佛法問題回答
大家好！
我們昨天南禪潮州讀書會有兩個問題來說一說。
問：那個比恩約修行者他在三點的時候起床也不穿鞋，不用手電筒，面對有可能的生命威脅，他們都不害怕嗎？
我昨天看到這個問題，有點生氣跟激動，其實在整個修道系統裡，好像老是掉了大腦了！
生氣，這種修法到現在還存在！
佛陀時代留下對於牛戒、狗戒的看法，大家覺得那是古老時代的事，
牛戒、狗戒是學牛的行為跟狗的行為認為學牠會有福報，
事實上這種愚蠢到目前都是存在的，抱歉！用詞激動。
那這麼高學歷的人為什麼被規定叫他不要穿鞋他就欣然同意？
原因在於這種學習，通常被冠上權威，你這樣做是成佛之道！
好像人世間的愚蠢都是一樣的，只要被冠上權威就會被很多人遵守，
或是說愚蠢比想像的多！
進而對於這種遵守，幻想出這樣做會造成福報或是成佛！
不穿鞋到底對修道有什麼幫助？
不拿手電筒到底對眼睛有什麼幫助？
這根本就是一種迷信！
迷信這樣做是在修行？
佛陀時代的「如理思維」在後代的傳遞越來越少，近代原始教典的提出當然還好。
但問題是就算不拿原始教典，整個佛教傳法一直在重量的強調智慧，但是這麼強調智慧的大腦為什麼會去遵行一個衝突性這麼高的法則？
就提供參考了！🙏
半寄
Buddhist
Teachings Q&A 1
Greetings,
friends of NanZen!
Yesterday
at the NanZen Study Club in Chaozhou, we discussed two questions.
Question
1: Practitioner Björn wakes up at 3 a.m., does not wear shoes, and does not use
a flashlight, even when facing potential life-threatening dangers. Is he not
afraid?
Answer
1:
When I read
of this question, I felt frustrated and agitated. It seems that rational
thinking is often abandoned in the entire system of spiritual practice! I find
it frustrating that such practices still exist today.
In the
Buddha’s time, there were “cow precepts” and “dog precepts,” where people
imitated the behaviors of cows and dogs, believing it would bring merit. Many
see this as an outdated practice, yet such foolishness still exists today.
Apologies for the strong wording, but it is truly frustrating.
Why
would highly educated individuals willingly follow a rule that forbids wearing
shoes? Because such practices are often framed as sacred and
authoritative—"the path to enlightenment." It seems that human
foolishness is universal—once something is labeled as authoritative, many will
blindly follow it. Or perhaps, foolishness is simply more common than we
think!
People
then believe that following these rules leads to merit or enlightenment.
But does
walking barefoot truly help in spiritual practice? Does avoiding the use of a
flashlight really benefit one's eyes? This is simply superstition! Mistaking
these actions for genuine practice is misguided.
The
Buddha emphasized "reasonable thinking (yoniso manasikarotha) ", but
over time, this has been gradually neglected. While modern efforts to restore
early Buddhist scriptures are commendable, the key issue remains: even without
referencing the original texts, Buddhism
as a whole has always emphasized wisdom.
So why
do people who emphasize wisdom still follow such contradictory practices?
Just
some thoughts for reflection. 🙏
Master
Banji
問題2:
《我可能錯了》前言p008。
「在十七年整日的精神修煉中，我最珍視的一點就是：我對自己的每個念頭，再也不相信了」這是我的超能力！
初看這段話會覺得好像很厲害，可是仔細想：
不相信自己的每個念頭，就好像沒有任何立足點，隨時擔心偏執，這不可怕嗎？師父怎麼看這段話？
回答：
人怎麼可能都不相信自己而活著？
你不相信自己的想法，應該是通過思索來批判吧！
比方說；你面對詐騙有人會問說為什麼會心驚肉跳，
答案在他是一個集團你是一個人！
一個集團的意識力量去對付一個人太簡單了！
那萬一被詐騙了，你需要完全不相信你自己嗎？
這無疑是在傷口上灑鹽巴！
還有你總不能在你的腦袋一直打拳擊吧！
自己一個念頭出來，你就像拳擊手一樣把它打死，那到最後他的大腦會怎麼樣？大家自己想？
半寄
Buddhist
Teachings Q&A 2
Q2:
"After seventeen years of full-time spiritual practice, the
most precious lesson I’ve learned is this: I no longer believe in any of my own
thoughts. That is my superpower!" ( Lindeblad, 2023, p.008)
(Lindeblad, Björn N. I May Be Wrong: And Other Wisdoms from Life as
a Forest Monk. UK: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2023.)
At first
glance, this statement sounds profound. But upon deeper reflection, if one
doesn’t trust any of their own thoughts, wouldn’t that mean having no firm
ground to stand on and to constantly fear being misguided—isn't that frightening? Master, what do
you think of this statement?
Answer 2:
How can
a person live without believing in themselves at all?
Not
trusting your own thoughts should come through reasoning and critical thinking,
shouldn’t it?
For
example, when encountering a scam, some people wonder why they feel anxious.
The answer is simple: a scam is carried out by an organized group, while you
are just one individual. The collective power of deception can easily overwhelm
a single person.
But if
you do fall for a scam, does that mean you should completely stop trusting
yourself? That would only add insult to injury!
Also,
you can’t constantly be “boxing” inside your own mind. If every thought that
arises is immediately treated as an opponent to be knocked down, what will
happen to your brain in the end? Take a moment to think about it carefully.
Master
Banji
佛法問題回答3
問題: 師父早年近身親近過廣欽老和尚的看法。
回答：懂佛法的人都知道廣欽老和尚的開示錄，看起來悶悶的，
其實我曾經看過廣老兩眼射出像兩道非常鋒利的劍光，那種劍光讓人ㄧ見，震撼到傻掉！
但我硬是吞不下祂開示的內容！
我後來弄明白了一個道理，
譬如說；你入定能看到過去的時間裡ㄧ個人去殺人，
但是你看不到那個人殺人背後的時代背景，
如果你是軍人，活在戰爭年代，你的殺人應該是另當理解的，
這是「知其所然」跟「知其所以然」的差別，
「知其所以然」能夠思考的問題範圍會非常大，
所以單獨看到人去殺人，事實上還是有很大的模糊空間，
我寧願選擇可以研究的後者「知其所以然。」
這文章的內容好像之前有寫過一部分，不再回頭找了！
半寄
Buddhist
Teachings Q&A 3
Q3:
What is Master’s
early experience with Master Kuang-ch'in?
Answer 3:
Anyone
familiar with Buddhism knows that Master Kuang-ch'in’s teachings may seem dull
at first.
However,
I once saw his eyes emit two sword-like beams of light. The sword-like beams
were so powerful that anyone who saw them would be left completely stunned!
Yet, I
struggled to accept his teachings.
Later, I
realized an important truth.
For
instance, if you enter deep meditation and witness someone committing murder in
the past, you might see the act itself but not the historical and situational
context behind it.
If that
person was a soldier living in a time of war, their act of killing should be
understood differently.
This
highlights the difference between “knowing what it is ” and “understanding why
it is.”
The
latter allows for deeper reflection and broader understanding.
So
simply seeing someone commit murder doesn’t tell the full story. I’d rather
pursue “understanding why” than just knowing the surface facts.
I
believe I’ve written about some of this before, and I won’t bother to go back
to find it out.
Master Banji
沒有留言:
張貼留言