reaction there would be no challenge. So the experience of an experiencer, or the reaction to a challenge which comes from the experiencer, are old, for they are determined by the experiencer. If you come to think of it, the word "experience" means to go through something and finish with it and not store it up, but when we talk about experience we actually mean the opposite. Every time you speak of experience you speak of something stored from which action takes place, you speak of something which you have enjoyed and demand to have again, or have disliked and fear to have repeated.
     So really to live is to learn without the cumulative process.

克：体验者即体验到的，否则他就不可能认出这体验，不会把它称为一次体验；在认出来之前，这体验他已经有过了。所以过去总是在运作并认出它自己；新的东西被旧的吞噬了。同样，是反应决定了挑战；挑战就是反应，这两者不是分开的；没有反应就没有挑战。所以一个体验者的体验，或者体验者对挑战的反应，是陈旧的，因为他们取决于体验者。如果你来想一想，“体验”这个词意味着经历某事，结束它而不存储，但是我们谈起体验的时候，我们实际上说的是相反的意思。每次你说到经验，你说的都是以前存储的东西，而行动从中产生，你说的是你曾经享受过并希望再来一次的事情，或者不喜欢、害怕会再重复的事情。

所以真正地活着就是学习而没有积累的过程。