7
Application of Buddhist Teachings in Modern Life: The Foundational Role of the Five Moral Precepts
佛教在現代生活的應用：五戒為本
By Ronald Epstein, Ph.D., Research Professor, Dharma Realm Buddhist University
易象乾 博士, 法界佛教大學研究教授
Third World Buddhist Forum, Hong Kong, April 25-27, 2012
第三屆世界佛教論壇, 香港, 2012年4月25-27
------
A Brief and General Explanation of Moral Precepts （戒律概述）
A large portion of the Buddha’s teaching can be summarized in the stock phrase: use moral precepts, meditative concentration and clear, correct understanding as antidotes for the three poisons of greed, anger and foolishness, which are the main causes of the fundamental unsatisfactoriness (duḥkha) of unenlightened living. From this formula, we can see that the first mentioned and foundational component of the Buddhist Path is the moral precepts. They were laid down by the Buddha at the beginning of his teaching life, elaborated upon as situations arose that required further moral guidelines, and are part of the two-fold formula—dharma-vinaya—that the Buddha recommended at the time of his nirvana as the most reliable guide to practice of the Path when the Buddha was no longer in the world.[1] In the very first Buddhist teachings brought to China, in the form of the Sutra in Forty-Two Sections, the Buddha says: "My disciples may be several thousand miles away from me, but if they remember my precepts, they will certainly obtain the fruits of the Way. If those who are by my side do not follow my precepts, they may see me constantly, but in the end they will not obtain the Way."[2]
佛陀的教誨中，大部分可以用這樣常常看到的語句來敘述：遵守戒律、打坐修定及明確的領悟，來對治貪、瞋、痴三毒。貪、瞋、痴是人生無明和煩惱的主要緣由。從上面的敍述，我們可以了解戒律是修行佛道最先需提出及最基本的要素。佛陀在教導初期時，就訂立戒律，爾後根據狀況，再增加細節。戒律是“法和律”二部之一，二者都是佛陀涅槃時咐囑的，當佛不住世時，這是最可靠的修道指南。《四十二章經》是最早傳來中國的佛法，其中，佛說：「弟子去，離吾數千里，意念吾戒必得道。在吾左側，意在邪，終不得道。」
The ethical guidelines embodied in the moral precepts (śila) and the monastic regulations (vinaya) are lenses that help to focus our understanding and are a protective guard that keeps us from generating karma that will lead to increased dissatisfaction in our lives. Buddhist ethics are based on knowledge of the relation between our intentional actions (physical, verbal and mental) and their consequences. Both wholesome and unwholesome intentional actions arise from the mind. Unwholesome ones are easier to curtail if one is aware when they are just sprouting into consciousness. Intentional activity is the definition of karma, so Buddhist ethics can be said to be karma-based. Such an understanding of ethical action has influenced Chinese civilization for over two thousand years, has become an important part of the Chinese cultural heritage, and is an integral part of the Chinese collective psyche.
戒規（尸羅）所蘊含的道德規範，以及出家生活的律規（毘奈耶），就像光學鏡片一樣，可以幫助我們專注於悟解，同時也像防護罩一樣，可以保護我們不去造作令我們生活更加苦惱的業。佛教徒的道德規範基礎，是讓我們理解（身、語、意）所作所為與後果的關連。不論是善或不善的作為，都生自於心。當一個人覺知到不善在意識中萌芽，那麼不善的作為就比較容易被遏止。“業”是我們所作所為的定義，所以佛教徒的道德規範，可以說是以“業”為基準。像這樣對道德行為的理解，影響了中國兩千多年來的文明，成為中華文化傳承中很重要的一部分，是中華精神的整體之一。
The title of the Brahma Net Sutra, which historically was the main source of the Bodhisattva precepts in China, is based on the following symbolic imagery. Before the god Brahma, lord of the Brahma Heaven of the pure world of form, is suspended a circular net curtain, as an adornment of his court. In each hole of the curtain, a pearl is found. Each pearl both reflects all other pearls and shines its light on all the other pearls. The result is an incredible display of infinite inter-reflected light. The net curtain can be understood analogically. It stands for one's own body and mind. Each hole in the netting represents a particular outflow of one's vital energy. Each pearl represents a moral precept that plugs an outflow. To the extent that one keeps the moral precepts, the pearls emit light and illuminate one's own body and mind and also those of all other living beings.
《梵網經》是中國長久以來菩薩戒的本源，根據下面象徵性的譬喻：在梵天王的王宮前，懸掛著一個圓形的網幔來裝飾宮殿。網幔上的每一個網孔都有一粒明珠。每一粒明珠映現其它的明珠，並且它的光芒照耀到所有的明珠，因而顯現無窮無盡互相反射的光芒。這個網幔可以喻解為一個人的自身和心。每一個網孔代表這個人某種精氣的漏失。每一粒明珠代表戒規，可以防堵漏洞。當一個人守戒到某種程度時，就像明珠，放出光明照亮自己的身心，也照耀其他的眾生。
The traditional understanding what it means to conduct one’s life under the influence of holding the moral precepts is well known in Buddhist communities in China and those all over the world and has been chronicled in a wide range of writings. The Venerable Master Hsuan Hua summarized it in the following verse:
If in this life you don't cage birds,
in future lives you will not sit in jail.
If in this life you do not fish,
in future lives you will not beg for food.
If in this life you do not kill,
in future lives you'll suffer no disasters.
If in this life you do not steal,
in future lives you won't be robbed.
If in this life you commit no sexual misconduct,
in future lives you will not be divorced.
If in this life you do not lie,
in future lives you will not be deceived.
If in this life you do not take intoxicants,
In future lives you will not go insane . . . . [3]
遵守戒規來律己的傳統觀念，是中國和全世界佛教團體所熟知的，而且被記錄在廣泛的文獻中。宣化上人把它概括在下面這首偈頌：
今生不籠鳥，來生不坐監；
今生不釣魚，來生不討飯；
今生不殺生，來生無災難；
今生不偷盜，來生無搶案；
今生不邪婬，來生無婚變；
今生不妄語，來生無欺騙；
今生不醉酒，來生不狂亂。
The Five Moral Precepts in Contemporary Society（現代社會的五戒）
What has been covered less well than the traditional Buddhist understanding of the moral precepts is their application in the incredibly complex world of the present.Nowadays Buddhist ethics are not primarily taught and applied in the aesthetically pleasing surroundings of ancient temples that have become museums or in places that attempt at a lifeless imitation of ancient Buddhist daily life. Every situation in the world is a situation in which to learn and apply them. It is to that challenge that I would like to direct the present discussion. Using the framework of karma, intentional action leading to consequences, in relation to the Five Moral Precepts, which embody the fundamentals of the Buddhist ethical teachings, I would like to reexamine their meaning and application in the context of contemporary society.
傳統佛教所熟知的戒規，比較少涵蓋和應用到目前複雜的花花世界。現在佛教德育的教導和應用，大部份不在環境優雅的古寺廟內。這些寺廟已成為美術博物館，或者只是呆板的模仿古代佛教徒的日常生活，其實世上每一個處境，都是我們去學習和應用戒規的場所。基於這種需求，我試著引導這個討論，以“業”為框架，所作所為造成的結果，和佛教道德教育根本--五戒的關聯。我將重新思考它們在當今社會潮流的意義和應用。
1) Respect for and non-harming of all sentient life （尊重及不傷害生命）
The non-harming of all sentient life is the first and essential step toward true compassion for others. All the other precepts can be derived from it. The Venerable Master Hsuan Hua explained it this way:
Why should one refrain from killing? It is because all living beings have a life; they love their life and do not wish to die. Even one of the smallest creatures, the mosquito, when it approaches to bite you, will fly away if you make the slightest motion. Why does it fly away? Because it fears death. It figures that if it drinks your blood you will take its life. From this you can see that all living beings love life and do not wish to die. Especially people. Everyone wants to live and no one wants to die. Although people sometimes commit suicide, ordinarily people do not seek death. Suicide is a special exception to the principle. That is why we should nurture compassionate thought. Since we wish to live, we should not kill any other living beings.[4]
真正慈悲對待其他生靈的首要步驟是：不傷害生命。其他的戒律都從這條戒規衍生出來。宣化上人是這麼解釋的：
為什麼不殺生？因為眾生都有生命，都歡喜活著，不願意死。就是蚊蟲這麼小的生命，牠咬你的時候你一動，牠就跑了。為什麼牠跑呢？就因為牠怕死。牠喝你的血，你就要牠的命。由這一點看來，所有的眾生都是歡喜活，不歡喜死。尤其是人，每一個人都願意活著，不願意死。雖然有的時候，有自殺的人，那是有特別情形；如果沒有特別情形，他也不願意死。因為這個，我們養我們的慈悲心。我們願意活著，所以也不殺一切的眾生。
This moral precept encompasses more than just not killing. Respect for life begins with recognition of the intrinsic value of sentient beings apart from any instrumental value they may have. That means beings should not been seen as objects, as means or tools for the gratification of other’s desires. Yet we are taught to treat others, and even ourselves as objects, objects to be judged by others and whose purpose is the gratification of the desires of others. In our true nature, we are not sex objects, and we are not objects to be used to assuage others’ insecurities through forced manipulations.
這條戒規遠超過“不殺”的含義。尊重眾生，認識眾生內在本具的價值，撇開工具主義的價值觀。這也就是說，眾生不應該被當成一樣物體，一個媒介，或者工具來滿足他人的慾望。然而，我們卻被教導對待別人、甚至自己，像一個物體，被人來衡量，其目的是滿足他人的慾望。我們真正的本性，並不是男女性的物體，也不是一個被操縱、來減輕他人沒有保障感的物體。
Respect for others and for ourselves starts with the notions of filial piety promulgated by both Confucius and the Buddha. Infant and childhood relations with our parents and other family members are the templates for all of our relations with others in later life. Yet the popular media totally undermines these basic values of a healthy society: respect for parents and elders, respect for our bodies, and respect for marriage and family.
尊重他人和尊重我們自己，起始於對孝順的認知。佛陀和孔子都提倡孝道。我們在嬰兒和童年時期，與父母及家人的關係，是我們日後與他人相處關係的模板。然而，流行媒體卻完全削弱或破壞這些構成健全社會的基本價值觀：恭敬父母和長輩、尊重自身、及尊重婚姻和家庭。
Although these same values can be found in the traditional canon of Western cultural values, they have been somewhat attenuated in the West by the myth of the isolated, independent rights bearing person, which is one of the foundations of Western democratic political theory. Yet that myth does not correspond to the reality of the experience of each one of us. From conception, we are not separate or isolated from others. One’s relation with mother, then with father and siblings and close relatives, becomes the template for one’s sense of identity and one’s further relationships in society. Of course, from the Buddhist perspective, even this sense of interpersonal self must be understood to be a temporary and ultimately illusory construction based on ignorance and fundamental cravings.
雖然西方傳統文化的典籍，也有這些相同的價值觀，但是在其民主政治賴以依靠的孤立及獨立自主的謬論下，這些價值觀都逐漸淡化，還好這樣的謬論並未和我們每一個人實際的體驗相應合。從胎兒開始，我們就不是跟他人分隔或孤立。從跟母親的相連關係開始，然後父親、手足和近親，這些都成為我們對自我價值的認識，以及進一步跟社會關係的模版。當然，從佛教徒的觀點來看，我們必須暸解，這種人際與自我的感受是短暫的，它畢竟只是一個緣起於根本無明和渴求的幻象。
The interpersonal self, which acknowledges its shared experience and welfare in common with others, creates a firm basis for the notion of properties and interests held in public commons that belong to all, in contradistinction to the closed off properties and interests of the isolated individual.
這個人際的自我，從與他人分享的經驗和共同的利益，產生一個堅定的信念：公共資產和利益應該屬於大眾，而不是孤立的個體所擁有的封閉資產和利益。
One important but overlooked aspect of this is the all-too-often denial or willful ignorance of the relation between mentally breaking the precepts and physically breaking the precepts. We all know that killing other humans is wrong, yet how many of us take seriously teaching kids to kill in computer games? In addition to nourishing a measurable predilection for violence in a significant minority of them, it has led to the dehumanizing situation in which soldiers in remote locations use computer game formats to control drones that kill people half way around the world.
一個重要但被忽視的問題，就是常常不承認或故意漠視：心地上破戒和實際行為上破戒的關係。我們都知道殺人是不對的，然而我們之中，有多少人卻認真的教孩童們在電腦遊戲中殺人？不少人除了因此增長暴力傾向之外，更有失去人性的情況，例如軍人在偏遠地區，利用電腦遊戲的模式，遠距離操作無人飛機來殺人。
Buddhism teaches that the karma of killing, which is the root cause of violence and war, hangs over all of us like the dark and ominous clouds of an incipient storm. Although that cloud of karma is invisible, it is nonetheless real. Its origin is thoughts of harm and killing in the minds of all sentient beings. Much of the cloud arises from the fear, resentment and hatred of those who have been killed or are about to be killed. They include not only the human victims of violence, but also the billions of animals that are victims of the explosion of meat-eating on the planet.
從佛法來說，殺業是暴力與戰爭的根源，就像暴風雨前，可怕的黑雲籠罩著我們。雖然業力的烏雲是看不見的，它卻是真實存在的，它從所有眾生心裡的殺念而生起，而多數的烏雲是從那些已殺或將被殺者的害怕、憤怒、和仇恨中產生。這些不僅包括因暴力而罹難的人類，同時也包括因地球上過多的肉食者，被殺害的數以億計的動物。
The First Moral Precept and Environmental Harm of Sentient Life （第一條戒規與有情生命環境上的危害）
Two special challenges to the keeping of this first and fundamental precept are 1) the fact that our senses have become effectively obsolete in their ability to detect harm, and 2) our inability to follow the long and complicated chains of cause and effect that are ubiquitous in contemporary life. Our nervous systems evolved to detect dangers to our health and life that we might encounter in a natural environment. They still work to a certain extent to detect human caused dangers, such as visible smog and tastable harmful chemicals. Yet many of the greatest sources of harm and causes of death are not detectable by our senses: invisible air pollution, much water and soil pollution, nuclear radiation, to give just a few examples.
受持第一條基本戒規，有二項特別的挑戰：(1)我們對傷害的感知，已經明顯的減退；(2)我們對現代生活處處錯綜複雜的因果長鏈，已經沒有能力去追踪跟循。我們神經系統的發展，是來偵測大自然環境中，我們可能會遇到對健康或生命的威脅。這些神經系統對於人類所造成的危害，仍有某種程度上的警覺，例如可見的煙霧、可以嚐的出來的有害化學物。然而，還有更大的傷害及致死的來源，卻無法被我們的感官所察覺：看不出來的空氣、水、和土地的污染，及核子輻射等，這只是少數的幾個例子而已。
And by our lack of understanding of how a wide range of individual and collective acts of pollution leads to serious and widespread consequences for humans, animals, ecosystems, and even for planet-wide self-regulating systems, we even put life on Mother Earth itself in danger of extinction.
而且，由於無知，個人及群體所造成廣大污染，導致對人類、動物、生態系、甚至地球層面，自我調整系統普遍嚴重的後果，以至於我們將地球這個大地之母，置於滅絕的危險之中。
The whole planet is in crisis and, since there are so many things wrong, it is hard to know where to begin. Yet Buddhist ethical teachings provide a mechanism for analyzing the underlying mental and physical causal patterns which are the seeds from which havesprouted the possibility of such dire conseqences. We need to explore carefully how Buddhist teachings can provide us with an analysis of root causes and help us develop new perspectives for lessening environmental death and destruction and the human suffering that they entail.
整個地球都處在危機之中，由於有太多的差錯，而不知從何處開始著手。不過佛教的道德教育，提供了一個機制過程，來分析隱伏於身與心的因果模式，它們如同種子，可能萌生嚇人的後果。我們必須細心探究，佛法如何提供我們分析原因的根源，來幫助我們發展新的遠景，以減輕環境的破壞與滅亡帶給人類的苦難。
From a Buddhist perspective, morality is based on purification of the mind. As one’s mind is purified, one’s actions are purified. As a result, not only do mental attitudes that are dissonant or harmful to Nature disappear, but one’s new mental states lead directly to more enlightened actions in relation to Nature and more enlightened influence on others about Nature.
從一個佛教徒的觀點來看，淨化心靈是道德的基礎。心淨則行淨。其結果是，不但個人心態上對大自然的抵觸和傷害消失了，進而引發對大自然更多覺悟的措施，並且帶動他人對大自然的覺悟。
Buddhist monks and nuns vow to follow moral precepts that prohibit harming of the environment, including all the sentient beings who live in it. There are vows for protecting the purity of the water; for not killing sentient beings who live in the earth; for not killing insects, birds, and animals; for not starting forest fires; and for respecting the life of trees, particularly ancient ones.
佛教的比丘和比丘尼，都發願持戒：不損害環境及居住其中的生物。譬如護持淨水；不殺害地球上的眾生，包括昆蟲、小鳥、及動物；不引發森林火災；並且尊重樹的生命，尤其是古老的樹。
2) Not taking what is not given （不予不取）
Not taking what is not given is much broader notion than merely not stealing, which is all too often thought to be restricted to not illegally taking the possessions of others.
不予不取所涵蓋的觀點比僅僅不偷盜更廣。不偷盜常常只限於不非法謀取他人的財物。
Do our thoughts and actions reinforce the duality of self and other that sees our own interests as separate from those of others, or do they generate the compassion for others that comes from the realization that what separates us is not as profoundly important and our fundamental commonalities and ultimate non-duality? When we take advantage of other people and extract from them, against their will, money, goods, labor, or services, then we are reinforcing mental attachments to categories that blind us on the Buddhist Path and cut us off from the selfless compassion of the Buddhas.
我們的念頭和行為，是否強化自我與他人的二元性？也就是說，看待自身的利益與他人是不相干的。或者，我們的念頭和行為，是否真正認識自他不二？進而對他人產生悲憫心。當我們佔取他人的便宜，不顧他們的意願、金錢、財物、勞力、或服務時，我們加強了自心的執著，那樣會使我們看不清佛道，違背了佛陀無我的慈悲。
In traditional cultures, taking what is not given was personal and direct. Everyone could identify it and see it happening, clearly and distinctly. The complicated nature of contemporary society, with its long, twisted, and often hidden chains of cause and effect, very often makes it difficult to identify this category of exploitation directly and personally. When the pathway from the doing of the deed to its consequences become muddled, and too long and circuitous to follow, the keeping of the precept becomes problematic. To give just one example, if a large corporation is, in either its broad or narrow sense, effectively stealing, whether legally or illegally, from large numbers of people in some third world country on the other side of the world, what degree of involvement with that corporation is permissible? That is not an easy question from most of us to answer.