Lecture No. 0135
Global Lamrim II
Lecture No. 0135
Tape: 3A 06:57 ~ 09:46
Date: 2019/07/15 ~ 07/17
Outline: Foundation
Topic: Prologue – Veneration at the beginning of commentary
English Lamrim Volume 1, page 34
Vol. 1 of Master’s discourse handbook P70-L1 ~ P71-L2 (2016 NanPuTuo Version: Vol 1 P70-L1 ~ P71-L1)
[3A 06:57 ~ 09:46]
Not only is our understanding partial, but we are also intellectually incapable of skillfully using our dialectic reasoning to understand the entire Buddha Dharma. Originally, “to comprehend” and “to distinguish” should be two aspects – that is to distinguish something rationally. The word “to discriminate” used [in the verse “they tend to view the scriptures through the eyes of partisanship, unable to use reason to discriminate the meaning of scriptures”] has its specific reason. Generally speaking, in academic research, there is a saying, “truth is clarified through debates.” Indeed, you can contemplate, analyze, and distinguish [the meanings of the scriptures] on your own; however, it can never be compared to the effect achieved through debating with other scholars and having dialectical reasoning back and forth, over and over again. Let’s not use the academic study as the example; we often have similar worldly experience: sitting there alone, you may feel bored. However, with two people getting together, if someone initiates a topic that arouses their interest, then the conversation will become very animated; we call it “a bone of contention” (抬槓⼦), or in Buddhism, we name it “digression” (沖殼⼦). Alas, as soon as we start this “bone of contention” or “digression,” we will become more and more enthusiastic, and the discussion will become more and more intense; thus, the whole interest is kindled. [01′23″]
The same also applies to learning Buddha’s teachings: if we know how to capitalize on this strength to debate properly, we will be able to produce a more profound effect. However, the debate has its complete and definite set of approaches. For instance, both Dignaga (陳那) and Dharmakirti (法稱) Bodhisattvas improved the Buddhist logic that we know of now. There is a very skillful methodology to conduct debate, and it is one of the best tools used in Dharma practice. Understandably, that explains why it is said in the Prologue that we have neither the intellectual ability to make discernment with reasoning nor the motivation to study debate. Consequently, we are not able to grasp the essence of the complete Buddha’s teachings; it is like the blind men touching an elephant. At the same time, we are not skillful enough to distinguish the meaning of the teaching thoroughly. Thus, we end up going astray or taking the wrong path; on this encompassing path, the path with Buddha’s proper guidance, we took the wrong turn. So the Prologue continues, “they lack the path pleasing to the wise.” [02′49″]
Did everyone hear, in this section, was Master mainly telling us what method to use to increase our clarity? What approach should one adopt? It is debating, right! He introduced a learning approach to us. “They tend to view the scriptures through the eyes of partisanship, unable to use reason to discriminate the meaning of the scriptures;” if we lack the “reason to discriminate the meaning of the scriptures”, then we should just apply the method of debating to enhance it. Thus, Master was referring to debate in the whole of this section, isn’t it? How many years ago was it when he talked about debating? It was 30 years ago! Back then, we probably did not even think about the term “debate”, and after reading this section feel, Oh, it is better for everyone to have a discussion together! That is why Master said, “Indeed, you can contemplate, analyze, and distinguish [the meanings of the scriptures] on your own; however, it can never be compared to the effect achieved through debating with other scholars and having dialectical reasoning back and forth, over and over again.” And then Master reiterated: “Having dialectical reasoning back and forth, over and over again which will bring incomparable benefits.” [03′44″]
In this section, Master addressed the issue of our habit or our latent propensity. One can contemplate the teaching alone, or have discussions with another person, called engaging in “a bone of contention” or “digression”, right? Master further elaborated on this in a large paragraph in his commentary on Nan-shan Preparation Precepts For Householders. He said, “as soon as we start this ‘bone of contention’ or ‘digression,’ we will become more and more enthusiastic, and the discussion will become more and more intense”. What does this “enthusiastic” refer to? A joyous feeling, isn’t it? And a strong interest gains momentum. Once we start discussing a certain aspect in our life with another person, the strong interest will arise. When we apply this to studying Buddha Dharma, and if we can skillfully capitalize on such strength, then we are unlikely to become “unable to use reason to discriminate the meaning of the scriptures”, and we won't lack such ability. [04′23″]
Hence, from such a perspective, what did Master actually introduce to us? The Buddhist logic! The Buddhist logic and epistemology passed down from Dignaga and Dharmakirti Bodhisattvas are known to be a very effective debating methodology. Everyone knows now, [the five great Treatises] begins with the study of the Pointing the Way to Reasoning – Compendium of Debates, right? We are learning the debating format, methods, specific ways of canonical answers, etc. Now, let’s imagine, if Master knew that so many of us are studying it now, he should be very very pleased! Thirty years ago, he was looking forward to us studying in this manner. So, if we learn in this way, does it mean that we are very good at it? Not at all! We have just begun our learning. All we need to do is continue our study following such reasoning; that will do! [05′01″]
Here it mentions the so called “Buddhist logic”. The meaning of “Buddhist logic” refers to understanding the causes. And all these treaties on valid cognition are the principal method to let us understand from the perspective of correct causes on what to adopt and what to cast aside. Then what method should we adopt to study the scriptures? Master mentioned in his commentary on the Nan-shan Preparation Precepts For Householders, many scriptures are in dialogue format based on questions and answers between Buddha and his disciples. That is, someone would ask questions, and someone would give answers. Master further mentioned that the masters of Zen meditation practice were also using the same method; someone would ask questions, and someone would provide answers. Sometimes, the questions were raised by the disciples; sometimes the teachers would ask questions, the questions were raised both ways. Sometimes, it takes merely one answer for someone to reach ultimate enlightenment. We also know that the Gomang lineage is known as “multiple doors sect [or zha-tsan*]”, meaning that having gone through one debate after another, some practitioners, during the debate, would walk out of the debate forum through the wall, signifying they have reached enlightenment. However, does it mean every enlightened practitioner would walk out through the wall? That is not necessarily so! There was such a legend. [05′53″]
[*Zha-tsan: in the Tibetan language means bigger dormitory or housing section, and kang-tsen is smaller housing section in the monastic campus.]
【全球广论 II 讲次: 0135】
讲次 0135
科判 道前基础
章节 善巧辩论，趣入教典广大海
标题 真理越辩越明
音档 3A 06:57 ~ 09:46
日期 2019/07/15 ~ 07/17
广论段落 P1-LL1 今勤瑜伽多寡闻……复乏理辩教义力
手抄页/行 第1册 P70-L1 ~ P71-L2 ( 2016 南普陀版：第1册 P70-L1 ~ P71-L1 )
手抄段落 不单是自己的......离开了智者欢喜的道路。
不单是自己的对认识方面是这样，而且自己的理智上面，又是没有力量能够善巧地辨别完整的这个佛法的道理。本来这个理解、辨别，应该是说两点，就是理智的辨别。这个地方用[言]字，这个有它的道理的，简单地说一下。通常我们作学问常常有一句话叫[真理越辩越明]。是！你一个人也可以思惟、观察、辨别，可是的的确确不如在学者彼此之间共同论辩、往复推敲这样好，往复推敲这样好。我们不要说作学问吧！譬如我们世间平常自己也感受得到，一个人坐在这个地方，也许你觉得没劲，但是两个人碰在一块儿，如果谈什么问题啊，大家辩起来，平常我们常常说[抬杠子]，或者佛门当中叫[冲壳子]。哎呀，这个抬起杠子来，冲起壳子来，是越冲越起劲，越抬越起劲，这劲就提起来了。 [01′23″]
那么修学佛法的人亦复如是，我们能够善巧利用这个特长的话，我们可以产生更深远的功效。不过这个辩论哪也要有它一套很完整的方法，譬如我们现在经过陈那、法称两位菩萨进化以后了所谓因明之学，这就是非常善巧的一个辩论的方法，那这个是在修学佛法当中一个最好的工具。那是所以这个地方所以说，我们理智上面的辨别能力也没有，修学上面的这样的学辩的力量也缺乏。因为这样，自己又不能完整地把握得住佛法的中心，像瞎子摸象一样；又不能善巧地去辨别这个完整的教义，所以总归走偏、走错。因此，对这个圆满的道路，这个佛指示我们正确的这个，我们就走错了，所以下面说，离开了智者欢喜的道路。 [02′49″]
大家有没有听到这一段师父是不是主要都是在讲用什么样的方法越辩越明？用什么样的方法？是辩论对吧！介绍了一种学习方法。 [观视佛语多片眼，复乏理辩教义力]，如果说缺乏了[理辩教义力]的话，那么就用辩论的方法把它补起来，所以这一段师父都是在讲辩论。是不是这样？在多少年前讲辩论啊？三十年前讲喔！像那时候可能我们连[辩论]这两个字都想不到，看这一段就觉得：喔，大家在一起讨论比较好！所以才在这里边说：[一个人也可以思惟、观察、辨别，可是的的确确不如在学者彼此之间共同论辩、往复推敲这样好]，然后师父又重复一遍：[往复推敲这样好。] [ 03′44″]
这里边讲了一下我们的习惯，或者说我们的习气。一个人讨论一个问题，和两个人讨论问题，说：[抬杠子]和[冲壳子]对吧？这个师父在《备览》里还有一大段在讲。说：抬起杠子、冲起壳子，越冲越起劲，越抬越起劲。这个[劲]是什么啊？欢喜心对不对？和力道，就提起来了。一旦把我们生命里对某一部分跟别人讨论问题那个力道提起来，用在佛法上的时候，能够善巧地利用这个特长的话，那么可能就不会[复乏理辩教义力]，就不会缺乏这个特点。 [04′23″]
所以从这样的一个角度，师父居然给我们介绍了什么？因明啊！陈那和法称两位菩萨的因明之学，说是非常好的一个辩论的方法。现在大家都知道了，从《摄类学》开始，对吧？我们就学习辩论的格式、辩论的方法、几种回答等等。现在想想，如果师父知道我们这么多人在学习，他应该会非常非常开心吧！三十年前师父就期待我们能够这样地学习。那如果我们这样地学习，是不是已经学得很好了？不会呀！刚刚开始。那大家沿着这样的理路学下去就好了！ [05′01″]
这里边提出了所谓[因明]，因明的意涵就是指明了原因，而这些量学的论典，也是从正因的角度让我们明了取舍的主要方法。那么应该以什么样的方式去学习教典呢？师父在《备览》里边有讲经典上很多时候都是佛陀和他的弟子问答问题，就是有人提问题、有人回答。后来又讲了禅宗祖师也是这样的，有人提问题、有人回答。有的时候是弟子问，有的时候是善知识问，互相问的。有的时候一个答案，有的人就大彻大悟了。大家也知道果芒派被称为[多门札仓]，辩论、辩论，辩论的人就从墙出去了，就是他开悟了。但是不是所有开悟的人都可以从墙出去？也不一定！有个这样的传说。 [05′53″]