首页 > 范文大全

让我们来谈谈灵魂诗歌

时间：2024年04月24日

来源：门口的花

编辑：本站小编

收藏本文

下载本文

以下是小编精心整理的让我们来谈谈灵魂诗歌，本文共3篇，供大家阅读参考。本文原稿由网友“门口的花”提供。

篇1：让我们来谈谈灵魂诗歌

来，让我们谈谈

我们的灵魂

让我们甚至躲开

自己的耳目

就像玫瑰花园一样

永远展露微笑

就像幻想一样

永远无声地言说

就像精神一样

统治着世界

用无言

诉说秘密

让我们远离

所有聪明的人

他们教我们该说些什么

让我们只说出

我们的心愿

甚至我们的手脚

都会感知每一个内在的行动

让我们保持安静

跟随内心的指引

神秘的命运

知晓每一粒尘埃的一生

让我们讲述我们的故事

有如一粒微尘

（赵红星摘自人民文学出版社《鲁米诗选》一书）

树和天空

〔瑞典〕托马斯·特朗

斯特罗姆

◎李笠译

有棵树在雨中走动

在倾洒的灰色里匆匆经过我们

它有急事。它汲取雨中的生命

就像果园里的一只黑鸟

雨停歇。树停止走动

它在晴朗之夜静静地闪现

和我们一样，它在等待

空中雪花绽放的一瞬

（林冬冬摘自四川文艺出版社《特朗斯特罗姆诗歌全集》一书）

无法喊出的爸

那次，我去外地出差。一上火车，我的座位上居然坐着一个黑不溜秋的男人，闭着双眼，抱着一个四五岁的孩子。孩子已经熟睡了，丝毫没有因为车厢内的嘈杂和喧闹而受到影响。

过了一会儿，男人把怀里的孩子放平，让她睡在座位上，然后脱掉身上的外套，盖在孩子瘦弱的身子上。他站起来，甩甩胳膊，扭扭脖子，在过道上来回走动。

男人隔一会儿就要回来看看孩子，并用手摸摸孩子的额头。大约一个小时后，孩子醒了。男人眼尖，很快抽身回来。孩子没有吭声，只用眼睛看着男人，又长又黑的睫毛眨巴眨巴的。男人什么也没有说，在行李架上扯下一个包，从包里掏出一桶大碗面。轻声细语地对孩子说：“我去接点开水啊！”孩子点点头笑了，还露出两颗洁白的门牙。这孩子长得挺可爱的，从她的笑容中我发现她是个小女孩，还是个哑女。

很快，男人手捧一碗泡面回来了。哑女拿起筷子要吃，他小声地说：“烫。等会儿再吃。”哑女望着男人，停下了伸出来的手。大概是想着哑女饿了，男人用筷子挑起几绺面，放到嘴巴前，使劲地吹着气“噗、噗……”吹完，男人把筷子上的面，喂进了哑女的嘴。哑女眼含笑意，张开嘴巴吃了起来……

一会儿，哑女用手掐了掐男人的手。男人说：“吃饱了？”哑女微笑着点头。男人又说：“那我吃了？”哑女再次微笑着点头。男人用嘴唇靠近方便面的碗沿，三下五除二把面吃完了。等他扔掉方便面碗筷回来时，哑女却坐立不安，焦急地用手抓着上衣。他抱起孩子，从过道走向厕所去了。原来哑女的所需和所求，全都是靠眼神传达给男人的。

对面座位上一个四川口音的中年女人说：“那女娃子是他在医院门口捡的。出生没几天，就被亲生父母扔掉了。他看见了，就抱回家自己养着。因为这个娃子，他快30岁了，还没有结婚，走到哪里打工，就把女娃带到哪里。”接着，中年女人告诉我说她是男人的工友，他养哑女的事情，工友们都劝过要他放弃，他坚决不干。

“那他这是要去哪里呢？”我问。四川妇女应声回答：“要去武汉打工。”带着这样一个孩子咋打工呢？四川妇女看出了我的疑惑，接着说，“别人说武汉有家医院可以看这种病，他就决定去武汉打工。”

听她这么一说，我的心顿时一沉。一个农民工带着一个病孩子，一边打工一边寻医，其艰难可想而知。正说着，男人抱着哑女从过道慢慢走了回来。

后来，有人推着车子卖水果。我买了两份西瓜、两份草莓，一份递给男人：“给孩子吃吧！”哑女摇着头，用葡萄般黑亮的眼睛望着，浅浅地甜笑，仿佛在说：“谢谢您。阿姨，我不吃。”男人笑了一下，用手挠了挠头顶，不好意思地说：“我姑娘她只爱吃泡面，从不吃这些……”他们父女委婉地拒绝了我的怜悯。

下了火车后，我看着他背着一个大包，把哑女架在脖子上，她用双手环绕着抱住他的额头。我忍不住，跑前几步，踮起脚拉住哑女的`手，在她粉嫩的脸上摸了一下。肩上的哑女回头冲着我笑了一下。那双会说话的眼睛忽闪忽闪地，好像对我说：“您不用担心我，我有爸爸照顾。”

我站在川流不息的出站口，望着那个黑不溜秋的男人瘦弱的背影，感慨万千：平凡普通的外表下面却隐藏着善良高贵的灵魂。

风的记忆

风吹乱了大地的情愫，

却吹不动曾经灵魂的悲伤。

为了曾经的随口的应答，

认真地等待无法结果的殇。

不知在何时，

那份心殇动荡了风的惆怅，

平静的夜晚又起了波澜，

用力地推翻记忆中，

一次又一次地拍打着身影留下的过去。

不因一滴雨露而看不清晨耀的光，

不因一句话语而跳不出禁锢的篱，

不因阴霾的云而体不会阴晴变换，

不因一阵狂风而感不到风轻云淡。

风吹过后绿草依旧如茵，

悸动的心忍受着风吹过后的苍茫，

生怕惊醒风的惆怅，

又一次吹乱大地、山峦的宁静，

让我们把平静的时光用记忆的沙漏埋藏，

在下一次波澜时倒转，

打开遗失的印记。

轻松的灵魂

洗一个澡，看一朵花，吃一顿饭。假使你觉得快活，并非因为澡洗得干净，花开得好，或者菜合你的口味，而是因为你心上没有挂碍。

轻松的灵魂可以专注肉体的感觉，以此来欣赏，来审定。

信手拈来

临近下班时候，阴霾的天空中下起来零零碎碎的小雨

路中行人来去匆匆

公交上，不知为何心却惆怅起来

回忆犹如电影般从脑海中浮现

不知不觉已经4年了

熟悉的城市

却找不到半点熟悉的味道

是什么让我们迷失了最初的初衷

是什么改变我们的生活

拥有失去

还是未曾拥有过呢

你，是否在此时此刻如我一般地回忆那些美好的年华

但始终回不了去

那些快乐，那些烦恼那些痛苦，那些抉择。

华为灰烬

一切只是漠然

人生的三种境界

归于哪种呢

生活或许就是这样

痛苦而又充满抉择的

罢了

面对现实吧

云自无心水自闲

四楼半的天空

告诉你一个秘密。每座学校都有一个四楼半，或者，是三楼半。可能并不是叫这个名字，但这样的地方一定存在。

通往学校屋顶的大门一般都牢牢紧锁，而通向屋顶的那段台阶，一般也没有什么老师或者清洁工去。就这么一小块的地方，势必会成为一小部分人的秘密园地。在我隔壁学校的那个三楼半，被当成学生的涂鸦天地，新的涂鸦盖掉旧的涂鸦，一届学生一届学生涂下去，谁也不记得它最初的模样。在我朋友学校的那个三楼半被叫做“纸条角”，墙上贴着“王老师是个没眼光的人给我的作文打那么低分”之类的纸条，大家还会在后面“跟帖”。也听说有的三楼半被当做一堆调皮学生吃饭玩闹的地方，天天放学聚在那里聊天。

在我的学校，是四楼半，它的墙上时不时会冒出一点涂鸦，有时地上也会有几个塑料瓶子。我不知道它最大的职能是什么，但是，每天中午，它一定是我一个人的。它是我一个人的背书园地。

每天中午，走读生会回家吃饭，而我们住宿生在食堂吃完饭后会回到教室，在课桌上打个盹儿。我没有午睡的习惯。我会走到我的四楼半，站在台阶上，拿起一本《李清照词》什么的背起来。也会在快考试的时候，我需要突击，就拿着课本背什么副高压气旋和地转偏向力。

告诉你第二个秘密，出声背的效果绝对比默背要好，因为多个感官参与会加深印象。毕业已经这么多年了，我还记得地球自转一周的周期是365日6时9分10秒，我的同龄人可都不记得这个了。

总之在那个时候，我会大声把要背的东西抑扬顿挫地朗诵出来，在空无一人的台阶上，在属于我的四楼半。

忘记是在哪天，我的四楼半出现了入侵者。那天我站在午后的阳光里，把书扣在一旁，背着手吟诵着：“秋千巷陌人静，皎月初斜，浸梨花……”一个男生，他手里拿着和卷子一样大的那么一张纸，往台阶上走了过来。他完全沉浸在自己的世界里，而我也是。所以当他意识到有个人在这里大声背书，就吓了一跳，而我意识到有人闯了过来，也吓了一跳。

我不认识他，他似乎也不认识我。他说：“不好意思啊。”就又低着头走了。

我觉得他应该是一个识趣的人，所以在第二天依然坦然地放声背诵。可我万万没有预料到他还是会闯过来。他还是拿着大大的一张纸往台阶上走，然后被我吓一跳。他走后我就背不下去了，总觉得还会有人闯过来，烦躁极了。

第三天，我吃了午饭后拿着书过来，居然看到他已经坐在那里了，膝盖上摊着一张纸。我生气了，我特别想说：“喂，这里是我的。”但是又想，没人规定这里是谁的啊。我气呼呼地站在那里看着他，说不出话来。他发现了我，站了起来，拎着那张纸说：“不好意思啊，你天天都会来这里的吧，那我走了。”

这下，我又觉得是我应该不好意思才对。我说：“算啦算啦，毕竟今天你先来。”

“真抱歉，不过我实在找不到别的地方了。这样吧，星期一三五，你来这里背书，星期二四六，我来这里，好吗？”

那个时候我们高年级的学生周六还要在学校补课。

我就这么答应了他的请求，我觉得还算公平。

每天的中午，我都会回忆一下今天是周几；我背书的时候，会想着他昨天在这里；他，或者我，偶尔会留这样的条子：“明天我有事不来了，跟你调一下啊。”这些事情，我都觉得很有趣。像是拥有一个共同的秘密。原来，分享没有想象中那么痛苦。

终于有一天，我忍不住去了轮到他占用的四楼半，看到他还是拿着一张大纸坐在那里。他吓了一跳，说：“你弄错时间了吧。”

我说：“我好奇很久了，你写的是什么？”

他敷衍地摇摇头，他说：“你以后不要弄错时间了，你闯过来，很打扰我的情绪。”

我觉得这个人实在是太冷了，我再也不打算去撞见他了。

日子一天天过去了，我认为我和那个男生再也不会产生什么交集。一切都会像流水一样，淌过去，就算有一点障碍，也仍会淌过去。

我有一个叫做赵丹的后桌。有天她神秘兮兮地要告诉我一个秘密。她说：“我昨天下了晚自习后，和刘玉跑到四楼半唱歌玩儿，那儿不是回音大嘛。我们从那里捡到东西了呢，你要不要看？”我点点头。

她拿出一支笔来，这是一支非常好看的英雄钢笔，金色的笔尖。我挺惊讶的，现在我们都几乎在用圆珠笔或者中性笔，没什么人用钢笔。我突然想到这会是谁的钢笔了，表情立马变了。赵丹说：“难道你知道这是谁的笔？”我点点头。赵丹说：“谁的啊？”我说：“我也不知道他叫什么。”赵丹说：“不熟吗？”我说：“了解一些。”赵丹说：“平时会碰到吗？”我说：“是能够碰到的。”但我不想把我去四楼半的事情告诉赵丹。

篇2：TED英语演讲稿：让我们来谈谈死亡

TED英语演讲稿：让我们来谈谈死亡

简介：我们无法控制死亡的到来，但也许我们可以选择用何种态度来面对它。特护专家peter saul博士希望通过演讲帮助人们弄清临终者真正的意愿，并选择适当的方式去面对。

look, i had second thoughts, really, about whether i could talk about this to such a vital and alive audience as you guys. then i remembered the quote from gloria steinem, which goes, “the truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.” (laughter) so -- (laughter)

so with that in mind, i'm going to set about trying to do those things here, and talk about dying in the 21st century. now the first thing that will piss you off, undoubtedly, is that all of us are, in fact, going to die in the 21st century. there will be no exceptions to that. there are, apparently, about one in eight of you who think you're immortal, on surveys, but -- (laughter) unfortunately, that isn't going to happen.

while i give this talk, in the next 10 minutes, a hundred million of my cells will die, and over the course of today, 2,000 of my brain cells will die and never come back, so you could argue that the dying process starts pretty early in the piece.

anyway, the second thing i want to say about dying in the 21st century, apart from it's going to happen to everybody, is it's shaping up to be a bit of a train wreck for most of us, unless we do something to try and reclaim this process from the rather inexorable trajectory that it's currently on.

so there you go. that's the truth. no doubt that will piss you off, and now let's see whether we can set you free. i don't promise anything. now, as you heard in the intro, i work in intensive care, and i think i've kind of lived through the heyday of intensive care. it's been a ride, man. this has been fantastic. we have machines that go ping. there's many of them up there. and we have some wizard technology which i think has worked really well, and over the course of the time i've worked in intensive care, the death rate for males in australia has halved, and intensive care has had something to do with that. certainly, a lot of the technologies that we use have got something to do with that.

so we have had tremendous success, and we kind of got caught up in our own success quite a bit, and we started using expressions like “lifesaving.” i really apologize to everybody for doing that, because obviously, we don't. what we do is prolong people's lives, and delay death, and redirect death, but we can't, strictly speaking, save lives on any sort of permanent basis.

and what's really happened over the period of time that i've been working in intensive care is that the people whose lives we started saving back in the '70s, '80s, and '90s, are now coming to die in the 21st century of diseases that we no longer have the answers to in quite the way we did then.

so what's happening now is there's been a big shift in the way that people die, and most of what they're dying of now isn't as amenable to what we can do as what it used to be like when i was doing this in the '80s and '90s.

so we kind of got a bit caught up with this, and we haven't really squared with you guys about what's really happening now, and it's about time we did. i kind of woke up to this bit in the late '90s when i met this guy. this guy is called jim, jim smith, and he looked like this. i was called down to the ward to see him. his is the little hand. i was called down to the ward to see him by a respiratory physician. he said, “look, there's a guy down here. he's got pneumonia, and he looks like he needs intensive care. his daughter's here and she wants everything possible to be done.” which is a familiar phrase to us. so i go down to the ward and see jim, and his skin his translucent like this. you can see his bones through the skin. he's very, very thin, and he is, indeed, very sick with pneumonia, and he's too sick to talk to me, so i talk to his daughter kathleen, and i say to her, “did you and jim ever talk about what you would want done if he ended up in this kind of situation?” and she looked at me and said,

“no, of course not!” i thought, “okay. take this steady.” and i got talking to her, and after a while, she said to me, “you know, we always thought there'd be time.”

jim was 94. (laughter) and i realized that something wasn't happening here. there wasn't this dialogue going on that i imagined was happening. so a group of us started doing survey work, and we looked at four and a half thousand nursing home residents in newcastle, in the newcastle area, and discovered that only one in a hundred of them had a plan about what to do when their hearts stopped beating. one in a hundred. and only one in 500 of them had plan about what to do if they became seriously ill. and i realized, of course, this dialogue is definitely not occurring in the public at large.

now, i work in acute care. this is john hunter hospital. and i thought, surely, we do better than that. so a colleague of mine from nursing called lisa shaw and i went through hundreds and hundreds of sets of notes in the medical records department looking at whether there was any sign at all that anybody had had any conversation about what might happen to them if the treatment they were receiving was unsuccessful to the point that they would die. and we didn't find a single record of any preference about goals, treatments or outcomes from any of the sets of notes initiated by a doctor or by a patient.

so we started to realize that we had a problem, and the problem is more serious because of this.

what we know is that obviously we are all going to die, but how we die is actually really important, obviously not just to us, but also to how that features in the lives of all the people who live on afterwards. how we die lives on in the minds of everybody who survives us, and the stress created in families by dying is enormous, and in fact you get seven times as much stress by dying in intensive care as by dying just about anywhere else, so dying in intensive care is not your top option if you've got a choice.

and, if that wasn't bad enough, of course, all of this is rapidly progressing towards the fact that many of you, in fact, about one in 10 of you at this point, will die in intensive care. in the u.s., it's one in five. in miami, it's three out of five people die in intensive care. so this is the sort of momentum that we've got at the moment.

the reason why this is all happening is due to this, and i do have to take you through what this is about. these are the four ways to go. so one of these will happen to all of us. the ones you may know most about are the ones that are becoming increasingly of historical interest: sudden death. it's quite likely in an audience this size this won't happen to anybody here. sudden death has become very rare. the death of little nell and cordelia and all that sort of stuff just doesn't happen anymore. the dying process of those with terminal illness that we've just seen occurs to younger people. by the time you've reached 80, this is unlikely to happen to you. only one in 10 people who are over 80 will die of cancer.

the big growth industry are these. what you die of is increasing organ failure, with your respiratory, cardiac, renal, whatever organs packing up. each of these would be an admission to an acute care hospital, at the end of which, or at some point during which, somebody says, enough is enough, and we stop.

and this one's the biggest growth industry of all, and at least six out of 10 of the people in this room will die in this form, which is the dwindling of capacity with increasing frailty, and frailty's an inevitable part of aging, and increasing frailty is in fact the main thing that people die of now, and the last few years, or the last year of your life is spent with a great deal of disability, unfortunately.

enjoying it so far? (laughs) (laughter) sorry, i just feel such a, i feel such a cassandra here. (laughter)

what can i say that's positive? what's positive is that this is happening at very great age, now. we are all, most of us, living to reach this point. you know, historically, we didn't do that. this is what happens to you when you live to be a great age, and unfortunately, increasing longevity does mean more old age, not more youth. i'm sorry to say that. (laughter) what we did, anyway, look, what we did, we didn't just take this lying down at john hunter hospital and elsewhere. we've started a whole series of projects to try and look about whether we could, in fact, involve people much more in the way that things happen to them. but we realized, of course, that we are dealing with cultural issues, and this is, i love this klimt painting, because the more you look at it, the more you kind of get the whole issue that's going on here, which is clearly the separation of death from the living, and the fear ― like, if you actually look, there's one woman there who has her eyes open. she's the one he's looking at, and [she's] the one he's coming for. can you see that? she looks terrified. it's an amazing picture.

anyway, we had a major cultural issue. clearly, people didn't want us to talk about death, or, we thought that. so with loads of funding from the federal government and the local health service, we introduced a thing at john hunter called respecting patient choices. we trained hundreds of people to go to the wards and talk to people about the fact that they would die, and what would they prefer under those circumstances. they loved it. the families and the patients, they loved it. ninety-eight percent of people really thought this just should have been normal practice, and that this is how things should work. and when they expressed wishes, all of those wishes came true, as it were. we were able to make that happen for them. but then, when the funding ran out, we went back to look six months later, and everybody had stopped again, and nobody was having these conversations anymore. so that was really kind of heartbreaking for us, because we thought this was going to really take off. the cultural issue had reasserted itself.

so here's the pitch: i think it's important that we don't just get on this freeway to icu without thinking hard about whether or not that's where we all want to end up, particularly as we become older and increasingly frail and icu has less and less and less to offer us. there has to be a little side road off there for people who don't want to go on that track. and i have one small idea, and one big idea about what could happen.

and this is the small idea. the small idea is, let's all of us engage more with this in the way that jason has illustrated. why can't we have these kinds of conversations with our own elders and people who might be approaching this? there are a couple of things you can do. one of them is, you can, just ask this simple question. this question never fails. “in the event that you became too sick to speak for yourself, who would you like to speak for you?” that's a really important question to ask people, because giving people the control over who that is produces an amazing outcome. the second thing you can say is, “have you spoken to that person about the things that are important to you so that we've got a better idea of what it is we can do?” so that's the little idea.

the big idea, i think, is more political. i think we have to get onto this. i suggested we should have occupy death. (laughter) my wife said, “yeah, right, sit-ins in the mortuary. yeah, yeah. sure.” (laughter) so that one didn't really run, but i was very struck by this. now, i'm an aging hippie. i don't know, i don't think i look like that anymore, but i had, two of my kids were born at home in the '80s when home birth was a big thing, and we baby boomers are used to taking charge of the situation, so if you just replace all these words of birth, i like “peace, love, natural death” as an option. i do think we have to get political and start to reclaim this process from the medicalized model in which it's going.

now, listen, that sounds like a pitch for euthanasia. i want to make it absolutely crystal clear to you all, i hate euthanasia. i think it's a sideshow. i don't think euthanasia matters. i actually think that, in places like oregon, where you can have physician-assisted suicide, you take a poisonous dose of stuff, only half a percent of people ever do that. i'm more interested in what happens to the 99.5 percent of people who don't want to do that. i think most people don't want to be dead, but i do think most people want to have some control over how their dying process proceeds. so i'm an opponent of euthanasia, but i do think we have to give people back some control. it deprives euthanasia of its oxygen supply. i think we should be looking at stopping the want for euthanasia, not for making it illegal or legal or worrying about it at all.

this is a quote from dame cicely saunders, whom i met when i was a medical student. she founded the hospice movement. and she said, “you matter because you are, and you matter to the last moment of your life.” and i firmly believe that that's the message that we have to carry forward. thank you. (applause)