佛陀的啟示 第一章 佛教的宗教態度 Chapter I. The Buddhist Attitude of Mind

Chapter I. The Buddhist Attitude of Mind

第一章 佛教的宗教態度

Among the founders of religions the Buddha (if we are permitted to call him the founder of a religion in the popular sense of the term) was the only teacher who did not claim to be other than a human being, pure and simple. Other teachers were either God, or his incarnations in different forms, or inspired by him. The Buddha was not only a human being; he claimed no inspiration from any god or external power either. He attributed all his realization, attainments and achievements to human endeavour and human intelligence. A man and only a man can become a Buddha. Every man has within himself the potentiality of becoming a Buddha, if he so wills it and endeavours. We can call the Buddha a man par excellence. He was so perfect in his ‘human-ness’ that he came to be regarded later in popular religion almost as ‘super-human’.

在所有的宗教創始人中，佛(假使我們也可以用世俗所謂的宗教創始人來稱呼他的話)是唯一不以非人自居的導師。他自承只是一個單純的人類，不若其他宗教的教主，或以神靈自居，或自詡為神的各種化身，或者自命受了聖靈的感動。佛不但只是人類的一員，而且他也從不自稱曾受任何神靈或外力的感應。他將他的覺悟、成就、及造詣，完全歸功于人的努力與才智。人，而且只有人才能成佛。只要他肯發願努力，每個人身內都潛伏有成佛的勢能。我們可以稱佛為一位卓絕群倫的人。因為他的『人性』完美至極，以至在後世通俗宗教的眼光中，他幾乎被視為超人。

Man’s position, according to Buddhism, is supreme. Man is his own master, and there is no higher being or power that sits in judgment over his destiny.

依照佛教的看法，人類的地位是至高無上的。人是自己的主宰，在他上面再沒有更高級的生靈或力量，可以裁決他的命運。

’One is one’s own refuge, who else could be the refuge?[1] said the Buddha. He admonished his disciples to ‘be a refuge to themselves’, and never to seek refuge in or help from anybody else. [2] He taught, encouraged and stimulated each person to develop himself and to work out his own emancipation, for man has the power to liberate himself from all bondage through his own personal effort and intelligence. The Buddha says: ‘You should do your work, for the Tathāgatas[3] only teach the way.’ [4] If the Buddha is to be called a ‘saviour’ at all, it is only in the sense that he discovered and showed the Path to Liberation, Nirvāna. But we must tread the Path ourselves.

『人應當自作皈依，還有誰可以作他的皈依呢？』﹝注一﹞佛曾經這樣說過。他訓誡他的弟子們，當自作皈依，切不可向任何人求皈依或援手。﹝注二﹞他教導、鼓勵、激勸每一個人要發展自己，努力自求解脫；因為人的努力與才智，足可以自解纏縛。佛說：『工作須你們去做，因為如來﹝注三﹞只能教你們該走的路。』﹝注四﹞我們把佛叫做『救主』，意思是說，他是發現以及指點我們解脫之道——涅槃——的人而已。這道還是需要我們自己去踐履的。

It is on this principle of individual responsibility that the Buddha allows freedom to his disciples. In the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta the Buddha says that he never thought of controlling the Sangha (Order of Monks)[5] , nor he did want the Sangha to depend on him. He said that there was no esoteric doctrine in his teaching, nothing hidden in the ‘closed-fist of the teacher’ (ācariya-muttbi), or to put it in the other words, there never was anything ‘up his sleeve’. [6]

在這條責任自負的原則下，佛的弟子們是自由的。在《大般涅槃經》中，佛說他從不想到約束僧伽(和合僧團)﹝注五﹞，他也不要僧伽依賴他。他說，在他的教誡中，絕無秘密法門。他緊握的拳中，並沒有隱藏著東西。換言之，他一向沒有什麼『袖中秘笈』。﹝注六﹞

The freedom of thought allowed by the Buddha is unheard of elsewhere in the history of religions. This freedom is necessary because, according to the Buddha, man’s emancipation depends on his own realization of Truth, and not on the benevolent grace of a god or any external power as a reward for his obedient good behaviour.

佛准許他的弟子們自由思想，這在宗教史中是向所未聞的。這種自由是必要的，因為，根據佛的話，人類的解脫全賴個人對真理的自覺，而不是因為他順從神的意旨，行為端正，因此靠神或其他外力的恩典，而得到解脫以為酬佣。

The Buddha once visited a small town called Kesaputta in the kingdom of Kosala. The inhabitants of his town were known by the common name Kālāma. When they heard that the Buddha was in their town, the Kālāmas paid him a visit, and told him:

佛有一次到憍薩羅國一個叫做羈舍子的小鎮去訪問，那鎮上居民的族姓是迦摩羅。他們聽說佛來了，就去拜見他，向他說：

‘Sir, there are some recluses and brāhmanas who visit Kesaputta. They explain and illumine only their own doctrines, and despise, condemn and spurn others’ doctrines. Then come other recluses and brāhmanas, and they, too, in their turn, explain and illumine only their own doctrines, and despise, condemn and spurn others’ doctrines. But, for us, Sir, we have always doubt and perplexity as to who among these venerable recluses and brāhmanas spoke the truth, and who spoke falsehood.’

『世尊，有些梵志和出家人來到羈舍子，他們只解說弘揚他們自己的教義，而蔑視、非難、排斥其他教義。然後又來了其他的梵志出家人，他們也同樣的只解說弘揚他們自己的教義，而蔑視、非難、排斥其他教義。但是對我們來說，我們一直都懷疑而感到迷茫，不知道在這些可敬的梵志方外人中，到底誰說的是真實語，誰說的是妄語。』

Then the Buddha gave them this advice unique in the history of regilions:

于是，佛給了他們如此的教誡，在宗教史上也是獨一無二的：

’Yes, Kālāmas, it is proper that you have doubt, that you have perplexity, for a doubt has arisen in a matter which is doubtful. Now, look you Kālāmas, do not be led by reports, or tradition or hearsay. Be not led by the authority of religious texts, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor by the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea: ‘this is our teacher’. But, O Kālāmas, when you know for yourselves that certain things are unwholesome (akusala), and wrong, and bad, the give them up… And when you know yourselves that certain things are wholesome (kusala) and good, then accept them and follow them’ [7]

『是的，迦摩羅人啊！你們的懷疑、你們的迷茫是正當的；因為對于一件可疑的事，是應當生起懷疑的。迦摩羅人啊！你們要注意不可被流言、傳說、及耳食之言所左右，也不可依據宗教典籍，也不可單靠論理或推測，也不可單看事物的表象，也不可溺好由揣測而得的臆見，也不可因某事物之似有可能而信以為實，也不可作如此想：「他是我們的導師。」迦摩羅人啊！只有在你自己確知某事是不善、錯誤、邪惡的時候，你才可以革除他們……而當你自己確知某事是善良的、美好的，那時你再信受奉行。』﹝注七﹞

The Buddha went even further. He told the bhikkus that a disciple should examine even the Tathāgata (Buddha) himself, so that he (the disciple) might be fully convinced of the true value of the teacher whom he followed. [8]

佛所教的尚不只此。他告訴他的比丘們：弟子甚至須審察如來(佛)本身。這樣，他才能充分地相信他所追隨師尊的真正價值。﹝注八﹞

According to the Buddha’s teaching, doubt (vicikkcchā) is one of the five Hindrances (nīvarana)[9] to the clear understanding of Truth and to spiritual progress (or for that matter to any progress). Doubt, however, is not a ‘sin’, because there are no articles of faith in Buddhism. In fact there is no ‘sin’ in Buddhism, as sin is understood in some religions. The root of all evil is ignorance (avijjā) and false views (micchā ditthi). It is an undeniable fact that as long as there is doubt, perplexity, wavering, no progress is possible. It is also equally undeniable that there must be doubt as long as one does not understand or see clearly. But in order to progress further it is absolutely necessary to get rid of doubt. To get rid of doubt one has to see clearly.

根據佛的教誨，疑是五蓋﹝注九﹞之一，能覆蔽人心，使不得如實見到真理，並能障礙一切進步。疑卻不是一種罪惡，因為在佛教理沒有盲信這一條。事實上，佛教里根本就沒有其他宗教里所謂罪的觀念。一切惡法的根本是無明與邪見。不可否認的是：只要有疑、迷惑、意志不堅定，就不可能有進步。但同樣不可否認的，在沒有確實明了之前，疑是一定存在的。可是想求進步，就絕對必須祛除疑惑；而祛除疑惑，又必須確實明了。

There is no point in saying that one should not doubt or one should believe. Just to say’ I believe’ does not mean that you understand and see, When a student works on mathematical problem, he comes to a stage beyond which he does not know how to proceed, and where he is in doubt and perplexity. As long as he has this doubt, he cannot proceed. If he wants to proceed, he must resolve this doubt. And there are ways of resolving that doubt. Just to say ‘I believe’, or, ‘I do not doubt’ will certainly not solve the problem. To force oneself to believe and to accept a thing without understanding is political, and not spiritual or intellectual.

叫人不懷疑，叫人必須要信，是沒有道理的。僅僅說一聲『我相信』，並不能表示你已有了知與見。一個學生做數學題目的時候，到了某一階段，他不知道該怎麼演算下去。這時他就生起疑慮和惶恐，只要此疑不除，他就不能進步。想進一步演算下去，他就必須解除疑惑。解除疑惑的門徑很多，僅靠說一聲『我相信』或『我不懷疑』，並不能解決問題。強迫自己去相信與接受某些不了解的事物，是政治，不是宗教，也不是睿智。

The Buddha was always eager to dispel doubt. Even just a few minutes before his death, he requested his disciples several times to ask him if they had any doubts about his teaching, and not to feel sorry later that they could not clear those doubts. But the disciples were silent. What he said then was touching: ‘If it is through respect for the Teacher that you do not ask anything, let even one of you inform his friend’ (i.e., let one tell his friend so that the latter may ask the question on the other’s behalf). [10]

佛為了祛疑解惑，素極熱切。就在他圓寂前幾分鍾，他還數度要求他的弟子們，如果他們對他的教誡仍有所疑的話，應向他提出問題，而不要到後來再後悔沒有把這些疑問搞清楚。可是他的弟子們都沒有出聲。那時他所說的話極為感人。他說：『假使你們因為尊敬你們的師尊而不肯提出問題的話，甚至有一個人肯告訴他的朋友也好。』(這意思就是說：他可以將所疑的告訴他的朋友，而由後者代替他向佛陀發問。)﹝注十﹞

Not only the freedom of thought, but also the tolerance allowed by the Buddha is astonishing to the student of the history of religions. Once in Nālandā a prominent and wealthy householder named Upāli, a well-known lay disciple of Nigantha Nātaputta (Jaina Mahāvīra), was expressly sent by Mahāvīra himself to meet the Buddha and defeat him in argument on certain points in the theory of Karma, because the Buddha’s views on the subject were different from those of Mahāvīra. [11] Quite contrary to expectations, Upāli, at the end of the discussion, was convinced that the views of the Buddha were right and those of his master were wrong. So he begged the Buddha to accept him as one of his lay disciples (Upāsaka). But the Buddha asked him to reconsider it, and not to be in a hurry, for ‘considering carefully is good for well-known men like you’. When Upāli expressed his desire again, the Buddha requested him to continue to respect and support his old religious teachers as he used to. [12]

佛不但准許弟子們自由思考，他的寬大為懷，尤令研究佛教史的人吃驚。有一次，在那爛陀城，佛接見了一位有名而富有的居士，名叫優婆離。他是耆那教主尼乾若提子(摩訶毗羅﹝注十一﹞)的在家弟子。摩訶毗羅親自選派他去迎佛，和佛辯論有關業報理論方面的某些問題，想將佛擊敗，因為在這些問題上，佛的觀點與尼乾若提子有所不同。可是出乎意料之外，討論論的結果，優婆離卻相信佛的觀點是對的，他老師的看法反而錯了。所以，他就求佛收他做佛的在家弟子(優婆塞)。但佛叫他不要急著作決定，要慎重考慮一番。因為『像你這樣有名望的人，審慎考慮是要緊的。』當優婆離再度表示他的願望的時後，佛就要求他繼續恭敬供養他以前的宗教導師們，一如往昔。﹝注十二﹞

In the third century B.C., the great Buddhist Emperor Asoka of India, following this noble example of tolerance and understanding, honoured and supported all other religions in his vast empire. In one of his Edicts carved on rock, the original of which one may read even today, the Emperor declared:

在西元前三世紀頃，印度的佛教大帝阿輸迦(阿育王)，遵照佛陀寬容諒解的模范，恭敬供養他廣袤幅員內所有的宗教。在他雕刻于岩石上的許多誥文中，有一則原文至今尚存，其中大帝宣稱：

‘One should not honour only one’ own religion and condemn the religions of others, but one should honour others’ religions for this or that person. So doing, one helps one’s own religion to grow and renders service to the religions of others too. In acting otherwise one digs the grave of one’s own religion and also does harm to other religions. Whosoever honours his own religion and condemns other religions, does so indeed through devotion to his own religion, thinking 「I will glorify my own religion」. But on the contrary, in so doing he injures his own religion more gravely.

『不可只尊敬自己的宗教，而菲薄他人的宗教。應如理尊重他教，這樣做，不但可幫助自己宗教的成長，而且也對別的宗教盡了義務。反過來做；則不但替自己的宗教掘了墳墓，也傷害了別的宗教。凡是尊重自教而非難他教的人，當然是為了忠于自教，以為「我將光大自宗」，但是，相反的，他更嚴重地傷害了他自己的宗教。

So concord is good: Let all listen, and be willing to listen to the doctrines professed by others’. [13]

因此，和諧才是好的。大家都應該諦聽，而且心甘情願地諦聽其他宗教的教義。』﹝注十三﹞

We should add here that this spirit of sympathetic understanding should be applied today not only in the matter of religious doctrine, but elsewhere as well.

在此，我們要加一句話，就是：這種富于同情、了解的精神，在今天不但應當適用于宗教方面，也適用于其他方面。

This spirit of tolerance and understanding has been from the beginning one of the most cherished ideals of Buddhist culture and civilization. That is why there is not a single example of persecution or the shedding of a drop of blood in converting people to Buddhism, or in its propagation during its long history of 2500 years. It spread peacefully all over the continent of Asia, having more than 500 million adherents today. Violence in any form, under any pretext whatsoever, is absolutely against the teaching of the Buddha.

這種寬容與了解的精神，自始就是佛教文化與佛教文明最珍視的理想之一。因此，在兩千五百多年漫長的佛教史中，找不到一個佛教迫害他教的例子。佛教也從來不曾因為弘法或勸人信佛而流過一滴血。它和平地傳遍了整個亞洲大陸，到今天已有了五億以上的信眾。任何形式的暴力，不論以什麼為藉口，都是絕對與佛的教誡相違背的。

The question has often been asked: Is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy? It does not matter what you call it. Buddhism remains what it is whatever label you may put on it. The label is immaterial. Even the label ‘Buddhism’ which we give to the teaching of the Buddha is of little importance. The name one gives it is inessential.

有一個時常被提起的問題：佛教到底是宗教呢？還是哲學？不管你叫它做什麼，都無關宏旨。佛教仍然是佛教，不論你給它貼上什麼樣的標籤。標籤是不相干的。我們將佛的教誡稱為『佛教』，也沒有什麼特別的重要性。人們為它所取的名字，是不關緊要的。

What’s in a name? That which we call a rose,

名字有什麼相干？ 我們叫做玫瑰的，

By any other name would smell as sweet.

叫任何別的名字， 仍然一樣的芬芳。

In the same way Truth needs no label」 it is neither Buddhist, Christian, Hindu nor Moslem. It is not the monopoly of anybody. Sectarian labels are a hindrance to the independent understanding of Truth, and they produce harmful prejudices in men’s minds.

同樣的，真理不需要標籤。它既不是佛教的，也不是基督教的、印度教的、或是回教的。它不是任何人的專利品。宗教的標籤，只是獨立了解真理的障礙。它們能在人們心中產生有害的偏見。

This is true not only in intellectual and spiritual matters, but also in human relations. When, for instance, we meet a man, we do not look on him as a human being, but we put a label on him, such as English, French, German, American, or Jew, and regard him with all the prejudices associated with that label in our mind. Yet he may be completely free from those attributes which we have put on him.

這不僅再與理性和心靈有關的事情為然。即使在人與人的關系間，亦復如是。舉例來說，我們遇到一個人，並不把他看成人類，而先在他身上加上一個標籤，好比英國人、法國人、德國人、或是猶太人，然後將我們心中與這些名稱有關的一切成見，都加在此人身上。實際上，這人可能不含有絲毫我們所加于他身上的種種屬性。

People are so fond of discriminative labels that they even go to the length of putting them on human qualities and emotions common to all. So they talk of different ’ brands’ of charity, as for example, of Buddhist charity or Christian charity, and look down upon other ‘brands’ of charity. But charity cannot be sectarian; it is neither Christian, Buddhist, Hindu nor Moslem. The love of a mother for her child is neither Buddhist nor Christian: it is mother love. Human qualities and emotions like love, charity, compassion, tolerance, patience, friendship, desire, hatred, ill-will, ignorance, conceit, etc., need no sectarian labels; they belong to no particular religions.

人類最喜歡有分別性的標籤，甚至將各種人類共同具有的品性與情感也都加上了標籤。因此，我們常常談到各種『商標』的慈善事業：好比佛教慈善事業，或者基督教慈善事業，而藐視其他『商標』的慈善事業。可是慈善事業實在不能分宗派；它既非基督教的、佛教的、印度教的、也非回教的。一位母親對子女的愛，既非佛教的，也非基督教的；它只是母愛。人類的品性與情感如愛、慈、悲、恕、忍、義、欲、憎、惡、愚、慢等，都用不著宗教的標籤；它們並不專屬于任一宗教。

To the seeker after Truth it is immaterial from where an idea comes. The source and development of an idea is a matter for the academic. In fact, in order to understand Truth, it is not necessary even to know whether the teaching comes from the Buddha, or from anyone else. What is essential is seeing the thing, understanding it. There is an important story in the Majjhima-nikāya (sutta no.140) which illustrates this.

對于尋求真理的人來說，某一思想的來源是無足輕重的。研究某種思想的源流及演變是學術界的事。事實上，如果單為了明了真理，甚至不需要知道這教義是否為佛說，或是他人所說。要緊的是了知與澈見真理。在巴利藏《中部經》第一四零經中，有一則很重要的記載，可資佐證。

The Buddha once spent a night in a potter’s shed. In the same shed there was a young recluse who had arrived there earlier. [14] They did not know each other. The Buddha observed the recluse and thought to himself: ‘Pleasant are the ways of this young man. It would be good if I should ask about him’. So the Buddha asked him ‘O bhikkhu, [15] in whose name have you left home? Or who is your master? Or whose doctrine do you like?’

有一次，佛在一個陶工的棚屋里度過一夜。在這棚屋里，先到了一位年輕的出家人。﹝注十四﹞他和佛陀彼此並不相識。佛陀將這出家人端詳一遍，就這樣想：這年輕人的儀態舉止都很可喜，我不妨盤問他一番。于是佛就問他：『比丘啊！﹝注十五﹞你是在誰的名下出家的？誰是你的導師？你服膺誰的教誡？』

‘O friend,’ answered the young man, ‘there is the recluse Gotama, a Sakyan scion, who left the Sakya-family to become a recluse. There is high repute abroad of him that he is an Arahant, a Full-Enlightened One. In the name of that Blessed One I have become a recluse. He is my Master, and I like his doctrine.’

『同修啊！』那年輕人回答說：『有一位名叫喬答摩的釋迦種後裔，離開了釋迦族做了出家人。他的聲名遠揚，據說已得了阿羅漢果，是一位覺行圓滿的尊者。我是那位世尊名下出家的。他是我的師傅，我服膺他的教誡。』

‘Where does that Blessed One, the Arahant, the Fully-Enlightened One live at the present time?’

『那位世尊、阿羅漢、覺行圓滿的尊者，現在住在那里呢？』

‘In the countries to the north, friend, there is a city called Sāvatthi. It is there that Blessed One, the Arahant, the Fully-Enlightened One, is now living.’

『在北方的國土中。同修啊！有一個城市叫做舍衛。那位世尊、阿羅漢、覺行圓滿的尊者，現在就住在那里。』

‘Have you ever seen him, that Blessed One? Would you recognize him if you saw him?’

『你見過他嗎？那位世尊，如果你見到他，會認識他嗎？』

‘I have never seen that Blessed One. Nor should I recognize him if I saw him.’

『我從來沒見過那位尊者。假使我見到他，也不會認識他。』

The Buddha realized that it was in his name that this unknown young man had left home and become a recluse. But without divulging his own identity, he said: ‘O bhikkhu, I will teach you the doctrine. Listen and pay attention. I will speak.’

佛知到這不相識的青年是在他名下出家的。他不透露自己的身份，說道：『比丘啊！我來將法傳授與你吧。你留神聽著！我要講啦！』

‘Very well, friend,’ said the young man in assent.

『好的，同修！』年輕人答應道。

Then the Buddha delivered to this young man a most remarkable discourse explaining Truth (the gist of which is given later). [16]

于是，佛為這年輕人講了一部極其出色解釋真理的經。(這經的要領，以後再行交代。)﹝注十六﹞

It was only at the end of the discourse that this young recluse, whose name was Pukkusāti, realized that the person who spoke to him was the Buddha himself. So he got up, went before the Buddha, bowed down at the feet of the Master, and apologized to him for calling him ‘friend’ [17] unknowingly. He then begged the Buddha to ordain him and admit him into the Order of the Sangha.

一直到這部經講完之後，這名叫弗加沙的年輕出家人才恍然大悟，原來那講話的人正是佛陀。于是他站起來，走到佛陀跟前，匍伏在世尊足下，向世尊謝罪，因他不明就里，竟把世尊叫做同修。﹝注十七﹞然後他請求世尊為他授戒，准他參加僧伽。

The Buddha asked him whether he had the alms-bowl and the robes ready. (A bhikkhu must have three robes and the alms-bowl for begging food). When Pukkusāti replied in the negative, the Buddha said that the Tathāgatas would not ordain a person unless the alms-bowl and the robes were ready. So Pukkusāti went out in search of an alms-bowl and robes, but was unfortunately savaged by a cow and died. [18]

佛問他有沒有準備衣和缽。(比丘應備三衣一缽，缽是用來乞食的。)弗加沙回說沒有。佛說如來不能為沒有衣缽的人授戒。弗加沙聞言就出去張羅衣缽，但不幸被一只母牛角觸致死。﹝注十八﹞

Later, when this sad news reached the Buddha, he announced that Pukkusāti was a wise man, who had already seen the Truth, and attained the penultimate stage in the realization of Nirvāna, and that he was born in a realm where he would become an Arahant[19] and finally pass away, never ti return to this world again. [20]

後來這噩耗傳到佛處。佛即宣稱弗加沙是一位聖者，已經澈見真理，得不還果，在他再生之地，即可得阿羅漢果﹝注十九﹞，死後永不再回到這世界來。﹝注二十﹞

From this story it is quite clear that when Pukkusāti listened to the Buddha and understood his teaching, he did not know who was speaking to him, or whose teaching it was. He saw Truth. If the medicine is good, the disease will be cured. It is not necessary to know who prepared it, or where it came from.

這故事很清楚地說明弗加沙聽佛說法，就了解佛所說義，他並不知道說法的是誰，所說的是誰的法卻見到了真理。只要藥好，就可治病。用不著知道方子是誰配的，藥是那里來的。

Almost all religions are built on faith-rather ‘blind’ faith it would seem. But in Buddhism emphasis is laid on ‘seeing’, knowing, understanding, and not on faith, or belief, In Buddhist texts there is a word saddhā (Skt. Śraddhā has three aspects: (I) full and firm conviction that a thing is, (2) serene joy at good qualities, and (3) aspiration or wish to achieve an object in view. [21]

幾乎所有的宗教都是建立在『信』——毋寧說是盲信——上的。但是在佛教里，重點卻在『見』、知與了解上，而不在信(相信)上。巴利文佛典里有一個字 saddha 梵文作sraddha)，一般都譯作『信』或『相信』。但是saddha 不是單純的『信』，而是由確知而生之堅心。只是在通俗佛教以及在經典中的一般用法方面來說， saddha 確含有若干『信』的成份。那是只對佛、法、僧的虔敬而言的。

根據西元四世紀頃的大佛教哲學家無著的說法，信有三種形態：(一)完全而堅定地確信某一事物的存在，(二)見功德生寧靜的喜悅，(三)欲達成某一目的的深願。﹝注二十一﹞

However you put it, faith or belief as understood by most religions has little to do with Buddhism. [22]

不論怎樣解釋，多數宗教所了解的信(相信)，都與佛教極少關涉。﹝注二十二﹞

The question of belief arises when there is no seeing- seeing in every sense of the word. The moment you see, the question of belief disappears. If I tell you that I have a gem hidden in the folded palm of my hand, the question of belief arises because you do not see it yourself. But it I unclench my fist and show you the gem, then you see it for yourself, and the question of belief does not arise. So the phrase in ancient, Buddhist texts reads:’ Realizing, as one sees a gem (or a myrobalan fruit) in the palm’.

一般『相信』之所以產生，全在無『見』；這包括一切見的意義在內。一旦見了，相信的問題即告消失。如果我告訴你：我握緊的掌中有一顆寶石，這就產生了信與不信的問題，因為你看不見。但是如果我張開手掌讓你看這寶石，你親見之後，相信的問題便無從產生了。因此，在古佛典中有這樣一句話：『悟時如睹掌中珍(或作菴摩羅果)。』

A disciple of the Buddha named Musila tells another monk: ‘Friend Savittha, without devotion, faith or belief, [23] without liking or inclination, without hearsay or tradition, without considering apparent reasons, without delight in the speculations of opinions, I know and see that the cessation of becoming is Nirvāna.’ [24]

佛有一位叫做謨尸羅的弟子。他告訴另外一位比丘說：『沙衛陀同修啊！不靠禮拜、信(相信)﹝注二十三﹞，沒有貪喜偏愛，不聽耳食之言及傳說，不考慮表面的理由，不耽于揣測的臆見，我確知、明見「生的止息」即是涅槃。』﹝注二十四﹞

And the Buddha says: ‘O bhikkus, I say that the destruction of defilement and impurities is (meant) for a person who knows and who sees, and not for a person who does not know and does not see.’ [25]

佛又說：『比丘們啊！我說離垢祛染，是對有知見的人說的，不是對無知無見的人說的啊！』﹝注二十五﹞

It is always a question of knowing and seeing, and not that of believing. The teaching of the Buddha is qualified as ehi-passika, inviting you to ‘come and see’, but not to come and believe.

佛教的信永遠是知見的問題，不是相信的問題。佛的教誡曾被形容為 ehipasika，就是請你自己『來看』，而不是來相信。

The expressions used everywhere in Buddhist texts referring to persons who realized Truth are: ‘The dustless and stainless Eye of Truth (Dhamma- cakkhu) has arisen.’ ‘He has seen Truth, has attained Truth, has known Truth, has known Truth, has penetrated into Truth, has crossed over doubt, is without wavering.’ ‘Thus with right wisdom he sees it as it is (yathā bhūtam)’.[26] With reference to his own Enlightenment the Buddha said: ‘The eye was born, knowledge was born, wisdom was born, science was born, and light was born.’ [27] It is always seeing through knowledge or wisdom (ŭāna-dassana), and not believing through faith.

在佛典里，說到證入真理的人，到處都用『得淨法眼』一詞。又如『他已見道、得道、知道，深入實相，儘祛疑惑，意志堅定，不復動搖。』『以正智慧如實知見。』﹝注二十六﹞談到他自己的悟道時，佛說：『眼睛生出來了，知識生出來了，智慧生出來了，善巧生出來了，光明生出來了。』﹝注二十七﹞佛教里一向是由智慧得正見，而不是由盲信而生信仰。

This was more and more appreciated at a time when Brāhmanic orthodoxy intolerantly insisted on believing and accepting their tradition and authority as the only Truth without question. Once a group of learned and well-known Brahmins went to see the Buddha and had a long discussion with him. One of the group, a Brahmin youth of 16 years of age, named Kāpathika, considered by them all to be an exceptionally brilliant mind, put a question to the Buddha:[28]

在正統婆羅門教毫不容地堅持要相信，並接受他們的傳統與權威為不容置疑的唯一真理的時代，佛這種態度日益受人激賞。有一次，一群博學知名的婆羅門教徒去拜訪佛，並與他作了長時間的討論。在這一群人中，有一位十六歲的青年，名叫迦婆逿伽。他的心智是公認為特別聰穎的。他向佛提出了一個問題﹝注二十八﹞：

‘Venerable Gotama, there are the ancient holy scriptures of the Brahmins handed down along the line by unbroken oral tradition of texts. With regard to them, Brahmins come to the absolute conclusions: 「This alone is Truth, and everything else is false」. Now, what does the Venerable Gotama say about this?’

『可敬的喬答摩啊！婆羅門教的古聖典是經過往哲口口相傳，直至于今今從未中斷。關于這個，婆羅羅門教徒有一個絕對的結論：「只有這才是真理，余者皆是假法。」可敬的喬答摩，對這點有什麼話說嗎？』

The Buddha inquired: ‘Among Brahmins is there any one single Brahmin who claims that he personally knows and sees that 「This alone is Truth, and everything else is false.」?’

佛問道：『在婆羅門教徒中，有沒有一個人敢說他已親身確知確見「只有這才是真理，余者皆假」？』

The young man was frank, and said: ‘No’.

那年輕人倒很坦白。：他說：『沒有！』

‘Then, is there any one single teacher, or a teacher of teachers of Brahmins back to the seventh generation, or even any one of those original authors of those scriptures, who claims that he knows and he sees: 「This alone is Truth, and everything else is false」?’

『那末，有沒有一位婆羅門的教師，或是教師的教師，如此上溯至于七代，或是婆羅門經典的原著作人，曾自稱他已知已見「只有這才是真理，余者皆是假法」？』

‘No.’

『沒有！』

‘Then, it is like a line of blind men, each holding on to the preceding one; the first one does not see, the middle one also does not see, the last one also does not see. Thus, it seems to me that the state of the Brahmins is like that of line blind men.’

『那末，這就像一隊盲人，每一個都抓住了前面的人。第一個看不見，中間的看不見，最後也看不見。這樣，依我看來，婆羅門教徒的情形正與一隊盲人相彷。』

Then the Buddha gave advice of extreme importance to the group of Brahmins: ‘It is not proper for a wise man who maintains (lit. protects) truth to come to the conclusions: 「This alone is Truth, and everything else is false」.’

然後，佛給了這群婆羅門教徒一些極為重要的忠告。他說：『護法的智者，不應作如是的結論：「只有這才是真理，余者皆假」。』

Asked by the young Brahmin to explain the idea of maintaining or protecting truth, the Buddha said: ‘A man has a faith. If he says 「This is my faith」, so far he maintains truth. But by that he cannot proceed to the absolute conclusions: 「This alone is Truth, and everything else is false」.’ In other words, a man may believe what he likes, and he may say ‘I believe this’. So far he respects truth. But because of his belief or faith, he should not say that what he believes is alone the Truth, and everything else is false.

那年輕的婆羅門，就請佛解釋應如何護法。佛說：『如人有信仰，而他說「這是我的信仰」，這樣可說是護法了。但這樣說過之後，他卻不可進一步地得出一個絕對的結論：「只有這才是真理，余者皆假。」換言之，誰都可以相信他所喜愛的，也可以說「我相信這個」。到此為止，他仍是尊重真理的。但是由于他的信仰，他卻不能說唯有他所相信的才是真理，而其他一切都是假的。』

The Buddha says: ‘To be attached to one thing (to a certain view) and to look down upon other things (views) as inferior – this the wise men call a fetter.’ [29]

佛說：『凡執著某一事物(或見解)而藐視其他事物(見解)為卑劣，智者叫這個是桎梏(纏縛)。』﹝注二十九﹞

Once the Buddha explained[30] the doctrine of cause and effect to his disciples, and they said that they saw it and understood it clearly. Then the Buddha said:

有一次，佛為弟子說因果律。﹝注三十﹞他的弟子們說他們已看見了，也明白了解了。于是佛說：

‘O bhikkhus, even this view, which is so pure and so clear, if you cling to it, if you fondle it, if you treasure it, if you are attached to it, then you do not understand that the teacher is similar to a raft, which is for crossing over, and not for getting hold of.’ [31]

『比丘們啊！甚至此一見地，如此清淨澄澈，但如你貪取它，把玩它，珍藏它，執著它，那你就是還沒有了解凡所教誡只如一條木筏，是用來濟渡河川的，而不是供執取的。』﹝注三十一﹞

Elsewhere the Buddha explains this famous simile in which his teaching is compared to a raft for crossing over, and not for getting hold of and carrying on one’s back:

在另一經里，佛曾解釋這則有名的譬喻。就是說：『他的法，好比是一條用以渡河的木筏，而不是為人執取、負在背上用的。』他說：

’O bhikkhus, a man is on a journey. He comes to a vast stretch of water. On this side the shore is dangerous, but on the other it is safe without danger. No boat goes to the other shore which is safe and without danger, nor is there any bridge for crossing over. He says to himself: 「This sea of water is vast, and the shore on this side is full of danger; but on the other shore it is safe and without danger. No boat goes to the other side, nor is there a bridge for crossing over. It would be good therefore if I would gather grass, wood, branches and leaves to make a raft, and with the help of the raft cross over safely to the other side, exerting myself with my hands and feet」. Then that man, O bhikkhus, gather grass, wood, branches and leaves and makes a raft, and with the help of that raft crosses over safely to the other side, exerting himself with his hands and feet. Having crossed over and got to the other side, he thinks: 「This raft was of great help to me. With its aid I have crossed safely over to this side, exerting myself with my hands and feet. It would be good if I carry this raft on my head or on my back wherever I go」.

『比丘啊！有人在旅行時遇到一片大水。在這邊岸上充滿了危險，而水的對岸則安全無險。可是卻沒有船可渡此人登上那安全的彼岸，也無橋梁跨越水面。此人即自語道：「此海甚大，而此岸危機重重，彼岸則安全無險。無船可渡，亦無橋梁。我不免采集草木枝葉，做一只木筏，藉此筏之助，當得安登彼岸，只須胼手胝足自己努力即可。」于是，那人即采集了草木枝葉，做了一只木筏。由于木筏之助，他只賴自己手足之力，安然渡達彼岸。他就這樣想：「此筏對我大有助益。由于它的幫助，我得只靠自己手足之力，安然渡達此岸。我不妨將此筏頂在頭上，或負于背上，隨我所之。」』

’What do you think, O bhikkhus, if he acted in this way would that man be acting properly with regard to the raft? 「No, Sir」. In which way then would he be acting properly with regard to the raft? Having crossed and gone over to the other side, suppose that man should think: 「This raft was a great help to me. With its aid I have crossed safely over to this side, exerting myself with my hands and feet. It would be good if I beached this raft on the shore, or moored it and left it afloat, and then went on my way wherever it may be」. Acting in this way would that man act properly with regard to that raft.

『比丘啊！你們意下如何呢？此人對筏如此處置，是否適當？』『不，世尊。』『那末，要怎樣處置這筏，才算適當呢？既以渡達彼岸了，假使此人這樣想：「這筏對我大有助益。由于它的幫助，我得只靠自己手足之力，安然抵達此岸。我不妨將筏拖到沙灘上來，或停泊某處，由它浮著，然後繼續我的旅程，不問何之。」如果這樣做，此人的處置此筏，就很適當了。』

‘In the same manner, O bhikkhus, I have taught a doctrine similar to a raft – it is for crossing over, and not for carrying (lit. getting hold of). You, O bhikkhus, who understand that the teaching similar to a raft, should give up even good things (dhamma); how much more then should you give up evil things (adhamma).’ [32]

『同樣的，比丘們啊！我所說的法也好像木筏一樣，是用來濟渡的，不是為了負荷(巴利文原字義作執取)的。比丘們啊！你們懂得我的教誡猶如木筏，就當明白好的東西(法)尚應舍棄，何況不好的東西(非法)呢？』﹝注三十二﹞

From this parable it is quite clear that the Buddha’s teaching is meant to carry man to safety, peace, happiness, tranquillity, the attainment of Nirvāna. The whole doctrine taught by the Buddha leads to this end. He did not say things just to satisfy intellectual curiosity. He was a practical teacher and taught only those things which would bring peace and happiness to man.

從這則譬喻，可以很清楚的了知，佛的教誡是用以度人，使他得到安全、和平、快樂、寧靜的涅槃的。佛的整個教義都以此為目的。他的說法，從來不是僅為了滿足求知的好奇。他是一位現實的導師。他只教導能為人類帶來和平與快樂的學問。

The Buddha was once staying in a Simsapā forest in Kosambi (near Allahabad). He took a few leaves into his hand, and asked his disciples: ’What do you think, O bhikkhus? Which is more? These few leaves in my hand or the leaves in the forest over here?

有一次，佛在憍賞彌(今印度阿拉哈巴特附近)一座尸舍婆林中住錫。他取了幾張葉子放在手里，問他的弟子們道：『比丘們啊！你們意下如何？我手中的葉子多呢？還是此間樹林的葉子多？』

‘Sir, very few are the leaves in the hand of the Blessed One , but indeed the leaves in the Simsapā forest over here are very much more abundant.’

『世尊！世尊手中只有很少幾片葉子，但此間尸舍婆林中的葉子卻確實要多得多了。』

‘Even so, bhikkhus, of what I have known I have told you only a little, what I have not told you is very much more. And why have I not told you (those things)? Because that is not useful… not leading to Nirvāna. That is why I have not told you those things.’ [33]

『同樣的，我所知法，已經告訴你們的只是一點點。我所未說的法還多的呢。而我為什麼不為你們說(那些法)呢？因為它們沒有用處……不能導人至涅槃。這就是我沒說那些法的原因。』﹝注三十三﹞

It is futile, as some scholars vainly try to do, for us to speculate on what the Buddha knew but did not tell us.

有些學者正在揣測佛所知而未說的是些什麼法。這是徒勞無功的。

The Buddha was not interested in discussing unnecessary metaphysical questions which are purely speculative and which create imaginary problems. He considered them as a ‘wilderness of opinions.’ It seems that there were some among his own disciples who did not appreciate this attribute of his. For, we have the example of one of them, Mālunkyaputta by name, who put to the Buddha ten well-known classical questions on metaphysical problems and demanded answers. [34]

佛對于討論不必要的形上學方面的問題不感興趣。這些都是純粹的臆想，只能制造莫須有的問題。他把它們形容為『戲論的原野』。在他的弟子中，似乎有幾個人不能領會佛的這種態度。因為有一個例子：一個叫做鬘童子的弟子，就曾以十條有名的形上學方面的問題問佛，並要求佛作一個答覆。﹝注三十四﹞

One day Mālunkyaputta got up from his afternoon meditation, went to the Buddha, saluted him, sat on one side and said:

有一天，鬘童子午後靜坐時，忽然起來去到佛所，行過禮後在一旁坐下，就說：

‘Sir, when I was all alone meditating, this thought occurred to me: There are these problems unexplained, put aside and rejected by the Blessed One, Namely, (I) is the universe eternal or (2) is it not eternal, (3) is the universe finite or (4) is it infinite, (5) is soul the same as body or (6) is soul one thing and body another thing, (7) does the Tathāgata exist after death, or (8) does he not exist after death, or (9) does he both (at the same time) exist and not exist after death, or (10) does he both (at the same time) not exist and not not-exist. These problems the Blessed One does not explain to me. This (attitude) does not please me, I do not appreciate it. I will go to the Blessed One and ask him about this matter. If the Blessed One explains them to me, then I will continue to follow the holy life under him. If he does not explain them, I will leave the Order and go away. If the Blessed One knows that the universe is eternal, let him explain it to me so. If the Blessed One knows that the universe is not eternal, let him say so. If the Blessed One does not know whether the universe is eternal or not, etc., then for a person who does not know, it is straight forward to say 「I do not know. I do not see」.’

『世尊！我正獨自靜坐，忽然起了一個念頭：有些問題世尊總不解釋，或將之擱置一邊，或予以摒斥。這些問題是：(一)宇宙是永恆的，還是(二)不永恆的？(三)是有限的，還是(四)無限的？(五)身與心是同一物，還是(六)身是一物，心又是一物？(七)如來死後尚繼續存在，還是(八)不再繼續存在，還是(九)既存在亦(同時)不存在？還是(十)既不存在亦(同時)不不存在？這些問題，世尊從未為我解釋。這(態度)我不喜歡，也不能領會。我要到世尊那里去問個明白。如果世尊為我解釋，我就繼續在他座下修習梵行。如果他不為我解釋，我就要離開僧團他往。如果世尊知道宇宙是永恆的，就請照這樣給我解釋。如果世尊知道宇宙是不是永恆的，也請明白說。如果世尊不知道到底宇宙是永恆不永恆等等，那末，不知道這些事情的人，應當直說「我不知道，我不明白。」』

The Buddha’s reply to Mālunkyaputta should do good to many millions in the world today who are wasting valuable time on such metaphysical questions and unnecessarily disturbing their peace of mind:

佛給鬘童子的回答，對于今日數以百萬計，將寶貴的時間浪費在形上問題上，而毫無必要地自行擾亂其心境的寧靜的人，當大有裨益。

’Did I ever tell you, Mālunkyaputta, 「Come, Mālunkyaputta, lead the holy life under me. I will explain these questions to you?」

『鬘童子，我歷來有沒有對你說過：「來！鬘童子，到我座下來學習梵行，我為你解答這些問題。」？』

‘No, Sir.’

『從來沒有，世尊。』

‘Then, Mālunkyaputta, even you, did you tell me: 「Sir, I will lead the holy life under the Blessed One, and the Blessed One will explain these questions to me」?’

『那末，鬘童子，就說你自己，你曾否告訴我：「世尊，我在世尊座下修習梵行，世尊要為我解答這些問題。」？』

‘No, Sir.’

『也沒有，世尊。』

’Even now, Mālunkyaputta, I do not tell you: 「Come and lead the holy life under me, I will explain these questions to you」. And you do not tell me either: 「Sir, I will lead the holy life under the Blessed One, and he will explain these questions to me」. Under these circumstances, you foolish one, who refuses whom?[35]

『就拿現在來說，鬘童子，我也沒有告訴你「來我座下修習梵行，我為你解釋這些問題」而你也沒告訴我「世尊，我在世尊座下修習梵行，世尊要為我解答這些問題」。既然是這樣，你這愚蠢的人呀！是誰摒棄了誰呢？﹝注三十五﹞

Mālunkyaputta, if anyone says: 「I will not lead the holy life under the Blessed One until he explains these questions,」 he may die with these questions unanswered by the Tathāgata. Suppose Mālunkyaputta, a man is wounded by a poisoned arrow, and his friends and relatives bring him to a surgeon. Suppose the man should then say: 「I will not let this arrow be taken out until I know who shot me; whether he is a Ksattiya (of the warrior caste) or a Brāhmana (of the priestly caste) or a Vaiśya (of the trading and agricultural caste) or a Sūdra (of the low caste); what his name and family may be; whether he is tall, short, or of medium stature; whether his complexion is black, brown, or golden: from which village, town or city he comes. I will not let this arrow be taken out until I know the kind of bow with which I was shot; the kind of bowstring used; the type of arrow; what sort of feather was used on the arrow and with what kind of material the point of the arrow was made.」 Mālunkyaputta, that man would die without knowing any of these things. Even so, Mālunkyaputta, if anyone says: 「I will not follow the holy life under the Blessed One until he answers these questions such as whether the universe is eternal or not, etc.,」 he would die with these questions unanswered by the Tathāgata.’

『鬘童子，如果有人說「我不要在世尊座下修習梵行，除非他為我解釋這些問題」，此人還沒有得到如來的答案時就要死掉了。鬘童子，假如有一個人被毒箭所傷，他的親友帶他去看外科醫生。假使當時那人說：我不願意把這箭拔出來，要到我知道是誰射我的；他是剎帝利種(武士)、婆羅門種(宗教師)、吠舍種(農商)，還是首陀種(賤民)；他的姓名與氏族；他是高、是矮，還是中等身材；他的膚色是黑、是棕，還是金黃色；他來自那一城市鄉鎮。我不願取出此箭，除非我知到我是被什麼弓所射中，弓弦是什麼樣的；那一型的箭；箭羽是那一種羽毛的；箭簇又是什麼材料所制……。鬘童子，這人必當死亡，而不得聞知這些答案。鬘童子，如果有人說「我不要在世尊座下修習梵行，除非他回答我宇宙是否永恆等問題」，此人還未得知如來的答案，就已告死亡了。』

Then the Buddha explains to Mālunkyaputta that the holy life does not depend on these views. Whatever opinion one may have about these problems, there is birth, old age, decay, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, distress, 「the Cessation of which (i.e. Nirvāna) I declare in this very life.」

接著，佛即為鬘童子解釋，梵行是與這種見解無關的。不論一個人對這個問題的見解如何，世間實有生、老、壞、死、憂、戚、哀、痛、苦惱。『而在此生中，我所說法可滅如是等等苦惱，是為涅槃。』

’Therefore, Mālunkyaputta, bear in mind what I have explained as explained and what I have not explained as unexplained. What are the things that I have not explained? Whether the universe is eternal or not etc., (those 10 opinions) I have not explained. Why, Mālunkyaputta, have I not explained them? Because it is not useful, it is not fundamentally connected with the spiritual holy life, is not conducive to aversion, detachment, cessation, tranquility, deep penetration, full realization, Nirvāna. That is why I have not told you about them.

『因此，鬘童子，記住：我所解釋的，已解釋了。我所未解釋的，即不再解釋。我所未解釋的是什麼呢？宇宙是永恆？是不永恆？等十問是我所不回答的。鬘童子，為什麼我不解答這些問題呢？因為它們沒有用處。它們與修練身心的梵行根本無關。它們不能令人厭離、去執、入滅，得到寧靜、深觀、圓覺、涅槃。因此，我沒有為你們解答這些問題。』

‘Then, what, Mālunkyaputta, have I explained? I have explained dukkha, the arising of dukkha, the cessation of dukkha, and the way leading to the cessation of dukkha.[36] Why, Mālunkyaputta, have I explained them? Because it is useful, is fundamentally connected with the spiritual holy life, is conductive to aversion, detachment, cessation, tranquility, deep penetration, full realization, Nirvāna. Therefore I have explained them.’ [37]

『那末，我所解釋的，又是些什麼呢？我說明了苦、苦的生起、苦的止息、和滅苦之道。﹝注三十六﹞鬘童子，為什麼我要解釋這些呢？因為它們有用。它們與修練身心的梵行有根本上的關連，可令人厭離、去執、入滅、得寧靜、深觀、圓覺、涅槃。因此我解釋這些法。』﹝注三十七﹞

Let us now examine the Four Noble Truths which the Buddha told Mālunkyaputta he had explained.

現在，讓我們來研究佛說已為鬘童子解釋過的四聖諦。

[1] Dhp. XII 4.

[2] D II (Colombo, 1929), p. 62 (Mahāparinibbāna-sutta).

[3] Tathāgata lit. means ‘One who has become the to Truth’ i.e., 「One who has discovered Truth’. This is the term usually used by the Buddha referring to himself and to the Buddhas in general.

[4] Dhp.XX

[5] Sangha lit means ‘Community’. But in Buddhism this term denotes ‘The community if Buddhist monks’ which is the Order of Monks. Buddha, Dhamma (Teaching) and Sangha (Order) are known as Tisarama ‘Three Refuges’ or Tiratana (Sanskrit Triratma) ‘Triple-Gem’.

[6] D II (Colombo, 1929), p. 62.

[7] A (Colombo, 1929), p. 115.

[8] Vīmamsaka-sutta, no.47 of M

[9] The Five Hindrances are : (ı) Sensuous Lust, (2) III-will, (3) Physical and mental torpor and languor, (4) Restlessness and Worry, (5) Doubt

[10] D II (Colombo, 1929), p. 95; A (Colombo, 1929), p. 239.

[11] Mahāvīra, founder of Jainism, was a contemporary of the Buddha, and was probably a few years older than the Buddha.

[12] Upāli-sutta, no.56 of M.

[13] Rock Edict, XII.

[14] In India potter’ sheds are spacious, and quite. References are made in the Pali texts to ascetics and recluses, as well as to the Buddha himself, spending a night in a potter’s shed during their wanderings.

[15] It is interesting to note here that the Buddha addresses this recluse as Bhikkhu, which term is used for Buddhist monks. In the sequel it will be seen that he was not a bhikkhu, not a member of the Order of the Sanga, for he asked the Buddha to admit him into the Order, Perhaps in the days of the Buddha the term ‘bhikkhu’ was used at times even for other ascetics indiscriminately, or the Buddha was not very strict in the use of the term. Bhikkhu means’ mendicant’ one who begs food’ and perhaps it was used here in its literal and original sense. But today the term ‘bhikkhu’ is used only of Buddhist monks, especially in Theravāda countries like Ceylon, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia, and in Chittagong.

[16] In the chapter on the third Noble Truth, see p.38.

[17] The term used us Āvuso which mean friend. It is a respectful term of address among equals. But disciples never used this term addressing the Buddha. Instead they use the term Bhante which approximately means ‘Sir’ or ‘Lord’. At the time of the Buddha, the members of his Order of Monks (Sangha) addressed one another as Āvuso ‘Friend’. But before his death the Buddha instructed younger monks to address their elders as Bhante ‘Sir’ or Āyasmā ‘Venerable’. But elders should address the younger members by name, or as Āvuso ‘Friend’. (D II Colombo, 1929, p. 95). This practice is continued up to the present day in the Sangha.

[18] It is well-known that cows in India roam about the streets. From this reference it seems that the tradition is very cold. But generally these cows are docile and not savage or dangerous.

[19] An Arahant is a person who has liberated himself from all sefilements and impurities such as desire, hatred, ill-will, ignorance, pride, conceit, etc. He has attained the fourth or the highest and ultimate stage in the realization of Nirvāna, and is full of wisdom compassion and such pure and noble qualities. Pukkusāti had attained at the moment only at third stage which is technically called Anāgāmi ‘Never-Returner’. The second stage is called Sakadāgāmi ‘Once-Returner’ and the first stage is called Sotāpanna ‘Stream-Entrant’

[20] Karl Gjellerup’s The Pilgrim Kamanita seems to have been inspired by this story of Pukkusāti.

[21] Abhisamuc, p.6

[22] The role of the Miracle in Early Pali Literature by Edith Ludowyk- Gyomroi takes up this subject. Unfortunately this Ph.D. thesis is not yet published. On the same subject see an article by the same author in the Unversity of Ceylon Review, Vol.I, No. I (April, 1943), p. 74 ff

[23] Here the word saddhā is used in its ordinary popular sense of ‘devotion, faith, belief’.

[24] S II (PTS), P. 117

[25] Ibid. III, p.152.

[26] E.g. S V, (PTS), p.423; III, p.103; M III (PTS), p. 19.

[27] S V (PTS), p. 422

[28] Canki-sutta, no.95 of M.

[29] Sn (PTS), p. 151 (v.798)

[30] In the Mahātanhāsankhaya-suttu, no. 38 of M.

[31] M I (PTS), p. 260

[32] M I (PTS), pp.134-135. Dhamma here, according to the Commentary, means high spiritual attainments as well as pure views and ideas. Attachment even to these, however high and pure they may be, should be given up; how much more then should it be with regard to evil and bad things. MA II (PTS), p. 109

[33] S V (PTS),p. 437

[34] Cūla-Mālunkya-sutta, no.63 of M.

[35] i.e. both are free and neither is under obligation to the other.

[36] These Four Nobble Truths are explained in the next four chapters.

[37] It seems that this advice of the Budda had the desired effect on Mālunkyaputta, because elsewhere he is reported to have approached the Buddha again for instruction, following which he came an Arahant. A (Colomo, 1929), pp. 345-346; S IV (PTS), p. 72 ff.

注釋：

一：見一九二六年哥崙坡版巴利文《法句經》第十二章第四節。

二：見一九二九年哥崙坡版巴利文《長部經》第二集第六十二頁。

三：巴利文 Tathagata之字義，是『來到真理之人』，亦即『發現真理之人』。佛自稱或稱他佛時，通常用此名詞。

四：見巴利文《法句經》第二十章第四節。

五：巴利文 Sangha 之字義是社團，但在佛教中專只和合僧團而言，亦即僧字的本義。佛法僧總稱三皈依或三寶。

六：見一九二九年哥崙坡版巴利文《長部經》第二集第六十二頁。

七：見一九二九年哥崙坡版巴利文《增支部經》第一一五頁。

八：見巴利文《中部經》第四十七經 Vimamsaka Sutta(譯者注：約相當于漢譯《中阿含經》第一八六求解經)。

九：五蓋為(一)貪欲，(二)嗔恚，(三)睡眠，(四)掉舉，(五)疑。

十：見一九二九年哥崙坡版巴利文《長部經》第二集第九十五頁及同版《增支部經》第二三九頁。

十一：摩訶毗羅是耆那教創始人，與佛陀同時，可能較佛年齡稍大些。

十二：見巴利文《中部經》第五十六優婆離經。

十三：見阿育王石誥第十二篇。

十四：印度陶工的棚屋大都寬敞而清靜。巴利文佛典中，常有佛及苦行頭陀等出家人游方時，在陶工棚屋中度夜之記載。

十五：這里值得注意的是：佛叫這出家人做比丘——佛教僧侶。由下文可知，其實並不是佛教僧團的一員，因他要求佛准許他參加僧團。也許在佛世，比丘一詞也可用于他教的苦行頭陀，再不然就是佛對這名詞的使用並不嚴格。比丘的意思是乞者、乞食之人。也許，佛在此用比丘一詞，乃是指它的原始字義。可是今日比丘一詞已僅限用于佛教僧眾，尤以上座部國家如斯里蘭卡、緬甸、泰國、柬埔寨、及七打更等地為然。

十六：請參閱第三聖諦章。

十七：此字巴利原文為 Avuso，意即朋友，在平輩中這也是一項尊稱。但是弟子們從不用此稱呼佛，而用 Bhante 一詞，意思略近于長者，師尊。佛世僧團的僧眾都互稱 Avuso。但佛滅前，曾訓令年幼的僧人稱呼年長的為 Bhante (師尊)或 Ayasma(大德)，而年長的僧人則應稱年輕的為 Avuso(見一九二九年哥崙坡版巴利文《長部經》第二集第九十五頁)。此項稱謂至今仍(在小乘國家)沿用不衰。

十八：印度牛群可在大街上逍遙漫步，是眾所皆知之事。從本文看來，這項傳統蓋由來已久。但一般說，來這些牛都是馴牛，而非危險的野牛。

十九：阿羅漢是已從各種污染不淨法如貪欲、嗔恚、不善欲、無明、貢高、我慢等得到解脫之人。他已得四果，親證涅槃，充滿了智慧、慈悲以及其他清淨高尚的品性。弗加沙在當時已得到三果，名為阿那含(不還)。二果叫斯陀含(一來)，初果叫須陀洹(預流)。

二十：傑勒魯普( Karl Gjellerup )氏所著之『朝聖者卡瑪尼塔』一書，似系受弗加沙故事的影響而作。

二十一：見一九五零年山提尼克坦版無著之阿毗達摩集論第六頁, 。

二十二：幾容洛易氏( Edith Ludowyk-Gyomroi)曾著有『奇蹟在早期巴利文學中所扮的角色』一文，對此論題作過一番探討，惜此論文尚未出版。同著者在錫蘭大學評論雜志第一卷第一期(一九四三年四月)第七十四頁以次，亦有一文就同一論題予以發揮。可參閱。

二十三：此處巴利文原字為 Saddha ，但其意義則為通俗的禮拜、信仰、相信等義。

二十四：見巴利文學會版《雜部經》第二集第一一七頁。

二十五：見同書第三集第一五二頁。

二十六：見巴利文學會版《雜部經》第五集第四二三頁；第三集一零三頁；及同版《中部經》第三集第十九頁。

二十七：見同書第五集第四二二頁。

二十八：見巴利文《中部經》第九十五經 Canki Sutta。

二十九：見巴利文學會版《小部經》經集第一五一頁。( V.798 )

三十：見巴利文《中部經》第三十八經( Mahatanhasankhya Sutta )。(譯者注：約相當于漢譯《中阿含經》第二零一嗏帝經。)

三十一：見同書第一集第二六零頁(巴利文學會版)。

三十二：見巴利文《中部經》第一集第一三四頁至一三五頁。法字在此之意義，根據巴利文學會版《中部經》覺音疏第二集第一九零頁之解釋，乃指精神方面之高度成就，亦指純淨之見解及意念。不論此等成就是何等高尚純淨，如有執著，即須放棄。一切惡法之不應執著，更當如何？

三十三：見巴利文學會版《雜部經》第五集第四三七頁。

三十四：見巴利《中部經》第六十三 Cula Malunkya Sutta(譯者注：約相當于漢譯《中阿含經》第二二一箭喻經)。

三十五：意即雙方都是自由的。任何一方對于對方均無任何義務。

三十六：關于四諦的詳細解釋，請看以後四章。

三十七：佛這番訓誡，似乎對鬘童子產生了預期作用。因為在其他經中曾有他再度向佛求法，接著成為阿羅漢的記載。見一九二九年哥崙坡版巴利文《增支部經》第三四五至三四六頁。