赛斯谈科学及宇宙的本质——给一位物理学家的答复（下）

此段摘自《个人与群体事件的本质》第855节

点击链接?阅读前文

赛斯谈科学及宇宙的本质——给一位物理学家的答复（上）

由于我必须使用客观词汇，所以总是在寻找比喻。说到词汇的客观性，我指的是使用语言会自动设置知觉的屏障——我们用的是英语——当然，任何语言在某种程度上都必然如此。

正如我之前说的，宇宙的扩张与意念的扩张是一样的；用你们的话说，就像句子建立在单词上，段落建立在句子上，在那个框架内，每一个都保持着自己的逻辑、连续性与根据一样，宇宙所有的部分在你们看来也有同样的内聚力——意指连续性与秩序。任何句子都是有意义的。你说出来时，它似乎自行排列成序，其秩序显而易见。一个句子之所以有意义，要归因于其字母的编组，或者，如果是说出口的，就要归因于其元音与音节的编组。然而，它之所以有意义，不只因为其中所使用的字母、元音或音节，还因为它所排除的所有字母、元音或音节。

这同样也适用于你们的宇宙。宇宙之所以有意义、一致性和秩序，不只是由于那些呈现出来的、显而易见的实相，却也因为那些“未说出的”或隐藏的内在实相。我谈及的不只是科学所说的隐含变量，我也不是在说宇宙是一个幻象，而是说宇宙是一个心理实相，其中的“客观性”是心理创造的结果。

这不仅仅是指，你们对实相的看法与你们在宇宙中所处的位置有关，也是指，宇宙因你们所在位置的不同而有所不同，这也适用于心灵或心理的法则。宇宙涉及了形形色色的秩序、知觉与组织，每一个都相互依赖，但每一个也分别存在于自己的领土里。

在你们的实相领域里，除了思想的自由，并没有真正的自由；除了思想的束缚，并没有真正的束缚。因为你们的思想形成了你们个人与群体的实相。你们企图从外在检查宇宙，从外在检查你们的社会。你们仍然认为内在世界不管怎样是象征性的，而外在世界才是真实的——比如说认为战争是自己打起来的，或是用炸弹打起来的。在所有的时候，心理实相才是最初的实相，它形成你们所有的事件。

这并不是说，你们无法对宇宙的本质有所了解，但答案存在于你们自己心智的本质里，存在于个人创造的过程里，存在于对以下这类问题的探究里：“这念头是从哪儿来的？又到哪儿去了？它对我自己或别人有什么样的影响？在没人教我以前，我是怎么知道如何做梦的？在不了解语言机制的情况下，我是怎么会讲话的？当我明明是以肉身出生，并将以肉身死去时，为什么会感觉自己有一个永恒的实相？”

不科学的问题？我告诉你们，这些才是最科学的问题。在某种程度上，如果科学尝试着去思索这类资料的话，也许会引发真正的科学性的直觉，那将有助于弥合我们与科学之间看法迥异的鸿沟。

Since I must use an objective vocabulary I am always seeking for analogies. By objective I refer to the use of language, the English language, that automatically sets up its own screens of perception ? as of course any language must do to some extent.

The universe expands, as I have said before, as an idea expands; and as sentences are built upon words, in your terms, and paragraphs upon sentences, and as each retains its own logic and continuity and evidence within that framework, so do all the portions of the universe appear to you also with the same cohesiveness? meaning continuity and order. Any sentence is meaningful. It seems to fall in order by itself as you say it. Its order is obvious. That one sentence is meaningful because of its organization of letters, or if it is spoken, its organization of vowels and syllables. It makes sense, however, not only because of the letters or vowels or syllables that are used within it, but because of all of the letters or vowels or syllables that it excludes.

The same applies to your universe. It has meaning, coherence and order not only because of those realities that are obvious to you, and that appear, but also because of those inner realities that are "unspoken," or hidden. I am not speaking merely of hidden variables, in scientific terms, nor am I saying that the universe is an illusion, but a psychological reality in which "objectivity" is the result of psychological creativity.

It is not just that your view of reality is relative to your position within the universe, but that the universe itself is different according to your position within it, and that spiritual or psychological rules apply. The universe deals with different kinds of order, perceptions, and organizations, each dependent upon the others, yet each separate in its own domain.

In your realm of reality, there is no real freedom but the freedom of ideas, and there is no real bondage except for the bondage of ideas, for your ideas form your private and mass reality. You want to examine the universe from the outside, to examine your societies from the outside. You still think that the interior world is somehow symbolic and the exterior world is real ? that wars, for example, are fought by themselves or with bombs. All of the time, the psychological reality is the primary one, that forms all of your events.

It is not to say that you cannot understand the nature of the universe to some extent, but the answers lie in the natures of your own minds, in the processes of individual creativity, in studies that ask questions like: "Where did this thought come from? Where does it go? What effect does it have upon myself or others? How do I know how to dream, when I have never been taught to do so? How do I speak without understanding the mechanisms? Why do I feel that I have an eternal reality, when it is obvious that I was physically born and will physically die?"

Unscientific questions? I tell you that these are the most scientific of all. To some extent the attempt on the part of science to consider such material may possibly bring about those qualities of true scientific intuition that will help science bridge the gap between such divergent views as its own and ours.

编译： Laujenny婷 /   美编：周周