剝落後記
最近臺灣讀者開始量大的點閱南禪佛法，原以為我所寫的佛
法心得只會是國外人士的點閱。
「止觀」這兩個法門台灣任何佛教徒都會說上兩句，但只要換上
「思考」的名稱，就不知所以，觀就是思考，除非你觀佛像的
像以外，其他的佛學在觀裡面都是思考，當然白骨觀那一類的
修法也是具體的人體觀像，
「四念處」雖有觀字，如果你沒有辦法運用思維，只用觀，到
底要怎麼觀我也搞不懂！
佛法，我對台灣的佛教徒起初都是沈默，後來就說你去看我們
的網站。
前面文章有提到這些是我自己要用的，讀得那麼辛苦，也不能
妥協去附和大眾的需求。（此事無關風與月，哈）
直接講思考的佛法是南禪主力，國外留學生回來一坐下來就聽
懂我說什麼，因為美國的高中就有哲思課，一些小留學生，也
一度給我安慰。
幾年前，來台大交流的博士後，三四個在各自回國前，經由介
紹來南禪精舍問我說：台灣的寺廟只有「唯心論」即使語言隔
閡他們也激動到不行，我無言以對，因為我也無法接受啊！
對他們解釋起「緣起」理論至少南禪不講「唯心論」。
這也是促使我想對國外說明佛法的一個主因。
東西方文化、教育內容真的是相隔甚深，也沒想到一個沒有廣
告的小部落格，真的引起國外的關注。
本來已經認定《中論》是寡眾之説，
或許因緣具足，台灣竟然開始看起我寫的佛法，
佛日增輝
半寄
注意（上述的唯心是理論薄弱的唯心，不是物理唯心，哲學唯心⋯）
Postscript on
Peeling Off
Recently, I’ve
noticed a significant increase in Taiwanese readers engaging with content about
NanZen Buddhist teachings. Initially, I assumed that the Buddhist insights I
wrote would primarily attract readers from abroad.
The two methods of
‘Samatha Meditation’ (tranquility meditation) and ‘Vipassana Meditation’
(insight meditation) are terms that almost any Taiwanese Buddhist can briefly
explain. But the moment you replace these terms with ‘thinking,’ they seem
lost. Yet, ‘Vipassana’ essentially means
thinking—unless you’re simply observing a Buddha statue. All Buddhist practices
involving ‘Vipassana’ are rooted in thinking. Of course, practices like the
contemplation of bones (asubha-bhavana) involve observing and visualizing
concrete bodily imagery. Even within the ‘Four Foundations of Mindfulness’,
‘observing’ cannot exist without thinking. If you try to separate the two, how
exactly are you supposed to observe? Frankly, I have no idea.
When it comes to
discussing Buddhism with Taiwanese Buddhists, I used to remain silent.
Eventually, I started directing them to our website. As I’ve mentioned in
previous articles, these reflections are primarily for my own use. Having
studied this so painstakingly, there’s no way I would compromise just to cater
to the popular demand.
Directly speaking
about the thinking-based approach to Buddhism is the hallmark of Southern Chan.
International students returning from abroad often immediately grasp what I’m
saying—probably because students in the USA already have philosophy classes in
high school. Even young overseas
students have given me sense of comfort at times.
A few years ago,
some postdoctoral researchers visiting National Taiwan University came to
NanZen Monastery to consult me before returning to their home countries. There
were three or four of them. They mentioned that, in Taiwan, temple teachings
seemed to focus solely on ‘Mind-Only Theory’. Despite the language barrier,
their frustration was clear. I had no response because, honestly, I couldn’t
accept it either. I started sharing my interpretation of ‘dependent
origination’ with them. At the very least, Nanzen explains ‘dependent
origination’, rather than preaches ‘Mind-Only Theory’.
This became one of
the primary reasons I wanted to explain Buddhism to people abroad. The cultural
and educational gap between the East and West is truly vast. Yet, I never
imagined that a small, ad-free blog would genuinely attract such global
attention.
At first, I
assumed Mūlamadhyamakakārikā would remain a niche subject, appealing only to a
select audience.
Perhaps the
conditions have ripened, as readers in Taiwan have now started paying attention
to what I write about Buddhism.
May the light of
the Buddha shine ever brighter.
Master Banji
(Note: ‘The
Mind-Only Theory’ mentioned above refers specifically to a weak theoretical
idealism, distinct from idealism in physics, idealism in philosophy, etc.)
