Paul: What is the resistance here [sarcastically]?
That isn't actually my question. I don't know what to ask. So, if you want to answer that question, fine. I'm willing to listen to whatever you want to say about anything.
保羅：這裡提到的抗拒是什麼（挖苦地問）？其實這不是我真正要問的，我只是不知該問什麼。如果你想針對這問題回答，那也可以。你說什麼我都願意聽。
Raj: Again, Paul, let the tape recorder run. And, again, it is good to have you back.
Indeed, your thinking is what is getting you into trouble, constituting a most definite block to your being able to hear me. Although you do not experience the full meaning of hearing me, the real necessity is for you to keep yourself in that state of communion—comm-union—with me, because that is the only thing which will allow for you to experience regaining Consciousness Here, where You Are.
瑞吉：保羅，還是一樣，讓錄音機繼續錄；還是一樣，很高興你回來了。
沒錯，你正受你的思維所困，你的思維是你聆聽我的最明顯障礙。雖然你尚未經驗到「聆聽我」的終究意義，但真正必要的是你得持續地與我交流（communion），亦即合而為一（comm-union），因為那是讓你在「此地」（也就是真實的你所在之處）經驗到恢復大我意識的唯一方法。
The distraction of your thoughts and the three-dimensional structures of perception draw your attention away from where You Are and what is Really going on, and thus deprive you of the opportunity for the influx of . . . not remembrance of Reality, but the real experience of It, which will feel like remembering. But it will really be constituted of letting it register with you by virtue of having your attention where It is present to register with you.
你散亂的念頭以及屬於三次元的知見，使你的注意力偏離了真實的你所在之處以及真理實相的運行，因此剝奪了你進入實相核心的機會（不是指你對實相的記憶，而是指你身歷其境的經驗，那會使你感到實相是記憶中的事）。如果要有這樣的經驗，你必須全神貫注於實相所在之處，讓它進入你的意識。
You cannot continue to dally in the imagination and the intellect, because it is crumbling. Its ability to sustain itself is failing, and as it fails, you will feel like you are going to fall, because you have believed that the thing that is failing has been what you have been standing on.
你不能再繼續耽溺於想像與思維上，因為它正漸漸瓦解。它自圓其說的能力越來越弱。當它一潰不振時，你會覺得自己快垮了，因為你一直都認定那個快垮的東西就是一直支撐你的立足點。
What is failing is a misperception of what you have been standing on, and when the misperception dissolves, you will simply find yourself standing on what you really were standing on, and there will not even be a drop of one-hundredth of a millimeter, because the misperception didn't actually take up space in Reality.
真正在崩潰的是你認為在支撐你的那個錯誤知見，當錯誤知見瓦解時，你只會發現自己其實正立於一直在支撐你之物，而且錯誤知見也不會留下任何一丁點兒痕跡，因為它在實相內從不曾真的佔有一席之地。
I have made it succinctly clear, ever since the beginning of our conversations, that you are always confronted with Reality and nothing else; that you are in the Kingdom of Heaven dreaming a dream; and that Love is the willingness to recognize that which is Real in each and every thing—meaning, where each and every illusion seems (to your perception) to be the thing that is there; that your divinity is to be found right in the center of your humanity; that the illusion is an overlay; and, indeed, that the misperception, the overlay, is like a projection of a 35mm slide on a screen.
從我們開始對話以來，我就清楚地表明：你一直以來所面對的就是實相，沒別的；你只是在天堂作了一個夢；那個「真愛」就是甘願在萬事萬物中認出它們的真相，也就是你的知見所感知到的存在那兒的每個幻相；你只能從人性中尋回你的神性；幻相只是個表層覆蓋物；以及眼前你看到的妄見（即表層覆蓋物）就像是一頁35厘米的幻燈片在螢幕上的投影圖。
The thing, the object that is viewed, apparently on the screen, isn't on the screen, takes up no space, and when the projection is discontinued, there simply is nothing to constitute a distraction or a different perception of what had been there all along—the screen, itself. And so, the interruption of the illusion will, in very simple terms, be the disappearance of an image of mortal, physical life, with sin, disease, and death, projected upon the Kingdom of Heaven, causing confusion about what is seen. And the confusion will cease.
我們好似在螢幕上看到的那個物體，根本不在螢幕上，它未曾佔有一席之地。當放映機投射停止時，就只剩始終都在那兒的「螢幕本身」，而沒有會分散人注意力或不同知見之物。因此，幻相的中止，簡單來說就是這註定一死的肉體生命的「影像」的消失，是這夾帶著罪疚、疾病和死亡的影像，投射到天堂上，混淆了我們的視線。幻相一停止，這種困惑便隨之結束。
In effect, it is like you are seeing the three-dimensional frame of reference with one eye, and Reality, the Fourth-dimensional Conscious experience of Being with the other eye. One tends to dominate. But then the other one looks and sees. It is as though the left eye is dominant and then the right eye is dominant, and then the left eye is dominant, et cetera. And because the three-dimensional frame of reference has been the reference of preference for so long, there is a tendency to honor it and assume that the feelings and concepts associated with those perceptions are more valid. So, now that both eyes are not seeing the same thing, and because the difference creates confusion, a choice has to be made!
事實上，這就像是你用一隻眼睛看著三度空間之物，而用另一隻眼睛看著實相（也就是第四次元大我意識的實存經驗）。先是一隻眼睛試圖主導，隨後又換另一隻眼睛在看。就好似先是左眼主導，然後換右眼主導，然後再換左眼主導，交互輪替。然而，由於三次元的思維模式長久以來一直佔盡優勢，我們便習慣尊崇它，認為與那些知見相關的感覺和觀念也較可信。結果，兩眼並非在看同一物，正因為兩者間的差異是你困惑的主因，所以你必須要做個選擇。
I will put it this way: There is an approach to vision for those who are far-sighted. It is a unique but unnatural approach. It is to utilize one contact lens in one eye so that one can see up close. And in the other eye there is no contact lens because there is nothing wrong with the vision when it comes to distance. If one tries to use both eyes to see up close or at a distance, one experiences visual confusion. But, if one lets the eye with the contact [lens] predominate when he looks at something up close and ignores the fuzzy image in the other eye, one can read or observe what he is looking at without confusion. And when one looks with the other eye at distant objects and does not try to make sense out of the fuzzy image in the eye with the contact lens, he again experiences no confusion.
我這樣形容好了，有一種專為遠視眼設計的看的方法，獨特卻不自然：讓其中一隻眼睛戴上隱形眼鏡，這樣他就能看到近距離之物；另一隻眼則不用戴，因為它看遠時並不成問題。如果他想用雙眼同時看近或同時看遠，他就會感到視覺混亂。但，如果他看近物時，讓戴有鏡片的那隻眼居於主導，而不理會另一隻眼所見的模糊影像，那麼他就能閱讀也能看得見眼前之物而不會困惑。然而，若他用另一隻眼看遠距離之物，且不追究戴著鏡片的那隻眼所見的模糊影像，同樣的，他也不會感到困惑。
You must make the choice for the infinite view, and cease choosing for the myopic, limited, up-tight, close-in view of the three-dimensional frame of reference which does not embrace the whole, but sees only partially—and, as I have said before, treats that partial view as though it were total. You are going to have to stop flip-flopping back and forth. And you are going to have to stop trying to see Fourth-dimensionally with both eyes, or three-dimensionally with both eyes, because you cannot see in a limited fashion with the infinite view, and you cannot see in an infinite fashion with a limited view.
你必須選擇那無限的眼光，不再選擇近視的、有限的、緊繃的、短視的三次元思想架構的眼光，它無法普視全貌，只能見到一隅，而且，就如我先前說過的，還把見到的一隅誤認為全貌。你得停止反覆不定，你也不能再用雙眼同時看第四次元或同時看三次元，因你不可能用無限的眼光來看有限的東西，你也不可能用有限的眼光來看無限的東西。
Simply remember that if you are experiencing frustration it is because you are confused. And if you are confused it is because you are trying to combine that which cannot be combined. The image of limitation projected on Reality can never really combine with Reality, and it also never actually alters Reality. But it is confusing.
只要記得，你之所以感到挫敗，是因為你混淆不清了。而你之所以混淆不清，是因為你試圖結合無法並存之物。投射到實相上的有限影像，絕不可能與實相相提並論，它也從來沒有改變實相，但它卻會造成混淆而令人困惑。
Now, thinking is the means by which the ego projects illusion upon Reality. As I have also said for a number of years, thinking is not part of the Fourth-dimensional Conscious experience of Being. Knowing is. And Knowing is the direct experience of Reality, with no process attached to it. So, as you choose for the infinite view, you are choosing for the direct experience of Knowing.
思考就是小我將幻相投射在實相上所利用的工具。幾年前我也曾提過，思考並不屬於第四次元中實存境界的最高意識經驗，真知才是。真知是對實相的「直接」體驗，無須轉折過程。而當你選擇無限的眼光時，你正是選擇了對真知的直接體驗。
You realize, therefore, that thinking will become a thing of the past. And, of course, the question occurs: "Well, what will happen to the mind that was doing the thinking? After all, it was the presence of thought processes which demonstrated the presence of that mind." Well, Paul, it didn't demonstrate anything. It insinuated a presence. It implied a presence of something called mind. But, you see, Mind Knows. The insinuation of the presence of a mind that is created through the process of thinking and reasoning was never anything more nor less than an insinuation, and therefore the embracing of the presence of that mind as though it were a fact has always been an assumption. The presence of that mind, by virtue of thinking, has been assumed, but never actually proven.
你已體認到思考是會變成過去的事，當然，疑問就產生了：「那麼，當初在從事思考的心靈（mind），又會怎樣？畢竟，就是這些思考過程證明了心靈的存在啊。」其實保羅，它沒有證明任何東西。它只是影射某種存在。它暗示某種叫做心靈（mind）之物的存在。但，你曉得的，只有「天心」（Mind）真正知道。這透過思考與推論的過程所影射出來的心靈，充其量不過是個影射罷了，因此，把那樣的心靈存在當成事實般地接受，最多只能算是個假設。藉由思考而證明它存在的心靈，一直都只是個假設，從未真正被證實過。
The illusion has, indeed, been summed up in the statement: "I think, therefore I am." The truth is, "I am, therefore I Know." And that is the crux of the pivot-point, the change-line that you stand on the brink of, and that everyone is approaching.
「我思，故我在。」這句話道盡了這個幻相。但真相是：「我在，故我『知』。」這就是關鍵所在，是你即將改道的關卡，也是每個人遲早接近的關鍵點。
The premise, "I think, therefore I am," has been a false premise. Indeed, the philosophical thinking of the Western World has been based on that misperception, that misunderstanding. I am not saying that the East is free of that misperception, but indeed it has come closer than the thinking of the Western World to the fact that the truth is: I am, therefore I Know. The East has embraced the truth consciously, but has, nevertheless, in practical terms of daily life, practiced the reverse.
「我思，故我在。」一直是個錯誤的前提。西方世界的哲學思想確實一直都是建立在這個錯誤的看法、錯誤的認知上。我並不是說東方就沒有犯這個錯誤知見，但相較於西方，東方思想確實較趨近於「我在，故我知」這個真相。意識上，東方接受了這個真相，但在日常生活的實際應用時，卻悖道而行。
So, if you are not going to think, what are you going to do? If you are going to stand porter at the door of thought, keeping the door securely closed—not just monitoring the thoughts, but allowing none to enter in—what are you going to do? What is going to happen instead? Well, I will tell you. You are going to pay attention. And paying attention will not be interfered with or blocked by thinking. The experience of being pure awareness will be had, and Knowing will be what will happen.
那麼，如果你不思考，你會怎樣呢？如果你守在思想之門，把它牢牢地拴上，不僅要觀照每個思想，還得不讓任何一念溜進去，你會怎樣呢？情況會有何不同？我來告訴你吧：你會變得專心，且不會受到念頭的侵擾或阻礙。你可以深入全然的覺知之境，而「真知」便會自然出現。
If you experience silence, infinite peace, and are uneasy with the "inactivity," don't unlock that door and invite a few thoughts in to provide a little diversion, because indeed they will divert you, and will provide that insinuation of the presence of a mind different from the conscious experience of Knowing, and you will once again be caught in that place of improving the mind by improving the thinking through the use of imagination, reason, and logic.
當你經驗到靜謐、無盡的平安，卻對這種「無作為」感到不安，也不要開門讓一些思想進來分你的心，因為它們確實會使你分心，而且會影射有一個與「真知」境界不同的心靈存在，接著你會想利用想像、推論與邏輯的運用，落回以前想藉改善思維來改善心靈的模式中。
The ego is that sense of mind which apparently creates and confirms its existence by means of its thinking. But it is, from first to last, nothing—no-thing—an assumption to presence, as I have said before.
小我正是那個想用思考來營造與肯定自身存在的那種意識感。但它自始至終都只是虛無（nothing），它什麼都不是（no-thing），如同我先前所說的，是一種虛擬的存在。
I have not said this before, but the ego will cease to seem to exist when thinking stops! When thinking stops, the insinuation of the presence of a mind doing the thinking will cease, and confusion will be nonexistent. The distraction of "improving the mind" and substantiating an illusory sense of self will cease, and the experience of Self, the Christ that you are, will be what is left. Confusion will be swallowed up in utter simplicity and clarity.
有一點是我之前沒提過的：“當思考停止時，小我那看似存在的狀態也會中斷”。當思考停止時，對那從事思考的心靈所影射出來的存在也會中斷，混亂無明的狀態便不復存在。“改善心靈”來維繫虛幻不實的自我感，這類障人眼目之舉一旦中斷，就只剩你的大我經驗，亦即你原是基督的真相。混亂無明的狀態會在全然的單純與清晰中淹沒。
Indeed, improving your time by putting your mind to its best use, creates the illusion of time. It takes time to think because thinking is linear. Knowing is nondimensional, and we can say "universal" if you understand that universal means nondimensional. This means, then, that references to dimensions—first, second, third, and Fourth—are ultimately nonsensical, but are used to penetrate and register with the linear dimensional nature of "thinking," for the purpose of providing a bridge, if you will, to that which is beyond the three-dimensional perception of nondimensional Being which thinking creates.
的確，發揮心靈的能力來善用時間，營造出了時間這個幻象。因為思考是線性的，它需要時間。真知是非次元的，我們也可稱之為「普遍性」，如果你能瞭解普遍指的就是非次元性的話。這意謂著，那些次元性的思想架構：第一、第二、第三，“甚至”第四，終究來說都是毫無意義的，只是用來設法打入線性次元的“思考”模式，為的是要提供一座橋樑，連結那超越三次元知見的非次元的實存境界。
Many speak of multi-dimensional realities—the 5th, 6th, 7th, 10th dimension. It is only necessary to speak of one more than your current frame of reference embraces. And again it is not because there actually is a Fourth dimension. It is because the use of that term bridges the gap between dimensionality and nondimensionality—or time and eternity, illusion and Reality.
Now, I do want you to transcribe this conversation immediately, and then we will talk again.
許多人在談論多次元的實相：第五、第六、第七、第十次元。其實只需談論比你目前所能接受的思想架構再多一次元即可。我再重申一次，這並不是因為真的有第四次元，我們只是用那名詞連結次元與非次元（或時間與永恆，幻相與實相）之間的缺口。
好了，我希望你立刻將這段對話謄寫下來，我們下次再敍。