..续本文上一页a truth conforming to the convention of the world. But the ultimate truth is that there is no ”I” or ”being” in reality. As the Mahāyāna-sūtrālankāra says: ”A person (pudgala) should be mentioned as existing only in designation (prajňapti) (i.e., conventionally there is a being), but not in reality (or substance dravya)”. [8]

　　为了避免混淆，于此必须申明，真理有两种：世俗的真理(俗谛)与最高的真理(真理)。［注六］我们在日常生活中，用我、你、众生、个人等名词的时候，不能因为实无我及众生等而将上项名词视为妄语。这些名词在世俗共认的意义来说，也是真实的。但是，最高的真理，却是实际上并无我与众生。在《大乘庄严经论》里就说：“当知“补特伽罗”只是假名安立(依世俗说，有所谓众生)，并无实义。”［注七］

　　”The negation of an imperishable Ātman is the common characteristic of all dogmatic systems of the Lesser as well as the Great Vehicle, and, there is, therefore, no reason to assume that Buddhist tradition which is in complete agreement on this point has deviated from the Buddha”s original teaching.” [9]

　　大小乘各宗派的共同特色，就是否定有不灭的神我。因此，就没有理由假定在这一点上完全一致的佛教传统，已经与佛的原始教诫有了偏差。［注八］

　　It is therefore curious that recently there should have been a vain attempt by a few scholars[10] to smuggle the idea of self into the teaching of the Buddha, quite contrary to the spirit of Buddhism. These scholars respect, admire, and venerate the Buddha and his teaching. They look up to Buddhism. But they cannot imagine that the Buddha, whom they consider the most clear and profound thinker, could have denied the existence of an Ātman or Self which they need so much. They unconsciously seek the support of the Buddha for this need for eternal existence-of course not in a petty inpidual self with small s, but in the big Self with a capital S.

　　因此，最近有少数学者［注九］，竟然违反佛教精神，妄图将“我”观念，私自输入到佛的教义之中，实在是奇怪之极。这些学者对于佛及其教义备极尊崇，仰佛教如泰山北斗。但是他们无法想像如佛这般头脑清晰、思虑精深的思想家，竟能将他们所热切需要的神我、自我予以否认。他们下意识地寻求佛陀的支应，以满足他们对永生的需要——当然不是个人的小我，而是大“我”的永生。

　　It is better to say frankly that one believes in an Ātman or or Self. Or one may even say that the Buddha was totally wrong in denying the existence of an Ātman. But certainly it will not do for any one to try to introduce into Buddhism an idea which the Buddha never accepted, as far as we can see from the extant original texts.

　　索性坦白地相信有神我、自我，甚至明白指摘佛不承认有神我自我为错误，都无所谓。可是应要将佛从来不曾接受过的的一种观念注入于佛教之中，那就不成了。这种观念在现存的原始佛典中，就我们所见，是不为佛所接受的。

　　Religions which believe in God and Soul make no secret of these two ideas; on the contrary, they proclaim them, constantly and repeatedly, in the eloquent terms. If the Buddha had accepted these two ideas, so important in all religions, he certainly would have declared them publicly, as he had spoken about other things, and would not have left them hidden to be discovered only 25 centuries after his death.

　　相信有上帝与灵魂的宗教，并不以这两种观念为秘密。相反的，他们还经常不断地反覆宣扬它们，极尽辩才吹擂之能事。如果佛曾经接受这两种在一切宗教中极为重要的观念，他一定会公开宣布，如同他谈论其它事物一样，而不会将它们秘藏起来，以留待他圆寂二千五百年后的人来发现。

　　People become nervous at the idea that through the Buddha”s teaching of Anatta, the self they imagine they have is going to be destroyed. The Buddha was not unaware of this.

　　可是人们一想到佛教的无我，会将他们幻想的“我”毁灭，神经就紧张了起来。佛对这一点并不是不知道。

　　A bhikkhu once asked him: ”Sir, is there a case where one is tormented when something permanent within oneself is not found

　　”

　　有一个比丘有一次问佛：“世尊！是否有人因为发现身内无有常住实性而遭受痛苦折磨呢？”

　　”Yes, bhikkhu, there is,” answered the Buddha. ”A man has the following view: “The universe is that Ātman, I shall be that after death, permanent, abiding, ever-lasting, unchanging, and I shall exists as such for eternity”. He hears the Tathāgata or a disciple of his, preaching the doctrine aiming at the complete destruction of all speculative views… aiming at the extinction of “thirst”, aiming at detachment, cessation, Nirvāna. Then than man thinks: “I will be annihilated, I will be destroyed, I will be no more.” So he mourns, worries himself, laments, weeps, beating his breast, and becomes bewildered. Thus, O bhikkhu, there is a case where one is tormented when something permane…

《佛陀的启示 第六章 无我论 Chapter VI· The Doctrine of No Soul: Anatta》全文未完，请进入下页继续阅读…