When Buddha talked about the Right View in Noble Eightfold Path, is he only talking about the knowledge of Four Noble Truths, Karma and Three Marks of Existence (Anicca, Dukkha and anattā ). Is knowing and accepting that these are the truth of our existences the only requirement for having the Right View?
在八正道中佛陀提到「正見」，在一般的說法，「正見」好像只是知道和接受「四聖諦」、「因緣法」、「無常」、「苦」和「無我」。真是這樣嗎？
When I read Buddhist publications, either on the web or in books and articles, I cannot help but wonder at the conclusions of these publications. In some cases, the authors and I do not share the same definition of some words and phrases common in Buddhism. So my disagreement with them is understandable. But in other cases, we shared the same definitions. It seems like we only differ in the implication of these words and phrases. These differences will lead us down different paths.
在網絡、書籍或一些文章裡頭，可以發現：某些佛教刊物的作者所下的結論，常常讓我們走向不同的路。有時，一些作者跟我一樣不同意某些佛教常見的詞的定義，而有些地方，我跟其它作者對這些詞的定義，持相同看法，唯一不同是對這些詞的用法。這些差異讓我們走向不同的路。
For example, I see questions on whether some actions are allowable under Buddha's teaching. Often, the answers will be framed in the percepts and virtues or karma. Often, karma are used as a restraint to limit one's action and used to justify the percepts and virtues. This view of karma turn us into automatons. This view seems to be saying that there is a complete list of things that we can do and cannot do. If we believe in Buddhism and want to be enlightened, we just have to do the things that are allowed on this list, and don't do what's not allowed. Only if we can get our hands on this list!
例如， 我看到一些問題，是關於：某些行為，身為一個佛教徒是否能做。常常，答案是用「戒」跟「善」或「因緣果」來回答。這樣的「因緣果」好像變成是用來約束一個人的行為，且也是用來交待「戒」跟「善」。如此「因緣果」的觀點，把人變成機器人。那觀點是說：世上好像有一個列表，裡頭所有能做、不能做的事都寫在上面；如果相信佛教，也想要覺悟，我們只需做此列表中允許的事，不做不允許的事。只要我們能夠拿到、遵照這個列表所示，大家都可以成佛！
But why would an enlightened person need such a list? Wouldn't an enlightened person be able to think for themselves what they should and should not do under a circumstance? Even if we need some aids, such as a list like this, to help us to enlightenment, would we be able to go from following rules all our lives to a free thinker over night?
但是，一位覺者為什麼會需要這樣的列表？覺者，不是都能思考一件事該不該做嗎？即使我們需要這樣的列表來幫助我們覺悟，我們能夠一夜之間從「遵循規則」跳到「自由思想」的人嗎？
So let us look at this from another point of view. In this view, the purpose of teaching us about Karma is not to tell us what we should and should not do. Instead, the purpose is to tell us that there are unavoidable consequences to everything that we do. It is not to delineate "right" from "wrong". It is to tell us that there are "pleasant" and "unpleasant" consequences. It tells us that perform we perform an action, we need to think about its consequences. If we are clear on the consequences, then we will need to be handle it, because the consequences will never go away by itself.
因此，讓我們從另一個角度來看「因緣果」。這觀點認為，佛陀教我們「因緣果」不是要告訴我們什麼是應該，什麼是不應該。 佛陀的目的是告訴我們，所做的一切都有逃不了的後果。他不是要規劃「對」跟「錯」。他要我們知道所有的行為都有「愉快」或「不愉快」的後果。如果明確一件事的後果，做這件事就得準備去承擔結果，因為後果永遠不會自己消失。
Given the same definition of Karma, one view forces us to constantly think about what is allowed and what is not allowed. The other view wants us to think for ourselves and take responsibility for our own actions. Given that Buddha is someone who is enlightened, which is the correct view? Which will get us closer to enlightenment?
這兩個觀點都用同樣「因緣果」的定義。一個觀點逼迫我們不斷的去想什麼是允許的，什麼是不允許的；另一個觀點，要我們自己去想、且為自己的行為承擔責任。 佛陀是一位大覺者，所以，哪一個觀點是「正見」呢？哪一個會讓我們更接近覺悟的那一刻呢？
沒有留言:
張貼留言