「自通之法」的深層探索 -- 依「緣起」法則作為論述脈絡=In Depth Study of the Practice of "Putting Oneself in Others' Shoes": An Explanation Based on the Law of Dependent Origination
This article tries to analyse the definition of “putting oneself in others’ shoes”, its theoretical evidence, ways of proving and psychological basis. The study also includes the universal applications of this practice and its differences, its objects of concern and effectiveness. The practice of “putting oneself in others’ shoes” is a resulting product of communication between the object and subject. Almost everyone possesses this ability of sharing the feelings of others. However, the ability may differ vastly depending on the causes and conditions encountered. There are two reasons for these differences: 1. The Circumstances/Objects: under different circumstances, one may develop different levels of ethical sentiments. The closer/dearer one’s relationship to the person (object), the stronger one’s ability in understanding and sharing the feelings of the person. On the other hand, the further one’s relationship with the object - right to the extreme state where the object is one’s enemy - the weaker one’s ability is in sharing the feeling of the object. 2. Personal Cultivation: Our moral awareness can become stronger and more acute with the development of our moral cultivation. The noble ones have transcended self-attachment and realised non-self. Thus, their ability of “putting oneself in others’ shoes” has thoroughly developed. They have broken through the barriers/obstructions of individuals and are able “to have great loving kindness to all unconditionally”, and “to see all sentient beings as part of themselves and have compassion for all”. The practice of “putting oneself in other’s shoes” is not equivalent to the teaching of the ‘true and eternal mind”. This practice is the rule on how the mind acts in accordance to the Law of Dependent Origination. This is the same as all dependent-originated phenomena. It does not possess a self-nature that is permanent, independent or real. However, the practice of “putting oneself in others’ shoes” also differs from the ‘dharma of form’. Unlike the ‘dharma of form’, this practice has the unique characteristic of cogitating and distinguishing, as well as the functions of perceptions, emotions and thoughts that the mind attributes have. Thus, it is not necessary to seek explanation from the teaching of the ‘true and eternal mind’. The fundamental principle of the study of Buddhist ethics is still founded on the teaching of Dependent Origination. On the other hand, it is also inappropriate for us to regards the dependent-originated phenomena among non-sentient beings as equivalent to that of sentient beings. We should not hold onto the common characteristic of dharma-nature alone and neglect the differences in the unique characteristics of each individual dharma/phenomenon. It is unwise to excessively deduce that non-sentient beings can also realise dharma-nature and advocate the theory that ‘non-sentient beings possess inherent (buddha) nature’.
