再談唯識學1Further Reflections on Yogācāra1

再談唯識學1 

 最近被問起《唯識學》的問題，把我個人拋得遠遠已不想看佛法，又拿出來想一想。

 前文已經提過，佛法後來分裂出唯心、唯識跟真如、如來藏心， 一般人既使唸到佛學博士學位，想搞清楚這些恐怕都不是這麼簡單的事情，

 這裡面除了學問，還有修證的問題，套句北傳佛法常講的，那是屬於百千萬劫的時間長河裡的修行了！ 

 說到底，這麼多佛法學派的說法，都只是要把所謂的「本來的面目」找出來， 沒有「上帝」的佛教佛法， 似乎一直要用唯心，唯識、如來藏， 去取代上帝的存在，另一位存在形而上的「主要意識」

，這個「意識」具體大到可以無所不在？ 彷彿，人一定要立一個真正的無形主人，才會過得舒適，

 如果是這樣，那豈不更應該朝自我的認識開始嗎？

 而「自我」是什麼？這個詞也是抽象的，

 你必須有很多知識上的力量才能理解， 

 尤其是上述的理論，在印度存在很久了，你要釐清它必須解讀得更多， 下面的截圖是《亞歷山大東征記》p.202一書裡面提到的印度思想， 

這麼多東西方哲學的唯物、唯識論一般人要釐清它要耗費1-20年的。

 有一個簡單的方法可以試著用，

中國禪宗六祖惠能提出「不思善、不思惡」的想法， 

 在我讀書會的老師們，很難理解這個觀點， 

 我曾經舉例說：當你在面對一個你認為對你懷著惡意的學生時， 如果你要教育他/她，是不是可以忘記他/她曾經對你怎麼惡，

只盡老師的職責去教育他/她。 

 你自己能夠在心裡拿捏自己對善惡的份量，這就是在朝不思善、不思惡前進， 這過程中如你已經可以超越善惡，

 不思善、惡自然會展現在內心的體會，用這樣的方法去「體驗自我」，應該是最快的。 

半寄 

（ AI資料， 唯識學：起源於公元四、五世紀的印度，由彌勒、無著、世親等菩薩所創立和弘揚。它在部派佛教的基礎上，深入探討心識活動，提出了八識的學說，特別是第七識末那識和第八識阿賴耶識（藏識），以此來說明輪迴的主體與萬法的根源。 • 核心主張 • 部派佛教：雖然承認人無我（沒有實體不變的自我），但在「法」的層面，某些部派（如說一切有部）傾向於主張諸法實有。 • 唯識學：主張「萬法唯識，識外無境」，認為世間的一切現象、山河大地等皆是心識（阿賴耶識）所變現的影像，並非實有。這是一種「境無唯識」（外境是虛幻的，內識是存在的）的觀點，屬於北傳佛教的「有宗」。） 

Further Reflections on Yogācāra1

 

Recently, someone asked me again about Yogācāra, bringing me back to a field of Buddhist teachings I had long set aside.Buddhist ideas I had stopped thinking about for a long time. As I have noted before, Buddhist thought eventually differentiated into schools such as idealism, consciousness-only theory, and doctrines of tathāgatagarbha. . Even a person with a PhD degree in Buddhist studies may find these topics difficult to understand. 

 

These are not merely about theoretical study, but also involve the issue of actual practice. As Mahayana Buddhists often say, “understanding these teachings takes countless lifetimes.”

Simply put, all the different schools of Buddhist thought are trying to help us find our "True Nature."

Since Buddhism doesn't have a "God," it seems to uses ideas like "Mind-Only", "Consciousness", and the "Buddha-Nature" to take the place of a higher, unseen power—something like an all-pervasive consciousness. 

 

It feels as if people need to imagine an invisible master in order to feel secure. If that's true, wouldn't it be better to start by understanding ourselves?

 

But what is the "Self"? It's a very abstract idea. To really understand it, you need a lot of intellectual tools and knowledge. 

 

The theories mentioned here have existed in India for a long time, and it takes even more study to sort them out.

 

The screenshot below is from The Anabasis of Alexander(p.202), which talks about Indian philosophy. For most people, understanding the various Eastern and Western philosophies—whether materialist or idealist—can take one to twenty years.

 

There is, however, a simple method. The Sixth Patriarch Huineng proposed: “Do not think of good; do not think of evil.”

 

The teachers in my study group find this hard to understand. I once illustrated it this way: when you face a student whom you believe once disliked you, if you are to educate them, can you forget the past and simply fulfill your responsibility as a teacher?

If you can balance your thoughts of good and bad in your mind, you are already moving toward this practice. When you can rise above good and bad, the state of “not thinking of good or evil” naturally appears. Using this approach to experience the self might be the quickest way.

 

Master Banji

 

AI Data:  Yogācāra originated in India during the 4th–5th centuries and was established and promoted by Maitreya, Asaṅga, Vasubandhu, and other bodhisattvas. Based on earlier Buddhist teachings, it looks closely at how the mind works. It teaches that there are eight types of consciousness, especially the seventh (manas) and eighth (ālaya-vijñāna, the storehouse consciousness). These explain why people continue in rebirth and where all experiences come from. Main Ideas • Early Buddhist Schools: They said people have no permanent self, but some schools (like the Sarvāstivāda) believed dharmas truly exist. • Yogācāra: Says “everything is only consciousness; there is no world outside the mind.” Everything we see—mountains, rivers, the whole world—is a mental image produced by the ālaya-vijñāna.  (The outside world is unreal; only mind is real. This is the “Mind-Only” view in Northern Buddhism.)

 

Text from the Screenshot   …He stood on the stone steps, still dripping with water, completely shocked. Sachar commented on the story: “Skandar thought many years had passed, but it was actually only a moment.” So he said, “See? You’re only an idea.” The story Sachar told is a later version, and it likely came from a real meeting. Alexander met an Indian ascetic named Calanas in Taxila. Calanas became very interested in him and followed him all the way to Babylon. When Calanas knew he had an incurable illness, he sacrificed himself by climbing onto a funeral pyre and burning himself. This shows that Alexander had chances to talk with skeptics, rationalists, materialists, and other Indian thinkers of the time. They probably discussed famous questions in Indian philosophy. Alexander may have found the similarities between Indian and Greek ideas especially fascinating—for example, how the two traditions…   (From The Anabasis of Alexander, p. 202) (The words in bold in this screenshot are what Master Banji wants to highlight.)

立足點的平等5 Equality of Starting Points 5

 立足點的平等5

讀者大概會注意到我常常舉例虛雲老和尚的典故來作說明，

那是因為虛老的年譜把他肉體受苦的情形說的一清二楚。

也或許虛老也有感於修行的斷層，所以以他本身為例交代了一些事情，

 

因為《虛雲老和尚年譜》有著細膩的交代，至少讓我個人在修行的時候的路上多了一條依據準則。

 

能夠入證這麼深層的大定，而肉體的感受也願意交代這麼清楚的，在民國初年史的高僧大德裡面也就只有他老人家。

這在我當年是一條寶貴的線索，所以我也不厭其煩地引用他的年譜記載。

 

人體沒有哪一個人的人體是沒有知覺或是超越在肉體知覺之上的，

高僧大德們所修持的福報當然是另當別論的，這在我之前的「兌現與變現」篇幅也寫過了，

所有的事情都是從立足點的公平出發，而如何開花結果都是個人的事。

半寄

 

 

後記：

我個人也願意說：苦難當頭的時候菩薩們現身渡苦厄，

但我不能認同高僧大德們都是來「示現」的，

那些結結實實的肉體痛苦，是沒有辦法用「示現」看待的，

至少我個人說不出「示現」兩個字，只要想起民國初年高僧大德們的遭遇--無言。

半寄

 

Equality of Starting Points 5

 

Readers may notice that I frequently refer to Master Xuyun’s accounts.

The reason is that his chronicle presents, with striking precision, the physical ordeals he experienced.

Perhaps Venerable Master Hsu Yun himself felt the break in later practitioners’ understanding and therefore used his own body as testimony to clarify certain matters.

 

Because the Chronicle of Master Xuyun offers nuanced and comprehensive descriptions, it has provided me with a reliable guideline in my own practice.

 

Among the great monks of the early Republic era, he was almost the only one who reached such deep levels of meditation and still described his physical experiences so openly.

This served as a crucial clue for me at the time, which is why I repeatedly reference his biography.

 

No human body is completely without sensation, and no one naturally transcends physical feelings.

The blessings of great monks are a separate issue—something I previously discussed in “Fulfillment and Manifestation.”

 

Everything begins from a fair starting point, and how things turn out depends on the individual.

 

Master Banji

 

Postscript: I personally believe that when someone is facing severe suffering, bodhisattvas really do appear to help.

But I cannot accept the idea that great monks experience pain only as a “display” or “manifestation.”

Their physical suffering was real and cannot be explained away like that.

Whenever I think about what the great monks in the early Republic went through, I simply cannot say the word “manifestation.”

 

 

立足點的平等4 Equality of Starting Points 4

立足點的平等4

 

讀者想聽聽，我對佛教慈悲觀點「同體大悲」的看法。

 

乍看「同體大悲」的觀點時，個人是完全接受的，

又或許我是天生的實踐者，

想知道「同體大悲」能做到哪個程度？

所以我常會去測試自我的人性，

測試自己聽起來好像很荒謬，我卻常常執行它，主因是我渴望理解什麼是具體的修行。

 

測試的結果，我自己的人性起了更強烈求生欲與求知欲，

「同體大悲」最高級別要求的是布施都沒有留下自己的生活份量，

就像故事中佛陀割肉餵食老鷹一樣，活生生的人去割肉餵食老鷹？

 

好奇故事內容真假的我，也會試試自己在ㄧ無所有下的感受，之後，可以確認那是虛擬的內容，

但凡是人，都必定在有所依歸的情況下活著，這是肯定的。

 

所以，目前我提供的想法，都是自己經歷過才說或寫出來，絕不寫、說自己沒測試或理解過的思維。

 

當然，虛雲老和尚當年尚在人間時，人在香港，卻自願回中國受難，體現「同體大悲」的氣勢，至今依然感動萬千佛教徒。

 

 

讀者反應說：立足點的平等式，

那中間我們跟虛老的立足點平等是什麼🤔

 

這個是沒有研究過虛老的大德在說的！

他老人家19歲出家，60歲才開悟，而且是夜與繼日的努力，

我也19歲開始修行，卻不能想像熬到60歲的痛苦，

那對我個人而言是恐怖的、不明就裡的無端折磨。

 

設使，虛老看到「四聖果」的修持方法後，是否修行生涯，徹底的不同？

 

再說；虛老被打的死去活來，雖說他可以入定，

但他一旦出定的痛苦跟我們是一樣的，

肉體的痛苦一樣，但精神的痛苦不一樣，

他的肉體痛苦不會導致他精神狂亂，這是道力的加被結果。

 

但如果有其他的路可以選擇，我想連大菩薩都不會去做這種事的。

人體的痛苦一樣，

精神世界的感受不一樣，

但你說肉體不會影響精神嗎？

似乎是不可能的，

最高等級就是精神不會狂亂。

半寄

 

Equality of Starting Points 4

 

Readers would like to hear my thoughts on the Buddhist concept of “compassion that comes from seeing all beings as one”

 

At first glance, I fully accepted this teaching—perhaps because I naturally tend to practice it. I’ve always been curious about how far “Great Compassion as Oneness” can actually be taken. That is why I often test my own humanity. It may sound strange, but I do it regularly because I want to understand what concrete spiritual practice truly means.

 

Through this process, my will to survive and my desire to understand truth have only intensified. The ideal of Oneness-Compassion appears to demand complete self-giving—to the point of leaving nothing for one’s own survival, like the story of the Buddha offering his flesh to an eagle. But could any living person truly perform such an act? My curiosity about the literal truth behind such stories has driven me to experiment with circumstances of having “nothing.” These experiences confirm that the stories are symbolic. As human beings, we inevitably survive with some form of support—this is indisputable.

 

Everything I offer—whether spoken or written—comes from experience. I never discuss concepts that I have not personally tested or understood.

 

For instance, Venerable Master Hsu Yun, when he was still alive, voluntarily returned from Hong Kong to mainland China to face great suffering. His willingness to do so remains profoundly moving for countless Buddhists, even today.

 

 

 

 

Some readers question: “If compassion is founded on equality, "what is the equal footing between us and the Venerable Master Xu Yun?”

 

Such questions typically arise from those unfamiliar with his life. He ordained at nineteen and attained enlightenment until 60—after decades of relentless, day-and-night effort. I also started practicing at 19, but I cannot even imagine enduring that much hardship until 60. To me, it sounds terrifying—an incomprehensible, seemingly endless trial.

 

If Venerable Master Hsu Yun had encountered the cultivation methods associated with the Four Stages of Enlightenment, would his spiritual path have unfolded differently?

 

Furthermore, although he could enter deep meditative absorption even when beaten nearly to death, the pain he felt upon emerging from that state would have been as intense as for any of us. The physical pain was the same; what differed was the mind. His spirit did not collapse—that was the fruit of his spiritual attainment.

 

However, if there had been another path available, I think even a great Bodhisattva would choose to avoid such intense physical suffering. Human bodies experience pain universally, though our inner responses differ. Still, can physical pain truly have no effect on the mind? That seems impossible. At the highest level, the mind simply refrains from falling into chaos.

 

Master Banji

 

 

立足點的平等3 Equality of Starting Points 3

 立足點的平等3

 

前面的文章都提過，從佛陀提出的「破身見」到「無色愛」（精神體的解脫），要完成有一定程度的困難。

 

但這整個過程都是在人性裡面可以掌握的，

例如；自己對已經有的成就戀戀不捨，這個自己完全清楚，（取捨與否另當別論）

 

這種對自我的清楚度，除了在修行可以使用，在所有的地方都是一樣的，

只有清楚自我的人們才能再突破。

 

只要抓住自己一個阻礙點，不管三年、五年我個人都會想辦法把它突破。

像「無我——空」的清晰與突破至少在裡面用功超過30年，而這整個過程，我個人非常清楚自己的進度，

 

這種內容度的清晰，也促使自己對佛學的掌握度整個提昇，

 

佛法確定是平凡人可以修持的，

只要願意動腦，願意思考一下自己的內心層次，必定人人有所得益。

 

在人性的立足點上出發，

只有佛陀教授的修證方法與系統給予「人」完全的肯定，

 

平凡如我，每踏入一步佛法的內容，常驚呼這怎麼可能，法跟人之間竟然可以融合！

 

而這只依據佛法就可達到，

是的——人性立足點的平等，促使人性得到轉寰的空間。

半寄

 

Equality of Starting Points 3

As mentioned earlier, going from the Buddha’s teaching of “dismantling the identity view” to fully releasing “formless attachment” (the liberation of the mental body)is not easy.

 

But everything in this process is something we can understand as human beings.

For example, when we don’t want to let go of something we’ve achieved, we actually know very clearly what we’re doing—even if we don’t want to change.

 

This kind of self-awareness is useful not only in spiritual practice but in everyday life.

Only when we see ourselves clearly can we move forward.

 

Whenever I recognize an inner obstacle, I commit to overcoming it—even if it takes three or five years.

Understanding “non-self and śūnyatā” took me over thirty years of effort, and during that time, I always knew exactly where I was in my practice.

 

This clarity has helped me understand Buddhism much more deeply.

 

The Dharma is, without doubt, a path ordinary people can follow.
If we are willing to think and examine one’s inner mind, everyone can benefit.

 

Starting from human nature,

only the Buddha’s discipline and system of realizationtruly affirm the value of being human.

 

As an ordinary person, each step I take into the Dharma amazes me—how can the teachings fit so naturally with human experience?

 

And all of this can be achieved through the Dharma alone.

Yes—this equality grounded in human nature creates the space for true transformation.

 

Master Banji

 

 

立足點的平等1-2 A Fair Starting Point1-2

 立足點的平等1

在讀書會裡，我說我無法接受北傳佛教所主張的：佛與菩薩早已成道，如今只是「示現」給我們看而已。
這樣的觀念與《聖經》中上帝的概念十分相似，
而一旦套用到佛法的修行上，顯得極為矛盾。

在徹底檢視這個問題之後，我選擇只接受南傳佛法所教的四聖果——也就是逐步削弱人性的貪、瞋、癡「薄」，

理由很簡單：這些煩惱本來就是人性的一部分。
既然經典記錄了它們，就表示它們是可以被修持、被轉化的——而不是佛菩薩因為沒有這些人性，卻來「示範」人性給我們看。

例如，《虛雲老和尚年譜》就記載老和尚在六十歲時才大徹大悟。
這漫長的等待與艱辛的歷程，風雪滄桑，
正反映任何具有人性的人在修行路上都會遇到的焦慮。

也正是這份焦慮，促使人奮力追求開悟，因此虛老的故事讓人覺得格外親切、貼近。
既使當時，我自己也處於焦慮，佛法還沒有著落。

在充分思考後，我捨棄了那種認為「在人性背後還有某個更超越的神秘存在」的想法。

放下這些顧慮，使我得以直接朝超越人性前進——後來也證明了這樣的判斷是正確的。

佛陀所教的佛法，是超越人性與思想體系的結合，
無論佛法歷經多少變化，解脫始終是面對並超越人性本身而來。

這就是立足點的平等，
也是未經人為捏造/修飾的佛法真實性。

半寄

 A Fair Starting Point 1

 

In the study club, I said that I can’t accept the Mahayana idea that buddhas and bodhisattvas became enlightened long ago and now just “act it out” for us. 

Such an idea resembles the idea of a biblical God, and it becomes profoundly inconsistent when applied toBuddhist practice.

 

After examining this issue thoroughly, I chose to accept only the Theravāda teaching that the Four Stages of Enlightenment involve gradually weakening humangreed, anger, and confusion. The reason is simple: these defilements are part of human nature. 

Since the scriptures record them, it means they can be cultivated and transformed—not that buddhas and bodhisattvas, lacking human nature, are “demonstrating” humanity for our sake.

 

For example, The Chronicle of Master Xuyun shows that he became enlightened at the old age of 60. This long wait and difficult journey reflects the anxiety anyone with human nature would experience on the path. It’s exactly this worry that people to strive for enlightenment, and that’s why his story feels so comforting and familiar. I, too, felt this anxiety, even when I had not yet really understood Buddhist Dharma.

 

Once I thought this through, I discarded the idea that some superior, transcendent being stands behind human nature. This release of concern allowed me to move directly toward transcending human nature—an approach that I have since confirmed to be correct.

 

What the Buddha taught unites transcending human nature with transcending conceptual systems. Regardless of how the Dharma has changed over time, liberation always comes from working with human nature itself. This is the equality of our starting point, and it is the authenticity of the Dharma unaltered by human invention.

 

Master Banji

立足點的平等2

 

至於《唯識學》的平等性智跟分別到底差在哪裡？

（AI，關於「分別」與「智」：

 

• 在唯識學中，通常有這樣的說法：「不分別是智，分別是識。）

 

對比一般的平等觀點：

 

立足點的平等，

如同教育機會的平等。

而不是齊頭式平等。

 

所謂智慧是一個大觀點，而其中必須深論的運用觀點是不斷在延續與進ㄧ步細究的。

 

當修行者有了唯識四種大智慧時，要落實在人間，還是必須分出細節。

 

觀察歷代華人祖師大德的言論，每一位證入佛法的修行者都充滿智慧，但每位大德的行事風格都迥然不同。

 

而我個人認為齊頭式的平等，誰都做不到。

 

如果只賦予立足點的平等，將給予佛法更高的活潑度。

半寄

 

Equality of Starting Points 2

 

Regarding how Yogācāra’s Wisdom of Equality differs from discriminative thinking:
(A brief clarification from AI on “discrimination” and “wisdom”:

• In Yogācāra, there is a common saying: “Non-discrimination is wisdom; discrimination is consciousness.”)

In contrast with common notions of equality:

Equality of the starting point, just like equality of educational opportunities, is the goal—not absolute uniformity.

 

Wisdom is a macroscopic view, and its practical application necessitates an ongoing, continuous process of detailed investigation and refinement.

When a practitioner attains the Four Great Wisdoms in Yogācāra, they must still differentiate and elaborate on the details for it to be implemented in the human world.

 

Observing the teachings of past Chinese Buddhist Patriarchs and Virtuous Masters, every realized practitioner is full of wisdom, yet each one acted in distinct styles.

 

I personally believe that absolute uniformity is fundamentally impracticable.

If we grant only equality of the starting point, it will bestow greater vitality and flexibility upon the Buddha Dharma.

 

Master Banji