無我，還是非我
作者] 坦尼沙羅尊者
[中譯]良稹
No-self or Not-self
by Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu
西方人了解佛教的過程中經常遭遇的第一個障礙，是有關 anatta的教導，這個詞常被譯成無我(no-self)。這個教導成爲障礙，有兩個理由。首先，沒有自我這個觀點與佛陀的其它教導並不吻合，比如業與輪回。假如沒有自我，是什麼承受業的後果，繼續輪回
第二，它與我們自己的猶太-基督教背景也難以吻合，後者把永恒的靈魂或者自我，當成一個基本前提。假如沒有自我，靈性生活的目的又是什麼
許多書籍試圖解答這個問題，但是如果查看記載著現存最早的佛陀教導的巴利文獻，你在經中根本找不到與此相關的陳述。實際上只有一處，有人當面直接問佛陀，自我是否存在，而他卻拒絕回答了。後來有人問他爲什麼，他說，認定有我、無我兩個觀點中的任何一個，均屬極端妄見，不可能走上佛法修持之路。因此，這樣的問題應該放在一邊。爲了理解他對這個問題保持緘默意味著anatta 的釋義是什麼，我們首先必須閱讀他的教導，有關怎樣提出問題、解答問題、以及怎樣理解他的答複。
One of the first stumbling blocks that Westerners often encounter when they learn about Buddhism is the teaching on anatta, often translated as no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for two reasons. First, the idea of there being no self doesn”t fit well with other Buddhist teachings, such as the doctrine of kamma and rebirth: If there”s no self, what experiences the results of kamma and takes rebirth
Second, it doesn”t fit well with our own Judeo-Christian background, which assumes the existence of an eternal soul or self as a basic presupposition: If there”s no self, what”s the purpose of a spiritual life
Many books try to answer these questions, but if you look at the Pali Canon — the earliest extant record of the Buddha”s teachings — you won”t find them addressed at all. In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible. Thus the question should be put aside. To understand what his silence on this question says about the meaning of anatta, we first have to look at his teachings on how questions should be asked and answered, and how to interpret his answers.
佛陀把一切問題分爲四類: 一類值得明確答複(直接的是與否); 一類值得分析式答複，即對該問題加以定義與限製; 一類值得反問，即把球送回提問者的場地; 一類值得放在一邊。這最後一類，則包括那些不能終止苦與緊張的問題。一位老師接到問題時，首要責任是弄清這個問題屬于哪一類，之後以相應方式作答。比如你對一個該放在一邊的問題，便不以是與否作答。假如你是提問者，得到一個答複後，便要決定對其推論該走多遠。佛陀說，誤解他的人有兩類: 一類對不該作推論的陳述去作推論，還有一類該作推論卻不作。
The Buddha pided all questions into four classes: those that deserve a categorical (straight yes or no) answer; those that deserve an analytical answer, defining and qualifying the terms of the question; those that deserve a counter-question, putting the ball back in the questioner”s court; and those that deserve to be put aside. The last class of question consists of those that don”t lead to the end of suffering and stress. The first duty of a teacher, when asked a question, is to figure out which class the question belongs to, and then to respond in the appropriate way. You don”t, for example, say yes or no to a question that should be put aside. If you are the person asking the question and you get an answer, you should then determine how far the answer should be interpreted. The Buddha said that there are two types of people who misrepresent him: those who draw inferences from statements that shouldn”t have inferences drawn from them, and those who don”t draw inferences from those that should.
這些便是理解佛陀教導的基本原則，不過如果看看多數作者對 anatta學說的解釋，我們發現這些基本原則給忽略了。有些作者試圖對無我的铨釋加以限定，說佛陀否定的是永恒自我或者獨立自我的存在，不過這樣做，是對一個佛陀表明該放在一邊的問題，給出分析式答複。其他人則試圖從經文中幾個似乎暗示自我不存在的陳述裏作推論，不過可以肯定，迫使這些句子對一個該放在一邊的問題給出答案，那麼他是在作不當推論。
These are the basic ground rules for interpreting the Buddha”s teachings, but if we look at the way most writers treat the anatta doctrine, we find these ground rules ignored. Some writers try to qualify the no-self interpretation by saying that the Buddha denied the existence of an eternal self or a separate self, but this is to give an analytical answer to a question that the Buddha showed should be put aside. Others try to draw inferences from the few statements in the discourse that seem to imply th…
《無我，還是非我
》全文未完，請進入下頁繼續閱讀…