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

Sue

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

     Questioner: I find myself in a great deal of conflict with everything about me; and also everything within me is in conflict. People have spoken of divine order; nature is harmonious; it seems that man is the only animal who violates this order, making so much misery for others and for himself. When I wake up in the morning I see from my window little birds fighting with each other, but they soon separate and fly away, whereas I carry this war with myself and with others inside me all the time; there is no escaping it. I wonder if I can ever be at peace with myself. I must say I should like to find myself in complete harmony with everything about me and with myself. As one sees from this window the quiet sea and the light on the water, one has a feeling deep within oneself that there must be a way of living without these endless quarrels with oneself and with the world. Is there any harmony at all, anywhere? Or is there only everlasting disorder? If there is harmony, at what level can it exist? Or does it only exist on the top of some mountain which the burning valleys can never know?

发问者：我发现自己处于大量的冲突中，与我周围的一切都冲突不断；而且我内在的一切也是冲突的。人们说起过神圣的秩序；自然界是和谐有序的；似乎只有人类是唯一违背这秩序的动物，给别人和自己制造了如此多的苦难。我早上醒来的时候，从窗口看到小鸟在互相交战，但是它们很快就散开了飞走了，但是我把自己内在的和自己和别人的这种战争一直背负在身上；完全无法逃避。我想知道我究竟能否与自己和平相处。我不得不说，我想发现自己与我周围的每件事和我自己是处于完全和谐中的。当一个人从这窗口望出去，看到平静的大海和水面上的光芒，他内心深处深深地感觉到，必然有一种生活方式，其中没有这些与自己与世界的无尽争吵。不管在哪里，究竟可有任何的和谐？还是只有无休止的失序？如果有和谐，那么它存在于哪个层面上？还是它只能存在于某座高山之巅，而这是燃烧的山谷永远无法知道的？

     Krishnamurti: Can one go from one to the other? Can one change that which is to that which is not? Can disharmony be transformed into harmony?

克：一个人能由此及彼吗？他能把是什么的变成不是什么吗？不和谐能被转化成和谐吗？

     Questioner: Is conflict necessary then? It may perhaps, after all, be the natural order of things.

发问者：那冲突是必然的了？毕竟，那也许就是事物的自然规律。

     Krishnamurti: If one accepted that, one would have to accept everything society stands for: wars, ambitious competition, an aggressive way of life - all the brutal violence of men, inside and outside of his so-called holy places. Is this natural? Will this bring about any unity? Wouldn't it be better for us to consider these two facts - the fact of conflict with all its complicated struggles, and the fact of the mind demanding order, harmony, peace, beauty, love?

克：如果一个人接受了这一点，那么他就得接受社会主张的一切：战争，野心勃勃的竞争，咄咄逼人的生活方式——人类所有野蛮残忍的暴力，存在于他所谓的神圣之地的里里外外。这是自然的吗？这会带来任何和谐一体吗？我们难道不该来考虑一下这两个事实——冲突的事实及其所有复杂的争斗，以及想要秩序、和谐、和平、美和爱的头脑的事实？

     Questioner: I know nothing about harmony. I see it in the heavens, in the seasons, in the mathematical order of the universe. But that doesn't give me order in my own heart and mind; the absolute order of mathematics is not my order. I have no order, I am in deep disorder. I know there are different theories of gradual evolution towards the so-called perfection of political utopias and religious heavens, but this leaves me where I actually am. The world may perhaps be perfect in ten thousand years from now, but in the meantime I'm having hell.

发问者：关于和谐，我一无所知。我在天空中，季节中，宇宙的数学秩序中看到了和谐。但是，那并不能给我自己的心灵和头脑带来秩序；数学的绝对秩序不是我的秩序。我没有秩序，我处于深深的失序中。我知道有很多种逐渐进化的理论，声称能通向所谓完美的政治乌托邦和宗教天堂，但是这把我带到了我现在实际的这个样子。世界也许会在从现在起的一万年后变得完美，但是在这个过程中我身处地狱。

     Krishnamurti: We see the disorder in ourselves and in society. Both are very complex. There are really no answers. One can examine all this very carefully, analyse it closely, look for causes of disorder in oneself and in society, expose them to the light and perhaps believe that one will free the mind from them. This analytical process is what most people are doing, intelligently or unintelligently, and it doesn't get anybody very far. Man has analysed himself for thousands of years, and produced no result but literature! The many saints have paralysed themselves in concepts and ideological prisons; they too are in conflict. The cause of our conflict is this everlasting duality of desire: the endless corridor of the opposites creating envy greed ambition aggression, fear, and all the rest of it. Now I wonder if there isn't an altogether different approach to this problem? The acceptance of this struggle and all our efforts to get out of it have become traditional. The whole approach is traditional. In this traditional approach the mind operates but, as we see, the traditional approach of the mind creates more disorder. So the problem is not how to end disorder, but rather whether the mind can look at it freed from tradition. And then perhaps there may be no problem at all.

克：我们看到了自己身上和社会中的失序。两者都非常复杂。真的没有答案。一个人能够非常仔细地研究这一点，近距离地分析，寻找自己和社会失序的原因，把它们曝光，相信或许如此他就能把心智从中解脱出来。这种分析过程就是大多数人正在做的，不管用聪明还是不聪明的方式，但是这并没有让任何人走多远。人类分析自己分析了几千年，除了文学没有得到任何结果！很多圣人把自己麻痹在概念和思想体系的牢笼里；他们也满是冲突。我们冲突的原因是欲望那无穷的二元性：对立面那没有尽头的通道，制造着嫉妒、贪婪、野心、侵略、恐惧以及等等一切。现在我想知道是不是有一种完全不同的方式来着手这个问题？接受这种挣扎，接受我们为了从中摆脱所做的一切努力，已经成为传统。整个处理方式都是传统的。头脑在这种传统中运作，但是，正如我们所看到的，头脑传统的方式制造了更多的冲突。所以问题不是如何终结失序，而是头脑能否从传统中解脱出来看这个问题。然后也许就根本没有问题了。

     Questioner: I don't follow you at all.

发问者：我完全不明白你的意思。

     Krishnamurti: There is this fact of disorder. There is no doubt about it: it is an actual fact. The traditional approach to this fact is to analyse it, to try to discover the cause of it and overcome the cause, or else to invent its opposite and battle towards that. This is the traditional approach with its disciplines, drills, controls, suppressions, sublimations. Man has done this for thousands upon thousands of years; it has led nowhere. Can we abandon this approach completely and look at the problem entirely differently - that is, not try to go beyond it, or to resolve it, or to overcome it, or to escape from it? Can the mind do this?

克：存在着失序这个事实。这一点毫无疑问：这确实是个事实。处理这个事实的传统方式是分析它，试图发现它的原因，克服那原因，或者编造出它的对立面，并为此而奋斗。这就是传统的方式，通过戒律，训练，控制，压抑和高尚化。人们这么做了几千年；它哪儿也没去到。我们能不能完全抛弃这种方式，以完全不同的方式来看问题——也就是，不去试图超越它，解决它，克服它，或者逃避它？头脑能否做到这点？

     Questioner: Perhaps....

发问者：也许...

     Krishnamurti: Don't answer so quickly! This is a tremendous thing I am asking you. From the beginning of time man has tried to deal with all his problems, either by going beyond them, resolving them, overcoming them or escaping from them. Please do not think you can push all that aside so lightly, simply with a verbal agreement. It makes up the very structure of everybody's mind. Can the mind now, understanding all this non-verbally, actually free itself from the tradition? This traditional way of dealing with the conflict never solves it, but only adds more conflict: being violent, which is conflict, I add the additional conflict of trying to become non-violent. All social morality and all religious prescriptions are that. Are we together?

克：不要那么快回答！我在问你一件非同寻常的事情。从时间之初，人类就试图处理他所有的问题，要么通过超越它们，解决它们，克服他们或者逃避它们。请不要以为你能如此轻易地把这一切推在一边，简简单单地说句话就完了。这恰恰构成了每个人头脑的结构。现在头脑能不能，不通过语言地理解这一切，把自己从传统中真正地解脱出来？处理冲突的这种传统方式永远无法解决冲突，只会增加更多的冲突：暴力着，也就是冲突着，我试图变得不暴力，这就额外增加了更多的冲突。所有的社会道德和所有的宗教对治方法都是如此。我们是在一起的吗？

     Questioner: Yes.

发问者：是的。

     Krishnamurti: Then do you see how far we have come? Having, through understanding, repudiated all these traditional approaches, what is the actual state of the mind now? Because the state of the mind is far more important than the conflict itself.

克：那你有没有看到我们走了多远？通过了解，否定了所有这些传统的方式，现在头脑的实际状态是怎样的？因为头脑的状态比冲突本身重要多了。

     Questioner: I really don't know.

发问者：我真的不知道。

     Krishnamurti: Why don't you know? Why aren't you aware, if you have really abandoned the traditional approach, of the state of your mind? Why don't you know? Either you have abandoned it or you haven't. If you have, you would know it. If you have, then your mind is made innocent to look at the problem. You can look at the problem as though for the first time. And if you do this, is there a problem of conflict at all? Because you look at the problem with the old eyes it is not only strengthened but also moves in its well-worn path. So what is important is how you look at the problem - whether you look at it with new eyes or old eyes. The new eyes are freed from the conditioned responses to the problem. Even to name the problem through recognition is to approach it in the traditional way. Justification, condemnation, or translation of the problem in terms of pleasure and pain, are all involved in this habitual traditional approach of doing something about it. This is generally called positive action with regard to the problem. But when the mind brushes all that aside as being ineffectual, unintelligent, then it has become highly sensitive, highly ordered, and free.

克：你为什么不知道？如果你真的已经抛弃了传统的方式，你为什么不知道你头脑的状态？你为什么不知道？要么你抛弃了传统方式，要么你没有。如果你已经抛弃了它，你就会知道。如果你做到了，那么你的头脑就可以纯真地看问题了。你就能像第一次看到这个问题一样。如果你做到了这点，难道还会有冲突的问题吗？因为如果你用过去的眼光看问题的话，就不只是加重了问题，而且还会重蹈覆辙。所以重要的是如何看问题——你是用新的眼光还是过去的眼光看着它。新的眼光就从对问题局限的反应中解脱出来了。即使通过认知来给问题命名，也还是在用传统的方式在处理问题。辩解，谴责，或者通过欢愉和痛苦来诠释，都包含在了这种习惯性的要对它做点什么的传统方式里。这通常被称为对于问题采取的积极行动。但是当头脑把这一切当作无效的和不智慧的扫在一边，那么它就变得高度敏感，高度有序和自由了。

     Questioner: You're asking too much of me, I can't do it. I'm incapable of it. You're asking me to be superhuman!

发问者：你对我要求太高了，我做不到。我没有这个能力。你在让我做个超人！

     Krishnamurti: You're making difficulties for yourself, blocking yourself, when you say you must become superhuman. It's nothing of the kind. You keep on looking at things with eyes that want to interfere, that want to do something about what they see. Stop doing anything about it, for whatever you do belongs to the traditional approach. That's all. Be simple. This is the miracle of perception - to perceive with a heart and mind that are completely cleansed of the past. Negation is the most positive action.

克：当你说你必须变成超人，你是在为自己制造困难，为自己制造障碍。完全不是这样的。你一直用想要干涉的双眼看事情，想要对它们看到的东西做点什么。停止对它做任何事情，因为无论你做什么，都属于传统的方式。就是这样。简单点。这就是觉察的奇迹——用完全清除了过去的心灵和头脑去觉察。否定是最积极的行动。

Sue

不管在哪里，究竟可有任何的和谐？

这样呢？