本文由【艾扬格瑜伽】授权转载
Prashantji自4月8日即哈奴曼敬拜日起，在Youtube网站上发布系列线上瑜伽教育视频，目前已更新六讲，此为第五讲。
现在，让我们开始聆听普尚吉语。
Lesson 5 第五讲
（以下为视频翻译中英文对照稿）
Namaska, all of you!
Today we are in the fifth session. Today I want to add something to yamas and niyamas which we discussed last time.
大家好，今天我们进行第五讲，今天我想针对上次讨论的yamas和niyamas做一些补充。
The moral-ethical principles come to work while we are in social reference, and therefore as I said, yoga is not having any social reference, you’re totally internalised, personalised ‘inwordly’. Then where is the field for practising morality-ethicality, which is something on the plane of behavior. That’s a face value of a person. If we speak to, refer to morality-ethicality, that is the face value for a person; we really don’t need face value while we are in spiritual practices, adhyatmic practices, yogic practices.
道德和伦理准则是我们参照社会环境时才发挥作用的，因此我说瑜伽并没有参照任何社会准则，你“非世间”地、全然地在实现内化、个性化。因此，言行举止层面上的东西存在于道德-伦理的奉行之地。那里是人的“面值”问题，如果我们在论及、参照道德-伦理的时候，其实是在论及和参照人的“面子价值”；而我们在精神的修为当中、在灵性的修行当中、在瑜伽化的修为当中，真的不需要面子工程。
Then the other point is, usually we all claim that we are morally-ethically strong compared to someone else, so we have this relativity concept with morality-ethicality. With regards to others, we are critical, and we tend to assess them in their morality and ethicality; while we deem ourselves that we are morally-ethically strong.
继而，另一点是，通常我们会声称，与其他人相比，在道德-伦理观上，我们会更强。因此，我们就有了道德-伦理上的相对感念。当涉及到其他人的时候，我们就会很挑剔，我们会趋向于在他们的道德伦理上说三道四进行评判；同时，我们自诩自己在道德伦理方面很强。
The morality and ethicality need aspects. One more thing to understand here is that if you are not committing ‘himsa’, that dosen’t mean that you are in ‘ahimsa’; if you are not indulging in ‘asatya’, it doesn’t mean that you are in ‘satya’.
道德伦理需要方方面面。在此要理解的另外一点是，如果你认为你没有犯下“暴力”之行，那不意味着你 “非暴力”；如果你没有执着于“不诚实”，那不意味着你“诚实”。
Like if somebody is not a bad person, it doesn’t mean he is a good person; or if somebody is not a good person, that doesn’t mean he is a bad person. A good parson must be a good person, a good person will be a good person, and bad person will be a bad person. Not being bad is not being good, not being good is not being bad.
就像是说，某人不是个坏人，那不意味着他就是个好人；或如果说，某人不是个好人，那不意味着他就是个坏人。好人一定是个好人，好人终将是个好人，坏人终将是个坏人。不坏并非好，不好并非坏。
So not being un-ethical, there’s no ground to claim that you are ethical; not being immoral, there’s no ground for you to claim that you are moral, that you are in morality.
因此，没有违反伦理，也没有理由声称你就符合伦理；没有不道德，也没有理由声称你就是道德的、你在道德当中。
Morality is morality, ethicality is ethicality, un-ethicality is unethicality; not in un-ethicality doesn’t mean that you are ethical; not being immoral, it doesn’t mean that you are moral.
道德就是道德，伦理就是伦理，不合伦理就是不合伦理；没有违背伦理，不代表你符合了伦理；没有不道德，不代表你遵守了道德。
Like somebody not ugly doesn’t mean the person is handsome or beautiful; somebody not beautiful, doesn’t mean the person is ugly. So, with reference to this moral-ethical principles, we would have to understand, there’s one more perspective there, dimension there.
就像是说，某人不丑，那不意味着这个人就英俊或漂亮；某人不漂亮，那也不意味着这个人必丑无疑。因此，在参照这个道德伦理准则的时候，我们终将会明白，其实在那里还需要再加一个视角、加一个维度。
Now, if we claim that we are practising ‘ahimsa’, ‘satya’, ‘asteya’. Somebody might be a good person, and therefore we say he’s in ‘ahimsa’, he’s in ‘satya’, he doesn’t take recourse to ‘asatya’, doesn’t take recourse to ‘himsa’, doesn’t take recourse to antagonizers. But one more point to reinforce the earlier statement that Patanjali is not dealing with moral-ethical principles, but ‘ethico-religious principles’. Why is it?
现在，假如我们声称我们在奉行“非暴力”、“诚实”、“不偷盗”的原则，那么某人可能是个好人，因此我们就说，他处于“非暴力”当中，他处于“诚实”当中，他没有诉诸于“偷盗”之行、没有诉诸于“暴力”之行、没有投靠敌对势力。但是还有一点，需要去强化之前课程里的声明，即帕坦伽利所论及的不是道德伦理的准则，而是“道德-宗教的准则”，为何会如此呢？
Suppose we are practising ‘ahimsa’, if we think we’re in ‘ahimsa’, and we don’t indulge in‘himsa’, we are not, definitely not in a vow of ‘ahimsa’. If somebody is a good person, the person has not taken a vow to be good, a person is merely good; If a person is a noble person, the person is noble because he is noble, it’s not that the person has taken vow of nobility. Whereas Patanjali immediately embarks upon the topic of ‘vratas’, or ‘vows’, either atomic vows, or great vows. That is why that in dharma, in his 5 principles, or 10 principles, yamas and niyamas, that’s something like vows.
假如，我们都遵守了“非暴力原则”，我们认定我们处于“非暴力”当中、我们没有执着于“暴力”当中，那么我们就没有、确定性地没有在“非暴力”的誓言当中。如果某人是个好人，这个人无需发个誓去做好人，这个人单纯地本就是个好人；如果一个人是个高尚的人，这个人是因为他高尚而高尚，而不是因为这个人发了高尚的誓。帕坦伽利反而直接就点到了‘vratas’（“誓”）这个概念，不论是小誓还是大誓。那就是为何在dharma中，在他的yamas和niyamas的五条准则、十条戒律中，那其实是类似于“誓”的东西。
It is not just practising ‘satya’, practising ‘ahimsa’, practising ‘brahmarcharya’, practicing ‘asteya’, practicing ‘sauca’, practicing ‘santosa’, ‘tapa’, etc. it’s not just practice; if you are practising, that is not sufficient, and that is not what Patanjali has mentioned. He expects that to be of ‘vrata’, ‘vrata’ means ‘vow’, that is how it is rendered into English which doesn’t have proper connotation, filtering out to lackage of English.
它不仅是在修行“诚实”、修行“非暴力”、修行“节制”、修行“不偷盗”、修行“净化”、修行“满足”、“苦练”等等原则，它不仅是原则的遵循；如果你是在遵守，那还不够，而且那还不是帕坦伽利在此所提及的，他期望的是‘vrata’的本质，‘vrata’的意思是“誓”，这在英语里没有合适的解释，因为英语的匮乏，这个词被过滤了一层意思。
‘Vrata’ is a unique concept in the ‘sanathana’ . ‘Vratas’ have a greater prowess and power. ‘Vrata’ have a cultural ambience, cultural sublimity, whereby one is able to be in a ‘vrata’, because ‘vratas’ are dharmic practices.
‘vrata’是“天赋圣职”当中的独特概念，‘vratas’拥有非凡的造诣和力量，‘vratas’拥有文化感、拥有文化层面的高贵，通过置身于其间，人就已经能够处于“誓言”当中，因为‘誓言’就是对使命的恪守。
So why it is ‘achara-niti-dharma’, because Patanjali immediately embarks upon ‘vrata’, and ‘vrata’ only comes in ‘dharma’.‘Vrata’ doesn’t come in morality-ethicality.
所以，为何它成为了’achara-niti-dharma’ —— “行为准则-道德意识-责任意识”，那是因为帕坦伽利直接就登临了‘vrata’的概念，‘vrata’并没有进入道德-伦理的概念当中。
The moral people/ethical people are not necessarily in the ‘vrata’, they need to take/make a ‘vrata’. Those observances must be coming within the frame work of ‘vrata’. That is what is expected.
那些道德/伦理之人不一定真的处于‘vrata’当中，所以他们才需要发个誓/立个誓。对这些准则的恪守必须进入 ‘vrata’的深层当中，那才是要期许的东西。
So that’s why Patanjali mentions ‘vratas’ immediately in the topic of yamas, niyamas, either this is ‘anu vrata’, or ‘maha vrata’. We should be going by ‘anu vrata’, not try to venture into ‘maha vrata’. We must be taking atomic vows, and those can be certainly practised. Atomic vows can be practised, great vows cannot be practised.
因此，那就是为何帕坦伽利在yamas和niyamas的话题里直接论及到‘vratas’的原因，可以是‘anu vrata’（小誓），也可以是‘maha vrata’（大誓）。我们必须从小誓入手，那些是铁定可以遵守的，小誓能够得到遵守，大誓一般无法遵守。
So that’s why he has suggested ‘vows’ in the topic of yamas and niyamas, therefore there’s some ‘dharma-aspect’, ‘dharmic aspect,’ because outside ‘dharma’ we don’t have to take ‘vratas’.
因此，那就是为何他在论及yamas和niyamas的话题时给出了“誓”的建议，因而会有一些“责任意识的层面”、“责任感的层面”，因为在“责任意识”之外，我们不必承担“誓言”。
Again, let me tell you, ‘vrata’ doesn’t have an English word, there are only ‘vows’. ‘Vows’ are taken out of resoluteness; ‘vrata’ is taken out of some dharmic-practices. That is why these are ‘achara-niti-dharma’ practices aspects, and that’s why they are not moral-ethical practices.
让我再次提醒你们，‘vrata’没有英语里可以与之对应的词汇，只有“誓”的翻译，而“誓”一般都出于决心；但‘vrata’则是对‘责任’的恪守，那就是为何这些是‘achara-niti-dharma’的修为层面，那就是为何它们不是道德-伦理的修为。
So even in 28th sutra of Astanga Yoga, he says ‘yoganganusthanat’, ‘anusthanam’.‘Anusthana’ is again a word which cannot be rendered into English. Many of them have rendered it as ‘reverential practice’. That doesn’t carry the connotation proper.
因此，甚至于在八支瑜伽经文的第二十八节当中，他还说道——‘yoganganusthat’/‘anusthanam’。‘anusthanam’在英语里也没有与之对应的解释，他们许多人将它说成‘虔诚的修行’，但那并没能拿捏到这个表述的准确含义。
‘Anusthana’ comes only in karma, there’s karma-anusthana, there’s jnana-anusthana, there’s mantra-anusthana, and there’s yoganganusthana. Today we are not aware of ‘yoganganusthana’, we are aware of only ‘yoga-practices’.
‘Anusthana’只会发生在karma当中，只会存在于行为修行、智慧修行、曼陀罗修行、瑜伽修行当中。而今时今日，我们并没有觉知到“瑜伽修行”，我们只觉知到“瑜伽习练”。
We think this is something to be practised, and we don’t give any frame work of ‘anusthana’; whereas Patanjali in his text speaks of ‘anusthanat’ when it comes to Astanga Yoga, ‘yoganganusthanat’. He doesn’t say ‘yoganga-praticasat’, he doesn’t say ‘yoganga-sadhanat*’.
（译者注：sadhana这个词在普尚吉最新出版的《帕坦伽利瑜伽经之研究——三摩地篇》中的词汇表里是被这样注解的：sadhana——means of attainment——实现的方法/手段。）
我们认为这是某种要去习练的东西，有那么一种东西是要被练的，他们并没有给予anusthana（修行）一个框架；帕坦伽利反而在其中、在他的经文里，在进入八支瑜伽的时候，论及了 瑜伽修行，但他并没有论及“瑜伽习练”、他并没有论及“瑜伽实现的手段/方法”。
So, these are all earlier stages/steps we have to take. Before going for ‘anusthana’,we have to go through other preparatories, other stages, such as practices, sadhanas, disciplines, etc, etc.
这些全都是我们必须要经过的早期阶段/早期步骤。在我们追寻‘anusthana’（修行）之前，必须要经过其他的准备、其他的阶段，诸如习练、精进方法、遵守戒律等等。
So yamas, niyamas（are）come in ‘anusthana’, therefore they are ‘dharma’. ‘Anusthana’ is a term which is only in dharma, karma, jnana, mantra and yoga. So, that is another kind of point which I’m putting forward for you to understand, and these are not moral-ethical principles.
因此，yamas和niyamsa就是这样进入“修行”——‘anusthana’当中的，它们由此而成为了责任意识——dharma。‘Anusthana’在dharma（责任）、karma（行为）、jnana（智慧）、mantra（曼陀罗）、yoga（瑜伽）当中才会成立为一个专业术语。所以那就是我想对你们提出的另一个要点，目的是让你们去理解，这些不是道德伦理准则。
Now going to the next topic. Before going to the next topic, I was post a question, and that’s a very important question, vital question I want to deal with it, because today people are fascinated to be doing yoga and meditation. Meditation has become a fashion, so much so that even in the medicos are prescribing meditation for certain problems, coronary-management, they say there must be some meditation done;stress-management, they speak of meditation. So, people are trying to go for meditation, everyone wants to go for meditation.
现在要进入下一个话题，在进入下一个话题之前，我被问及了一个问题，那是一个很重要的问题、很关键的问题，我想涉及一下这个问题，因为今时今日，人们对瑜伽和冥想都很着迷，冥想变成了一种时尚，甚至发展到了这样一种程度，乃至医学界都将冥想当作处方去针对某些问题。冠状动脉管理，他们说必须做一些冥想；压力管理，他们也会提到冥想，所以人们都试图进行冥想，每个人都要冥想。
The strangest thing is that everyone wants to get meditation, everyone wants to try and get meditation, no one wants to know what is meditation. This is a very strange scenario.
最为奇怪的是，每个人都想获得冥想，每个人都想尝试冥想并且获得冥想，但却没有人想了解什么是冥想，这是非常奇怪的现象。
When you have such an intent to go for meditation, why is that one is not trying to understand what is meditation? The question put to me was ‘that Guruji often said that his yoga is dynamic meditation’.
当你拥有如此强烈的冥想意愿，那又为何人们不去尝试理解什么是冥想?给我的一个问题是，“艾扬格大师常说他的瑜伽是动态冥想”。
Nobody questioned how yoga is meditation. The asanas for Iyengar Yoga, that is the practice, how it can be ‘dynamic-meditation’? Because usually meditation means/one imagines:sitting, /sitting quiet/relaxed/and then closing the eyes/and doing something as meditation…So, everyone wants to make an attempt for meditation. But it is important that we must know what is meditation.
没有人去问瑜伽如何是冥想，体式对于艾扬格瑜伽体系而言就是习练，它如何会是动态冥想呢？因为通常冥想意味着/人们想象着：坐着/安静地坐着/放松/然后闭上眼睛/去做那个叫冥想的东西…因而，每个人都想做出冥想的尝试，但重要的却是，我们必须知道什么是冥想。
Meditation is a psychological psycho-mental act. At the outset, let me tell you, I’m not talking about dhyana. Meditaion is not dhyana. Dhyana is a wider concept. Meditation is a component of it, meditation is a part of it, meditation is a facet of it.
冥想是心理层面的心理-精神行为，让我从头告诉你们，我并没有在讲dhyana，冥想不是dhyana，dhyana是一个更宽的概念，冥想则是它的一个部件、冥想是它的一个部分、冥想是它的一个方面。
We should not equate meditation with dhyana. Dhyana has a wider scope. Anyway, people are not interested today in dhyana, they are all interested in meditation particularly. The western world which has come into the fold of yoga, dhyana is not a familiar term for them, and they have been told that dhyana is meditation, and therefore they are going for meditation, they want to go for meditation.
我们不应该将冥想与dhyana划上等号，dhyana的范围更为宽广。不过，今时今日的人们对dhyana不感兴趣，他们全都对冥想特别感兴趣。西方世界的人在涉猎瑜伽圈时，dhyana对他们而言不是一个熟悉的术语，他们被告知dhyana就是冥想，因此他们开始追求冥想，他们想要冥想。
Let me try to give a little explanation about what meditation is. Meditation is a psychological psycho-mental act. It is of the brain, it is in the brain, it is from the brain, it is by the brain, it is with the brain. That’s why it is a psychological psycho-mental process.
让我尝试给出关于什么是冥想的一点解释，冥想是一种心理层面上心理-精神的联动行为，它是大脑的行为、它是大脑当中的行为，它是源于大脑的行为，它是通过大脑的行为，它是运用大脑的行为，那就是为何它是心理层面的心理-精神的过程。
Now, that means meditation will always have a thought. You can’t be having no thought and then go for meditation. Absolute thoughtlessness will not be meditation, it is something else, which Patanjali speaks about ‘chitta vrittinirodhaha’, in case the mind is restrained, chitta is restrained, it’s a different state. Meditation is however not the rest of a thought.
现在，那意味着冥想总是会有个思考内容，你不可能什么都没想、然后进行冥想。绝对的无念不是冥想，它是另外一种东西，那是帕坦伽利所论及的“终止意识之波动”，那是头脑得到控制的情况，chitta（意识）得到了制约，它是另外一种境况，而冥想则不是念头之外的东西。
Now usually, we worldly people only know about a thought, and then we are in thinking. We think, and then there’s a thought; keep thinking, we have a thought; keep on thinking, we have a thought, we have thoughts. Thoughts come and go. Thoughts have inward-outward movements. Thoughts arrive, thoughts depart. So, there’s traffic of thoughts going on.
通常，我们世俗之人只去了解想法，然后我们就会处于思考当中，我们思考，然后有了想法；继续思考，我们又有了想法；再继续思考，我们又有了想法，诸多的想法。各种想法来来去去，各种想法进进出出，各种想法粉墨登场、各种想法相继离去。因此，各种念头通道始终开启。
So, while the thoughts are on, even in our mundane state, worldly state, a wakeful state, the thoughts are on, then, meditation is something different. The point is there’s always a thought, and then, we keep thinking.
因此，各种念头不停地上演，在我们的尘世间、世俗的境况当中、清醒的时候，这些念头会不停地运转，而冥想则是另外一种不同的东西。重点是，总会有个念头，然后我们就会继续进行思考。
Now meditation can take place, which is a thought process, which is a thinking process, it can take place in only particular realms. Any thought matter, any thought content, doesn’t qualify to go for meditative state. Every thought will not culminate in meditative state. There’re only a few thoughts, sublime thoughts, transcendent thoughts. It requires suitable thought matter for going to a meditative state. So, meditativity depends upon the thought, how transcendent the thought is, how noble a thought is, how virtuous a thought is. Any thought cannot land in meditativity.
现在，冥想可以进行，那是一个思想过程、那是一个进行思考的过程，它只会在一个特定的领域之内进行。不是任何构成思想的事物、任何思想内容都具有进入冥想状态的资质，不是每一个念头都可以终结在冥想境界当中，只有极少的思想，即那些高尚的思想、超凡脱俗的思想才可以，它需要合适的思想事物，才可以进入冥想境界。因此，冥想性取决于思想内容，取决于这类思想如何超然、这类思想如何高尚、这类思想如何充满道义，不是任何想法或念头都能登临冥想之境。
So, when there’s a thought, there’s invariably thinking;when there’s a thinking, there’s a thinker. So there’s a ‘triad’ which constitutes the process of our thought. It may be a non- meditative thought, or it could be a meditative thought.
因此，有了一个念头的时候，就不可避免地开始了思考；进行思考的时候，就必然会有一个思考者。因此，存在一个“三件套”，是它构建了我们的思想过程，它可以是非冥想性的思想，它也可能是具有冥想性的思想。
There will be invariably a thinker, and there will be thinking, and there will be a thought. Now we worldly people are merely used to thinking around a thought. We have a thought, and we go on thinking, we go on thinking, we go on thinking. So，there’s always thinking about a thought, this will never land us in meditative state.
不可避免地存在着一个思考者，并且存在着思考活动，并且存在着一个念头/想法这类思考内容。我们世俗之人只是习惯于在想法或念头上进行思考，我们有了念头，我们就会不断地想，我们想啊、想啊、想啊，所以总是在一个念头上进行思考，这永远都无法让我们登临冥想境界。
What is meditation then? When there’s this ‘tri-partite’ constitution, there are a thinker, there’s thinking, and there’s a thought. Understand these inflections of the word, it’s one word having 3 inflections: ‘thinker’, ‘thinking’ and ‘a thought’.
那什么才是冥想？当存在这“三方”组合时，就存在着一个思考者，就在进行着思考，就存在着思考了什么。去理解这个词的这些形态转变，它虽然是一个词，但携带着三个变体：“思考者——thinker”、“思考——thinking”、“思考了什么——thought”（*念头、想法）。
（*译者注：在英语的语法中，think是一个及物动词，意思是“思考”、“想”， 在think后加一个后缀er，就变成了思考者，想事情的这个人，也可以翻译为思想家。think的被动式，可以翻译为想了什么、被思考了什么，所以通常又会翻译为“想法”、“念头”、“思考内容”、“思想”。）
Now we are only used to having a thinking process on a thought. We never have a thinking process on thinking. Now it is essential that there’s a thinking process about ‘very thinking’. There’s a thinking process about ‘very thinker’.
我们只是习惯于在一个‘思想’上拥有一个思考过程，我们从未在思考上拥有一个思考过程。而现在，最基本的恰恰是，对 “这个思考”要有一个思考过程，对“这个思考者”要有一个思考过程。
So, we will have to find a thought, not only the thought, but we will have to find a thought in thinking. We will have to find a thought in thinker. So just around the thought, if we go on hovering, hovering, hovering with thinking, it will not be meditativity. So, we will have to get used to a process.
因此，我们必须要去发现一个念头，不止要发现这个念头，我们还必须要在思考过程中发现念头，我们必须在思考者那里发现念头。所以只是围绕着这个念头想啊、想啊、想啊，来回地想，它是永远都不会成为冥想的，因此，我们必须习惯这样一个过程。
Today the meditation has been suggested. Any Tom/Dick/and Harry suggests, and we think we should embark upon meditation. Now listen carefully to what I say now. So, there’s a thinker, there’s thinking, there’s a thought. Don’t just think about the thought. Don’t just keep thinking about the thought. You must also investigate the very thought: what is this thought? why is this thought needed? from where the thought has come? what is the subject matter of the thought? what is the realm of the thought? We must have the investigation about the thought.
今时今日，冥想被大力推荐，任何张三/李四/王小二都可以大力推荐，我们认为我们应该登上冥想这艘大船。现在，仔细听我在这里讲的东西，存在着思考者、存在着思考、存在着思考内容。不要只是去想这个想法，不要只是不停地去想这个想法，我们还必须就这个想法展开一番调查：这个想法是什么？为何需要这个想法？这个想法从何而来？这个想法的主观事物是什么？这个想法属于什么范畴？我们必须开始去调查有关这个想法的一切。
So, thought must be thought about. There will be thought about the thought, as to why this thought came, when did it come, how did it come, what are the agencies through which I got the thought, what is the purpose of the thought, should I keep thinking on this thought, is it worthwhile to be on thinking about this thought. So, the thought must be under scrutiny. This is implied in meditativity.
因此，想法必须被想（被思考），会存在关于这个想法的想法，它关乎于：为何产生这个想法、它是何时进来的、什么是我得到这个想法的载体、这个想法的目的何在、我应该继续去想这个想法吗？它值得我继续去想它吗？因此，这个想法必须被置于审视之下，这都包含在了冥想性当中。
Have a scrutiny of your thought:is thought of anything good to me? Should I continue to be having a thought in my mind, this thought in my mind? Or should I do away with the thought? Is the thought harmful? Or is the thought helpful,nourishing,helping me to get what I want.
要对你的想法有一种审视：这个想法里面有对我有益的东西吗？我应该在我的头脑中继续保留这个想法吗？或者我是否应该请这个想法离开？这个想法是有害的呢、还是这个想法是有益的、滋养我的、帮助我去得到我想要的。
So, there should be a thought about thought. There should be a thought about a thought. There should be thinking about very thought, rather than just thinking and having a thought in thinking.Then let there be a thought:what is the thought content, thought container, thought resource, thought source, subject of thought, subjective matter of thought, purpose of thought, worth of thought, value of thought.
因此，应该存在想法上的一个想法，应该存在一个想法上的一个想法，应该存在这个想法上的思考，而不是仅仅进行思考，并且在思考当中再有一个想法。然后，让那里存在一个想法：这个想法的内容、想法的承载体、想法的资源、想法的源头、想法的主体、想法的主观性事物、想法的目的、想法的值得性、想法的价值，它们都是些什么。
You will not like to be thinking on something once you are convinced that it is worthless to have a thought about. You will not engage yourself in a thought once you realised it is worthless to be thinking on it; or, it is disturbing me, or it is agonizing me, annoying me. You will not continue to encourage the thought. So, there should be scrutiny about the thought. So, there should be thought about the thought, and not just thinking on the thought. Thought about the thought is a componet of meditativity.
你不会喜欢在一个你一旦确定它不值得去想的某件事上再去多想，你不会将你自己投入到一旦你意识到它不值得去想的想法当中；或它是否在干扰我、让我不爽、困扰我，你不会继续鼓励这个想法继续下去。因此，应该要有对这个想法的审视，因此，应该要有想法上的想法，而不仅仅去想这个想法，想法的想法才是构成冥想性的一个零件。
Then thought about thinking:how am I thinking？Why am I thinking? What are the tools with which I use for thinking? Because behind your thinking, you are having a thinking, there’s perception, there’s cognition, there’s sensation, there are memories, there are other inputs, there are experiences. So, they will all be constituting the thinking process. If they are not there, then the thinking process will not be constituted. So, one needs to investigateabout the very thinking. How the thinking is taking place？What is the data supporting my thinking？What is underlying my thinking? As I just now said, there will be perceptions, you’ll have perception, you’ll have cognition, you’ll have sensations, you’ll have memories, then you’ll have experiences. All these things constitute the thinking processes. So, we must have a thought on thinking.
然后，关于思考的思考，我是怎么想的？我为何这么想？我都用了什么思考工具去想？因为，在你的思考背后，你有一个思考过程，存在着感知、存在着认知、存在着记忆、存在着其他输入、存在着感受，因此，它们都在构建着这个思考过程。如果它们不在那里，那么这个思考过程也将无法建成。因此，一个人需要就在这个思考过程上进行一番调查：这个思考是如何发生的？支持我思考过程的数据都是什么？什么隐藏在我的思考过程当中？我刚才说过会有感知，你们会有感知、你们会有认知、你们会有感受、你们会有回忆、然后你们会有体会，所有这些都构建了这个思考过程，所以我们必须要在思考上进行思考。
Now, that is a component of meditativity. Why am I thinking? How am I thinking? How should I be thinking? How should I not be thinking? When should I be thinking? When should I not be thinking, because a thought is a good thought, thinking is a good process, but sometimes the place is not right, time is not right. So, we have to have a scrutiny:is it right time to have thinking upon it? Is it right time to have thinking on a thought, particular thought? Is it right time, space, situation, scenario？
现在，那成为了冥想性的组成元件：我为何在思考？我在如何思考？我该如何思考？我不该如何思考？我该何时思考？我何时不该思考？因为一个想法是好的想法，思考过程是好的过程，但有时场合不对、时间不对，所以我们必须进行一番审视：在一个想法上进行思考的时间对吗？在一个想法上、一个特定的想法上进行思考的时间、空间、场合、场景都对吗？
Objectively we will have to look at this, not just keep on thinking, keep on thinking, keep on thinking. Is it right time to think about it? Thinking…if it worthwhile to be thinking about it, but may be thetime, space, situation may not be right. So, we have to objectify this, is it the right time, space, situation, scenario for you to be thinking on this thought? So，there must be a thought about thinking.
我们必须要客观地看待这个问题，而不只是想啊、想啊、想啊，想它的时间合适吗？它是否值得去想？又或者，它的确值得去想，但可能时间、空间、场合都不对。因此，我们必须将它客体化，看它是不是处于合适的时间、空间、场合、情景，让你在这个想法上进行思考。因此，必须存在思考上的思考。
Then, there should be thought about thinker. What is the state of the thinker? Am I in a proper state of mind to be having thoughtfulness, or thinking process? Am I vexed? Am I tormented? Am I angry? Do I have prejudices? There’s no point of having thought process when you have prejudices about that particular thing.
然后，该有关于思考者的思考，这个思考者是什么状态？我是否处于适合深思或进行思考的头脑状态？我很沮丧吗？我很痛苦吗？我在生气吗？我有偏见吗？当你对一件特定的事情存在偏见的时候，所产生的想法是毫无意义的。
So, we would have to also investigate the thinker. Is the thinker in the right frame of mind to think about that thought there and then? Is the thinker in proper state of mind? Is the thinker in proper profile? Is it the proper profile to be thoughtful? If it’s a vexed condition, tormented condition, agonizing condition, or erupted condition with some malaise etc. then that’s not the right time to be thinking, the thinker should not be thinking then. A thinker should start becoming a thinker at another point in time knowing that ‘I am not in the right state of mind’.
因此，我们会对思考者也要进行调查，这个思考者是否处于正确的头脑框架当中去对彼处和彼时所产生的想法进行思考？这个思考者是否处于合适的头脑层面？它是一个适合深思的层面吗？如果是一个恼火的状态、敌对的状态、或是突如其来的情况、带着莫名的不适等等，那就不是正确的思考时机，这个思考者在那个时候就不该进行思考。思考者应该开始变成另一个时间点上的思考者，知晓“我不在合适的头脑状态当中。”
So, medititivity primarily means having a thought about thinker, a thought about thinking. It is so important, and also some thought about very thought, rather than just thinking and thinking and thinking. Because, if you don’t analyze the thoughts, some thoughts have a stress-potential, tension-potential, stress-potential, anxiety-potential, worry-potential, tormentation-potential. So, these are the thoughts you want to be away from such thoughts, because they are vexing your mind. The thought must be analyzed, thought must be scrutinized.
因此，冥想性主要意味着对思考者的思考，对思考过程的思考，那是极其重要的，并且还有一些对这个思考内容的思考，而非只是一味地想啊、想啊、想啊。因为，如果你不去分析这些想法，一些想法就会养成压力潜质、紧张潜质、压力潜质、焦虑潜质、担忧潜质、痛苦潜质。因而这些是你想从中逃离的想法，因为它们干扰着你的头脑，这个想法必须得到分析、想法必须得到审视。
Similarly, thinking should be scrutinized, and thinker should be under scrutiny. So, thinking about thinker is a meditativity component, thinking about the thinker, rather than thinking about the thought; then, thinking about the thinking, it’s a meditative component, rather than usual, worldly course of merely having a thinking process and a thought object.
同理，思考应该得到审视，思考者应该被置于审视之下。因此，对思考者进行思考是冥想性的一个元件，要对这个思考者进行思考，而非对这个想法进行思考。然后，要对思考进行思考，它是冥想性的一个元件，而非普通的、世俗过程中的那样，只有那么一个思考过程、一个思考对象。
So, you realise that for meditativity, you would have to select a proper thought object, or thought content. Any thought content cannot lead you to meditativity, for there must be filtration about the thought. The thought must be suitable. Then the thinking process should be scrutinized，so that, that will be evolved, that will be set right, that will be tuned, fine-tuned，and the thinker.
因此，你意识到，对于冥想性而言，你要选择一个合适的思考对象，或思考内容。任意的思考内容无法将你带到冥想境界，因为必须要有对思考内容进行过滤，想法必须适于冥想。然后，这个思考过程应该得到审视，它才会得到提高、它才会得到矫正，它才会得到调试、得到微调，对思考者也是如此。
So, in short, if I have to just give a definition of meditation, primarily, these are of the nature of thought on thinker, thought on thinking at the second stage, and thought about the thought. So, evolvement will take place in the reverse manner: thought about the thought, thought about thinking, thought about thinker.
因此简而言之，如果我不得不给冥想一个定义的话，那么它主要是对思考者的思考、第二阶段是对思考过程的思考、对思考内容的思考。因此，它还可以在倒转的模式中进行：对思考内容的思考、对思考过程的思考、对思考者的思考。
So, that is a culminative phase, that is a reflective phase. The thinker should be known. The thinker should be objectified. Thinker should be assessed. Thinker should be investigated. Thinker should be under scrutiny. And yogic subject matter is the best subject matter to be going formeditativity.
因此，那是一个终极的阶段，那是一个反思的阶段，思考者应该被了解、思考者应该被客体化、思考者应该被评估、思考者应该被调查、思考者应该被审视，瑜伽化的主观事物是进行冥想的最佳主观事物。
Now why Guruji called his process/his yoga as dynamic-meditation？Let me clarify here：‘Iyengar yoga’ is not dynamic-meditation. ‘Iyengar’s yoga’ was dynamic- meditation！So, we Iyengar students should not be complacent, thinking that we are doing ‘Iyengar Yoga’, and‘Iyengar Yoga’ is dynamic-meditation，because his yoga which was meditation. Because yoga/yogasanas are wonderful condition to enter into the academy of meditativity, where there’s a body-set addressal, there’s a breath-set addressal, there’s a mind-set addressal. The subjective entity is set right, object, the asanas are set right, instrumental entities are set right.
现在谈谈为何艾扬格大师称他的过程/他的瑜伽为动态冥想，让我在此说明：“艾扬格瑜伽”并非动态冥想，“艾扬格的瑜伽”才是动态冥想。因此，我们作为艾扬格的学子，不该自诩我们在做“艾扬格瑜伽”、“艾扬格瑜伽”即动态冥想。因为，他的瑜伽才是冥想，因为瑜伽/瑜伽体式是进入到冥想学院的绝佳条件，那里有一套针对身体层面的调理、针对呼吸层面的调理、针对头脑层面的调理，主观体、客观体、体式都得到了矫正，工具体也得到了矫正。
So,in an asanic rendition classically, there’s a subjective entity, there’s an objective entity, there’s an instrumental entity.Sometimes the subjective entity comes on the anvil. These were happening to Guruji in his practices. He was not just trying to perfect his sirsasana, he was getting his subjective entity on the anvil, on the operation table, and carve, sculpt, culture the subjective entity.
因此，在传统的体式化呈现当中，存在着一个主体、存在一个客体、存在一个工具体。时不时地，这个主体会被放在案板上进行锤炼，而这些就发生在艾扬格大师的习练当中，他并没有只是努力去完善他的头倒立，他将他的主体放在了案板上、放在了手术台上，去打磨、去雕刻、去培育这个主体。
So, he would ‘objectify’ the subjective entity. That is called ‘witnessivity’, ‘auto-witnessivity’, ‘self-witnessivity’. So, in his yoga, he was having ‘auto-witnessivity’, and therefore, he would set right his subjective entity; whereas we have mistaken the process, and we just go on correcting our sirsasana, we go on correcting our sarvangasana, we go on correcting our trikonasana, but we don’t try to get corrected ourselves in a subjective profile, whereas that’s the implication of an asana.
因此，他会‘客体化’他的主体，那被称为“见证”、“自动见证”、“自我见证”。因此在他的瑜伽当中，他在进行自动见证。因此，他会矫正他的主体；我们反而误解了这个过程，我们会去纠正我们的头倒立，我们会去纠正我们的肩倒立，我们会去纠正我们的三角式，但我们恰恰没有尝试在主观的层面当中去实现对我们自身的纠正，而那才是体式深含的意义。
So, Guruji would be doing that, that any asana there would be thought process. Now, this is an adhyatmic thought process, usually for us, a thought object, or thinking process, there’s some external elements coming in; whereas in yoga, there is no external elements coming in, the ‘doer-doing-done’ are all integral to one, to oneself. So, there’s something called as karma-kriya, something called as jnana-kriya, something called as dhyana-kriya in yogasanas.
因此，艾扬格大师会那样去做，即任何体式都存在着思考过程。此地，这是一个灵性的思考过程；而通常对于我们而言，那却只是一个对象、或思考过程，总会有外在的因素进来；反而在瑜伽当中，不会有外在的因素进来，“做者-做-做了什么”全都整合为一，与其自身合二为一。因此，在瑜伽体式当中，会存在某种被称为karma-kriya的东西 (行为的行为)，存在某种被称为jnana-kriya (智慧行为)的东西，存在某种被称为dhyana-kriya (冥想行为)的东西。
So Guruji would not just have his asana under scrutiny, but he would have his instrument under scrutiny. What is the point in doing a perfect sirsasana for sight by*hook or crook*. So, instrumentation should be proper, so that should be under scrutiny: how am I doing? How the instruments are being used? Are they justifiably used? Are they properly used?
（*译者注：hook or crook的意思是不择手段、旁门左道、用尽一切手段去习练，这组词出现在普尚吉《意识之歌》原著当中的第三章第19页）
因此，艾扬格大师不仅将他的体式置于审视之下，他还会将他的工具体的应置于审视之下。为了好看而采取不择手段的方式让头倒立完美，那又有什么意义？因此，工具性的使用应该正当，应该置于审视之下：我在如何做？这个工具在如何被使用？它们是否被公正地使用？它们是否恰当地得到了使用？
We just want to do an asana perfectly, we don’t bother about the instruments of it, because we think asana is a posture, posture is a spectacular thing, and spectacle, so we try to work on an asana as a spectacle, we don’t bother about what we do inside, we don’t bother about the processes, we want to just perfect an asana.
而我们只是想完美地做出一个体式，我们并不在意它的器具使用，因为我们认为体式就是一个姿势，姿势就是一个具有观赏性的东西，是用来做表演的。我们尝试将体式作为表演而努力，我们不去关心我们里面做了什么，我们不去关心这些过程，我们只想完美一个体式。
Guruji would have thought process on instruments, Guruji would have a thought process on subjective entity. Because in meditativity, you get reflections. That is why in higher faculty functions, the process is pensivity, reflectivity, meditativity. If there’s no reflectivity, and no reflection, you can’t meditate. So you don’t meditate on a thought, you meditate on a reflection of a thought. You meditate on reflectivity. If there’s no reflectivity, you can’t get meditativity. Pensivity should be there.
而艾扬格大师会在工具使用上拥有思考过程，艾扬格大师会在主体上拥有思考过程。因为，在冥想当中，你会获得反思，那就是为何在更高官能的阶段中，这个过程会具有深思性、反思性、冥想性。如果那里没有反思，没有对想法的反思，你就无法展开冥想。你不会在一个想法上冥想，你会在经过了反思的那个想法上冥想，你会在反思性上冥想。如果没有反思性，你也就无法获得冥想性，深思性也该在那里。
These are higher faculty functions, and that’s why I said at the outset, ‘these are psychological psycho-mental processes’. Meditativity is out of pensivity, reflectivity, meditativity. But we have messed up in our understanding. We think ‘first we must concentrate’, ‘the concentration leads to meditation’ is what our notion, idea. That’s why we have got the triad of‘concentration-meditation-trance’. That is not right. That is a fault.
这些都是更高级的大脑官能，并且那就是为何我开始时说： “这些是心理层面的心理-精神过程”，冥想境界出自于深思性、反思性、冥想性。但我们却在我们的理解当中搞糊涂了，我们认为“首先我们必须集中注意力”、“这个专注会导致冥想”，这是我们的认识、观点，那就是为何我们获得了一个三部曲——“专注、冥想、忘我”，但那是不对的，那是错误的。
Concentration will never give you meditativity. Concentration is always on an object. Can you imagine concentration with no sensory object? You must have a sensory object to concentrate. With no sensory object, you can’t concentrate. So, concentration is psycho-sensory.
注意力的集中永远不会给你冥想性，注意力的集中总是会对准一个对象，你能想象没有感官对象而去集中注意力吗？你必须有个感官对象去集中注意力；没有感官对象，你就无法集中。因此，专注属于精神感官的层面。
That is why the education is important. To have proper crystalisations.So, concentration is psycho-sensory. That will escalate to a state, higher state, concentration and absorption. Concentration evolvement, and then absorption, you can get absorbed in a sensory object.So, we have wrongly brought in meditation as a link, because of mistaken translation of dharana, dhyana, samadhi as concentration, meditation, trance.
那就是为何这里的教育至关重要，要去拥有适度的明晰。因此，专注是属于精神感官层面的，那会加速进入到一种状态，专注并且忘我。注意力的集中得到提高，然后你在感官对象里进入忘我的境界，所以，我们误将冥想作为一个链接而将其带入，因为我们误将‘dharana、dhyana、samadh’分别翻译为“专注、冥想、三摩地”。
Dharana is not concentration. Dhyana is not in that sense meditation. Samadhi in that sense is not trance. So, they happen in psycho-mental realm progressively, and we have brought meditation as a link which is faulty, which is a blunder. Where does meditation come? It comes in a higher faculty functions：pensivity, reflectivity, meditativity.
专注的修行不是集中，冥想的修行不是那个意义上的冥想，三摩地的修行也不是那个意义上的忘我。因此，它们逐渐发生在心理-精神领域当中，而我们将冥想作为一个链接援引进来，这是错误的，这是愚蠢的。那么冥想从何而入？它来自于更高的官能：对思想的深思、反思、冥思。
So, for meditativity, there must be reflectivity. So, object must be reflection-worthy. If the object is not reflection-worthy, you can’t go for meditativity.
因此，对于冥想性而言，必须存在对思想的反思性。因此，这个对象必须值得反思，如果这个对象不值得反思，你无法将其适用于冥想性。
And this, pensivity, reflectivity and meditativity, they are churned out by the process, the thought process, which I just told you, thought-thinking-thinker. Identify them, classify them, recognize them. Then, what is the churning here?
这个深思性、反思性、冥想性，它们都是通过这个过程、这个思考的过程而被搅拌出来的。那就是我刚才告诉你们的：思考内容-思考-思考者。去认识它们、划分它们、识别它们。那么，什么是这里的搅拌？
The thought about a thought, thought about the thought, thought about thinking, thought about thinker. Then again, thought about the thought, thought about thinker, thought about thinking. Again, thought about the thought, thought about thinking, thought about thinker. So, this circular process, rotary process, does the churning. And the reflectivity is evolved, meditativity is evolved out of this churning.
一个想法上的想法，这个想法上的想法，思考上的想法，思考者上的想法。然后再来，这个想法上的想法，思考者上的想法，思考上的想法。再来，这个想法上的想法，这个思考上的想法，这个思考者上的想法。所以，这个循环的过程、来回的过程，展开了这个搅拌的过程。因而这里的反思性得到了提升、冥想性从这个搅拌过程中也得到了提升。
Only point to be noticed here from the educative perspective/ dimension, that meditativity doesn’t come from concentration. You don’t need concentration to be meditative. You need a good, noble object, suitable object for thought to be woven around it. Every object is not worthwhile to be going for meditativity. Then you must go for disection of thinker, thinking, thought.
在此，从这个教育性视角/维度中要去注意的唯一一点是，这里的冥想性不是出自于专注。你无需为了冥想性而专注，你需要的是美好的、高尚的思考对象、恰当的思考对象，为的是让思想可以围绕着它而被交织在一起。不是每个对象都值得、适于冥想性，你必须划分开思考者、思考、思考内容这三部分。
If I may say so, tri-section. The tri-section of thought, thinking and thinker. Identify each one of them, objectify each one of them, analyze each one of them, investigate each one of them, scrutinize each one of them. And then, psychically, go on doing it, it will land us in meditativity. So how Guruji’s yoga was a dynamic meditative process, or meditation？Because he was dealing with his core to periphery, periphery to core aspects.
如果我可以这么说的话，它是三个部分，即思考内容-思考-思考者。去认识它们当中的每一个、去勘察它们当中的每一个、去审视它们当中的每一个。然后，用心灵继续去做，它就会带领我们登临冥想境界。因此，艾扬格大师的瑜伽如何成为了动态冥想过程、为何成为了冥想？那是因为他在调动他的核心去向远端、从远端回到核心。
All aspects of ‘me’ and ‘mine’ coming as objective entities, instrumental entities and subjective entities. And that’s why there was thought about thinking, and there was thought about thinker in meditative process. So Guruji was not just perfecting asanas, but he was trying to carve, sculpt, also address, set right the instrumental entities and subjective entities. That is why there was meditativity in his asanas.
“我”以及“我的”这所有的层面都作为了客体、工具体、主体而发生，那就是为何在冥想性的过程当中，会有思考者上的思想、会有思考者上的思想。因此，艾扬格大师不只是在完美体式，他还在尝试去打磨、雕刻、调理、矫正他的工具体和主体，那就是为何在他的体式当中存在着冥想境界。
Now, how will you embark upon this process in your practices? Try to understand the ‘syntax’ which I said last time:‘I am doing trikonasana; trikonasana is being done; trikonasana is being done on me; tirkonasana is done by the breath and by the mind; tirkonasana is done for the breath and for the mind; I’m doing trikonasana; trikonasana is done on me’… So, this classical process will bring on horizon, the meditativity in your process. You will start understanding how an asana can be a meditative state.
现在，你如何在你的习练当中登上这个过程的航船呢？在你的习练里，尝试去理解我上次说过的那个“句法”：“我在做三角式；三角式正在被做；三角式在我之上正在被做；三角式通过呼吸和通过头脑被做；三角式为了呼吸和为了头脑被做；我在做三角式；三角式在我之上完成了”……因此，这条传统路径会带来新的窗口，会带来你过程当中的那个冥想境界，你会开始领悟到一个体式如何才能成为一个可冥想的状态。
See in asana, we go for a state of mind, and a state of mind is always a thought pattern. You can’t have a good state of mind with no thought pattern, scheme of thoughts, arrangement of thoughts, content of thought. They must be there behind the state of your mind. So, in natural, organic yogic processes, a state of mind has always a thought pattern underlying it, and there’s a thought structure raised over it.
在体式当中去看看，我们都是为了头脑的状态而做，而头脑的状态会是一种思考模型。你无法在没有思考模型、没有思考计划、没有思考安排、没有思考内容的情况下而拥有一个良好的头脑状态，它们必然存在于你头脑状态的背后。因此在自然的、天然的瑜伽化进程当中，头脑的状态总会暗藏着一种思考模型，并且会有一个思想架构在其之上被搭建起来。
In in-organic process, you can have a state of mind without a thought substrate. Like if you swallow apsychedelic pill, psychedelic drug, you don’t need a thought scheme for you to have a psychedelic state. The drug will do that. That is in-organic process. That is unnatural process. In yoga, you work on your state of mind very naturally, very organically, very autogenically.
而在非天然的过程当中，你无需思想基座就可以拥有一种头脑状态，那就好比，如果你吞下一颗迷幻药丸、迷幻剂，为的是获得迷幻的境地，你无需对思想做出计划或安排，那剂药就能做到，但那是非自然的过程。而在瑜伽当中，你会非常自然地、天然地、自动生成地作用在你的头脑状态之上。
So, bear in mind that there’s always a thought pattern, thought scheme, thought arrangement behind that state of mind. Sirsasana is not a psychedelic pill, or savangasana is not a psychedelic pill that you get that state, sublime state. It is autogenically turned out, bio-chemically turned out, electro-chemically turned out. So, there’s always a thought, thought process.
因此要牢记在心，在头脑的状态背后总会存在着思考模型、思考计划、思考安排。头倒立不是你获得那个境界、崇高境界的迷幻剂，肩倒立也不是，它是自动产出、是生物-化学性的产出、是电动-化学性的产出。因此，总会存在着一个思想、对思想的加工过程。
That’s why in asanas I have to use the precept of activity process and thought process. Laymen, common men, most of the practitioners also think yoga is activity process, and then only go for activity process, they don’t identify thought process. Bring in thought process, bring it in significantly, there will be basis for meditativity. Meditativity doesn’t get base on activity, meditativity gets base on thought.
那就是为何在体式中，我不得不使用行为过程和思考过程这一概念。外行人、普通人、大部分习练者都认为，瑜伽是行为过程，然后去展开这个行为过程。他们没有认识到，还有个思考过程，要将思考过程援引进来，还要将它极大地援引进来，那才会有冥想性的基础。冥想性不会在行为上获得根基，冥想性在思想上才能获得根基。
So,
Let us try to improve our thought process in asanas.
Let us objectify the thought processes.
Let us have scrutiny of the thought processes.
Let us try to address the thought processes.
Let us try to improve the thought processes.
You will certainly be heading towards meditativity, and the dynamic-meditation of Iyengar System.
I think that is enough for the day, thank you very much for your patience. Namaskar!
因此，
让我们尝试在体式当中去精进思考过程。
让我们将思考过程客体化。
让我们拥有对思考过程的审视。
让我们尝试针对这些思考过程而进行调理。
让我们尝试去提高这些思考过程。
你一定会迈向冥想境界，并且走向艾扬格体系的那个动态冥想。
我认为今天够了，非常感谢你们的耐心聆听。谢谢！
英文听写和整理：王春明
中文翻译：梁洪
英文审校：Richard Agar Ward
未经授权, 不得转载。
EN 
TW