第七章 · 秩序、结束依赖、不再比较

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.

暴力的息止，我们刚刚一直在考虑的，并不意味着一种能跟自己和谐相处进而能在它所有的关系中和谐共处的内心状态。

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.

人与人之间的关系是基于画面的生成和防御的机制。在我们所有的关系中，我们中的每一个人构建了关于另一方的一个画面，这两个画面之间的关系，不是人与人的关系。

妻子脑海中有丈夫的一个画面——或许人没有意识到，但事情就是这样——同时，丈夫脑海中也有一个妻子的画面。一个人心中有他的国家和他自己的画面，我们总是不断的给画面喂料来巩固它们。正是这些画面之间存在关系。

当画面形成的时候，两个人或多个人之间真正的关系就完全停止了。

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.

基于画面的关系显然无法在关系中带来和谐，因为画面是虚构的，一个人不是生活在抽象中。然而这就是我们都在做的事情：活在想法里，活在理论里，符号里，图像里，这些都是我们基于自己和他人创造的，没有一点现实意义。我们所有的关系，无论是和财产的，和想法的，还是和人的，都是基于这种画面构成，因此总是存在冲突。

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?

那么有没有可能跟我们自己，以及在我们所有的关系中跟他者和谐共处呢？毕竟，人生就是关系中的动态，要不然人生不存在，如果人生是基于一个抽象，一个想法，一个臆测，那么这样的抽象人生不可避免地让关系成为战场。

所以，人有没有可能过一个内在完全有序的人生，没有任何形式的强迫、效仿、压制或自我美化？一个人可以给他的内心带来这种秩序吗? 一种鲜活的品质，不被任何想法的框架所框限——一种内心的平静，任何时刻都没有扰动——不是在一些荒唐的神秘的抽象世界，而是在家和办公室的日常生活中？

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.

我想我们应该仔细的思考一下这个问题，因为在我们的意识中，冲突无处不在。在我们所有的关系中，无论是最亲密的人，还是跟邻居、跟社会，冲突都存在——冲突意味着矛盾，一种划分、隔离、二元性的状态。观察我们自己以及我们跟社会的关系，我们发现，在我们生活的各个层面都存在冲突——小的或者大的冲突，带来了非常肤浅的回应或是致命的后果。

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.

人类已经接受了冲突是日常生活的一部分，因为他已经接受了竞争、嫉妒、贪婪、占有和好斗，作为一种通行的生活方式。当我们接受这样一种生活方式，我们也就接受了社会构架原本的样子，活在这种体面的模式中。这是我们大多数人被困的地方，因为他们极其渴望受尊敬。

当我们审视自己的内心，思考方式，感受的方式，和在日常生活中我们是怎么做的，我们观察到，只要我们去遵循社会的模式，生活必定变成挣扎。如果我们不接受——没有一个虔诚的人会接受这样的社会——那么我们就完全从社会心理构架中摆脱。

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.

我们中的大多数人脑子里塞满了社会的各种东西。社会在我们身上创造的，以及我们在自己身上创造的是贪婪、羡慕、愤怒、憎恨、嫉妒、焦虑——我们富含这些。

全世界各种宗教都在宣扬清贫。僧人穿上袍子，换个名字，剃度，进入一个小房间，宣誓清贫和贞洁；在东方社会，他有一块遮羞布，一块袍子，一天吃一顿饭——我们都对这样的清贫充满敬意。但是这些人穿着象征清贫的袍子，而内在地、心理上依然富含社会的东西，因为他们依然在寻找位置和威望，他们属于这个等级或者那个等级，这个宗教或者那个宗教，他们依然生活在文化和传统的划分中。这不是清贫。

清贫是（在精神上）完全地从社会中解脱，尽管一个人可能有多几件衣服，多几顿饭——天呐，谁管这些呢？但是不幸的是，在大多数人心里，都有一种表现主义的冲动。

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.

当这颗心从社会中解脱，清贫变成了一个绝美的东西。一个人必须内在变得清贫，因为那时不再有寻求，不再追问，没有欲望，什么也没有。只有这种内在的清贫才可以看到人生的真相，那种人生一点冲突也没有。这样的人生是一种祝福，不曾在任何的教堂或者寺庙找到。

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.

有没有可能让我们自己从社会心理构架中解脱出来，也就是让我们脱离冲突的本质？解决一些零散的冲突并不难，但我们在问自己，有没有可能活在一种完全的、由内而外的平静中？这不意味着我们变成植物人或者停滞。正相反，我们将变得充满活力，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.

能够理解和解脱于任何问题，我们需要大量的热情和能量，不仅仅是身体上和智识上的能量，还有一种不依赖于任何动机、任何心理刺激或药物的能量。如果我们依赖于任何的刺激物，那么刺激物将让大脑变得迟钝和不敏锐。

通过服用某些形式的药物，我们可能暂时找到足够的能量来清晰地看事情，但是我们很快就回到了之前的状态（药物失效之后），因此我们开始越来越依赖于那种药物。

所以，所有的刺激，无论是信仰的、酒精的、药物的、书面的、还是口头的文字，将不可避免地带来依赖，那个依赖阻止我们看清自己，因此阻止我们有这个能量（一种不依赖于任何动机、任何心理刺激或药物的能量）。

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，我们都在心理上依赖某些东西。为什么我们依赖？为什么有一种冲动去依赖？我们是一起踏上这个旅程，而不是你在等我来告诉你，你依赖的原因。如果我们能够一起探寻，我们都会各自发现，因而那种发现是属于你的，因此，你的发现意味着你的深刻领悟，这将给你带来活力。

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.

我发现我自己依赖于一些事情——比方说，观众，能够刺激我。我从那些观众中，从面向一大群人讲述中，获得一种能量。因此我依赖于那些观众，依赖于那些人，无论他们同意还是不同意。他们越不同意，他们越给我带来活力。如果他们同意，一切就变得肤浅、空洞。

所以，我发现我需要观众，因为向他们发言是一件很刺激的事情。那为什么呢？为什么我依赖？因为在我内心深处，我很肤浅，我什么也没有；在我内心里，没有一种总是饱满、丰富、充满活力和生气的源泉。所以我依赖，我已经找到了原因。

（译注：克举这个例子，因为他有大量的面向大众的讲话，所以，某个时刻，这个想法的移动，让他去询问自己，自己是否依赖听众。这个例子和他自己有关系。但实际上，他发现，他压根就不依赖于听众，因为这样一个状态，饱满、丰富、充满活力和生气，不可能依赖。这个例子中的“我”不是克，但确实指出了很多所谓的演说家的自我欺骗。但这个例子的确和克的生活有关系，请大家体会这个想法的移动。）

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.

但是发现原因能让我从依赖中解脱吗？（译注：克的这段话在指向那些自我分析的套路，全是想法，想法不可能让一个人从依赖中解脱。）原因的发现只是智识上的，所以很显然，这不能让内心从依赖中解脱。

仅仅是智识上接受一个想法，或者在情感上，默认接受了某种意识形态，都不能让内心摆脱对那些能给它带来刺激的东西的依赖。（译注：“我”在意识上接受这个依赖的原因，那这依然是想法，这跟看到实际上在发生什么——什么导致了依赖，是两码事。）

能让内心从依赖中摆脱的，是看到刺激和依赖的整个构架和本质，看到那种依赖是如何让内心变得愚蠢、迟钝和懒散。看清依赖的整体本身让内心解脱。

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.

所以我必须得探索全然地看意味着什么。只要我从某个特定的观点，或者我看重的某个特别的经历来看待生活，或者从我所搜集的一些特定的知识来看，也就是我的背景，也就是“我”，我就无法全然地观察人生。

智识上、口头上，通过分析，我已经发现了我依赖的原因，但是无论想法探究什么，不可避免的，肯定是不完整的，所以只有当想法不干涉的时候，我才能看到事物的整体性。

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.

那么我看到了我依赖的这个事实，我看到了实际上是什么。没有任何的喜欢或不喜欢，我看到了它，我不想摆脱那种依赖，或者从它的原因中摆脱出来。

我观察它，这种观察存在的时候，我看到了整个画面，不是画面的一部分，而当那内心看到了整个画面，自由便来了。现在，我发现当存在片段的时候，便存在能量的耗散。我已经找到了能量耗散的那个源泉。

（译注：内心有分裂division，就有片段fragmentation，它们是一回事。）

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.

你可能会想如果你效仿，接受权威，依赖僧人、仪式、教条、政党或者某个意识形态，不存在能量耗散。但是跟随或者接受一个意识形态，无论是好还是坏，无论神圣与否，总是一个片段式的活动，因而引起冲突，只要在“应该是什么”和“是什么”之间存在划分，冲突不可避免的产生，任何的冲突都是一种能量的耗散。

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.

如果你问自己：“我怎么才能够从冲突中解脱？”那么你正在创造另外一个问题，因此你在增加冲突，然而如果你仅仅去清晰地、直接地观察冲突，作为一个事实——就像你看某个具体的事物 ，那么你就会在本质上理解不含有任何冲突的生活的真谛。

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.

我们换种方式来表达。我们总是拿“我们此刻是什么”跟“我们应该是什么”来比较。“应该是”是我们认为的我们应当成为什么的投射。只要有比较，矛盾就存在，不仅是跟某物或某人比较，也跟昨天的你比较，因此在“过去曾经是”和 “现在是什么”之间存在冲突。

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.

当完全没有比较的时候，只有 “当下是什么”，跟“是什么”共处，就是平静。那样你才可以全然地关注你当下的状态，没有任何分心——无论那种状态是绝望、丑陋、残忍、恐惧、焦虑还是孤独——完全地跟当下共处，那时没有任何的矛盾，因此没有任何的冲突。

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.

但是我们总是在拿我们自己跟更富有的或者更聪明的，更有学识的，更有爱心的，更有名的，更这样、更那样的人比较。“更”在我们的生活中起到了一个极其重要的作用。这种一直基于某事或者某人来衡量我们自己，是产生冲突的主要原因之一。

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.

那么为什么会存在比较？为什么你拿自己跟别人比较？这种比较从小就被灌输。在每一个学校，A 被拿来和B 比较；A为了像 B，把自己摧毁。

当你一点都不比较的时候，当没有理想，没有对立面，没有二元性¹，当你不再挣扎着变得跟你现在不一样——你的心发生了怎样的变化？这颗心停止了生出对立面，变得极其智慧，高度敏锐，充满了热情，因为努力是对热情的消耗——热情就是一种充满活力的能量——没有热情，你无法做事情。

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.

如果你不跟其他人比，那你将做你自己。通过比较，你希望能够进化，成长，变得更聪明，更漂亮。但你会吗？你此刻的状态是事实，但通过比较，你分割了事实，这就是一种能量的浪费。能够不通过比较来看到你实际的样子，给你带来了巨大的能量去看。

当你能够没有比较地观察自己，你无与伦比，这不意味着内心停滞于自我满足。而是我们从本质上看清内心是如何浪费能量，这对理解人生的全部是很有必要的。

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.

我不想知道我跟谁有冲突，我不想知道我的外围冲突。我想知道的是为什么存在冲突。当我问自己这个问题的时候，我看到了一个底层问题，跟外围的冲突和它们的解决方案无关。

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.

我关心的是核心问题，我看到了 —— 或许你也看到了 —— 欲望的本质如果不能被合适地理解，必然会导致冲突。欲望总是自相矛盾。我渴望自相矛盾的东西 —— 这不意味着我必须得摧毁欲望，压制、控制，或者升华它 —— 我仅仅是看到欲望本身是自相矛盾的。不是欲望的宾语，而是欲望本身是自相矛盾的。

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.

在我理解冲突之前，我得理解欲望的本质。我们内心处在一种矛盾的状态，那个矛盾的状态是由欲望导致的 —— 想要追逐愉悦和避免痛苦，这些话题我们已经探寻过了。

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.

所以我们看到欲望是所有矛盾的根源 —— 想要和不想要 —— 一种二元的活动。当我们做一些令人愉悦的事情，没有任何的努力，对吗？但愉悦带来痛苦，而避免痛苦是一种挣扎，这又是能量的耗散。

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.

为什么我们有二元性呢？当然，在自然里面，存在二元性 —— 男人和女人，光和影，夜和日 —— 但内在的，心理上，为什么我们有二元性？请跟我一起思考出答案，不要等着我来告诉你。你得操练你自己的大脑来找到答案。我的话只是用来观察你的一面镜子。

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?

为什么我们有心理上的二元性 ² ？是来自我们被教育的总是拿“是什么”跟“应该是什么”比较？我们已经条件依赖于各种是是非非，好与坏，道德与不道德。这些二元性的产生是因为我们相信，思考暴力的对立面，羡慕、嫉妒、吝啬的对立面，将会帮我们摆脱这些？我们在用对立面作为杠杆来摆脱此刻是什么（what is）？或者说对现实的一种逃避？

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.

你是否在用对立面来回避那些你不知如何应对的现实？或是因为数千年的各种宣传告诉你，你得有理想 —— 此时此刻的对立面 —— 为了能够应付当下？当你有一个理想，你认为它能帮你摆脱当下，但这不可能。你可以用你的余生宣讲非暴力，但可能一直在散播暴力的种子。

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.

你有一个“你应该是什么，应该如何做”的概念，但一直以来，你实际在做的非常不一样；所以你看到，原则、信仰和理想不可避免地带来伪善和虚伪的人生。正是“理想”制造了“当下”的对立面，所以如果你知道如何跟当下相处，那么对立面就没有必要。

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.

努力变成其他人，或你的理想，是矛盾、困惑、冲突的主要原因之一。一个困惑的心，无论它做什么，在任何层面都是困惑；任何基于困惑的行动会导致进一步的困惑。对此我看得很清楚，就像我看到了一个即刻的物理危险。所以会发生什么呢？在困惑中，这颗心停止了所有的“为”，因此无为是完整的行动。³

————

曼谛注：

¹ 没有二元性，即没有分裂，没有独立，详见曼谛词条“分裂”。“二元性”这个词压根不重要，关键是看到这个词指向什么。这是一个来自“西方”的语汇，现在这个思维全世界都普遍，比如，身、心，这样说出来就有一种分裂感，这种表述方式本身是一个失序。

或者说，在整个西方的意识里，大家对duality很熟悉，这个在中文语汇中，谈得很少。但当下的中国意识，也都是这个东西。

² “二元性”，不要被“二”这个数字困惑，不一则二，这颗心只要不在“一”里，就都属于“二”的范畴了。一就是完整，一即是全，全即是一。

二元是怎么发生的？一旦这颗心有追逐，追逐意味着愉悦；没有愉悦，大脑不会追逐。这样一个状态，已经意味着这颗心有了偏好，追逐自己喜欢的，排斥不喜欢的——这本身意味着“我”的活动，意味着这颗心不在当下了。

³ 在困惑中，这颗心的任何行动，只是加深困惑。这颗心始终都要无为，即全然观察 / full attention，大脑不再使劲，即刻看到所有想法的移动，即无为。

这个无为，就是让大脑从当前以“我”为中心的视角中跳出来。彻变就在这里，和时间、知识没关系。

“我”制造了“为”，“为”制造了“我”。

“为”是各种的心理动作，比较、评判、羡慕、嫉妒、排斥、拒绝、回避……整个基于追逐愉悦和排斥痛苦的心理动作，都是“为”，仔细看看，排斥痛苦本身也是愉悦，所以最终，“为”就是愉悦，愉悦就是“为”。息止对愉悦的追逐，即无为。