問題回答
問題：
心法如何作解？
半寄回答：
佛陀的「諸法因緣生，諸法因緣滅，」
沒提到「心」。
你去觀察自己，碰到想要的東西時候，產生的情緒，還有你對它的看法，在想要跟不想要之間要如何拿捏？
佛法屬於貪的解釋，被歸類到避之唯恐不及，
以佛法修行而言，必須去理解自己對於貪這個問題的看法夠不夠清楚。
一如「泥中無瓶」看到泥土對於陶作師 或常識而言，就有基本定位，
貪也被定位，而應該是對於貪的思考都必須清清楚楚，
說佛法的人們，把心講到無限大，無限的可能⋯⋯。
沒有思考性內容的心法，將走向何方？
(個人觀點)
沒有錯，人受感官的掌控，
但心跟感官畫等號嗎？
很多人又認為不是？
那如果修行者從整個思考裡面清楚，什麼是可以拿的，什麼是不能拿的，
再跨越到錯誤的認知問題，
例如：陶作師看到泥土，如果不做第一個反射，那麼泥土對他的束縛性就降低，不用再運用心、感官去做全面的解釋。
我個人已經寫出的「四聖果」內容，相信已完整表達佛法修行的程序。
對於所謂的「心法」我個人沒有任何看法，因為我早已不用它了！
佛法實地的「色愛與無色愛「精神與肉體）」的解脫，
一定是用非常清楚的理論與深定並行去解開它，
光用「心法」無法詮釋這一切。
提供參考。
半寄
（南禪基金會不對外募款）
Q&A: On the Interpretation of Mind-Dharma
Question:
How should “mind-Dharma” be interpreted?
Banji’s Response:
The Buddha taught: “All phenomena arise and cease through causes and conditions,” without referring to “mind.”
Through self-observation, when encountering desired objects, emotions and judgments arise.
The key issue is how to navigate between desire and non-desire.
Buddhist teachings often categorize desire as something to be avoided.
However, in practice, one must clearly understand one’s own perception of desire.
As in the statement “no pot exists in the clay,” clay already has a defined role within conventional understanding.
Similarly, desire must be clearly defined, and one’s reflections on it must be precise.
Some present the mind as infinite and boundless. Yet without analytical content, such “mind-Dharma” lacks direction.
(Personal Viewpoint)
Although humans are influenced by sensory input, the mind is not identical to the senses.
If a practitioner can clearly discern what should be taken and what should not be taken, they can go beyond wrong views.
For example,
when a potter sees clay, if the first automatic reaction does not arise, the control that the clay has over him becomes weaker.
Thus, there is no need to rely on mind and senses to explain everything.
I have already explained the practice process through the “Four Stages of Enlightenment.”
I do not hold any particular position on “mind-dharma,” as I no longer use it.
True liberation from desire (mental and physical) requires clear theory combined with deep meditative absorption.
“Mind-dharma” alone cannot account for it.
For reference.
Master Banji
沒有留言:
張貼留言