..续本文上一页o with it, all that is useless." ” So you attach to the view that religious conventions are all useless, and you shouldn”t have anything to do with them. But that”s also an attachment, isn”t it

　　 – attachment to views and opinions – and if you attach to what Krishnamurti says, or you attach to what I say, it”s still an attachment.

　　So we”re recognising attachment, and it”s wisdom that recognises attachment. This doesn”t mean that we have to attach to any other opinion, but to just recognise and know attachment frees us from being deluded by the attachments we do make.

　　Recognise that attaching does have a certain value. We have to learn to walk first of all by crawling, just by waving our arms and legs. When a baby is young, the mother doesn”t say, ”Don”t wave your arms and legs like that! Walk!” or ”You”ll always be dependent on me, nursing at my breast, clinging to me all the time, you”ll just be clinging to your mother all your life!” The baby needs to attach to the mother. But if it”s the mother”s intention to keep the baby attached to her all the time, then it”s not very wise of her. When we can allow people to attach to us in order to give them strength, so that when they have strength they can let go of us, that”s compassion.

　　Conventional forms are things that we can use according to time and place, and wisely consider and learn from – rather than forming an opinion that we shouldn”t be attached to anything, but be completely independent and self-sufficient. The position of a Buddhist monk is a very dependent existence. We are dependent on the requisites offered by lay people: on food, on robes, on a place to live, and medicine for illness. We have no money, no way of cooking food, growing food, or providing for ourselves. We have to depend on the kindness of other people for the basic necessities of life. People say, ”Why don”t you grow your own food, and become self-sufficient so that you don”t need all these people

　　 You can be independent.” That”s highly valued in our society”s terms – to be self-sufficient, independent, not in debt to anyone, not dependent on anything. Yet there are these rules and conventions designed by Gotama the Buddha – they weren”t designed by me. If I had my way, I would probably have designed it differently: it would be nice to be self–sufficient, have my little cabbage patch all to myself, my private funds, my little hermitage – “I don”t need you, I”m independent and free, self-sufficient.”

　　When I took ordination, I didn”t really know what I was getting into; I found out later that I had made myself totally and completely dependent on other people. My family had the white, middle-class, Anglo-Saxon, self-sufficient, independent, don”t-depend-on-anyone type of philosophy. In America we call it the W.A.S.P. – White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant – syndrome. You”re not like Southern Europeans that depend on their mamas and all that. You are completely independent from your mother and father; you”re Protestant – no Popes, none of that stuff, you are not subservient, Black people might have to be in a subservient position, but being White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, means that you”re at the top of the social scale – you”re the best.

　　Then I found myself in a Buddhist country, taking samanera [novice] ordination at the age of thirty-two. In Thailand, little boys ordain as samaneras, so I had to sit with the little Thai boys all the time. Here I was, six foot two, thirty-two years old, having to sit and eat my meals and fall in line with little boys – it was very embarrassing for me. I had to be dependent on people to give me food, or whatever; I couldn”t have any money. So I considered this: ”What is the purpose of this

　　 What is the value

　　 What did the Buddha mean

　　 Why did he do it this way

　　 Why didn”t he f…

《Cittaviveka》全文未完，请进入下页继续阅读…