加载中…
个人资料
或然谷
或然谷
  • 博客等级:
  • 博客积分:0
  • 博客访问:7,518
  • 关注人气:15
  • 获赠金笔:0支
  • 赠出金笔:0支
  • 荣誉徽章:
相关博文
推荐博文
谁看过这篇博文
加载中…
正文 字体大小:

真正的上師「全然不在乎」――專訪宗薩蔣揚欽哲仁波切

(2010-11-20 06:49:39)
标签:

杂谈

Real Gurus Couldn't care less

The dilemma of an Eastern master in a postmodern world

An interview with Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche by Andrew Cohen

 

真正的上師「全然不在乎」

――東方上師在後現代世界的兩難

安德魯·寇涵(Andrew Cohen)對薩蔣揚欽波切的專訪

 

Enlighten Next Magazine: Issue 31, December 2005–February 2006

http://www.enlightennext.Sorg/magazine/j31/dzongsar.asp?page=1

Enlighten Next雜誌第31期,200512月-20062

 

The enlightened mentor—the guru—has throughout the ages been that great being who willingly does battle with the powerful forces of ignorance that reside in the depths of the human soul. Through his or her living presence, the guru catalyzes extraordinary transformation, guiding human beings from darkness to light, from the limitations of a small and petty existence to the free and infinite expanses of illuminated awareness. Few modern teachers are as qualified to claim the title of guru as Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche, heir to a long and illustrious lineage of enlightened Buddhist masters. In this recent interview with spiritual teacher and WIE editor in chief Andrew Cohen, Dzongsar Rinpoche candidly discusses what it takes to fulfill his role as guru and explains why the greatest challenge, East or West, is to have the courage to completely disengage from public opinion and attain “a genuine indifference.”

開悟的導師――上師――從無數世紀以來,一直是願意與人類靈魂深處的强大無明力量戰鬥的位偉人。透過他或她活生生的存在,上師催化著不尋常的轉化,引導人類從黑暗走向光明,從一個微小且狹隘的存在之侷限,轉化成受啓蒙覺性的自由且無限之開闊。當代導師中具有如薩欽波切般的資格而足稱爲上師者,僅為少數,波切承繼了一個佛教開悟大師們悠遠且著名的傳承。在這個最近的訪問中,薩欽波切與靈性教師兼WIE主編安德魯·寇涵率直地討論了達成如他一般身為上師角色所需的條件,並解釋無論在東方或是西方,爲何最大的挑戰在於具有完全無視公衆意見的勇氣,並達到「一個真正的不在乎」。

 

ANDREW COHEN: You are uniquely straddling two worlds: you were born a tulku and had traditional Buddhist education and training in your own culture, but you have spent a lot of time in the West and have also become a well-known filmmaker. So you seem to have one foot in the premodern world and one foot in the postmodern world. You are quite an independent thinker, forging your own path as one of the pioneers in this very interesting time of transition in the evolution and development of the dharma, of East-meets-West spirituality. So I would like to talk with you about what it means to be a guru at this point in history.

寇涵:你獨特地跨足於兩個世界:生爲「祖古」(轉世),在自己的文化中接受佛教傳統的教育與訓練,然而你又花了很多時間在西方,也成爲一位知名的電影工作者。以此看來你是一腳踏在傳統社會,一腳踩在後現代社會。你的思考相當獨立,在這個非常有趣、佛法演化發展的過渡時期,東西方靈性相遇的時刻,你鍛造出自己的道路,成爲開拓先驅之一。所以,我想要跟你討論在歷史的這個時點,身爲上師意味著什麽。

 

When someone takes on a guru, as is clearly illustrated in Words of My Perfect Teacher, it's a deep and serious engagement. And in the film, you speak very directly about the challenge that relationship poses to the ego, to the separate sense of self. The guru represents the dissolution of the ego, and yet Westerners of our generation, more often than not, don't seem to be prepared for this. And while you have said that there are many different methods for finding enlightenment, for discovering “the guru within,” one of the quickest and easiest is to receive the blessings of the teacher. Why is this? What actually is the role of the guru, and why is it so vital?

當某人擔任上師,如同在〈真師之言〉影片中清楚說明的,是很深刻、嚴肅的任務。而在電影中,你非常直率地說到種關係對自我、對視自身為分離?的想法所帶來的挑戰。上師代表自我的崩解,然而我們這個世代的西方人卻多數時候仍然不像是對此做好了準備。雖然你曾說過尋求證悟、發現「內在的上師」可以有許多不同的方式,不過最迅速且最容易的方式之一,就是領受上師的加持。爲何如此?上師的角色到底是什麽,爲何如此至關重大?

 

DZONGSAR Rinpoche: The reason why the guru is the most effective is because the guru is someone you are supposed to look at as being superior to a human being. But he is also someone you can relate to. A guru is someone who eats pizza, who likes the same pizza that you like. And that's quite important because at the same time that he is someone you can relate to, he is the one you have consciously or unconsciously hired to destroy yourself!

薩欽波切:上師爲何最為有效,其原因在於你理應視上師比一般人更爲殊勝,但他也是你能具有某種連結的人。上師是個吃批薩、和你一樣喜歡某種披薩的人,相當重要,因爲他同時是你能建立關係的一個人,是你有意或無意中雇用來摧毀自己的人!

 

COHEN: Could you say what you mean by that?

寇涵:能說說你指的是什麼嗎?

 

DZONGSAR: You give up everything and then hire him to destroy your ego. And you pay him body, speech, and mind to do that.

薩欽波切:你放棄一切,然後雇他來摧毀你的自我。而且你用身、語、意來支付他這麽做。

 

COHEN: When you say, “destroy the ego,” that's not a small thing.

寇涵:你說「摧毀自我」,這可不是件小事情。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes. That's true.

薩欽波切:是的,確實如此。

 

COHEN: And as we were saying earlier, it seems that the destruction of the ego is an alien concept in postmodern Western culture, which is a nonreligious secular society. In fact, it seems that in postmodern culture, the ego, or the separate self-sense, has become even more powerful as a result of the cultural revolution that began in the sixties. At that time, the emphasis became freedom of the individual and freedom for the individual. And the result is that, unlike in previous times, there was no God above that one had to fear, which in the past had perhaps engendered humility, a bit of healthy fear of something higher than oneself.

寇涵: 如同我們稍早所說的,摧毀自我在後現代的西方文化裡似乎是個外來的觀念,後現代的西方文化是個非宗教性的世俗社會。事實上,似乎在後現代文化中,由於六〇年代開始的文化上的革命,自我、或視自身為分離的想法已經變得更爲强大。那個時候所强調的是個人的自由以及為個人而有的自由。不同於過往,其結果是上方沒有必須懼怕的上帝。在過去,對高於自己的某個東西具有一點健康的畏懼,可能激發了謙卑。

 

So when we in the West discovered enlightenment and then found that in order to attain it, the ego, or the separate self, had to die, this was a very big shock because culturally we had no training or preparation for this whatsoever. Now in the film, Words of My Perfect Teacher, you speak about how you hire the guru to be the assassin, the man or woman you hire to “completely dismantle you.” But how does a teacher succeed in “dismantling” their students' egos in this kind of cultural milieu?

所以當我們在西方發現有開悟,然後發現爲了要得到開悟,自我或是分離的自身必須死去,這是個極大的震撼,因爲我們在文化上對此毫無訓練或準備。而今在電影〈真師之言〉裡,你說到關於如何雇用上師做為殺手――那個你雇來「完全拆解你」的男人或女人。但是在這種文化環境下,一個導師要如何才能成功地「拆解」學生的自我?

 

DZONGSAR: It's difficult. This is why defining ego is very important, especially within a culture that doesn't have this kind of background. And I think the classic way of defining the ego is, at the end of the day, the only solution: Ignorance—which is the same as ego—is when you're looking at two, or more than two, ever-changing transitory things, and yet you think that they're one; you think they're independent and permanent. That is ignorance and that is ego.

薩欽波切:不容易。這就是爲什麽定義「自我」非常重要,特別是在一個沒有這種背景的文化中。我認為定義「自我」最經典的方式,也是最後唯一的解答,就是:無明,即等同於自我,就是當你看著兩個或兩個以上不斷改變的暫時性事物時,你卻認爲它們是同一個;你認為它們是獨立且永恒的。就是無明,就是自我。

 

For instance, if I look at my hand, I make three mistakes. One, I think it's the same hand I had this morning. But that's not true; it has changed. And two, I think there's something called “hand” when there actually isn't because it's a part of a lot of things—my veins, my skin, my blood, all kinds of things.

舉例來說,若我看著自己的手,我犯下三個錯誤。第一,我認為它是今早我所具有的同一隻手。但不是真的,它已經改變了。第二,我認為有一個叫做「手」的東西。其實並沒有,因爲它是很多東西――我的血管、皮膚、血液等等各種東西――的一部分。

 

COHEN: So the point is that there's no such thing as independent existence.

寇涵:所以重點是,沒有獨立存在的東西。

 

DZONGSAR: Right. And then another mistake I make is not realizing that the existence of my hand actually depends on many things. For instance, the fact that the ceiling hasn't fallen on my hand is the reason why it's moving, why it's there. But I don't think in that way. I think my hand is there because my hand is there.

波切:對。然後我還犯了一個錯誤,就是不明白我的手的這個存在實際上有賴於許多事物。例如,天花板沒有掉在我手上,這是爲什麽我的手能够移動,爲什麽我的手在這裡的原因。但我不用那樣的方式思考,我認為我的手在那裡,是因爲我的手在那裡。

 

COHEN: You're talking about what is called “dependent origination,” the understanding that everything that exists depends upon everything else that exists, which depends upon everything else that exists. In this, one sees that one's own self exists as part of this infinitely dependent process in which there is no one who is isolated or separate from the whole.

寇涵:你在說的是所謂的「緣起」,了解存在的一切事物都相依於其他存在的一切,且後者又依賴於其他存在的一切。在這當中,一個人知道自己的存在,是這個無盡相依的過程之一部分。在這過程中,沒有人是孤立或離於整體的。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes, and all this information needs to be transmitted to one who wants to be the victim of the guru.

波切:對,這所有的訊息都需傳遞給想要變成上師受害者的人。

 

COHEN: In the movie, you also spoke about how the guru crushes people's pride, as the means to purify them of ego motivations and attachment.

寇涵:在電影裡,你還說到上師是如何粉碎人們的驕慢,而這是為了淨除他們的自我動機和執取。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes, because pride is thinking something that is not necessarily you. For instance, if I asked you, “Are you a man?” you would say, “Yes.” That is confidence, not pride. Now, if I ask, “Are you a superman?” and you say, “Yes,” that may be pride because “super” is only an adjective, and is not imputed. Pride, ego, and ignorance are all synonymous.

波切:是的,因爲驕慢是將某個不必然是你的東西視爲自己。例如,如果我問你:「你是男的嗎?」你會說:「是的。」是自信,不是驕慢。現在如果我問你:「你是超人嗎?」而你說:「是的。」可能是驕慢,因爲超人的「超」只是個形容詞,也不是指稱。驕慢、自我、無明都是同義詞。

 

COHEN: And you said that the teacher who “crushes your pride and makes this worldly life completely miserable is something that you ask for. He is the assassin, he is the man or woman whom you have hired to completely dismantle you.”

寇涵:你說了「粉碎你的驕慢並且將這個世俗生活變得全然悲慘,這樣的導師是你所要尋求的。他是個殺手,是你雇來摧毀自己的男人或女人。」

 

DZONGSAR: You may not realize that's what you're doing, but that's the idea—to dismantle everything: your identity, everything. And it's not like dismantling one big habit. It changes. Let's say today I would like to be stroked. Then a teacher should not stroke me. Or maybe today I would like to be beaten. Then maybe I should be stroked. So that's why this is actually beyond abuse and not abuse. If somebody bites you or beats you and handcuffs you, that's a kind of abuse, isn't it? But what I'm talking about is ultimate abuse. At the same time, abuse phenomena only exist if you are still clinging to transitory phenomena as permanent and real. If you don't, there is nothing to be abused. But that's difficult, really difficult.

波切:你可能不瞭解自己是在這麼做,但確實是這樣――摧毀一切:你的認同、一切。而且並非像毀掉一個根深蒂固的習慣那樣。它會變化。比如今天我想要被輕撫,那麽導師就不該輕撫我。或者也許今天我想被打一頓,那麽也許我該被輕撫。因此就是爲何這件事情其實是超越虐待和不虐待。如果某人咬你、打你或用手銬把你銬住,是種虐待,不是嗎?但是我說的是究竟的虐待。同時,只有在你仍然將暫時性現象執取為「常」和「實有」時才會存在有虐待的現象。若你沒有執取,就沒有受虐待者。不過這有困難,十分困難。

 

COHEN: In that case, the teacher's work would be done.

寇涵:在那個情況下,老師的工作就完成了。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes, of course. But the kind of student we're talking about doesn't exist. And that kind of teacher doesn't exist, either. Teachers don't have that kind of courage. I don't have it. I may be a teacher, but I don't have that kind of courage because I love my reputation. Who wants to be referred to as an abuser? I don't. I am a sycophant. I try to go along with what people think. If people think a teacher should shave his head, wear something maroon, walk gently, eat only vegetarian food, be so-called serene, then I'm very tempted to do that. Rajneesh had the guts to have ninety-three Rolls Royces. I call it guts. One Rolls Royce is one thing. Even two or three—but ninety-three is guts! And I don't have the guts, the confidence. I like Rajneesh very much. I like him much better than Krishnamurti. Many of his words are quite good, and I can see why the Westerners would like him.

波切:對,當然。但是我們說的種學生並不存在, 種 老師也不存在。老師沒有種勇氣。我就沒有。我也 許是個 老師,但是我沒有種勇氣,因爲我愛我的名聲。誰想被指為施虐者呢?我可不想。我是個媚俗的人,試著跟從人們的想法。如果人們認爲老師應該剃光頭、穿絳紅色衣衫、慢步、吃素、是所謂沉靜的,那麽我就很想那樣做。拉傑尼Rajneesh,即奧修)有膽擁有九十三輛勞思萊思,我稱為有膽量。一輛勞思萊思――甚至兩、三輛,是一回事,但九十三輛,是膽量!而我並無種膽量、自信。我非常喜歡拉傑尼,我喜歡他遠勝過喜歡Krishnamurti)。拉傑尼說的很多話都相當好,我看得出來爲什麽西方人會喜歡他。

 

 

COHEN: Perhaps the problem with Krishnamurti was that he pretended that he wasn't a guru or a master, although he obviously was. I think this made it very difficult for people.

寇涵:也許的問題是他自稱並非上師或大師,儘管他顯然是。我想這對人們來說很難接受。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes; it was a contradiction.

波切:是的,是個矛盾。

 

COHEN: Are you saying, then, that you hold back with your students?

寇涵:那麽,你是說你會對你的學生有所保留?

 

DZONGSAR: I do, always.

波切:我總是如此。

 

COHEN: At the same time, you said in the film that you're an assassin—that that's your job.

寇涵:同時,你在電影裡說你是個殺手,是你的工作。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes, in the context that if I am a student's teacher, then that is my job. But I'm not promising I can do it. You know, but I love very much the eight worldly dharmas. I'm like these police undercover cops who are sent into a Mafia family. What I'm supposed to do is really check out these people, but I fall in love with what they do, so I follow what they want. It's difficult. And that comes from attachment to the eight worldly dharmas—attachment to the praise and fear of the criticism.

波切:是的,以我身為學生的老師來說,就是我的工作。然而,我並非承諾我有能力這麼做。你瞧,我是很喜愛世間八法的。我就像那些送到黑手黨家族裡的臥底警察,理應要仔細偵查那些人,卻愛上他們所做的事,因此我遵循他們所想要的。很難。來自對於世間八法的貪執――貪愛稱譽,懼怕批評。

 

COHEN: But some of the greatest Tibetan gurus have the reputation for being the most fierce, like Marpa, for example. He was the fiercest.

寇涵:然而有些最偉大的西藏上師是因極爲凶惡而聞名,例如馬爾巴。他是最凶惡的。

 

DZONGSAR: Oh, yes, of course. They could do it because they have no agenda. Their only agenda was to enlighten. They didn't care what people said, what other people thought—I call it CCL: couldn't-care-less-ness. That holds the biggest power. But who has it today? No one.

波切:對,當然。他們能這樣做是因爲他們沒有自己的規劃議程。他們唯一的規劃事項就是要證悟。他們不在乎其他人說什麽、想什麽――我把這個叫做CCLCouldn’t-care-less;全然不在乎)。具有最大的力量。但是今天誰有呢?沒有人。

 

COHEN: One of the most interesting things that were revealed about you in the film was the juxtaposition of the roles you're playing. As a guru in the West, you are working with Western students who, at least in theory, are coming to you for enlightenment, and yet who come from this postmodern context where there's an inherent mistrust of authority. Whereas in Bhutan , thousands and thousands of Bhutanese people have no doubt that you are a living god.

寇涵:在電影揭露關於你的事情裡,最有趣的事情之一就是並列出你所扮演的各個角色。身爲在西方的上師,你與西方的學生一起工作,至少在理論上他們來你這裡是爲了證悟,然而他們仍是來自這個對權威向來不信任的後現代環境。而在不丹,數以千計的不丹人却毫不懷疑地確信你是個活神仙。

 

DZONGSAR: I think on both continents I have mastered the art of pretense. I go to Bhutan and I know what to do for them, to do what is most harmonious. Because if I act or say things in Bhutan or in Tibet that I say in the West, I'll be in trouble. Now that is what I was referring to before. I do this because I don't want to lose disciples; I don't want to be criticized. Of course, I can justify those actions by saying, “Oh, it's coming from a good motivation, because I don't want to jeopardize the spiritual path of hundreds of people.”

波切:我想我在兩塊大陸 (PS:亞洲和美洲) 都僞裝得很好。我去不丹時,知道要爲他們做什麼,知道做什麼是最和諧的。因爲假如我在不丹或西藏做或說我在西方說的東西,我會陷入麻煩。就是我先前所指的,我這樣做是因爲我不想喪失弟子,我不想受批評。當然,我能夠合理化這些行爲,說是:「哦,它起於一個善良的動機,因爲我不想要危害數百人的修道。」

 

COHEN: You described in the film how it's very difficult for you to have an authentic relationship with many of your Bhutanese devotees because of the kind of admiration they have for you. But with your Western students, there is the fundamental ego position that feels that “no one is higher than me.” And this also presents difficulty, because for any authentic guru to be able to help a student achieve enlightenment, there has to be the acceptance from the outset that the guru has realized something that the student has not yet realized. Then, of course, there's the tremendous pressure the teacher places on the ego and the student's identification with it. And in Words of My Perfect Teacher, Lesley Ann Patten showed very well how many of your Western students were struggling with these very issues—with the notions of hierarchy and authority, and even with their lack of faith in the possibility of enlightenment itself.

寇涵:你在電影裡說到很難與衆多不丹信徒建立真正的關係,因爲他們對你的種崇敬。但是你的西方弟子們卻有根本的自我立場,覺得「沒有人比我更崇高」。而這也帶來困難,因為任何真正的上師若要幫助學生開悟,就必須從一開始就接受上師,明白一些學生尚未明白的事情。然後,當然還有老師加在自我、以及學生對自我的認同其上的巨大壓力。在〈真師之言〉中,萊斯莉·安·派滕清楚展現出你的西方學生裡有多少人在這個議題上掙扎――連同對階級制度與權威的看法,甚至還有他們對證悟本身的可能性缺乏信心等。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes, exactly. But in both cultures there is one thing that is similar—it's this culprit: expectation. In Eastern cultures, like in Bhutan , there may be blind devotion, but they all have an expectation. In the Western culture, they may be skeptical and secular, but there's also expectation. And that expectation, while it may manifest differently, fundamentally has only one nature and that is that everybody wants to be happy. And that is where things go wrong.

波切:對,的確。但是在兩種文化中有一個東西是類似的,就是「期望」這個罪人。在東方文化中,像是在不丹,可能有盲信,但全都有一個期望。在西方文化裡,他們也許保持懷疑態度,是世俗論者,但也有期望。期望也許以不同的方式顯現,但基本上只有一個本質,就是每個人都想要快樂。而這就是事情出差錯的地方。

 

To be a Buddhist and to be practicing dharma have nothing to do with being happy. If you're practicing the dharma to be happy, then it's like you're doing the opposite, just the opposite. Enlightenment has nothing to do with happiness or unhappiness. And both cultures come to me to be happy. That really is the source of all the misunderstanding.

身為佛教徒以及學佛,這和快樂一點關係都沒有。假如你學佛是為了要快樂,那麼就像是反其道而行,完全相反。證悟和快樂或不快樂都沒有關係。而這兩種文化來我這裡都是為了要快樂。真是一切誤解的來源。

 

COHEN: Yes. The goal is to be free from both happiness and unhappiness.

寇涵:是的。目標是要從快樂和不快樂中解脫。

 

DZONGSAR: Yes, and I have to teach them what to expect. But it's really difficult.

波切:對,而我必須教導他們該期望什麼。不過這十分困難。

 

COHEN: The fact that you are in these two different cultures seems to make it challenging for you to be simply and authentically yourself. Because on the one hand, in Bhutan , there is a certain role you need to assume, which you've accepted—that's your dharma, your destiny. But there are restrictions associated with that premodern context. And in the West, because of the postmodern secular context, there are also restrictions. So your own capacity to just be fully and spontaneously yourself, even as a teacher or as a guru, must be inhibited in both cases. Could you speak a little bit about this?

寇涵:置身於兩個不同的文化,這似乎對於你要做單純且真正的自己造成挑戰,因為一方面在不丹你需要扮演一個特定的、你已接受的角色――是你要遵守的法則,是你的命運。但是在傳統情況下有某些相關的限制。而在西方由於後現代的俗世情境,也有許多限制。因此,你想單單做個完整且自然的自己,甚或是做為老師或上師,這樣的能力必然在兩種情況下都受到禁制。你能對此稍談一些嗎?

 

DZONGSAR: This is a very good question. It all goes to tell me that the bottom line is that I need to develop my courage, the courage to learn CCL—“couldn't-care-less-ness.” In the morning, with a little bit of good motivation, I can start teaching. That will accumulate some merit, I'm sure. At least I'm not going around teaching people to blow themselves up or kill infidels. And even teaching I only do when I'm in a spiritual mood. But my job now, my duty is to first develop my “couldn't-care-less-ness.” The bottom line is that I need to learn that; I need to achieve that. Then, even if I receive bad publicity in the West, I couldn't care less. Once I achieve that, then I'll reach a certain level where real genuine compassion is. Until then, everything is a bit deceptive.

波切:這是個非常好的問題。這全都在告訴我,底線就是我需要發展出自己的勇氣――去學習「全然不在乎」的勇氣。早晨,帶著些微良善的發心,我能開始傳法,我確信會累積一些功德。至少我不會四處遊走,教導人們把自己炸了或是殺掉異教徒。而即使是傳法,我也只有在心情偏向靈性方面時才會做。不過現在我的工作,我的職責是要先發展出自己的「全然不在乎」。至少我需要去學習全然不在乎,我需要做得到。然後,即使我在西方得到不良風評,我也完全不在乎。一旦我做到了,那麼我就達到一定的境界,具有真正的慈悲。在那個時刻之前,一切都有些虛偽矯飾。

 

~ Bella中譯,Serena 2009/11/14初校,11/24PO,若有錯誤敬請指正

0

阅读 评论 收藏 转载 喜欢 打印举报/Report
  • 评论加载中,请稍候...
发评论

    发评论

    以上网友发言只代表其个人观点,不代表新浪网的观点或立场。

      

    新浪BLOG意见反馈留言板 电话:4000520066 提示音后按1键(按当地市话标准计费) 欢迎批评指正

    新浪简介 | About Sina | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站律师 | SINA English | 会员注册 | 产品答疑

    新浪公司 版权所有