Shambhala Buddhism’s Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche: relationships, loneliness & “Ruling Your World.”

What about You/What about Me: A Conversation with Sakyong Mipham” from the Spring 2006 issueof elephant journal.


Sakyong Mipham is sometimes referred to as a Buddhist monarch. His family lineage is, indeed, royal—he’s the son of Chögyam Trungpa, a guru credited with pioneering the transmission of the Tibetan Buddhist teachings to the West—and he’s a distant descendant of Gesar of Ling, Tibet’s King Arthur. But sitting with him at 7:30 a.m. over breakfast, I had to keep pinching myself. For, despite being in the midst of promoting his second book, Ruling Your World—and despite having just fallen in love and wedded a lovely, Western-educated Tibetan princess fluent in six languages—and despite having a long day of meetings, audiences and travel ahead of him—Sakyong Mipham has a way of making you feel at home.
In Buddhism, the goal is enlightenment. But as the Zen saying goes, before enlightenment you “chop wood, carry water.” After enlightenment? More of the same. So enlightened mind is ultimately NBD; it’s ordinary mind. And, with the Sakyong, it is tantalizingly easy to get a glimpse of such a way of being.We only wish the interview could have gone on forever. But, thankfully for our transcriber’s sake, it didn’t. Enjoy..
! —ed.


WAYLON H. LEWIS, for elephant: Well, thank you very much, Rinpoche. Your majesty. We’re joined by Emily Hilburn Sell, the editor of your new book, Ruling Your World. So…I forgot the date…late October 2005?


SAKYONG MIPHAM RINPOCHE: Halloween! [laughing]


ele: And it’s very early in the morning. Partially because of your having just been married, I wanted to ask about how Dharma [Buddhist teachings] relates to life—


right livelihood and relationships. And talking with Ted Rose at your [book release] party last night, he encouraged me to ask you why you named [your new book] Ruling Your World.


Rinpoche: The title came to me fairly quickly after I had written my previous book [Turning the Mind Into an Ally], which had been about meditation. It did pretty well. Still, it’s a meditation book—and ultimately, if you are not interested in meditation, you will not pick it up. So I wanted to write a book that encouraged people to proactively engage their life. The next book had to have a quality of “Where do you go from the meditation seat, and how do you engage in daily life?”


Ruling Your World conveys a sense that you have the power and potential to fully interact with your world. Ruling here is outside of the connotation of aggression. We are not talking about domination, we’re talking about engaging as opposed to receding. The key is that a lot of times people think spirituality is something sedentary, reclusive…that you have to draw back from the world. Ascetic. And then you basically become a spiritual meditator when, really, the fruition of the path is that you can completely interact with your world. You are able to have confidence in whatever you do. The notion of rulership here is having confidence in how you live your life.


The title is about life, as opposed to about meditation. Everybody lives their life—and do you want your world to rule you, or do you want to rule your world? We’re not talking about Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Hitler—ruling the world. If you can’t have harmony with your own world then anything beyond that is a fantasy.


ele: The other night [at a lecture held at a church, and attended by 1,200 persons], you used the term ‘authentic presence’—that if you can have an authentic presence, you can do anything in a mindful, powerful way.


Rinpoche: The Tibetan word is called wong tong and wong is power, tong is field or domain. You exude a sense of confidence, compassion and genuineness. Within your own domain, sphere, field. Authentic presence means that an individual is so genuine that they actually have resilience and power. A lot of times we feel like if we are authentic then we can’t really get what we want—we have to manipulate the world. So the notion here is that being authentic is actually a genuine source of power. And if you have that, you’re able to accomplish what you want—benefiting, helping, uplifting others. So it’s not self-centered. And then when an individual has that, they radiate goodness. If you are talking about individuals that we might respect, they have that authenticity. In a conventional sense, you can call it charisma—but if they don’t have genuineness and authenticness, that charisma is short lived.


ele: Their mission, the whole point, needs to be helping others?


Rinpoche: Well, if they have a malevolent, aggressive energy it may be startling or strong. But because it’s rooted in some aggression, it’s a totally different thing. They still have not ruled their own mind, they have not ruled their own aggression, ambition…they have not ruled their own self centeredness. They have already lost the battle—and then figured out a way to manipulate or force the situation, temporarily. The notion of authentic presence is that it’s a stable and natural way of living your life—you are not looking behind your back all the time. Somebody in this situation is more relaxed. They don’t have to manipulate.


ele: There seems to be this sense, in a society that is based somewhat on capitalism, that that aggression or self-centered charisma or power is more successful. Do you think that’s true?


Rinpoche: It depends on how you define success. Certainly there are such individuals who are successful on some level. But how content is the individual? How happy are you? How sane? If they are domineering but their marriage is a mess and nobody really likes them, [laughing] they have no friends, everybody is scared of them…ultimately when you look at that from any distance, you think, “My god, who would want to be in that situation?” But if you look and say, “All I want is a lot of money and I’m going to do it even at the cost of my own happiness,” well then. They are successful.


But that’s not what we are talking about. We are redefining the terms of life. We are redefining success. We have been fooled. And that’s why [in Ruling Your World] I talk about the dark age—a theme that runs within Tibetan culture and Buddhism and Shambhala meditation. We live in an age where we’re fooled. We think that aggression is a way to solve problems. We feel like being a domineering individual is success. And when you really look at that, it’s just like any Hollywood tragedy where a business tycoon has the face of success. But authentic presence is when there is individual success inside and outside. Because they are genuine, they are synchronized inside, they are synchronized outside. Ultimately, a person who is living their life and ruling their world is not afraid of death, or of birth—there is a sense of understanding things, as opposed to getting as much as you can before you die and being terrified of the end. That is not the ruling your world approach.


ele: So, in terms of relationships, which is something I am particularly interested in in terms of you as it seems like your profession is teaching the Dharma. Most human beings waste a great deal of our emotional energy in relationships. Whether we are married or not, or happy or not, love and sex seem to be objects of a lot of desire and frustration. I know you just got married yourself, you’ve written some wonderful poems, you’ve been talking about love a lot and experiencing it…


Rinpoche: Uh-huh.


ele: So what is love from a sane or enlightened point of view?


Rinpoche: [pause] I think it’s genuinely being able to see the other individual and genuinely taking delight in them. With the quality of genuineness, it doesn’t have to be completely self-fulfilling or self-satisfactory. A lot of times when we have love, it’s still what about me and you make me feel good and what’s the famous line? “You complete me.” It’s always about me, me, me. And if you have that relationship, [laughing] it’s doomed because the notion is actually that the individual should be whole. As opposed to you complete me or you complete the other person.


ele: They should be whole on their own.


Rinpoche: The union of the situation should be another whole unto itself. Or you can say, the relationship makes the individuals almost selfless, as opposed to a push and pull thing. Once you are in a relationship, you can do certain things to make it better. But really the whole point of relationship in terms of the way you approach it is who you are as an individual—that’s the beginning point. What their attitude is. And then also how you choose each other.


Sometimes people ask me for advice on a relationship. But they’ve already made a bunch of decisions that are going to send them in a certain direction. I can try to correct or help it, but just starting from the ground level the individual has to come in and say, “You know, this is an interdependency. We are working together.” And of course when you have two people together there’s going to be karma; there’s going to be different emotions coming up. So you try to find somebody who has a similar view and attitude so that you can have a basis of working with things. And like you are saying, if you are a master of emotion and completely selfless, yeah, you could probably work with anyone. But a lot of us [chuckling] are in a situation where we can’t—and so you have to find an individual who is actually going to support you as opposed to doing you in or you doing in. A lot of times people get upset at each other because they feel like the other person and the energy they are putting into the other person has drained them. They can’t put it into their career, or whatever. Whether it be Dharma or whether we are talking about the notion of being in love, it’s about having a completely fresh and clean and direct state of mind. This mind can come from taking delight in another individual. That’s what love is. You know, when you see somebody, there’s a sense of attraction—even if it’s just infatuation, you see another person and you take delight in them.


ele: From a naïve point of view, looking at spirituality, one might think that if you are enlightened and a great meditator, you wouldn’t experience great passion and great longing and loneliness. But it seems like in the poetry of your father [First Thought, Best Thought, by Chögyam Trungpa] as well as yourself, there is a lot of loneliness and delight and great emotions. How does that come out of the meditative state?


Rinpoche:Well, it’s not so bad to be alone. Even in a relationship. We’re afraid of being alone. So when we get together we feel like, “Oh, now I’m never going to be alone again!” But ultimately we’re still two individuals. There’s no sense of failure about being alone. It’s not that you don’t have any friends. It’s more of a romantic notion, in the sense that every individual is alone and that’s okay and we can actually be by ourselves.


That doesn’t mean we have to retreat from the world. It’s beautiful, really. It’s like seeing a single tree. There is a quality where it’s full, whole, simple. When we die we are alone. When we do many things we are alone. So the quality of being alone is important in a relationship or any other situation.So spiritual teachers are not meant to be distant from these emotions. Otherwise, if you are distant from affection and love, spiritually, you haven’t won—you’ve lost. Because those emotions—desire, delight, love—if you can’t experience them, it means that they are a threat to you. So the notion of a spiritual master is that they have actually, totally conquered. They call the Buddha the “All-Victorious One.” There is nothing he is afraid of—love, anger…In the beginning, we may not be able to completely conquer love. So we simplify our life. Maybe we don’t get involved in a relationship. But once we have developed a sense of stability, then we get involved.


The key here is you can have love, aggression, all these things—but experience them without believing them to be real and solid and being dominated by them. A lot of times, when people get angry we get completely consumed. It has total power and sucks us in. And then when we love, we have incredible attachment. And it’s usually the attachment that ruins our love, as opposed to love ruins our love.


ele: And the attachment is—


Rinpoche: —To the other person.


ele: It’s a sign of not being able to be alone, in a way?


Rinpoche: Not being able to be alone and ultimately not having any freedom of mind and body. You are not really able to remove yourself from the situation and have some freedom to do as you wish. Thespirituality versus love idea is the result of historical precedents. In the Catholic Church, people thought, “Oh, you are a priest, you can’t marry.” It was part of the political power structure—they didn’t want popes marrying and having strong families. They didn’t want it becoming a monarchy. Originally, some of the popes were married and had children.


In Tibet, this question just never comes up. Spiritual teachers married. And there’s ones who are monastics. And that’s the way it’s always been. A story you would like because it has to do with Sechen Kongtrül, my father’s teacher. He met my wife’s uncle, who was a representative in the central government. He was a monk. And their family is known as a very good family lineage—a lot of great saints and teachers, nobility and royalty, generations upon generations—like 19 generations long. And you don’t have the lineage of 19 generations if everybody is a monk, right?


So they were all married. So when her uncle actually took a vow to become a monk, Sechen Kongtrül came to the monastery and looked at him and goes, “Ah, it makes me so sad.” And Kongtrül was known for being a very pure monk! When somebody became a monk, he was usually very happy. But when he saw my wife’s uncle, he said, “Ah, you—you have the blood of the leopard,” from his father’s side and then from his mother’s side, “You have the blood of the tiger,” which is this other lineage. And he said, “Why are you giving it all up, just to become a monk? What a terrible waste. This is a sad day.”


And then if there was a tulku, whose incarnations had for many generations been monks, who then all of a sudden married, that would be a terrible thing: it breaks up the lineage. They don’t think it’s morallybad, as opposed to here. There’s this Western attitude overlaying a morality on a foreign culture that just doesn’t even think about that. I don’t know if people have theories…whether it’s the Protestant ethic and so forth.


ele: I think it’s very basic. It’s like what you talk about in your book, that if you are spiritual in some way, you must not be involved in the world. You are above the worldly pursuits. And if you get involved in love or politics or business…


Rinpoche: But if you look at Charlemagne, he was a religious king. At that point, I’ll bet they weren’t worrying about that.


ele: Switching gears to right livelihood. In Buddhism, there’s the bodhisattva vow where you dedicate your life to benefiting others. It would seem like since most of us spend most of our lives working, work is a powerful opportunity to benefit others. So, whatever job we are doing already…or whatever direction we are moving in, in terms of our career…how do we regard our day-to-day life as an opportunity to help others?


Rinpoche: [Long pause; eating breakfast]. Hmmm.


ele: I mean, with some jobs it’s easier, you know. You can say, “Well, if I have a magazine, my magazine should hopefully be about things that are going to help people—”


Rinpoche: That’s right.


ele: But say I’m a stock-broker—and there’s certainly nothing wrong with that—but how can I actually benefit others in that job?


Rinpoche: There are certain livelihoods where it’s easy to benefit others. And there’s others that are more challenging. The more challenging your job is, the more you really have stability in your intention. But if you are working at the World Health Organization…giving out food to everybody…but you are yelling at them and kicking them? You may be in the right situation, doing what people think is right livelihood, but [laughing] your attitude is really not where it should be. Or you could be doing another job, and you think it’s not so good, but if you have the right attitude..? Attitude is very, very important in terms of right livelihood.


ele: Just treating everyone with respect, and kindness—


Rinpoche:Thinking beyond yourself. There’s a certain quality that an individual gets when it’s not justabout themselves, when their actions come out of another attitude or motivation. If pure intention is there, your body and your speech will exude authentic presence, genuine confidence—and you’ll naturally find further ways of expressing your inspiration.


But it’s hard to be that way 24 hours a day. There’s times when you’ll feel strong. And there’s times of the day where people are tired and need to rest, so they take care of themselves a little bit. Be practical about it. The other quality here is that kindness and confidence and these other virtues are a result of seeing what’s going on, of open their eyes. If they see people are in difficult situations, they will naturally act with some compassion. But if they are blocking people out and just seeing people as opposition, then they will always have a difficult time. Most times when we are not forthcoming it’s because we are not really looking at them as a human individual—we are just seeing them as an issue, a symbol, a thing that may be in our way. So, it’s challenging—but you can handle everything. And at the same time if you have right livelihood, there is hopefully a base of sanity and strength and meditation. You have a reservoir of energy.


ele: My meditation practice is pretty limited these days. But I make a point of practicing for even a minute when I first wake up and before I go to bed [the two times traditionally considered to be most beneficial]. And like you talk about in the book, and in a poem—“What About Me?”I wake up, and instantly the gates open and my mind is flooded with what happened yesterday and what I need to do today. But even in two minutes of meditating, I can at least touch that anchor of sanity—some reference point that isn’t all about me. That then enables me to see people and situations more nakedly, and not from my point of view. It’s rather aggressive, if everything is about trying to protect my happiness!


Rinpoche: In a basic way, there is virtue and merit when you help other people. And when you do that you are gaining merit yourself. So from a Buddhist point of view it’s not in vain: it’s not like you are helping but because nobody is noticing, it didn’t happen. A lot of times we do good things as public display. But that doesn’t have to be the point.


ele: What exactly do you mean by the notion of “What about me?,” and how, very simply, do we relate to it and correct it?


Rinpoche: “What about me” is a bad habit. [Laughing] It reduces our strength, dignity, clarity. If you start off your day with “What about me,” you are already starting off on the wrong foot. Starting off with a mistake, a misunderstanding. We could talk about how there is no self, and get into all that—but it can get too technical and philosophical. Look at it just as a habitual pattern. If “What about me” worked, then it should have worked by now. Because it’s what most of us have been doing our whole life.


Because really what is it that we want to get out of the day? We want to be happy, we want things to go well—we want success, whether in love or business. We feel like the world owes us something. You get up in the morning, and automatically you are in a poverty mentality: “What about me? Hey, somebody left me out. I didn’t get what I want. I need more.”There’s a quality of, “I’m not good enough.”True selflessness is realizing that you already have everything. That’s a positive way of looking at it. There’s a negative way of looking at it, too.


ele: That I don’t exist, or something.


Rinpoche: Right. Which is not true. That’s only one part of it. The other part is that you are complete. If we wake up thinking we are not complete, we have to fill ourselves up. Everything has to be poured in. Then, when we start talking about selflessness, we think, “I already don’t have enough—now I’m going to really lose everything!” [laughing] But it’s not true. Because, with meditation, you see that you already have everything.


ele: There’s that famous quote you refer to: “If you want to be happy, think about others; if you want to be unhappy, think about yourself.” So how would practicing the opposite, “What about you?,” make mehappy?


Rinpoche: When you think about others, there’s an attitude of genuine compassion. Whereas, “What about me?” tightens the mind, constricts, makes it small and self-centered. When you think “What about you?,” it expands the mind. There’s room for compassion—and that is inherently how we are, anyway. When you make that attitude shift, you are actually being more genuine, more who you are supposed to be. If you asked the Buddha or any great meditator, “Ultimately, what do you find when you meditate for a long time,” they’d say, “You find wisdom and compassion—what’s innate in who you are.”When you are obsessed with yourself, you do not have compassion. You can’t think about others.


Whereas the result of “What about you?” has a sense of delight. When I think, “What about me,” I just follow my thought patterns. I stress out because I think something is not going to work out. But when I think about others, there’s a quality of possibility.


ele: There’s some joy and freedom and relaxation in your life, which is what you want in the first place.


Rinpoche: When you meditate, you begin to feel that way. It’s just a matter of people beginning to do the practice a little bit and then realizing that attitude shift. People get very technical, and start thinking “Well, how exactly am I going to do all this?” and things like that. It’s the same as with “What about me”—we don’t consciously think about it, exactly—we just wake up with that intention.


ele: I was reading The New York Times yesterday, after your [lecture; at a book signing]. Karl Rove was afraid of being indicted, but he wasn’t. So when he woke up that morning, he was quoted saying, “I feel great. Today is going to be a great day.” It reminded me of your talk: just because you wake up with a certain attitude, your mind can actually determine how your day will be. Just because he hadn’t been accused of any crimes, which was a relief, just because we was happy, he knew that his day would be great. Perhaps an interesting dark age example of what we are talking about.


Rinpoche: [Long pause] I don’t know if I’ll use that example in a talk!


For more:






張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言

Ken Wilber – Subject becomes object

張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言

The Road Not Taken Robert Frost,1874-1963

TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;

Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,

And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言

If you bring love….

“If you bring love…"

At a certain moment in Nietzsche’s life, the idea came to him of what he called ‘the love of your fate.’ Whatever your fate is, whatever the heck happens, you say, ‘This is what I need.’ It may look like a wreck, but go at it as though it were an opportunity, a challenge. If you bring love to that moment – not discouragement – you will find the strength is there. Any disaster that you can survive is an improvement in your character, your stature, and your life. What a privilege! This is when the spontaneity of your own nature will have a chance to flow. Then, when looking back at your life, you will see that the moments which seemed to be great failures followed by wreckage were the incidents that shaped the life you have now. You’ll see that this is really true. Nothing can happen to you that is not positive. Even though it looks and feels at the moment like a negative crisis, it is not. 

— Joseph Campbell, 1904-1987; American Mythology Professor and Author

張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言

The Way of Transformation


The man who, being really on the Way, falls upon hard times in the world will not, as a consequence, turn to that friend who offers him refuge and comfort and encourages his old self to survive.

Rather, he will seek out someone who will faithfully and inexorably help him to risk himself, so that he may endure the suffering and pass courageously through it, thus making of it a “raft that leads to the far shore."

Only to the extent that man exposes himself over and over again to annihilation, can that which is indestructible arise within him. In this lies the dignity of daring. Thus, the aim of (spiritual) practice is not to develop an attitude which allows a man to acquire a state of harmony and peace wherein nothing can ever trouble him. On the contrary, practice should teach him to let himself be assaulted, perturbed, moved, insulted, broken and battered – that is to say, it should enable him to dare to let go his futile hankering after harmony, surcease from pain, and a comfortable life in order that he may discover, in doing battle with the forces that oppose him, that which awaits him beyond the world of opposites.

The first necessity is that we should have the courage to face life, and to encounter all that is most perilous in the world. When this is possible, meditation itself becomes the means by which we accept and welcome the demons which arise from the unconscious, a process very different from the practice of concentration on some object as a protection against such forces.

Only if we venture repeatedly through zones of annihilation can our contact with Divine Being, which is beyond annihilation, become firm and stable. The more a man learns whole-heartedly to confront the world that threatens him with isolation, the more are the depths of the Ground of Being revealed and the possibilities of New Life and Becoming opened.

The Way of Transformation by Karlfried Gras von Durkheim

張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言

Be A Positive Infulence


How many times have you been in a room when there is a great deal of tension? You’re sitting there minding your own business when, let’s say an argument develops between two people.  If you’re like most, you can actually feel the tension in a room like that.  This situation reminds me of that phrase, “There was so much tension in the air that you could cut it with a knife."  You have probably said those exact words at one time or another. Now let me ask you to think of the opposite situation.
When there is a lot of love in a room, it feels differently as well.  My point in mentioning this today is very simple.  Just as each of you have the ability to make a room feel tense and uncomfortable, you also have the ability to turn that around and make people feel relaxed and at ease.  The way we act creates a ripple effect on those around us.  So take this thought with you as you wander through your day today and be mindful of the impact that your behavior has on others.  Choose to be a positive influence on your environment and those around you.  Try it and see what happens.



張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言







今早由报上看到巴基斯坦与印度边界发生大地震,死伤人数逾万,又是谁的错呢? 其实都是我们的「意识生命」需要走过的进化与净化,也许这是他们为我们演出的一场「悲剧」,供我们活人去学习的?
人间事本身并无对错好坏,我们永远都不敢确定 WHY?但我们都可以藉此而从受害者的心态中走出。你目前看到自己的「受害」,正是你宽恕自己,更爱自己的机会。请千万不要责怪自己,你应为你自己的「全身而退」而骄傲。










《宽恕心理学》源于西方的一部灵修著作《奇迹课程》,它是心理学与灵修学的结合体,将心理学由人文科学推进了「超个人心理学」(Transpersonal Psychology)的领域。
最理想的心理治疗乃是一连串的神圣会晤,弟兄聚在一起彼此祝福,一起领受上主的平安。终有一天,这种境界会临于世上所有的「患者」,因为除了有待治疗的患者以外,还有谁会来到这个世界?心理治疗师只是某种比较专业的「上主之师」罢了。他教学相长;他愈高明,教的就愈多,学的也愈多。但不论他处于什么阶段,总会有需要他那种程度的患者。那些人只消化得了他目前所能给的东西。最后,双方终会恢复神智清明之境的。( 奇迹课程补编P.13-14)







作者 Paul Ferrini
玲莹 若水 译


正如我练习自我负责时仍然常常犯错,同样的,在人际关系上我也难免犯错。我会在这件事上承担过多责任,在另一件事上却不够负责。在这件事上,我也许捞过了界;在另一件事上,却裹足不前。当你需要自己决定时,我却急着替你作决定;当我该自己决定时,却又让你来替我作决定,于是权责本应分明的那条界线,便因而模糊不清了,最后遂沦入心理学上「暴力」 (abuse)以及「依存共生」 (co-dependence)这两种下场。
















因此,我们必须认清一个事实:我们都在编导自己的电影,而且我们在银幕上所看到的一切,都是自己潜在意识的反射。然而,同时我们也必须明白,我们的电影并不是唯一的一部。在我们电影里出现的那些演员或技术人员也一样在编导他们自己的电影,我们也在他们的电影里扮演某个角色或摄影师。你可看过黑泽明 (Akira Kurosawa)的电影「罗生门」,它即曾以极其悲悯而抒情的手法表达了这一观念。











作者 Paul Ferrini
玲莹 若水 译







但是,我的生命力知道,它知道我的需求并把它吸引到我这儿来。我以前习惯把这生命力称为「命运」或 「神」,但始终未曾奏效,因为这样的指称已把它推到我生命之外了。其实不是的!它不在我外或我内,或许它既在我外,也在我内。当我划下界线时,它就隐藏到内心深处,避不露面,或是伸展到无限之外。它也可以小到无法辨认的地步,纵使你搜遍身心也无从找到它。










作者 Paul Ferrini
玲莹 若水 译


















因为《奇迹课程》说过:「我们所看到的一切不具任何意义;一切的意义都是我们自己赋予的。」 我们自以为知道它是什么,其实并不知道。我们自以为知道自己是谁,其实并不知道。我们什么都不知道,我们一无所知。我们必须赤裸裸地走入内心,空着双手且不带任何想法进入那片寂静。











错误仍会存在,但最后都会引来宽恕。一切罪污终会在接纳和爱中洗净,这就是《奇迹课程》所谓的「一蹴即至的旅程」(Journey without distance) ,一个没有起点或终点的旅途。「爱不会谴责」,它只会提醒我们,我们永是自由的,自由地学习和宽恕吧!





人格与次人格的形成各家说法不一,有先天说,如星座、血型等,有后天说,就是成长的环境造成的,像排行,父母的管教方式等。还有综合说。 我比较倾向于先天有影响,但是是会因后天的环境而改变的。通常显性的次人格,就是个性中比较明显的部分,主要是一套因应模式,通常是在我们人生的早期发展出来的。例如:老大通常负责的次人格会比较明显,因为老大通常会被父母要求或期望要负责,分担家里的事,或照顾弟妹等,然后就会得到父母或长辈的赞赏,于是这样的行为因鼓励而增强,慢慢地就成为他的模式。
隐性的次人格累积到一个程度就会自己找出路。出路有时会以隐性的方式出现。例如一个好好先生,答应了别人其实自己并不想作的事,那么他内在那个叛逆的次人格可能会用拖延、或作不成、甚至搞砸的方式来呈现 。如果答应了又要负责的人,可能会等到自己受不了了,突然爆发, 对任何人的任何要求都拒绝。这两种情况都会让这个好好先生是后自责不已:"自己怎么这个样子",决定以后要作一个更好的人,然后开始重复下一个循环。
如果连爆发也不允许的人,最后可能就会发生生病,或得忧郁症,或发生其它的意外,这样才能有正当里由休息,甚至以此攻击那些对他提出要求的人: "妳看,为了妳(们),我都累得病倒了或受伤了"举证证明别人的罪咎。无法攻击别人的,就会攻击自己:"你活该,谁教你要答应别人, 你以为你是谁……"
那么要如何处理呢?首先我们要知道,每一个次人格就是小我的一部分,处理的方是就是处理小我的方式-看清楚。看清楚他是如何形成的, 他要的是什么,这就是研习会中要次人格活动的用意。通常看到最后就会发现那是在证明自己是好人,这样才可以得到爱,所以其实目的都是在呼求爱。每个人都会发展出一套自己最熟练、最有效的爱的模式。负责、听话都是这样。因为作的熟了,别人也对妳有这样的期望,就很自然会用这样的方式,到最后自己也忘了是在呼求爱。不幸的是,这世界上的爱都是有条件的,这样的次人格努力与辛苦都是为了符合某条件才可能得到爱,看到了这一点,我们就可以松动对这些次人格的坚持僵化。
所以,请圣灵陪伴,看清楚后,我们自会有灵感知道该如何处理。例如:负责的要请休息的来一起来决定要作多少。听话的要请叛逆来帮忙拒绝。圣灵会知道要怎样利用小我的这些次人格,哪个何时要出场,要配合哪个,哪个何时退场。于是各个次人格由互相对抗变成互相帮忙。 一切自然会如行云流水,进退有序。
请记得,我们是抉择者,不是我们的次人格,他们是我们在这个小我的世界中可用的工具。当觉察到自己坚持要呈现某个或某几个次人格时,或陷入某些次人格的争吵时,就知道自己落入小我的圈套了。提醒自己,  “我是抉择者,我要重新选择“,然后请圣灵出场。当我们感觉到内心的平静时,一切就对了。

简医师(Jerry Jampolsky)在他人眼中是个仁慈、负责而且成功的心理医师,在家里,他好似也算善尽了为父为夫的责任,在事业与家庭方面都如日中天,受乡亲的爱戴。然而,在他内心深处,有个不可告人的隐痛时时攫掠他的心灵,让他活得有如「双面人」。在诊疗室里,他可以大谈爱心、耐心与完全地接纳;但回到家里,他照样唠叨自己的孩子,抱怨厨房的太太,尽做一些他规劝别人少做的「禁忌」。他知道自己的问题相当严重,却不敢去面对或处理。
就当他陷于谷底时,他的好友茱丽 (Judy Skutch)从纽约打电话到加州给他,叙述她与海伦及比尔的邂逅经验,还有一本足以改变一生的奇书。他好奇地探问书中大意,一听到茱丽提到神、灵修等字眼,这位「无神论」的死忠派立刻说:「多谢,我心领了。」
简医师在旧金山的加大医学院中心工作时,看到一位患了绝症的孩童,问医生说:「死亡是怎么一回事?」医师故意转变话题,不答复他,而病患的父母通常一听到这类话题就难过得直掉眼泪。他发现,最后唯一能够跟病患谈这一问题的,竟是医院的清洁女工!不久,他内心好似得到一个启示,要他撇开所有的宗教名词,运用《奇迹课程》的治疗观念,成立一个支持绝症病患的心理机构。那内在的指示告诉他,由儿童病患开始,「 因为儿童的『灵』比较灵活,他们不仅能够互相帮助,甚至还能帮助那些辅导他们的义工。」于是第一个「心态诊疗中心」(Center for Attitudinal Healing)成立了,而简医师自称是第一个受惠的人。
简医师自己也不知道这个中心在不收费的原则下如何运作下去,他只知道自己需要学习「信任」。那一段时间,他正打算把这中心里许多感人的经验分享出来,所以写了一部《爱的疗伤法》(Love Is Letting Go of Fear)。由于他从小有阅读障碍,写作绝不是他的长才,他在动笔的时候,耳边清楚地响起他中学老师的劝告:「杰瑞,你将来作什么都好,拜托你千万别去写书!」所以他对这部书不抱任何期待。万万没想到这本书竟然受到一位电视脱口秀主持人的青睐,在节目中推荐,一炮而红,暂时抒解了「心态诊疗中心」的经济压力。


張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言