第十二章―智慧与净化恶业（摘自《狂智》）
已经接触过狂智教法的人，对这个观念再熟悉不过了。但是对于大部分人而言，它们认为心灵修持的基本精神纯粹就是『好的』状态，任何与之相反的状态或障碍，都被视为魔障的展现。把障碍视为一种庄严是相当不寻常的，如果出现了对上师或教法造成威胁的状态，我们通常立刻将之归类为『魔鬼的杰作』。这种观点认为，能不碰到障碍或威胁最好，应该把这些成为坏的、与教法敌对的东西，马上抛弃。你本该赶紧净化自己，将这魔鬼的杰作剔除。你应该抛弃它，而不是看待它成为当下境遇中，某种自然不造作、整体不可或缺的发展，从而去探索它。你就是纯粹把它当成麻烦而已。 我想我们当中很熟悉这些教法的人，即使能从极微妙的层面来深入观察自己，这个方法的某些元素可能依旧会隐隐作现。虽然我们了解哲学思想和观点，我们知道应该去处理负面状态，并以之为庄严，但心里老是想着是否别有他法，或仍旧祈求某种隐晦的承诺或保证。 事实上，我们的学生之中有很多这样的情况。大家嘴里挂着说要以恶业或负面状态作为生命境遇之提升，但是他们还是把这种方法本身视为一种替代方案，用以解决负面状态的麻烦。即使是老弟子，无论是公开课程或私下，也还是不断在问那些基本上只是某种替代解决方案的问题。大家依旧坚信还是有某种〔最好的方法〕，还是有某种能皆大欢喜的方式。尽管我们都知道自己应当将痛苦和逆境视为修道的一部分，我们仍旧将〔它〕当成一种得到快乐的方式，一种解决问题的方式，一种更好的替代方案。假使我们是身为国师的莲师，我们就会在自己被焚烧之前，试图与前来捉拿自己的卫兵谈判，我们会说：『你们大错特错了，切不可如此，你们根本不知道自己在做什么。』我们一定会这样做，而不是让事情自然发生，或让作为或行持代替言语来发声。 我们普遍的处理方式上，仍旧含有某种胆怯。之所以胆怯是因为，无论教法说的有多么微妙或显而易见，我们还是无法与『苦乐无别乃庄严，饰以庄严乐陶然』的观念同步一致。我们或许会去读这些教法，嘴上谈论这些内容，但我们仍旧觉得去扭转那些曲折是很了不得的，我们觉得那些惨痛的经验或负面状态是好的：〔我们得去面对、处理它。没错，其实我一直都在这么做。最近我心里和生命中，不断发生各种剧烈难受的经验，感觉不太愉快，但我困的这一切都很有意思。〕其实我们心里还是抱着一丝希望。认为负面状态〔很有意思〕的概念，意味着我们总有一天会经由某种状态得到救赎；其中不言而喻的是，最终这一切都会变得美好愉悦。这心态非常微妙，几乎就像是某种不约而同的共识：每一条路终归都会通向罗马。即使正在探讨狂智这最殊胜的教法，我们却还在小乘心态上做挣扎，还一厢情愿的认为，这个狂智或许会带领我们到达快乐幸福的境地，认为金刚乘的拐杖或许能帮助我们走上一条顺利的小乘道。这显示了我们尚未理解整件事其实根本就是无望的，绝对的无望――但是连无望都被我们认为是某种解决方法，终究还是有个借口或推辞，我们仍不断以为有那么一个不约而同的共识：无论怎么说，我们都在争取幸福快乐。但是莲师在身为国师的身份中，丝毫不在乎这些。他的态度是：〔如果快乐会发生，就让它发生，但如有必要，就让我被处决吧。〕 承认你自己就是个罪犯，就这么承认吧！莲师这么做了，他像个罪犯一般被处决了，但是接着事情有了转折。 把他人的错误认可为自己的错误，看起来非常困难，然而，痛苦即是道。我们通常不想为他人的行为背黑锅，总是急着为自己澄清：『那不是我的错。』我们无法忍受不公平的指责。我想这也是合情合理的，大家都不喜欢被指责，但假设我们决定承担整件事，把种种指责搅在自己身上的话，会发生什么事呢？这是一件非常值得发现的事，只要追随莲师的脚步就会知道（如果这么说能让你觉得好过一些的话）。这样的态度非常有意思，这道理不见得是难以捉摸的。反而非常显而易见。如果有点难以捉摸，那也是因为这是欺诈妄念之转折的转折的转折，也就是朝向目标的转折。
I suppose if those of us already familiar with these teachings would look into ourselves on a very subtle level, we might still find some element of this approach. Although we know the philosophy and the ideas—we know we are supposed to work with negativity and use it as an adornment—nevertheless, there is still some sense of trying to find alternatives, of trying to find some kind of underlying promise.
Actually, this happens quite a lot with our students. People talk about relating to negativity as part of the development of the situation, but then they regard this approach in itself as an alternative way of solving the problem of negativity. Even older students are constantly asking questions, publicly and in private, based on this alternative-solution approach. They still believe that there is a “best way”; they still believe there is a way to some kind of happiness. Although we know we are supposed to relate to pain and misery as part of the path, we still try to regard that as a way to happiness, as a way of solving the problem, as a better alternative. If we had been Padmasambhava as the rajguru, we would have tried to talk to the guards who arrested us before they put us in the fire. We would have said, “This is a great mistake; you mustn’t do this. You don’t understand what you’re doing.” We would try this, rather than letting the event happen, rather than letting action speak louder than words.
There still seems to be some kind of timidity in our general approach. We are timid in the sense that, no matter how subtle or obvious the teachings may be, we are still not reconciled to the notion that “pain and pleasure alike are ornaments which it is pleasant to wear.”6 We might read it, we might say it, but still we find it magnificent to twist the twist and feel that misery or negativity is good: “We have to work with it. Okay, I’ve been doing that. Lately I’ve been finding all kinds of rough and rugged things going on in my mind and in my life. It’s not particularly pleasant, but all in all it’s interesting for me.” There is some tinge of hope. The idea of finding the negativity “interesting” is that somehow as we go along we will be saved. The unspoken implication is that finally the whole thing is going to be good and pleasurable. It’s very subtle. It is almost as though there’s an unspoken agreement that in the end all roads are going to lead to Rome.
We are still struggling along with the hinayana mentality, even though we are talking about the most profound teachings of crazy wisdom. We are still thinking this crazy wisdom might lead us to happiness, that the crutches of the vajrayana might help us to walk on a good hinayana path. This shows that we have not related to the whole thing as hopeless—absolutely hopeless—at all. Even hopelessness has been regarded as a solution. That cop-out is still happening. We are still going on as though there were this silent agreement that, no matter what we say, we are working toward some kind of happiness. But Padmasambhava, in his aspect of rajguru, was not concerned about that at all. His approach was, “Let happiness present itself if it happens, but in the meantime, let me be executed if necessary.”
Acknowledge yourself as the criminal—go ahead and do it! He did it. He was executed as a criminal. But then something changed.
Acknowledging other people’s mistakes as yours seems to be very difficult to do; however, pain is the path. We don’t want to get blamed for somebody else’s action. We will immediately say that we didn’t do it. “It wasn’t my fault.” We can’t bear to be blamed unjustly. Well, that is quite sensible, I suppose—people don’t like to be blamed. But suppose we decide to take the whole thing on ourselves and let ourselves be blamed, then what would happen? It would be very interesting to find out—purely by following the example of Padmasambhava (if that makes you feel any better).
That is a very interesting kind of approach. It is not particularly subtle; it is obvious. It becomes subtle only with the twist of the twist of the twist of deception, which is a twist toward a goal.
