教育的真正意義是自我了解赫舒。你是什么羊娃，世界就是什么唐全。
——克里希那穆提
克里希那穆提（1895—1986）是二十世紀(jì)最卓越的靈性導(dǎo)師，天生具足多樣神通蕊玷。十四歲時(shí)學(xué)會(huì)領(lǐng)養(yǎng)邮利，被通神學(xué)會(huì)認(rèn)為是東方的彌勒佛下生，并且認(rèn)為他就是這個(gè)再來的世師垃帅。
1925年悟道以后延届，為了保持教誨的獨(dú)立無染、排除救世主的形象贸诚，毅然脫離了"通神學(xué)會(huì)"方庭，解散了專為他設(shè)立的"世界明星社"厕吉，并宣布真理乃"無路之國(guó)"，任何一種形式化的宗教械念、哲學(xué)头朱、宗派都無法一窺究竟。此后的一生订讼，別人一直要給他上師的尊位髓窜，他都一直拒絕。而他成道后的長(zhǎng)達(dá)半世紀(jì)的宣講工作欺殿，卻不斷吸引全世界各地的人士寄纵，但是他一直宣布他不是權(quán)威，而且演講永遠(yuǎn)像單對(duì)單的講話一樣脖苏。他一直對(duì)世人講話程拭，一直到1986年過世，享年90歲棍潘。他的60冊(cè)以上的著作恃鞋，全是從空性流露的演講集和講話集結(jié)而成，目前已譯成了47國(guó)語言亦歉，在歐美恤浪、印度及澳洲也都有推動(dòng)他志業(yè)和理念的基金會(huì)和學(xué)校。
如果我批評(píng)你，那是在了解你嗎？
首先奶甘，我們?yōu)槭裁磁u(píng)？是為了了解砂客？還是純粹是在嘮叨？如果我批評(píng)你呵恢，那是在了解你嗎鞠值？了解來自評(píng)判嗎？如果我想了解渗钉，如果我不只想要一種泛泛的了解彤恶，而是想深度了解你我關(guān)系的全部意義，我會(huì)開始批評(píng)你嗎晌姚？還是我會(huì)覺察你我的關(guān)系粤剧，靜靜地觀察它——不投射我的觀點(diǎn)、批評(píng)挥唠、判斷、認(rèn)同或責(zé)備焕议，而是靜靜地觀察正在發(fā)生的一切宝磨？
First of all, why do we criticize? Is it in order to understand? Or is it merely a nagging process? If I criticize you, do I understand you? Does understanding come through judgement? If I want to comprehend, if I want to understand not superficially but deeply the whole significance of my relationship to you, do I begin to criticize you? Or am I aware of this relationship between you and me, silently observing it - not projecting my opinions, criticisms, judgement, identifications or condemnations, but silently observing what is happening?
我們要是不批評(píng)弧关，那會(huì)怎樣？我們會(huì)陷入沉睡唤锉，不是嗎世囊？這并不表示我們嘮叨的時(shí)候就不會(huì)睡著。也許那會(huì)變成一個(gè)習(xí)慣窿祥，通過習(xí)慣我們就催眠了自己株憾。通過批評(píng)，我們會(huì)對(duì)關(guān)系產(chǎn)生更深晒衩、更廣的了解嗎嗤瞎？批評(píng)是破壞性還是建設(shè)性，并不重要——那顯然是相對(duì)而言的听系。因此問題就是：“頭腦和心靈要處于怎樣的狀態(tài)贝奇，才能獲得對(duì)關(guān)系的了解？”
And if I do not criticize, what happens? One is apt to go to sleep, is one not? Which does not mean that we do not go to sleep if we are nagging. Perhaps that becomes a habit and we put ourselves to sleep through habit. Is there a deeper, wider understanding of relationship, through criticism? It doesn't matter whether criticism is constructive or destructive - that is irrelevant, surely. Therefore the question is: "What is the necessary state of mind and heart that will understand relationship?"
了解的過程是怎樣的靠胜？我們?cè)鯓恿私馐挛锏敉磕阍鯓恿私饽愕暮⒆樱绻銓?duì)自己的孩子感興趣的話浪漠？你會(huì)觀察陕习，不是嗎？你在他游戲時(shí)觀察他址愿，研究他各種情緒下的狀態(tài)该镣；你不會(huì)將你的觀點(diǎn)投射在他身上。你不會(huì)說他應(yīng)該這樣應(yīng)該那樣必盖。你會(huì)敏銳地觀察拌牲，不是嗎？然后歌粥，你也許就開始了解那個(gè)孩子了塌忽。如果你不停地批評(píng)，不斷地灌輸你自己的個(gè)性失驶、你的特質(zhì)土居、你的觀點(diǎn)，為他做出各種應(yīng)該不應(yīng)該的決定嬉探，如此等等擦耀，顯然你就在關(guān)系中制造了障礙。
What is the process of understanding? How do we understand something? How do you understand your child, if you are interested in your child? You observe, don't you? You watch him at play, you study him in his different moods; you don't project your opinion on to him. You don't say he should be this or that. You are alertly watchful, aren't you? Then, perhaps, you begin to understand the child. If you are constantly criticizing, constantly injecting your own particular persparticular personality, your idiosyncrasies, your opinions, deciding the way he should or should not be, and all the rest of it, obviously you create a barrier in that relationship.
了解的過程是怎樣的涩堤？我們?cè)鯓恿私馐挛锞祢眩磕阍鯓恿私饽愕暮⒆樱绻銓?duì)自己的孩子感興趣的話胎围？你會(huì)觀察吁系，不是嗎德召？你在他游戲時(shí)觀察他，研究他各種情緒下的狀態(tài)汽纤；你不會(huì)將你的觀點(diǎn)投射在他身上上岗。你不會(huì)說他應(yīng)該這樣應(yīng)該那樣。你會(huì)敏銳地觀察蕴坪，不是嗎肴掷？然后，你也許就開始了解那個(gè)孩子了背传。如果你不停地批評(píng)呆瞻，不斷地灌輸你自己的個(gè)性、你的特質(zhì)续室、你的觀點(diǎn)栋烤，為他做出各種應(yīng)該不應(yīng)該的決定，如此等等挺狰，顯然你就在關(guān)系中制造了障礙明郭。
不幸的是，大多數(shù)人批評(píng)就是為了塑造丰泊，為了干涉薯定。與丈夫的關(guān)系，與孩子的關(guān)系瞳购，不管與誰话侄，在關(guān)系中塑造他人，給了我們某種樂趣学赛、某種滿足年堆。你在其中享受某種權(quán)力，你就是老板盏浇，這當(dāng)中有著巨大的滿足变丧。顯然，那整個(gè)過程中绢掰，不存在對(duì)關(guān)系的了解痒蓬。那當(dāng)中只有強(qiáng)加，只有塑造他人的欲望滴劲，讓他人符合你的特質(zhì)攻晒、你的需要、你的期待班挖。這一切都阻礙了對(duì)關(guān)系的了解鲁捏，不是嗎？
Unfortunately most of us criticize in order to shape, in order to interfere; it gives us a certain amount of pleasure, a certain gratification, to shape something - the relationship with a husband, child or whoever it may be. You feel a sense of power in it, you are the boss, and in that there is a tremendous gratification. Surely through all that process there is no understanding of relationship. There is mere imposition, the desire to mould another to the particular pattern of your idiosyncrasy, your desire, your wish. All these prevent - do they not? - the understanding of relationship.
接下來還有自我批評(píng)萧芙。對(duì)自己不滿碴萧，批評(píng)自己乙嘀、責(zé)備自己末购，或者為自己辯護(hù)——那能讓你了解自己?jiǎn)崞朴鳎咳绻议_始批評(píng)自己，不就限制了探究和了解的過程盟榴？自我反省——即一種自我批評(píng)的形式曹质，那披露了自我嗎？什么能讓自我披露擎场？不斷地分析羽德、恐懼、批評(píng)——顯然那無助于披露迅办。
Then there is self-criticism. To be critical of oneself, to criticize, condemn, or justify oneself - does that bring understanding of oneself? When I begin to criticize myself, do I not limit the process of understanding, of exploring? Does introspection, a form of self-criticism, unfold the self? What makes the unfoldment of the self possible? To be constantly analytical, fearful, critical - surely that does not help to unfold.
不斷地覺察自我宅静，不帶絲毫責(zé)備、絲毫認(rèn)同站欺，那才能披露自我姨夹，才能開始了解自我。必須有某種自發(fā)性矾策；你不能一直分析它磷账、規(guī)訓(xùn)它、塑造它贾虽。這種自發(fā)性對(duì)于了解是必要的逃糟。如果我只是限制、控制蓬豁、指責(zé)绰咽，就阻斷了思想和情感的活動(dòng)，不是嗎地粪？只有在思想和情感的活動(dòng)中取募，我才能有所發(fā)現(xiàn)——只是控制是不會(huì)有發(fā)現(xiàn)的。
What brings about the unfoldment of the self so that you begin to understand it is the constant awareness of it without any condemnation, without any identification. There must be a certain spontaneity; you cannot be constantly analysing it, disciplining it, shaping it. This spontaneity is essential to understanding. If I merely limit, control, condemn, then I put a stop to the movement of thought and feeling, do I not? It is in the movement of thought and feeling that I discover - not in mere control.
