對於經濟中的觀念、衝動、驅動力等 等，佛教至少可以提供許多看法，可以預見其結果是貪心、自利、貪得無厭，必然導致暴力性的競爭、追求物質享受、剝削、縱欲、權力、無盡的貪求，這與人對資本主義樂觀的期盼大不相同。
佛教認為基本上人都有苦：不如意、焦慮、緊張、不安、沮喪、消沉、陌生、空虛等等，這些都來自對貪欲、滿足貪欲的無明缺乏覺察。可貪欲無法被滿足，這是其性質，它並非基於實際的需要，而是基於貪心與錯解的幻想。因為它是非理性的，所以也無法從外界來滿足。「貧窮」是我們社會中大多數人貪得無厭的驅動力，這真是聳人聽聞，令人費解，因為這個世界擺脫貧窮已經幾十年了。貧窮，產生於分配不均，而非生產不足。我們永不滿足地在生產、獲取；渴望越強，痛苦也越大。這些觀念都可以從四聖諦的前兩諦中找到。
這些分析並非佛教哲學所獨有。我想你從東南亞各種傳統中都能找到，只是形式講法不同罷了。在市場經濟中，人心中貪求的觀念、衝動，在一切人類苦惱的心中也存在。無論我們多麼熱烈地去追求，去滿足它們，都於事無補，反而使之惡化，《法華經》中稱之為「以苦止苦」。換句話說，通過競爭，渴求、放縱，來尋求安寧、滿足，就如同火上澆油。試圖靠置身於諸多事物之中來滿足自己的空虛，只會產生更大的空虛。關於這個問題，我沒有時間談及所有的東方宗教，但相應的內容是有的。我舉幾個例子，老子說如果你要好好地治理人民，就要「我無欲，而民自樸。」他還說「不見可欲，使心不亂」、「不貴難得之貨，使民不盜。」這絕非「麥迪生大道的金科玉律」。
看一下〈道德經〉，我們發現，「知足者富……多藏必厚亡；知足不辱；……罪莫大於可欲，禍莫大於不知足，咎莫大於欲得。故知足之足，常足矣！……福兮禍所伏。」Bhagavad Gita中充滿了這樣的教誨，「為了獲得寧靜、快樂、心靈的和諧，你要徹底放棄因固執意志而引起的欲念。」書中的看法與資本主義真是大相徑庭。「若能超出欲望的束縛，你就獲得了不倚賴感官的絕對自由。」
大乘佛教中極受重視的《華嚴經》直截了當個地說要「少欲知足」。禪宗開示說：「處處眾生，障蔽妙有；放下鬆手，顯現妙有。」因此我們可以視這些教導為一個模型；俱備了一些條件，人們就會得到一些結果；在這個模型中，佛教的預見和資本主義不同。將市場經濟學做為一種意識形態崇拜的「衝動」、「欲望」，實際上就是佛教所說的一切「苦」的根源。重要的一點是，資本主義並非只是在容忍人們的貪心，或主張為了得到好結果，我們要限制貪欲與私心，而是主張讓這些令人存疑的衝動在不受任何約束地條件下來作主導，這樣世界就會達到最完美的境地。如果佛教模型是對的，我們就應看到一些由於縱欲而產生的預期結果。
待續
|
|
Interestingly, Buddhism has a great deal to say about economics at least in the sense that the ideas, impulses, urges, and values that drive the current economy—greed, self-interest, acquisitiveness, competition (which inevitably leads to violence), longing for material pleasures, mutual exploitation, indulgence, power, and endless longing/craving have predictable outcomes (though not the rosy outcomes predicted and promised by capitalism).
Basically, Buddhism teaches that all human suffering (dukkha)— dissatisfaction, anxiety, stress, restlessness, despair and depression, alienation, emptiness, etc.— comes from unchecked desire or thirst (trishna) and the ignorance that feeds this thirst. But it is not a craving that can be satisfied; this is the nature of thirst, because it is not brought on by real need, but rather imagined need, i.e. greed and misunderstanding. Nor can it be satisfied by externals, because it is irrational. Thus, the notion of “scarcity” that drives most of our acquisitive society, is really a canard, a myth, as we have been living in a post-scarcity world for decades. Scarcity exists only in the distribution of goods, not in production; yet, we keep on frantically producing and acquiring as if we never had enough. The greater the thirst, the greater the suffering. These concepts represent the first two of the Four Noble Truths.
This analysis is not unique to the Buddhist philosophy. I think you will find it, in one form or another, throughout the East and South Asian traditions. Namely, that the ideas and impulses of greed and longing that lie at the heart of the market economy also lie at the heart of all human suffering; and that no matter how feverishly we try to pursue and fulfill them, they can never solve our problems, only exacerbate them. In the Lotus Sutra, this is called “trying to use suffering to end suffering.” In other words, trying to find peace, fulfillment, contentment through competition, craving, and indulgence is like attempting to put out fire with gasoline. And paradoxically, attempting to fill the hollowness that comes from immersing ourselves in “things,” only creates a deeper hollowness.
Time does not allow me to go into all of the scriptural bases for this across the eastern religious landscape, but they are there. For example, to quote a few:
Lao-tzu says that if you wish to benefit and rule or lead the people,“ Give them selflessness and fewness of desires.” Again, he advises, “If the people never see such things as excite desire, their hearts will remain placid and undisturbed,” and, “if we cease to set store by products hard to get, there will be no more thieves.” This is not exactly the Madison Av- enue mantra!
Or, if we look at the classic, Tao Te Ching, we find:
To be content with what one has is to be rich... He who accumulates the most suffers the heaviest loss; be content with what you have and no one can despoil you; ... No lure is greater than to possess what others want, [and we might add, to want what others possess], no disaster greater than not to be content with what one has, no presage of evil greater than that men should be wanting to get more... Truly, he who has once known the contentment that comes simply through being content, will never again be otherwise than contented... But to fill life to the brim invites disaster.
The Bhagavad Gita is full of exhortations to “entirely abandon desires aroused by willful intent...in order to obtain tranquillity, joy, and spiritual harmony.” It holds out a promise far different from the capitalist in suggesting that “one finds absolute joy beyond the senses when freed from craving objects of desire.”
The highly considered Buddhist Mahayana text, the Avatamsaka Sutra, puts it plainly: “with fewness of desires, one knows contentment.” And from the Zen tradition comes this verse:
Living beings everywhere,
cover over the wonderful;
Let go, release your hold,
The wonderful revealed.
So, we can look at these teachings or propositions as a model, where given certain conditions, one is likely to see certain outcomes and results. In this model, Buddhism makes the opposite prediction of capitalism. Market economy as an ideology actually enshrines, deifies the very same impulses and urges that Buddhism places at the root cause of all suffering. It is important to point out that capitalism does not simply tolerate human greed, or suggest that by curbing and limiting avarice and selfishness, we can obtain a good end. Rather, it says that by giving free rein to these questionable urges, letting them rule unfettered, we thereby reach the best of all possible worlds. So, if the Buddhist model is right, then we should be able to see some of the predicted outcomes resulting from giving unim peded play to desires.
To be continued
|
