印度思辯
補充不執著的概念：
個人認為南、北傳佛法的認同似乎呈現定局狀態，事實上以印度人的習慣都應該還存在思辯的空間才是正確的。
然而辯論早已經沒落，不管是在印度或是其他流傳佛法的地區，那些已經被寫為經典的佛經不斷延用誦讀、供奉，專有名詞去解釋它，再無其他的可能性，
印度人善於思辯在原始教典或部派佛教時期都呈現豐富多元的思辯能力，早在佛陀的時代，他們的思想在達到高峰時期，很多問題都被提出來辯論過及問過佛陀本人。
而當時歐洲的思維模式在城邦的建立，倫理、邏輯架構。
印度跟歐洲都有邏輯的思考架構，但裡面的內容是截然不同的，
主因是：
一個想藉由佛法系統的實證-融合完整的理性架構及實際修行必有的精神境界而達到解脫，
一個注重哲學，致力於思慮與規劃人生，尤其強調實踐公德生活。
而這兩者我個人都興致高昂。
漢系佛法對「不執著」的觀念用的興高采烈，完全不覺其立足點根本不存在，
因為沒有通過辯論很多的所謂佛法已經是「單方面存在的問題」
沒有「雙方面性」的思辯過。
來看印度人自己的看法：
AI資料 「《好思辨的印度人》（The Argumentative Indian） 這本書是諾貝爾經濟學獎得主阿馬蒂亞．森（Amartya Sen）的文集，書名*本身就概括了其核心主題。
核心內容與主題： 這本書的主要內容是顛覆西方及世人對印度的刻板印象，強調印度文化中悠久且豐富的「論辯」和「理性思辨」傳統的重要性。
阿馬蒂亞．森主張，印度的偉大之處不僅在於其精神性、宗教性或靈修面向，更在於其對話、討論、理性爭辯以及包容異議的傳統，這些是印度文化乃至其民主制度的基石。
主要論述重點： 1. 辯論的傳統： • 本書貫穿的核心觀點是：辯論精神是印度歷史上一個強大且活躍的傳統。 • 他追溯至古代史詩《摩訶婆羅多》中充滿的激烈對話和不同觀點的交鋒，以及阿育王和蒙兀兒皇帝阿克巴等歷史人物對公共討論和理性對話的提倡。 2. 民主與世俗主義的根源： • 他認為，印度當代的民主制度和世俗主義並非完全是西方移植的產物，而是深深根植於印度社會內部長久以來就存在的多元觀點和討論的傳統。」 |
Indian Dialectics
Supplementing the Concept of Non-Attachment:
I think both Southern and Northern traditions of Buddhism have already become fixed in what they believe. But according to the Indian intellectual habit,there should still be space for open discussion and debate—that’s the right way to understand the Dharma.
Unfortunately, debate has long declined. In India and in other Buddhist countries, the scriptures that were once discussed are now simply recited and worshiped. People rely on special terms to explain them, and that leaves no room for further philosophical development.
Indians were once very good at reasoning and debate. In the early Buddhist period, they showed strong and diverse ways of thinking. As early as the Buddha’s time, their thought had reached a high point—many issues were debated and even directly questioned to the Buddha himself.
At that same time, European thinkers were forming ideas through city-states, ethics, and logic. Both India and Europe had logical systems, but what they aimed for was very different.
Both traditions deeply inspire me.
In Chinese Buddhism, the idea of “non-attachment” is often praised, but few notice that its foundation is weak.Without dialectical testing, much of Buddhist thought has become one-sided—never having been examined through two-sided debate.
So, let’s take a look at how the Indians themselves understood it.
AI Data: The Argumentative Indian This book, The Argumentative Indian, is a collection of essays by Nobel Prize–winning economist Amartya Sen. Its title itself encapsulates the book’s central theme. Main Idea: Sen believes that India’s greatness is not only about religion or spirituality. It also comes from the Indian habit of talking, questioning, debating, and accepting different opinions. These qualities are the base of both Indian culture and Indian democracy. Main Points: 1. The Tradition of Debate o Sen says that debate and discussion have always been important in India’s history. o He gives examples from the ancient Mahābhārata, which is full of different opinions and lively discussions, and from leaders like Emperor Aśoka and Emperor Akbar, who both encouraged public reasoning and fair dialogue. 2. The Roots of Democracy and Secularism o Sen explains that India’s democracy and secularism did not come only from Western influence. o They are deeply connected to India’s own long tradition of many voices, open discussion, and respect for difference. |
Master Banji
