大雾一整天都没有散去，将近傍晚雾散的时候，一阵风从北方刮来——干燥、刺骨的风，吹落了枯叶，吹干了大地。这是一个狂风暴雨、天气险恶的夜晚；风力增加，房屋吱吱作响，树枝被折断。第二天早晨，空气是如此清新，你几乎可以触到群山。热量随着风又被带回来；而当风在傍晚停息以后，大雾再次从海上滚滚而来。
　　大地是多么不可思议地美丽和富饶啊！它永不厌倦。干枯的河床上充满了活跃的生物：金雀花，罂粟，高高的桔黄色向日葵。大石头上趴着蜥蜴；一条身上布满棕色和白色花纹的王蛇正在晒太阳，它黑乎乎的舌头吞进吐出，而山谷对面一只狗正在汪汪叫着追赶一只地鼠或野兔。
　　满足绝对不是实现、成就、或对事物的占有的结果；它并非诞生于有为或者无为。它因真实存在的圆满而发生，而不在对它的改造中。那圆满的不需要改造、改变。是那试图变成的不完成体会着不满足和改变的混乱。真实存在就是那未完成的，它不是那个完成的。那完成的是不真实的，而对不真实的追求就是永远不可能被治愈的不满足的痛苦。治愈那种痛苦的企图正是对不真实的寻求，不满足由此而生。没有脱离不满足的出路。觉知不满足就是觉知真实存在，而在它的圆满中有一种也许可以称为满足的状态。它没有对立面。
　　房子俯瞰着山谷，远处群山最高的山峰被落日染得通红。它的石堆似乎是从天际挂下，从云中落下。而在阴暗的房间里，那光线美得无法形容。

　　他是一个小伙子，热情而敏锐。

　　“我读了一些关于宗教和宗教修行、关于禅定和各种不同的鼓吹达到至高无上的方法的书。我曾被天主教吸引。它的一些学说让我中意，并且有一段时间我考虑做一名天主教徒；但是一天，当我与一位学识渊博的教士交谈的时候，我突然认识到天主教教义和监狱是多么地相似。在我像随意漂泊的水手一样到处游荡其间，我到过印度并在那里待了将近一年，而且考虑过当和尚；但那过于从生活中隐退也过于理想化地不真实。为了修习禅定我尝试过独自生活，但是那也结束了。在这些年以后我似乎依然完全没有能力控制我的思想，而这就是我想要谈的。当然我还有其他问题，性等等，但是假如我完全是我的思想的主人，那么我就能约束炙热的欲望。”
　　思想的控制会导致欲望的平服吗？还是仅仅导致它的压抑，将反过来带来其他更深的问题呢？
　　“当然您不提倡对欲望让步。欲望是思想的方式，而我希望通过努力控制思想来克制欲望。欲望要么被克制要么被升华，但即使要升华它们也必须首先被控制。大部分导师都主张欲望必须被克服，而且他们制定了不同的方法以使之发生。”
　　除了别人说的之外，你怎么认为呢？仅仅控制欲望就能解决欲望的许多问题吗？对欲望的克制或升华将产生对它的了解，或从中解脱吗？通过某种宗教的或其他方面的占据，头脑可以被一天二十四小时地训练。但是一个被占据的头脑不是一个自由的头脑，而当然只有自由的头脑才能够觉知到无始无终的创造。
　　“在超越欲望中没有自由吗？”
　　你说的超越欲望是什么意思呢？
　　“对于一个人自身快乐的实现和那至高无上的实现来说，不被欲望所驱使，不被它的骚动和混乱困住是必要的。使欲望处于控制之下，某种形式的克制是绝对必要的。与其追求生命中微不足道的东西，那相同的欲望可以找寻到崇高的顶点。”
　　你可以把欲望的对象从一所房子变成知识，从低的改变成最至高无上的，但是它依然是欲望的行为，不是吗？一个人也许不想要世俗的认可，但是达到天堂的欲望仍然是对获得的追寻。欲望永远在追寻实现、获得，而正是这种欲望的活动必须被了解而不是被赶走或埋藏。没有对欲望的方式的了解，仅仅控制思想没有多少意义。
　　“但是我必须回到那个开始的问题。即使要了解欲望，专注也是必要的，而那就是我的全部困难。我似乎不能控制我的念头。它们到处纷飞，互相干扰。在所有不相干的念头里没有一个单一的念头是占主导的并连续。”
　　头脑就像一部机器似的日夜运转，无论睡着还是醒着都喋喋不休、不停地忙碌着。它是迅速的，就像大海一样动荡不安。这部错综复杂的机械装置的另外一个部分尽力控制整个活动，并因此启动了对立的欲望和欲望间的冲突。一个也许被称为较高的自我而另一个被称为较低的自我，但是两者都在头脑的范围内。头脑、思想的行动和反应，几乎都是同时地并自动地发生的。这整个有意识或无意识地接受或拒绝，顺从或力争自由的过程是极端快速的。所以问题不是如何控制这复杂的机器，因为控制导致了摩擦并且只会耗费能量，那么这迅捷的头脑有可能慢下来吗？
　　“但是怎么办呢？”
　　如果可以指出的话，先生，问题不在于“如何”。“如何”只是产生出一个没有太多意义的结果、后果；而当它被获得以后，另一次对所欲望的目标的追寻，连同它的痛苦和冲突，将要开始了。
　　“那么该怎么做呢？”
　　你没有问对问题，不是吗？你不是在亲自探索减缓头脑的真实或者虚假，但是你却关心得到一个结果。得到一个结果相对来说是容易的，不是吗？不设置障碍而让头脑减缓有可能吗？
　　“您说的减缓头脑是什么意思呢？”
　　当你在一辆汽车里高速行驶的时候，附近的景致一片模糊；只有当在步行速度的时候，你才能够细致地观察树木花鸟。自知伴随着头脑的减缓而来。但是那不意味着强迫头脑减缓。强迫只会导致反抗，而在头脑的减缓中却不会有能量的耗费。正是这样，不是吗？
　　“我想我开始认识到人所做的控制思想的努力是徒劳的，但是我不了解还能做些什么。”
　　我们还没有接近行动的问题，不是吗？我们尝试认识到对头脑来说减慢速度是重要的，我们还没有考虑如何让它减缓。头脑能够减缓吗？并且何时发生呢？
　　“我不知道，以前我从来没有考虑过。”
　　先生，你没有注意到当你观察的时候头脑就减缓了吗？当你注视着那辆沿着公路行驶的车，或专心地查看任何物体的时候，你的头脑不是运转地更缓慢吗？注视、观察确实减缓了头脑。看着一幅画、一个影像、一个物体，帮助头脑平静，就像语词的重复所做的；但是那样的话物体或语词就变得非常重要，而不是头脑的减缓以及因此被发现的东西。
　　“我正在观察您解释的东西，有一种对头脑的停止的觉知。”
　　难道我们真的观察到什么了吗？抑或我们在观察者和被观察者之间插入了一个各种偏见、价值观、判断、比较和谴责的屏障呢？
　　“没有这道屏障几乎是不可能的。我不认为我有能力以一种清净的方式来观察。”
　　请允许我建议，不要让你自己被语言或一个肯定或否定的结论所阻碍。有可能没有这道屏障而观察吗？换一句话说，当头脑被占据的时候有关注吗？只有一个不被占据的头脑才可能关注。当有观照的时候，头脑是缓慢而警觉的，这是一个没有被占据的头脑的关注。
　　“我开始体验到您所说的，先生。”
　　让我们做更进一步的尝试。如果在观察者和被观察的之间没有评价，没有屏障，那么在它们之间还有分离、分裂吗？观察者不就是被观察的吗？
　　“恐怕我无法了解。”
　　钻石不可能被从它的质地中分离出来，它能吗？嫉妒的情绪不可能从那种情绪的经验者那里被分离出来，尽管确实有一种滋生出冲突的虚幻的分裂存在着，而头脑就被困在这种冲突里。当这种虚幻的分裂消失的时候，才有解脱的可能性，而只有那时头脑才会停止。只有当经验者停止的时候，才有“真实”的创造性的活动。

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES II CHAPTER 54 'THE STORM IN THE MIND'

ALL DAY THE fog had lasted, and as it cleared towards evening a wind sprang up from the east - a dry, harsh wind, blowing down the dead leaves and drying up the land. It was a tempestuous and menacing night; the wind had increased, the house creaked, and branches were being torn from the trees. The next morning the air was so clear you could almost touch the mountains. The heat had returned with the wind; but as the wind died in the late afternoon, the fog rolled in again from the sea.
     How extraordinarily beautiful and rich the earth is! There is no tiring of it. The dry river beds are full of living things: gorse, poppies, tall yellow sunflowers. On the boulders there are lizards; a brown and white ringed king snake is sunning itself, its black tongue shooting in and out, and across the ravine a dog is barking, pursuing a gopher or a rabbit.
     Contentment is never the outcome of fulfilment, of achievement, or of the possession of things; it is not born of action or inaction. It comes with the fullness of what is, not in the alteration of it. That which is full does not need alteration, change. It is the incomplete which is trying to become complete that knows the turmoil of discontent and change. The what is is the incomplete, it is not the complete. The complete is unreal, and the pursuit of the unreal is the pain of discontent which can never be healed. The very attempt to heal that pain is the search for the unreal, from which arises discontent. There is no way out of discontent. To be aware of discontent is to be aware of what is, and in the fullness of it there is a state which may be called contentment. It has no opposite.
     The house overlooked the valley, and the highest peak of the distant mountains was aglow with the setting sun. Its rocky mass seemed hung from the sky and alight from within, and in the darkening room the beauty of that light was beyond all measure.
     He was a youngish man, eager and searching.
     "I have read several books on religion and religious practices, on meditation and the various methods advocated for attaining the highest. I was at one time drawn to Communism, but soon found that it was a retrogressive movement in spite of the many intellectuals who belonged to it. I was also attracted to Catholicism. Some of its doctrines pleased me and for a time I thought of becoming a Catholic; but one day, while talking to a very learned priest, I suddenly perceived how similar Catholicism was to the prison of Communism. During my wanderings as a sailor on a tramp ship I went to India and spent nearly a year there, and I thought of becoming a monk; but that was too withdrawn from life and too idealistically unreal. I tried living alone in order to meditate, but that too came to an end. After all these years I still seem to be utterly incapable of controlling my thoughts, and this is what I want to talk about. Of course I have other problems, sex and so on, but if I were completely the master of my thoughts I could then manage to curb my burning desires and urges."
     Will the controlling of thought lead to the calming of desire, or merely to its suppression, which will in turn bring other and deeper problems?
     "You are of course not advocating giving way to desire. Desire is the way of thought, and in my attempts to control thought I had hoped to subjugate my desires. Desires have either to be subjugated or sublimated, but even to sublimate them they must first be held in check. Most of the teachers insist that desires must be transcended, and they prescribe various methods to bring this about."
     Apart from what others have said, what do you think? Will mere control of desire resolve the many problems of desire? Will suppression or sublimation of desire bring about the understanding of it or free you from it? Through some occupation, religious or otherwise, the mind can be disciplined every hour of the day. But an occupied mind is not a free mind, and surely it is only the free mind that can be aware of timeless creativity.
     "Is there no freedom in transcending desire?"
     What do you mean by transcending desire?
     "For the realization of one's own happiness, and also of the highest, it is necessary not to be driven by desire, not to be caught in its turmoil and confusion. To have desire under control, some form of subjugation is essential. Instead of pursuing the trivial things of life, that very same desire can search out the sublime."
     You may change the object of desire from a house to knowledge, from the low to the very highest, but it is still the activity of desire, is it not? One may not want worldly recognition, but the urge to attain heaven is still the pursuit of gain. Desire is ever seeking fulfilment, attainment, and it is this movement of desire which must be understood and not driven away or under. Without understanding the ways of desire, mere control of thought has little significance.
     "But I must come back to the point from which I started. Even to understand desire, concentration is necessary, and that is my whole difficulty. I can't seem to control my thoughts. They wander all over the place tumbling over each other. There is not a single thought that is dominant and continuous among all the irrelevant thoughts."
     The mind is like a machine that is working night and day, chattering, everlastingly busy whether asleep or awake. It is speedy and as restless as the sea. Another part of this intricate and complex mechanism tries to control the whole movement, and so begins the conflict between opposing desires, urges. One may be called the higher self and the other the lower self, but both are within the area of the mind. The action and reaction of the mind, of thought, are almost simultaneous and almost automatic. This whole conscious and unconscious process of accepting and denying, conforming and striving to be free, is extremely rapid. So the question is not how to control this complex mechanism, for control brings friction and only dissipates energy, but can this very swift mind slow down?
     "But how?"
     If it may be pointed out, sir, the issue is not the `how'. The `how' merely produces a result, an end without much significance; and after it is gained, another search for another desirable end will begin, with its misery and conflict. "Then what is one to do?"
     You are not asking the right question are you? You are not discovering for yourself the truth or falseness of the slowing down of the mind, but you are concerned with getting a result. Getting a result is comparatively easy, isn't it? Is it possible for the mind to slow down without putting on brakes?
     "What do you mean by slowing down?"
     When you are going very fast in a car, the nearby landscape is a blur; it is only at a walking speed that you can observe in detail the trees, the birds and the flowers. Self-knowledge comes with the slowing down of the mind, but that doesn't mean forcing the mind to be slow. Compulsion only makes for resistance, and there must be no dissipation of energy in the slowing down of the mind. This is so, isn't it?
     "I think I am beginning to see that the effort one makes to control thought is wasteful, but I don't understand what else is to be done."
     We haven't yet come to the question of action, have we? We are trying to see that it is important for the mind to slow down, we are not considering how to slow it down. Can the mind slowdown? And when does this happen? "I don't know, I have never thought of it before."
     Have you not noticed, sir that while you are watching something the mind slows down? When you watch that car moving along the road down there, or look intently at any physical object, is not your mind functioning more slowly? Watching, observing, does slow down the mind. Looking at a picture, an image, an object, helps to quiet the mind, as does the repetition of a phrase; but then the object or the phrase becomes very important, and not the slowing down of the mind and what is discovered thereby.
     "I am watching what you are explaining, and there is an awareness of the stillness of the mind."
     Do we ever really watch anything, or do we interpose between the observer and the observed a screen of various prejudices, values, judgments, comparisons, condemnations?
     "It is almost impossible not to have this screen. I don't think I am capable of observing in an inviolate manner."
     If it may be suggested, don't block yourself by words or by a conclusion, positive or negative. Can there be observation without this screen? To put it differently, is there attention when the mind is occupied? It is only the unoccupied mind that can attend. The mind is slow, alert, when there is watchfulness, which is the attention of an unoccupied mind.
     "I am beginning to experience what you are saying, sir."
     Let us examine it a little further. If there is no evaluation, no screen between the observer and the observed, is there then a separation, a division between them? Is not the observer the observed?
     "I am afraid I don't follow."
     The diamond cannot be separated from its qualities, can it? The feeling of envy cannot be separated from the experiencer of that feeling, though an illusory division does exist which breeds conflict, and in this conflict the mind is caught. When this false separation disappears, there is a possibility of freedom, and only then is the mind still. It is only when the experiencer ceases that there is the creative movement of the real.

　　以任何速度行驶都会有细微而无孔不入的灰尘涌进车厢。尽管是大清早，离太阳出来还要一两个小时，但是已经有一种还算不上太不舒服的干燥的炎热。甚至在那个时候路上就已经有牛车了。车夫在睡觉，但是那些牛继续赶路，优哉游哉地返回他们的村子。有时是两辆或三辆牛车，有时十辆，有一次有二十五辆，排成长长的一列，所有车夫都酣然入梦，只有一盏煤油灯挂在领头的牛车上。汽车不得不驶出道路以超过它们，结果扬起了漫天尘土。牛的项铃有节奏地铃铛作响，有条不紊。
　　经过一小时的平稳行驶之后，天色依然昏暗。树木黑乎乎的，神秘而遥远。现在的路面是铺过的但很狭窄，每一辆牛车都意味着更多的尘土，更多的铃声，而前面还有更多的牛车。我们向东方行驶，很快微白的、柔和而没有阴影的黎明就要到来。这不是一个闪烁着明亮露水的晴朗早晨，而是那种非常阴沉的伴随着接踵而至的炎热的早晨。但这一切是多么美啊！山脉就在远方，还看不清，但是能够感觉到它们就在那儿，宽广，清凉，与时间无关。
　　道路穿过每一种村庄，有的干净整洁，保养得很好；有的污秽不净，因无望的贫穷和堕落而腐败。男人们都到田里去了，女人们都在井边，而孩子们在街上呼喊嬉笑。有好几英里政府农场，有拖拉机、鱼塘和农业实验学校。一辆马力强大的新汽车开过，满载着富有的、养尊处优的人们。山脉依然在远处，大地肥沃丰饶。在有些地方道路穿过再也无路可寻的干枯河床，但是公共汽车与牛车却走出一条路来。红绿相间的鹦鹉疯狂地飞舞着互相叫唤；也有金绿色的小型鸟类与白色的禾雀。
　　现在道路正在离开平原并开始上升。山麓中厚厚的植被正在被推土机清理，数英里的果树正在被栽种。当山丘成为覆盖着粟子树和松树的高大山脉的时候，汽车继续向上攀行。松树秀挺而笔直，粟子树上繁花累累。现在景色正在展开，广大无边的山谷在下方延展，而前方是白雪皑皑的山峰。
　　最后我们转了一个弯来到此次攀登的顶峰，群山屹立，洁白耀眼。它们在六十英里以外，在它们与我们之间隔着巨大的蓝色山谷。它们绵延两百英里以上，横贯地平线，只要一转头就能够从一端看到另一端。这是蔚为壮观的景象。中间的六十英里似乎潜踪匿迹，只有那种力量和隐世绝尘的气息。那些山峰——有些超过海拔两万五千英尺——有着神圣的名字，因为诸神居住在那里，为了朝圣人们千里迢迢赶来，膜拜并死去。

　　他在国外受教育，并在政府部门里有个好职位；但是二十多年前他毅然决定放弃他的职位以及在尘世中的生活，为的是在禅定中度过他的余生。

　　“我修习不同方法的禅定，”他继续说，“直到完全控制住我的思想，而这已经带来了某种高于我自己的能量和控制力。然而，一个朋友带我听了一次您的演讲，其间您回答了一个有关禅定的问题，您说通常练习的禅定是某种形式的自我催眠，是对自我投射的欲望的培养，无论它有多么精纯。这对我的打击是如此实在，以至于我竭尽全力想与您进行一次交谈；并且考虑到我已经全身心地献给了禅定，我希望我们可以非常深入地探讨此事。”
　　“我希望稍微介绍一下我的发展过程来开始。从所有我读过的东西中我认识到完全成为自己的思想的主人是必要的。这对我来说极端困难。在行政工作中全神贯注是一件完全不同于平衡头脑并驾驭思想的整个过程的事情。依据书本，一个人必须把被控制的思想的所有缰绳牢牢地抓在手里。思想不可能被磨练得能够穿透许多幻象，除非它被控制和指引；所以那是我的第一项任务。”
　　如果可以插一句，思想的控制是第一项任务吗？
　　“我听到您在演讲中谈论专注，但是如果可以我希望尽可能地描述我的全部经历，然后再专门谈一些极为重要的有关话题。”
　　随您的便，先生。
　　“从一开始我就对我的工作不满意，而放弃一项有前途的职业相对来说是容易的。我读了大量有关禅定和冥想的书籍，包括这里的和西方的各种神秘家的著作，对我来说思想的控制显而易见是最重要的事。这要求相当可观的努力，坚定不移并目标明确。当我在禅定中有所进展的时候我获得过许多经验，看见克里须那、耶稣、还有一些印度教圣人的景象。我变得有透视能力，并开始阅读人们的思想，还获得了某些其他悉地（sidhis，意译，念愿成就，指修习密法所得的成就。）或力量。我有了一次又一次的经验，看见一次又一次带着象征性的意义的景象，经历过从绝望到最高形式的狂喜。我有着一种胜利者的、成为自己的主人的骄傲。苦行、对自己的掌握，确实给了我一种力量感，而它培育了浮夸、力量和自信。我的身上充斥着所有那些东西。尽管多年前就已经听说过您，我对我所取得的成就的骄傲总是阻碍我来听您演讲；但是我的朋友，另一位修道者，坚持认为我应该来，而我听到的已经让我心神不安了。之前我还以为我已经超越了一切烦恼哪！这就是我修习禅定的大致经历。
　　在您的演讲中您说头脑必须超越一切经验，否则它就会被囚禁在它自己的投射、它自己的欲望和追逐里，而我极为惊讶地发现我的头脑正是被这些东西束缚着。意识到这个事实后，头脑如何冲破它在它自己周围建造的禁闭的围墙呢？这二十多年的时间浪费了吗？这一切只是在幻想中的漫游吗？”
　　什么行为应该发生可以稍后讨论，但是如果你愿意的话，让我们先仔细考虑一下思想的控制。这种控制是必要的吗？它是有益的还是有害的呢？不同的宗教导师们都鼓吹把思想的控制作为首要的步骤，这对吗？这个控制者是谁？难道他不正是他自己竭尽全力控制的思想的一部分吗？他也许认为自己是独立的，是不同于思想的，但他自身难道不是思想的产物吗？诚然，控制意味着意志为抵御之所不欲而采取的克制、压抑、支配和防范。在这整个过程中充溢着巨大而痛苦的冲突，不是吗？冲突能够产生任何好的结果吗？
　　在禅定中的专注是一种自我中心的发展形式，它强调在自己、自我、“我”的边界以内的行为。专注是一个使思想狭窄化的过程。一个孩子被他的玩具吸引。玩具、形象、符号、语言，吸引了头脑的永无止境的漫游，而这样的吸引就被称为专注。头脑被外在的或内在的形象和对象接管。于是形象或对象成为首要的，而不是对头脑自身的了解。在某些事物上专注是相对容易的。玩具确实吸引了头脑，但是这并没有令头脑解放去探索、发现真实存在，去探索、发现是否还有超越于它自己的边界的东西。
　　“您所说的与我读过的和被教导的东西是如此不同，然而您似乎是对的，而我开始了解控制的含义。但是没有戒律头脑如何能够解脱呢？”
　　压抑和服从不是通向解脱的台阶。通向解脱的第一步是对束缚的了解。戒律确实约束行为并且把思想塑造成为它所渴望的模式，没有对欲望的了解，仅仅控制和持戒只会使思想扭曲；反之，当有一种对欲望方式的觉知的时候，那个觉知将带来清晰和秩序。总而言之，先生，专注是欲望的方式。一个生意人专注是因为他想要聚敛钱财和权力，而当另一个人专注于禅定的时候，他也是在追逐成就、回报。两者都是在追求产生自信和安全感的成功。就是这样，难道不是吗？
　　“我理解您的解释，先生。”
　　只是在文字上理解，是对所听的东西的理智的把握，并没有多少价值，你不这么认为吗？解放的要素决不仅仅是一个文字上的理解，而是对事物的真实或虚假的洞察。如果我们能够了解专注的含义并看到虚假就是虚假，那么就会有从获得、经验、成为的欲望的解脱。来自于此的关注是完全不同于专注的。专注意味着一个二元化的过程，一个选择，一种努力，不是吗？有努力的发出者和努力所针对的目标。所以专注加强了作为努力的发出者、征服者、那个高尚的人的“我”，自己，自我。但是在注意中这种二元化的活动不存在；经验者不在场，那个积累、储藏和重复的人不在场。在这种关注的状态下，成功与失败的恐惧之间的冲突停止了。
　　“但不幸的是，不是所有人都被赋予了那种注意的能量。”
　　它不是一个礼物，一个奖赏，一个可以通过戒律、修炼等等被追求到的东西。它伴随着对欲望的了解——自知而来。这种关注的状态就是好，就是自己的不在场。
　　“我的一切努力和多年的戒律完全浪费了，根本没有价值吗？正当我问这个问题的时候我开始看到事情的真实。现在我看到二十多年来我一直在追求一种方法，其实是自己在建造一所监狱，我在其中生活、经验并受苦。为过去哭泣是自我放纵，而人必须洗心革面，重新开始。但是所有那些景象和经验呢？它们都是虚假的、一文不值的吗？”
　　头脑不是储藏人的一切经验、所见的景象和思想的巨大仓库吗，先生？头脑是数千年的传统和经验的结果。它对荒谬的奇思怪想驾轻就熟，从最简单的到最复杂的。它具有惊人的错觉，也有强大的洞察能力。集体的和个人的经验、希望、焦虑、快乐以及积累的知识都在这儿，在意识的深层被贮藏起来，而一个人可以重新经历那被继承的和获得的经验、景象等等。我们被告知某些药物能够带来清晰，一睹那些深度和高度，那可以使头脑从它的混乱中解脱出来，赋予它巨大的能力和洞察力。但是头脑必须穿越所有这些黑暗和秘道才能到达光明吗？而当通过这些方法它确实到达了光明的时候，那是永恒的光明吗？或者它是已知的、被确认的光明，一个诞生于追求、斗争、希望的产物？一个人必须经历这令人厌倦的过程才能找到那不可测度的事物吗？我们能够绕过所有这些而直接面对那所谓的爱吗？既然你已经有过景象、能量、经验，您怎么说呢，先生？
　　“当它们持续的时候我自然而然地认为它们是重要的并蕴涵深意；它们给了我一种拥有能量的满足感，在令人快乐的成就中的幸福感。当各种能力发生的时候它们给我以巨大的信心，一种包含着压倒一切的自豪感的自我主宰的感觉。现在，经过这些讨论后，我已经完全不能相信这些曾经一度对我具有如此重大意义的景象等等了。它们似乎在我自己的了解的光明面前退却了。”
　　人必须经历所有这些经验吗？它们对开启那永恒之门是必要的吗？它们不可能被绕过去吗？总而言之，至关重要的是自知，它带来了一个静止的头脑。一个静止的头脑不是意愿、戒律、各种压抑欲望的修炼的产物。所有这些修炼和戒律只是加强了自我，而美德是自我用来建造傲慢与名望的大厦的另一块石材。头脑必须清空已知以让未知出现。没有对自我的方式的了解，美德就开始给自己披上傲慢的外衣。自我的活动，连同它的意愿和欲望，它的追寻和积累，必须彻底停止。只有那时，没有时间的事物才有可能发生。它不可能被邀请。通过各种修炼、戒律，通过祈祷和姿势去寻求邀请真实的头脑，只能收到它自己的令人满意的投射，而它们并不是真实。
　　“现在我看清了，在这么多年的苦行、守戒和自我禁欲之后，我的头脑被禁锢在它自己的设置的监狱里，而这监狱的围墙必须突破。怎么动手呢？”
　　它们必须有觉知，觉知就足够了。任何突破它们的行动都会给予获得、达到的欲望以动力，继而产生出对立面、经验者和经验、追寻者和被追寻的东西之间的冲突。在它里面看到虚假就是虚假就足够了，因为正是那个洞察将头脑从虚假中解放出来。

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES II CHAPTER 55 'CONTROL OF THOUGHT'

AT ANY SPEED there was always dust, fine and penetrating, and it poured into the car. Though it was early in the morning and the sun wouldn't be up for an hour or two, there was already a dry, crisp heat which was not too unpleasant. Even at that hour there were bullock carts on the road. The drivers were asleep, but the oxen, keeping to the road, were going slowly back to their village. Sometimes there would be two or three carts, sometimes ten, and once there were twenty five a long line of them with all the drivers asleep and a single kerosene lamp on the leading cart. The car had to go off the road to pass them, raising mountains of dust, and the oxen, their bells ringing rhythmically, never swerved.
     It was still rather dark after an hour of steady driving. The trees were dark, mysterious and withdrawn. The road was now paved but narrow, and every cart meant more dust, more tinkling of bells, and still more carts ahead. We were going due east, and soon there was the beginning of dawn, opaque, soft and shadowless. It was not a clear dawn, bright with sparkling dew, but one of those mornings which are rather heavy with the coming heat. Yet how beautiful it was! Far away were the mountains; they could not yet be seen, but one felt they were there, immense, cool and time free.
     The road passed through every kind of village, some clean, orderly and well kept, others filthy and rotting with hopeless poverty and degradation. Men were going off to the fields, women to the well, and the children were shouting and laughing in the streets. There were miles of government farms, with tractors, fish ponds, and experimental agricultural schools. A powerful new car passed by, laden with wealthy, well fed people. The mountains were still far away, and the earth was rich. In several places the road went through a dry river bed where it was no longer a road, but the buses and carts had made a way across. The parrots, green and red, called to each other in their crazy flight; there were also smaller birds, gold and green, and the white ricebirds.
     Now the road was leaving the plains and beginning to ascend. The thick vegetation in the foothills was being cleared away with bulldozers, and miles of fruit trees were being planted. The car continued to climb as the hills became mountains covered with chestnut and pine trees, the pines slender and straight and the chestnuts heavy with bloom. The view was opening now, measureless valleys stretching away below, and ahead were the snowy peaks.
     At last we rounded a bend at the summit of the climb, and there stood the mountains, clear and dazzling. They were sixty miles away, with a vast blue valley between them and us. Stretching for over two hundred miles, they filled the horizon from end to end, and with a turn of the head we could see from one end to the other. It was a marvellous sight. The intervening sixty miles seemed to disappear, and there was only that strength and solitude. Those peaks, some of them rising over 25,000 feet, had divine names, for the gods lived there, and men came to them from great distances on pilgrimages, to worship and to die.
     He had been educated abroad, he said and had held a good position with the government; but over twenty years ago he had made the decision to give up this position and the ways of the world in order to spend the remaining days of his life in meditation.
     "I practiced various methods of meditation," he went on, "till I had complete control of my thoughts, and this has brought with it certain powers and domination over myself. However, a friend took me to one of your talks in which you answered a question on meditation, saying that as generally practiced meditation was a form of self-hypnosis, a cultivation of self-projected desires, however refined. This struck me as being so true that I sought out this conversation with you; and considering that I have given my life to meditation, I hope we can go into the matter rather deeply. "I would like to begin by explaining somewhat the course of my development. I realized from everything I had read that it was necessary to be completely the master of one's thoughts. This was extremely difficult for me. Concentration on official work was something wholly different from steadying the mind and harnessing the whole process of thought. According to the books, one had to have all the reins of controlled thought in one's hand. Thought could not be sharpened to penetrate into the many illusions unless it was controlled and directed; so that was my first task."
     If one may ask without breaking into your narration, is control of thought the first task?
     "I heard what you said in your talk about concentration, but if I may I would like as far as possible to describe my whole experience and then take up certain vital issues connected with it."
     Just as you like, sir.
     "From the very beginning I was dissatisfied with my occupation, and it was a comparatively easy matter to drop a promising career. I had read a great many books on meditation and contemplation, including the writings of the various mystics both here and in the West, and it seemed obvious to me that control of thought was the most important thing. This demanded considerable effort, sustained and purposive. As I progressed in meditation I had many experiences, visions of Krishna, of Christ,and of some of the Hindu saints. I became clairvoyant and began to read people's thoughts, and acquired certain other sidhis or powers. I went from experience to experience, from one vision, with its symbolic significance, to another, from despair to the highest form of bliss. I had the pride of a conqueror, of one who was the master of himself.
     Asceticism, the mastery of oneself, does give a sense of power, and it breeds vanity, strength and self-confidence. I was in the rich fullness of all that. Though I had heard of you for many years, the pride in my achievement had always prevented me from coming to listen to you; but my friend, another sannyasi, insisted that I should come, and what I heard has disturbed me. I had previously thought that I was beyond all disturbance! This briefly has been my history in meditation.
     "You said in your talk that the mind must go beyond all experience, otherwise it is imprisoned in its own projections, in its own desires and pursuits, and I was deeply surprised to find that my mind was caught up in these very things. Being conscious of this fact, how is the mind to break down the walls of the prison it has built around itself? Have these twenty years and more been wasted? Has it all been a mere wandering in illusion?".
     What action should take place can presently be talked over, but let us consider, if you will, the control of thought. Is this control necessary? Is it beneficial or harmful? Various religious teachers have advocated the control of thought as the primary step, but are they right? Who is this controller? Is he not part of that very thought which he is trying to control? He may think of himself as being separate, different from thought, but is he not the outcome of thought? Surely control implies the coercive action of will to subjugate, to suppress, to dominate, to build up resistance against what is not desired. In this whole process there is vast and miserable conflict, is there not? Can any good come out of conflict?
     Concentration in meditation is a form of self-centred improvement, it emphasizes action within the boundaries of the self, the ego, the `me'. Concentration is a process of narrowing down thought. A child is absorbed in its toy. The toy, the image, the symbol, the word, arrests the restless wanderings of the mind, and such absorption is called concentration. The mind is taken over by the image, by the object, external or inward. The image or the object is then all important, and not the understanding of the mind itself. Concentration on something is comparatively easy. The toy does absorb the mind but it does not free the mind to explore, to discover what is, if there is anything, beyond its own frontiers.
     "What you say is so different from what one has read or been taught, yet it appears to be true and I am beginning to understand the implications of control. But how can the mind be free without discipline?" Suppression and conformity are not the steps that lead to freedom. The first step towards freedom is the understanding of bondage. Discipline does shape behaviour and mould thought to the desired pattern, but without understanding desire, mere control or discipline perverts thought; whereas, when there is an awareness of the ways of desire, that awareness brings clarity and order. After all, sir, concentration is the way of desire. A man of business is concentrated because he wants to amass wealth or power, and when another concentrates in meditation, he also is after achievement, reward. Both are pursuing success, which yields self confidence and the feeling of being secure. This is so, is it not?
     "I follow what you are explaining, sir."
     Verbal comprehension alone, which is an intellectual grasp of what is heard, has little value, don't you think? The liberating factor is never a mere verbal comprehension but the perception of the truth or the falseness of the matter. If we can understand the implications of concentration and see the false as the false, then there is freedom from the desire to achieve, to experience, to become. From this comes attention, which is wholly different from concentration. Concentration implies a dual process, a choice, an effort, does it not? There is the maker of effort and the end towards which effort is made. So concentration strengthens the `I', the self, the ego as the maker of effort, the conqueror, the virtuous one. But in attention this dual activity is not present; there is an absence of the experiencer, the one who gathers, stores and repeats. In this state of attention the conflict of achievement and the fear of failure have ceased.
     "But unfortunately not all of us are blessed with that power of attention."
     It is not a gift, it is not a reward, a thing to be purchased through discipline, practice, and so on. It comes into being with the understanding of desire, which is self-knowledge. This state of attention is the good, the absence of the self.
     "Is all my effort and discipline of many years utterly wasted and of no value at all? Even as I ask this question I am beginning to see the truth of the matter. I see now that for over twenty years I have pursued a way that has inevitably led to a self-created prison in which I have lived, experienced and suffered. To weep over the past is self-indulgence and one must begin again with a different spirit. But what about all the visions and experiences? Are they also false, worthless?"
     Is not the mind, sir, a vast storehouse of all the experiences, visions and thoughts of man? The mind is the result of many thousands of years of tradition and experience. It is capable of fantastic inventions, from the simplest to the most complex. It is capable of extraordinary delusions and of vast perceptions. The experiences and hopes, the anxieties, joys and accumulated knowledge of both the collective and the individual are all there, stored away in the deeper layers of consciousness, and one can relive the inherited or acquired experiences, visions, and so on. We are told of certain drugs that can bring clarity, a vision of the depths and the heights, that can free the mind from its turmoils, giving it great energy and insight. But must the mind travel through all these dark and hidden passages to come to the light? And when through any of these means it does come to the light, is that the light of the eternal? Or is it the light of the known, the recognized, a thing born of search, struggle hope? Must one go through this weary process to find that which is not measurable? Can we bypass all this and come upon that which may be called love? Since you have had visions, powers, experiences, what do you say, sir?
     "While they lasted I naturally thought they were important and had significance; they gave me a satisfying sense of power, a certain happiness in gratifying achievement. When the various powers come they give one great confidence in oneself, a feeling of self-mastery in which there is an overwhelming pride. Now, after talking all this over, I am not at all sure that these visions, and so on, have such great meaning for me as they once had. They seem to have receded in the light of my own understanding."
     Must one go through all these experiences? Are they necessary to open the door of the eternal? Can they not be bypassed? After all, what is essential is self-knowledge, which brings about a still mind. A still mind is not the product of will, of discipline, of the various practices to subjugate desire. All these practices and disciplines only strengthen the self, and virtue is then another rock on which the self can build a house of importance and respectability. The mind must be empty of the known for the unknowable to be. Without understanding the ways of the self, virtue begins to clothe itself in importance. The movement of the self, with its will and desire, its searching and accumulation, must wholly cease. Then only the timeless can come into being. It cannot be invited. The mind that seeks to invite the real through various practices, disciplines, through prayers and attitudes, can only receive its own gratifying projections, but they are not the real.
     "I perceive now, after these many years of asceticism, discipline and self-mortification, that my mind is held in the prison of its own making, and that the walls of this prison must be broken down. How is one to set about it?"
     The very awareness that they must go is enough. Any action to break them down sets in motion the desire to achieve, to gain, and so brings into being the conflict of the opposites the experiencer and the experience, the seeker and the sought. To see the false as the false is in itself enough, for that very perception frees the mind from the false.

　　大海在棕榈树的远处，狂暴而永不停息；它从不平静，永远波涛汹涌，巨浪滔天。夜晚的寂静中，它的咆啸声在相距颇远的内陆也能听到，而在那深沉的怒吼声中蕴涵着警告和威胁。但是这儿的棕榈树丛里有浓密的树阴和宁静。圆月当空，照如白昼，却没有白天的高温和强光；映照在那些起伏的棕榈树上的光线柔和而优美。那不仅是棕榈树上的月光的美，也是树影的美，浑圆树干的美，闪烁的水花和富饶的大地的美。大地、穹苍、路人、鸣蛙、远方火车的汽笛——这是浑然一体的、头脑无法测度的活生生的事物。
　　头脑是一部令人惊异的机器；没有任何人造的机械配件能够如此复杂而精密，具有如此无限的可能性。我们只是觉知到头脑一些浅表层面，如果我们也算是觉知到的话，并且满足于生存在它的外表。我们接受思考作为头脑活动：策划大屠杀的将军的思考，狡诈的政客的思考，博学的教授的思考，木匠的思考。那么有深邃的思考吗？一切思考不都是头脑的表层活动吗？在思考中，头脑是深邃的吗？头脑——那被堆积起来的，时间、记忆、经验的结果——能够觉知到不属于它自己的东西吗？头脑一直在探索、寻求某种超越它的自闭活动的东西，但是那个发起寻求的中心却永远维持原状。
　　头脑不仅是表层的活动，而且是许多个世纪的隐藏的运动。这些运动修正或控制着外在的活动，因此头脑发展出它自己的二元性的矛盾。没有一个完全的、整体的头脑，它碎裂成许多部分，彼此对立。寻求整合、协调自己的头脑，不可能在它的许多支离破碎的部分之间创造和平。由思想、知识、经验整合起来的头脑依然是时间和悲伤的结果；即使被放置在一起，它依然是环境的产物。
　　我们正在错误地对待这个整合的问题。部分永远不可能变成整体。整体不可能通过部分被了悟，但是我们看不到这一点。我们看到的恰恰是那个别部分扩张自身以包容许多部分；但是被聚集起来的许多部分并不倾向于整合，即使不同部分之间协调一致也不会有多大意义。重要的不是协调或整合，因为这可以由谨慎和注意，由正确的教育造成；最重要的是让未知的呈现。已知的永远不可能接收未知的。头脑不断寻求在自我创造的整合的泥潭里快乐地生活，但是这不会带来未知的创造力。
　　从本质上说，自我改善是再平庸不过的事情。通过美德、通过对能力的认同、通过任何形式的积极或消极的安全保障所进行的自我改善，无论多么广泛，都是一个自我封闭的过程。野心养育了平庸，因为野心是通过行为、集体、观念所进行的自我实现。自我是一切已知的中心，它是过去穿越现在向未来的运动，而在已知的范畴内的一切活动都导致头脑的浅薄。头脑永远不可能是伟大的，因为伟大的是不可测度的。已知的是可以比较的，而已知的一切活动只能带来悲伤。

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES II CHAPTER 56 'IS THERE PROFOUND THINKING?'

FAR BEYOND THE palms was the sea, restless and cruel; it was never calm, but always rough with waves and strong currents. In the silence of the night its roar could be heard some distance inland, and in that deep voice there was a warning, a threat. But here among the palms there were deep shadows and stillness. It was full moon and almost like daylight, without the heat and the glare, and the light on those waving palms was soft and beautiful. The beauty was not only of the moonlight on the palms, but also of the shadows, of the rounded trunks, of the sparkling waters and the rich earth. The earth, the sky, the man walking by, the croaking frogs, and the distant whistle of a train - it was all one living thing not measurable by the mind.
     The mind is an astonishing instrument; there is no man-made machinery that is so complex, subtle with such infinite possibilities. We are only aware of the superficial levels of the mind, if we are aware at all, and are satisfied to live and have our being on its outer surface. We accept thinking as the activity of the mind: the thinking of the general who plans wholesale murder, of the cunning politician, of the learned professor, of the carpenter. And is there profound thinking? Is not all thinking a surface activity of the mind? In thought, is the mind deep? Can the mind, which is put together, the result of time, of memory, of experience, be aware of something which is not of itself? The mind is always groping, seeking something beyond its own self-enclosing activities, but the centre from which it seeks remains ever the same.
     The mind is not merely the surface activity, but also the hidden movements of many centuries. These movements modify or control the outer activity so the mind develops its own dualistic conflict. There is not a whole, total mind, it is broken up into many parts, one in opposition to another. The mind that seeks to integrate, coordinate itself, cannot bring peace among its many broken parts. The mind that is made whole by thought, by knowledge, by experience, is still the result of time and sorrow; being put together, it is still a thing of circumstances.
     We are approaching this problem of integration wrongly. The part can never become the whole. Through the part the whole cannot be realized, but we do not see this. What we do see is the particular enlarging itself to contain the many parts; but the bringing together of many parts does not make for integration, nor is it of great significance when there is harmony between the various parts. It is not harmony or integration that is of importance, for this can be brought about with care and attention, with right education; but what is of the highest importance is to let the unknown come into being. The known can never receive the unknown. The mind is ceaselessly seeking to live happily in the puddle of self-created integration, but this will not bring about the creativity of the unknown.
     Essentially, self-improvement is but mediocrity. Self-improvement through virtue, through identification with capacity, through any form of positive or negative security, is a self-enclosing process however wide. Ambition breeds mediocrity, for ambition is the fulfilment of the self through action, through the group, through idea. The self is the centre of all that is known, it is the past moving through the present to the future, and all activity in the field of the known makes for shallowness of mind. The mind can never be great, for what is great is immeasurable. The known is comparable, and all the activities of the known can only bring sorrow.

　　山谷横卧在远方，并充满了大多数山谷都有的勃勃生机。太阳刚好隐没到远方的山脉以下，影子昏暗而狭长。这是一个宁静的黄昏，飘荡着海上吹来的和风。一排排的橘树几乎漆黑一团，而在横贯山谷的漫长笔直的马路上，偶尔有疾驰而过的汽车反射出落日的余晖。这是一个迷人而宁静的黄昏。
　　头脑似乎涵盖了巨大的空间和无穷的距离；或者更确切地说，头脑似乎在无限制地扩张，而在头脑背后并超出头脑之上有某种东西包容了一切。头脑模模糊糊地奋力辨认并记下那些不属于它自己的东西，因而停下了它的正常活动；但是它不可能把握那不属于它自己的本性的东西，而眼下所有的一切，包括头脑，都被那浩渺无垠者所拥抱。夜幕降临，远处的犬吠根本不可能打扰那超越一切意识之外的事物。它不可能被头脑思考过就经验到了。
　　但是那样的话，那已经觉察并觉知到有某种东西完全不同于头脑的投射的是什么呢？体验它的又是谁呢？显然它不是那个每天记忆、反应并欲求的头脑。有没有另外一个头脑或者头脑是否有一部分还在沉睡中，只能被那超越于一切头脑之上的所唤醒呢？如果是这样，那么在头脑中就一直存在那超越一切思想和时间的。然而这不可能，因为这只是一个推测的想法，因此只是头脑的许多发明之外的又一个发明。
　　既然那浩渺无垠者并非诞生于头脑的过程，那么觉知到它的是什么呢？是头脑作为经验者觉知到它的吗？或者是浩瀚无垠者自己觉知到自己，因为根本就没有经验者吗？在下山的路上当这一切发生的时候没有经验者，然而在性质上和深度上头脑的觉知和那不可测度者完全不同。头脑没有在运作，它是警醒而被动的，尽管知道有微风在树叶间吹拂，在它自己里面却没有任何形式的运动。没有观察者在测度那被观察的。只有“那个”，而“那个”不加测度地觉知到它自己。它没有开始也没有言说。
　　头脑觉知到它不可能靠经验或语言抓住那永住的、没有时间的和不可测度的……

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES II CHAPTER 57 'IMMENSITY'

THE VALLEY LAY far below and was filled with the activity of most valleys. The sun was just setting behind the distant mountains, and the shadows were dark and long. It was a quiet evening, with a breeze coming off the sea. The orange trees, row upon row, were almost black, and on the long straight road that ran through the valley there were occasional glints as moving cars caught the light of the setting sun. It was an evening of enchantment and peace.
     The mind seemed to cover the vast space and the unending distance; or rather, the mind seemed to expand without an end, and behind and beyond the mind there was something that held all things in it. The mind vaguely struggled to recognize and remember that which was not of itself, and so it stopped its usual activity; but it could not grasp what was not of its own nature, and presently all things, including the mind were enfolded in that immensity. The evening darkened, and the distant barking of dogs in no way disturbed that which is beyond all consciousness. It cannot be thought about and so experienced by the mind. But what is it, then, that has perceived and is aware of something totally different from the projections of the mind? Who is it that experiences it? Obviously it is not the mind of everyday memories, responses and urges. Is there another mind, or is there a part of the mind which is dormant, to be awakened only by that which is above and beyond all mind? If this is so, then within the mind there is always that which is beyond all thought and time. And yet this cannot be, for it is only speculative thought and therefore another of the many inventions of the mind.
     Since that immensity is not born of the process of the mind, then what is it that is aware of it? Is the mind as the experiencer aware of it, or is that immensity aware of itself because there is no experiencer at all? There was no experiencer when this happened coming down the mountain, and yet the awareness of the mind was wholly different, in kind as well as in degree, from that which is not measurable. The mind was not functioning; it was alert and passive, and though cognizant of the breeze playing among the leaves, there was no movement of any kind within itself. There was no observer who measured the observed. There was only that, and that was aware of itself without measure. It had no beginning and no word.
     The mind is aware that it cannot capture by experience and word that which ever abides, timeless and immeasurable.

　　不依赖于背景、组织、名衔，我们能否真正了解一个个体的价值？不管我们是否曾经这样做过，现在都必须抛开一切外在的附属物、直接面对克里希那穆提。因为，尽管译完了全书，我还是无法用简单的概念划分把他的思想划归为某种宗教、某个思想流派；把他称之为什么家也十分不妥。显然每一个定义本身都是一种局限和束缚，透过狭隘的框架窥测大海的汪洋，终究失却浩瀚的精神。
　　克里希那穆提不属于印度、不属于任何一个特殊的宗教、也不属于哪个组织团体，他的一切洞察来自本心，来自对自我的认识。他主张要了解真实，就必须抛开传统、超越已知、不依赖任何一个组织和权威。对于一个不生活在二手思想中的人，我们根本无法把他纳入习惯的概念，因为他是独特的、无染的。
　　克里希那穆提在本书中记录了1960年和许多普通人的谈话。每一篇都是从风景开始，从那一天的天气、环境开始。描写是很细微的，他眼中的一切呈现在我们的脑海里。那是谈话的气氛，就像一个主题的色调背景。然后，在这样的氛围中，来访者以及他独特的经历和问题摆在了我们面前。最后才是克氏和来访者的交谈。这三者——自然环境、来访者和交谈——组合在一起的时候，就变成不可重复、时时新鲜而充满活力的。
　　不仅叙述的方式独具一格，而且更为重要的是：这些来访者的背景及经历虽然千差万别，但他们的渴望、恐惧、期待和挣扎却和我们自己内心的风景相差无几。他们提出的疑问是具体的，表明的却是人类共同遭遇的问题：由于我们的制约，由于我们的不自知，我们的行动已经使自己深陷于困惑和迷茫之中。克氏满怀慈悲，倾听人们的诉说，他不断反问质疑，详加讨论，指出人们思考的盲点，带领人们穿越心中的迷津，卸下痛苦的重负，治愈内心的创伤。来访者不管是什么身份，我们在书中是找不到一个名字的；地点在不断地变化，也没有地名的记录。我们读到的是对每个具体人物的感受，每个地方风景的变化——在剥除了名相之后真正属于一个人、属于一个地方的特质。
　　克里希那穆提一直强调，要区分直接的体验和语言，语言并不等于真理本身。为了传达他所体验的真理，他必须使用语言来表达；而译者限于自身的理解是否把握了作者的精神，都势必影响到书中精神实质的体现。但是读者如果能够体验自己的内心、探究自我，在自知中一定可以超越翻译语言的局限，见证克氏的智慧。

索引：

《生命的注释（III）》

　　湖对岸的丘陵非常美丽。丘陵之后耸起的是白雪覆盖的山峰。一整天都在下雨，但现在，像一个无法预见的奇迹，天空突然放晴了，万物变得生机勃勃，喜悦而安详。花朵绽放出浓烈的黄色、红色和深紫色，花上的雨珠就像珍贵的珠宝。这是一个非常可爱的夜晚，光彩绚烂。大人们走到街边湖岸，孩子们笑语喧哗。在所有这些躁动喧哗中有一种迷人的美丽，弥漫着一种奇特的平静。
　　我们几个在长凳上临湖而坐。一个人的声音相当高，难免听到他和邻座的谈话。“就像这样一个夜晚，我想远远地离开这种喧闹混乱，但我的工作使我留在这儿，我讨厌这种情况。”人们正在喂天鹅、鸭子和一些迷路的海鸥。天鹅雪白，非常优雅。现在湖水没有一丝涟漪，对岸的丘陵几乎变成黑色了；而丘陵之后的群山在夕阳中焕发着光彩，山后生动的云看上去充满了激情。

　　“我不太明白你的话”，我的来访者开了头，“你说，要了解真实，就必须抛开知识。”他是个上了年纪的人，游历丰富、博览群书。他解释说，他曾经在寺庙里呆了一年左右的时间；他周游世界，从一个港口到另一个港口。在船上工作，攒钱并积累知识。“我指的不只是书本知识，”他继续说，“我指的是人类积累但没有付之纸张的知识，那些超越卷轴典籍的神秘传统。我曾经涉猎神秘学，但它对我来说总是相当愚蠢而肤浅。一个好的显微镜要比一个能够看到超物质世界事物的人的洞察力有用得多。我曾经读过一些伟大的历史学家的理论和见解，但是……假如一个人拥有一流的头脑和吸收知识的能力，他应该成就斐然。我知道这观点并不时髦，但我内心之中有种无法克制地改造世界的愿望，而知识就是我的激情。我在许多方面一直是个充满激情的人。现在我心里就充满了要知道的渴望。有一天我读了你的一些东西，它们引起了我的兴趣，但你说必须摆脱知识的束缚，我就决定来看你——不是作为一个追随者，而是一个提问者。”
　　追随另一个人，不管那人多么博学高贵，都会阻碍了解，不是吗？
　　“那么我们就能彼此尊重，自由地交谈。”
　　可以问一下，你所谓的知识是什么意思吗？
　　“当然可以，这是个开始话题的好问题。知识是人类通过经验学来的一切；它是通过学习积累起来的，经过多少世纪的奋斗和痛苦，在许多领域的努力，包括科学方面的和心理方面的。即使是最伟大的历史学家也是依照他自己的学识和情感在诠释历史，那像我这样的普通学者就会把知识解释为行动，无论‘好的’还是‘坏的’。尽管我们目前不考虑行动，但它必然和知识相关，那是人类通过思考、禅修、悲哀体验来的或学来的。知识是茫茫无涯的，它不仅写在书本上，也存在于个体和集体或人类的意识之中。科学和医学的信息、物质世界的‘知识’这个术语主要扎根于西方人的意识之中，就像在东方人的意识中对精神境界更为敏感一样。所有这些都是知识，不仅包括已知的，还包括那些日复一日正在被发现的。知识是一个累积的、无尽的过程，没有终止，它可能就是人们所追求的不朽。所以我不明白为什么你说要了解真实就必须抛开所有的知识。”
　　知识和理解的区分是人为的，它不是真实存在的。要想摆脱这种感知两者差别的区分，我们就必须找出什么是最高的思考形式，不然就会产生混乱。
　　思考是从一个结论开始的吗？思考是不是从一个结论到另一个结论的运动吗？如果思考是肯定的，思考会存在吗？最高形式的思考不是否定的吗？所有的知识不是一个定义、结论和肯定性声明的集合吗？肯定的思想是以经验为基础的，它总是过去的结果，这样的思想永远不能发现新事物。
　　“你是说知识任何时候是存在于过去的，那些源于过去的思想必然会遮蔽有可能被称之为真理的洞察。但是没有作为记忆的过去，我们就无法辨认出这个物体，我们已经一致赞同把它叫做椅子。‘椅子’这个词反映由人们的共识而得到的结论，如果这样的结论不是理所当然的，那所有的交流就会停止。我们大部分的思考都是建立在结论、传统和他人经验的基础上的，没有这些非常明显的、必然的结论就不可能生活。所以你的意思肯定不是要抛开所有的结论、所有的记忆和传统吧？”
　　传统的道路必定走向平庸，一个陷于传统的头脑无法洞察什么是真实的。传统可能只有一天，也可能追溯上千年。一个工程师抛开上千人的经验积累起来的工程知识显然是荒谬的；而一个人试图抛开生活环境的记忆只能是神经官能症的表现。但是搜集事实不等于了解生活。知识是一回事，了解是另一回事。知识不会导致了解，但了解可能会丰富知识，知识可能会实现了解。
　　“知识是重要的、不可轻视的。没有知识，现代手术和成百的其他奇迹都不可能存在。”
　　我们不是在攻击知识或者为它辩护，而是试着了解整个问题。知识只是生活的一部分，不是全部。当局部自认为是最重要的，就像它现在扬言要做的一样，生活就变成肤浅的。变成一条单调乏味的、具有灾难性后果的途径，人们可以借此以各种形式的转移和迷信来逃避。只有知识，无论是多么广泛地和聪明地放在一起，都不能解决我们人类的问题。认为知识能解决问题将会招致挫折和不幸。我们需要某种更深刻的东西。一个人可能知道仇恨是徒劳无益的，但要摆脱仇恨却完全是另一回事。爱不是一个知识的问题。
　　回到前面的讨论，肯定的思考根本就不是思考；它只是那些已经被思考过的问题的变相延续。它的外形可能时时改变，这取决于愿望和压力，但肯定思考的核心总是传统。肯定的思考是一个顺从的过程，顺从的头脑不可能处于发现的状态。
　　“但是肯定的思考是可以被抛弃的吗？不一定要处于人类存在的特定层次吗？”
　　当然，但这还不是全部情况。我们正在试图发现知识是否会成为了解真实的障碍。知识是重要的，因为没有它，我们就必须重新开始经历我们存在的某些领域。这是相当简单清楚的。但是积累的知识，不管多么多，可以帮助我们了解真实吗？
　　“什么是真实？它是一个所有人都可以踏上的共同基础，还是一个主观的、个体的经验？”
　　不管它可能被叫作什么，真实必须是新鲜的、生动的；但是“新鲜”和“生动”这两个词只是要表达人们的头脑中不静止的、不死气沉沉的、不固执于一点的状态。真实必须是时刻被重新发现的，它不是可以被重复的经验；它没有延续性，是一个无时间的状态。要追求真实必须消除多和一的区分。它既不是可以达到的状态，也不是头脑可以朝之进化发展的方向。如果真实像事物一样可以得到，那知识的培养和记忆的积累就是有必要的。进而产生古鲁（guru，印度教或锡克教的宗教教师或领袖。）和门徒——一个知道而另一个不知道。
　　“那么说你反对古鲁和门徒？”
　　这不是一个反对什么的事情，而是认清：因循守旧是对安全的渴望，由于害怕而避免无时间的体验。
　　“我想我明白你的意思。但要放弃一个人所积累的不是极其困难吗？真的，这是可能的吗？”
　　为了得到而放弃根本不是放弃。把虚假的看成虚假的，在虚假中看到真实，把真实的看成真实的——这就是解放头脑。

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES III CHAPTER 1 'DOES THINKING BEGIN WITH CONCLUSIONS?'

THE HILLS ACROSS the lake were very beautiful, and beyond them rose the snowcovered mountains. It had been raining all day; but now, like an unexpected miracle, the skies had suddenly cleared, and everything became alive, joyous and serene. The flowers were intense in their yellow, red and deep purple, and the raindrops on them were like precious jewels. It was a most lovely evening, full of light and splendour. The people came out into the streets, and along the lake, children were shouting with laughter. Through all this movement and bustle there was enchanting beauty, and a strange, all-pervading peace.
     There were several of us on the long bench facing the lake. A man was talking in rather a high voice and it was impossible not to overhear what he was saying to a neighbour. "On an evening like this I wish I were far away from this noise and confusion, but my job keeps me here, and I loathe it." People were feeding the swans, the ducks and a few stray seagulls. The swans were pure white and very graceful. There wasn't a ripple on the water now, and the hills across the lake were almost black; but the mountains beyond the hills were aglow with the setting sun, and the vivid clouds behind them seemed passionately alive.
     "I am not sure I understand you," my visitor began, "when you say that knowledge must be set aside to understand truth." He was an elderly man, much travelled and well-read. He had spent a year or so in a monastery, he explained, and had wandered all over the world, from port to port, working on ships, saving money and gathering knowledge. "I don't mean mere book knowledge," he went on; "I mean the knowledge that men have gathered but have not put down on paper, the mysterious tradition that's beyond scrolls and sacred books. I have dabbled in occultism, but that has always seemed to me rather stupid and superficial. A good microscope is vastly more beneficial than the clairvoyance of a man who sees super-physical things. I have read some of the great historians with their theories and their visions, but... Given a first-rate mind and the capacity to accumulate knowledge, a man should be able to do immense good. I know it isn't the fashion, but I have a sneaking compulsion to reform the world, and knowledge is my passion. I have always been a passionate person in many ways, and now I am consumed with this urge to know. The other day I read something of yours which intrigued me, and when you said that there must be freedom from knowledge, I decided to come and see you - not as a follower, but as an inquirer."
     To follow another, however learned or noble, is to block all understanding, isn't it?
     "Then we can talk freely and with mutual respect."
     If I may ask, what do you mean by knowledge?
     "Yes, that's a good question to begin with. Knowledge is everything that man has learnt through experience; it is what he has gathered by study, through centuries of struggle and pain, in the many fields of endeavour, both scientific and psychological. As even the greatest historian interprets history according to his learning and mood so an ordinary scholar like me may translate knowledge into action, either `good' or `bad'. Though we are not concerned with action at the moment, it is inevitably related to knowledge, which is what man has experienced or learnt through thought, through meditation, through sorrow. Knowledge is vast; it is not only written down in books, but it exists in the individual as well as in the collective or racial consciousness of man. Scientific and medical information, the technical `know-how' of the material world, is rooted principally in the consciousness of western man, just as in the consciousness of eastern man there is the greater sensitivity of unworldliness. All this is knowledge, embracing not only what is already known, but what is being discovered from day to day. Knowledge is an additive, deathless process, there is no end to it, and it may therefore be the immortal that man is after. So I can't understand why you say that all knowledge must be set aside if there is to be the understanding of truth."
     The division between knowledge and understanding is artificial, it really doesn't exist; but to be free of this division, which is to perceive the difference between them we must find out what is the highest form of thinking, otherwise there will be confusion.
     Does thinking begin with a conclusion? Is thinking a movement from one conclusion to another? Can there be thinking, if thinking is positive? Is not the highest form of thinking negative? Is not all knowledge an accumulation of definitions, conclusions and positive assertions? positive thought, which is based on experience, is always the outcome of the past, and such thought can never uncover the new. "You are stating that knowledge is ever in the past, and that thought originating from the past must inevitably cloud the perception of that which may be called truth. However, without the past as memory, we could not recognize this object which we have agreed to call a chair. The word `chair' reflects a conclusion reached by common consent, and all communication would cease if such conclusions were not taken for granted. Most of our thinking is based on conclusions, on traditions, on the experiences of others, and life would be impossible without the more obvious and inevitable of these conclusions. Surely you don't mean that we should put aside all conclusions, all memories and traditions?"
     The ways of tradition inevitably lead to mediocrity, and a mind caught in tradition cannot perceive what is true. Tradition may be one day old, or it may go back for a thousand years. Obviously it would be absurd for an engineer to set aside the engineering knowledge he has gained through the experience of a thousand others; and if one were to try to set aside the memory of where one lived it would only indicate a neurotic state. But the gathering of facts does not make for the understanding of life. Knowledge is one thing and understanding another. Knowledge does not lead to understanding; but understanding may enrich knowledge, and knowledge may implement understanding.
     "Knowledge is essential and not to be despised. Without knowledge, modern surgery and a hundred other marvels could not exist."
     We are not attacking or defending knowledge, but trying to understand the whole problem. Knowledge is only a part of life, not the totality, and when that part assumes all-consuming importance, as it is threatening to do now, then life becomes superficial, a dull routine from which man seeks to escape through every form of diversion and superstition, with disastrous consequences. Mere knowledge, however wide and cunningly put together, will not resolve our human problems; to assume that it will is to invite frustration and misery. Something much more profound is needed. One may know that hate is futile, but to be free of hate is quite another matter. Love is not a question of knowledge.
     To go back, positive thinking is no thinking at all; it is merely a modified continuity of what has been thought. The outward shape of it may change from time to time, depending on compulsions and pressures, but the core of positive thinking is always tradition. positive thinking is the process of conformity and the mind that conforms can never be in a state of discovery.
     "But can positive thinking be discarded? Is it not necessary at a certain level of human existence?"
     Of course, but that's not the whole issue. We are trying to find out if knowledge may become a hindrance to the understanding of truth. Knowledge is essential, for without it we should have to begin all over again in certain areas of our existence. This is fairly simple and clear. But will accumulated knowledge, however vast, help us to understand truth?
     "What is truth? Is it a common ground to be trodden by all? Or is it a subjective, individual experience?"
     By whatever name it may be called, truth must ever be new, living; but the words `new' and `living' are used only to convey a state that is not static, not dead, not a fixed point within the mind of man. Truth must be discovered anew from moment to moment, it is not an experience that can be repeated; it has no continuity, it is a timeless state. The division between the many and the one must cease for truth to be. It is not a state to be achieved, nor a point towards which the mind can evolve, grow. If truth is conceived as a thing to be gained, then the cultivation of knowledge and the accumulations of memory become necessary, giving rise to the guru and the follower, the one who knows and the one who does not know.
     "Then you are against gurus and followers?"
     It's not a matter of being against something but of perceiving that conformity, which is the desire for security, with its fears, prevents the experiencing of the timeless.
     "I think I understand what you mean. But is it not immensely difficult to renounce all that one has gathered? Indeed, is it possible?"
     To give up in order to gain is no renunciation at all. To see the false as the false, to see the true in the false, and to see the true as the true - it is this that sets the mind free.

　　整个晚上和早上的大部分时间都在下雨，现在，太阳正落到厚重的乌云后面。天空毫无色彩，但雨水浸湿地面的香气充满了空气。青蛙呱呱地叫了整夜，持久而富有节奏，黎明时分，它们却安静下来。树干因为长时间下雨而颜色变暗，洗净了夏季灰尘的树叶几天后会再次变得浓密碧绿。草坪也会更绿，灌木会很快开花，那将有一场欢庆。炎热、多尘的日子之后，一场雨是多么受人欢迎！丘陵之后的山峰看上去并不遥远，那里吹来的微风凉爽而纯净。将有更多的工作、更多的食物，饥饿将成为过去的事。
　　一只巨大的棕色的鹰正在空中盘旋，不必扇动一下翅膀就能御风翱翔。几百个人在办公室里度过了漫长的一天之后正骑着自行车往家赶。几个人边骑边聊，但大部分人都沉默不语，明显地疲惫不堪。一大群人停下来，身子靠在自行车上，热烈地讨论着某个话题，附近的一个警察疲倦地看着他们。拐角处一个巨大的新建筑正拔地而起。街面上布满了棕色的水洼，行驶的汽车溅起的脏水在一个人的衣服上留下了深色的印迹。一个骑车人停下来，在小贩那儿买了支香烟，又继续赶路。
　　一个男孩儿走过来，头上顶着一个旧煤油罐，装了半罐液体。他肯定是在那个正在施工的新建筑那里工作。他眼睛明亮，一张脸特别快活，身子虽瘦却很强壮，皮肤颜色被太阳烤得很深。他穿着一件衬衫和一条缠腰带，因为长时间使用都成了棕色。他的头形状很好看，走路的时候带着某种骄傲——一个孩子正干着大人的活儿。他一把人群甩在后面，就唱起歌来。整个气氛突然之间就改变了。他的声音很普通，孩子的声音，精力充沛而沙哑，但歌是有节奏的，要不是他的两只手要扶着头上的煤油罐，可能早就打上拍子了。他意识到有人走在身后，可是快乐得顾不上害羞，也显然并不在意气氛的改变。空气中弥漫着一份祝福、一种包容万物的爱、一种简单没有算计的温柔、一种绽放的善良。
　　突然那男孩儿不唱了，转向一个离路边有些距离的破旧的小棚。很快又要下雨了。

　　来访者说他在政府部门任职，一直都发展得不错。由于他在国内和国外受过一流的教育，可以升迁得很高。他说他结婚了，有两个孩子。日子过得相当愉快，成功是毫无疑问的。他拥有他们居住的房子，为孩子的教育存了钱。他懂梵文，熟悉宗教传统。他说一切都一帆风顺。但是有一天早上，他醒得非常早，淋浴之后，在家人和邻居起床前坐下来打坐。尽管他头天睡得很安稳，却无法入静；突然他感到一种不可抗拒的强烈愿望，要用他的余生来禅修。没有任何犹豫和怀疑，他要用他的余生去发现通过禅修能发现的东西。他告诉妻子和两个正在读大学的儿子他打算出家。他的同事很惊讶他的决定，但还是接受了他的辞职。几天后他离开家，再也没有回去。
　　那是二十五年前的事，他继续说。他对自己戒律严格，但他发现舒适的生活之后要恪守戒律是很困难的，他花了很长的时间才完全控制了自己心里的念头和激情。最后，他观想时眼前出现佛、基督和克里须那（krishna，印度教三大神之一毗湿奴的主要化身。）的影像，影像优美迷人，有好几天他都生活在恍惚的状态中，头脑和心灵的边界变得开阔了，他完全沉浸在奉献给至上的爱中。周围的万物——村民、动物、树木、草地——都焕发着强烈的生机，生动可爱。他说，他花了这么多年时间才碰触到无限的边缘，他能活在其中是多么了不起。
　　“我有几个门徒和追随者，在这个国家是必然的。”他继续说，“其中一个建议我参加你在这个镇上的演讲，我恰好要在这里逗留几天。我去听了演讲，与其说想听听演讲者说什么，还不如说是想让我的门徒高兴。但是那个有关禅修的回答给我留下了深刻的印象。它是说在自知中才是禅修，没有自知，所有的禅修都是一个自我催眠的过程，一种自己思想和欲望的投射。我一直在考虑这些，现在来和你讨论这个问题。”
　　“我明白你说的完全正确，我非常震惊地发现我陷在自己头脑的形象和投射中了。现在我深刻地认识到我的禅修是什么。二十五年来我被困在我自己建造的美丽的花园中；那些人物、那些影像是我特殊文化的结果，是我想要得到、学习和吸收的结果。现在我了解了我一直以来所做的事情毫不重要，更惊讶的是我浪费了这么多宝贵的时间。”
　　我们俩沉默了一会儿。
　　“现在我该做什么？”他很快又继续问。“有什么办法可以走出我为自己建造的监狱？我知道我的禅修是没有结果的，虽然就在几天前它还好像意义非凡。不管怎么样，我都不能回到自我欺骗、自我兴奋中去了。我想撕破这些幻象的面纱，找到那些不是由头脑拼凑起来的东西。你不知道我这两天是怎么度过的！我小心而痛苦地建立起来维持了二十五年的清规戒律都没有意义了，在我看来，我又要从头开始。我该从哪儿开始？”
　　可能根本没有重新开始，只是领悟虚假的是虚假的，这是了解的开始，不是吗？如果要重新开始，就可能困在另一个幻象中，可能是另一种方式。蒙蔽我们的是要达到一个终点、得到一个结果的欲望；但是如果我们认识到我们想得到的结果仍然处于自我中心的范畴，那就不会再有成就的想法。把虚假的看成虚假的、真实的看成真实的，才是明智的。
　　“但我不是真的明白，我这二十五年所做的是错误的吗？我不是认识到我所谓的禅修的全部含义了吗？”
　　渴望经历是幻象的开始。就像你现在认识到的，你的影像只是你的背景、你的制约的投射，你所经历的正是这些投射。毫无疑问这不是禅修。禅修的开始是了解背景、了解自己。没有这样的了解，所谓的禅修，不管是愉快的还是痛苦的，都只是一种自我催眠的形式。你已经实践过自制，控制了念头，专注于更进一步的经历。这是一个以自我为中心的控制，不是禅修；认识到它不是禅修才是禅修的开始。在虚假中发现真实，头脑才能摆脱虚假。摆脱虚假并不是通过要达成它的欲望来实现的；在头脑不再专注于成功、结果的时候，它才能实现。所有的寻找都必须停止，只有这时那个无名的才有可能形成。
　　“我不想再次欺骗自己了。”
　　自我欺骗只在任何形式的愿望或执著存在的时候才存在：执著一种偏见、一种经历、一种思想体系。经历者总在有意无意地寻找更大、更深、更广的经验；只要有经历者存在，就有这种或那种形式的欺骗。
　　“所有这些都和时间和耐心有关，不是吗？”
　　要达到一个目标，时间和耐心是有必要的。一个有世俗或其他方面野心的人需要时间来达到目的。头脑是时间的产物，所有的思想都是它的结果。思想要摆脱时间的控制只会加强时间对它的束缚。只有在实际是什么和应该是什么——也就是所谓的理想、结果——之间存在着心理上的鸿沟，时间才会存在。意识到整个这种思考方式的错误性才能摆脱它，这不需要任何努力、任何实践。了解是当下的，不是时间性的。
　　“我所享受的禅修只有在它被看成虚假时才有意义，我想我把它看成是虚假的。但是……”
　　请别问必然的问题，什么可以代替它，等等。虚假的被扔掉，才有形成真实的自由。你不可能通过虚假来寻找真实；虚假不是通向真实的台阶。虚假必须彻底结束，而不能与真实相提并论。虚假和真实之间没有比较；暴力和爱是不能比较的。暴力必须停止，爱才存在。停止暴力不是一个时间的问题。把虚假当成虚假来看就是虚假的结束。让头脑空下来，不要装满东西。那样就只有禅修，而不是一个正在禅修的修行者。
　　“我被禅修者、寻找者、享受者、经历者塞满了，那些都是我自己。我生活在我自己建造的快乐的花园里，成了里面的囚犯。现在我看清了所有这些错误——很愚蠢，但我看清了。”

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES III CHAPTER 2 'SELF-KNOWLEDGE OR SELF-HYPNOSIS?'

IT HAD RAINED all night and most of the morning, and now the sun was going down behind dark, heavy clouds. There was no colour in the sky, but the perfume of the rain-soaked earth filled the air. The frogs had croaked all night long with persistency and rhythm, but with the dawn they became silent. The tree trunks were dark with the long rain, and the leaves washed clean of the summer's dust, would be rich and green again in a few more days. The lawns too would be greener, the bushes would soon be flowering, and there would be rejoicing. How welcome was the rain after the hot, dusty days! The mountains beyond the hills seemed not too far away and the breeze blowing from them was cool and pure. There would be more work, more food, and starvation would be a thing of the past.
     One of those large brown eagles was making wide circles in the sky, floating on the breeze without a beat of its wings. Hundreds of people on bicycles were going home after a long day in the office. A few talked as they rode, but most of them were silent and evidently tired out. A large group had stopped, with their bicycles resting against their bodies, and were animatedly discussing some issue, while nearby a policeman wearily watched them, On the corner a big new building was going up. The road was full of brown puddles, and the passing cars splashed one with dirty water which left dark marks on one's clothing. A cyclist stopped, bought from a vendor one cigarette, and was on his way again.
     A boy came along carrying on his head an old kerosene tin, half-filled with some liquid. He must have been working around that new building which was under construction. He had bright eyes and an extraordinarily cheerful face; he was thin but strongly built, and his skin was very dark, burnt by the sun. He wore a shirt and a loincloth, both the colour of the earth brown with long usage. His head was well-shaped, and there was a certain arrogance in his walk - a boy doing a man's work. As he left the crowd behind he began to sing, and suddenly the whole atmosphere changed. His voice was ordinary, a boyish voice, lusty and raucous; but the song had rhythm, and he would probably have kept time with his hands, had not one hand been holding the kerosene tin on top of his head. He was aware that someone was walking behind him, but was too cheerful to be shy, and he was obviously not in any way concerned with the peculiar change that had come about in the atmosphere. There was a blessing in the air, a love that covered everything, a gentleness that was simple, without calculation, a goodness that was ever flowering. Abruptly the boy stopped singing and turned towards a dilapidated hut that stood some distance back from the road. It would soon be raining again.
     The visitor said he had held a government position that was good as far as it went, and as he had had a first-class education both at home and abroad, he could have climbed quite high. He was married, he said, and had a couple of children. Life was fairly enjoyable, for success was assured; he owned the house they were living in, and he had put aside money for the education of his children. He knew Sanskrit, and was familiar with the religious tradition. Things were going along pleasantly enough, he said; but one morning he awoke very early, had his bath, and sat down for meditation before his family or the neighbours were up. Though he had had a restful sleep, he couldn't meditate; and suddenly he felt an overwhelming urge to spend the rest of his life in meditation. There was no hesitancy or doubt about it; he would devote his remaining years to finding whatever there was to be found through meditation, and he told his wife, and his two boys, who were at college, that he was going to become a sannyasi. His colleagues were surprised by his decision, but accepted his resignation; and in a few days he had left his home, never to return.
     That was twenty-five years ago, he went on. He disciplined himself rigorously, but he found it difficult after a life of ease, and it took him a long time to master completely his thoughts and the passions that were in him. Finally, however, he began to have visions of the Buddha, of Christ and Krishna visions whose beauty was enthralling, and for days he would live as if in a trance, ever widening the boundaries of his mind and heart, utterly absorbed in that love which is devotion to the Supreme. Everything about him - the villagers, the animals, the trees, the grass - was intensely alive, brilliant in its vitality and loveliness. It had taken him all these years to touch the hem of the Infinite, he said, and it was amazing that he had survived it all.
     "I have a number of disciples and followers, as is inevitable in this country," he went on "and one of them suggested to me that I attend a talk which was to be given by you in this town, where I happened to be for a few days. More to please him than to listen to the speaker, I went to the talk, and I was greatly impressed by what was said in reply to a question on meditation. It was stated that without self-knowledge, which in itself is meditation all meditation is a process of self-hypnosis, a projection of one's own thought and desire. I have been thinking about all this, and have now come to talk things over with you.
     "I see that what you say is perfectly true, and it's a great shock to me to perceive that I have been caught in the images or projections of my own mind. I now realize very profoundly what my meditation has been. For twenty-five years I have been held in a beautiful garden of my own making; the personages, the visions were the outcome of my particular culture and of the things I have desired, studied and absorbed. I now understand the significance of what I have been doing, and I am more than appalled at having wasted so many precious years."
     We remained silent for some time.
     "What am I to do now?" he presently continued. "Is there any way out of the prison I have built for myself? I can see that what I have come to in my meditation is a dead-end, though only a few days ago it seemed so full of glorious significance. However much I would like to, I can't go back to all that self-delusion and self-stimulation. I want to tear through these veils of illusion and come upon that which is not put together by the mind. You have no idea what I have been through during the last two days! The structure which I had so carefully and painfully built up over a period of twenty-five years has no meaning any more, and it seems to me that I shall have to start all over again. From where am I to start?"
     May it not be that there is no restarting at all, but only the perception of the false as the false which is the beginning of understanding? If one were to start again, one might be caught in another illusion, perhaps in a different manner. What blinds us is the desire to achieve an end, a result; but if we perceived that the result we desire is still within the self-centred field, then there would be no thought of achievement. Seeing the false as the false, and the true as the true, is wisdom.
     "But do I really see that what I have been doing for the last twenty-five years is false? Am I aware of all the implications of what I have regarded as meditation?"
     The craving for experience is the beginning of illusion. As you now realize, your visions were but the projections of your background, of your conditioning, and it is these projections that you have experienced. Surely this is not meditation. The beginning of meditation is the un- derstanding of the background, of the self, and without this understanding, what is called meditation, however pleasurable or painful, is merely a form of self-hypnosis. You have practised self-control, mastered thought, and concentrated on the furthering of experience. This is a self-centred occupation, it is not meditation; and to perceive that it is not meditation is the beginning of meditation. To see the truth in the false sets the mind free from the false. Freedom from the false does not come about through the desire to achieve it; it comes when the mind is no longer concerned with success with the attainment of an end. There must be the cessation of all search, and only then is there a possibility of the coming into being of that which is nameless.
     "I do not want to deceive myself again."
     Self-deception exists when there is any form of craving or attachment: attachment to a prejudice, to an experience, to a system of thought. Consciously or unconsciously, the experiencer is always seeking greater, deeper, wider experience; and as long as the experiencer exists, there must be delusion in one form or another.
     "All this involves time and patience, doesn't it?"
     Time and patience may be necessary for the achievement of a goal. An ambitious man, worldly or otherwise, needs time to gain his end. Mind is the product of time, as all thought is its result; and thought working to free itself from time only strengthens its enslavement to time. Time exists only when there is a psychological gap between what is and what should be, which is called the ideal, the end. To be aware of the falseness of this whole manner of thinking is to be free from it - which does not demand any effort, any practice. Understanding is immediate, it is not of time.
     "The meditation I have indulged in can have meaning only when it is seen to be false, and I think I see it to be false. But..."
     Please don't ask the inevitable question as to what there will be in its place, and so on. When the false has dropped away, there is freedom for that which is not false to come into being. You cannot seek the true through the false; the false is not a steppingstone to the true. The false must cease wholly, not in comparison to the true. There is no comparison between the false and the true; violence and love cannot be compared. Violence must cease for love to be. The cessation of violence is not a matter of time. The perception of the false as the false is the ending of the false. Let the mind be empty, and not filled with the things of the mind. Then there is only meditation, and not a meditator who is meditating.
     "I have been occupied with the meditator, the seeker, the enjoyer, the experiencer, which is myself. I have lived in a pleasant garden of my own creation, and have been a prisoner therein. I now see the falseness of all that - dimly, but I see it."

　　这个花园非常美，有开阔的绿色的草坪和盛开的灌木，完全被舒展的树木所环绕。一条路从它的一边经过，无意中经常能听到高声的谈话，尤其是晚上人们回家的时候。其他时候花园里非常安静。草地早晚各浇一次水，这时，就有许多鸟在草坪上飞上飞下找虫子吃。它们是那么迫不及待，即使有人还坐在树下，它们也毫无惧怕地走得很近。两只绿色和金色相间的鸟长着宽宽的尾巴和醒目的又长又精致的羽毛，经常停歇在玫瑰丛中。它们正好和那些柔嫩的叶子颜色相仿，让人几乎看不到它们。它们的脑袋扁平、眼腈又细又长，长着深色的嘴巴。它们划着弧线俯冲到接近地面的地方，抓住一只虫子，又飞回摇曳的玫瑰枝。这是非常可爱的一幕，充满了自由和优美。人们不能接近它们，它们太害羞了。但要是一个人坐在树下，不发出太大的动静，就能看到它们自娱自乐，太阳照在它们透明的、金色的翅膀上。
　　一只大獴狐猴经常出没在密密的灌木丛中，红色的鼻子高高地翘在空中。锐利的眼睛观察着周围的每一个动静。第一天，它看到有人坐在树下显得非常不安，但很快就习惯了人类的存在。它有时会穿过整个花园，不急不慢地，长尾巴拖在地上。有时它沿着靠近灌木的草坪边缘走，就更加警觉，嗅觉活跃，鼻子不停地翕动着。要是全家出动，大獴狐猴就头前领路，后面跟着它个头稍小一些的妻子，她的后面是两个小猴子，全都排成一列。两个孩子时不时停下来玩儿一会儿，但它们的妈妈一发现它们不是紧跟在身后，就飞快地转过头，于是它们就赶上去，重新排成一列。
　　在月光下花园变成一个令人心醉的地方。一动不动的静默的树木在草坪和静止的灌木丛中投下长长的、深色的阴影。喧闹繁忙、叽叽喳喳之后，鸟儿们已经栖息到黑暗的叶簇中过夜。现在路上几乎没有人了，偶尔可以听到远处的歌声，或是有人在赶往村子的路上吹奏的长笛的音符。其他时候花园非常安静，充满了柔和的飒飒低语。没有一片树叶摇动，树木映衬出银色朦胧的天空。
　　想象在禅修中是没有位置的，它必须被完全抛开。因为陷入想象的头脑只会产生迷惑。头脑必须清晰，没有运动，在清明之光中无时间性才会显现出来。

　　他非常老，长着白胡子，瘦削的身体上只披了一件出家人绛红色的袍子。他言行举止非常温和，但眼中却充满了悲伤——徒劳无功的悲伤。他十五岁离家遁世，花了许多年时间周游了整个印度，拜访修行社区、学习、禅修、不停地寻找。他曾在一个宗教政治领导人的修行社区呆过一段时间，那人为了印度的自由而艰苦努力；他还在南部另一个修行社区住过，在那里唱诵经文非常愉快。在一个圣徒安静居住的大厅，他也夹在许多人中间，默默地寻找着。东部和西部海岸有许多他曾经住过的修行社区，他在那里探索、提问、讨论。在遥远的北方，他在冰雪和寒冷的洞穴中呆过；他曾在汩汩流动的圣河水边禅修。他生活在苦行者当中，身体遭受磨炼，他长途跋涉去神圣的寺院朝圣。他精通梵文韵文，当他从一个地方走到另一个地方的时候，就很快乐地吟诵它们。
　　“从十五岁开始我就用各种可能的方式寻找上帝，但我还没有找到他，而现在我已经年过七十了。我来你这儿就像去别人那儿一样，希望能找到上帝。我必须在我死之前找到他，——除非，他实际上只是又一个人类神话罢了。”
　　请问，先生，您认为不可测量的东西是可以通过寻找而找到的吗？通过戒律、自我折磨、牺牲和奉献服务这些不同的途径，寻找者会遇到永恒？毫无疑问，先生，永恒是否存在是不重要的，真相也许以后会被发现；但重要的是要了解为什么我们要寻找，我们正在寻找的是什么？我们为什么要寻找？
　　“我寻找是因为，没有上帝生活就毫无意义。我因为悲伤和痛苦寻找他。我因为想得到平静寻找他。我寻找他是因为他是永恒的、不变的；因为有死亡，而他是不死的。他是秩序、优美和善良，我因此寻找他。”
　　那就是处于不能永恒的痛苦之中，我们希望找到我们所谓的永恒。我们寻找的动机是在永恒的理想中找到安慰，这种理想是从非永恒中产生的，它是从不断变化而形成的痛苦之中产生出来的。这种理想是不真实的，而痛苦是真实的。但我们好像并不了解痛苦的事实，我们执著于理想、执著于无痛苦的希望。因此在我们内心中就产生了现实和理想的双重状态，在真实存在和价值存在之间产生无尽的冲突。我们寻找的动机是逃避非永恒、逃避悲伤，进入头脑所认为的永恒、极乐的状态。但这个想法本身就是非永恒的，它从悲伤之中产生。对立的一面不管如何加强，总是包含着相反一面的种子。那样我们的寻找只是要逃避真实存在。
　　“你的意思是说我们必须停止寻找？”
　　如果我们把没有分散的注意力放在对真实存在的了解上，那我们所知道的寻找也许是完全没有必要的。如果头脑摆脱了悲伤，又何必去寻找快乐呢？
　　“头脑有可能摆脱悲伤吗？”
　　下结论说有可能或没有可能就结束了所有的疑问和了解。我们必须把全部注意力放在对悲伤的了解上，要是我们试图从悲伤中逃离，或者我们的头脑中塞满了寻找的原因，我们就做不到这一点。它必须是全然的注意，而不是拐弯抹角的关注。
　　当头脑不再寻找，不再通过需求和渴望产生冲突时，当它能安静地了解时，不可测量的才有可能出现。

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES III CHAPTER 3 'THE ESCAPE FROM WHAT IS'

IT WAS A RATHER nice garden, with open, green lawns and flowering bushes, completely enclosed by wide-spreading trees. There was a road running along one side of it, and one often overheard loud talk, especially in the evenings, when people were making their way home. Otherwise it was very quiet in the garden. The grass was watered morning and evening, and at both times there were a great many birds running up and down the lawn in search of worms. They were so eager in their search, that they would come quite close without any fear when one remained seated under a tree. Two birds, green and gold, with square tails and a long, delicate feather sticking out, came regularly to perch among the rose - bushes. They were exactly the same colour as the tender leaves and it was almost impossible to see them. They had flat heads and long, narrow eyes, with dark beaks. They would swoop in a curve close to the ground, catch an insect, and return to the swaying branch of a rosebush. It was a most lovely sight, full of freedom and beauty. One couldn't get near them, they were too shy; but if one sat under the tree without moving too much, one would see them disporting themselves, with the sun on their transparent golden wings.
     Often a big mongoose would emerge from the thick bushes, its red nose high in the air and its sharp eyes watching every movement around it. The first day it seemed very disturbed to see a person sitting under the tree, but it soon got used to the human presence. It would cross the whole length of the garden, unhurriedly, its long tail flat on the ground. Sometimes it would go along the edge of the lawn, close to the bushes, and then it would be much more alert, its nose vibrant and twitching. Once the whole family came out the big mongoose leading, followed by his smaller wife, and behind her, two little ones, all in a line. The babies stopped once or twice to play; but when the mother, feeling that they weren't immediately behind her, turned her head sharply, they raced forward and fell in line again.
     In the moonlight the garden became an enchanted place, the motionless, silent trees casting long, dark shadows across the lawn and among the still bushes. After a great deal of bustle and chatter, the birds had settled down for the night in the dark foliage. There was now hardly anyone on the road, but occasionally one would hear a song in the distance, or the notes of a flute being played by someone on his way to the village. Otherwise the garden was very quiet, full of soft whispers. Not a leaf stirred, and the trees gave shape to the hazy, silver sky.
     Imagination has no place in meditation; it must be completely set aside, for the mind caught in imagination can only breed delusions. The mind must be clear, without movement, and in the light of that clarity the timeless is revealed.
     He was a very old man with a white beard, and his lean body was scarcely covered by the saffron robe of a sannyasi. He was gentle in manner and speech, but his eyes were full of sorrow - the sorrow of vain search. At the age of fifteen he had left his family and renounced the world, and for many years he had wandered all over India visiting ashramas, studying, meditating, endlessly searching. He had lived for a time at the ashrama of the religious-political leader who had worked so strenuously for the freedom of India and had stayed at another in the south, where the chanting was pleasant. In the hall where a saint lived silently, he too, amongst many others, had remained silently searching. There were ashramas on the east coast and on the west coast where he had stayed, probing, questioning discussing. In the far north, among the snows and in the cold caves, he had also been; and he had meditated by the gurgling waters of the sacred river. Living among the ascetics, he had physically suffered, and he had made long pilgrimages to sacred temples. He was well versed in Sanskrit, and it had delighted him to chant as he walked from place to place.
     "I have searched for God in every possible way from the age of fifteen, but I have not found Him, and now I am past seventy. I have come to you as I have gone to others, hoping to find God. I must find Him before I die - unless, indeed, He is just another of the many myths of man." If one may ask, sir, do you think that the immeasurable can be found by searching for it? By following different paths, through discipline and self-torture, through sacrifice and dedicated service, will the seeker come upon the eternal? Surely, sir, whether the eternal exists or not is unimportant, and the truth of it may be uncovered later; but what is important is to understand why we seek, and what it is that we are seeking. Why do we seek?
     "I seek because, without God, life has very little meaning. I seek Him out of sorrow and pain. I seek Him because I want peace. I seek Him because He is the permanent the changeless; because there is death, and He is deathless. He is order, beauty and goodness, and for this reason I seek Him."
     That is, being in agony over the impermanent we hopefully pursue what we call the permanent. The motive of our search is to find comfort in the ideal of the permanent, and this ideal is born of impermanency, it has grown out of the pain of constant change. The ideal is unreal, whereas the pain is real; but we do not seem to understand the fact of pain, and so we cling to the ideal, to the hope of painlessness. Thus there is born in us the dual state of fact and ideal, with its endless conflict between what is and what should be. The motive of our search is to escape from impermanency, from sorrow, into what the mind thinks is the state of permanency, of everlasting bliss. But that very thought is impermanent, for it is born of sorrow. The opposite, however exalted, holds the seed of its own opposite. Our search, then, is merely the urge to escape from what is.
     "Do you mean to say that we must cease to search?"
     If we give our undivided attention to the understanding of what is, then search, as we know it, may not be necessary at all. When the mind is free from sorrow, what need is there to search for happiness?
     "Can the mind ever be free from sorrow?"
     To conclude that it can or that it cannot be free is to put an end to all inquiry and understanding. We must give our complete attention to the understanding of sorrow and we cannot do this if we are trying to escape from sorrow, or if our minds are occupied in seeking the cause of it. There must be total attention, and not oblique concern.
     When the mind is no longer seeking, no longer breeding conflict through its wants and cravings, when it is silent with understanding, only then can the immeasurable come into being.

　　我们好几个人呆在房间里。其中两个因为政治原因在监狱里呆了很多年；他们为了国家的自由受苦、做出牺牲，非常著名。他们的名字经常出现在报纸上，当他们谦逊的时候，那种功成名就的特殊骄傲仍然闪现在眼中。他们学识渊博，讲话的时候带着公开演讲的灵活熟练。另一个是一位政治家，身材高大、眼光锐利，富有谋略，关注个人的晋升。他也因为同样的原因进过监狱，但现在他身居要职，他的表情自信而充满目标；他可以左右思想和人们。还有一个人放弃了世俗的财产，渴望拥有权力来多行善事。他非常博学，言辞中旁征博引，他的微笑非常友善愉快，目前他正周游全国，交谈、劝诫和禁食。另外三、四个人也渴望爬上政治知名或精神谦虚的梯子。
　　“我不明白，”其中一个人开了头，“为什么你这么反对行动。活着就是行动，没有行动，生活就是一个停滞的过程。我们需要具有奉献精神的人的行动来改变这个不幸国家的社会和宗教状况。你肯定不反对改革：有土地的人自愿把一部分土地分给没有土地的人、教育村民、改善村庄、打破种姓划分，等等。”
　　改革虽然是必要的，但只会产生进一步改革的需求，它是无止境的。重要的是人们思想的解放，而不是拼凑的改革。没有人类头脑和心灵的根本转变，改革只是通过使人更满意的手段让人睡觉。这是非常明显的，不是吗？
　　“你是说我们不要改革？”另一个人带着强烈的惊诧问。
　　“我想你误解他了，”一个上了年纪的人解释。“他的意思是改革永远不会带来人类完全的转变。事实上，改革妨碍人类完全的转变，因为它通过给人短暂的满意让人睡觉。通过增加这些令人满意的改革，你会慢慢毒害你的邻居，使他们满足。”
　　“但如果我们严格地把我们限制在一个重要的改革中——比如说，自愿把土地分给那些没有土地的人——它真的实现了，不是会使人受益吗？”
　　你能把部分从整体存在中区分出来吗？你能在它周围围上栅栏、专注于它，而不影响到周围的其他地方吗？
　　“影响整个存在正是我们计划要做的。一个改革成功了，我们就会转向另一个。”
　　生活的全部可以通过部分来了解吗？还是整体必须先被领悟了解，只有这样，才能依照整体来检验和重塑部分？不了解整体，仅仅专注于局部。只会带来更大的困惑和不幸。
　　“你的意思是说，”那个强烈惊讶的人问，“不先研究存在的整个过程，我们就不应该行动或改革？”
　　“那当然是愚蠢的，”政治家插进来。“我们就没有时间去搞清楚生活的全部意义。那得留给梦想家、留给古鲁、留给哲学家。我们必须应付每一天的存在，我们必须行动，我们必须立法，我们必须管理，为混乱带来秩序。我们关心水坝、灌溉和更好的农业；我们忙于商业、经济；我们必须对付外国势力。日复一日，我们要是能不让重大灾难发生就足够了。我们职责在身，必须为人类的利益而竭尽全力。”
　　请问，你怎么知道什么是对人类有益的呢？你这么确定。你从这么多结论开始讨论；如果你从一个结论开始，不管是你自己的还是其他人的结论，所有的思考都会停止。你知道而别人不知道的平静的假设，会带来比一天只有一餐更大的不幸。因为正是对结论的自负产生人类的剥削。在我们为了他人利益的急迫行动中，我们制造了巨大的危害。
　　“我们中的一些人认为我们确实知道什么对国家和她的人民有利，”政治家解释道。“当然，反对派也认为它知道。对我们来说幸运的是，反对派在这个国家不太强，所以我们会赢，我们可以实施我们认为是好的和有益的事。”
　　每个党派都知道或者认为它知道什么是对人民有益的。但真正有益的不会产生对抗，无论是在国内还是国外；它会把人和人团结到一起；真正有益的关注人类整体，而不是某些只会导致更大灾难和不幸的肤浅利益；它会结束国家主义和有组织的宗教所产生的分裂和敌对。有益的是这么容易找到的吗？
　　“如果我们不得不考虑到什么是有益的全部含义，那我们就无路可走，什么也不能做。即刻的需求要求即刻的行动，尽管行动可能会带来些许的混乱，”政治家回答。“我们只是没有时间沉思默想、把一切哲学化。我们中的一些人从清晨忙到深夜，我们不可能舒舒服服地坐下来考虑我们所采取的每个行动的全部意义。我们简直无暇享受深入思考的乐趣，我们把这种乐趣留给他人。”
　　“先生，你好像正在建议，”一直沉默不语的一个人说，“在我们实施我们所假定的有益的行动之前，我们应该充分考虑清楚那个行动的意义，因为，即使看上去是有益的，这样一个行动也可能在将来产生更大的不幸。但是这样深刻地洞察我们自己的行动是可能的吗？在行动的那一刻我们可能认为我们有那样的洞察，但以后可能发现我们是盲目的。”
　　在行动的那一刻，我们充满热情、坚持己见，为一个理念而着迷，被领导者的人格和激情所吸引。所有的领导者，从最残忍的独裁者到最具宗教性的政治家，都宣称他们正在为人类的利益而行动。但他们都走向坟墓。尽管如此，我们仍然屈从于他们的影响，跟从他们。先生，你没有受过这样一个领导者的影响吗？他可能已经不在世了，但你仍旧按照他的准则、他的形式、他的生活模式思考和行动；要不然你受到一个年代更近的领导者的影响。当情况令人舒适时，或者一个更好的领导者出现、许以更大的利益时，我们就放弃原来的领导者，从一个领导者轮换到另一个领导者。我们热情洋溢的时候，把其他人带入我们的信念之网，而当我们自己转而跟从另一个领导者、进入另一个信念之网时，那些人通常还留在原来的网中。但什么是有益的和影响、强制以及舒适无关，任何在这种意义上不好的行动都注定会产生混乱和不幸。
　　“我想我们都要承认直接或间接地受到一个领导者的影响，”最后一个讲话者勉强承认。“但我们的问题也在这儿。认识到我们从社会受益良多而回报极少，看到到处都充满了不幸，我们感到对社会负有责任。我们必须做些什么来解除无尽的不幸。但我们大部分人都感到迷失方向，所以我们跟从某个具有强大人格的人。他具有奉献精神的生活、显而易见的忠诚、充满活力的思想和行动都极大地影响着我们，我们以各种方式成为他的追随者；在他的影响之下我们就迅速卷入行动，不管它是为了国家的解放，还是为了改善社会状况。接受权威在我们心中是根深蒂固的，从对权威的接受中产生行动。你告诉我们的和我们习以为常的恰好相反，它没有给我们留下判断和行动的标准。我希望你能看到我们的困境。”
　　毫无疑问，先生，任何建立在一本书的权威之上的行动，不管多么神圣，或者建立在一个人的权威之上，不管多么高贵、圣洁，都是没有思考的行动，它必然带来混乱和悲伤。在所有国家中，领导者通过阐释所谓神圣的经典得到他的权威，他从中旁征博引；或者权威来自自己的经验，但那些经验是被过去所限制的；或者来自他朴素的生活，但那又是基于神圣记载的模式。因此领导者的生活和追随者的生活一样被权威束缚。两者都是书本、经验或他人知识的奴隶。在这样的背景下，你想重新创造世界，是可能的吗？还是说你必须把对生活的整个权威、等级观念抛在一边，以新鲜、渴望的头脑来应对许多问题？生活和行动不是分裂的，它们是相互联系、连为一体的过程。但现在你把它们分割开来，不是吗？你把日常生活以及相关的思考和行动看成是和改造世界不同的活动。
　　“是这样的，”最后一个讲话的人继续说。“但我们该怎样扔掉从孩提时代就乐意接受的权威和传统的枷锁呢？那是我们远古的传统的一部分，而你却来告诉我们要把它抛在一边、依靠我们自己！从我的所闻所读了解，你说印度哲学中的自性（Atman，梵文原意为“呼吸”，引申为宇宙灵魂。）本身是不具有永恒性的。所以你可以理解我们为什么困惑。”
　　那不正是因为你从来没有真正质疑过权威的存在方式吗？质疑权威就是权威的结束。没有什么方式或系统可以让头脑摆脱权威和传统。如果有，那这个系统就会成为支配一切的要素。
　　为什么你接受权威，那个词的深层意义是什么？你接受权威，因为古鲁也这样做，为了安全，为了可靠，为了舒服，为了成功，为了抵达彼岸。你和古鲁都是成功的祈祷者，你们都被野心驱动。有野心的地方没有爱，没有爱的行动是没有意义的。
　　“理智上我明白你的话是对的，但内心中、感情上，我觉得它不可靠。”
　　不存在理智上的了解，我们要么了解，要么不了解。这种把我们自己划分成好几个防水舱的想法是我们另一个愚蠢之处。承认我们不了解比坚持说有理智上的了解好，因为那只会产生骄傲和自找的冲突。
　　“我们已经占用了你太多时间，但也许你会同意我们再次前来。”

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES III CHAPTER 4 'CAN ONE KNOW WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE?'

THERE WERE SEVERAL of us in the room. Two had been in prison for many years for political reasons; they had suffered and sacrificed in gaining freedom for the country, and were well-known. Their names were often in the papers, and while they were modest that peculiar arrogance of achievement and fame was still in their eyes. They were well-read, and they spoke with the facility that comes from public speaking. Another was a politician, a big man with a sharp glance, who was full of schemes and had an eye on self-advancement. He too had been in prison for the same reason, but now he was in a position of power, and his look was assured and purposeful; he could manipulate ideas and men. There was another who had renounced worldly possessions, and who hungered for the power to do good. Very learned and full of apt quotations, he had a smile that was genuinely kind and pleasant, and he was currently travelling all over the country talking, persuading, and fasting. There were three or four others who also aspired to climb the political or spiritual ladder of recognition or humility.
     "I cannot understand," one of them began, "why you are so much against action. Living is action; without action, life is a process of stagnation. We need dedicated people of action to change the social and religious conditions of this unfortunate country. Surely you are not against reform: the landed people voluntarily giving some of their land to the landless, the educating of the villager, the improving of the village, the breaking up of caste divisions, and so on."
     Reform, however necessary, only breeds the need for further reform, and there is no end to it. What is essential is a revolution in man's thinking, not patchwork reform. Without a fundamental change in the mind and heart of man, reform merely puts him to sleep by helping him to be further satisfied. This is fairly obvious, isn't it?
     "You mean that we must have no reforms?" another asked, with an intensity that was surprising.
     "I think you are misunderstanding him," explained one of the older men."He means that reform will never bring about the total transformation of man. In fact, reform impedes that total transformation, because it puts man to sleep by giving him temporary satisfaction. By multiplying these gratifying reforms, you will slowly drug your neighbour into contentment."
     "But if we strictly limit ourselves to one essential reform - the voluntary giving of land to the landless, let's say - until it is brought about, will that not be beneficial?"
     Can you separate one part from the whole field of existence? Can you put a fence around it, concentrate upon it, without affecting the rest of the field?
     "To affect the whole field of existence is exactly what we plan to do. When we have achieved one reform, we shall turn to another."
     Is the totality of life to be understood through the part? Or is it that the whole must first be perceived and understood, and that only then the parts can be examined and reshaped in relation to the whole? Without comprehending the whole, mere concentration on the part only breeds further confusion and misery.
     "Do you mean to say," demanded the intense one, "that we must not act or bring about reforms without first studying the whole process of existence?"
     "That's absurd, of course," put in the politician. "We simply haven't time to search out the full meaning of life. That will have to be left to the dreamers, to the gurus, to the philosophers. We have to deal with everyday existence; we have to act, we have to legislate, we have to govern and bring order out of chaos. We are concerned with dams, with irrigation, with better agriculture; we are occupied with trade, with economics, and we must deal with foreign powers. It is sufficient for us if we can manage to carry on from day to day without some major calamity taking place. We are practical men in positions of responsibility, and we have to act to the best of our ability for the good of the people."
     If it may be asked, how do you know what's good for the people? You assume so much. You start with so many conclusions; and when you start with a conclusion, whether your own or that of another, all thinking ceases. The calm assumption that you know, and that the other does not, leads to greater misery than the misery of having only one meal a day; for it is the vanity of conclusions that brings about the exploitation of man. In our eagerness to act for the good of others, we seem to do a great deal of harm.
     "Some of us think we really do know what's good for the country and its people," explained the politician. "Of course, the opposition also thinks it knows; but the opposition is not very strong in this country, fortunately for us, so we shall win and be in a position to try out what we think is good and beneficial."
     Every party knows, or thinks it knows, what's good for the people. But what is truly good will not create antagonism, either at home or abroad; it will bring about unity between man and man; what is truly good will be concerned with the totality of man, and not with some superficial benefit that may lead only to greater calamity and misery; it will put an end to the division and the enmity that nationalism and organized religions have created. And is the good so easily found?
     "If we have to take into consideration all the implications of what is good, we shall get nowhere; we shall not be able to act. Immediate necessities demand immediate action, though that action may bring marginal confusion," replied the politician. "We just haven't time to ponder, to philosophize. Some of us are busy from early in the morning till late at night, and we can't sit back to consider the full meaning of each and every action that we must take. We literally cannot afford the pleasure of deep consideration, and we leave that pleasure to others."
     "Sir, you appear to be suggesting," said one of those who had thus far remained silent, "that before we perform what we assume to be a good act, we should think out fully the significance of that act, since, even though seemingly beneficial, such an act may produce greater misery in the future. But is it possible to have such profound insight into our own actions? At the moment of action we may think we have that insight, but later on we may discover our blindness."
     At the moment of action we are enthusiastic, impetuous, we are carried away by an idea, or by the personality and the fire of a leader. All leaders, from the most brutal tyrant to the most religious politician, state that they are acting for the good of man, and they all lead to the grave; but nevertheless we succumb to their influence, and follow them. Haven't you, sir, been influenced by such a leader? He may no longer be living, but you still think and act according to his sanctions, his formulas, his pattern of life; or else you are influenced by a more recent leader. So we go from one leader to another, dropping them when it suits our convenience, or when a better leader turns up with greater promise of some `good'. In our enthusiasm we bring others into the net of our convictions, and they often remain in that net when we ourselves have moved on to other leaders and other convictions. But what is good is free of influence, compulsion and convenience and any act which is not good in this sense is bound to breed confusion and misery.
     "I think we can all plead guilty to being influenced by a leader, directly or indirectly," acquiesced the last speaker, "but our problem is this. Realizing that we receive many benefits from society and give very little in return, and seeing so much misery everywhere, we feel that we have a responsibility towards society, that we must do something to relieve this unending misery. Most of us, however, feel rather lost, and so we follow someone with a strong personality. His dedicated life, his obvious sincerity, his vital thoughts and acts, influence us greatly, and in various ways we become his followers; under his influence we are soon caught up in action, whether it be for the liberation of the country, or for the betterment of social conditions. The acceptance of authority is ingrained in us, and from this acceptance of authority flows action. What you are telling us is so contrary to all we are accustomed to that it leaves us no measure by which to judge and to act. I hope you see our difficulty."
     Surely, sir, any act based on the authority of a book, however sacred, or on the authority of a person, however noble and saintly, is a thoughtless act which must inevitably bring confusion and sorrow. In this and other countries the leader derives his authority from the interpretation of the so-called sacred books, which he liberally quotes, or from his own experiences, which are conditioned by the past, or from his austere life, which again is based on the pattern of saintly records. So the leader's life is as bound by authority as the life of the follower; both are slaves to the book, and to the experience or knowledge of another. With this background, you want to remake the world. Is that possible? Or must you put aside this whole authoritarian, hierarchical outlook on life, and approach the many problems with a fresh, eager mind? Living and action are not separate, they are an interrelated, unitary process; but now you have separated them, have you not? You regard daily living, with its thoughts and acts, as different from the action which is going to change the world.
     "Again, this is so," went on the last speaker. "But how are we to throw off this yoke of authority and tradition, which we have willingly and happily accepted from childhood? It is part of our immemorial tradition, and you come along and tell us to set it all aside and rely on ourselves! From what I have heard and read, you say that the very Atman itself is without permanency. So you can see why we are confused."
     May it not be that you have never really inquired into the authoritarian way of existence? The very questioning of authority is the end of authority. There is no method or system by which the mind can be set free from authority and tradition; if there were, then the system would become the dominating factor.
     Why do you accept authority, in the deeper sense of that word? You accept authority, as the guru also does, in order to be safe, to be certain, in order to be comforted, to succeed, to reach the other shore. You and the guru are worshippers of success; you are both driven by ambition. Where there is ambition, there is no love; and action without love has no meaning.
     "Intellectually I see that what you say is true, but inwardly, emotionally, I don't feel the authenticity of it."
     There is no intellectual understanding; either we understand, or we don't. This dividing of ourselves into watertight compartments is another of our absurdities. It is better to admit to ourselves that we do not understand, than to maintain that there is an intellectual understanding, which only breeds arrogance and self-imposed conflict.
     "We have taken too much of your time, but perhaps you will allow us to come again."

　　太阳落到丘陵之后，市镇在暮色中像燃烧了一般，天空中光彩绚烂。在徘徊的黄昏暮色中，孩子们叫嚷着、玩耍着；离他们的晚饭还有不少时间。不协调的寺院的钟声在远处响起，近处的清真寺传来召唤人们晚祷的声音。鹦鹉们从远离市中心的树林和田野中飞回它们在大路两旁浓密的叶丛里。它们在晚上就寝前发出巨大的声响。乌鸦加入其问，发出沙哑的鸣叫，还有其他鸟，一片责骂和喧闹。这是市镇上一个僻静的地区，往来车辆的声音被大声的鸟鸣淹没了；但随着夜色深沉下来，鸟儿们安静了一些，几分钟后它们沉默了，准备过夜。
　　一个脖子上绕着像粗绳子一样东西的人走过来。他抓着那东西的一头。一群人正在树下聊天、开怀大笑，树上的电灯洒下斑驳的光。那人走向人群，把他的绳子扔在了地上。有人尖叫着开始奔跑起来，原来那绳子是一条巨大的眼镜蛇，咝咝叫着，摇着头颈。那人大笑着，用他的光脚趾推推蛇，又很快把它捡起来，盘在头后。当然，它的毒牙被拔掉了，它实际上是没有伤害力的，但还是令人毛骨悚然。那人要把蛇盘在我脖子上，我抚摸它的时候他感到很满意。那条蛇长着鳞片，浑身冰凉，肌肉结实、长满细纹，黑色的眼睛目不转睛地盯着人——因为蛇是没有眼皮的。我们一起走了几步，他脖子上的眼镜蛇从来没有安静过，一直动个不停。
　　路灯使星星黯淡无光、看上去非常遥远。但红色的火星很清晰。一个乞丐迈着又慢又疲惫的步子走过来，行动艰难。他披着旧布，腿上缠着撕成条的帆布，用粗线绑在一起。他扶着一根长长的拐杖，正在自言自语，我们走过的时候也没有抬头看一眼。沿街更远的地方有一个时髦而昂贵的饭店，前面停着差不多各种牌子的车。

　　来自一所大学的一位年轻教授——相当紧张，音调很高，有着明亮的眼睛——说他走了很远的路来问一个问题，这个问题对他来说非常重要。
　　“我已经知道各种不同的快乐：夫妇之爱的快乐、健康的快乐、兴趣的和友谊的快乐。作为一个文学教授，我阅读广泛，满足于书本世界。但是我发现每种快乐的本性都是短暂的，从最小的到最大的，它们都随着时间流逝。没有什么我接触的是永恒的，即使是文学，我生命中的最爱，也开始失去它持久的快乐。我觉得肯定存在着一个永恒的快乐之源，但尽管我努力地寻找，也没有找到。”
　　寻找是一个特别具有欺骗性的现象，不是吗？不满意现在，我们寻找超越它的东西。对现在感到痛苦，我们探究将来或过去；即便我们所找的是存在于现在的。我们从来没有停下来探询一下现在的完全满意，总是追寻未来的梦想；或者从过去死去的记忆中选择最丰富多彩的，赋予它生命。我们执著过去，或者由于未来而拒绝过去，这样现在就能含糊过去；它只是一个通道，要尽快地穿过。
　　“不管它在过去还是将来，我想找到快乐之源，”他继续道。“你知道我的意思，先生。我不再寻找可以产生快乐的客体——观念、书本、人、自然——而是快乐本身的源泉，超越一切短暂易逝的东西。如果一个人不能找到那个源泉，就会永远陷入非永恒的悲哀之中。”
　　先生，你不觉得我们必须了解“寻找”这个词的意义吗？不然，我们就会抱着截然不同的目的在交谈。为什么会有迫切寻找、渴望找到和达成的强烈愿望？也许如果我们可以发现动机，看清它的含意，我们就能了解寻找的意义。
　　“我的动机简单而直接：我想找到永恒的快乐之源，因为我所知道的每一种快乐都是会逝去的。迫使我寻找的是无法拥有永恒的悲哀。我想逃离这种不确定的悲哀，我并不认为这其中有什么不对劲的。任何一个有思想的人都必定在寻找我所寻找的快乐。其他人可能把它叫做别的什么——上帝、真理、自由、解脱等等——但它本质上是同一件事。”
　　陷入非永恒的痛苦中，头脑被驱赶着去寻找永恒，不管永恒被叫做什么。正是对永恒的渴望产生永恒，它是现实的反面。所以实际上没有寻找，只有找到令人舒适满意的永恒的欲望。当头脑意识到它处于不断的变化中，它一直在建立相反的状态，它就会陷入二元的冲突中。然后，为了逃离这种冲突，它仍然要找到另一个反面。因此头脑就陷人了对立面的轮回。
　　“我发现头脑的反应过程就像你说的一样，但是一个人根本不该寻找吗？如果没有发现，生活将多么可怜！”
　　我们通过寻找发现了什么新东西吗？新的并不是旧的反面，它不是现实的对立。如果新事物是旧事物的投射，那它只是旧事物变相的延续。所有的认识都是以过去为基础的，可以被认识的东西并不是新的。现实的痛苦产生寻找，因此可以找到什么是已知的。你在寻找安慰，你可能会找到；但它也是短暂易逝的，因为这个迫切寻找的愿望不是永恒的。所有要得到什么的欲望——快乐、上帝或其他什么——都是短暂易逝的。
　　“既然我的寻找是欲望的结果，欲望又是短暂易逝的，那么我的寻找就是徒劳的。我是不是理解了你的意思？”
　　如果你理解了这个真相，那么短暂易逝本身就是快乐。
　　“我该怎样理解真相呢？”
　　不存在“怎样”的问题，没有方法。方法产生永恒的念头。只要头脑想到达、得到、达成，它就会陷于冲突之中。冲突是不敏感的，只有敏感的头脑才能认识到真实。寻找产生冲突，停止冲突就没有寻找的必要。那就是极乐。

COMMENTARIES ON LIVING SERIES III CHAPTER 5"I WANT TO FIND THE SOURCE OF JOY"

THE SUN WAS behind the hills, the town was afire with the evening glow, and the sky was full of light and splendour. In the lingering twilight, the children were shouting and playing; there was still plenty of time before their dinner. A discordant temple bell was ringing in the distance, and from the nearby mosque a voice was calling for evening prayers. The parrots were coming back from the outlying woods and fields to the dense trees with their heavy foliage, all along the road. They were making an awful noise before settling down for the night. The crows joined them, with their raucous calling and there were other birds, all scolding and noisy. It was a secluded part of the town, and the sound of the traffic was drowned by the loud chatter of the birds; but with the coming of darkness they became quieter, and within a few minutes they were silent and ready for the night.
     A man came along with what looked like a thick rope around his neck. He was holding one end of it. A group of people were chatting and laughing under a tree, where there were patches of light from an electric lamp above; and the man, walking up to the group, put his rope on the ground. There were frightened screams as everyone started running; for the `rope' was a big cobra, hissing and swaying its hood. Laughing, the man pushed it with his naked toes, and presently picked it up again, holding it just behind the head. Of course, its fangs had been removed; it was really harmless, but frightening. The man offered to put the snake around my neck, but he was satisfied when I stroked it. It was scaly and cold, with strong rippling muscles, and eyes that were black and staring - for snakes have no eyelids. We walked a few steps together, and the cobra around his neck was never still, but all movement.
     The street-lights made the stars seem dim and far away, but Mars was red and clear. A beggar was walking along with slow, weary steps, hardly moving; he was covered with rags, and his feet were wrapped in torn pieces of canvas, tied together with heavy string. He had a long stick, and was muttering to himself, and he did not look up as we passed. Further along the street there was a smart and expensive hotel, with cars of almost every make drawn up in front of it.
     A young professor from one of the universities, rather nervous and with a high-pitched voice and bright eyes, said that he had come a long way to ask a question which was most important to him.
     "I have known various joys: the joy of conjugal love, the joy of health, of interest, and of good companionship. Being a professor of literature, I have read widely, and delight in books. But I have found that every joy is fleeting in nature; from the smallest to the greatest, they all pass away in time. Nothing I touch seems to have any permanency, and even literature, the greatest love of my life, is beginning to lose its perennial joy. I feel there must be a permanent source of all joy, but though I have sought for it intensely, I have not found it."
     Search is an extraordinarily deceptive phenomenon is it not? Being dissatisfied with the present, we seek something beyond it. Aching with the present, we probe into the future or the past; and even that which we find is consumed in the present. We never stop to inquire into the full content of the present, but are always pursuing the dreams of the future; or from among the dead memories of the past we select the richest, and give life to it. We cling to that which has been, or reject it in the light of tomorrow, and so the present is slurred over; it is merely a passage to be gone through as quickly as possible.
     "Whether it's in the past or in the future, I want to find the source of joy," he went on. "You know what I mean, sir. I no longer seek the objects from which joy is derived - ideas, books, people, nature - but the source of joy itself, beyond all transiency. If one doesn't find that source, one is everlastingly caught in the sorrow of the impermanent."
     Don't you think, sir, that we must understand the significance of that word `search'? Otherwise we shall be talking at cross purposes. Why is there this urge to seek, this anxiety to find, this compulsion to attain? perhaps if we can uncover the motive and see its implications, we shall be able to understand the significance of search.
     "My motive is simple and direct: I want to find the permanent source of joy, for every joy I have known has been a passing thing. The urge that is making me seek is the misery of not having anything enduring. I want to get away from this sorrow of uncertainty, and I don't think there's anything abnormal about it. Anyone who is at all thoughtful must be seeking the joy I am seeking. Others may call it by a different name - God, truth, bliss, freedom, Moksha, and so on - but it's essentially the same thing."
     Being caught in the pain of impermanency, the mind is driven to seek the permanent, under whatever name; and its very craving for the permanent creates the permanent, which is the opposite of what is. So really there is no search, but only the desire to find the comforting satisfaction of the permanent. When the mind becomes aware of being in a constant state of flux, it proceeds to build the opposite of that state, thereby getting caught in the conflict of duality; and then, wanting to escape from this conflict, it pursues still another opposite. So the mind is bound to the wheel of opposites.
     "I am aware of this reactionary process of the mind, as you explain it; but should one not seek at all? Life would be a pretty poor thing if there were no discovering."
     Do we discover anything new through search? The new is not the opposite of the old, it is not the antithesis of what is. If the new is a projection of the old, then it is only a modified continuation of the old. All recognition is based on the past, and what is recognizable is not the new. Search arises from the pain of the present, therefore what is sought is already known. You are seeking comfort, and probably you will find it; but that also will be transient, for the very urge to find is impermanent. All desire for something - for joy for God, or whatever it be - is transient.
     "Do I understand you to mean that, since my search is the outcome of desire, and desire is transient, therefore my search is in vain?"
     If you realize the truth of this, then transience itself is joy.
     "How am I to realize the truth of it?"
     There is no `how', no method. The method breeds the idea of the permanent. As long as the mind desires to arrive, to gain, to attain it will be in conflict. Conflict is insensitivity. It is only the sensitive mind that realizes the true. Search is born of conflict, and with the cessation of conflict there is no need to seek. Then there is bliss.