13 September 2020
第十七世大寶法王嘉華噶瑪巴泰耶多傑，繼續回答學生的問題，這次開示有關僧伽和團結。
藏語中的“僧伽”Sangha或“格頓”Gedun（“格瓦”Gewa和“敦巴”Dunpa的組合）的意思是「良好的動機」
“敦巴” Dunpa通常被英文譯作“意向”或“動機”。 藏語”格瓦”Gewa英文常譯作”功德”，“美德”，“善良”或“仁慈”。這個藏語Gewa可能與另一個藏語“ Dewa”有關聯，後者是梵語“ Sukha”的翻譯，英文翻譯為
”甜蜜”或“ 喜悅”。但是，我們不太了解“ Sukha”到底是什麼意思，因為這種“甜蜜”並不僅僅由身體的感覺來定義。
但是，如果我們將這些詞語用在“發生”與“做事”這種對比的情況下，解釋則可能會變得有道理。
當我們說“發生”，與“做事”就是相反意思，”發生”是一種描述自行發生的事情，例如，太陽會自己升起並發光，心臟會自己跳動，呼吸是自行發生，依此類推。
而“做事”則剛剛相反。 “做事”意味有”另一個”主體令事情發生。不管那個“另一個”是誰，當我們談論“做事”，就是說它不是自行發生的，是有人或其他事物令事情發生。例如，某物或某人強迫自己呼吸得更快或更慢。
因此，從這種對比的角度來看，我們就可以與動機Gedun相聯，意思是“善良的動機”。
在某意義上，“動機”來自於”行為者”（歸納於”做事”）。美德或“ Gewa”會帶來甜蜜、喜悅“ Dewa”或“ Sukha”的狀態。
因此，可以說那些有動機，認為自己在做事情的就是我們。如果我們仔細觀察並從這個觀點來看自己，我們本身也是在“發生”當中。只是人身這種狀態使我們有機會將發生的事情看作是在做著事情。
但是，當我們不理解這些條件或因緣本來存在於人身當中，我們會將 “發生”的事情視為混亂且不文明，並將之貶為可輕視的事情，就以為這些事情是我們必須要征服的。
而視自己為行為者的我們，就會自視優越並且認為自己有很強組織能力，這種侷限不全面的理解，不僅會導致想要征服大自然，也將導致對人類的征服。
然後慢慢地到最終，當這種有限的認知逐漸變成習慣時，我們對“僧伽”的理解也變成謬見。”僧伽”被視為一種群體主義，讓我們可以感受到歸屬感。
這種歸屬感的渴求，基於我們將“做事”和“發生”只看待為概念性的一種謬誤和不完整的認知。更甚的是，我們視它們為反義詞，視一方比另一方更優越。
結果，作為“行為者”的我們，與“事件”的力量相比就好像顯得極為渺小。因此，我們覺得有必要在一個名為“ 僧伽”的群體中並肩作戰對抗這些混亂的事情。當然，這種觀點給我們一種浪漫的感覺，使我們可以齊心合力面對壓倒性的外在力量。
但這只是一種非常情感性的想法而已。
我們會喜歡可以長久地肩並肩作戰嗎？即使只是片刻。
但事實是我們並不會做到。
不是因為我們不應該這樣做，而是因為根本不會做得到。
那些了解「僧伽」真正含義的僧人（已證悟的僧伽 ）不會化力氣這樣做。
由於他們認識到一切聚合一定不可避免地會有分離，因此他們不刻意做什麼，而只是有意識地讓群體或群組自然顯現。
因為他們看到事情本身沒有自性，除了顯現之外，根本沒有所謂實質的”群體”。
作為金剛乘的僧伽，有意識地讓事情自然發生就成為目的。
我們不知道我們是否屬於哪乘教法，但是如果我們認為自己是屬於某乘教法的話，那麼就更有理由，至少要效仿已證悟僧伽的方式來修行。
為什麼？為什麼我們連多待一會兒的肩並肩在一起都不可能？
最好的做法是追隨已證悟僧伽的步伐去修持，我們就有更好的機會能保持”肩並肩”的狀態。
如果我們能夠肩並肩在一起是真實的話，那麼它就會自然這樣子的出現，但是現實並非這樣。實際上是我們彼此關愛對方，讓事物按照本來規律自行發生，現實中一刻也無法留在一起，這就是實相。
我們非常努力地維持相聚一起，不是嗎？
我們與有血緣或非血緣的群體或家人一起長大，我們當然都是有著相同之處，表面上看起來我們能夠團結在一起。所以，我們和我們的家人以及我們自己都有這種想法，從無始以來到現在都被困在這種想法當中。
這就是為什麼當我們聽到或看到一些人能做到放下時，會讓我們感到困惑。
好像那是絕不可能的事情。
好像我們在祈禱，“請告訴我事實並非如此，請告訴我，我們不需要分離。”
但是，如果我們讓自己超越需要團結在一起的框架，那麼實際上我們就在一起了。
因此，“ 僧伽”的真正含義或最接近真實的含義，完全不是建基於群體主義。
相反，“ 僧伽”是一種方法有意識地放下。
就像投降一樣，但是我們不是沒有選擇地屈服，而是有意識地放下。
我認為那是一種美德。
那是功德。
因此，如果我們用這種美德激勵自己，也許我們可以在僧伽中感到安慰。
沒有一個將所有開悟的人都被擠在一起直到永遠的俱樂部或一個名為“ 僧伽”的團體。
我認為那簡直是難以忍受的。
以我們太陽系的“事件”為例：太陽繞著銀河系的螺旋臂旋轉，但太陽並不會使其依附著它，也不會偏離它。
但至少在顯現上它就在那裡，而且現象正在發揮它的作用。它看起來像一群東西，但僅在表象上是這樣子而已。
實際上，它既不是群體也不是非群體。
但是，它也沒有妨礙群體的顯現。
當我說“讓它就這樣子”時，我並不是說不用在乎。 相反，”讓它這樣子”是出於有意識的、出於在乎的。
如果我們感覺想在一起，那就讓我們有意識地在一起，並覺察在一起是分開的另一種方式。
讓我們培養覺知，察覺“ 僧伽”只是一種有用的短暫舒適感，就像短時間的休息一樣，然後接受一個根本沒有“ 僧伽”這樣的一個事實。
這樣，就沒有需要焦慮的原因。
噶瑪巴
Thaye Dorje, His Holiness the 17th Gyalwa Karmapa, continues to respond to students’ questions, this time with a teaching about Sangha and togetherness.
The meaning of ‘Sangha’, or ‘Gedun’ (a combination of ‘Gewa’ and ‘Dunpa’) in Tibetan, is something like ‘motivated in merit’.
Dunpa’ is often translated in English as ‘aspiration’ or ‘motivation’. ‘Merit’, ‘virtue’, ‘goodness’ or ‘kindness’ are common English terms we have for the Tibetan term ‘Gewa’. This Tibetan term may have some association with another Tibetan term – ‘Dewa’ – a translation of the Sanskrit term ‘Sukha’, which in English would translate as something like ‘sweetness’ or ‘pleasantness’. We don’t quite know what ‘Sukha’ really is, though, because this ‘sweetness’ is not defined by physical sensations alone.
But if we use these terms in the context of a contrast between ‘happenings’ and ‘doings’ then it might begin to make some sense.
When we talk about ‘happenings’ – as opposed to ‘doings’ – it is a way to describe something that is happening by itself – for example, the sun seems to rise and shine by itself, the heart seems to beat by itself, our breathing seems to happen by itself, and so on.
Whereas ‘doing’ is the opposite. ‘Doing’ suggests something that happens when it is done by ‘another’. Whoever that ‘another’ may be – when we talk about ‘doings’ it’s a way to say that it’s not happening by itself, that someone or something else is doing it. For example, something or someone is forcing oneself to breathe faster or slower.
So, from this perspective of contrast we can somehow relate to motivation – ‘Gedun’, which means ‘motivation in merit’.
‘Motivation’ is a term that belongs to the ‘doer’ (to the category of ‘doings’), in a way. The merit or the ‘Gewa’ leads to the state called ‘Dewa’ or ‘Sukha’.
So let’s say that the ones who are motivated, the ones who think that they are doing things, are us – although if we zoom out and look at ourselves from that perspective, we are ‘happenings’ too. It’s just that the human state is such that we have the opportunity to view the happenings as doings.
But when we don’t recognise that condition or opportunity inherent in the human state, we tend to view the happenings as chaotic and illiterate and degrade them to something to be looked down upon – as if the happenings were something that we need to subjugate.
And the doer – us – as superior and organised. That kind of limited recognition, then not only leads to the subjugation of nature, but of ourselves – humankind – as well.
Then, slowly and eventually, when that limited recognition settles into a habit, the understanding of ‘Sangha’ becomes strange too. ‘Sangha’ then becomes a kind of groupism, where we can feel a sense of belonging.
This need to belong arises on the basis of our strange and limited view of not seeing both ‘doings’ and ‘happenings’ as nothing more but concepts; and then moreover seeing one of these opposites as better than or superior to the other.
As a result, we as the ‘doers’ seem small against the might of the ‘happenings’, and so we feel the need to stand together against these chaotic happenings, shoulder to shoulder, in a group called ‘Sangha’. Of course, that kind of perspective gives us a romantic feeling that we are up against an overwhelming force.
But that is just a very emotional way of thinking.
How we would like that, wouldn’t we, staying shoulder to shoulder a little longer? Even if it were just for a few moments.
But the truth is that we can’t.
Not because we are not supposed to, but because it just can’t be done.
Those who understand what Sangha really means (the realised Sangha) make no effort to stay that way.
Since they realise that whatever comes together must inevitably part ways, they consciously let the appearance of a cluster or a group be.
Because they see that there is no essence; there is no ‘real group’ beyond the appearance.
As a Vajrayana Sangha, consciously letting that be seems to be the goal.
We don’t really know if we are part of any Yana, but if we like to think that we are, then all the more reason to at least strive to live according to the realised Sangha’s way.
Why? Why is it that we can’t stay shoulder to shoulder even for a little while?
Well, the benevolent thing in following the footsteps of the realised Sangha is that if we practice their way we stand a better chance to stay ‘shoulder to shoulder’.
If it were the nature of reality to be able to stay shoulder to shoulder then it would work that way, but because reality is not that way, or confined in any way, it’s in fact loving towards one another to let things be according to the reality – the reality of not being able to stay, even for a moment.
We grew up with our biological or non-biological groups or families, so of course there is a semblance, an appearance of being able to stay together, and so both we and our families and ourselves got carried away into thinking that that just seems to be the way, and we got stuck from nowhere until now.
We try so hard to stay together, don’t we?
That’s why when we hear or see someone who seems to be quite alright to let go, it confuses us.
As if that is not possible.
As if we are praying, “Please tell me that that isn’t so, please tell me that we don’t need to part.”
But if we allow ourselves to break out of that boundary of needing to stay together then in fact we are together.
So the real or the closest meaning of ‘Sangha’ is not based on groupism at all.
Instead, ‘Sangha’ is a way to let go consciously.
It’s almost like surrendering – but rather than submitting without choice, we let go consciously.
That’s a virtue, I think.
That’s merit.
So if we motivate ourselves towards that virtue then maybe, just maybe, we can take comfort in being in a Sangha.
There isn’t a club or a group called ‘Sangha’ where all the enlightened ones are crammed together for eternity.
That would be unbearable, I feel.
Take the ‘happenings’ aspect of our solar system, for example: it orbits in the spiral arms of the Milky Way but it doesn’t try to attach itself to it, nor does it try to deviate from it.
But it’s there, in appearance at least, and that appearance is doing its thing. It looks like a group, but only in appearance.
In reality it’s neither a group nor the opposite.
But it has no hang-ups about appearing as a group.
When I say “Let it be” I don’t mean it in a way as if not to care. But “let it be” in a conscious way, out of care.
If we feel like staying together, then let’s stay together consciously, with the awareness that the appearance of staying together is another way to go apart.
Let’s develop the awareness that being in a ‘Sangha’ is just a useful momentary comfort, just like having a breather, before accepting that there was really never any ‘Sangha’.
In that way, there is no real basis for anxiety.
#Karmapa
(Photo/Karmapa)
(中文翻譯由本中心翻譯小組負責。若有錯漏，請見諒。節錄或載列文章內容以原文為準。）
