如果沒有道德約束,你會變成什麼樣?

If there were no morals-who would you be? What would you act like? What would you talk like? What would you think like? Would you really be any different?

如果沒有了任何的道德標準，你會是誰？會做什麼，說什麼，想什麼，你會與現在有什麼不同呢？

Our morals are rules laid down for us by a society called a religion or a society called a church or a school. Some will even say that these laws were laid down for us by the divine-in whatever form we see the divine. Regardless of their origin, they tell us what is wrong and what is right and we are taught that we have within us a conscience which will tell us when we have violated one of these rules by making us feel guilty. And so we have a direction and whether we land on the "bad" side of these rules or the "good" side of these rules, we do it by conforming our mind, heart and behavior to what it takes to fit into that identity. Once conformed, we could say, "I'm a bad dude" or "I think I'm a pretty good person." So, essentially what we have said is that we learn to rely on one of these two categories (or one of the gradations between them) as identity. They define us. But these are external constructs that very often do not even truly touch the deepest inner regions of the psyche.

事實上，我們的道德標準通常是由教堂或者學校等宗教和社會團體來定義的，有些人甚至認爲這是神賜的準則。這些道德標準，不知源自哪裏，一味的告訴我們什麼是對什麼是錯，告訴我們一旦違反了某項規則，內心的良知自然會讓我們感到羞愧。於是我們被指引着把自己的想法、意願、行爲與道德標準的“好”與“壞”去衡量，一旦符合，我們便知道了自己是好人還是壞人。所以，基本上我們只需要在“好”與“壞”這兩個類別裏（或者某個中間地帶）找到自己的定位，由它們來評判自己。可是，這些外部構想大部分時候並不能觸及到我們的內心深處。

So, how do we even begin to define ourselves without the use of these external stratagems? We go to the deeper inner regions of the psyche where they do not exist. And how, you will I'm certain ask, does one do that?

那麼，不去理會這些膚淺的伎倆，我們又該如何來定義自己呢？所謂“內心深處”的地方並不是真實存在，就算存在，我們又能做些什麼？

We begin by refusing to repress material in our everyday lives. We begin by staying conscious in a given moment about what's going on inside of us-and allowing it to stay in the forefront of our minds so that we can see it and feel it and even dialogue with it. In so doing we are treating the energy of emotion, thought and sensation as valid, instead of invalidating it immediately by sending it to its room in the unconscious.

首先，我們不能再在日常的生活中壓抑自己。我們要保持清醒，時刻關注內心的動態並讓它停留在意識前沿，這樣我們才能看到它，感覺到它，甚至與它對話。通過這樣的方式把轉瞬即逝的情緒、想法和感覺轉化爲有用的力量，而不是讓它們在無意間消失。

That said, many of us don't even know how to access our feelings in a given moment. Try asking yourself what you are feeling right this minute. Of what are you immediately aware? Is it a thought that appears first, or an emotion. Thoughts will often describe an event instead of a feeling, or they will start off with "I think" or they will use the word that as in "I feel that...". There is no that in a feeling. A that will be followed by an explanation of why you feel what you feel, but will not state the feeling itself. A feeling will be simply described by its name: "I feel angry," "I feel sad," "I feel mildly irritated." If you find it difficult to get to a feeling you may have to try some other tricks to sort of jog your feelings loose in order to grab hold of them. You might try writing poetry or doing art work just allowing it to flow from you without edit or revision and then go back and look at the picture or read what you've written and ask yourself to find the feeling trying to be expressed. If you are still having trouble getting to a feeling, you might want to try working with a therapist on this.

問題是，很多人並不知道如何在特定的時刻抓住自己的感覺。那麼，試着問問自己：“這一刻你在想什麼？” 這時，即刻出現在你腦子裏的是什麼，一個想法還是一種情緒？想法一般代表一個事件而不是感覺，它們會以 “我認爲……” 或者 “我覺得……” 來表述自己。情緒則沒有類似的表述，它們不會闡明自己，而是讓你意識到它們出現的原因。情緒通常以簡單直接的方式來描述，比如 “我很生氣，” “我很難過，” “我有些惱火。” 如果你覺得這很難，你可以嘗試用放鬆的方式來喚起你的感覺，隨着心情寫詩，或者畫畫，然後看看自己完成的作品，試着從中讀出自己的感覺。如果這些都行不通，你還可以尋求心理醫師的幫助。

Once you get to a feeling you might want to try to start a dialogue with the feeling, so that it can tell you what it came to tell you. Our feelings are telling us something about ourselves and our lives. They are not telling us about someone else or someone else's life. Are you feeling resentful of a coworker, because you end up having to do his job-but also because you hate the job and end up having to do more of it because he's not doing his job. What does that feeling tell you? Does it tell you that you must be a "bad" person in some kind of way because you have these "negative" feelings? If so, you are still using external stratagems to define yourself. If you step beyond that, what does your feeling tell you about your life? Could it possibly be telling you something like "Go get a new job that you love?"

一旦你抓住了自己的感覺，試着和它交流，讓它告訴你它爲什麼會出現。由此我們可以更多的瞭解自己和自己的生活，與他人無關。試問，你是否對同事有所不滿，因爲你需要做他的工作，或者，你其實討厭這工作本身，而同事的不作爲讓你承擔了更多你不喜歡的事。你的感覺告訴了你什麼？因爲擁有這些負面情緒，所以你就是個“壞人”？如果是，那麼你仍然在用外在的因素來評判自己。試着跨過這一步，想想你的情緒是否反映了你的生活？或許它想對你說的是：“去換一份你真正喜歡的工作吧。”

Is there someone inside of us who can direct us from something deeper and more real than mere morality? What if loving all of life, really loving all of life unconditionally-really unconditionally-were the guiding light? What if loving life unconditionally means accepting what we have as it is without judging or interpreting it to be unacceptable. This doesn't mean we don't change our lives once we have accepted what is. It means that our acceptance of life as it is allows us to change our lives according to who we actually are, rather than according to some external and internalized code.

在我們的內心深處，有沒有一個人，能讓我們看到比道德標準更加深層和真實的東西呢？其實我們應該熱愛生活，無條件的熱愛生活。不去判斷生活是否令人滿意，只是去接受它本來的樣子。當然這並不代表我們不能改變生活，事實上，正是對生活的熱愛和接受允許了我們根據自己的內心去改變生活，而不是根據任何外在或內在的規則。

Loving life unconditionally means that whatever we are feeling about a given scenario in our lives tells much more about ourselves than it does about the given scenario. This means all of our work on acceptance is an inside job, and it further means that the more internal we go, the more of the external we can receive. This makes life bigger and rounder. And it allows to live with at least a modicum of peace. So, who are you without your morals?

無條件的熱愛生活意味着我們對某些事件的感覺往往比事件本身更具啓示意義。而且，在意識上更深層的認知，將在現實中帶給我們更大的收穫。人生會變得更加豐富和充實，我們也會以更加平和的心態去生活。所以，除去你的道德標準，你想成爲怎樣的你呢？