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: mipham.com

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

http://www.indranet.com/spirit/transform.html

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

为什么我们需要学习宽恕?

为什么我们需要学习宽恕?

因为我们生来都在不断谴责自己,无论外在的条件如何变化,总觉得自己"不够好",每个人都为了化解"我不够好"的问题而把自己应负的责任投射到别人身上。然而,即使将他人卷入进来,我们仍然难以解决我们潜意识里的"自惭形秽"。我们每个人心里都有一个受伤的小孩有待治愈。

宽恕提供给这小孩治愈的机会。只要我们继续批判自己或别人,我们就不免被自己的批判所伤。然而,藉着宽恕,我们接纳自我,把爱带到内心受伤之处。藉着宽恕,我们能打开我们内心去迎接爱,让爱来治愈所有的创伤。

宽恕心理学学习所指的"宽恕"是怎样的?

《宽恕心理学》所指的"宽恕"并不是世俗的宽恕,世俗的宽恕一般指「给予真正伤害我们的人一个他根本不配接受的礼物」,我们所谈的宽恕则是基于「世界根本不曾伤害过我们」这个观念上。世界「好似」带给我们痛苦,然而所有的痛苦,都是透过我们的心灵对世界所作的诠释而造成的。世界从来不曾伤害过我们,也不曾对我们做过任何事。既然如此,那么我们对它的怨恨就没有理由了。这种了悟就是宽恕,它是看到真相后的必然结果。

我们一入人世,就不只是个「个体」,而是降生在一个大环境(局势)的一个意识生命,每一件事情的发生,不能只由你「个人」的角度去评断,因它未必是冲着你个人来的,而是一个大团体的共业。彭老师说的没错,小我的世界,随处都会有「意外」,这不是你能掌控的。
你生长在一个贫富不均的中国,绝非偶然。许多剧情,在另一层次已经写定了,某些事件,迟早会发生,但结局却没有定论。有修的人,不论顺逆,都能藉此而成长。
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?
人间的任何现象,不论多么残忍,不可理喻,都被奇迹课程归纳为二:「爱的表达」或「求助的表达」。强盗抢劫与你被抢,都是「受害与求助」的不同方式。而这不是「你」的个人事件,我们都在跟你一起学习。
在我眼中,你所经历的考验,已经过了,你除了失落一些身外之物以外,你安全过关,你通过考试了。现在轮到风闻此事的「我们」面临同一个考试,我们是怀着爱或是恐惧或是防备的心态来面对你的问题?有些人会与你一起掉在受害者的坑里,而责怪你不小心?有些人会给你一些自我防卫的建议?这其实反映出我们的问题,不是你的问题。你已经通过考试,我们却还没有。
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。
至于你身边关怀你的人,会因着自己的忧惧之心而投射给你许多忠言善劝,也宽恕我们吧,因为通常旁观者会比遇险的当事人更加害怕呢。
你可以气得大哭一场,或是和朋友诉一诉苦,这都是很健康的反应。可以放心了,你已经「躲过一劫」了,很快就会拾回旧日的平安的。我对你有信心。遥寄祝福。

问:宽恕可以给我什么?

答:宽恕会给你所想要的一切。宽恕可以给你带来平安、幸福、平静的心,让你拥有目标明确、超越世俗的尊严与美感。让你感受到受眷顾及安全感,并且随时体会到一种被保护的温暖。让你享受一种不受侵扰的宁静、不会受伤的温柔、深沈而持久的抚慰,以及不受搅扰的彻底安息。

宽恕会给你这一切,甚至更多。当你苏醒过来时,它就在你眼中闪耀,在你今天一切境遇中带给你喜乐。当你安眠时,它轻抚你的前额,安息你的眼睑上,使你不再梦见恐惧与邪恶、敌意与攻击。当你再度苏醒时,它又为你带来一天的幸福及平安。宽恕会带给你这一切,甚至更多。

宽恕是幸福的关键。

 

 

 

 

 

《宽恕心理学》与传统心理治疗学的异同
《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。
其实心理学(Psychology)的字根原意乃是「治愈心灵的一门学问」,但为了挤身于学院制度,它必须与科学认同,把无法在实验室里证明之物,一律摒弃于外,以致于近一个世纪以来,心理学与灵修学各自发展成两条不交集的路线。传统心理学视「灵性的追求」为一种逃避现实,自甘耽溺于幻境的病态;而灵修学则视心理学为「止小儿啼」、「不究竟」的雕虫小技。直到近二三十年,东西方文明交会,灵修学与心理学才逐渐出现合流的现象,形成心理学的「第四势力」。
许多病患经过长年的心理分析,十分清楚自己的异常反应,却苦无扭转的力量。根据心理治疗的临床经验,许多重大的转变通常发生在病患到了无路可退的处境,不得不放下自己的力量,而转向另一个超越能力求助。这个转捩点,连病患本人都觉得难以解释,好像是灵光一闪,突然开窍的感觉,但绝不是他的理性所推出的结论。这是传统心理学无法证明也不想深究的一个现象。
《宽恕心理学》的治疗途径已经由心理层次进入了灵性层次,由现象界追溯至形上界的终极原因,它与传统心理辅导有不同的特色,说明一下:
(一)在目标上,
《宽恕心理学》与心理学都是以「心理复健」为目标的,达到幸福和谐的人生理想,只是它们对健康的定义与疾病的诊断有所不同。
心理治疗的目的,简言之,就是解除通往真理的障碍。其宗旨是为了帮助患者放下他所执着的错觉体系,开始反省那体系所凭据的虚妄因果关系。世上没有一人躲避得了恐惧,但每个人都能重新去看它的起因,学习正确的评估方法。(奇迹课程补编P.6)
由此观之,心理治疗的目标止于解除某些心理障碍,让病患能够在人际关系或家庭社会中正常运作;而《宽恕心理学》的治疗观念却是除了应付世俗问题以外,让人们更清楚认识自己生命的实相,迈向灵性的成熟。
(二)在方法上,
心理治疗着重于消除症状,而《宽恕心理学》强调的是认知体系整体的根本改变。心理治疗由于时间和费用的关系,通常治疗目标比较具体,只是针对患者症状的某种或某一方面的错误的认知观念改变,所以它能够把问题孤立出来,而帮人越过这一难关,但未必能彻底解决问题的起因。
《宽恕心理学》对治疗与康复却有不同的观点,它认为,错误的认知体系才是一切恐惧与痛苦的肇因,这种认知夹杂着过去的经验,逐渐凝固为某种人生信念了。这一信念默默地在潜意识中运作,掌控着人的自卫系统,做出许多身不由己的反应。
为了打入这一幽冥地带,它是以潜移默化的方式,让患者看清自己加于自身的痛苦,而后决定选择另一种思想模式与宽恕心态,自行走出过去的阴影,所以它是帮助患者形成一种自我发展与成熟人格的心理学,而不是一剂止一时之痛的特效药。
因此,心理治疗的过程可以简单地界定为宽恕,这乃是治愈的本意。不宽恕的人是有病的,因为他认定自己未受宽恕………只有当病人开始听到自己所唱的挽歌,并质询它的合理价值时,救治才可能发生。除非亲耳听到,否则他不可能了解那竟是他唱给自己听的歌。听到它,是康复的第一步。那么,质询它,便成了他唯一的抉择。(奇迹课程补编P.31)
(三)在关系上,
心理治疗基本上是一种职业,治疗师与病患的关系只是医师为病患负责的单向关系,他需要的是专业技巧,个人的人生观或品德与治疗本身没有直接的关系。
《宽恕心理学》则视医师与病患同为人生的学徒,他们的会晤并非偶然,具有某种天意。外表上医师可能在病患之前领路,但最多是在前几步而已。医师本身亦非完人,有待治疗,就在他协助病患之际,他再次面对了人性多重的表象与表象下面的真相,当他教病患做一选择时,他也给自己了一个选择治愈的机会。
这样,他们便已建立了所谓的「神圣关系」了。这种互动所带来的治愈,绝不限于病患的一些毛病而已,它已深入了彼此的心灵。
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)
(四)治愈的关键–宽恕,
宽恕在早期心理学的眼中,属于宗教的德行,他们认为勉强患者宽恕,其实是一种误导,教他否认自己受到伤害的事实,未必合乎心理健康。他们选择的方式是分析问题,寻找弥补,或是透过工作、交友、嗜好等等途径另辟一个桃园。
直到近一二十年来,宽恕的观念突然流行起来,屡屡出现于西方的脱口秀与电视剧中。心理学以及医学也开始重视宽恕的治愈力量。但它们与《宽恕心理学》对宽恕的解读非常不同,传统的心理学在教人宽恕时,十分强调罪恶的真实性,只为帮助受害者摆脱他的痛苦,不得不饶恕他人的罪过,给对方「不配得到」的宽恕。这是极不公平也不合理的,但为了摆脱过去的阴影,这仍不失为一种权宜的解决办法。
《宽恕心理学》的宽恕却具有浓厚的形上意味。它基本上视人际之间的表面互动,都是在制约之下身不由己的表现,(若用宗教的术语,便是业力或原罪),因时因地而变幻莫测,既不真实,也损伤不了人的本性。它先肯定了「神所创造的人灵依旧完美如初」,因此每一个人都「配」得到宽恕。而且唯有宽恕才能一笔勾消我们肉眼肉身执以为真的种种幻相,唯有宽恕才可能彻底解除他人言行与过去的经验对我们的掌控,唯有宽恕,我们才会认出自己的本善而忆起自己源自何处

 

 

 

 

第二要诀:找回你我平等之处

摘自《宽恕就是爱》

作者 Paul Ferrini
玲莹 若水 译

找回「你我平等」的关键,即系于我们个人如何练习自我负责。只要我们对自己的生活负责,就不会把不适当的期待加在别人身上,或把不必要的重担揽到自己身上。

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。

我发现自己不断失去与别人平等的意识,我在此处被人捧,却在别处受人贬,不论哪一种待遇,都让我觉得不对劲。我渴望与大家平起平坐、面对面平等相待,但若要达此境地,唯一的方式便是对所发生的事负起责任来。

此刻,我感到被你伤害,但我了解你不是造成我受伤的主因,我的伤在你碰触到我这敏感地带以前早已存在。或许,我对你生气是因为你令我失望,但你并不是造成我失望的主因,而是我对你的期待构成了我被排斥的感受,而你正好路经我这一程。你像一面镜子般地出现,让我看清自己的期待是有问题的。我无法改变你已做或未做的事,但能改变我对你的期待。

我既然无法改变你,那么我唯一能做的只有接纳。我若不接纳你的真相,就会失去自己内心的平安。

耶稣说:「己所欲,施于人。」这是最根本的灵性修持,它和自我负责同样重要。只要你批判别人,你就干扰了自己内心的平安,因为你作的任何批判都会变成自我批判。你若接纳了别人,就等于祝福了自己,因为你所施予的必会重返自己身上。

重要的是,你该了解:任何想法都会返回原处。投射只是幻相,我憎恨你身上的某个特质,但那个憎恨仍留存于我内。我以为憎恨已跑到你身上了,然而唯有你接收下来,才会如此。你若根本没有察觉到我的憎恨,它就黏不住你。

任何想法都会返回原处。我无法面对你,那是因为我无法面对自己;我认为你应该受责备,那是因为我还没准备好面对自己的愧疚。

在生活中,我对别人的任何反应都是我的一面镜子。我在你身上看到自己无法接受的一面时,等于告诉我,那正是我不愿意接受自己的部分。凡是你无法满足我所期待的,无异于提醒我,那正是我必须给予自己的。

任何人际关系若非为我们订制了一个学习环境,就是订制了一个自我折磨的环境。我若能从你眼中看清自己,表示我确实有成长的愿心;而如果我所看到的全都是你的毛病,表示我已经拒绝了一个放下自我怀疑的机会。

我一向把你当成我无法成长的借口,但是这样并无法改变任何事情。无论我如何诿罪于你,我的成长终究是我自己的责任。你若笨到接受那根本不属于你的责任,不过显示出你也有必要去学习如何只为自己负责。婚姻关系中,不论谁强势,谁弱势,都有相同的人生课程,他们所演出的不过是同一场戏的正反角色而已。道家有一种说法:对立的两端并不像我们所想的那么遥远。

所以,找回你我平等之处就等于在练习失去平等,失去平等就等于练习找回平等。不信的话,你不妨问自己:「若未曾失去,我怎么可能找回来呢?」如果没有失去的感觉,就没有什么东西可找。若有失去的感觉,那么它必定来自记忆里那从未失落的一刻,「如果不曾拥有,我怎么可能失去呢?」

平等是真实的,不平等才是假的,但是藉由不平等,我才能学习平等。当我真正了解平等时,就会明白它其实一直都存在着,我并未曾失去过它,我只是误以为失去而已。

「以为我已经失去了」以及「明白我从未真正失去」,涵括了宽恕的整个内涵,也就是从第一招「承认我在生气」,到最后一招「对始终存在的内在平安敞开心灵」。当我了解到没有什么好宽恕的,我才会知道我终获宽恕了。《奇迹课程》说:「凡是真实的,不受任何威胁;凡是不真实的,根本就不存在。」

我从未失去自己的纯洁无罪,我的兄弟姊妹亦然,我们只是在一剎那,或是一、二天,甚且一辈子失去它似的。然而,时间的长短并不重要,因为只要我们清醒过来,那个梦就被遗忘了。活在幻相里,不会使你变坏,只会延续你的痛苦。当你准备好时,你自然会放下那个痛苦。你一旦这么做了,那么你苦过两分钟或十年都不重要了,因为它已经不存在。

把这份理解应用在我们的人际关系上,不是一件容易的事。物质世界的种种以及我们对世界的看法,都是我们自己加上去的;同样的,我们的人际关系和所有喜怒哀乐也是我们自找的。或许我们还没准备好去看清这一切不过是一场不平等的梦魇。只要我们一生气,那就是我们的世界。

所有的痛苦都是因为我们着眼于某些根本不存在的东西,而我们之所以认定它们存在,是因为我们的想法与信念老是在某些特定的人或境上绕不出来,更因为那些人或境都陷于同一个关系里,使我们更加肯定自己的观念是可*的。其实,这样做,不过是招募了一堆新角色,使事情更戏剧化、复杂化而已。

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。

我们之间虽无绝对的界线,但除非我们承认自己经验的有限,并尊重别人的经验,否则我们是不可能合一的。我们不必同意彼此的意见,但务必彼此尊重。只要彼此相互尊重,我们是可能达成某种程度的协议。缺少了尊重,亦即缺少了「健康而合理的界线」,那么协议就成了强迫性的了,而「被迫的协议」是多么讽刺的名词。

找出彼此的平等,就是承认观看事物的角度有很多种,而我们知道的只是其中一种而已。倾听别人,尊重他们的想法和经验,能帮助我们向更广大的实相开放,能使我们打开观念的牢狱,而自由地走向光天化日。它帮助我们了解自己知识的有限,使我们得以迈向未知的世界,不论是踽踽独行,或是携手并进。

找出彼此的平等,就是承认观看事物的角度有很多种,而我们知道的只是其中一种而已。倾听别人,尊重他们的想法和经验,能帮助我们向更广大的实相开放

 

 

 

 

 

第三要诀:信任自己的生命

摘自《宽恕就是爱》

作者 Paul Ferrini
玲莹 若水 译

 

我们的生活常把我们逼到自己的极限,然后就把我们丢在那里,而且告诉我们:「你的生命决不受限于这界线内的一切。」

为了证实这一睿见,我们看到自己一直在和自订的每一道限制抟斗。每当我们采取一种立场(哪种立场都无所谓),我们已把一个实体分裂为二了,不论我们用甚么名称来表达:好与坏,男与女,高与低,我们已由一个整体营造出二元对立的状态了。每当我说「我」,就产生了你,意谓着「非我」;即使我说「我们」,也意谓着「不是他们」。

不论我如何努力扩展自己的意识境界,仍会不断遇到令人难以接受的人事环境。在那里,我划下了一道线,圈出自己的势力范围。线的这边是可接受的,而另一边则无法接受,这就是我意识之旅的真面目。我的整个生命乃是一个不断划下界线再撤销界线的过程。我若能看出这一真相,便会学着对自己和别人放轻松一点,因为我知道那些界线都是虚幻不实的,只是我的想法认定它们是真的。一旦我改变自己的想法,那条界线就消失了。

我一直努力界定自己存在的定义,想活得更有条理一些。然而我愈努力,似乎愈糟糕,不论怎么努力,都难以掌控自己的生活,我迟早都会面对这一现实的。而且,我迟早也会了解到,我此生的目的不是为了控制自己的生活,而是与它携手合作。

说出自己的渴望,并没有什么不对。但是,我只能选择生活给我的一切,不管那是不是我想要的。我常会认定发生在我身上的一切并非我想要的;事后,我才慢慢领悟,那正是我当时最需要的。慢慢的,我明白了一点:原来我并不知道自己需要什么。

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。

大脑有多重呢?生命力比那还轻。灵魂有多重呢?生命力甚至比它还轻!它轻到无法称磅,而且不受地心引力影响,然而,它的浩瀚无边,让整个宇宙都鞭长莫及!

当我正视真实的自己时,我看到无限的存在,无内也无外。我看到我与你原来毫无分别,与神无异。我们全都一样,都是生命力无始亦无终的运转!

当我活在自己的界线内时,每件芝麻小事似乎都很重要。当生命开始插手,并拭去那些界线时,我才了解,所有我曾视为重要的事其实毫无意义。每个生命起伏的波动都是一种净化,溶化了所有的执着,清扫了一切批判和评价。正如同我的朋友杰米在最近的一场聚会后所说的:「我是这样地喜悦,喜悦到无法填写评估表了。」

我生命的漩涡逐渐缓慢下来,形成一种优雅的舞步,多棒呀!我开始发现目前的生活其实并没有问题,根本不须改变任何事。我无须改变人际关系、工作,或住所,才能使自己快乐。此时此刻的我已是快乐的。生命降临于我,我只是单纯而深刻地拥抱着它。

我不知道下一刻将会发生什么事,那已不重要了,无论什么都好,因为我已把恐惧和批判置于身后。过去的阴影污染不了我的纯洁无罪,未来的期待也不会使我失去活出自己或让你活出自己的自由,因为我已了解,我现在没有问题,你现在也没有问题,生活本身本来就没有问题。那就是我的天堂与净土,也是我的生命本质,其余的只是尺寸和形状而已,那些外在的形式最后都将归于尘土。

非实质之物无法涵盖实质,界限无法涵盖无相的虚空,有限的心智无法涵盖天心。但是,天心却能涵容一切,它是永远空着的杯子,无论我们倒入多少美酒,它永不满溢。那是我们终将抵达的福乐极境,那是我们唇边的祷词,是我们相互敞开心灵时记起来的那首被遗忘的歌,它说:「欢迎,各位兄弟姊妹们,你们离开时的位置至今仍是空着,正等着你们回来,我们终于团圆了。」

当我活在自己的界线内时,每件芝麻小事似乎都很重要。当生命开始插手,并拭去那些界线时,我才了解,所有我曾视为重要的事其实毫无意义。

第四要诀:铭记「生命是爱」

摘自《宽恕就是爱》

作者 Paul Ferrini
玲莹 若水 译

 

生活中总会出现一些事件或境遇深深震憾着我们,痛击我们,硬把我们拉出自己的安乐窝,例如失去工作、亲友去世,或人际关系破裂。于是,我们深受打击,内心沮丧,意志消沉,感到自己完全失败了。

表面上看似负面的每个事件,首先会勾起我们的罪咎,让我们不知不觉地掉入情绪的黑洞里。在那里,我们毫无价值,天地无情,亲友也漠不关心,我们的生命既空虚又无意义。谁不曾有过这种经验?这种情境不只违反了我们的期待,它是有始以来存在性的悲哀,它是「失乐园」,它是阴森的涕泣之苦,它是整个人类的集体创伤。

我们并不知道,我们所哀悼的乃是我们与生命根源之间原本亲密的关系,我们与生命之主的联结变得如此不堪一击。我们愈想过自己的日子,愈感到生命的疏离。只要我们的焦点还集中在状似空虚的表相上,生命就愈显得支离破碎。

我们在孤绝中哀号,以为没有人听到。其实,在这伤痕累累及难熬的沉寂中,生命之主不断向我们发言。我们已经被挖空了,准备聆听了,我们总算谦虚下来,准备求援了,我们在绝望中抱着希望。我们逐渐体会到那儿一定有东西,虽然不知道那是什么。

你若从未有过这类经验,我无从为你描述。你若有过这种经历,但尚未感受到内在的悸动,经验过一道暖流,或在痛苦中听过希望之翼正飒飒作响,那么我也无法帮你的忙。这个地方是我们每个人都必须单独面对的,从这个地方出来的人,没有不改变的。在这曾是伤心之处,翅膀修补好了,旧创被洗净了,罪咎从它的无底杯里泄空了,黑夜已过了夜半,正等待黎明到来,封在心底的伤口已在皮肤表面渗出了点点血迹,一个身躯出现在空荡荡的十字架上了。

每一个人,无论是男是女,来到这世上,都不是来受苦的,而是来摆脱痛苦的。有些人认为只要否认,就不会感到痛苦,他们迟早会发现那是不可能的。指向欢乐之路必须穿过痛苦,那是人生旅途所提供的唯一助缘,人们在这条路上会出其不意地与它照面,而在开始时,人们甚至不知道那是一个助缘。

在痛苦里,我找到了宽恕;在痛苦里,我找到了神的爱。然而,除非我允许这一切发生,否则它不会来临。虽然这可能必须经历很长的一段时间,但是唯有我开始求助,我才会看到解脱的希望。当我对那前所未见的存在敞开心灵时,我会感到它已融入我内了,我感到它稳住我的脚步,我觉得它与我同进退,步步引导我的人生旅途。

有些人从未认出这个助缘。他们必须学会给予自己的东西,若拒而不给,则别人也得不到;他们必须学会给予别人的东西,若拒而不给,则自己也得不到。他们转身面对着镜子,却认不出那个从镜中回望着自己的影像,他们不惜打破镜子,想用破碎的镜片,硬划出一条通往自由之路。

然而,自由并不是*一双利爪夺取的,每个利爪都隐隐记得自己有过一对翅膀,那对翅膀正在我们心灵寂静的一角等候着展翅高飞的机会。每个灵魂都与生命之主有约。

在会晤的那一剎那,我们终于知道自己从未落单过,终于知道所有的痛苦、分离、罪咎及羞愧只是幻相而已,终于知道我们是被爱的而且无时无刻不在被爱当中。不一会儿,我们也许又会滑落到那震憾的一刻之外,我们的生活再度庸俗乏味,我们的眼光变得狭窄,我们缩回自己的小天地,我们的注意力溃散,常常烦燥得坐立不安。于是,我们需要营造出一个新的危机,需要挻而走险,以便能再度摔回地面。

我们实在不必老玩这种痛苦游戏,但我们却喜欢这样。我们「小小的愿心」似乎已经离不开痛苦了。没有痛苦,我们就不会屈服;没有痛苦,我们就会忘记生活并非我们所能掌控的。没有锥心刺骨的痛,我们会相信自己是真正的老板,自以为知道自己在做什么。

显然,没有比这更离谱的想法了。那正是一切痛苦和烦恼所要教我们的功课,也是一切幻相要我们学的功课。我们好似掌控了一切,但实际上并不是。我们自以为知道自己需要甚么,实际上并不知道。

我们努力追求的每件事,所看到的每件事,都充满了自己制造的虚幻。我们追寻圆满,但从未找到,因为它不在我们自身之外,也不属于小我的心境。它与追寻或追寻的游戏规则毫不相干,它毫不理会我们这虚幻世界的运作法则。

你开始明白了吗?每个失落,每个痛苦,都会把我们带到内在空虚之处,而那正是生命之主所在之地,祂就在那里等着我们。我们一旦想填满那个空位,祂就只好暂时隐退。任何的沈湎、期待,或信念体系都可能横梗在生命之主与我们的中间,占领那寂静之地。我们若想与祂同在,必须空着双手,不带任何想法地前来,才可能听到祂的声音,而且与祂同住。时候一到,我们终会了解,这种境界不在外边,而是在心内;时候一到,我们终会领悟的。

这地方不是指禅房或教堂,而是被我们的意向圣化了的那一剎那。当我们允许它出现时,当我们愤怒而懂得求助时,它就开启了。当我们生活出了轨,被搅得天翻地覆,开始准备求助时,圣殿便出现了。

在我们情绪激荡而失去内心平安之刻,无论是甚么原因造成的,我们必须把一切放下,才进得了那个圣殿。我们必须放下批判的念头、评论的冲动,或对眼前事物所下的定义;我们必须放下所有的认知,才进得去。

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。

活在「生命是爱」的意识里,意即领悟到我们完全无法凭自己去理解任何事情,也就是放下我们需要理解或掌控的本能,同时学会信任每件事的发生都有它的原因,虽然那是无法用肉眼见到的。我们生命中的每个遭遇都会带来一个无声的祝福,即使我仍无法感受得到。

当我受伤时,愿我记住天地有情,愿我不评断或批判,或自以为知道原因,愿我不再攻击或防卫、否认或辩护,愿我只记得生命是爱。那便是我所需要的一切,全都在那里了。

愿生活在幻境中的我,能找到这单纯的生命真相。其它的一切,在我所拥有的大爱之前,顿时黯然失色。在那渗透了你我和任何开放的心灵的大爱前,我的一切希望显得如此无足轻重。

在人间权力斗争的游戏里,愿我臣服于这单纯的真理,生命之主一视同仁地爱着你和我,你我之间怎会有优胜劣败之分呢?

在充满内咎的人生游戏里,愿我记住自己是纯洁无罪的,你也如此。无论我对你做了什么,或你对我做了什么,都已被宽恕了。真的,在造物主眼里,它从未存在过,那只是我们的幻梦游戏而已。

你认为造物主可能了解攻击、自杀、抢夺和虐待是怎么一回事吗?你认为爱之神会把人在绝望中的反扑举动当真吗?若是,那么祂必会报复、降下大火,焚毁众生,处罚我们的罪过。这么一来,祂就不再是爱之神了。真相马上变成相对的,暴力成了神的属性,也变成我们的天赋了。我们岂是愤怒之神的儿女?若是,我们在此涕泣之谷岂有得救的指望?若是,幻相便统治了一切。

你相信生命之主是怎样的,就会相信自己和你的弟兄姊妹也是怎样的,这一点必须了解透彻。你若把恶魔高举在上奉为神明,或是把它当作你的罪过与内咎而踩在脚下,那么,你这一生,不论遇到什么人,都会在他们的脸上看到邪恶。你究竟愿意与邪恶或是良善同行呢?那是你的选择,一种选择肯定了幻相,另一种则会揭开面纱,把你带入真相。

活在「生命是爱」的意识里,便会感到没有任何坏事会落在你身上,因为坏事怎么可能落在神的儿女身上呢?事实上,那是绝不可能的。有些事情看似坏事,但我并不知道它们真正的含意,也没有能力去判断它们,我是完全纯洁无罪与自由的,因为全知全能的那一位会引导我度过这一天、这一小时、这充满悲伤与泪水的一刻。 

一旦坏事发生,我发现自己不是自责,就是怪罪别人,但我看到了,那是因为我的理性在充当向导,妄自评估那本来无所谓好或坏的事情。所以,我愿让事件呈现原状,既不否认,也不辩护,只是允许每件事呈现它的本来面目,然后说:「请显示我回家的路吧,我已失去内心的平安了。」

我的生命原是一首祈求平安及真相的祷词。在外表欠缺爱时,我毫不羞愧地呼求爱,因为爱是我渴望的,也是我真正需要的。我们是有福的一群,因为我们正慢慢地移向光明,走过黑暗地带,穿过自己的痛苦,越过自己的悲伤、愧咎和苦难。这就是我们穿越黑暗的旅途,我们怀着信心祈求,迎向第一道光明。爱人在呼叫心爱的人,那充满爱心的「渡者」必会现身。他一现身,便会将我们领到生命之主前,他是光明的使者,会亲自引导我们走出黑暗。

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!

外在的样子并不重要,重要的是内部。表相之下永远有一个慈悲的声音说:「这是我衷心喜悦的儿女。」每个表相之下都充满无条件的爱,它是维系宇宙的力量。这个爱使得花朵在春风中绽放,使得海浪不断拍打海岸。表相下面的神圣内涵会自动地向外延伸,有如呼吸一般,给我们气息,爱抚着我们,把我们交托给生命。

即使是一朵花,一片海洋,一个思想,我们都是彼此的一部分,现在直到永远,愿我们记住这一点。

永远铭记不忘。

愿平安与你同在。

次人格
王敬伟
前记:
上个月(12/9-11)的研习会中有一个次人格的活动,有同学提出次人格是如何形成及要如何处理的问题。对这个问题,我当时作了一些回答,事后想想,还有一些需要补充之处。所以,我想在这里作一个比较完整的说明(当然,这也是我那个要完美的次人格在作祟)。
在心理学的用语中,所谓人格,就是我们一般所说的个性。通常我们的个性有许多的面向,譬如说我们会说一个人他脾气很好,但拗起来的时候很拗;或者说他做事很认真负责,不完成绝不罢休。那么我们可以说,前者的个性有一个好好先生的部分,但也有一个絶不让步的部分;后者有一个很负责的部分。这些部分我们就称之为次人格。
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。
本来这样也不会有事,但是小我专门搞分裂,而且是要二元对立的,这样冲突才会难以解决,而且会越演越烈。每一个次人格通常会有一个相对的,就是方向相反,但程度相当的另一个次人格。例如越是负责的人,内在就越想丢下一切,什么都不要管的次人格。越听话的人,内在就有一个越叛逆的次人格。这些相对的次人格通常会是隐性的,被压抑的,但他不会因为压抑而消失,压抑只会更累积他的能量,所以我们经常会感觉到内在有两股力量在拉扯。
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……"
所以,次人格本身并不会造成困扰,造成困扰的是僵化。坚持只能有某些所谓"积极、正面"次人格才能出现,而不允许其它次人格出现,甚至不承认,更严重的不知道其它次人格的存在,使得台面下的矛盾更加强烈,终至爆发。
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。
若要处理次人格,必须将自己提升到次人格之上,才可能看清它们的动机与演出方式;这种位居其上的反照能力,即是「抉择者」。然而,我们经年累月地演着小我的戏码,逐渐陷入剧情中,而忘却自己是编剧者,只敢在既定的现实中选来选去。状似自由选择,其实始终跳不出小我的掌心。因此面对次人格时,最重要的是要先呼求圣灵出场,只有和圣灵在一起,才会不批判,才能看清楚。否则如果是用小我的眼光来看,我们只会批判指责这些次人格,是他们造成我们的困扰,必除之而后快,如此又落入小我的圈套,制造另一个二元对立,离看清真相就越来越远了。
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。
(后记:本文在改过三次以后,遵照若水指示,再加头加尾。看来我那个要完美的次人格还不是最厉害的。)

医师,医治你自己吧!
摘自若水《点亮生命的奇迹》一书
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。
正如他早已料中的,与他结褵了二十年的妻子终于决定跟他分手了。简医师在此打击下,变得极其忧郁,极其易怒,不久便染上了酗酒的毛病。他眼看着自己每况愈下,却不知如何挽回。只好继续忙着诊断、治疗别人,对自己的创伤束手无策。
根据简医师日后的告白,他从小就感到自己是个没人爱的孩子,在学校里,因为有阅读障碍,也充满了挫折。在这浓重的自卑感下他所发展出来的弥补办法,竟然是「自我惩罚」。他会故意把事情搞砸,来证明别人对他的负面评判是正确的。冥冥中,他以为自己活得愈内疚,别人才会愈得意,而对他好一点。没想到,他的自暴自弃却招来更多的愤怒与指责,使他更觉得自己一无是处。
由于他从未察觉这是小我的自卫模式,以为是天性使然,所以明知这种反应会带给自己麻烦,依旧按此模式混下去,在他的专业形象之下,活出一个自认为不可爱又没价值的人,最后不得不藉助酒精来逃避自己。
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。」
事隔大约半年以后,茱丽迁到加州,再度提起这部《奇迹课程》,问他是否想要翻阅一下?简医师至今还记得他当时不屑的口吻:「好吧!但我只答应读一页,仅此一页。」当他回到家翻开书时,他这一生首次听到内心的声音说:「医师,医治你自己吧!这是你回家的路。」根据他的回忆:「我实在无法形容那个感受,在那一剎那,自己好似与整个世界与天地主宰都成了一个,我知道自己的一生就要改变了。」
在最初几个月里,简医师还抱着怀疑的心态,深怕自己被骗或着魔了,直到他会晤了海伦与比尔,发觉这两位「相当平凡而且正常」的知识份子,不仅没有装神弄鬼,连海伦自己对这本书都充满了矛盾与抗拒。那时,他才开始认真地阅读,而且预感到这部书对他的帮助绝对不是他所能预料的。
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。
「心态诊疗中心」一改传统心理治疗的原则,不再以「治疗病症」为目标。因为根据《奇迹课程》的定义,整个人类其实都活在「神智失常」(insanity)的状态下,所有的疾病基本上都是因为感受不到自己内在爱的本质,也无法给出这份爱而形成的心病。这种与生命的「断层」,有时反射在自己身上,破坏自己的免疫能力,有时投射在人际关系上,带给彼此很大的苦楚。所以「心态诊疗中心」一再提醒工作人员,他们不是治疗病症,而是彼此帮助,一起活出「片刻」的清明神智(sanity)而已。所以员工与病患的关系是「互为师生」,他们甚至称病患为「同事」(co-worker)。
《奇迹课程》从不要求我们完全恢复清明而正常的神智,它只要求人间的学生试着活出「一个剎那」的清明就够了。根据这些工作人员的临床经验,光凭这几个剎那,便足以扭转人的一生了。
简医师参加了茱丽在谛伯伦组成的第一个「奇迹读书会」,一起研读这本奇书,在1979年的聚会里,他感受到一个新的启示,决定把「心态诊疗中心」变成完全免费的辅导机构。他的秘书听了紧张万分地说:「你要聆听圣灵的声音,那是你的事情,但我有一堆的帐单要付,这样搞下去,迟早要破产的。我看你真该去看心理医师了!」
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。
如今,许多心理工作人员受到他的精神感召,陆续在自己的地区成立了「心态治疗中心」,免费协助癌症病患以及任何面对人生困境的

 

張貼在 未分類 | 發表留言