|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
聖嚴法師與馬丁布伯——淨土與對話哲學的相遇=Between Chan Master Sheng Yen and Martin Buber: An Encounter of Pure Land and Dialogical Philosophy |
|
|
|
| Author |
Margulies, Hune (著)
|
|---|
| Source |
2021 第八屆漢傳佛教與聖嚴思想國際學術研討會
|
|---|
| Date | 2021.06.29 |
|---|
| Publisher | 財團法人聖嚴教育基金會 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
https://www.shengyen.org.tw/index.aspx?lang=cht
|
|---|
| Location | 臺北, 臺灣 [Taipei, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 會議論文=Proceeding Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Keyword | 布伯=Buber; 佛教=Buddhism; 禪=Zen; 存在主義=Existentialism; 詩歌=Poetry; 安息日=Sabbath; 猶太教=Judaism; 基督教=Christianity; 戒律=Precepts; 上部座=Theravada; 希伯來聖經=Torah; 神學=Theology; 哲學=Philosophy; 淨土=Pure Land; 聖嚴法師=Master Sheng Yen; 上帝=God |
|---|
| Abstract | 本文深入探討馬丁布伯的對話哲學，和聖嚴法師的教導的內在聯結。我認為馬丁布伯的對話哲學，是他融合西方宗教性靈人文主義的面向，以及人間禪宗佛教的某些形式，特別是聖嚴法師所闡釋的人間淨土教義而成。聖嚴法師的佛陀淨土在人間，與馬丁布伯的對話人道社會主義，有許多共同點，其中最重要的，是其存在的顯現。我認為東西方在重拾慈悲為懷的靈性實踐上，聖嚴法師的教導在上述的脈絡下，起了開創性的重要作用。此篇研究聖嚴法師成功地教導佛法，在於慈心與悲心。這與馬丁布伯在對話哲學所教導的，在瞭解與實踐法門上具共通性。對話哲學認為性靈追求中，至善的上帝並非高位於天堂，而存乎你我之間。類似聖嚴法師所教導的淨土，“我與汝”的對話，是基於當時當地的環境條件下產生的社會慣常行為。換言之，我與汝的對話行為，在類似於人間淨土的對話社會形式下發展。在此前提下，我認為布伯所強調我與汝這個初始靈性的互動關係，在文化約束影響下構成的靈性生活，與聖嚴法師教導的淨土，有許多異曲同工之妙。上文的“初始”，指的是一種先行於其他所有的作為，而且所有後續的作為之正當性，都取決於是否與該原始作為之吻合與否。在此，我要闡述的是對話哲學與淨土在存在上的匯合，未必是原則上的相似性。也就是說，人與人之間，以及人與自然的我–汝對話，與淨土的基本社會作為相似。亦即禪的社會作為，只能存在對話社會的框架之下。從對話的角度來看，人生就是關係；而證悟或覺醒，就是與街坊鄰居以及自然界進行如法的互動關係。在與他人與世界互動關係中真正實踐正念，全方位從個人到社會層面，都必須建立不倚賴消費行為以及重商主義的社會。這是淨土與對話哲學的教導。我認為馬丁布伯對於我–汝和我–它互動的分別，最基本的瞭解上而言，就是人間淨土的論述。這個重要的分別，在於我–汝之間有關係，然而我–它之間沒有關係；只有互動，或者交易。可以說馬丁布伯的對話哲學和其他存在理論的不同，在於馬丁的我–汝關係在存在之前就已存在，因而存在早於其本性。關係是人類的初始經驗，人類所有其他作為升起或者落下，與關係保持或遠或近的距離。禪也是人類初始的性靈，因而早於佛教。這裡所謂的早，並非時間上而言，而是指意欲離苦證得解脫的修行。布伯的對話哲學與淨土教導，代表了社會上慈悲的修行與心。布伯援引許多基督教聖經與猶太教的文獻，大多是傳統認為上帝是宗教至善的顯示，相當於佛教對於涅槃的認識。然而布伯的對話哲學，認為我們與鄰人以及所有人類的我–汝關係，與上帝的至善無二無別。人們無法在關係裡找到上帝，上帝就是關係。同樣的，菩薩不認為其行為是延遲證涅槃，而是在此時此地證悟涅槃。實踐我–汝關係者，不在其行為結果找到上帝，而是其行為的本身就是上帝的存在。同理，聖嚴法師教導我們在慈愛的行為中找到佛，在照顧地球的同時，找到人性的愛與尊嚴。在我看來，聖嚴法師教導「提升人的品質，建設人間淨土」的人間佛教，與馬丁布伯基於猶太人文主義的對話宗教之相遇，會引發對於目前迫切所需的豐碩瞭解，以及佛法價值社會建立的前景。縱然這件事不易辦到，誠如來自布拉茲拉夫的那赫曼所言：「這個世界是個很窄的橋，所以最重要的事，就是永不害怕。」聖嚴法師就是憑著他無懼的決心，法隨法行，在這困難重重的五濁惡世裡，重建人性。
This study discusses in depth the intrinsic connections between the Dialogical philosophy of Martin Buber and the teachings of Chan Master Sheng Yen. I argue that the Dialogical philosophy of Martin Buber is a creative confluence between aspects of western spiritual Humanism and some forms of Humanistic Zen Buddhism, especially the Pure Land in the human realm doctrine as espoused by Chan Master Sheng Yen. Master Sheng Yen’s Pure Land of the Buddha in the human realm and the Dialogical- Humanist-Socialism of Martin Buber share similar principles and, most importantly, similar existential manifestations. It is in this context that I hold the teachings of Master Sheng Yen to be of seminal importance for the recovery of a compassion-based spirituality in both the east and the west. In the spirit of Upaya, this study argues that a successful pedagogical method to teach and learn the Buddhist teachings of Chan Master Sheng Yen is to address their commonality with similarly understood and similarly practiced formulations of Metta and Karuna, such as those espoused in the Dialogical Philosophy of Martin Buber. Dialogical philosophy argues that God, as the summon bonum of the spiritual quest, is not above in a realm of transcendent heavens, but rather, God is the between of an I and a Thou. As is the case with Master Sheng Yen’s teachings of Pure Land, I and Thou dialogue is a social practice applicable to the conditions and circumstances of the here and the now. That is to say, the Dialogical practices of I and Thou are translated in the social realm in the form of a Dialogical society, which in its general contours is much akin to the Pure Land on earth. In this sense I argue that Buber’s emphasis on the relationship between I and Thou as the primordial spiritual practice, constitutes, with some obvious cultural reservations, a view of the spiritual life that resembles in many respects the Pure Land teachings of Master Sheng Yen. By “primordial” it is meant to indicate that a particular practice precedes all others, and those other practices in turn derive their legitimacy from the extent to which they either coincide with or drift apart from it. What we seek to elucidate are the points of existential confluence between Dialogue and Pure Land, not necessarily principles of philosophical similarities. That is to say, I argue that the enactment of I-Thou Dialogue between people and with nature shares the same basic social practices as those of Pure Land Buddhism. Or in other words, the social practices of Zen can only be enacted within the framework of a Dialogical society. From a dialogical perspective, all life is relati |
|---|
| Hits | 562 |
|---|
| Created date | 2022.06.14 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
