WIE: Do these complexes have a will of their own or do we, in the end, choose which complex predominates?
WIE：这些情结是不是有它们自发的意志？或者我们最终可以选择让某些情结占优势？
JH: Let’s take an example: A person could say, “When I look at my history I see that there are certain patterns there. The only person who has been in every scene in the history of my life has been me, so I am somehow the manufacturer of those patterns. I can blame Western civilization or my parents, if I want to, but I have to recognize that somehow I am doing this.” We’d say that that’s good work by the ego because it’s opening up dialogue with other parts of the psyche.
JH：让我们用一个例子来说明：一个人可以说，“当我们回顾我们自己的历史，我看到那里有些特定的模式。在我生命的历史中每一幕中都出现的那唯一的一个人就是我，所以我是所有这些模式的制造者。如果我要的话，我可以谴责西方文明或者我的父母，但是，我必须认识到，某种意义上来说，是这个我决定了选择责备和制造那些模式的。 我们说这是自我所做的良好工作，因为它开放了与心智的其他部分的对话。
WIE: Is the ego, according to Jung, equivalent to who or what we refer to when we say “I”?
WIE：根据容格的理论，自我等同于我们说“我”的时候所指的那个人或者物么？
JH: Generally speaking, “who I think I am” is the ego state. But the problem is “who I think I am” can also be a complex. I could be born a slave and have the identity of a slave. The only time we’re in a pure state of ego, I think, is when we’re responding strictly reflexively to the moment. In an activity of sports, one is normally not in a complex. One could be at the batter’s plate so filled with anxiety that one couldn’t swing the bat, but usually in the moment of the ball’s flight, one is wholly absorbed and present to the moment. That’s a pure ego state.
JH：一般说来，“我认为我是谁”是自我的状态。但是问题是“我认为我是谁”也可能是一个情结。我可能出生是一个奴隶，于是我就对奴隶认同。我想，我们处于自我的纯粹状态的唯一时刻是瞬间彻底自发的反应。在一体育运动中，一个人一般不会处于情结之中。他可能是如此充满焦虑地处于击球手的位置，以致于无法挥动球棒，但是在球的飞行时刻，他被彻底地沉浸于那一刻。这就是纯粹的自我状态。
WIE: Would Jung’s pure ego state be equivalent to a condition where we were in touch with reality directly as it is?
WIE：容格的纯自我状态等同于我们与现实本身直接接触时的状况么？
JH: Yes, that’s right. In that sense it would be not unlike the Zen concept of “no mindedness”—it’s just pure being. And yet to function in culture, we need an ego that allows us to structure time and organize our energies in service to certain abstractions like economics or service or whatever.
JH：是的，这是正确的。从这个意义上来看， 它并非不象禅宗的“空明”概念——它就是一个纯粹的存在。但要在文化中正常发挥功能，我们需要一个自我来保证我们构造时间和组织我们的能量来服务于特定的抽象机制， 比如经济，服务业或其他什么。
Jung’s concept of the ego evolved over time. Early on he wanted, I think, to privilege the messages of the unconscious and to say that the job of the ego was to serve what the unconscious wanted. Later in his life he modified that and emphasized the need for ethical responsibility. For example, if I dream I’m murdering someone, I don’t wake up and murder the person. I say, “What’s that about?” That’s a proper use of the ego—to serve as a conscious processing of life’s experience, neither giving too much authority to the outer world, nor too much to the inner world.
容格关于自我的概念是随着时间而发展。我想，在他早期观点中，他要给特权予无意识的信息，宣称自我的工作是服务于无意识的需要。在他生命的后期，他修改了这个观点并且强调伦理的责任的需求。例如，如果我做梦我在谋杀某人，我没醒来并且谋杀了这个人。我说，“这是什么？”这是自我的一个恰当应用——有意识地体味生命的具体经验。既不太臣服于外部世界，也不任性于内部世界的指使。
WIE: What was Jung’s view on the relationship between conscience and ego?
WIE：容格关于道德和自我的关系的观点是什么？
JH: Well, let me step back and I’ll come around to that in a moment. You see, for Jung, the superordinate reality is what he called the “Self”—which is not to be confused with the ego. In the first half of life, our task is to develop an ego, a conscious sense of who we are that’s strong enough to leave our parents and go out into the world and say, “Hire me, I can do that job”; “Have a relationship with me, you can trust me”; etcetera. If we fail to develop our ego awareness sufficiently, we remain children. The dialogue in the first half of life is the dialogue with the world: What does the world ask of me? But the second half of life, Jung said, was for the ego to develop a dialogue with the Self. The question then is: What does the Self ask of me?—which is much more of an interior dialogue, and one could say, a religious dialogue. Because the Self may very well wish one to go in a direction that the ego would prefer not to go in—a direction that might lead not to a path of self-aggrandizement but to a path of sacrifice. For example, if the summons of the Self is to be an artist, then chances are you’re going to starve in our culture. And yet if that’s what the Self is asking and the ego continues to fly off in the other direction, immense internal suffering is going to be the by-product. So ultimately, the ego would have to come to respect what the Self was asking. There would be an ethical and religious responsibility to dialogue with that and still live in the real world. And part of the task of the ego is to cope with the conflict that that could produce.
JH：恩，让我回顾一下以前所讲述的，我再立即回到这个问题。你看，对于容格来说，超高级的现实是他所称的“自性”——这个不能与“自我”混淆。在生命的第一半段，我们的任务是发展一个自我，一个对我是谁的有意识的感觉，这个感觉强壮到足以让我们离开父母走入世界，说：“雇佣我吧，我可以做那份工作”；“和我确定关系吧，你可以相信我”等。如果我们不能充分发展我们自我的意识，我们仍旧是儿童。在生命的第一段的对话是与世界的对话；世界期望我做什么？但是，容格说，在生命的第二阶段是自我发展与自性对话的阶段。问题于是变为： 自性期望我做什么？——这个更多的是一个内心的对话，可以说，是一个宗教的对话。因为自性可能期望一个人进入一个自我不期望进入的方向——一个不走向自我积资的道路而是走向自我牺牲的路。比如，如果自体的召唤是成为一个艺术家，而在我们的文化中，这个机会意味着着，你会被饿死。但如果这是自性的要求， 而自我却继续象其他方向飞逃，极大的内心痛苦将会成为副产物。所以，最终，自我必须尊重自性的要求。保持与自性的对话同时继续留在现实世界中，这是一个伦理和宗教的责任。自我的部分任务就是调和因为这些带来的冲突。
WIE: What is the Self according to Jung? Is it that which represents or calls us to realize our highest potential as human beings?
WIE：对于容格来说，什么是自性？它是代表着实现我们作为人类所具有的最大的潜能的呼唤么？
JH: The Self would be the wisdom of the organism. The totality of the purposefulness of that which we are, which transcends consciousness.
JH：自性是有机体的智慧。那趋向完满的我们的内在本质，它超越了意识。
WIE: You mentioned that in “dialoguing with the Self,” one might discover that one’s destiny was to become an artist. When Jung refers to this “summons of the Self,” it seems that he is referring to that undertaking or role in life for which we are best suited, which utilizes our talents most fully, regardless of what it may be—and that it is not necessarily a summons to the spiritual path.
WIE：你提到“与自性话”，一个人可能会发现他的命数是成为一个艺术家。当容格谈及“自性呼唤”的时候，似乎他是指在生命中扮演一个最适合我们的角色，最充分的运用我们的天赋-不管它可能是什么——但这并不一定是对精神道路的呼唤。