觀測心中的太空 Observing The Space Of The Mind

OBSERVING THE SPACE OF THE MIND

觀測心中的太空

作者：Alan Wallace

Parallels in Astronomy

天文學的比對

For thousands of years, people have been fascinated by the night sky and observed celestial phenomena very carefully, but with the unaided eye, only a few thousand stars can be seen. Everything else remained hidden in the 「subconscious」 of deep space, beyond the scope of empirical research and therefore confined to the domain of metaphysics until 1609, when Galileo heard of the telescope invented by a Flemish spectacle maker, Hans Lipperhey, and swiftly constructed one for himself. His fi rst attempt produced an eight-power telescope, which he later increased to twenty-power by grinding his own lenses, and he used his new instruments for observing the heavens in ways never before attempted. The next year he published his findings in a book, The Starry Messenger, in which he reported not only his observations of the moons of Jupiter but also his discovery that the Milky Way consists of a vast collection of stars that had never been seen before. In this way, the depths of the physical universe previously concealed from human consciousness began to be explored.

幾千年以來，人們一直為夜空所吸引，對天體各種現象做仔細的觀察，只不過，沒有任何工具的幫助，裸眼能看到的不過幾千顆星星。其他的則深深隱藏在太空的「潛意識」里，為實驗型研究無法察覺而只能停留于形而上學的層面，直到1609年這種情況才發生變化，此時，伽利略(Galileo)聽說一位佛萊芒鏡片商——漢斯. 立博西(Hans Lipperhey)發明了望遠鏡，他很快找到他為自己做了一台。開始是8倍的，但他很快自己打磨鏡片，做了一台20倍的，從此開始了前所未有的太空觀測。第二年，他出版了一本書《星辰信使》，書中他不僅報告了他對木星衛星的觀察，而且解釋了銀河系中實際有很多以前從未被發現的星體。就這樣，人們開始了對從未探索過的宇宙縱深處開始了新的探索。

The science of astronomy has continuously progressed since Galileo』s time, but it was more than 300 years before scientists discovered galaxies beyond the Milky Way. As a result of a series of observations in 1923–1924, the American astronomer Edwin Powell Hubble, using the newly completed 100-inch Hooker Telescope at Mount Wilson, established beyond doubt that the fuzzy 「nebulae」 seen earlier with less powerful telescopes were not part of our galaxy, as had been thought, but galaxies themselves, outside the Milky Way. Hubble announced his discovery in 1924, and five years later, together with another American astronomer, Milton Humason, he formulated the empirical Redshift Distance Law of galaxies, or 「Hubble』s law,」 which states that the greater the distance between any two galaxies, the greater their relative speed of separation. This influenced the formulation of the big bang theory by George Gamow in 1948, for which the discovery of cosmic background radiation in 1965 provided empirical support.

自伽利略之後天文學持續不斷的進步，但直到300年以後才發現了銀河系之外的星系。美國天文學家哈勃(Edwin Powell Hubble)采用安裝在威爾遜山上最新完成的100寸虎克望遠鏡，在1923-1924年期間做了一系列的觀測，結果表明，以前采用較低倍數望遠鏡所看到的星云，不是通常大家認為的銀河系的一部分，而本身就是銀河系之外的星系。

1924年哈勃公布了他的發現。5年以後，同另一位美國天文學家米爾頓.胡馬森(Milton Humason)合作，發現了星系的紅移距離定律，也稱哈勃定律，即兩個星系的距離越遠，他們分離開的速度越快。這個發現對喬治.加莫的宇宙大爆炸理論產生了深遠的影響，而天體背景輻射的發現為大爆炸理論提供了支持。

Some of the most recent probes into deep space, made with the Hubble Space Telescope in 2003–2004, have unveiled the most detailed portrait of the visible universe ever achieved by humankind. The Hubble Ultra Deep Field, a million-second-long photo exposure taken over the course of 400 Hubble orbits around Earth, reveals the first galaxies to emerge from the so-called 「dark ages,」 the time shortly after the big bang when the fi rst stars reheated the cold, dark universe. The telescope was directed to a region of space in the constellation Fornax, of which ground-based telescopic images appear mostly empty. But in this long exposure from the orbiting Hubble telescope, with photons from the very faintest objects in space arriving at a trickle of one photon per minute, scientists were able to acquire a 「deep」 core sample of the universe, cutting across billions of light-years. By peering into a patch of sky just one-tenth the diameter of the full moon, scientists brought into view nearly 10,000 galaxies, some of them existing when the universe was only 800 million years old. The whole sky contains 12.7 million times more area than this Ultra Deep Field. Scientists expect that such observations will offer new insights into the birth and evolution of galaxies.

近期的太空深度探索，即2003-2004年間哈勃望遠鏡的觀察，提供了人類有史以來對可視的宇宙最詳細的描繪。哈勃超級景深工程，即由400台圍繞地球運轉的哈勃望遠鏡，以一百萬米的曝光時間拍攝，解釋了從所謂「黑暗時代」開始的第一批星系，即大爆炸之後，第一批為冰冷黑暗的宇宙帶來熱量的星星們。望遠鏡對準的是天爐座，地面的望遠鏡觀察這個方向基本看不到什麼，哈勃望遠鏡能接受到最弱的發光體發出的光，速度慢到幾乎每分鍾一個光子，就這樣通過接受幾百萬光年外的光得到一個深度的宇宙核心樣本。僅僅對于月球直徑十分之一的寬度進行觀察，科學家們發現了1000個星系，有些星系在宇宙僅僅8億歲的時候就存在了。整個天空的面積是這個縱深區域的1270萬倍，科學家們預測如果對這樣廣大的區域進行觀察會對星系的進化有更深的發現。

This brief history of astronomy gives some idea of the importance of sophisticated, penetrating observation for exploring the depths of space and the evolution of the physical universe. But such objective observations tell us nothing about the role of the observer in relation to the quantum fl uctuations in the last stages of inflation after the big bang, without which there would be no galaxies and no matter in our universe.

對天文學的歷史的簡單回顧，表明對于宇宙深處以及進化的綜合的、透徹的探索是多麼重要。不過這類觀察並沒有提供給任何大爆炸後，最後幾個膨脹階段的量子浮動與我們觀察到的有什麼關系，沒有大爆炸也就沒有星系乃至物質。

Philosophical Resistance to Introspection

對于內省的哲學抵抗

As discussed in the first chapter, since the time of Descartes, scientists have taken on the challenge of exploring the world of objective physical phenomena, leaving the world of subjective mental phenomena to philosophers. Renaissance philosophers such as Paracelsus, who advocated an organic philosophy in contrast to the mechanistic philosophy of Descartes, did emphasize the first-person observation of the mind and fi rst-person experimentation using the power of imagination (vis imaginativa). But they lived in the tragically psychotic era of witch hunting, during which any such notions were suspiciously regarded as magic. Protestant reformers were especially quick to condemn anything of that sort as impious, useless, and potentially demonic, and those who advocated such theories and methods could find their lives imperiled. In contrast, Bacon』s empiricism, which was confined to the objective world, was perfectly consistent with the new Protestant work ethic and the prevalent fear of probing the depths of the human psyche.

如第一章所述，從笛卡爾時代，科學家接過了探索客觀物理世界的任務，把探索心智現象的任務留給了哲學家。文藝復興時代的哲學家如帕拉塞爾蘇斯(Paracelsus)主張器質性哲學，而非笛卡爾所主張機械類哲學，強調的確應該用想象力(vis imaginativa)對心進行第一人稱的觀察和第一人稱的實驗。不幸的是他生活在以巫術指導狩獵的心智錯亂年代，這樣的觀念被視為太魔幻。新教改革者則非常基于判定為不虔誠、不實用、有魔鬼驅使的可能，主張這些觀念的人可能存在生命危險。比較來說，培根的經驗主義雖然限于對客觀世界的范圍，卻完美的順應了新教主張的職業道德以及對人類內心心智的深入探索的恐懼。

Since that time, instead of developing rigorous means to experientially explore the subjective dimensions of the natural world, generations of philosophers have devised ingenious arguments for denying that the mind can be explored from a first-person perspective. Immanuel Kant, for instance, claimed that due to the subjective nature of mental phenomena, any introspective observations could at most provide a historical account, not a true, 「objective」 science. But if 「real-time」 observations were a requirement for any objective science, the whole of astronomy would fail to meet it. Even observations of the moon entail a time lag of more than a second, observations of the sun and planets record events minutes after they have taken place, and our knowledge of distant galaxies is billions of years old. Due to delays caused by the speed of light, astronomers may be regarded as 「celestial journalists」 with regard to the solar system and 「historians」 with regard to their observations of the rest of the universe.

從那時開始，哲學家們不但沒有投入精力開發任何可以探索自然界中主觀這個維度，而是發明了一些巧妙的辯解來規避以第一人稱進行探索。比如康德( Immanuel Kant)就主張因為精神現象的客觀特性，任何內省的觀察至多可以得到一個歷史記錄，並非一個真實的，客觀的科學。事實上，如果「實時」的觀察是客觀科學的必要條件話，整個天文學的研究並不符合這個條件。對于月亮的觀察也有一秒鍾左右的之後，對于太陽則有幾分鍾，更不用說所觀察到的星系的信息已經是幾億年了。因為光速造成的延遲，天文學家在太陽系研究中應該被稱為「天體學記者」而在其他部分宇宙的研究中則應該成為「歷史學家」。

In twenty-first-century astronomy, historical accounts of the universe are the most we can ever hope for. In the introspective study of the mind, there are certainly many mental phenomena, such as emotions, that may be 「observed」 only retrospectively by way of memory. But there are many other mental phenomena, such as mental chit-chat, deliberately induced mental images, and dreamscapes, that are observed in real time. Arguably, the introspective observations of mental events as they occur are the only truly 「real-time」 accounts available to us. For even the visual and auditory perceptions of nearby colors and sounds are slightly delayed due to the speeds of light and sound.

在二十一世紀的天文學中，我們能希望得到的也僅僅是歷史記錄。在對于心的內省研究中，有些精神現象如情緒只能靠記憶進行內省研究，但其他的精神現象，如內心的自身自言自語、有目的引入的精神圖像、夢境等，其觀察則是實時的。或者說，內省的觀察只有對我們來說是「實時的」，對于周邊顏色聲音的觀察則因為光速聲速的原因是有延遲的。

Kant further argued that there could be no true science of the mind based on introspection since the observed mental phenomena are altered and transformed by the very act of observation.1 Niels Bohr was among the first physicists to note the observer participancy parallel between examining mental phenomena and examining quantum processes. In quantum measurement, the act of observation invariably alters the observed phenomena, but that has not prevented quantum mechanics from becoming the most successful physical theory in the history of science.

In many experiments, it has been demonstrated that objects do not exist in a well-defined way prior to the act of measurement. For example, when single photons are emitted by a source so low in intensity that the probability of the simultaneous arrival of more than one photon at the detector is negligible, it is possible to count the number of detector actuations and thereby find the number of arriving photons. But it turns out that a light field cannot be represented as a collection of a definite number of photons, for the number of photons in it is not defined prior to the instant of measurement!

康德進一步論述到，另外一個內省觀察不能成為一門科學的原因是由于被觀察的的心智現象會被觀察這個行動所改變。波爾(Niels Bohr)是首批科學家中的一位，他們確認觀察者的加入在心智現象和觀察和量子測量方面都是會對觀測結果造成影響的，但這並沒有阻礙量子力學成為科學史上最成功的一種物理理論。眾多的實驗表明，在測量之前，物體並沒有一個完全與定義好的特性，例如，如果一個光子從強度極弱的光源發出，兩個光子以上同時到達檢測器的可能性幾乎沒有，這樣就可以看一下收到光子的檢測器的數量，但實際上，光場不能被確定數量的光子所表示，原因是在測量之前光子的數量並沒有被定義好。

Moreover, the extent to which mental events are altered and transformed by the very act of observation is variable. One testable hypothesis is that with training, one may observe mental phenomena more and more 「objectively,」 so as to exert less and less influence on what is being observed. This may occur in the dream state as well as the waking state. For example, one may observe events in a lucid dream (in which dreamers are aware that they are dreaming) without overtly altering them. Of course, there is still observer participancy, so the comparison with quantum mechanics is an excellent one, but in neither case does this imply that the objects being observed are mere artifacts of the method of observation.

Among cognitive scientists, William James took the bold step of emphasizing the primacy of introspection for the scientific study of the mind, 3 and among philosophers, Edmund Husserl made a worthy attempt at developing a phenomenology of consciousness with his method of 「bracketing」 consciousness from its object. 4 But twentieth-century philosophers have continued to raise serious questions about the possibility, let alone the efficacy, of developing a science of the mind based on the direct observation of mental phenomena.

進一步說，精神的事件被觀測的動作影響的程度並不固定不變，一個可以驗證的假設就是通過訓練，一個人可以越來越客「客觀的」觀察精神現象，即越來越少的影響被觀察的對象。這種情況既可能出現在夢境，也可能出現在走路的時候，當然，觀察者的參與仍然是存在的，所以與量子力學做對比再恰當不過了，在這兩種情形下，都不能假設觀察對象僅僅是觀察方法產生的工件。在認知科學家中，詹姆斯(William James)對于反省作為基本的研究心的方法大膽進行了強調，哲學家方面胡塞爾(Edmund Husserl)通過「包圍」被觀察物的意識的方法作出了意識現象學的有益嘗試。但二十世紀的哲學家對基于對精神現象的直接觀察而建立一門科學的可能性還是持極度懷疑的態度，更不說說其有效性了。

Ludwig Wittgenstein, for instance, divided mental vocabulary into two classes: world-directed concepts and mind-directed concepts. Regarding the latter, he challenged the very possibility of a 「private language」 conveying meaningful information about internal experiences of being conscious.5 In support of this argument, it is true that science requires theories to be intersubjectively re-testable by replicating experiments with suitable instruments. But in addition, to test any sophisticated theory, the experimenters must have professional training in the use of those instruments and in interpreting the data produced. In modern scientifi c research, an untrained person called in from the street rarely qualifi es as a suitable 「third person」 who can either validate or invalidate a previous finding.

比如維特根斯坦(Ludwig Wittgenstein)把精神方面的詞彙分為兩類，客觀概念(world-directed)和主觀概念(mind-directed)，對于後者，他懷疑「私人語言」能否在意識的內部體驗方面傳遞有意義的信息。從他的認識的正確的角度看，的確任何理論都需要在借助合適的儀器的情況下，在不同的主觀個體間可以再重現。但進一步說，想要對任何複雜的理論進行驗證，測試者一定需要經過專業的訓練才能操作儀器、解讀所得到的數據。在現代科學研究中，從大街上隨便叫一個人，很難成為驗證和否定一個發現的「第三者」。

A crucial element of scientific inquiry since the time of Pythagoras has been mathematics, which has taken on an especially prominent role since the scientific revolution. In 1623 Galileo famously wrote: 「Philosophy is written in this grand book—the universe—which stands continuously open to our gaze. But the book cannot be understood unless one fi rst learns to comprehend the language and interpret the characters in which it is written. It is written in the language of mathematics, and its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometrical fi gures, without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it; without these one is wandering about in a dark labyrinth.」6 And the practice of higher mathematics takes place within the mind of the mathematician and is then communicated to other mathematicians. Writing equations on a chalkboard is simply a kind of public behavior that may or may not result from the internal process of understanding proofs and devising theorems. A mathematically uneducated person may be taught how to write down the same equations, but when subjected to interrogation by a qualifi ed mathematician, will clearly not understand what he has written. Mathematicians do commonly converse among themselves in a kind of language that is unintelligible to nonmathematicians, and the same is true of experts in all fields of science. So there is no reason in principle that researchers could not receive professional training in observing mental phenomena and learn to communicate among themselves about their experiences. However, this is a major undertaking that neither philosophers nor cognitive scientists have yet tackled.

從畢達哥拉斯(Pythagoras)時代起，科學研究上必不可少的一個元素是數學，自科學革命後數學就更成為一個令人矚目的角色。1623年伽利略寫下這段注明的話「哲學寫在一本大書—宇宙之中，大本書隨時打開供我們閱讀，不過，要想讀懂這本書，必須先要弄懂這本書寫就所用的語言和文字，這種語言就是數學以及它的三角、圓和其他幾何形狀，沒有它們，人們不可能懂得書中的一字一句，沒有它們人們將在黑暗迷宮中迷失」。

高級數學的推演先是在一個數學家頭腦中形成，然後傳遞到其他的數學家，把方程式寫在黑板上有時候不一定是表明一個人在頭腦中懂得並證明了定理，一個沒有數學教育的人也可以寫下來，但被一個合格的數學家提問的時候，就未必講得明白他所寫的是什麼。數學家之間的交流會使用一種非數學家不懂得的語言，其他的學科也是類似。所以理論上來說，研究精神方面的人沒有經過訓練也是不能有效溝通他們自己的感受。可惜的是，不論哲學家和認知科學家在這方面訓練上都是缺乏的。

Sigmund Freud raised a formidable practical concern about the prospects for making unbiased observations of one』s own mind: there are conscious and unconscious impulses in the mind that may sometimes conceal thoughts, memories, emotions, and desires we would prefer not to acknowledge, and we may imagine such mental processes even though they are not present.7 Albert Einstein is credited with the statement, 「Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I』m not sure about the former,」 and this is a serious concern for raising introspection to a scientifically rigorous status. What is required is relentless self-honesty, which may be cultivated with intensive, prolonged training in introspection. This is where the validity of introspective observations may be crosschecked with sophisticated ways of evaluating behavior and determining the neural correlates of mental states and processes. This threefold approach is precisely what William James advocated when he set forth his strategy for the scientific study of the mind.

佛洛伊德(Sigmund Freud)就無偏的觀察自己的心提出一個嚴重的擔憂：心會有有意識和無意識的沖動，有時候會形成我們並不願意承認的思想、記憶、情緒和欲望，儘管它們並不存在但我們可能把他們想象出來。人們大多知道愛因斯坦說過一句話，「只有兩種東西是無限的，宇宙和人類愚蠢，對于前者我們並不是那麼的肯定」這對于把內省提升到科學的嚴格狀態是有巨大的擔憂的。必須要做的是無情的對自己誠實，這實際需要高強度、長時間的內省訓練，這也就是需要用高級的評估行為和確定神經與精神狀態、過程的方法來交叉驗證內省有效性的地方。這個三段式的方法也正是詹姆斯在確定它的用科學方法研究心的時候所提倡的。

Psychologists have a lot of evidence to show that perception is a function of expectation, and introspective perception is clearly not immune to such infl uences. 8 Both sensory and introspective experiences are precognitively structured; those structures enable us to perceive things in terms of specific aspects; and those aspects are constrained by our familiarity with sets of categories that enable us, in varying degrees, to assimilate our experiences, however novel, to the familiar. Making genuine discoveries in the space of the mind by means of introspection will evidently require months or years of rigorous training, and once again, cross-checking fi ndings with behavioral and neural analyses.

心理學家有許多證據來證明感知是預期活動，內省的感知顯然無法免于這種影響。8感官的與內省的經歷都是先于認知而構成；該結構能讓我們從特定的方面理解事物；那些方面則被我們對類別集的熟悉而約束，這些類別能讓我們在不同程度上將我們的經歷——但非新奇的經歷——同化為所熟悉的。借助于內省在心智太空中進行真正的探索顯然將需要數月或數年的嚴格訓練，並且再次，需要用行為學的和神經系統的分析反復檢驗結果。

Subtle distinctions must also be made, for example, between imagining that one desires something and actually desiring it. Within the space of the mind, superficial appearances do not always correspond to reality, especially when they have been sifted through complex and often subliminal processes of interpretation. In addition to this pragmatic psychological question, Gilbert Ryle raises the philosophical concern about making ontological inferences about the way mind is from the way mental states seem. 9 This relates to an issue discussed in the first chapter: the fact that mental phenomena appear to bear no distinctively physical attributes at all. But if one assumes that everything that exists must be physical, then the appearances of mental phenomena must be illusory.

細微的差別也必須了知，比如想象某人想要某物與他實際需要某物之間的差別。在心智的太空中，表面的顯現並非總是與現實相符，尤其是當他們通過複雜的和常常下意識的解釋過程過濾時。除了這種實際的心理學問題，吉爾伯特Ÿ萊爾(Gilbert Ryle)產生了對以本體論推斷心智是從心理狀態顯示方式而來的哲學關注。這與第一章討論的問題相關：心理現象表現出完全不能忍受與眾不同的實體屬性的事實。但是如果假設所有存在的事物必須是實體的，那麼心理現象的表現必然是虛幻的。

This is precisely where the Baconian and Cartesian approaches to scientific inquiry diverge. If we follow Bacon』s emphasis on empirical induction and apply it (as he did not) to the examination of subjective experience, we will be inclined to learn as much as possible about the mind by observing mental phenomena themselves. But if we follow Descartes』 deductive, rationalistic lead as it has been adapted by scientifi c materialists, then we will focus almost entirely on the physical correlates of consciousness, while marginalizing the observation of mental phenomena. Evidently, mainstream philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience have embraced the latter option. There are strengths and weaknesses to this approach; I am suggesting that it may be well complemented, not supplanted, by the incorporation of refined introspection into the scientific study of the mind.10

這恰恰是培根學說(Baconian)與笛卡爾學說(Cartesian)的方法在科學探究中的分歧。如果我們追隨培根對經驗導向的強調並將其應用(培根沒有應用)于對主觀經驗的檢驗，我們將趨向于通過觀察心理現象本身來盡可能地研究心智。但是如果我們跟隨笛卡爾推斷的、理性的引導，如同其已經被科學唯物主義者所適用的那樣，那麼我們將幾乎完全集中于意識的物理聯系，而排斥對心理現象的觀察。顯然地，主流哲學、心理學以及神經系統科學已經信奉了後一種選擇。這種方法有利有弊；我認為通過將微妙的內省融入對心智的科學研究，該方法可以被更好地補充、而非替代。

Developing a Telescope for the Mind

開發一台心智的望遠鏡

Philosophers have been debating the merits, limitations, and defects of introspection for centuries, but they do not seem to have refined our capacity for observing mental phenomena. We are as far as we ever were from developing a telescope for the mind. A thesis can in principle be proved or strongly argued, whereas a stance—such as a particular approach to scientific inquiry—can be adopted only by a sort of 「Gestalt-switch.」 And this is what I am proposing: a Gestalt-switch away from the common tendency to empirically and theoretically marginalize introspection to accepting the formidable challenge of enhancing introspection in ways that are unprecedented in the history of modern science. This implies a return to empiricism: taking the methods for making penetrating observations of all kinds of natural phenomena to be of the highest value, instead of assuming that the materialist ideology in its present formulation already provides a key to unlocking all the remaining mysteries of nature.

哲學家們已經就內省的價值、有限性以及缺陷辯論了幾個世紀，但他們似乎沒有改善我們觀察心理現象的能力。我們距離開發一台心智的望遠鏡還很遠。一般而言，一個論點能被證明或強有力地質疑，而一個立場——比如科學探究的一種特殊方法——只能被某種「格塔式轉換」所接納。這是我所提倡的：以在現代科學史中前所未有的方式，避開經驗上和理論上排斥內省的普遍趨勢、接受強化內省的巨大挑戰的「格塔式轉換」。這意味著經驗主義的回歸：獲取了將對各種自然現象的敏銳觀察形成最高價值的方法，以代替假設唯物主義意識形態以其現存的表述提供了開啟自然界依然未解之謎的鑰匙。

Scientific empiricists since Francis Bacon have generally confi ned their stance to observations of objective physical phenomena, whereas contemplative empiricists claim to have developed their faculty of mental perception to observe the space of the mind. To someone who has not utilized or refined this faculty, which the ancient Greeks called noeˉtos , contemplatives』 experiential reports may sound like nothing more than speculation. The semiprivate language of highly trained contemplatives, like that of professional mathematicians, therefore becomes either unintelligible to or misinterpreted by laypeople.

自弗朗西斯Ÿ培根以來的科學經驗主義者逐漸限制了觀察客觀物理現象的立場，而靜觀經驗主義者宣稱已經開發了觀察心智宇宙的心理覺知的能力。對于那些沒有使用或改善這種能力——古希臘稱之為理念(noe-tos)——的人們而言，靜觀者的經驗報告可能聽上去像推測。因此，受過高度訓練的靜觀者的半私密語言——如同專業數學家語言一樣，對局外人而言是難以理解、或被誤解的。

Over the past three millennia, contemplative traditions of varying degrees of sophistication have developed in the East and West, and one point on which they all seem to agree is the need to refine one』s attention skills in order to make reliable observations of mental phenomena. Specifi cally, the deeply habituated tendencies of mental agitation and dullness need to be overcome through the development of attentional stability and vividness. These skills may be strengthened in a separate set of mental exercises11 or in the very process of learning how to observe the mind. Both approaches have been explored in the Hindu, Buddhist, and Taoist traditions of India, Southeast Asia, East Asia, and the Himalayan plateau. In the spirit of healthy, open-minded, scientific skepticism, the alleged discoveries of contemplatives in these traditions should be treated with the same attitude with which scientists respond to any other claim of discovery: see if you can replicate their findings in your own laboratory.

在過去的三千年中，不同複雜程度的靜觀傳統在東西方發展，他們似乎都贊同的一點是，為了形成可靠的對心理現象的觀察，需要改善一個人的注意力。具體地說，心理散亂與昏沉的深刻習以為常的傾向需要通過注意力恆定與清晰的改進來克服。這些技能在一系列獨立的心理練習或學習如何觀察心智的特定過程中可能得以加強。這兩種方法已經在遍布于印度、東南亞、東亞和喜馬拉雅山脈的印度教、佛教與道教傳統中開發探索。在健全的、開明的、科學懷疑論的宗旨中，這些傳統中的靜觀者所謂的發現應該與科學家對待其它任何宣稱的發現持同樣態度對待：看看你是否能在自己的實驗室重現他們的發現。

For a minute fraction of the expense of building, maintaining, and operating the Hubble Space Telescope, contemplative observatories could be created for empirical research into the trainability of attention and the possibility of observing the space of the mind with scientific rigor and replicability. Such laboratories would ideally include facilities for conducting behavioral and neuroscientific research, together with simple, individual accommodations for people to devote themselves to mental training for months and years on end. This would be tantamount to creating a new profession of highly trained observers and experimentalists of the mind.

由于只需建造、維護及操作哈勃太空望遠鏡成本的一小部分，靜觀天文台有可能為了展開對注意力的可訓練性以及用科學的嚴謹和可複制性來觀察心智太空的可能性的經驗研究而創造出來。理想上，這些實驗室將包括指導行為與精神系統科學研究的設備，同時具備簡單的、獨立的居住設施，讓人們貢獻其自身去經歷持續數月和數年的心理訓練。這相當于為心智的高度受訓觀察者和經驗主義者，創造了一個新的職業。

One valuable kind of mental training that I have explained elsewhere entails focusing one』s attention on the space of mental events, distinct from appearances generated by the five physical senses. 12 Expertise in this mode of observation may require as much as 5,000 to 10,000 hours of training, 8 to 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, for months on end. In addition to this formal practice of observing the mind and whatever events arise within it, the practitioner must take all necessary steps in terms of lifestyle and emotional regulation to ensure mental health throughout the course of this extremely demanding discipline. Contemplative traditions that have developed such introspective practice have much sound advice to offer in these regards.13

我在別處已解釋過的一種有價值的心理訓練類型，必須將一個人的注意力專注于心理活動的空間中，相異于由五種生理感官產生的外相。這種觀察模式的專長，可能需要差不多5000到10000個小時的訓練，每天8到12個小時、一周7天、持續數月。除了這種正式的觀察心智的練習以及無論這一過程中有什麼活動，練習者都必須依據生活方式和情緒規制，來秉持所有需要的步驟，以保證通過這種極端苛刻的自律達到心理健康。開發這種內省練習的靜觀傳統，在這些點上提出了許多忠告。

As the faculty of mental perception is refi ned, one may begin probing the nature of the thoughts, images, emotions, and desires that arise in each moment. Specific questions may guide these observations, such as:

隨著心理覺知能力的改善，一個人開始探索在每一個當下產生的思想、想象、情緒以及需求的本性。具體的問題能引導出這些觀察，例如：

Are any of these mental events, including one』s awareness of them, static, or are they constantly in a state of flux?

任何這些心理活動——包括一個人對它們的意識——是靜態的嗎？還是它們一直處于變化的狀態？

Are any mental phenomena inherently satisfying or unsatisfying, or do these qualities arise only relative to one』s attitudes and desires?

任何心理現象原本就是令人滿意的或不滿意的嗎？還是這些特性只是在與一個人的態度和需求相關的時候才生起？

Is the space of the mind, any of its contents, or the awareness of them inherently 「I」 or 「mine,」 or is one』s sense of personal identity and possession of one』s mind purely a conceptual projection?

心智的空間——其任何內容或對它們的意識——本來就是「我」或「我的」嗎？還是一個人的個人身份感與其心智的所有都純粹是一個概念的投射？

Hypotheses

假說

When a large number of researchers engage in such empirical inquiry in different laboratories, running their experiments with different sets of assumptions and expectations, it may turn out, contrary to Kant』s expectations, that they can extract features of the mind independent of the acts of observation. They may be able to identify universal qualities and regularities among mental phenomena and thereby formulate laws of the mind analogous to the rest of the laws of nature. As in any other branch of science, this research will require controlled experiments, repeated iterative evolving cycles of hypothesis formation, controlled testing, hypothesis revision, and prediction.

當一大群研究者們在不同的實驗室參與這種經驗研究，用不同的假設和期望開展他們的實驗，這樣的結果可能是，與康德的預期相反，即他們能提取獨立于觀察行為的心智特性。他們可能能夠在心理現象中得到普遍的特性與規律，從而類似于自然界其它規則那樣創制心智規則。如同科學的其它任何分支，這項研究需要受控的實驗、假說信息演變周期的反複疊代、對照檢驗、假說校正以及預測。

The above method of observing the space of the mind and everything that arises within it has been practiced in Tibet for more than a thousand years. Those engaged in this practice within a context of religious belief, which certainly colors experience, claim to have made many discoveries that can be replicated by any open-minded individual willing to devote the time and effort to putting their findings to the test. 14 The following discussion highlights some of the alleged discoveries about the mind that may be scientifically treated as hypotheses that can be tested through experience. Such scientific research is already in progress, with one notable project being conducted by the Santa Barbara Institute for Consciousness Studies in collaboration with a team of psychologists and neuroscientists at the University of California, Davis.

以上觀測心智空間與其中產生的一切事物的方法已經在西藏踐行了一千余年。那些參與了宗教信仰環境內部這項訓練——當然渲染了經歷——的人們宣稱已經有許多發現，這些發現能夠被任何樂意貢獻其時間與努力于將他們的發現拿去檢驗的開明個體所複制。以下討論強調了一部分所謂的關于心智的發現，它們可能作為能通過經歷來檢驗的假設而按科學方法看待。這種科學研究已經在進行中，其中一個值得注意的項目是由聖巴巴拉意識研究學會與加利福尼亞大學的一隊心理學家和神經系統科學家協作進行的。

With regard to Wittgenstein』s concern about the unfeasibility of any private language, Tibetan contemplatives claim that a shared, highly specialized language concerning rarified subjective experience has been developing within a community of professionally trained observers of the mind. Throughout such training, participants converse among themselves and with their mentors and in this way learn to communicate their inner experiences. Nonparticipants overhearing such communication may believe they understand the kinds of experiences being narrated, but in fact most of what is said will be beyond their imagination, for they have never experienced the states of consciousness that are being probed.

至于維特根斯坦對任何私密語言非可行性的關注，西藏靜觀者稱說一種關于純淨主觀經歷的共享的、高度專業化的語言已經在經過專業化訓練的心智觀察者的團體中發展起來了。通過這樣的訓練，參與者彼此交談、與他們的導師交流並且以這種方式學著溝通他們內在的經歷。無意聽說這樣溝通的非參與者們可能認為他們懂得這種敘述出來的經歷，但事實上溝通中多數所說的將超出他們的想象，因為他們從未經歷過探索意識的狀態。

Freud』s concern about the obscuring and distorting influences of unconscious mental impulses has long been a major concern among Tibetan contemplatives. The remedy they have settled on is relentless, passive but vigilant observation of whatever arises in the space of the mind, without being carried away by or identifying with it. It is imperative not to respond to discursive thoughts, mental images, emotions, and desires with either aversion or craving. Rather, one must simply let them arise and pass of their own accord, without intervening or attempting to suppress or augment them. Metaphorically, one must rest in a 「space of awareness」 that is larger than the 「space of one』s own psyche.」 Whatever arises within the psyche is observed closely and with discerning intelligence, but without modifying, censoring, or editing in any way. This is an extraordinarily demanding endeavor, and it is pursued in close collaboration with an experienced and accomplished mentor who is well versed in such practice.

弗洛伊德關于無意識心理沖動的模糊與扭曲的影響在西藏靜觀者中早已是一個主要關注的問題。他們選擇的補救措施是對心智空間升起的無論什麼的無情、消極但警覺的觀測，而非被它轉移或認同它。不對厭惡或渴求之事產生散漫的想法、心理意象、情緒以及欲望是必要的。更確切地說，一個人必須簡單地讓它們生起並隨其自身而去，不加以介入或嘗試去抑制或增強它們。比喻地說，一個人必須在「意識的空間」中休憩，該空間較「一個人獨自的心靈空間」更大。對心靈中生起的無論什麼都進行近距離地、敏銳智慧觀察，但沒有任何形式的修改、刪除或編輯。這是一種格外苛刻的努力，且在與一位有經驗、有學問的導師——他精通于這種練習——開展密切的合作。

Buddhist contemplatives throughout Asia have taken special interest in the possible differences between the way mental processes appear and the way they exist, a concern raised more recently in Western research by Gilbert Ryle.16 Specifically, they have found that although mental states and processes often appear to be relatively static, upon close examination, all the immediate contents of the mind as well as our awareness of them are constantly in flux, arising and passing many times per second. A relatively homogenous continuum of a mental state, such as depression, may endure for seconds or even minutes, but that stream of emotion consists of discrete pulses of awareness, each of finite duration. There is nothing static in the human psyche, though habits may become deeply ingrained over the course of a lifetime.

遍及亞洲的佛教靜觀者已經在心理過程出現方式與其存在方式之間的可能區別中獲得了特殊利益，這是由吉爾伯特Ÿ萊爾在西方研究中最近關注到的。特別地，他們已經發現，儘管心理狀態和過程常常好像是相對靜態的，但根據仔細的檢驗，所有的心理當下念頭與我們對它們的意識一直是處于每秒多次的變化、生起與流逝之中。一種心理狀態相對同質的連續性——比如憂郁症——可能會持續數秒甚至數分鍾，但那種情緒流是由意識的不連續脈沖構成——中間每一個脈沖是有限持續的。人類心靈中沒有什麼是靜態的，儘管習慣可以在生命歷程中深深扎根。

A second discrepancy between appearances and reality is that certain mental states, such as joy and elation, may appear to be intrinsically satisfying, but upon more careful examination are found to be misleading. No mental state that arises from moment to moment in dependence upon sensory or intellectual stimuli is inherently satisfying. Every aff ective state is experienced as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral only in relation to a complex of attitudes and desires. When these affective states of mind are passively observed from the wider perspective of the space of awareness, without identifying with them, they have no absolute, independent attributes of either pleasure or pain.

表象與現實之間的第二種差異在于，特定的心理狀態比如快樂與得意可能產生于內在的滿足，但基于更多細緻的檢驗發現這是誤導的。依賴感官或理智刺激的及時反饋生起的心理狀態並非本來就是令人滿意的。每一種情感狀態只是經歷涉及態度與欲求復合體的愉悅、不快或中性。當這些心智的情感狀態是從對意識空間的廣闊覺知而來的被動觀測，而不認同它們，那麼它們就失去了或愉快或痛苦的絕對的、獨立的屬性特徵。

A third disparity between mental appearances and reality pertains to the fact that thoughts, emotions, and other mental phenomena seem to have an inherent personal quality. When strong identification with these processes occurs, one may feel that one』s very identity has become fused with them, and momentarily have the sense 「I am angry, 「 or 「I am elated.」 But with some skill in observing the contents of the mind, one fi nds that thoughts and mental images arise by themselves, with no voluntary intervention or control by a separate agent or self. Psychophysiological causes and conditions come together to generate these mental events, but there is no evidence that a separate 「I」 is among those causal infl uences. To be sure, some thoughts and desires do appear to be under the control of an autonomous self, but as expertise is gained in this practice, this illusion fades away, and everything that arises in the mind is seen to be a natural event, dependent upon impersonal causes and conditions, like everything else in nature.

意識顯現與現實的第三個區別是有關這樣的事實：思考，情緒或者其他精神現象似乎擁有一個內在個人素質。當這些過程特徵明顯發生時，人們就會感覺到自己已與這些精神現象融于一體，暫時會感到「我很高興」、「我很開心」。但是通過某些技巧來觀察意識的內容，人們會發現思考和意識的顯現是它們自己產生的，並沒有單獨的一個代理或者自我來有意識地干預或者控制。心理生理原因和條件聚合，就會產生這些精神事件，但沒有證據說明有一個單獨的「我」存在這些隨機的影響中。確切地說，一些思考與欲求確實似乎在一個隱藏的「我」的控制之下，但在這領域的專業知識判斷，這樣的錯覺會最終消失。任何從意識中產生的東西被認為和自然界中的其他事物一樣是一個自然事件，取決于非人為的原因和條件。

As noted previously, all usual kinds of experience, both sensory and introspective, are structured by memories, language, beliefs, and expectations, which cause us to assimilate even novel experiences, whether we want to or not. One of the names for the meditative practice I am describing here is 「settling the mind in its natural state,」 which implies a radical deconstruction of the ways we habitually classify, evaluate, and interpret experience. The Buddhist hypothesis in this regard is that it is possible to so profoundly settle the mind that virtually all thoughts and other mental constructs eventually become dormant. The result is not a trancelike, vegetative, or comatose state. On the contrary, it is a luminous, discerningly intelligent awareness in which the physical senses are withdrawn and the normal activities of the mind have subsided.17

正如前面所說，各種常有的體驗(感官的或者內省的)都是由記憶、語言、信仰、和期望構成，其導致我們不管願不願意都會吸收更新奇的體驗。對于我這里描述的冥想訓練，其中有一個說法叫做「使意識處于其自然的狀態」。其含義是指對我們通常歸類、評價和理解的經歷進行激烈的分解。對此，佛教認為讓意識所產生的思考或者其他意識活動最終處于休眠狀態是有可能的。其結果不是一種恍惚、呆板或者昏沉的狀態。相反，它是一種澄明、能分辨的智力覺知，在這樣的狀態中，身體的感覺已經隱沒了，意識的正常活動也隱沒。

The culmination of this meditative process is the experience of the substrate consciousness (ālaya-vij.āna), which is characterized by three essential traits: bliss, luminosity, and nonconceptuality. The quality of bliss does not arise in response to any sensory stimulus, for the physical senses are dormant, as if one were deep asleep. Nor does it arise in dependence upon a pleasant thought or mental image, for such mental features have become subdued. Rather, it appears to be an innate quality of the mind when settled in its natural state, beyond the disturbing influences of conscious and unconscious mental activity. 18 A person who has achieved this state of attentional balance can remain effortlessly in it for at least four hours, with physical senses fully withdrawn and mental awareness highly stable and alert.

該思想過程的幾點是自然本智的體驗，其有三個主要特點：幸福、澄明、非概念化。幸福的屬性並不是對任何感官刺激的反應，因為身體感覺此時已經沉寂了，就像一個人正處于深度睡眠當中，它也不是依靠一種愜意的念頭或者腦中顯現，因為這些特徵的意識已經褪去了。它當將意識放在其自然狀態時，它似乎成為了意識存在的屬性，而不需要其他意識或者無意識的精神活動的干預。

The quality of luminosity is not any kind of interior light similar to what we see with the eyes. Rather, it is an intense vigilance that has the capacity to illuminate, or make consciously manifest, anything that may arise within the space of the mind. To get some idea of what this is like, imagine being wide awake as you are immersed in a perfect sensory deprivation tank so that you have no experience of any of the five senses, or even of your own body. Then imagine that all your thought processes involving memory and imagination are put on hold, so that you are vigilantly aware of nothing but your own experience of being conscious. This is also analogous to 「lucid dreamless sleep,」 in which one is keenly aware of being deep asleep, in a kind of wakeful vacuum state of consciousness.19

達到這種專注平衡狀態的人能毫不費力地安住于這種狀態保持至少四個小時，其身體感覺完全消失，精神覺知卻非常穩定和警覺。澄明的屬性並不像我們肉眼所看到類似于屋內燈光的情況。然而，它是一種十分強烈的警覺狀態，能夠照亮所有意識層面展現的任何在精神范圍內的任何事物，想了知這具體是什麼樣的感覺，假想你自己淹沒在一個完全脫離感觀的罐子里，體驗不到任何五種感覺，甚至你自己的身體，然後想象所有你的記憶、想象、思考過程都暫時中止。這樣你會非常清醒地知道你自己感覺到清醒之外，不能感覺到其他任何東西。這有點類似于清淨的無夢睡眠。其中你自己會以醒著的意識真空狀態真切地感覺到自己處于深度睡眠當中。

The empty space of the mind of which one is aware, once the mind has been settled in its natural state, is called the substrate (ālaya).20

個人所意識到精神的空無，一旦意識處于其自然狀態時，其被稱之為自然本智。

Due to the relatively nonconceptual nature of this state of consciousness, there is no distinct experience of a division between subject and object, self and other. Relatively speaking, the subjective substrate consciousness is nondually aware of the objective substrate, an experiential vacuum into which all mental contents have temporarily subsided. The mind may now be likened to a luminously transparent snow globe in which all the normally agitated particles of mental activities have come to rest. To draw an analogy from classical physics, virtually all the kinetic energy of the human psyche has been turned into potential energy, stored in this nondual experience of the substrate.

由于該意識狀態的相對非概念性，就不會出現關于主體與客體、自己與他人的區分經歷。相對地講，主觀的自然本智以非二元對立的方式來了知其客觀自然本智，一種體驗虛空，其中所有意識內容都全部沉澱下來。此時的意識也許可以比作一個澄清透明的雪球。在里面所有正常被攪動的意識活動微粒都已經停歇了。用經典物理來做類比，幾乎所有人類心理的動能被轉變成潛在的能量，貯存在一個沒有二元對立的自然本智體驗中。

This natural, or relatively unstructured, state is permeated with an extraordinary amount of 「creative energy」 that has the capacity to generate alternative realities, such as whole dreamscapes that emerge from a state of deep sleep. To draw another analogy from contemporary physics, the substrate may be likened to the zero-point field, a background sea of luminosity permeated by an enormous amount of energy. This is the lowest possible energy state of the mind that can be achieved through such straightforward calming practices, and the energy of all kinds of mental activity is over and above that zero-point state.

該種自然的或者相對精神解構的狀態充滿著不可思議的創造性能量，其能夠產生另外的現實，例如，從深度睡眠中所產生的夢境。用現代物理再取一個例子，自然本智類似于零點場，周圍是存在充滿著能量的澄明之海。這是通過坦誠的平靜練習能夠達到意識的最可能低的能量狀態，且所有意識活動的能量會超過零點狀態的能量。

For the normal mind, enmeshed in a myriad of thoughts and emotions, this zero-point field—substrate—of consciousness is unobservable, for we see things by way of contrast. Our attention is normally drawn to appearances that arise to the physical senses and mental perception, and they alone are real for us. But all such appearances originate from this zero-point field, which permeates all our experience. We are effectively blind to it, while the world of appearance arises over and above it. When sensory and mental appearances naturally cease, as in deep sleep, the mind is normally so dull that we are incapable of ascertaining the substrate consciousness that manifests.

對于正常的意識來說，沉浸在念頭和情緒的汪洋中，這種意識零點場，自然本智是不能被觀察的，因為我們都是通過對比來看事物。我們的注意力被生理和心理感覺產生的現象吸引。對于我們來說，這些東西是真實的。但是所有這些顯現都是起源于我們體驗的零點場。我們確實對其一無所知，但整個世界的顯現都是由它而產生的。當感官和意識顯現自然停止時，例如在深度睡眠中，意識一般非常昏沉以至于我們不能辨別所展現的自然本智。

The experience of the substrate is imbued with a relative degree of symmetry, and in this vacuum state reality does not appear in a structured form, either as a human psyche or as matter. This unstable equilibrium is perturbed by the activation of the conceptual mind, which creates the bifurcations of subject and object, mind and matter, which may be regarded as broken symmetries. When the fundamental symmetry of the substrate manifests in dreamless sleep, it is generally unobservable, and can only be retrospectively inferred on the basis of the broken symmetries of waking experience.

自然本智的體驗與對稱度有關，在這個真空狀態中其不以具體的形式出現，亦不以人類心靈或者物質的形式出現。這種不穩定平衡被概念化的意識的啟動受到干擾，其構造了主客體，意識和物質這樣的分別。其可以被看成破壞的對稱。當意識本原的基本對稱在無夢的睡眠中顯現時，其總體上是不能被感知的，只能基于睡醒體驗的破壞對稱作為之前的追溯參考。

But as mentioned before, as a result of continuous training in developing increasing stages of mental and physical relaxation, together with attentional stability and vividness, it is said that one may directly vividly ascertain this relative ground state of consciousness and observe how mental and sensory phenomena emerge from it in dependence upon a wide range of psychological and physical influences.

但正如前面所提到的，通過訓練強化意識和身體放松的程度後，作為穩定清晰的注意力結果，據說可以直接清晰地確認這相關的意識的基礎狀態，且能夠觀察意識和感覺現象依靠大范圍的心理或者生理影響如何從它產生。

The mind gradually settles into the substrate consciousness as mental activities gradually subside, without suppression, throughout the course of this training. And in this process, memories, fantasies, and emotions of all kinds come to the surface of awareness. Our usual experience of our mental states is heavily edited and processed by the habitual structuring of the mind, so we tend to experience them in a way we regard as 「normal.」 But in this training, the light of consciousness, like a probe into deep space, illuminates bizarre mental phenomena that seem utterly alien to one』s past experience and sense of personal identity. As an analogy from contemporary astronomy, recall the million-second-long exposure of the Hubble Ultra Deep Field. Astronomers discovered in that region of deep space a zoo of oddball galaxies, in contrast to the classic images of spiral and elliptical galaxies. Some look like toothpicks, others like links on a bracelet, and a few of them appear to be interacting. These bizarre galaxies chronicle a period when the universe was more chaotic, when order and structure were just beginning to emerge.

意識逐漸進入自然本智，當意識活動逐漸地沉澱，無需壓制，通過這種訓練，而且在這個過程中，記憶、幻想，所有的情緒都能被覺知。由于我們通常的意識狀態體驗被意識的習慣性建構著重編輯和處理，所以我們傾向于以一種我們稱之為「正常」的方式來體驗它們。但是在這個訓練中，覺悟之光，像是在深太空探索一樣，照亮了那些似乎完全不同于個人之前體驗和感覺的奇妙精神現象。現代天文學做一個類比，像是哈勃超深空的百萬秒長的曝光，天文學家在那個深太空區域發現了奇怪的星系集合，與經典螺旋或者橢圓形的外形相比，有些看上去像是牙籤。其他像是手鐲上的連接件，其中有些看上去還有相互影響。當宇宙處于非常無序、秩序和結果才剛剛顯現時，這些古怪星系就已形成了一段時間。

Likewise, consciously exposing the deep space of the mind to thousands of hours of observation reveals normally hidden dimensions that are more chaotic, where the order and structure of the human psyche are just beginning to emerge. Strata upon strata of mental phenomena previously concealed within the subconscious are made manifest, until finally the mind comes to rest in its natural state, from which both conscious and normally subconscious events arise. This is an exercise in true depth psychology, in which one observes deep core samples of the subconscious mind, penetrating many layers of accumulated conceptual structuring.

同樣，意識上顯露于幾千小時的意識深太空的觀察會顯示出正常的更為混亂的隱藏維度。那里，人類心靈的秩序與結構才剛剛開始出現，之前被封存于潛意識的一層一層的意識現象開始顯現，直到最後意識安住于其自然狀態中，從中意識和正常的潛意識顯現。這是一項真實的深度心理訓練。其中人們能夠穿過很多積累概念性構造的精神層覆觀察潛意識的深度內核取樣。

Just as scientists expect that observations of the Hubble Ultra Deep Field will offer new insights into the birth and evolution of galaxies, so do Tibetan contemplatives believe that the experience of the substrate consciousness offers insights into the birth and evolution of the human psyche. Drawing on an analogy from modern biology, this may be portrayed as a kind of 「stem consciousness.」 Much as a stem cell diff erentiates itself in relation to specific biochemical environments, such as a brain or a liver, the substrate consciousness becomes differentiated with respect to specific living organisms. This is the earliest state of consciousness of a human embryo, and it gradually takes on the distinctive characteristics of a specific human psyche as it is conditioned and structured by a wide range of physiological and, later, cultural influences. The substrate consciousness is not inherently human, for this is also the ground state of consciousness of all other sentient animals. Contrary to the hypothesis that consciousness ultimately emerges from complex configurations of neuronal activity, according to the Great Perfection (Dzogchen) tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, the human mind emerges from the unitary experience of the zero-point field of the substrate, which is prior to and more fundamental than the human, conceptual duality of mind and matter. 21 This luminous space is undifferentiated in terms of any distinct sense of subject and object. So this hypothesis rejects both Cartesian dualism and materialistic monism, and it may be put to the test of experience, regardless of one』s ideological commitments and theoretical assumptions.

正如科學家期望對哈勃超深空的觀察將對星系的生成和演化提供新的觀念，用現代生物學做一個類比，這可以被看做為一種「意識之莖」，莖的大部分會與特定的生活環境而發生變異，就像是腦袋和肝臟，自然本智當與特定的有機物結合時也會發生變異。這就是人類胚胎最早的意識狀態。當它受到心理和後來文化等大范圍影響後，逐漸地具有了個人心靈的明顯特徵。自然本智並不是只有人類才有，因為它也是其他有感覺的動物的基礎意識狀態。與意識最終對複雜的神經元活動的確認而產生的假說相比，根據藏傳佛教的大圓滿(多欽則)的觀點，人類意識是從自然本智的零點場的一元體驗中產生的。其比人類、物質與意識的二元概念更早出現且更具基礎。對于主觀與客觀的清楚感知不同，這種明亮的境界是不變異的。所以這種假說反對笛卡爾的二元論與唯物質論。

While resting in the substrate consciousness, one may deliberately direct attention to the past, gradually exercising memory until one can vividly and accurately recall events.

不管個人的意識形態與理論假設，它都可以通過體驗來證明，當安住于自然本智中，有人能夠故意將注意力轉向過去，訓練記憶並能夠清晰地準確回憶起以前的事情。

Some Buddhists claim that within the distilled, luminous space of deep concentration, one may direct the attention back in time even before conception in this life and recall events in the distant past.22

一些佛教徒聲稱，通過深度注意力集中而提煉的明亮境界中，有人能夠將注意力轉向到這一世之前，回憶起前世的事情。

As far-fetched as this hypothesis may seem, it can be tested with carefully controlled experiments, assuming that the subjects involved are highly expert in this practice. By such rigorous examination, it should be a fairly straightforward process to determine whether such adepts』 「memories」 are accurate recollections from the past or mere fantasies.

然這種假說聽起來不怎麼靠譜，但是也可以通過謹慎的受控實驗來測試。被測試的對象是這領域的專家。通過高強度的檢查，確定這些專家的記憶是否是源于過去或僅僅是幻想可以得到比較坦誠的答案。

Open-minded skepticism toward these claims—specifically, the kind of skepticism that inspires testing hypotheses in the most rigorous way possible—is healthy and appropriate for the scientific community. To the great detriment of science, however, the ideal of skepticism in the twentieth century has often degenerated into a kind of complacent closed-mindedness about any theory or method of inquiry that deviates from current mainstream science. Richard Feynman reminded us of the true ideal of scientific skepticism when he encouraged experimenters to search most diligently in precisely those areas where it seems most likely they can prove their own theories wrong.23

對于這些言論比較開放的懷疑主義者們，尤其是鼓勵用最可能激烈的方法來測試假說的懷疑論者，認為這樣是對整個科學界來說是有益的。然而，對于科學的最大損害，二十世紀的懷疑論者通常墮落為某種沾沾自喜的封閉思想，認為其探索的理論與方法與當今科學主流相背離。理查德費曼，當他鼓勵實驗者們努力尋找此領域里探索時，提醒我們什麼是真正的科學家中的懷疑論者，因為看上去只有這里他們最可能證明他們自己的理論是錯誤的。

Heraclitus, the sixth-century b.c.e. Greek philosopher known for his belief that the nature of everything is change itself, encouraged this open-minded attentiveness to novelty: 「If you do not expect the unexpected, you will not find it, since it is trackless and unexplored.」 24

赫拉克利特(Heraclitus)，公元前六世紀的希臘哲學家，其堅信一切事物的性質就是變化而聞名于世，鼓勵對新鮮事物保持開放思想。「如果你不能看見所不能看見的，你將無法找到它，因為它毫無蹤跡，從未被開拓。」

來源：Allan Wallace的個人網站

智悲翻譯中心 翻譯：慈恆、圓優、才仁扎西

校對：圓優、慈恆