The cessation of violence, which we have just been considering, does not necessarily mean a state of mind which is at peace with itself and therefore at peace in all its relationships.
暴力的终止 －－ 我们刚才一直在讨论的问题 －－ 并不一定意味着心灵处于一种自身平和、并因而在其所有的关系中都平和的状态。
Relationship between human beings is based on the image-forming, defensive mechanism. In all our relationships each one of us builds an image about the other and these two images have relationship, not the human beings themselves. The wife has an image about the husband - perhaps not consciously but nevertheless it is there - and the husband has an image about the wife. One has an image about one's country and about oneself, and we are always strengthening these images by adding more and more to them. And it is these images which have relationship. The actual relationship between two human beings or between many human beings completely end when there is the formation of images.
人与人的关系是基于意象形成、防御机制的。在我们所有的关系中，我们每个人都构建了关系另一方的意象，而这些意象之间形成了关系，而不是人本身之间形成了关系。妻子对丈夫形成了意象 －－ 也许不是有意识形成的，但确实存在 －－ 丈夫对妻子也形成了意象。人们对自己的国家形成了意象，对自己也是，我们总是通过累积，不断地巩固这些意象。正是这些意象之间有了关系。而当意象形成时，人与人之间真正的关系就完全结束了。
Relationship based on these images can obviously never bring about peace in the relationship because the images are fictitious and one cannot live in an abstraction. And yet that is what we are all doing: living in ideas, in theories, in symbols, in images which we have created about ourselves and others and which are not realities at all. All our relationships, whether they be with property, ideas or people, are based essentially on this image-forming, and hence there is always conflict.
基于这些意象的关系显然不能带来关系中的和平，因为意象是虚假的，人不能活在抽象中。但这却是我们都在做的：活在观念中，理论中，符号中，以及我们对自己和他人构建的、完全不是事实的意象中。我们所有的关系，不管是跟财产、观念、还是人的关系，都在根本上基于这个意象的形成，因而总是存在冲突。
How is it possible then to be completely at peace within ourselves and in all our relationships with others? After all, life is a movement in relationship, otherwise there is no life at all, and if that life is based on an abstraction, an idea, or a speculative assumption, then such abstract living must inevitably bring about a relationship which becomes a battlefield. So is it at all possible for man to live a completely orderly inward life without any form of compulsion, imitation, suppression or sublimation? Can he bring about such order within himself that it is a living quality not held within the framework of ideas - an inward tranquillity which knows no disturbance at any moment - not in some fantastic mythical abstract world but in the daily life of the home and the office?
那么，怎样才有可能在我们跟自己和跟他人的所有关系中完全处于和平呢？毕竟，生活是在关系中的活动，否则就完全没有生活，而如果生活是基于抽象、观念、或推测出来的假设的话，那么这样的抽象生活必然不可避免地要造成冲突不断的关系。故人到底有无可能使内在生活完全有秩序，而没有任何形式的强迫、模仿、压抑或升华？他能否让内心有秩序，不是一种由观念的框架构成的生活品质，而是一种任何时刻都没有困扰的内在平静，不在幻想的神秘抽象世界中，而是在家庭、办公室的日常生活中（有秩序）？
I think we should go into this question very carefully because there is not one spot in our consciousness untouched by conflict. In all our relationships, whether with the most intimate person or with a neighbour or with society, this conflict exists - conflict being contradiction, a state of division, separation, a duality. Observing ourselves and our relationships to society we see that at all levels of our being there is conflict - minor or major conflict which brings about very superficial responses or devastating results.
我认为我们应该非常仔细地深入这个问题，因为我们的意识中没有哪个点是不被冲突影响的。在我们所有的关系中，不管是跟最亲近人的关系还是跟邻居或社会的关系，这种冲突都存在 －－ 冲突就是矛盾，就是分化（division）、分开（seperation）的状态，就是二元性。通过观察我们自己，观察我们跟社会的关系，我们看到，在我们存在的所有层面上都有冲突 －－ 大大小小的冲突，这些冲突造成了非常肤浅的反应，或毁灭性的结果。
Man has accepted conflict as an innate part of daily existence because he has accepted competition, jealousy, greed, acquisitiveness and aggression as a natural way of life. When we accept such a way of life we accept the structure of society as it is and live within the pattern of respectability. And that is what most of us are caught in because most of us want to be terribly respectable. When we examine our own minds and hearts, the way we think, the way we feel and how we act in our daily lives, we observe that as long as we conform to the pattern of society, life must be a battlefield. If we do not accept it - and no religious person can possibly accept such a society - then we will be completely free from the psychological structure of society.
人们已经接受了冲突，作为每日存在固有的一部分，因为，他们已经接受了竞争、妒忌、贪婪、占有和侵略，作为生活的自然方式。当我们接受了这样的生活方式的时候，我们就接受了现在这种社会结构，并生活在这种“体面”的模式中。而这就是我们大多数人陷入其中的地方，因为我们大多数人都想要非常体面。当我们检视我们的思想和内心，我们思考的方式，我们感觉的方式和我们在日常生活中如何行动，我们就会观察到，只要我们遵从社会的模式，生活必然成为战场。如果我们不接受它 －－ 没有哪个“宗教人士”（religious people）能接受这样的社会 －－ 那么我们就会完全不受社会心理结构的影响了。
Most of us are rich with the things of society. What society has created in us and what we have created in ourselves, are greed, envy, anger, hate, jealousy, anxiety - and with all these we are very rich. The various religions throughout the world have preached poverty. The monk assumes a robe, changes his name, shaves his head, enters a cell and takes a vow of poverty and chastity; in the East he has one loin cloth, one robe, one meal a day - and we all respect such poverty. But those men who have assumed the robe of poverty are still inwardly, psychologically, rich with the things of society because they are still seeking position and prestige; they belong to this order or that order, this religion or that religion; they still live in the divisions of a culture, a tradition. That is not poverty. poverty is to be completely free of society, though one may have a few more clothes, a few more meals - good God, who cares? But unfortunately in most people there is this urge for exhibitionism.
我们大多数人都富于社会的东西。社会在我们身上、我们也在自己身上创造了贪婪、羡慕、愤怒、憎恨、妒忌、焦虑 －－ 我们正是“富于”所有这些东西。纵观世界各种宗教都宣扬清贫。僧侣穿上长袍、改名换姓、削发剃度、斗室简居、立誓清贫和纯洁；在东方，一根腰布、一袭长袍、一日一餐 －－ 我们都尊敬这样的清贫。但那些穿上清贫外衣的人，内心里、心理上，仍然“富于”社会的东西，因为他们仍然在追逐地位和名望；他们属于这个阶层或那个阶层，这个宗派或那个宗派；他们仍然生活在文化及传统的分化中。那不是清贫。清贫是完全不受社会的影响，就算一个人可能多穿点衣服、多吃点饭 －－ 上帝啊，谁在乎呢？但不幸的是，大多数人都急于（通过这些）来表现自己。
Poverty becomes a marvellously beautiful thing when the mind is free of society. One must become poor inwardly for then there is no seeking, no asking, no desire, no - nothing! It is only this inward poverty that can see the truth of a life in which there is no conflict at all. Such a life is a benediction not to be found in any church or any temple.
当心智不受社会的影响时，清贫才成为极为美丽的东西。人必须内在变得清贫，因为那时就会没有追逐，没有寻求、没有欲望 －－ 什么也没有！唯有这种内在的清贫能够看到生活的真相，这种真相里完全没有冲突。这种生活，是在任何教堂或寺庙中都找不到的一种恩赐。
How is it possible then to free ourselves from the psychological structure of society, which is to free ourselves from the essence of conflict? It is not difficult to trim and lop off certain branches of conflict, but we are asking ourselves whether it is possible to live in complete inward and therefore outward tranquillity? Which does not mean that we shall vegetate or stagnate. On the contrary, we shall become dynamic, vital, full of energy.
那么怎样能让我们不受社会心理结构的影响，也就是说，不受冲突的本质的影响呢？修剪或砍掉一些冲突的分支不是很难，但我们在问自己的是，可不可能生活在完全的内在的从而外在的平静（tranquility）中呢？那不意味着我们应该无所事事和停滞不前。相反，我们应该变得活泼、有生机、充满能量。
To understand and to be free of any problem we need a great deal of passionate and sustained energy, not only physical and intellectual energy but an energy that is not dependent on any motive, any psychological stimulus or drug. If we are dependent on any stimulus that very stimulus makes the mind dull and insensitive. By taking some form of drug we may find enough energy temporarily to see things very clearly but we revert to our former state and therefore become dependent on that drug more and more. So all stimulation, whether of the church or of alcohol or of drugs or of the written or spoken word, will inevitably bring about dependence, and that dependence prevents us from seeing clearly for ourselves and therefore from having vital energy.
要理解任何的问题并不受其影响，我们需要大量的激情和持久的能量，不仅仅是身体上的和智性上的能量，还要有一种不依赖于任何动机、任何心理刺激或药品的能量。如果我们依赖于任何刺激，那么这种刺激就会让大脑迟钝和不敏感。通过服用任何形式的药品，我们也许能够短暂地获得足以看清事物的能量，但是我们会回退到之前的状态，因而变得越来越依赖于药品。所以，任何的刺激，不管是教堂、酒精、药品还是书面或口头的语言，都不可避免地造成依赖，而这种依赖妨碍了我们看清我们自己，因而妨碍了我们拥有生命的能量。
We all unfortunately depend psychologically on something. Why do we depend? Why is there this urge to depend? We are taking this journey together; you are not waiting for me to tell you the causes of your dependence. If we enquire together we will both discover and therefore that discovery will be your own, and hence, being yours, it will give you vitality.
不幸的是我们在心理上都有依赖。我们为什么依赖呢？这种要依赖的紧迫感为什么会存在呢？我们在一起继续这个旅程（研究这个问题）；你不是在等待我告诉你你依赖的导因。如果我们一起探求，我们彼此都会发现，这个发现因而就成为你自己的，因为它是你的，就会给你活力。
I discover for myself that I depend on something - an audience, say, which will stimulate me. I derive from that audience, from addressing a large group of people, a kind of energy. And therefore I depend on that audience, on those people, whether they agree or disagree. The more they disagree the more vitality they give me. If they agree it becomes a very shallow, empty thing. So I discover that I need an audience because it is a very stimulating thing to address people. Now why? Why do I depend? Because in myself I am shallow, in myself I have nothing, in myself I have no source which is always full and rich, vital, moving, living. So I depend. I have discovered the cause.
我发现自己依赖于某种东西 －－ 比如，听众，听众能刺激我。我通过听众，通过向一大群人演说，获得一种能量。因而我依赖于听众，依赖于这些人，不管他们同意还是不同意。他们越不同意，就给予我越多的活力。如果他们同意，就变成了一件肤浅、空虚的事情。故我发现我需要听众，因为向人群演说是一件刺激的事情。那么，为什么？我为什么依赖？因为我内在肤浅、内在一无所有、内在没有一个总是充盈富足、有活力、运动着的、活着的源泉。故我依赖。我发现了其导因。
But will the discovery of the cause free me from being dependent? The discovery of the cause is merely intellectual, so obviously it does not free the mind from its dependency. The mere intellectual acceptance of an idea, or the emotional acquiescence in an ideology, cannot free the mind from being dependent on something which will give it stimulation. What frees the mind from dependence is seeing the whole structure and nature of stimulation and dependence and how that dependence makes the mind stupid, dull and inactive. Seeing the totality of it alone frees the mind.
但是发现导因会让我摆脱依赖吗？发现导因只是理性上的，显然不会让心智摆脱依赖。仅仅在理性上接受一个观念，或者在情感上默许一种意识形态，不能让心智摆脱那给其刺激的依赖物。让心智摆脱依赖的是，看到刺激和依赖整个结构和本质，以及依赖如何让心智变得愚蠢、迟钝和懈怠。只有看到整体才能让心智解脱。
So I must enquire into what it means to see totally. As long as I am looking at life from a particular point of view or from a particular experience I have cherished, or from some particular knowledge I have gathered, which is my background, which is the 'me', I cannot totally. I have discovered intellectually, verbally, through analysis, the cause of my dependence, but whatever thought investigates must inevitably be fragmentary, so I can see the totality of something only when thought does not interfere.
故我必须追问下去，看到整体是什么意思。只要我在从一种我持有的特定的视角或经验，或者从我收集的某些特定的知识 －－ 即我的背景，即“我”（the 'me'） －－ 来看生活，我就不能看到整体（全然地看）。我已经发现了依赖的导因，从理智上、从语言上、通过分析，但是不管思想在探究什么，不可避免地一定是片段化的，故只有在思想不干预的时候，我才能看到事物的整体。
Then I see the fact of my dependence; I see actually what is. I see it without any like or dislike; I do not want to get rid of that dependence or to be free from the cause of it. I observe it, and when there is observation of this kind I see the whole picture, not a fragment of the picture, and when the mind sees the whole picture there is freedom. Now I have discovered that there is a dissipation of energy when there is fragmentation. I have found the very source of the dissipation of energy.
此时我看到了我依赖的事实；我真切地看到了。我看它，不喜欢也不厌恶；我不想摆脱依赖，也不想摆脱依赖的导因。我观察它，当有这种观察的时候，我看到了整幅画面，不是其中的一个片段。当心智看到整幅画面的时候，就有自由。现在我发现，当片段化的时候就有能量的损耗。我发现了真正损耗能量的所在。
You may think there is no waste of energy if you imitate, if you accept authority, if you depend on the priest, the ritual, the dogma, the party or on some ideology, but the following and acceptance of an ideology, whether it is good or bad, whether it is holy or unholy, is a fragmentary activity and therefore a cause of conflict, and conflict will inevitably arise so long as there is a division between what should be' and what is', and any conflict is a dissipation of energy.
你可能认为如果你模仿、如果你接受权威、如果你依赖于牧师、仪式、教条、团体或某些意识形态，就不会有能量的浪费。但是跟随和接受一种意识形态，不管它是好的还是坏的，不管它是神圣的还是邪恶的，都是一种片段化的活动，因而是冲突的一个导因，而只要在“应然”（what should be）和“实然”（what is）之间有分化，冲突就不可避免地会发生。任何冲突都是一种能量的损耗。
If you put the question to yourself, `How am I to be free from conflict?', you are creating another problem and hence you are increasing conflict, whereas if you just see it as a fact - see it as you would see some concrete object - clearly, directly - then you will understand essentially the truth of a life in which there is no conflict at all.
如果你拿“我如何才能从冲突中解脱”这个问题问自己，你就在创造另一个问题，因而你又增加了冲突，然而如果你只是把它当做事实来看 －－ 就好像对某个具体的物体那样来看 －－ 清晰地，直接地 －－ 你就会从本质上理解生命的真相，在这真相中完全没有冲突。
Let us put it another way. We are always comparing what we are with what we should be. The should-be is a projection of what we think we ought to be. Contradiction exists when there is comparison, not only with something or somebody, but with what you were yesterday, and hence there is conflict between what has been and what is. There is what is only when there is no comparison at all, and to live with what is, is to be peaceful. Then you can give your whole attention without any distraction to what is within yourself - whether it be despair, ugliness, brutality, fear, anxiety, loneliness - and live with it completely; then there is no contradiction and hence no conflict.
让我们换种方式来说。我们总是在比较实然和应然。应然是一种我们认为我们应该是什么样子的投射（projection）。当有比较的时候，矛盾就存在，不仅仅是与某物或某人的矛盾，还有与你昨天是什么样子的矛盾，因而在已然（what has been）和实然之间就有冲突。仅当完全没有比较的时候，才有实然，而要与实然共处，就是要处于平和。那么你就可以毫不分心地将你的全部注意力放在你的内在的实然上 －－ 不管这实然是绝望、丑陋、残忍、恐惧、焦虑还是孤独 －－ 完全地与之共处；此时，就没有了矛盾，因而也没有了冲突。
But all the time we are comparing ourselves - with those who are richer or more brilliant, more intellectual, more affectionate, more famous, more this and more that. The `more' plays an extraordinarily important part in our lives; this measuring ourselves all the time against something or someone is one of the primary causes of conflict.
但是我们随时都在比较我们自己 －－ 与更富有的人、更聪明的人、更理性的人、更感性的人、更出名的人，更这样或更那样的人比较。“更”在我们的生活中扮演着极为重要的角色；这种随时将我们与某物或某人进行的度量，就是冲突的一个主要导因。
Now why is there any comparison at all? Why do you compare yourself with another? This comparison has been taught from childhood. In every school A is compared with B, and A destroys himself in order to be like B. When you do not compare at all, when there is no ideal, no opposite, no factor of duality, when you no longer struggle to be different from what you are - what has happened to your mind? Your mind has ceased to create the opposite and has become highly intelligent, highly sensitive, capable of immense passion, because effort is a dissipation of passion - passion which is vital energy - and you cannot do anything without passion.
那么到底为什么会有比较呢？你为什么会拿自己与别人比较？这种比较是从儿时被教育的。在每个学校中，A都会被与B相比，而A为了跟B一样，他毁灭了自己。当你完全不比较的时候，当没有理想、没有对立面、没有二元要素，当你不再挣扎着要与你的本来样子不同 －－ 你的心智会发生什么？你的心智不再创造对立面了，变得高度理性、高度敏感、拥有巨大的激情，因为努力是对激情的一种消耗 －－ 激情就是生命力 －－ 而没有激情你什么也做不了。
If you do not compare yourself with another you will be what you are. Through comparison you hope to evolve, to grow, to become more intelligent, more beautiful. But will you? The fact is what you are, and by comparing you are fragmenting the fact which is a waste of energy. To see what you actually are without any comparison gives you tremendous energy to look. When you can look at yourself without comparison you are beyond comparison, which does not mean that the mind is stagnant with contentment. So we see in essence how the mind wastes energy which is so necessary to understand the totality of life.
如果你不与别人比较，你就成为了你的本来样子。通过比较，你希望进化、成长，变得更理性、更美丽。但是会吗？事实是你的本来样子，而通过比较你片段化了事实，这就是能量的浪费。通过没有比较地看到你真正的样子，给了你巨大的能量去看。当你没有比较地看你自己的时候，你超越了比较，但这并不意味着心智因满足而停滞了。故你从根本上看到了心智是如何浪费能量的，这一点对于理解生活的整体十分必要。
I don't want to know with whom I am in conflict; I don't want to know the peripheral conflicts of my being. What I want to know is why conflict should exist at all. When I put that question to myself I see a fundamental issue which has nothing to do with peripheral conflicts and their solutions. I am concerned with the central issue and I see - perhaps you see also? - that the very nature of desire, if not properly understood, must inevitably lead to conflict. Desire is always in contradiction. I desire contradictory things - which doesn't mean that I must destroy desire, suppress, control or sublimate it - I simply see that desire itself is contradictory. It is not the objects of desire but the very nature of desire which is contradictory. And I have to understand the nature of desire before I can understand conflict. In ourselves we are in a state of contradiction, and that state of contradiction is brought about by desire - desire being the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, which we have already been into.
我不想知道我与谁有冲突；我不想知道我存在的外围冲突。我想知道的是冲突为什么会存在。当我拿这个问题问我自己的时候，我看到一个基本问题，这个问题与外围的冲突及其解决毫无关系。我关心的是核心的问题，而我看到 －－ 可能你也看到了？ －－ 我看到欲望的真正本质，如果没有正确地理解，必然不可避免地导致冲突。欲望总是矛盾的。我对矛盾的事物有欲望 －－ 这我并不意味着我必须摧毁、压抑、控制或升华欲望 －－ 我只是看到欲望本身是矛盾的。矛盾的不是欲望的对象，而是欲望的本质。而在我能够理解冲突之前，我得理解欲望的本质。我们的内在是矛盾的状态，而这个矛盾的状态是欲望造成的 －－ 欲望是对快乐的追求和对痛苦的逃避，这一点我们已经研究过了。
So we see desire as the root of all contradiction - wanting something and not wanting it - a dual activity. When we do something pleasurable there is no effort involved at all, is there? But pleasure brings pain and then there is a struggle to avoid the pain, and that again is a dissipation of energy. Why do we have duality at all? There is, of course, duality in nature - man and woman, light and shade, night and day - but inwardly, psychologically, why do we have duality? Please think this out with me, don't wait for me to tell you. You have to exercise your own mind to find out. My words are merely a mirror in which to observe yourself. Why do we have this psychological duality? Is it that we have been brought up always to compare what is' with what should be'? We have been conditioned in what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is bad, what is moral and what is immoral. Has this duality come into being because we believe that thinking about the opposite of violence, the opposite of envy, of jealousy, of meanness, will help us to get rid of those things? Do we use the opposite as a lever to get rid of what is? Or is it an escape from the actual?
故我们看到了欲望是所有矛盾的根源 －－ 想要某物和（同时）不想要它 －－ 一个两面的活动。当我们做某种令我们快乐的事情的时候，其中完全没有努力，是不是？但是快乐带来了痛苦，然后就有了避免痛苦的挣扎，而这又一次变成了能量的消耗。我们到底为什么有二元性呢？当然，在自然中存在二元性 －－ 男人和女人、光明和阴暗、黑夜和白天 －－ 但是内在的、心理上，我们为什么会有二元性呢？请跟我一起想清楚这个问题，不要等待我告诉你。你必须练习你的心智来弄清楚。我的话只是一面镜子，你从中可以观察你自己。我们为什么有这种心理的二元性呢？是不是我们从小就总是被教育把实然和应然相比较？我们被限制在什么是对的和什么是错的、什么是好的什么是坏的、什么是道德的什么是不道德的之中了。这种二元性是否因为我们相信，只要考虑暴力的对立面、羡慕的对立面、妒忌的对立面、自私的对立面，就能帮助我们摆脱这些东西？我们是否在使用对立面作为杠杆（手段）来摆脱实然？或者是否是对现实的逃避？
Do you use the opposite as a means of avoiding the actual which you don't know how to deal with? Or is it because you have been told by thousands of years of propaganda that you must have an ideal - the opposite of what is' - in order to cope with the present? When you have an ideal you think it helps you to get rid of what is', but it never does. You may preach non-violence for the rest of your life and all the time be sowing the seeds of violence.
你是否使用对立面作为一种手段来避免那些你不知如何处理的现实？或者是否因为你曾被几千年来的宣传告知，为了应对眼下，你必须有一种理想 －－ 实然的对立面？当你有了理想，你就认为它会帮助你摆脱实然，但事实上它办不到。你或许下半辈子都在宣扬非暴力，而实际上只是在播种暴力的种子。
You have a concept of what you should be and how you should act, and all the time you are in fact acting quite differently; so you see that principles, beliefs and ideals must inevitably lead to hypocrisy and a dishonest life. It is the ideal that creates the opposite to what is, so if you know how to be with `what is', then the opposite is not necessary.
你拥有对于应然和应为（how you should act）的概念，而事实上你做的却相当不同；故你看到，原则、信仰、理想都不可避免地必然导致伪善和不诚实的生活。正是理想，创造了实然的对立面，故如果你知道如何与实然共处，实然的对立面就不是必要的了。
Trying to become like somebody else, or like your ideal, is one of the main causes of contradiction, confusion conflict. A mind that is confused, whatever it does, at any level, will remain confused; any action born of confusion leads to further confusion. I see this very clearly; I see it as clearly as I see an immediate physical danger. So what happens? I cease to act in terms of confusion any more. Therefore inaction is complete action.
试图变得像其他人，或者像你的理想，是矛盾和困惑冲突的一个主要导因。困惑的心智，不管做什么、在任何层次，都仍然困惑；由困惑而生的任何行动都导致了进一步的困惑。这一点我看得非常清楚；就像看到直接的身体危险一样清楚。那么发生了什么？我不再出于困惑而行动了。因而不行动（inaction）就是完整的行动。