第五節 皈依與紅包
在亞洲皈依的佛教徒，流行著一種錯誤的觀念，大家都以為皈依的師父愈多愈好，這是一種末法的跡象。也就是左皈依一次，右皈依一次，弄得一些法師們水火不容，互相競逐法緣及徒弟。而上人常要求已授過皈依的人，不必再登記皈依證了，只要在一旁隨喜皈依就可以了。當代高僧印光大師也說過，皈依是由僧人代佛授三皈依，以求證明，並非皈依人。也就是應該問「誰為你代授三皈依的證明師？而非「你皈依誰？」上人開示說：
「有些人說：「善財童子五十三參，為何我不可以多拜幾個師父？」但須知善財童子是由他的善知識，親自遣他去參師的，而不是他貪慕旁的法師有德行，便違背原有的師父，偷偷溜去皈依。中國很多老佛教徒，一生皈依幾十百次；你問他什麼是「皈依」，他卻不知道。你說這可不可憐？他說所有出家人都是他師父；但我說他一個師父都沒有，因為他的心不相信，那怎能得救？心裡要相信，才能得救。沒有說：「我頭第一次皈依，大概佛不知道？所以再來第二次。」
其次是「紅包」的問題，上人一向很反對紅包的習俗，因為這裡包含著一種欺騙的性質。因為沒有人知道那紅包內有多少錢？在亞洲的佛教徒，幾乎是把皈依與紅包劃上等號。這樣會讓沒有紅包的人，或外道的人，不敢來信佛皈依的。上人說道：
「善財童子在《華嚴經》上，佔了很重的地位，卻對中國佛教起了很複雜的影響。多數的法師也曉得，同一個人皈依很多個師父是不對的，不合佛法的。但若不這樣做，『果儀』（指紅包）就少得很多了。故直到現在，沒有人公開反對這種風俗。明明知道不對，也要去做，你說是不是很複雜呢？為什麼呢？第一、是為了『童子』（拉信徒），第二、是為了『善財』（分紅包），這是佛教中最壞的習氣。」
上人的真知灼見，確實與眾不同，為了「不忍聖教衰」，上人的獅子吼背後，隱藏了多少「慈悲」！亞洲很多「明星師父」，被皈依弟子捧得高高的，卻忘了自己「荷擔如來家業，度化眾生」的責任，每天只沉醉在名利中，忽略了生死大事。其實三寶弟子碰到出家師父，應該請示佛法，而不是一味的供養紅包。在泰國、斯里蘭卡等國家，都是以食物作為供養三寶的；而且佛制比丘日中一食，絕非以缽去化錢用。
在《阿含經》佛說：「沙門釋子，法不應捉金等錢寶，若捉金等錢寶。非彼沙門釋子之法。」所以出家人乞錢（化緣），不是修行法。佛告珠鬘長者說：「沙門釋子不應受取金銀，除捨珠寶，不著飾好，其有受取金銀者，則受五欲，若受五欲，則非沙門釋子法。」想不到在末法的今天，出家人以缽來乞錢，這對佛教的名譽與僧眾的行持，均有莫大的壞處，尤其造成假出家人化緣來破壞佛教。僧眾若不托缽乞錢，決不會有人願意當假僧尼受苦的。所以上人也都要求弟子能盡量持銀錢戒，盡量少跟錢「結緣」，上人說：
「因為出家人若沒有錢，他還能修行，一有了錢，絕對不修行了，這是我敢保證的。你看一看！你研究研究，這個道，是講『貧道』；僧人叫『貧僧』。沒有說『富僧』、『富道』的。所以你們弄這個錢，都去供養『富僧』、『富道』的話，這是等於造罪一樣的。我說這話會得罪很多人，我雖然得罪，我也要說真話。」
另外，在現代佛教中，竟然有所謂的「發財法」。上人亦嚴正的開示說：「佛教裡沒有發財法。」永嘉大師證道歌中說：「窮釋子，口稱貧，實是身貧道不貧。貧則身常披縷褐，道則心藏無價珍。」也就是佛教中都說「貧僧貧僧」，沒有所謂的「富僧、富僧」的。既然是「貧」僧，怎能傳「發財法」？（也許是佛的方便，但決非如此。）上人開示說：
「凡是教人發財的法，你看看他發財了沒有？若他是有錢，那就因為你要發財，你就把財都給了他，他就有錢了。就像賭股票似的，你先要買多少股票，然後你才能贏錢。也即是你先供養他，或者一千，一萬，十萬，你就滿屋倉庫裡都長滿了錢，又放什麼紅光？黃光？黑光？紫光？……這都是老千在那兒作怪哩！因為我不會傳發財的法，所以我要揭穿這個秘密。」
佛教是一種高級的宗教，絕非只停留在名利中的「紅包」及超渡的「法會」上。佛乃大智慧者，是要眾生了知世事無常，去除貪瞋癡。怎麼可以把佛菩薩當做神明一樣來「求財升官」呢？這不是一種賄賂嗎？那這種佛教跟民間宗教及西洋神教，又有何不同？
待續 |
|
Section Five Taking Refuge and Red Envelopes
Among Asian Buddhists who have taken refuge, there is a popular misconception. Everyone thinks that the more teachers you take refuge with, the better. This is a sign of the Dharma Ending Age. By taking refuge with this one and then taking refuge with that one, they cause contention among the Dharma Masters, who quarrel with each other over who has the Dharma affinities and who gets the disciples. But the Master always asked those who had already taken refuge not to sign up to take refuge again--that they could just follow along and rejoice from the sidelines. The contemporary High Sanghan Great Master Yinguang also said that in taking refuge, the member of the Sangha is representing the Buddha in transmitting the three refuges. He is a certifier, not the person one is taking refuge with. That means we really should ask, "Who was the Master who certified your being transmitted the three refuges?" not "Whom did you take refuge with?" The Master said:
Some people say, "The Youth Good Wealth visited fifty-three [teachers], why can't I bow to a few more teachers?" But you need to realize that the Youth Good Wealth was always sent on by his previous teacher to the next teacher.
It wasn't that he greedily longed for another Dharma Master endowed with virtuous conduct and so turned his back on his current teacher and stole away to take refuge with another. A lot of older Chinese Buddhist disciples have taken refuge tens or hundreds of times. But when you ask them what take refuge" means, they don't know. Isn't that pathetic? They say that all left-home people are their teachers. But I say they don't have any teacher at all because their minds lack faith, so how can they be saved? One must have faith in order to be saved. Don't say "Probably the Buddha didn't notice the first time I took refuge, so I'd better do it again."
Actually when it comes to the question of red envelopes, all along the Master was very opposed to the custom. That's because there's an element of cheating in it. No one knows how much money is in those red envelopes. For Buddhist disciples in Asia, taking refuge and red envelopes amount to the same thing. That being the case, people who can't come up with red envelopes and those of externalist ways don't dare believe in the Buddha and take refuge. The Master said:
In the Avatamsaka Sutra, the Youth Good Wealth holds a very important position and yet he has had a very complicated influence on Chinese Buddhism. Most Dharma Masters know very well that for a person to take refuge with lots of different teachers is incorrect. It is not in accord with the Buddhadharma. But if they don't let it happen, their "tokens" (the red envelopes) will diminish significantly. And so to this day no one openly opposes this custom. Knowing full well it is wrong, they still do it. Complicated, huh? Why? First, it's for the sake of the "youths" (pulling in laity) and second it's for the sake of "Good Wealth" (getting one's share of red envelopes). This is the worst habit going in Buddhism.
The Master's true knowledge and brilliant views are decisively different from the multitudes. How much compassion there is behind the Master's lion's roar that he emits because he "cannot bear to watch the sagely teachings decline"! A lot of "movie star teachers" in Taiwan, being put on pedestals by their disciples, forget all about their responsibility to "carry on the Thus Come One's work of saving living beings." Every day they wallow in their intoxication for fame and profit and neglect the great matter of birth and death. Actually when disciples of the Triple Jewel encounter left-home teachers, they should inquire about the Buddhadharma, not just be intent upon giving them red envelopes. In Thailand, Sri Lanka and so forth, the laity makes offerings of food to the Triple Jewel. Besides which, the Buddha restricted the Bhikshus to one meal a day at noon; he definitely would not have permitted them to use their bowls to beg for money.
In roll 7 of Translations of Extra Material from the Agama Sutra, the Buddha said: "Holding gold or other money or valuables is not one of the Dharmas of Shramanas, disciples of Shakya. If they do hold gold or other money or valuables, then they are not according with the Dharmas of Shramanas." And so begging for money is not part of the method of cultivation for left-home people. In the 54th roll of the Four Divisions Vinaya the Buddha told the Elder Pearl Garland: "Shramana, disciples of Shakya should not hold gold and silver; they should give away their pearls and gems, and should not adorn themselves. Anyone who holds gold or silver will involve themselves in the five desires. If they involve themselves in the five desires, then they are not following the Dharmas of Shramanas, disciples of Shakya." Who would have thought that in these days of the Dharma-ending Age there are left-home people who use their bowls to beg for money. This has a devastating effect on the reputation of Buddhism and on the practices of members of the Sangha, especially now when those who are begging are just passing themselves off as left-home people in order to destroy the Buddhadharma. If members of the Sangha themselves did not carry their bowls to beg for money, then there certainly wouldn't be people willing to undergo the suffering of passing themselves off as part of the Sangha. That's why the Master encouraged his disciples to hold the precept against possessing money as much as possible; to avoid "tying up conditions" with money as much as possible. The Master said:
That's because left-home people can cultivate if they don't have money. As soon as they have money, they certainly won't be able to cultivate. I can guarantee it. Look into it! Investigate it. Taoists are referred to as "poor Taoists." Sanghans are referred to as "poor Sanghans." Nobody talks about "rich Sanghans" or "rich Taoists." And so when you use your money to make offerings to "rich Sanghans" and "rich Taoists," it's the same as if you were committing offenses. I'm going to offend a lot of people by saying this. But although I am offending you, I have to tell the truth.
Another thing that's happening in contemporary Buddhism is so-called "Dharmas for getting rich." The Master was also stern and proper about this one: "There isn't any such Dharma of getting rich in Buddhism." Great Master Yongjia said in his Song of Enlightenment:“The Shakyan disciples say that they are poor; they are indeed poor in body, but not poor in the Way. As to poverty, their bodies are ever wrapped in coarse rags. As to the Way, a priceless jewel is stored in their hearts." That's referring to Buddhism's "poor Sanghans." The expression "rich Sanghans" does not exist. Since they are "poor Sanghans,” how can they transmit "Dharmas of getting rich"? (and delude people by saying it's a method of the Buddha's when in fact it absolutely is not!) The Master's comments are:
You should look carefully at anyone who teaches others "Dharmas for getting rich" to see if he himself is rich or not. If he is, then that's because you are hoping to get rich and so you give your riches to him. That's why he has money. It's like investing in stocks. You first have to buy some stocks before you can make money. And so you first have to make an offering to him--maybe a thousand, or ten thousand, or a hundred thousand--and then your whole safe will be chocked full of money and it will emit red light, is it? Or yellow light? Or black light? Or purple light? If that isn't a professional crook at work, what is it? Since I would never transmit a Dharma for getting rich, I am exposing this secret.
Buddhism is a lofty teaching. It certainly doesn't stop with the "red envelopes" that accompany seeking fame and profit. Nor does it stop with the "Dharma Assemblies" that go along with saving souls. The Buddhas and those with great wisdom want living beings to understand that the world is impermanent and that they should get rid of their greed, hatred, and stupidity. How can the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas be relegated to the level of gods from whom one "seeks for wealth and officialdom”? Isn't that just bribery? Then how would Buddhism be different from Eastern or Western folk religions?
To be continued |
