泰國佛教1
大家好！
南禪精舍的居士沛宏，
傳了一篇泰國僧侶講的「證入阿羅漢的肉體生理」文章給我。
泰國僧侶從「阿姜查」（Ajahn Chah，泰文：อาจารย์ชา）
傳入臺灣開始，
他們所講述的佛法與修行內容，我一樣無感，
雖然我感謝南傳佛教把《阿含經》保存的很好，
當他們經常有入定者在講述他們的一些經歷時，個人無法敘述我對他們的感慨！
由於沛宏傳的這篇文章有點長，也沒有辦法截一些出來講，就直接說我個人看法，
（複製標題讀者可以查閱。
泰國近年有一則語錄在佛教圈流傳頗廣，出自Luang Por Ganha之口：
《阿羅漢不再有生殖元素 Arahants no longer have reproduction elements》）
在《阿含經》裡頭，就記載了很多歷史上真實的佛陀，生病、托缽還有其弟子群體修行生活的事實，
有研究過《阿含經》的讀者都清楚歷史上的佛陀長什麼樣子。
人有肉體必定依賴著食物、醫藥、種種⋯⋯乃至於社會關係，這是絕對無可避免的，
佛法既然向廣大的群眾做出了弘法，那麼有著認知層次的社會群眾，必然決定了佛法的走向。
想知道什麼是佛陀的教學，首先必定要釐清這種混淆。
我個人認為一旦失去了對「破身見-無我」的主要佛法內容的理解，
修行者的肉體探討已經沒有必要，
大部分的肉體問題還是歸屬於醫療知識面。
其餘是基本上群體生活需要管理而已！
為什麼不去探討證果阿羅漢是如何去弘法的，還有面對其他團體阻擾的困難！
就我個人長達20年的時間不斷有惡靈叫我去死，（大都是台灣語言）
面對不斷的詛咒，我常想我個人的生死阻礙了誰？
（在南禪讀書會，前兩年我常提及惡靈又叫我去死了！我的解脫也是被這些惡力量逼出來的，哈）
要不是當年目睹過臺灣的廣欽老和尚經常被一些惡群眾包圍，
我大概不能相信我聽到的！
弘法困難重重，以致於後來印度佛教又被伊斯蘭教消滅，面對這些歷史，或許可以去想的問題更多吧！
關於「大天五事」盡說些「不痛不癢」的問題，僧團也沒佛法知識判別，
還要導致僧團的分裂，當時無法判讀應該就是佛法修行者的恥辱了！
半寄
Thai Buddhism1
Greetings, friends of NanZen!
Layman Pei-Hong of NanzenVihara recently forwarded to me an article by a Thai monk discussing the physiological transformation associated with attaining Arahantship. Since the arrival of Thai monks, beginning with Ajahn Chah, in Taiwan,
I have never felt much resonance with their teachings and methods of practice.
Nevertheless, I appreciate how well Theravāda Buddhism has preserved the Āgama texts.
When Thai practitioners recount their meditative experiences or states of absorption, I often find myself unable to respond or express my feelings about it. Since the article Pei-Hong sent is rather long, so instead of quoting it, I will simply share my thoughts. (Those interested may search the title: “Arahants no longer have reproduction elements.” by Luang Por Ganha:)
In the Āgama sutras, we see a real historical Buddha—getting sick, begging for food, and living with his disciples. Anyone who has studied the Āgamas knows what the historical Buddha was like. Human beings with physical bodies inevitably rely on food, medicine, and various social connections. This is unavoidable.
Since Buddhism is intended for society, society’s collective level of understanding inevitably influences how the Dharma is spread.
If one truly wants to understand the Buddha’s teachings, one must first dispel these confusions. In my view, once the key teaching of “breaking the view of self—anattā (non-self)” is lost, further discussion on the body becomes unnecessary. Most physical issues should be handled by medical knowledge. The rest is just group management.
Rather than speculating on biological changes in Arahants, why don’t we examine how they actually spread the Dharma, and how they overcame oppositionfrom rival groups?
For over two decades, I’ve endured relentless spiritual harassment—voices, often in Taiwanese, urging me toward death. It has made me question: whose progress does my mere existence obstruct?
(In our NanZen study club, I used to mention that evil spirits urged me to die. Ironically, it was these hostile forces that catalyzed my own awakening)
Had I not personally seen Venerable Guangqin in Taiwan being harassed by unruly crowds, I wouldn’t have believed such oppression was real.
Spreading the Dharma is extremely difficult. The eventual suppression of Buddhism in India by Islamic invasions is a sobering historical lesson. These are the matters truly worth contemplating.
The case of Mahādeva’s Five Points is an example of focusing on trivial matters. The Sangha at the time lacked the insight to properly assess them, leading to the split in the Sangha. Such inability to distinguish truth from distraction is, in my opinion, a profound embarrassment for any sincere practitioner.
Master Banji
泰國佛教2
泰國佛教2-虛雲老和尚
中國的《虛雲和尚自述年譜》，1840-1959
有提到：「虛雲老和尚晚年時，
「老病所苦，夜夢頻繁，時有夢遺流精之現象，雖非心動，然亦汗顏。」
老和尚說這是身體衰老虛弱、氣脈不調所致，非因淫念，也非戒行鬆懈。」
我記得40年前看到這一段的時候，除了感動，還伴隨著許多的問號？
虛老一生如果犯著病都是大病痛，
到這個節骨眼還要做這種交代，
不能相信之餘，想說這是人嗎？
如果不是人體，卻有著人體的現象。
虛老的定力之高，是華人佛教界的普世價值，
但連生病都得這麼清楚的交代，我個人是沒有辦法接受的，
把肉體弄到一個針孔都得說清楚的地步，令人毛骨悚然！
（參考下面截圖：
很久以前就想說：
由於無法理解「破身見-無我」的思考，
所以盡往身體去發展了！）
後來看到研究資料指向《楞嚴經》是有問題的，
想說虛老這一代的大菩薩，忙著慈悲救度眾生，
卻不願意對經典提出另外的看法，
經典才需要字字必究的，有問題的經典反倒被整本吞噬不言說。
虛老是提倡《愣嚴經》的，
這些看法放在我心裡很久了，虛老畢竟是大菩薩我也不想說什麼，
但面對有問題的經典仍是一代一代的傳下去，
怎麼說呢？
或許，佛陀是哲學史上、修行史上唯一的普世價值。
半寄
（修行從佛陀親自的教導開始，也常處於被誤解的狀態）
Thai Buddhism 2- Master Xuyun
In the Chinese text "The Autobiographical Chronicle of Master Xuyun (1840–1959)", there is a passage stating:
“In his later years, Master Xuyun suffered from illness and physical weakness. He often had dreams at night and sometimes experienced involuntary emissions. Although it wasn’t caused by lustful thoughts, he still felt ashamed.”
He explained that this happened because his body was weak and his energy channels were unbalanced—not because of any sexual thoughts or loss of discipline.
I remember reading this passage forty years ago. I was moved, but also filled with confusion and questions.
Master Xuyun had endured many serious illnesses throughout his life,
and even at such an old age, he still felt the need to explain this in detail.
It made me wonder—was he even human? I couldn’t believe it.
If it is not a human body, yet displays characteristics of one.
His meditative strength is widely recognized as a universal value within Chinese Buddhism.
However, I personally find it difficult to accept that even his illnesses had to be explained in such detail.
It’s chilling to think that every minute detail of the body— even a pinprick, had to be clearly reported.
(Please refer to the screenshot below.
I’ve long wanted to say this: Since the concept of “eliminating identity view and realizing no-self” is difficult to grasp, explanations have often shifted toward focusing on the body.)
Later, I read some research questioning the authenticity of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra.
It made me reflect: Xuyun, a great bodhisattva of the generation, so devoted to saving sentient beings with compassion, seemed reluctant to talk about those questionable scriptures.
Yet it is the scriptures themselves that ought to be carefully examined word by word.
Instead, problematic sutras continue to be passed down, untouched and unquestioned.
Master Xuyun strongly advocated for the Śūraṅgama Sūtra,
and I have carried these mixed thoughts for a long time.
He is a great bodhisattva, and I hesitate to voice criticism.
But when problematic scriptures are handed down generation after generation without being questioned, it raises serious concerns.
Perhaps the Buddha remains the only true universal value—
both in the history of philosophy and the path of spiritual practice.
Master Banji
(Spiritual practice originates from the Buddha’s own instruction, yet it is frequently misunderstood.)
