12月讀書會錄音檔Study Club Q&A

南禪讀書會在潮州錄音檔-樹葬-骨灰與牌位-分享到FB-請下載後收聽

https://reurl.cc/3bkkyV

讀書會問題回答

 

南禪讀書會的另一個問題是沒有肉體了，怎麼有反射動作？

 

回答：

往生的人，在歷經7個7次（49天）的靈魂從肉體的依附消失後，肉體記憶的生理基本反射動作逐漸薄弱，

所以民間會有第一個7天（頭7）往生者比較靈驗的說法，因為第一個7天的記憶反射是最清楚的。

 

這跟胎兒的意義是一樣的，也是從胚胎開始，

不可能一個往生者的能量在瞬間就完全消失。

但是，大修行者，大惡之人跟大善之人，不受此限，

大惡之人有不能想的惡報，

而有修證的修行者跟大善之人一樣，有不能想像的福報，

所以不在7 x7天的49天限制裡。

（補充：人往生以後的屍體、骨灰，往生者只會認知那是自己，不會認為那是屍體、骨灰。

而人死後，意識（靈魂）守著屍體、骨灰，在修行者看來就是守屍鬼，

 

這是一種從純理性的角度出發，往往缺乏人性的觀點。

 

不管屍體也好、骨灰也好，在還沒有投胎下一世之前，它都還是一個轉繼站。）

Study Club Q&A

 

One question from our study club was:

If the body no longer exists, how can there still be reflex actions?

 

Answer:

After a person dies, it takes about seven cycles of seven days—forty-nine days in total—for the soul to fully detach from the physical body. During this time, reflex actions that come from bodily memory slowly become weaker.

This is why folk beliefs say that the deceased are most responsive during the first seven days after death. In that first week, memory-related reflexes are still the strongest.

 

This is similar to how a fetus develops. Life begins as an embryo, not all at once. In the same way, a deceased person’s energy cannot disappear completely in an instant.

However, this forty-nine-day rule does not apply to everyone. Great spiritual practitioners, extremely evil individuals, or extremely virtuous individuals are exceptions.

Those who commit great evil face consequences beyond imagination,

while accomplished practitioners and those of great virtue receive blessings that 

are also beyond imagination.

Therefore, they are not limited by the forty-nine-day period.

 

Master Banji

(Supplement:

After death, people does not think of their body or ashes as “a corpse” or “remains.” Instead, they still see them as themselves.

When the consciousness or soul stays near the body or ashes after death, practitioners call this state a a “corpse-guarding ghost.”

 

This viewpoint arises from a purely rational perspective and often overlooks the human and emotional aspect involved.

 

Whether it is a body or ashes, before the person is reborn into the next life, it is simply a temporary stopping point in the journey of rebirth.)

漢系佛法Han-transmission Buddhism

 漢系佛法

 

讀者說：我在台灣講了很多佛法，也應該幫助華人的佛法建立一條更好的路。

 

感謝🙏讀者願意聽聽我的意見，

前面才寫過「立足點的平等」，原則上我懂得的佛法與自身修持的經驗都有做了交代。

 

中國的天台宗祖師智者大師（智顗，西元538-597年），

講解《妙法蓮華經》的時候，一個「妙」字講了三個月，

一個「妙」字可以講三個月，我光看就暈了！

 

縱觀中國佛教，可以理解出這麼大區塊的大陸土地，早已孕育出屬於它自己的佛法，

中國智者大師的天台宗「空、假、中」思想，

及華嚴宗體系，也自成一主要的漢系佛教思想。

 

舉例智者大師，想說內地文化有自己的特色，這麼廣大的區域，轉身也不容易，

 

如果不把《雜阿含經》再列為小乘經典，不屑一讀，把《雜阿含經》列為佛經的必讀經典或基礎點的建立，是不是更讓華人佛教的內容豐富，

 

而且正確的基礎點建立後，不再任由修行者個人的修行經驗去主導佛法的講解。

 

幾年前，看終南山佛教修行者，大多帶了一本《楞嚴經》就往孤僻的山上修行，都覺得替他們捏了一把大冷汗！

 

再怎麼說漢系佛法資料也是由中國內地保存下來的，至少它讓佛法一直綿延不絕，在這條佛法歷史的恆河中，

隨著新一代的證據產生，也早該列入修正了，為漢系佛法再添新血。

半寄

 

Han-transmission Buddhism

 

A reader remarked:
“Since I have taught the Dharma extensively in Taiwan, and I should also help build a better path for Chinese Buddhism.”

 

I appreciate the readers' openness to my views.
I previously discussed the notion of “equality of starting points.” In principle, I have already clarified both my understanding of Buddhist doctrine and my personal cultivation experience.

 

The founder of the Tiantai school in China, Master Zhiyi (538–597 CE),
when lecturing on the Lotus Sutra, spent three months explaining just one word—“wonderful” (miao).
The idea that to speak on a single word for three months is, frankly, overwhelming.

 

From a broader historical perspective, it becomes evident that the immense territory of China gradually cultivated its own Buddhist system.

Master Zhiyi’s Tiantai teaching of “śūnyatā, provisional existence, and the middle,”
together with the Huayan system, formed a major stream of Han-transmission Buddhist thought.

I cite Master Zhiyi as an example to illustrate that mainland Chinese culture has its own distinctive characteristics.

With a vast region,such a huge cultural background, change is never easy.

If the Saṃyukta Āgama were no longer looked down on as a “Hīnayāna” text and ignored,
but instead treated as essential reading or a basic foundation,
wouldn’t Chinese Buddhism become much richer?

 

Once a solid foundation is set,
Buddhist teachings would no longer be explained mainly through individual practitioners’ personal experiences.

A few years ago, I saw practitioners in the Zhongnan Mountains who carried only a copy of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra and headed into remote mountains for solitary practice.
Honestly, I felt quite worried about them.

After all, the textual corpus of Han-transmission Buddhism was preserved in mainland China.

At the very least, it allowed the Dharma to continue unbroken.
In this long river of Buddhist history, as new evidence appears over time,
it should be included and revised accordingly, bringing new life into Han-transmission Buddhism

Master Banji

北傳佛教唯心論 2-3 Mind-Only Doctrine in Northern Buddhism 2-3

 北傳佛教唯心論 2

 

禪宗有「芥子納須彌」的說法，

 

慢慢想起來，年輕的時候也在這裡打轉過，老實說，精神跟肉體想要說得清楚就很困難，

加上佛法的修行跟心、意識的觀點，這個問題就像亂線一般，難上加難。

 

試論；大腦這麼小可以裝得下這麼多資訊，那是透過學習的結果，

如果沒有學習與吸收大部分的人，腦袋是空空的，

用現今的觀點來看電腦的整個發展，也是一段漫長的路，不可能說空間裡面已經先存在一個電腦，等你塞下記憶吧？

 

人腦可以發展到像佛陀堂弟阿難這麼厲害，可以背誦這麼多資料，

佛法的邏輯指出應該是阿難自己修福慧的結果，

成就他的腦力特別發達，

而不能說他的腦力本來就比別人發達，

 

那到底是「心」在因、緣、果之前？

 

還是因、緣、果與心同在，難分難解！

半寄

 

AI資料提供   1. 質疑的焦點：物質與精神的邊界 當學人（質疑者）提出「大腦（或肉身）包含萬物」時，其實是落入了唯物或五蘊的範疇。 • 質疑者的邏輯： 如果你說「心生則種種法生」，而心就在我這顆腦袋裡，那是不是我這顆腦袋就裝下了整個宇宙？如果是，這不符合物理常識；如果不是，那禪師就是在騙人。 • 禪師的回應（核心思維）： 禪師通常會用「反詰法」或「直接否定」來打破這種空間感的錯覺。   2. 公案中的比喻：芥子納須彌 禪宗處理這類質疑最著名的觀點是「芥子納須彌」   質疑者問：「大腦這麼小，萬法這麼大，小如何包得住大？」 禪師通常會回答：「你讀過萬卷書嗎？」 質疑者：「讀過。」 禪師：「那萬卷書現在在哪裡？」 質疑者：「在腦子裡。」 禪師：「腦子只有拳頭大，萬卷書疊起來比屋頂高，你是怎麼塞進去的？」   透過這個比喻，禪師想點出：「心」沒有空間的量度。 你認為大腦包含萬法是有「空間感」的障礙，但真正的「自性」是不受大小、方圓、內外限制的。   3. 「為心」的雙重含義 在禪宗公案裡，這類討論往往會區分兩種層次的「心」： 1. 肉團心（大腦/意識）： 這是物質的、有生滅的、有大小限制的（即您提到的「大腦」）。 2. 靈覺真心： 這是遍布虛空、包含宇宙的。 如果像質疑者那樣把「萬法」侷限在「物理的大腦」裡，禪師會斥之為「認賊為子」。因為你把一個生理器官當成了本來面目。   4. 禪宗對此的經典結論 在《指月錄》中，針對這類「包含」的辯論，最終往往會導向： 「心不在內，不在外，不在中間。」 這打破了我們對「大腦」作為容器的執著。如果心在大腦裡，那大腦壞了，法界難道就消失了嗎？禪師認為，是「萬法在大腦（根塵）中顯現」，而非大腦「物理性地裝著」萬法。   您的感觸與現代對比 現代神經科學認為意識是大腦產生的；而禪宗公案則認為大腦（色身）是心性中所幻化出的「一粒浮漚」（大海中的一顆小氣泡）。」

Mind-Only Doctrine in Northern Buddhism 2

Zen tradition speaks of “holding Mount Sumeru within a mustard seed.”

 

Looking back, I realize that I struggled with this issue even in my youth. Frankly speaking, clearly explaining the relationship between mind and body is already extremely difficult. OnceBuddhist practice and theories of consciousness are added, the issue becomes even more complex—like a ball of tangled wires.

The brain is physically small, yet it can store an astonishing amount of information. This capacity is clearly the outcome of learning. Without learning and absorption, most people’s minds would remain nearly empty. Even from a modern technological standpoint, the evolution of computers has been a long process. We would not say that a computer already exists in empty space, simply waiting for memory to be loaded.

 

The human brain can be cultivated to the level of Ānanda, the Buddha’s cousin, who could memorize vast amounts of the Dharma. Buddhist reasoning would attribute this not to innate superiority, but to Ānanda’s own cultivation of merit and wisdom, which enabled such remarkable mental development.

 

This leads to a deeper question:

Is the “mind” prior to causes, conditions, and results?

Or do causes, conditions, results, and mind arise together, inseparably intertwined?

 

Master Banji

 

AI Data 1. The Central Question: Matter Versus Mind When a questioner claims that the brain contains all phenomena, the discussion has already shifted into materialism or the framework of the five aggregates. • The questioner’s reasoning: If “all phenomena arise when the mind arises,” and the mind is located in the brain, does that mean the brain contains the universe? If yes, this violates physical logic. If no, then Zen teachings are deceptive. • Zen’s method: Zen masters dismantle this assumption by reversing the question or negating the premise itself, exposing the mistaken sense of spatial containment.   2. Koan Illustration: A Mustard Seed and Mount Sumeru Zen’s most well-known response is the metaphor “A mustard seed contains Mount Sumeru.” When challenged— “How can something so small contain something so vast?” The master counters by pointing to memory and learning, showing that meaning and awareness are not governed by physical volume. This reveals that mind is not measurable in spatial terms, while self-nature transcends size, boundaries, and location.   3. Two Levels of “Mind” Zen discourse distinguishes between: 1. The corporeal mind: the brain-bound, conditioned consciousness. 2. The awakened mind: boundless, non-local, and all-pervasive. Confusing the first for the second is denounced as “recognizing a thief as one’s own child.”   4. Zen’s Final Position Classical Zen texts repeatedly conclude: “The mind is neither within, nor without, nor in between.” Thus, phenomena are manifested through the brain, not contained by it. The Dharma realm does not arise or vanish with the condition of neural tissue.   5. Dialogue with Modern Science While neuroscience claims consciousness emerges from the brain, Zen holds that the brain itself is a conditioned appearance within mind-nature— a fleeting bubble upon the vast ocean of awareness.

 

北傳佛教唯心論3 

 

如果有一位大禪師堅持跟我說：

他認為「心性本淨」，他已經見到他的「本來面目」，

我個人不會認為這是錯的，因為他們修證的三摩地裡面，可以變現出他們要看的內容來。

而這是用強大的禪定力量兑現學說，

 

「心」當然是「不在內，不在外，不在中間。」

而這需要給予完整的說明，去處理有為與無為法，才不致於使「心」懸掛在

「不在內，不在外，不在中間。」之外！

 

假如；你是位用功的修行者你在修行的禪定中照見了本來面目，那是不是回頭看看初果的「破身見」，

 

(斷身見使用破字，源於中觀論思想，破字賦予身見更多的解讀空間）

 

或許用禪定的力量，再去破除身見的認知，個人相信此時修行才朝著佛陀的教學前進，

能入定的各種教派太多了，如果肯定自己要修持的是佛法，那就只能抓著佛法，

 

能夠達到「破身見」的目的地時，

有為法與無為法的脈絡自然會條理清楚，

 

複雜與講解不清，而浪費生命的精神與肉體（形而上學）也會迎刃而解，

踏在對的佛法教學上，修證不那麼困難，但不修證也可以得到智慧吧！

 

半寄

 

（昨晚有一個夢境：一個力大無窮的人，不斷在砍樹給我看，砍的樹面積遼闊，卻都是沒有用的樹，

這力大無窮就白白浪費在這些沒有用的事情上，

而那個人卻興致高昂的要展現他的奇蹟。）

 

 

Mind-Only Doctrine in Northern Buddhism 3

 

If a great Zen master tells me with certainty that “mind-nature is originally pure,” and that he has already seen his “original face,” I personally would not say he is wrong. This is because, in the samādhi reached through deep practice, such masters can bring forth and observe whatever they wish to examine. In this way, teachings are proven through the strong meditative power.

 

Indeed, the mind is “neither inside, nor outside, nor in between.”

But this idea needs a full explanation. It must clearly address both conditioned and unconditioned phenomena, so that the mind is not left suspended beyond that statement “neither inside, nor outside, nor in between.” 

 

"Suppose you are a dedicated practitioner who, in the depths of meditative absorption, has glimpsed your Original Nature. From this vantage point, you look back at the 'seeing thru self-view'—the first stage of awakening (Sotapanna). 

 

(The use of the word 'seeing thru ' to describe 'cutting offself-identity view' originates from Madhyamaka thought. The term “seeing thru” gives more room to understand self-view.

 

Using the power of Samadhi, you may be able to further loosen and remove the belief in a fixed self. I believe this is when practice truly follows the Buddha’s teaching. 

 

There are many ways to reach deep meditation, but if you want to follow Buddhism, you must stick to the Buddhist Dharma. Upon achieving the ' seeing thru self-view,' the difference between things that change and the eternal truth becomes easy to see.

 

All the confusing theories that waste our time and energy disappear. 

By following the right path, reaching enlightenment isn't that hard—and even if you haven't reached it yet, you can still gain great wisdom."

 

Master Banji

 

(I had a dream last night. A very strong man kept chopping down trees for me to watch. The forest was huge, 

but the trees were useless. He wasted all his strength on things without value,

 yet he was very excited, eager to display his so-called miracle.)

 

必也一說A Necessary Statement

 必也一說

 

台灣的讀者抱怨我說，沒有把一些好的經歷端出來，任憑人家攻擊我！

 

本來我寫的佛法就是台灣佛教徒——已被制式化的佛學教育制衡，是不能懂的，早就不期待。

 

再來，既然不懂我的文章內容有什麼珍貴處，那攻擊對我又有什麼🤔？

再加上我也上了年齡，世事看多了！

那一些也早就不在我眼裡，

 

況且那些國外學者對台灣講說的佛法批評，根本就是恥辱，如果不是發覺他們有持續在看南禪的網站，有什麼好說的！

 

如果我所理解的佛法能夠寫出來，雪恥，這才是真正要做的事，

前面說過我在1991年就已經衝破了第一關，

等我把佛法跟修行的功力都具足以後，何懼，世人不能知道我？

 

年輕的時候，從錄音帶裡聽到一個說法，對廣欽老和尚的比諭是，猴子也是吃香蕉的，因為廣老是吃水果的，然後錄音檔裡面掌聲滿滿，

在佛教的大活動裡面，親眼看過廣老的徒弟要被揪出來打的，

這裡面只有一個說明，

有修行的貼標籤成魔，

打人的貼標籤成佛，

 

貼標籤成為臺灣佛教必備的標準，令人不寒而慄，

這在我年輕的時候早就絕望，不敢想自己走到什麼世界了？

 

剩下的只是我對佛法的情感而已，佛法不隸屬於誰吧！

 

我後來看了歐洲宗教史，把這些東、西方宗教的濫權放一邊，走上自己研讀與努力進入佛法內容的路，

幸好，我沒有時間憤世嫉俗，

而年輕就已經摸著邊的佛法，也一直支撐著我大步的往前，

 

我依然願意為佛法貢獻，只此。

 

 

我個人本著研讀的佛法資料是什麼就說什麼，那裡面有被證實的事實，

不再是研究的歸研究，講又是另外一回事。

 

前面提到，很多資料的研究也得來不易，要不是時代的進步，根本不可能，

在南禪讀書會常常提到我對自己的佛法成績，認為是拜時代所賜，

沒有那麼好的資料，我再用功也是事倍功半。

 

這幾年在南禪部落格，培養出來的讀者有多少我個人清楚，

既然佛陀的大弟子舍利弗聽到所誦偈，就可以證入佛法果位，那麼佛法的證入永遠是給有準備的善知識。

 

我不打擾別人的信仰，只能說：

佛教徒信仰的是佛教，

我信仰的是佛法，

各有所歸！

 

半寄

 

A Necessary Statement

 

Taiwanese readers complain that I haven't presented some of my valuable experiences, allowing others to attack me without defense.

 

Frankly, I never expected my Dharma writings to be accessible to Taiwanese Buddhists, whose intellectual approach is already rigid and circumscribed by conventional Buddhist education.

 

Moreover, if they cannot recognize what is valuable in my writings, then what difference do their attacks make to me? 🤔

In addition, I am no longer young and have seen much of the world.

Such matters have long ceased to matter to me.

 

As for the criticisms of Taiwanese Buddhism made by certain overseas scholars, they are nothing short of humiliating. If I had not noticed that they continue to read the Nanzen website, there would be nothing further to say.

 

 

If my understanding of the Dharma can be written down and thereby wash away this disgrace, then that is the task that truly matters.

As mentioned earlier, I had already broken through the first barrier in 1991.

Once my understanding of the Dharma and my cultivation are fully mature, why should I fear that the world does not recognize me?

 

In my youth, I once heard a cassette recording that mocked Venerable Master Guangqin with the analogy, “Even monkeys eat bananas,” simply because the Master lived on fruit. The tape was met with loud applause.
At large Buddhist gatherings, I personally witnessed disciples of Master Guangqin being singled out and beaten.

This reveals only one thing:
those who truly cultivate are branded as demons,
while those who strike others are branded as Buddhas.

 

Putting labels on people has become a basic rule in Taiwanese Buddhism, and it is frightening.
I lost hope in this already when I was young, and I dared not imagine what kind of world I had entered.

 

What remains is only my deep commitment to the Dharma itself. The Dharma doesn't belong to anyone!

 

Later, after studying European religious history, I set aside the abuses of power found in both Eastern and Western religions and chose my own path—studying the Dharma and striving to enter its true meaning.

Fortunately, I had no time to become cynical or resentful.

The Dharma, which I began to grasp when I was young, has consistently sustained my great strides forward.

 

I remain willing to contribute to the Dharma—nothing more.

 

I speak only according to what I have studied in Buddhist sources, stating things as they truly are.
Within them are facts that have been verified.

Research no longer remains separate from what is preached.

 

As mentioned earlier, much of this research material was extremely difficult to obtain. Without the progress of our era, it would have been impossible.

In the Nanzen study club, I often acknowledge that my achievements in Dharma are a gift of the era.

Without such excellent resources, even my diligent efforts would yield only half the result.

 

Over these past years, I know very well how many readers have been cultivated through the Nanzen blog.

Since the Buddha’s great disciple Śāriputra attained realization simply upon hearing a verse, the realization of the Dharma has always been reserved for prepared and capable good friends.

 

I do not interfere with others’ beliefs. I can only state:

Buddhists believe in Buddhism(the institutional religion).

I believe in the Dharma (the ultimate truth).

We each have our own path.

Master Banji