佛法的兩面性—Two Faces of the Dhamma

菩提比丘 Bhikkhu Bodhi： 
佛法的兩面---Two Faces of the Dhamma 
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝ 
原文版權所有 © 1985 佛教出版社。免費發行。 
本文允許在任何媒體再版、重排、重印、印發。然而，編者希望任何再版與複製分發，以免費與無限制的形式分發給大眾，譯文與轉載也要求表明作者原意。 https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_02.html
流通條件如上所述，轉載時請包括並登載本版權聲明。 
========= 
佛法的兩面---Two Faces of the Dhamma　 
 菩提比丘 Bhikkhu Bodhi  

　　剛接觸佛教時，佛教似乎給我們呈現了一個矛盾。在智力方面，佛教顯示了自由思考者的喜悅，在它的表相與方法上，它是冷靜的、實際的、非教條的，也幾乎是符合科學的。但是如果我們接觸它內部鮮明生動的佛法 ，不久便發現它還有另一面貌，似乎與我們對它所有的理性推斷相反。我們仍然不會遇到刻板的教條與雜亂的推測，我們確實會遇到解脫、冥思與虔信等宗教理想；我們看見了一套與超越感官的「受(感受)、想(認知)」有關的教義；或許更令人不知所措的是，一套修行指示，在其中虔誠的信被當成重要的美德，而質疑則是一種阻撓、障礙、與束縛。 
　　當我們嘗試決定我們與佛法的關係時，最終都會發現我們面臨挑戰，需要對這似乎無法調和的兩面作出合理的解釋: 經驗主義的那一面注重此世，告誡我們對萬事親自作審查與驗證，宗教性的那一面則朝向出世，勸導我們遣除疑念，尊信佛陀與佛法。 
　　我們解決這個困境的辦法，是將佛法的一面當真實可信的來接受，把另一面當作不實或不必要的而加以排斥。如此一來，在傳統的篤信式佛教裏，我們可以包容宗教面的信與施，而避免掉頑固的宇宙觀與批判性的質詢；或者，用現代的佛教護教法，我們可以贊揚佛法的可以實證而與科學相似，但在宗教那一面迴避地躊躇不前。然而對真正的佛教精神所應具備的因素作審慎思考之後，很清楚佛法的此兩面都是同樣真實可信，也必須同時兼顧。如果做不到這點，不僅可能會冒著對佛法作偏頗見解的危險，而且我們個人修習佛法時，也可能受到偏好與衝突態度的障礙。 
　　然而，怎樣協調佛法的這兩面而避免自我矛盾仍然是個問題。我們建議，要達成此一協調，從而維持個人的見與修習的內在和諧，其關鍵在於兩個基本要點：第一，佛法教導的目的，第二，要達成此目的所採用的策略。佛法的目的是在離苦解脫。佛法的目標並非提供我們有關世界的實際知識；也因如此，佛法即使與科學相容無誤，其目標與關切重點也必然與科學不同。最主要地與最基本地，佛法是一條導向解脫、斷除生死輪迴、究竟苦邊的修證之路。佛法提供我們獨一而無可取代的解脫之道，不僅是尋求智力上的認同，它也必定會贏得全然宗教性的反應。它教導我們存在的基石，從而喚醒了深信、崇敬與承諾，來面對遭受衝擊而岌岌可危的生命終極意義。 
　　但是對佛教來說，信與崇敬只是能促使我們修道、並且堅持不懈的激勵；它們本身不能保證解脫。佛陀教導說，束縛與苦的根源，是對諸有真相的無明；因此佛教解脫的策略中，最主要的工具必須是智慧，即是如實知見的智慧。冷靜而不受約束的審查與批判性的質詢，使我們能解除疑惑，對解脫所依的真理有一個概念上的理解。但是不能毫無止境地持續懷疑與質問，一旦我們決定佛法是通向解脫的承載工具，我們就得走到修習的道上來：我們必須把猶豫拋到身後，投身於修習的歷程，它會把我們從信仰引導向解脫的正見。 
　　對那些尋求智力或情感滿足而接近佛法的人，它不可避免地呈現雙重面貌，對這個人來說，佛法的兩面始終是個謎題。但如果我們準備依照它的教導來接近佛法，把它作為離苦解脫之道，就完全不會意識到佛法有不協調的雙面存在。反而我們一開始就能看見它的全貌，如同其他面貌，會顯示互補的兩面。 

On first encounter Buddhism confronts us as a paradox. Intellectually, it appears a freethinker's delight: sober, realistic, undogmatic, almost scientific in its outlook and method. But if we come into contact with the living Dhamma from within, we soon discover that it has another side which seems the antithesis of all our rationalistic presuppositions. We still don't meet rigid creeds or random speculation, but we do come upon religious ideals of renunciation, contemplation and devotion; a body of doctrines dealing with matters transcending sense perception and thought; and — perhaps most disconcerting — a program of training in which faith figures as a cardinal virtue, doubt as a hindrance, barrier and fetter.
When we try to determine our own relationship with the Dhamma, eventually we find ourselves challenged to make sense out of its two seemingly irreconcilable faces: the empiricist face turned to the world, telling us to investigate and verify things for ourselves, and the religious face turned to the Beyond, advising us to dispel our doubts and place trust in the Teacher and his Teaching.
One way we can resolve this dilemma is by accepting only one face of the Dhamma as authentic and rejecting the other as spurious or superfluous. Thus, with traditional Buddhist pietism, we can embrace the religious side of faith and devotion, but shy off from the hard-headed world-view and the task of critical inquiry; or, with modern Buddhist apologetics, we can extol the Dhamma's empiricism and resemblance to science, but stumble embarrassingly over the religious side. Yet reflection on what a genuine Buddhist spirituality truly requires, makes it clear that both faces of the Dhamma are equally authentic and that both must be taken into account. If we fail to do so, not only do we risk adopting a lopsided view of the teaching, but our own involvement with the Dhamma is likely to be hampered by partiality and conflicting attitudes.
The problem remains, however, of bringing together the two faces of the Dhamma without sidling into self-contradiction. The key, we suggest, to achieving this reconciliation, and thus to securing the internal consistency of our own perspective and practice, lies in considering two fundamental points: first, the guiding purpose of the Dhamma; and second, the strategy it employs to achieve that purpose. The purpose is the attainment of deliverance from suffering. The Dhamma does not aim at providing us with factual information about the world, and thus, despite a compatibility with science, its goals and concerns are necessarily different from those of the latter. Primarily and essentially, the Dhamma is a path to spiritual emancipation, to liberation from the round of repeated birth, death and suffering. Offered to us as the irreplaceable means of deliverance, the Dhamma does not seek mere intellectual assent, but commands a response that is bound to be fully religious. It addresses us at the bedrock of our being, and there it awakens the faith, devotion and commitment appropriate when the final goal of our existence is at stake.
But for Buddhism faith and devotion are only spurs which impel us to enter and persevere along the path; by themselves they cannot ensure deliverance. The primary cause of bondage and suffering, the Buddha teaches, is ignorance regarding the true nature of existence; hence in the Buddhist strategy of liberation the primary instrument must be wisdom, the knowledge and vision of things as they really are. Investigation and critical inquiry, cool and uncommitted, constitute the first step toward wisdom, enabling us to resolve our doubts and gain a conceptual grasp of the truths upon which our deliverance depends. But doubt and questioning cannot continue indefinitely. Once we have decided that the Dhamma is to be our vehicle to spiritual freedom, we have to step on board: we must leave our hesitancy behind and enter the course of training which will lead us from faith to liberating vision.
For those who approach the Dhamma in quest of intellectual or emotional gratification, inevitably it will show two faces, and one will always remain a puzzle. But if we are prepared to approach the Dhamma on its own terms, as the way to release from suffering, there will not be two faces at all. Instead we will see what was there from the start: the single face of Dhamma which, like any other face, presents two complementary sides.