是時候徹底變革我們培養轉世祖古的方式了──宗薩蔣揚欽哲仁波切

       是時候徹底變革我們培養轉世祖古的方式了──宗薩蔣揚欽哲仁波切

      

       最近第四世蔣貢康楚仁波切發布聲明稱他已放棄之前所承擔的角色，這一聲明激起了來自很多不同角度的複雜感受。

       一方面來講，作爲在過去許多生世都曾與蔣貢康楚有著緊密聯結的蔣揚欽哲的轉世祖古，我所關心的是佛法，尤其是利美（不分教派）這一我們兩者的前世曾共同倡導的精神。

       而另一方面，作爲人類，我們就是無法擺脫做對比的習氣，而我也發現自己會在我那一代祖古與現今這一代祖古之間做對比。

       我們那一代的祖古們經歷過很多艱辛，比如整整一年都只吃米飯和土豆，而沒有其他食物；乘坐印度最廉價的公共交通旅行；睡在火車站台上；六七個月的時間裏我們口袋裏裝著不到10盧比；一支鉛筆要湊合著用上一整年；甚至必須與其他18位學生共享課本。作爲一個孩子，我只有過兩個玩具，還是我自己親手做出來的。

       更糟的是，我的輔導老師讓我在一個房間裏禁足，不僅是幾個星期或幾個月，而是整整一年，以致於即使是去趟廁所也算得上是一次期待已久的短途旅行。我們也經常會遭受語言及肢體上的虐待，甚至於打到我們頭破血流，以及用蕁麻抽打我們。

       我不是在爲這些行爲辯護或美化它們。但是對比來說，我們現今一代的祖古真是受到了十足的溺愛，而且日子算是最好過的了。不過進一步思量的話，如今這些年輕的祖古們也面臨著屬於他們的挑戰，這些挑戰在某些方面遠比我們那一代的挑戰更爲困難。

       世界變得更小也更開放，人們的期待也變得高了許多。尤其是一些背負著傳承歷史的祖古，經常會成爲各方公衆的關注焦點。這對那些年幼即被推上寶座、被賦予諸如「法王」的頭銜、所到之處都會有人爲之吹奏喇叭的祖古們來說尤其如此。

       所有這些大張旗鼓的舉動都抬高了公衆的期待，且不當地將這些孩子置於巨大的壓力之下。他們經常成爲公衆焦點的一個關鍵原因就是當今的宗教機構總是不斷地將他們置於聚光燈下。這一現象在未來的幾年裏也看不出什麽減輕的跡象。

       在這些巨大變化的時代背景下，第四世蔣貢康楚仁波切的決定讓我們不得不承認和檢視現今教導與撫養祖古們的方式中所存在的一些根本缺陷。這是一個非常複雜的主題，但它也必須得到解決，而這正是本篇文章的目的。

      

       【爲什麽年輕的祖古們需要接受訓練】：

       一個主要的複雜因素來自於學生和弟子們不知道該如何在他們出於真實的佛法修行而生出的對這些年輕男孩的淨觀，與他們文化傳統中經常將諂媚與崇拜置於淨觀之上的成見之間取得平衡。

       作爲金剛乘的修行人，我們被認爲應該對自己的上師抱持淨觀。對那些具備這個能力的人來說，即使是上師的外在顯相改變了，這種淨觀和虔誠心也不該有所動搖。實際上，我見過一些偉大的修行人，他們看待自己上師年輕的轉世時沒有任何疑惑，而是超越了對轉世者特定的年齡、體型、外貌或是國籍一類的外顯，而清楚地從中看到他們真實的上師。理想上，這是一個修行人應該要做到的。

       當然這並不是說，被認定爲一位大成就者之轉世的孩子沒有學習和接受訓練的責任。如果，在最好的情況下，這個孩子是個出衆且真實的轉世，展現出了他是自己上一世生命的完整延續，那麽當然任何的訓練和教養都顯得武斷。但若非這種情況，那麽這個孩子就需要被訓練，以便能夠爲他/她自己的行爲負起責任。

       因此，即使上一世成就者的弟子對其轉世擁有淨觀，並全心全意的獻身於他們的職責，這位祖古自身也需要履行他被認定所代表的轉世所承載的角色和責任。

       現今的事實是，盡管這些孩子可能是真實的轉世祖古，他們之中的許多人卻甚至沒有學過自己擦鼻子，更別說是要完全地展現出他們上一世所具備的諸如遍知一類的品質了。

       從一個生世轉到下一個生世，可不像是從一個房間搬去另一個房間。時代流轉中發生著巨大的變化，要讓轉世祖古展現出他們的真實本性和品質，也就需要新的訓練形式。我們需要重新檢視這些年輕祖古實際需要的訓練，然而出自於文化成見的盲目弟子式的崇拜掩蓋掉了這一點。

       實際上，需要注意的是，這些祖古經常並非真正的轉世，只是在孩童時就被貼上了“祖古”的標籤，人們希望由此利益到這些孩子以及其他人。在這樣的情況下，「祖古」這個詞就只是個象徵性的標籤，而這樣的孩子如果不經過恰當的訓練也就不會彰顯出什麽有成就的品質。

       無論是哪一種情況，這些年輕的祖古仍然只是孩子，需要接受訓練，以恰當的方式撫養長大，給予灌頂和教授——而且不僅是智識上和學術上的教授。我們需要讓他們在自信的同時也懂得謙遜。我們需要讓他們看似神聖的同時也不失爲一個常人。

       而且其中最爲重要的是，我們需要讓他們成爲真正的精神修行者。畢竟，他們是要成爲精神領袖或傳承的持有者，而不僅僅是政治領袖或村落首領。因此如果他們不是真實的佛法修行者，那未來還有什麽希望呢？

       【當前的教學方式中存在的根本缺陷】：

       我們的教學以及撫養祖古們的方式並沒有與時俱進，而且我必須說，西藏人，尤其是在寺院裏的西藏人，極爲頑固並且抗拒變革。

       這其中也有一些表面上的改變，僅僅是因爲，如果教師們繼續沿用以前培養我們的方式對待現在的學生，就會被人送進監獄。如今的祖古們可能不再遭受暴打了，甚至可能有周末假期，有充足的家人探訪和一大堆玩具。但這並不意味著教學方法從根本上有所改變或是適應了時代。

       今天的祖古們被置於寶座之上，並被隨從圍繞，而對這個隨從來說，他更感興趣的經常是如何延續（這個祖古的）機構，而不是培養出下一代的精神和傳承領袖。所有那些隨身配備，包括隨衆、地毯、錦緞、玉盞，可以讓祖古看起來與衆不同，但這並不意味著他接受過訓練。

       所有這些喧鬧似乎在他們年幼時就開始了，因爲如果你給一個街頭流浪兒用香波洗澡，再讓他坐在錦緞上，他也會至少在幾個小時裏看起來讓人印象深刻。如果一個非常年幼的祖古甚至能在這種不尋常的氛圍下微笑，信徒們就會將它解讀爲某種神奇的表徵。

       然而這種以做秀替代真正的訓練的狀況，已經發展成了一個嚴重的問題，因爲它對年輕的祖古們施加了一種隱形卻強烈的壓力。畢竟，沒有哪種壓力比來自他人的期待更強大且嚴峻。

       因此就算沒有上千雙眼，哪怕只有上百雙眼盯著這些祖古的所作所爲並且品頭論足時，他們可能就會將自己隔離並關閉在自己所能想到的最孤獨也最與世隔絕的地帶裏。

       【被誤導的對於形象和財富的關注----造成壓力的因素之一】：

       這個世界與日俱增的物質主義及其影響已經滲入了我們的寺院和宗教組織，高階喇嘛、尤其是傳承持有者過著鋪張奢華且隔絕於凡俗現實的生活，幾乎是帝王一般！

       這也許有些效用——而且我並不是說它沒發生過效用——在西藏，很少人會提問質疑，極少有人審查，而且人們有著巨大的虔誠。然而從長期來看，那些本應出離於世間的高階喇嘛卻過著奢侈如暴發戶一般的生活，帶著金錶和手鐲，這樣的現象向外界傳遞著嚴重錯誤的訊號。

       最首要的是，這種「模式」完全不鼓勵人們修習佛法，尤其是對那些新加入寺院、思維還並不很嚴密的年輕僧侶來說。畢竟，釋迦牟尼佛選擇以赤腳托缽的形象示現於世是有理由的——因爲這種苦行、出離和簡樸的象徵有其真實的含義。

       我並不是說今日的高階喇嘛們都應該突然改爲托缽而行。但他們展現出某種樸實的謙遜，以及簡單生活的形象卻是非常有必要的。

       一個很好的需要改變的例子，是一年一度在菩提伽耶的菩提樹下進行冬季祈願法會和慶典期間很多喇嘛的行爲。我時常在想，其他的佛教徒，比如小乘佛教的修行者，會怎樣看待我們置身寶座上的喇嘛甚至坐得比一些佛像還要高的現象。

       當然，密乘之道教導我們視自己的上師爲一切諸佛的總集。然而在如菩提伽耶這樣的地方，那些佛像和符號對一般大衆、乃至對所有佛教徒來說都有著深遠的意義，而其中沒有那尊佛像會位於佛陀之上。因此菩提伽耶是一個讓我們的喇嘛開始修習簡樸和謙遜的好地方。

       我可以想象得到，一位富有的僧人或傳承領袖如何爲一些遊蕩的西藏人或過於熱情的中國學生留下深刻的印象。但是有意無意的，這確實也樹立了一種不好的習俗，好似一個喇嘛必須擁有財富或階層。

       從佛教徒最基本的觀點來看，這樣的訊息是完全錯誤的。畢竟，對於佛教徒來說，佛陀是這個世界上迄今爲止最爲重要的人。而佛陀最重要的舉動就是戰敗摩羅，贏得證悟。這一偉大的事件發生在一個簡樸的、由草和菩提葉片製成的坐墊上，而不是發生在寶座、錦緞或其他諸如此類的裝飾物上面。

       簡而言之，當前對於財富和特權的關注成爲了祖古訓練中的一個組成部分，這不僅會不自覺地將我們年輕的祖古們變成被寵壞的頑童，也與佛陀的教育及其中的核心價值觀相悖。

       【由特權形成的牢獄】：

       有意或無意地，如今的寺院找到並爲之加冕成爲祖古的孩子們貌似經常恰好來自於富有或有權勢的家族。不管動機如何，如今的祖古被用作寺院的主要看點，因爲絕大部分的人來寺院是爲了觐見祖古或是高階喇嘛，而非來參訪寺院本身。如果這個祖古的名字前還綴有「法王」或是「尊貴的」這樣的詞彙，再附上對這個祖古是過去哪位偉大成就者之轉世的奇異描述時就更是如此了。

       實際上，諸如「法王」這樣的詞彙並非源自佛教，而是從基督教中直接借用而來的。因此藏傳喇嘛們對這種來自基督教的頭銜有所執迷，真可謂頭腦錯亂，當他們將法王的稱號綴於一個蹣跚學步的孩子的名字前面時就更讓人感到尴尬。實際上，基督教徒們一定會嘲笑我們，尤其是因爲一位被任命的主教在被授予諸如教皇這樣的頭銜時，平均年齡都已在60多歲。

       而且，由於這些年輕的轉世喇嘛對於寺院來說是如此重要的資産，我們可以預見到背後隱藏著對於尋找和加冕祖古的迫切，因此如今祖古的數量比我們三四十年前所能見到的要多得多。

       實際上，在接受加冕坐床及與之相關的大肆宣傳之後，很常見的就是，這些祖古經常從非常年幼開始，就被賦予了開展某種項目或工程的責任——或是保護環境、或是建造佛塔、佛學院、或是建造一些巨型佛像。幾乎好像是要成爲一個好的喇嘛，他就必須做出個工程。

       但是更深入的審視這些行爲就會發現，這些經常只是創造收入的工具，而且我們知道西藏體系對于接受公衆捐贈的透明程度和管理能力都是多麽的匱乏。

       東南亞的盲目虔誠及慷慨供養的文化習俗與西藏沒有捐贈複核機制及收支管理的封建式祖古體系的結合，也成爲了現代祖古訓練系統向前發展的阻礙。那些年紀尚輕的男孩最終忘記了錢並不是從樹上長出來的，也對自己面前堆積如山的供養背後流血流汗的人們沒有什麽概念。

       面對如此之多的財富、特權和崇拜作爲犒賞，我們不難發現有許多家長渴望自己的孩子被封爲高階喇嘛。他們對孩子將因此而承受哪些知之甚少。

       成爲一個轉世祖古，實際上非常像是被扔進了最令人難以想象的監獄。把孩子置於最舒適的環境，配上最鮮亮的錦緞，給他冰淇淋、玩具、禮物和尊敬，同時又有系統地讓他失去成長爲能夠應對人類世界的正常人的機會。

       真正的痛苦會在這些年輕祖古長大的時候到來，他們無法控制自己的荷爾蒙，對世界的真實狀況一無所知，並感到自己一無是處。他們甚至不知道和這個世界互動的最基本的方式，更不要說是怎樣做一位領袖了。這樣的祖古怎麽可能成爲一個真正的精神導師並且引導學生們呢？

       【僞善的溫床】：

       在持續且高強度的公衆聚焦之下，試圖保持我們年輕的祖古們享有特權和尊重的形象，不可避免地會助長僞善。

       舉例來說，年輕的祖古被教導說他們必須堅守梵行，保持僧侶的身份。但是在他們如此年輕的年紀，就以是否禁欲作爲考量他們清淨與否的標准，這對他們造成了巨大的壓力，而且也會很危險，因爲這樣的外在標準實際上是一種不贏即輸的遊戲。畢竟說來，我們人類在荷爾蒙面前真的沒有多少自控能力。

       甚至從戒律上來講，是根本不允許將禁欲的誓言強加在一個人的自由意志之上，或是作爲高壓的結果的，而這樣的情形卻經常發生在如今的年輕僧侶們身上。值得銘記在心的是，釋迦牟尼佛自己也是在結過婚有了孩子之後才做出了出離於此的決定的。

       長期以來社會壓力變得如此強大，以至於之前有一位康楚仁波切決定還俗時，他所處僧團中的一個人甚至想要暗殺他。

       當然，不可否認的是，一些在幼年就被強迫接受禁欲的年輕僧人最終成長成爲了真正優秀的僧侶。然而更常見的是，在當今高強度的社會壓力及網絡娛樂之下，強加上禁欲的要求，讓我們很多年輕的祖古不得不掩藏自己的“錯誤”，並因此變得僞善。

       當這些祖古們發現他們的同伴，有些時候甚至是他們的指導老師也同樣僞善而行時，他的這種僞裝會進一步被強化。一個助長這類僞善行爲的教學體系是嚴重誤導他人的，並且最終會導致非常怪異的行爲現象。

       【當今及未來世界所需要的教學方法】：

       從另一方面講，我真的對拉章（labrang，祖古的內閣）、僧人、以及其他肩負訓練我們年輕轉世喇嘛之責任的人們感到由衷的同情。他們中的大多數人都有著非常好的動機，他們僅僅是不知道如何撫養當今這個時代的孩子，僅僅是不知道該怎樣調整以適應當今的情況。

       除了學術上的訓練之外，我們年輕的祖古們需要學習如何排隊以得到那些需要排隊才能獲得的東西；需要學習如何分享該分享的東西；需要學習其他一些人類禮儀與社會契約方面的基本內容。當他們被無微不至的照料和給予時，很多祖古們甚至連諸如“分享”這樣最基本的人類常識也完全沒機會學習，因而無法招架這個世界。他們不僅僅需要領導力訓練，也需要人類關係方面最基礎的課程。

       指導老師和侍者們必須知道，除了沮喪之外，這些年輕祖古中的其中一些人甚至燒傷自己或用剃須刀割傷自己——就像其他困惑的青少年們所做的那樣。這類行爲警醒我們去意識到，當前是一個多麽危險的時代。

       在這個時代，僅僅是要撫養一個尋常的孩子，尤其是一個青少年，都格外具有挑戰，這是所有爲人父母都知道的。那麽，撫養一個將來要執掌遠遠超過於一個家族資産或家族傳承的孩子或青少年，又該是多麽的困難呢?況且我們的祖古訓練者們對於在當今世界撫養孩子所需要的基礎人類訓練方面完全沒有相關的知識和經驗。

       遺憾的是，這些祖古訓練者們關心的更多的是這些年輕的孩子、這些常常是蹣跚學步中的小孩，在公衆面前的行爲舉止以及如何被公衆所對待，而不是將這些孩子作爲最基本的人類來關懷。這些訓練者們不停地關心誰得到了更高的座位或更好的待遇，護送祖古的車隊裏有多少輛車，有多少人到機場去迎接他們，這些從根本上影響到了這些祖古們的心念——而且並不是朝著好的面向。

       我們可以從如今日漸增多的“雙祖古”現象、以及同一個過往大師有多個轉世並被不同的團體所擁立的現象中看到這種態度的改變。我們還沒見過任何一個祖古說：“哦不，我不是真正的祖古，另一個喇嘛才是真正的轉世。”取而代之的是，他們對自己的頭銜極爲執著，緊緊的抓著不放，這很難被視爲一個真正的“佛教徒”的品質。

       而且我們也在人們對待教學體系本身的態度上看到了同樣令人困擾的改變。在我們那一代，我們會積極主動地去尋找老師並獲得教授，即使是要在交通設施都幾乎不存在的地方長途跋涉。我清楚的記得有一次，我從Gorakpur一路走到Lumbini，再搭上一輛去往Birantnagar的拖拉機，只是爲了在尼泊爾接受噶瑪巴的一次教授。在某種程度上，我們那一代的教師爲我們灌輸了僅僅爲獲得珍貴法教中的一個詞語也要樂於付出犧牲的熱忱和意樂。

       如今我們幾乎看不到年輕的祖古們渴切地四處尋找老師和尋求教法了。實際上我們還得爲他們對某個教授表現出了興致、或是親自召見某位老師而感到高興。在佛教傳統上，對於佛法教授的態度發生如此的轉變，真是嚴重的錯誤。

       有多少人曾注意到，比方說，現如今的年輕祖古們的照片上那裏還有他們坐在自己老師的座下，並表達恭敬之心的影像？更不要說是他們對老師鞠躬的影像了。盡管這樣做是非常有益的表率。在祖古坐床儀式上，將一個孩子置於寶座之上是可以理解的，但是從那一刻起一直到整個青春期都持續的讓他坐在寶座上卻不是個明智之舉。

       西藏人大多認爲培養祖古只是意味著擁有一位指導老師，接受很多法教，背很多經文，學很多儀軌。而他們沒有意識到的是，更廣義的訓練來自於這個祖古被撫養的環境和方式——盡管這是非常基礎又簡單的道理。

       【對于真正的祖古訓練教學存在的社會和文化壁壘】：

       再一次強調，我不想把整個責任都歸咎於那些直接負責訓練祖古的拉章成員和僧侶們在培養方式上的缺陷。實際上，這一情形的很大原因可以被歸咎于西藏和不丹這樣的傳統社會裏所存在的全心全意的虔誠與過時的文化包袱所形成的複雜混合體。

       我時常想象這些高階喇嘛們該有多渴望能一個人背著行囊旅行，在茶鋪飲茶，坐坐人力車。而他們熱忱的隨從卻不會允許他們這樣做，因爲他們要面對來自於我們傳統社會的巨大壓力，傳統會對這些喇嘛們的行爲舉止有著特定的要求，認爲喇嘛們應當被信徒、聽衆、侍者、錦緞所圍繞，並且要保持所有來自於傳統和現代的關於地位的象徵。

       在我成長期間，人們甚至用一個東藏的諺語來責備我說，喇嘛應該舉止像一尊黃金佛像——意思是我們應該坐得筆直，不左觀右顧，要表現得像是個聖物，而不是人類。還有另一個諺語說，一頭雪獅就該待在高山上，因爲如果它下到平地上，會被錯當成一條狗。

       這兩則諺語已經表明了全部，它們揭示出喇嘛們如何主觀上就不被鼓勵與一般大衆混在一起，以及我們撫養喇嘛的傳統方式對於現代社會來講有多麽的過時。

       令人難以面對的現實是，一個金色的雕像根本沒法養活自己。雕像從屬於它的所有者，而這個所有者有權賣掉雕像，或至少可以售票給想來瞻仰雕像的人們。而喇嘛們，像是雪獅一樣，幾乎對尋常人的世界裏發生的事情一無所知。若是如此，這些喇嘛們，如果持續地被呵護而隔離于苦難之外，如果他們所知道的苦難都僅僅來自於書本的閱讀，那他們又怎麽能向世人教授苦難的真諦呢？

       實際上，這正是這一問題裏最嚴重的部分----那就是現在的教學仍然主要是智識上的，是與現實世界脫節的，無法讓我們的祖古們成爲真正的佛法修行人。是的，這些年輕祖古們會唱誦心咒，起得很早，甚至依儀軌修法、做薈供或接受剃度。

       但是，如阿底峽尊者所說，真正的佛法修行人必須從根本上學習放棄對世間生活及此生的興趣。作爲起點，那意味著不再在乎法座的高度、學生的數量、頭銜以及他們手上戴的手錶的牌子。

       【困在時間隧道中】：

       總而言之，現在西藏訓練祖古的傳統方式正朝向與建立真正的領導力完全相悖的方向。這不是在否認這個過去的確曾培養出既優雅又富有學識、還兼備戒律的祖古的傳統中有某些可取之處。

       但是進一步的分析也揭示出當前體系中的一個不可取之處，即無法讓我們的祖古們做好因應這個世界的準備，更不要說是適應再過二十年之後他們所處的世界了，那時的世界將與現在截然不同。

       我們的祖古訓練體系仍停留在十九世紀三四十年代的水平，並沒有認識到現在已經是2016年，也並不是在幫助我們的年輕祖古們爲適應2026年的世界做準備，那個時候他們將會長大成人，並被期許肩負精神領袖的職責。在未來的時代，蘋果公司可以生産出一種芯片，祖古們憑它就可以與世界相連，去探索這個世界中的性、毒品、金錢；我們現在該如何培養我們的祖古，爲他們應付那樣的時代做出準備呢?

       毫無疑問的是，當我們年輕的祖古長大成人，20歲左右時，他們常常會成爲人群中完全的異類，對這個世界一無所知，然後由他們的拉章、隨從、親近家屬指點他們生活中的一舉一動。當這些拉章成員們陷入腐敗，任人唯親時，會使情況變得更糟，而這種狀況同樣屢見不鮮。

       結果就是，新接觸藏傳佛教的人會對自己所見到的情形感到相當困惑，發現這些理應是遍知且無所不能的喇嘛竟然連他們最親近的侍者都掌控不了。而西藏人會爲這種顯而易見的怪相辯解說，這並不是喇嘛的錯——喇嘛永遠是偉大的——而他的隨從和侍者才是問題所在。

       然而這無法掩飾一個赤裸裸的現實，那就是我們的祖古很少是真正的佛法修行者，而更多的是與外界隔絕、生活非正常運轉的人，更不必提及他們爲學生們和弟子們提供真實引領的能力了。我只能祈願，他們這些怪異的行爲有一些隱而未現的利益，而無法被如我這樣的凡俗人等所理解。

       【爲我們未來的祖古們所做的祈願】：

       因此，出於上述所提及的這些造成傳統祖古教學方法無法適應現今社會的原因，我必須說，從我個人來講，我並不會對蔣貢康楚仁波切的所作所爲有任何評判。盡管我對他沒有多少直接的了解，但我聽說過很多他所做出的偉大的事跡，也出於很多種理由而爲他深深祈願，希望他在未來真正的展現光彩。

       站在普通人的立場，我真的不在乎第四世蔣貢康楚是否想要成爲一名醫生。實際上這可能會很偉大和令人鼓舞。他也盡可以去做一名手錶匠人，就像我們過去很多偉大的成就者中，有人是製造弓箭的匠人，有人是榨芝麻油的人，有農民，有理髮師，甚至有人是妓女。對比來看，做一個醫生聽起來更讓人敬重！

       實際上蔣貢康楚的選擇可以作爲給藏傳佛教寺院當前所存在的根本缺陷的一劑絕好的解藥。藏傳佛教寺院體系使佛教成爲了一項職業，被設計用來保障僧侶、寺院及佛法教師的存續。盡管這種佛教徒的“職業”有它的歷史根基，保障寺院存續的這種需求是可以被理解的，然而它也在今天引申出很多誤解，而不利於佛陀的教法在當今時代更廣泛的傳播。

       出於這個理由，我也一再地建議我的朋友、同事、和其他仁波切夥伴們，當他們教導非藏族人時，不該強調穿著西藏的僧袍或是任何一種佛教袈裟。相反的，讓人們見到一位穿著軍裝、或是穿西裝打領帶、或是其他尋常服飾的佛法修行人，可以傳遞出這樣一種訊息，即任何人都可以修持佛法。

       喇嘛穿著某種特別的服飾是一種相當根深蒂固的習氣，而當他這樣穿戴時，會立即産生拒人於千里之外的效果，並創造出一種狂熱崇拜的氛圍。在我看來，全世界範圍裏佛教徒的數量在下降，而其他宗教如伊斯蘭教的信徒數量在增長，其中一個很關鍵的原因就是我們封閉式的排外主義。

       總而言之，蔣貢康楚仁波切成爲一名醫生的選擇可能會有一個很完美的結果，可能會在長遠上真正的利益於佛法。然而我希望、期冀和祈願的是，無論他採取哪種形式，都繼續全心全意地修持佛法——不是爲了某一個傳承，而是爲了所有的傳承----正如他的前世所做的那樣。

       （翻譯 ：噶瑪善引）

       文章出處：宗薩蔣揚欽哲粉絲 Dzongsarjamyangkhyentsefanclub

      

       英文原文出自宗薩蔣揚欽哲仁波切臉書：  Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse

      

      

       Time for radical change in how we raise our tulkus

       -Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse

       The recent statement by Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche 4th that he has given up his role brings up a lot of mixed feelings from many different angles.

       On the one hand, as a Jamyang Khyentse tulku closely connected to Jamgon Kongtrul for several lifetimes, my concern is for the Buddhadharma and especially for the Rime (non-sectarian) spirit that our supposed earlier incarnations shared.

       On the other hand, as human beings, we just can’t help making comparisons. And so I find myself comparing my generation of tulkus with this present generation.

       In my time we went through a lot of hardship, eating nothing but rice and potatoes for up to a year, travelling on India’s cheapest public transportation, sleeping on railway platforms, having no more than 10 rupees in our pockets for six or seven months, getting by with one pencil for a year, and even having to share our study books with 18 other students. As a child I had just two handmade toys that I made myself.

       Worse, my tutor confined me to one room not just for a few weeks or months but for a whole year, so that even going to the toilet became a long awaited excursion. We also suffered regular verbal and physical abuse, which went as far as making us bleed from the head and whipping us with nettles.

       I am not justifying or romanticizing any of this. But by comparison, our present generation of tulkus is utterly spoiled and has the easiest ride. Yet on further contemplation, these young tulkus today have their own share of challenges that are in some ways far more difficult than those we faced.

       The world is now much smaller and more open, and so, expectations are very much higher. Particularly tulkus with some lineage history behind them are always under the spotlight from all directions. This is especially true for tulkus who are put on thrones at a young age, given titles like “His Holiness”, and for whom trumpets are blown every time they arrive.

       All this hype and more inevitably backfires by raising expectations and putting these kids under tremendous pressure. A key reason they are always under the spotlight is simply that today’s institutions have continuously put them under the spotlight. There is no indication that this is going to get any easier in the years ahead.

       In the midst of these huge changes, Jamgon Kongtrul 4th’s decision pushes us to acknowledge and examine some fundamental flaws in the way tulkus are presently taught and raised. This is a very complicated subject, but it must be addressed, which is the intent of this article.

       Why our young tulkus need training:

       One key complication comes from students and disciples not knowing how to balance their pure perception of these young boys, which may come from their genuine dharma practice, with their cultural preconceptions that often put adulation and veneration above clear seeing.

       As individual Vajrayana practitioners, we are supposed to have pure perception towards our gurus. For those with the capacity or ability, that pure perception and devotion should not change even if the guru’s form changes. In fact, I have seen great practitioners look at their guru’s young incarnation and, without any doubt, clearly see their actual guru beyond the particular age, size, appearance or nationality of the incarnation. Ideally, this is what individual practitioners are supposed to do.

       Of course this does not mean that a child who is supposedly the incarnation of a great master has no responsibility to learn and be trained. If, at best, the child is an exceptional and genuine reincarnation manifesting as a complete continuum from the previous life, then of course any training or upbringing is arbitrary. But if not, then the child needs to be trained to take responsibility for his or her own actions.

       So, while disciples of a previous master may have pure perception towards the new incarnation and practice their devotional duties wholeheartedly, the tulku himself also needs to fulfil the role and responsibility of whatever reincarnation he has chosen to be.

       The reality today is that, even though these kids may be genuine tulkus, many of them have not even learned to wipe their own noses, let alone manifest intact all the qualities of their previous incarnations such as omniscience.

       Moving from one life to the next is not like moving from one room to another. There have been tremendous changes over time, which require new forms of training if tulkus are to manifest their true nature and qualities. Blind student adoration, often arising from cultural preconceptions, conceals from us the need to re-examine the training these young tulkus actually need.

       In fact, it’s worth noting that these tulkus are often not genuine reincarnations at all, but are given the “tulku” label as a child, with the aspiration that it will benefit them and others. In such cases, the term “tulku” may simply be a symbolic label that will certainly not manifest without proper training.

       Either way, these young tulkus are still just kids who need to be trained, properly raised, and given initiations and teachings – and not just intellectually and academically. We need to make them confident and at the same time humble. We need to make them sublime and at the same time human.

       And above all, of the most paramount importance, we need them to become genuine spiritual practitioners. After all, they are supposed to be spiritual leaders and lineage holders, not simply political leaders or village heads. And if they are not true dharma practitioners, what hope is there?

       Fundamental flaws in current pedagogy:

       Our pedagogy and way of raising tulkus have not changed with the times, and I have to say that Tibetans, especially in monasteries, are extraordinarily stubborn and resistant to change.

       There have been superficial changes, if merely because teachers could today go to prison for the way they used to raise us. There may be no beatings today, and there may even be weekend holidays, plenty of family visits, and lots of toys. But that doesn’t mean the pedagogy has fundamentally changed or adapted to the times.

       Tulkus today are put on thrones and surrounded by an entourage that is often more interested in perpetuating the institution than in bringing up the next spiritual and lineage leaders. All the accompanying paraphernalia of processions, carpets, brocades, and jade cups may make the tulku look exotic and special, but they don’t mean he’s been trained.

       All this hoopla may seem to work at a young age, because if you wash and shampoo even a street kid and sit him on brocades, he will look impressive at least for a few hours. If a very young tulku even smiles in that kind of lofty atmosphere, devotees will interpret it as some kind of amazing sign.

       But this substitution of show for real training becomes a serious problem over time, as it exerts an insidious but strong pressure on the young tulku over time. After all, there is no pressure greater and more severe than the expectations of others.

       So when hundreds if not thousands of eyes are looking and judging everything these tulkus do, they can end up isolated and imprisoned in one of the loneliest and most alienating zones imaginable.

       Misguided focus on image and wealth – a formula for pressure:

       The world’s growing materialism and affluence have found their way into our monasteries and religious institutions, where many high lamas and especially lineage holders now lead a lifestyle so lavish and estranged from ordinary realities that they could almost be emperors!

       This may have worked – and I am not saying it did work – in Tibet, where few questions were asked and where there was little scrutiny and huge devotion. But in the long run, seeing the highest lamas, whom novices are supposed to emulate, living extravagant nouveau-riche lifestyles, complete with gold watches and bracelets, sends seriously wrong signals.

       First and foremost, this “model” simply does nothing to encourage people to practice the dharma, especially young monks newly enrolled in a monastery, and whose thinking may not be very sophisticated. After all, there is a reason why Sakyamuni Buddha chose to appear barefoot with a begging bowl – because the austerity, renunciation and simplicity this symbolized has real meaning.

       I am not saying that the head lamas today should all suddenly go around with begging bowls. But it is so necessary for them to exude some sort of unpretentious humility and to project an image of simple living.

       A good example of the change that’s needed is the behaviour of many of us lamas at the annual winter prayer gatherings and festivals under the Bodhi tree in Bodhgaya. I often wonder what other Buddhists, like the Theravada practitioners, think of our lamas sitting on thrones that may even be higher than some of the Buddha statues.

       Of course, the path of tantra trains us to perceive our guru as the embodiment of all the buddhas. But in places like Bodhgaya, where its statues and symbols are profoundly meaningful for the general public and for all Buddhists, there is no one above the Buddha. So Bodhgaya would be a good place for our lamas to start practicing simplicity and humility!

       I suppose seeing a wealthy monastic or lineage head might impress some nomadic Tibetans or overly enthusiastic Chinese students. But, subconsciously or consciously, it really establishes the bad habit of the model that a lama must have wealth or rank.

       Such a message is fundamentally wrong from a basic Buddhist perspective. After all, the Buddha is by far the most important person on earth for Buddhists. And the most important act of the Buddha was to gain enlightenment after defeating the maras. That great event took place on a simple cushion of grass and bodhi leaves, without thrones, brocades or any other such trappings.

       In short, besides inadvertently turning our young tulkus into spoiled brats, the current focus on wealth and privilege as part of tulku training is anathema to Buddhist pedagogy and its core values.

       The prison of privilege:

       Purposefully or not, monasteries these days often seem to find and enthrone a tulku who happens to come from a wealthy or powerful family. Whatever the intentions, the tulku is today still used as the monastery’s main attraction, since far more people go to a monastery to see a tulku or high lama than to see the monastery for its own sake. This is especially true if the tulku’s name is preceded by “His Holiness” or “His Eminence”, along with an exotic description of how the tulku is a reincarnation of one of the greatest past masters.

       Incidentally, terms like His Holiness are not even Buddhist but are borrowed straight from Christianity. So Tibetan lamas’ obsession with such Christian titles is really mind-boggling, and it is downright embarrassing when they put His Holiness in front of a toddler’s name. At best, Christians must be laughing at us, especially since the average age at which the Papal title of His Holiness is bestowed on the appointed bishop is in the mid-60s.

       And yet, because these young reincarnate lamas are such great assets to monasteries, we have predictably seen an unseemly rush to find and enthrone tulkus, of whom there seem to be far more today than we saw three or four decades ago.

       In fact, not long after enthronement and all the associated hype, it is not surprising to find many of these tulkus, often from a very early age, being given some kind of project or operation – whether to save the environment or to build a stupa, shedra, or giant statue of some bodhisattva. It’s almost as if, in order to be a good lama, he must then have a project.

       But on closer scrutiny these activities are almost always tools to generate income, and we know how poor the Tibetan system is in issues of transparency and good governance with respect to public donations.

       The encounter of east and southeast Asian cultural traditions of blind devotion and lavish offerings, with a feudal Tibetan tulku system of no checks and balances, has also hindered the development of a modern system of tulku training. Those tender-aged boys end up forgetting that money does not grow on trees, and they have no idea how people have sweated and bled to produce the offerings now heaped up on them.

       With so much wealth, privilege, and adoration as the prize, it’s no wonder we now find so many parents eager to have their kids enthroned as one high lama or another. Little do they know how much their children will suffer.

       Being an incarnate tulku is really like being put into one of the most unimaginable prisons. You put the child in the most comfortable situation, with the brightest brocades, feed him ice-cream, and give him toys, gifts, and respect. And at the same time you systematically alienate him from developing into a proper human being who can deal with the human world.

       The real pain will come later when these young tulkus grow up, with their hormones out of control, no idea about worldly realities, and feeling totally useless. They will not even know how to interact with the world in the most basic ways, let alone how to be a leader. How can such a tulku ever be a genuine spiritual guide to students?

       Breeding ground for hypocrisy:

       Trying to maintain outer images of privilege and respect under the intense public spotlight constantly on our young tulkus inevitably breeds hypocrisy.

       For example, young tulkus are told they have to be pure and be monks. But measuring their purity from a very young age according to who is celibate or not creates huge pressure and can be dangerous, because such external standards are really a hit-and-miss game. After all, when we work with people’s hormones, we really don’t have much control.

       Even according to the vinaya, it’s just not permissible to impose celibacy vows on someone against their free will or as a result of peer or social pressure, as so often happens with young monks these days. It’s worth remembering that Sakyamuni Buddha himself became a renunciant by choice only after he had been married and had a child.

       So strong has this social pressure become over time that, when one of the previous Khamtrul Rinpoches decided to give up his celibacy, one of his monks wanted to assassinate him.

       Of course it can’t be denied that some of the young monks pressured to be celibate at a young age have ended up becoming really good monks. But far too often, imposing celibacy in the face of today’s intense social pressure and cyber-entertainment turns many of our young tulkus into hypocrites forced to hide their “faults”.

       This culture of pretence is reinforced as the tulkus realize that their peers, and sometimes their superiors, are also practising hypocrisy. A pedagogy that encourages such hypocrisy is hugely misguided and can even produce grossly aberrant behaviour.

       Pedagogy for today’s world and for the future:

       On the other hand, I also have genuine empathy for the labrangs, monks, and others responsible for training our young incarnate lamas. They generally mean so well and have such good intentions, but they just don’t know how to raise a child in today’s world, and have simply not adapted to current conditions.

       Beyond just academic training, our young tulkus need to learn how to queue up for things that need queueing, how to share what should be shared, and other basic elements of human decency and social contract. When they are served and offered everything, many of these tulkus never learn even the simple human knowledge of sharing, and end up ill-equipped to live in the world. They not only need leadership training, but need a basic course in human relationship.

       Tutors and caretakers must know that, out of frustration, some of these young tulkus have even burned themselves or cut themselves with razors – as other troubled teenagers have also done. Such behaviour alerts us to what a dangerous time and precarious age this is.

       Just to bring up an ordinary kid, and especially a teenager, in this day and age is extraordinarily challenging, as all parents know. How much more difficult, then, to raise a child and teenager who is supposed to lead much more than just a family estate or family lineage. Yet our tulku handlers have almost no knowledge and experience in the basic human training required to bring up children in today’s world.

       Sadly, the tulku trainers often worry more about how these small children, often no more than toddlers, will behave and are treated in public, than about them as basic human beings. Their constant worry about who gets the higher seat and better treatment, how many cars will be in the tulku’s convoy, and how many people turn up at the airport to receive them, has fundamentally changed the minds of these tulkus; and not for the better.

       We see this changed attitude today in the increasing number of “double” tulkus and the multiple claims by different aspirants to be the reincarnation of the same past master. What we have yet to witness is even one tulku saying: “Oh no, I am not the right one; the other lama is the right incarnation.” Instead they clutch onto their titles with so much clinging and grasping, it can hardly be deemed a worthy “Buddhist” characteristic.

       And we see a similar troubling change in attitudes towards the teachings themselves. In my day we would actively seek out teachers and teachings, travelling far and wide, even with almost non-existent means of transport. I remember well once when I actually walked from Gorakpur to Lumbini, and then hitched a ride on a tractor to Biratnagar, just to receive a teaching from the Karmapa in Nepal. Somehow my generation’s tutors instilled in us that passion and willingness to make sacrifices for a word of the precious teachings.

       Today we can almost forget about our young tulkus eagerly seeking out teachers or teachings. Instead we have to be really pleased if they even express some interest in a teaching and summon the teacher to them. In the Buddhist tradition, this change in attitude towards the teachings is deeply mistaken.

       How many have noticed, for instance, that photographs of young tulkus these days hardly ever show them sitting below their teacher and offering veneration, let alone bowing down to them? Yet such a sight would be so helpful as an example. It is understandable to put a kid on a throne on the day of his enthronement, but it is really unwise to keep putting him on a throne from then on right through puberty.

       Tibetans mostly think that raising a tulku comes only from having a tutor, receiving lots of teachings, memorizing lots of texts, and learning rituals. What they don’t realize, although it’s very fundamental and simple, is that the larger training comes from the environment where the tulku is raised and, more critically, from how the tulku is raised.

       Social and cultural barriers to a genuine tulku training pedagogy:

       Again, I don’t want to put the entire responsibility for the shortcomings in today’s methods of raising tulkus on the labrangs and monks directly in charge of this training. In fact, a large reason for the situation can be attributed to traditional societies like the Tibetan and Bhutanese, which are a complex mixture of heartfelt devotion and outdated cultural baggage.

       I often imagine how some of these high lamas must dream of walking alone and carrying their own bags, drinking tea in a chai shop, or riding in a rickshaw. It’s only their zealous entourage that won’t let them do this, because there is such strong pressure from our traditional societies to make these lamas act in certain ways, and for devotees to surround the lamas with attendants, servants, brocades, and all manner of traditional and modern emblems of status.

       There’s even an eastern Tibetan saying that was used to scold me when I was growing up, that lamas should be like a gold statue – meaning we should sit very still, not look right or left, and act more like a precious object than a human being. There’s another saying that a snow lion must remain as a snow lion in the high mountains, because if he comes down to the ground, he will be mistaken for a dog.

       These two idioms really say it all, revealing not only how lamas are actively discouraged from mingling with ordinary people but also how obsolete is our traditional pedagogy for raising lamas for a contemporary society.

       The hard reality is that a golden statue cannot even feed itself. It belongs to an owner who has the power to sell it, or at least sell tickets to those who want to see it. And lamas, like the snow lion, know virtually nothing about what is going on in the ordinary world. So how can these lamas teach the truth of suffering, when they are constantly shielded from it, and when the only suffering they know is what is read about in the texts.

       In fact, that is precisely a big part of the problem – that the present pedagogy remains largely intellectual, divorced from the world, and unable to make our tulkus into genuine dharma practitioners. Yes, these young tulkus may chant mantras, get up early, and even do sadhanas, pujas, and receive ordination.

       But, as Atisha said, genuine dharma practitioners must fundamentally learn not to be interested in worldly life or in this life altogether. For a start, that means not caring about the height of their thrones, the number of their students, their titles, or the make of their watches.

       Stuck in a time warp:

       In sum, the present Tibetan tradition is training tulkus towards the exact opposite of true leadership. This is not to deny the merits of the traditional system, which in the past has produced a certain elegance alongside real scholarship and discipline.

       But a closer analysis reveals an unacceptable trade-off in failing to prepare our tulkus to function in this world, let alone in the totally different world we will be living in twenty years from now.

       Our tulku training system remains stuck somewhere in the 1930s or 40s, never acknowledging that this is 2016, and certainly not preparing our young tulkus for the world of 2026 when they will reach maturity and supposedly assume the mantle of spiritual leadership. What are we doing to prepare our tulkus for a future era in which Apple produces a chip that tulkus can wear to connect with broadband and explore the world of sex, drugs and money.

       It’s no wonder that by the time our young tulkus grow up and reach their 20s, they have often become completely strange, knowing nothing about the world, and with their labrangs, staff, and close relatives appearing to dictate every movement of their lives. The problem is worse when these labrang members themselves are corrupt and given to nepotism, as is too often the case.

       As a result, the scene that newcomers to Tibetan Buddhism encounter can be hugely confusing, with supposedly omniscient lamas unable even to control their closest attendants. Tibetans will excuse such blatantly strange behaviour by saying it’s not the lama’s fault – the lama is always great – but his attendant or consort is the problem.

       But somehow this doesn’t wash in the face of the bald reality that our tulkus are rarely genuine dharma practitioners, and are largely out of touch and dysfunctional in their own lives, let alone capable of providing true leadership to students and disciples. I can only pray their odd behaviour has some invisible benefit that can’t be conceptualized by ordinary beings like myself.

       Aspiration for our upcoming tulkus:

       And so, for all these reasons showing the serious failure to adapt traditional pedagogical methods for tulkus to today’s world, I have to say that, personally, I have no judgment about what Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche is doing. Though I have no direct knowledge of him, I have heard a lot of great things about him, and for many reasons have the deep aspiration and hope that he will truly shine forth.

       At a basic human level, I really don’t care whether Jamgon Kongtrul 4th wants to become a doctor or not. It could actually turn out to be great and very inspiring. He could be a watchmaker for all I care; just as some of our greatest past masters included an arrow-maker, a sesame oil extractor, a farmer, a barber, and even a prostitute. By comparison, being a doctor sounds much more respectable!

       In fact Jamgon Kongtrul’s choice could be an excellent antidote to a fundamental flaw in the Tibetan Buddhist monastic situation, which is to make Buddhism itself into a profession designed to ensure the survival of monks, monasteries, and dharma teachers. While this Buddhist “profession” has its historical roots in the understandable need for monastic survival, it leads today to a lot of misunderstanding, and may not be helping the wider propagation of the Buddhadharma in this day and age.

       For this reason, I’ve also advised my friends, colleagues, and fellow Rinpoches time and again that, when they teach non-Tibetans, they should not encourage the wearing of Tibetan robes or any sort of Buddhist garb. By contrast, seeing a Buddhist practitioner in army uniform, suit and tie, or other normal dress sends the message that Buddhism can be practised by everyone.

       The moment a lama imposes some sort of special robes, which is such a deeply ingrained habit, it immediately excludes others and creates a cultish atmosphere. In my view, one of the key reasons the number of Buddhists worldwide is decreasing while other religions like Islam are growing is our habit of introverted exclusivism.

       In sum, Jamgon Kongtrul’s choice to become a doctor could end up being perfect, and may genuinely serve the Buddhadharma in the long run. But what I hope, wish, and pray is that, in whatever form he takes, Jamgon Kongtrul 4th will work wholeheartedly for the dharma; not just for one lineage but for all lineages, – as his earlier incarnation did.

      

       標籤: 宗薩蔣揚欽哲仁波切 開示-是時候徹底變革我們培養轉世祖古的方式了